-
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
RICKYBOBBY
-
Posts
718 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
CGC Journals
Gallery
Events
Store
Posts posted by RICKYBOBBY
-
-
On 6/24/2023 at 11:22 AM, Kryptic1 said:
Wait, someone actually paid that price? For a panel page with no action? And thought it was such a good price they could immediately flip it for a profit after fees?
No one paid the 150k. That was the consignors original listing on CAF asking that price. Didn’t sell of course and then auctioned it.
Don’t know what he paid to obtain it however looking in the HA archives, this page did very well when comparing previous sales.
- RBerman and Terry E. Gibbs
-
2
-
On 6/23/2023 at 1:32 PM, oldwhy said:
So, too high in 22 or too low now?
I’d say to high. Didn’t notice this from September 2020
-
Wow…
and now..
- Twanj, KirbyCollector, Bill C and 2 others
-
5
-
On 4/17/2023 at 1:38 PM, DINGER033 said:
I need help, I picked up a box of Spawn books about 150 and as I am going thru the box I find these. Are they authentic? One says it is the cover art from Spawn 118 and the other I don't remember the # and can't make it out in the picture due to the lighting, the third one has no information on it.
Don’t think any of those are authentic. Maybe someone traced them for fun?
Here is the real cover to Spawn 57(I used to own it)
-
On 4/2/2023 at 6:45 PM, Dirtcheap31 said:
Pretty sure that was just the ask the sale pending I think meant they sent it to be auctioned
Not sure if understand what you are saying here. Only 2 ways I understand that comic link would show as a sale pending with a price.
a) it was sold at auction and the buyer did a check out
b) it was sold on the exchange and the buyer did a check out
So I would guess that this piece sold for 29k at some point before today.
-
On 4/2/2023 at 4:48 PM, delekkerste said:
Nice, congrats!
I was hoping that Dark Victory #8 page might do a little worse, given that it was being resold only about a year later. Sadly, it did $18K (vs. $17.4K in Feb. 2022). Seller will have lost money after fees (and sales tax, if paid), but, no discount for the new buyer (wasn't me).
You mean this one?
Looks like it resold for 29k before selling for 18 today.
-
On 2/16/2023 at 12:04 PM, Matches_Malone said:
Not Marvel, but the auction also has the page with Sandman's- Lucifer's very first appearance (birth page).
Also a page from Sandman 1 - a key page where we see sandman’s face for the first time.
- Grant Turner and grapeape
-
2
-
On 8/7/2022 at 6:19 PM, BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES said:
If there's a global catastrophe big enough to make all collectibles worthless, the devaluation of your collectibles should be among the last things on your mind. All sorts of investments and hard property will also be worthless, except for greenhouses, atmospheric water generators, fortified bunkers and crossbows.
Yup 100%. If @Humpty-Dumpty thinks the world is collapsing the last place you should be posting and worrying about is the original comic art market on these boards.
You might as well start stock piling food and water and sell all your assets of any kind and any value. -
On 5/14/2022 at 12:40 PM, lb jefferies said:
He's really not.
Question for you: did you read the entire comment thread when Pistella posted this piece on CAF? I'm just curious if you read those comments - by some people far more knowledgable about Jack's methods than you or I - and if so I'm wondering why that did not give you pause before purchasing?
I'm also wondering why this piece was listed in the HA preview over a month ago as a 100% Kirby piece and then the listing was only updated after a few collectors reached out to HA, and then it was removed altogether until recently. Perhaps to avoid discussions like this one?
I hope anyone thinking of bidding reads this thread.
Wow you just love speculating eh? I can see why your stance is the way it is on this piece of art lol. I’ll enlighten you but I’ll answer your question about the purchase first.
I did read all the comments and no one had any firm information about it. I knew Joe Sinnott had inked it, it was hanging in Jacks home during his life and when Mark Evanier confirmed he remembered Jack working on it - that was good enough for me to make the purchase.
Now about the listing ? I never wrote the first write up - someone at Heritage did that. I spoke to Joe M about the piece in length before consignment and it was decided right from the beginning that the original write up would be used.
Also, Heritage took down all the listings for this auction when this was originally posted. They reposted at their own discretion along with the other pieces that had originally taken down.See - sometimes a simple answer to your conspiracy theories
And I agree - someone bidding should read all these posts.
RB
-
On 5/14/2022 at 1:51 AM, Monsterhoodoo said:
Hi Ricky Bobby. I assume that’s a screen name. Mine is John Butler. Yes, I owned it for a bit longer than 10 months. And that link to Rob Stiefel's piece on the Kirby Museum page that you posted was written before I had researched the piece. I think it’s human nature probably (or at least mine) to defend something you own or care about. And I did at the time, as Eriks post sort of blind-sided me. But then I spoke with several people. Kirby scholars? Well, I’m not sure about that designation. But Mark McDermott's name never really came up alongside some of the dealers, artists, and collectors that I spoke with. Greg Theakston, Joe Mannarino, Mike T, Todd Seisser, Glen Gold, Erik Larsen, and David Schwartz did-- I would consider all to be at least educated and knowledgeable about Kirby because they all either knew him or have done the work to know about him for decades. I spoke to all of them. The only guy I couldn’t get to was Evanier. He never answered me. The rest did, and rather quickly.
All had slightly different things to say, some just weren’t sure and couldn’t really say other than to mention they saw it on Jack’s wall at one point, (that was literally the best piece of info anyone had as to its legitimacy… didn’t pass the sniff test for me) some were certain it was mostly done by another hand… none said, “Oh no, that’s Jack and Jack alone.”
So, just an opinion here, but that came after a lot of research and an open mind. The key clues for me were
1. The back of the piece is bone white. So, it never hit Jacks' drawing board which made very specific graphite smudges on the backs of his art. Possible that he did it elsewhere, but that was a rare occurrence.
2. If you look at pieces Jack did in the late 80s, as you mention as the time period that this was done, they are wonky. Nothing like this.
3. The piece is very tightly rendered. Some of it looks outlined and filled in. Jack worked with the edge of his pencil and spit the graphite out like he was chiseling, it’s just far too meticulous. Like those cover recreations from the 90s… possibly by the same hand. Look at other Kirby pencil pieces. This is very different.
4. The pieces the artist traced or used as reference are clear if you look at other Kirby work. The Surfer Sketch from the Kirby Collector issue 48, and a flopped surfer drawing by Kirby and Sinnott from a Marvel Portfolio done in 1979 (with modifications) is the main surfer body. I’ve lined them up in Photoshop and they come pretty darn close. The Doom head is from a panel in FF #59, and an exploding planet from the Gods portfolio is at least part of the background. I think it would have been odd for Jack to have traced these out. He just didn’t do that. And these are almost exact. The Doom head scales up perfectly, except for the eyeballs.
5. The erased leg. Kirby just wouldn't have done that.
Of course, people will believe what they want. Probably Rob's designation as The Studio of Jack Kirby is about as accurate as one can be with the piece. Someone else's hand is in there. I have a pretty good idea whose it is, but I’m not comfortable saying who that is here. How much Jack is in there if at all? Who knows? Unless the Kirby estate wants to say and that’s probably not going to happen. But I personally think there is very little. But I also don’t think it’s a forgery, as Erik originally stated. I believe someone helped Jack out because he and Roz needed the dough, and it was a decent thing to do between friends. Now that stuff is worth thousands of dollars, I think it matters.
So, I flipped it back through Heritage. They gave me a slightly better deal than the hammer price in the end, but I still lost money. But I made sure people knew what they were getting and wrote the auction description myself, with some additions by Todd Hignite. I did write a lengthy article about this in the APA as Felix mentioned. I won’t post that here for anyone to download, but if you want to read it, I think it's in issue 102. This is really what it says though-- Most were kind enough to talk to me about it and help me come to my conclusion, but of course, we’ll probably never really know for sure.
Making an edit to my post and removed some of the repeated information:
Great! Nice to read your full write up John - thanks for that. Seems like you are saying the same thing as I am - Jack did this piece with a help of another because of his ailing health. Been saying that all along.
I could go one by one and break down each of your points but they are just opinions. As you stated so I am not going into that.What I did want to add was that I did speak to Mark Evanier on the piece. For the people who don’t know - he was Jacks friend and was around him and his family during his ailing health in the 80s. He basically confirmed Jacks work on the piece.
Here is what he said :
ME: Hi, Rick. I make a point of never authenticating artwork unless I
can inspect the original but I can tell you this...
Jack did a drawing that looked exactly like what you sent me. It was
when he was having trouble with his drawing hand so he had some
assistance from someone else, probably Mike Thibodeaux. I believe it
was somewhere between 50% and 75% by Jack.
Does that help?I don’t want to keep going back and forth and flooding this forum on the same conversation. You have said exactly what I have been saying all along - the piece is done by Jack with assists.
Thanks!
-
On 5/13/2022 at 7:18 PM, Nexus said:
The people John talked to about this piece are listed in his CFA-APA article.
IMO, that Royer and Sinnott inked copies of the pencils is neither here nor there. I can understand why someone who owned the pencils would commission the work, to perhaps help legitimize the piece. But it's just an inking job...that they would take the gig doesn't necessarily indicate anything.
I dont agree with your opinion as don’t think either Royer and Sinnott have anything to gain by adding their name with Jacks. In fact, Sinnott inked this piece far before this conversation started and from what I know did it for free. Not even a real gig. And from what I heard Sinnott doesn’t sign his name on Kirby pencils that he thinks are fake.
But again - I find the signed inked pieces a lot more indication of things then a bunch of people with 0 skin in the game.
-
And have to ask - renowned Kirby scholars? Royer? Sinnott? Mark E? Any of them on your list of “renowned” scholar list?
-
On 5/13/2022 at 6:25 PM, Nexus said:
Your FACTS are missing some facts...
My friend won it at HA in 2009 for $21510. It had presumably been consigned by Mark M.
In 2011, it came to his attention that the piece may not be full-Kirby pencils. Or any Kirby pencils at all. Upon consulting with renowned Kirby scholars, he realized that it wasn't what he thought it was when he bought it.
In 2012, he consigned it back to HA. He insisted this time that the description include the possibility that the piece was done by an assistant(s). It then resold for $10157.50. Less than half the original result.
It then shows up on Mike Burkey's site. Shortly after, in Rob Pistella's CAF. Where a long comment thread ensued, with various parties making the case for/against. Mostly against, it must be said. (I have the page saved before Rob took it down.) At that point, Rob came up with the designation "Studio of Jack Kirby" for artist attribution.
In 2018, Rob found a taker. So that makes at least 5 owners, not 3.
I did not know you are the current owner. Because the piece has shown up on various venues for sale/auction since. Ankur was selling it for a while, too (and said it had sold?). From all appearances, it had been sold repeatedly since you got in 2018, and your ownership of it was several links ago in the chain.
None of that is made up.
I have the original CAF page with all the comments saved in HTML. Not sure if I'm able to post here. As well, my friend who was the first HA buyer wrote a lengthy and well-researched article about this piece for CFA-APA. Not sure if that can be shared or reproduced. But any CFA-APA members can probably read it. Regardless, none of that is made up, either.
Hope that fills in some of the blanks for you.
Thanks I forgot about John owning it for like 10 months. My understanding was it went straight to Rob after that and as we know Burkey is a dealer and only buys to resell.
And you are still completely wrong about:Because the piece has shown up on various venues for sale/auction since. Ankur was selling it for a while, too (and said it had sold?). From all appearances, it had been sold repeatedly since you got in 2018, and your ownership of it was several links ago in the chain.
It was actually offered one time by Ankur for 1 -2 days. That’s it. Never showed up anywhere else. So your claim of it being in various venues and auctions is 100% not true.
And yes your friend did write about this piece and is on the Kirby Museum website.
I will post it for convenience:
https://kirbymuseum.org/blogs/dynamics/2011/09/18/the-silver-surfer-art-mystery/
Nothing different then what I am saying and what others like Mark E have confirmed.
-
On 5/13/2022 at 5:32 PM, drdonaldblake1 said:
please excuse my ignorance, what does lightboxed pencils actually mean?
Roger traced over Kirby's pencils then inked ?
You are absolutely correct. He traced the pencils and then inked it.
-
On 5/13/2022 at 4:08 PM, Bronty said:
That seems logical!
I'm still not sure I understand the history.
Piecing together what's in this thread, is this supposed to be kirby pencils to some extent (one guess 70%), along with an assistant. Pencils left unmolested but then inked onto separate boards by both Sinnott and Royer?
Am I following the bouncing ball correctly?
And what parts of that story are uncertain?
I’ll clear up the confusion.
One Pencil piece with Kirby and assists.
Mike Royer lightboxed pencils and inked.
Joe Sinnott inked a photo copy.
That’s it.
-
On 5/13/2022 at 3:55 PM, Nexus said:
The people who have bought this piece over the past few years (and there have been many) DEFINITELY wanted to believe that this was a legit Kirby pencil piece. And then they DEFINITELY wanted everyone else to believe that, too.
Somehow, I DEFINITELY believe that if anyone truly concluded they were holding the real thing...they would have kept it.
Hmm that’s DEFINITELY not true at all Felix. Would have had expected better from you. Didn’t think you were the type to make up things.
Rob Pistella bought it in 2011 ish and I bought it from him in 2018. Before that Mark M owned it since 1996. 3 Owners 3 decades.What a great example of how quick the truth gets buried and theories, speculation and opinion get confused with FACTS.
-
On 5/11/2022 at 11:31 PM, drdonaldblake1 said:
is this DEFINITELY Kirby pencils??
A lot of people will have strong opinions on what they believe but I will help with a bit of a reminder of facts.
Piece was drawn in the late 80s and hung in Jacks home (confirmed by collectors and his assistants)and subsequently was sold by Jack and Roz in the early 90s to Graham Nash of Nash collectibles.
Later on then the piece was inked both by Mike Royer and Joe Sinnott and had signed their name beside Jacks. You can see the pieces below.
Additionally, Mark Evanier who is a Kirby historian confirmed he remembered Jack working on the piece but also said he had help from someone and believes it it be around 70% by Jack.
-
-
-
the Buscema page
-
On 10/13/2021 at 9:01 PM, jaybuck43 said:
I don’t think Albert cares about value, rather eye catchingness. If I remember correctly, the Silver Surfer recreation was $7,500 or there about, but he had it at the top of his wall because when you walk by you see it and definitely want to go look.
The Buscema SS 1 colored recreation?
Yeah he’s asking 50k on that.
-
1 hour ago, jjonahjameson11 said:
I see the 1st spoken words, but there’s no sandman in the last two panels…just perspective from his POV
Yeah - his POV with him talking. So you can’t say no sandman just because he’s not drawn on the page.
At least that’s how I see it. -
31 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said:
I think the most recent page from issue #1 on Alberts site sold for $15K on June 10. No Sandman, but the main protagonist was featured prominently.
Actually Sandman/Dream is in the last 2 panels and it contains his first spoken sentence. He only spoke 4 individual words on a previous page. The page sums up the Sandman 1 story pretty well and I like this better then the one Albert sold for 25k which just had a sketch of Dream in a book.
-
50 minutes ago, grapeape said:
MIKE ZECK PUNISHER PAGE
I knew the snipers waiting in the weeds. Sat there $3900 for awhile....
LIVE bidding was grueling kept thinking it was going to end sooner....
DRIP DRIP DRIP
HAMMER. $36,000 w BP
I spoke with the owner who was shopping it briefly before the auction. He was taking offers. I knew what he paid for it. It’s an impressive page and one I wish I could’ve added to the ape cave. Congrats to the new owner.
That mini series stands out from the eighties.
Just a quick correction - it sold for 33.6k with juice. Not 36k.
Looks like it resold for 29k before selling for 18 today.
the Buscema page
MIKE ZECK PUNISHER PAGE
Heritage Jan 11-14, 2024 Auction
in Original Comic Art
Posted
I thought this went a bit low originally and now I see it’s already resold.
https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/story-page/barry-windsor-smith-marvel-comics-presents-76-story-page-8-wolverine-weapon-x-original-art-marvel-1991-/a/7358-91021.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515