• 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.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Superman # 1 - Where Are All The High Grade Copies ?

Started by Peter G,

219 posts in this topic

Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted

Ehh, he's got a point Roy. If it was any other dealer and any other book, I'd agree with you. (ie your general point holds). But from the cheap seats, Fishler would appear to have a vested interest in the market value of action 1.

 

Not to say that he isn't buying it for his collection, but it does raise the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
Ehh, he's got a point Roy. If it was any other dealer and any other book, I'd agree with you. (ie your general point holds). But from the cheap seats, Fishler would appear to have a vested interest in the market value of action 1.

 

Not to say that he isn't buying it for his collection, but it does raise the question.

 

Saying Fish has a vested interest was different to me than just the general formation of a bubble and using Fishler as an example of the bubble.

 

Everyone spending big bucks on books has vested interests.

 

Bedrock bought the Action #15 page for a ridiculous amount of money. Was there a vested interest because he owns (I think) 5 stores now? Is there a bubble? No, Rich has been collecting since he was a Texas sized young teenager.

 

But again, I am a dealer looking through dealer's eyes so my perception is different.

 

Again, just agreeing to disagree respectfully as I can see where you guys are coming from. I just disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted
Ehh, he's got a point Roy. If it was any other dealer and any other book, I'd agree with you. (ie your general point holds). But from the cheap seats, Fishler would appear to have a vested interest in the market value of action 1.

 

Not to say that he isn't buying it for his collection, but it does raise the question.

pretty sure Vincent said book will be offered for sale at some future point...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sqeggs

Sqeggs

Posted
Posted
Ehh, he's got a point Roy. If it was any other dealer and any other book, I'd agree with you. (ie your general point holds). But from the cheap seats, Fishler would appear to have a vested interest in the market value of action 1.

 

Not to say that he isn't buying it for his collection, but it does raise the question.

 

Saying Fish has a vested interest was different to me than just the general formation of a bubble and using Fishler as an example of the bubble.

 

Everyone spending big bucks on books has vested interests.

 

Bedrock bought the Action #15 page for a ridiculous amount of money. Was there a vested interest because he owns (I think) 5 stores now? Is there a bubble? No, Rich has been collecting since he was a Texas sized young teenager.

 

But again, I am a dealer looking through dealer's eyes so my perception is different.

 

Again, just agreeing to disagree respectfully as I can see where you guys are coming from. I just disagree.

 

I would say that bubble-wise the distinction is not so much between dealers and collectors. The key distinction is between someone who intends to hold a book in his collection long-term -- although he may, of course, sell it should he receive the right offer -- and someone who is hoping/expecting to profit from a resale in the near future.

 

It's the latter case that can be a problem in the sense that if prices weaken, people holding books hoping for a short-term gain are more likely to head for the exits, increasing the likelihood of a crash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted

It's the latter case that can be a problem in the sense that if prices weaken, people holding books hoping for a short-term gain are more likely to head for the exits, increasing the likelihood of a crash.

 

Fair point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sqeggs

Sqeggs

Posted
Posted
Ehh, he's got a point Roy. If it was any other dealer and any other book, I'd agree with you. (ie your general point holds). But from the cheap seats, Fishler would appear to have a vested interest in the market value of action 1.

 

Not to say that he isn't buying it for his collection, but it does raise the question.

pretty sure Vincent said book will be offered for sale at some future point...

 

When I asked him, he said they wouldn't have bought it if they didn't think it was a good investment. Which I interpret as meaning that the expectation of future prices increases was hardly irrelevant to their decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Silver Surfer

Silver Surfer

Posted
Posted
Ehh, he's got a point Roy. If it was any other dealer and any other book, I'd agree with you. (ie your general point holds). But from the cheap seats, Fishler would appear to have a vested interest in the market value of action 1.

 

Not to say that he isn't buying it for his collection, but it does raise the question.

pretty sure Vincent said book will be offered for sale at some future point...

 

Correct and you can bet that it won't less than $4M when it does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sfcityduck

sfcityduck

Posted
Posted

 

Bedrock bought the Action #15 page for a ridiculous amount of money. Was there a vested interest because he owns (I think) 5 stores now? Is there a bubble? No, Rich has been collecting since he was a Texas sized young teenager.

 

 

I'm not saying that dealers don't buy for their own collections. Obviously, many do. For example, Bedrock isn't a market maker in early Action Comics pages (is he even an OA dealer?). It's a very unique piece and the amount he paid, while high, was not a record for OA. In fact, compared to the prices on some other pieces, I thought it was a good deal.

 

More simply restated, my point is as follows:

 

(1) Looking at historical rate of return data for Action 1 sales is not necessarily a good predictor for future rate of returns;

 

(2) Between 1938 until recently, the rate of return between record Action 1 sales was diminishing. E.g., between 1938 and 1965 the RoR was above 30%; between 1965 and 1973 it was in the high 20%, and with each sale after that the RoR declined.

 

(3) Until recently. The RoR reflected in the sales that occurred starting in 2010 with the $1M book have been astoundingly high. $1M, $1.1M, $1.5M, $2.1M, $3.2M. Breaking the trend. And it these high RoR (Darren probably got around 38% compounded annually) that may indicate a bubble (not dealer to dealer transactions). You wouldn't expect RoR to increase the way it has.

 

(4) Had the big record sale gone to someone other than Fishler, depending on who it was it might have been evidence that there was no bubble, just strong demand from new high end market players. That isn't what happened. That Fishler bought the book is not indicative that there's no bubble.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimjum12

jimjum12

Posted
Posted

.... if we follow the logic on a slightly different tangent, is it not a sign of a strong market that a dealer, at public auction, is willing to outbid even the wealthiest of collectors to acquire the book ? GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

..... for the record, I've never considered books like Action 1 to be contingent upon the comic market as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted

 

Bedrock bought the Action #15 page for a ridiculous amount of money. Was there a vested interest because he owns (I think) 5 stores now? Is there a bubble? No, Rich has been collecting since he was a Texas sized young teenager.

 

 

I'm not saying that dealers don't buy for their own collections. Obviously, many do. For example, Bedrock isn't a market maker in early Action Comics pages (is he even an OA dealer?). It's a very unique piece and the amount he paid, while high, was not a record for OA. In fact, compared to the prices on some other pieces, I thought it was a good deal.

 

More simply restated, my point is as follows:

 

(1) Looking at historical rate of return data for Action 1 sales is not necessarily a good predictor for future rate of returns;

 

(2) Between 1938 until recently, the rate of return between record Action 1 sales was diminishing. E.g., between 1938 and 1965 the RoR was above 30%; between 1965 and 1973 it was in the high 20%, and with each sale after that the RoR declined.

 

(3) Until recently. The RoR reflected in the sales that occurred starting in 2010 with the $1M book have been astoundingly high. $1M, $1.1M, $1.5M, $2.1M, $3.2M. Breaking the trend. And it these high RoR (Darren probably got around 38% compounded annually) that may indicate a bubble (not dealer to dealer transactions). You wouldn't expect RoR to increase the way it has.

 

(4) Had the big record sale gone to someone other than Fishler, depending on who it was it might have been evidence that there was no bubble, just strong demand from new high end market players. That isn't what happened. That Fishler bought the book is not indicative that there's no bubble.

 

There were two immediate underbidders. So even if metro had not of won, the book would have sold for about the same

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sqeggs

Sqeggs

Posted
Posted
.... if we follow the logic on a slightly different tangent, is it not a sign of a strong market that a dealer, at public auction, is willing to outbid even the wealthiest of collectors to acquire the book? GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

..... for the record, I've never considered books like Action 1 to be contingent upon the comic market as a whole.

 

Yeah, I gotta admit being pretty upset when he outbid me by that much! :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sfcityduck

sfcityduck

Posted
Posted

There were two immediate underbidders. So even if metro had not of won, the book would have sold for about the same

 

Agree. Which is why I said upthread when Roy and I first started discussing this topic:

 

 

I think the dealer to dealer aspect isn't a big deal because it was an auction transaction. There was an underbidder who was willing to pay close to the same price. Thus, this wasn't like those rumored sales that used to occur between dealers where they swapped inventory to create the appearance of a record sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peter G

Peter G

Posted
  • Author
Posted

:cloud9:

 

http://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/superhero/superman-1-dc-1939-cgc-pr-05-cream-to-off-white-pages/a/7152-91050.s?ic3=ViewItem-Auction-Open-NextLot-081514

 

:cloud9:

 

http://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/superhero/superman-1-dc-1939-cgc-fr-gd-15-off-white-to-white-pages/a/7152-91049.s?ic2=mytracked-lotspage-lotlinks-12202013

 

:cloud9:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crowzilla

Crowzilla

Posted
Posted

 

I bought this copy from FIshler in the mid-90s for $1000.

Was incredibly happy when I was finally able to sell it (guy who bought it thinking it would be his pet restoration project).

Price still amazes me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing