Spiderman 62 cover - get your bets in

[otherworldsj33]

I didn't do to well with predicting the GL 76 cover, but I'll take another shot. 182k.

[hippiecop]

Additionally, it is not a "twice-up" Marvel as we know them. It's more of an "in-between."

Almost all "large" Marvel covers images are 20 1/4" x 13 1/4". The "small" covers are usually 10 1/2" x 14 1/2". This example (like the Spidey #61 I used to own) is the "in-between" size of 12 3/8" x 18 1/2" used for a couple months while the industry transitioned page sizes.

The difference in the in-between size and the large size is quite apparent when you look at two covers side-by-side. The in-between covers are the same size as pre-68 D.C. covers.

Food for thought when bidding tens of thousands of dollars I would think, and no kudos to Heritage (in my opinion) for presenting it as "twice-up."

[Eric Seffinga]

Does it get dinged at all by the BSD's since the art is a giant wonky cut pasteup patch on the backing board (that appears to be lifting in the bottom right corner)?

 

Obviously all art is one of a kind, and you take the good with the bad when buying these things, but curious how much the pieces at these upper air prices take a hit (or not) when factoring in such things.

 

-e.

[Bronty]

agreed. I put my guess in without considering the paste up issue. Way too rich for my blood but if I were bidding, I would bid less because of it.

[Tatterdamillion]

172K

[*paull*]

Due to the hodge-podge puzzle piece assemblage, I'll say 90K including premium

[Chicago Boy]

Wrong forum but since it was brought up here--what did the GL 76 go for?

[vodou]

Due to the hodge-podge puzzle piece assemblage, I'll say 90K including premium

I hear you but Gene makes a good point too, this piece pretty much has to be protected to minimum $100k.

[AKA Rick]

Does the piece itself consist of a series of paste-ups onto a single board, so although the logo and the title at the bottom may both be stats, the actual figure of Medusa and Spider-Man almost looks like a stat at worst, and at best looks like an art piece trimmed and glued onto the board. In any case, 'tho it is a final publication published piece and contains original art, if that is the case where it's not rendered onto the board itself and the art was attached, I'd probably place a lower (not worthless by any means) value based on that less desired aesthetic.

 

I'd put a valuation around $80k on the low end and $160k on the high end, but if I had to be and won something if I were right, I'd say $126,000.

 

 

[stinkininkin]

I'm not going to hazard a guess of the hammer price of the ASM 62 cover since it falls outside of my primary collecting interests, but I'm surprised to hear comments about the condition and "simple" nature of the cover. If this was a cover that I wanted to add to my collection, the image pasted onto another board would not factor into my valuations or bidding strategies in the slightest. Would that be a an issue of any of you? And does the simplicity (no backgrounds) really bother anyone out there or downgrade it's status or value? These are foreign concepts to me, but I admit I could be in the minority.

 

Scott

 

 

[delekkerste]

Due to the hodge-podge puzzle piece assemblage, I'll say 90K including premium

I hear you but Gene makes a good point too, this piece pretty much has to be protected to minimum $100k.

 

I haven't taken a close look at this piece - it's possible that any condition/construction issues plus talk of this not being "true twice-up" may be mitigating factors that keep this one from reaching my original $179,250 target. Maybe, maybe not.

 

But, regardless, The Cabal will bid this one up to protect their collective self-interest (it's not a cohesive entity but rather a collection of individuals and factions working towards a common purpose). Barring a full-on financial meltdown by February, there is no chance that this one will sell for 5-figures. No chance at all. Even if it isn't considered to be true twice-up, it's larger than regular art, and to let this one sell for, say, $90K, would ripple down and affect the prices of small art Silver and Bronze Age covers as well as twice-up covers by less expensive artists than Romita. I mean, you can't ask 6-figures for a twice-up cover by, say, Gene Colan if a Romita Spidey cover ends at $90K in a public auction.

 

I think $100K hammer ($119,500 with the juice) is about as low as I can even fathom it selling for, and I do think it will go higher than that, even with the concerns cited. Even that would have been a kooky price not long ago, but The Cabal is not going to undo the perception they have helped shaped since then by letting this one go for anything that isn't solidly in the $100Ks.

[Peter G]

I'm not going to hazard a guess of the hammer price of the ASM 62 cover since it falls outside of my primary collecting interests, but I'm surprised to hear comments about the condition and "simple" nature of the cover. If this was a cover that I wanted to add to my collection, the image pasted onto another board would not factor into my valuations or bidding strategies in the slightest. Would that be a an issue of any of you? And does the simplicity (no backgrounds) really bother anyone out there or downgrade it's status or value? These are foreign concepts to me, but I admit I could be in the minority.

 

Scott

 

 

This is the cover to Amazing Spider-Man number 62. There is no other. So long as the art is not a stat then I have no problem with this cover. It is gorgeous and historic and rare.

[Peter G]

Due to the hodge-podge puzzle piece assemblage, I'll say 90K including premium

I hear you but Gene makes a good point too, this piece pretty much has to be protected to minimum $100k.

 

I haven't taken a close look at this piece - it's possible that any condition/construction issues plus talk of this not being "true twice-up" may be mitigating factors that keep this one from reaching my original $179,250 target. Maybe, maybe not.

 

But, regardless, The Cabal will bid this one up to protect their collective self-interest (it's not a cohesive entity but rather a collection of individuals and factions working towards a common purpose). Barring a full-on financial meltdown by February, there is no chance that this one will sell for 5-figures. No chance at all. Even if it isn't considered to be true twice-up, it's larger than regular art, and to let this one sell for, say, $90K, would ripple down and affect the prices of small art Silver and Bronze Age covers as well as twice-up covers by less expensive artists than Romita. I mean, you can't ask 6-figures for a twice-up cover by, say, Gene Colan if a Romita Spidey cover ends at $90K in a public auction.

 

I think $100K hammer ($119,500 with the juice) is about as low as I can even fathom it selling for, and I do think it will go higher than that, even with the concerns cited. Even that would have been a kooky price not long ago, but The Cabal is not going to undo the perception they have helped shaped since then by letting this one go for anything that isn't solidly in the $100Ks.

 

I do not know if there is a secret cabal or not

 

But whenever I talk about price manipulation in the comic book world by the big dealers, I am labelled a conspiracy nut and told that price fixing cannot happen between dealers setting prices on books like new mutants 98 and batman adventures 12 because it would be impossible to fix prices in such a big free market

[AKA Rick]

If this was a cover that I wanted to add to my collection, the image pasted onto another board would not factor into my valuations or bidding strategies in the slightest.

 

Would that be a an issue of any of you?

 

And does the simplicity (no backgrounds) really bother anyone out there or downgrade it's status or value?

 

 

The fact that it's a one of a kind and authentic original used in the process of publication and final art makes this an "it is what it is" desirable piece.

 

However, I think for many collector's there's rarely "one defining piece" that they want and there's always substitutions which provide equal happiness, and somehow I doubt if Amazing Spider-Man #62 isn't "the" one, it could be one of many most would love to have, but if at a given high price, I do think that some of it's shortcomings may factor into what others may be willing to pay.

 

Maybe they're looking for a cover with backgrounds or if this indeed wasn't rendered on the board itself, maybe looking for something that is pencil and ink onto paper. I guess it's sort of like the modern artwork where there's discussions about the valuation of inked over original pencils VS inked over blue-lined pencils. Then there's some covers where it's digitally assembled with the use of patches or just the foreground figures are rendered.

 

Value at times is sort of subjective to perception of "what it's worth to (me)" in the eye of the beholder in terms of just how much they'd be willing to pay. Price is named after the person who values a piece the most

[Bronty]

I'm not going to hazard a guess of the hammer price of the ASM 62 cover since it falls outside of my primary collecting interests, but I'm surprised to hear comments about the condition and "simple" nature of the cover. If this was a cover that I wanted to add to my collection, the image pasted onto another board would not factor into my valuations or bidding strategies in the slightest. Would that be a an issue of any of you? And does the simplicity (no backgrounds) really bother anyone out there or downgrade it's status or value? These are foreign concepts to me, but I admit I could be in the minority.

 

Scott

 

 

All I can say is I own one piece where part of the art was a big paste up on another board, and it ruins the piece for me.

 

Its a painting so that sort of thing is especially egregious perhaps, but when I bought it I didn't think it would matter much, but having owned it for a while... it bugs me for sure.

[zhamlau]

hmm, didnt know so much of it was paste up....lowering to 150-155

[Bronty]

I'm not going to hazard a guess of the hammer price of the ASM 62 cover since it falls outside of my primary collecting interests, but I'm surprised to hear comments about the condition and "simple" nature of the cover. If this was a cover that I wanted to add to my collection, the image pasted onto another board would not factor into my valuations or bidding strategies in the slightest. Would that be a an issue of any of you? And does the simplicity (no backgrounds) really bother anyone out there or downgrade it's status or value? These are foreign concepts to me, but I admit I could be in the minority.

 

Scott

 

 

This is the cover to Amazing Spider-Man number 62. There is no other. So long as the art is not a stat then I have no problem with this cover. It is gorgeous and historic and rare.

 

The point though - is what are you going to do with your (say) 175k. Spend it on something one of a kind and gorgeous and rare, with pasteups that bother you, or spend that same 175k on something equally one of a kind and gorgeous and rare (remember the spidey 49 cover sold in the same range) but without the big blocky paste up issues?

 

No one's questioning that its gorgeous and rare, the question is why would someone pay 100% as much as something just as gorgeous but with few to no visually distracting issues?

 

In other words, yes its one of a kind and there's no perfect substitute. But there are many, many potential substitutes of equal desirability nontheless.

 

I previously said 190 + BP, I"m going to revise to be "exactly what spidey 49 sold for" (whatever that was exactly). I think that prior to condition issues they are equally lovely and 62 would have sold for more just due to upward trend, but the paste up will knock it back down to a price = #49

[Peter G]

I'm not going to hazard a guess of the hammer price of the ASM 62 cover since it falls outside of my primary collecting interests, but I'm surprised to hear comments about the condition and "simple" nature of the cover. If this was a cover that I wanted to add to my collection, the image pasted onto another board would not factor into my valuations or bidding strategies in the slightest. Would that be a an issue of any of you? And does the simplicity (no backgrounds) really bother anyone out there or downgrade it's status or value? These are foreign concepts to me, but I admit I could be in the minority.

 

Scott

 

 

This is the cover to Amazing Spider-Man number 62. There is no other. So long as the art is not a stat then I have no problem with this cover. It is gorgeous and historic and rare.

 

The point though - is what are you going to do with your (say) 175k. Spend it on something one of a kind and gorgeous and rare, with pasteups that bother you, or spend that same 175k on something equally one of a kind and gorgeous and rare (remember the spidey 49 cover sold in the same range) but without the big blocky paste up issues?

 

No one's questioning that its gorgeous and rare, the question is why would someone pay 100% as much as something just as gorgeous but with few to no visually distracting issues?

 

In other words, yes its one of a kind and there's no perfect substitute. But there are many, many potential substitutes of equal desirability nontheless.

 

I previously said 190 + BP, I"m going to revise to be "exactly what spidey 49 sold for" (whatever that was exactly). I think that prior to condition issues they are equally lovely and 62 would have sold for more just due to upward trend, but the paste up will knock it back down to a price = #49

 

I like this cover even with the paste up. To me it's a non-issue even though I recognize some may feel otherwise. Personally, I like this cover more so than the 49 but that is just me.

[delekkerste]

I'm not going to hazard a guess of the hammer price of the ASM 62 cover since it falls outside of my primary collecting interests, but I'm surprised to hear comments about the condition and "simple" nature of the cover. If this was a cover that I wanted to add to my collection, the image pasted onto another board would not factor into my valuations or bidding strategies in the slightest. Would that be a an issue of any of you? And does the simplicity (no backgrounds) really bother anyone out there or downgrade it's status or value? These are foreign concepts to me, but I admit I could be in the minority.

 

Scott

 

Paste-ups are not ideal - all else being equal, I would view a piece with one or more paste-up elements to be worth a bit less than something that was done wholly on the board. Obviously, there are instances where it might not matter at all, but I think it does have some impact in most cases (at least for me).

 

Simplicity, though, definitely has as big impact on valuation for me. It's like a told a friend last week: "At the risk of sounding like a Philistine, all else being equal*, the more ink on the board, the more it's worth." It was over at Metropolis and Vincent showed me two covers by the same artist and asked me which I preferred. The one with more ink stood out more and I had no doubt that the market would value it higher. Sounds stupid, but it works more often than not.

 

I mean, why do you think your work is so valuable? Not many people want a loosely drawn two-character cover by Jim Lee and Scott Williams against a blank background. They want your famous detail - ours is an ink hobby, and the more you give them, the more it's worth!

 

 

*All else being equal meaning, for example, two covers from the same run, by the same artist, with comparable content. Obviously a sparse Neal Adams cover is going to be worth more than a detailed Frank Robbins cover - that's most definitely NOT what's being compared here!

[Eric Seffinga]

I'm with Scott, in that it's not my area of collecting interest, and the value is above the field I play on, so my purpose in asking about the condition/construction method and how it applies was simply hypothetical from the more knowledgeable among you. Interesting to hear the replies.

 

The no-backgrounds complaint thing is a foreign concept to me. Good is good. Powerful is powerful. Etc. Personally I prefer this cover's sleeker layout to a lot of the overly busy and fidgety covers people often like around here. Though I have no interest or nostalgia in these characters, just from a compositional point of view, I like the piece quite a bit.

 

I happen to be a fan of process, and so the pasteup thing doesn't bother me personally, but when one gets into high end sports car/small home prices for a single work, I was curious how buyers would react, as Bronty and Gene just pointed out... all things being equal.