Question for Heritage and comiclink reps wrt Burkey admission 2 2

[jjonahjameson11]

3 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I’d argue that the market for ~some~ artists is artificially high (Herb Trimpe, anyone? John Romita Sr and especially Jr.) But not for Jack Kirby. 
 

 

Especially for Romita Jr?

how so? 

[PhilipB2k17]

4 hours ago, RBerman said:

I reviewed Fourth World issue-by-issue over here last year. More Kirby is certainly on my to-do list. I have a stack of trade hardcovers and softcovers I'm working on, everything from Silver Age Daredevil to Moore's Promethea to Vol 5 of Elfquest, etc.

I am well convinced of Kirby's excellence and stature in the field; you don't have to sell me on that. My kids may watch Star Wars or The Matrix, but it won't feel to them like it felt to me. Kirby will never feel innovative to me, because his innovations were so thoroughly adopted by his followers that I read first. I wouldn't mind having a published page from him. But if I had $5,000 or $6,000 to burn (which I am sure my wife would say I don't), I would get a Sienkiewicz or Ross first, because they mean more to me.

I'd be happy to get a Little Nemo, but the $33,000 it's currently commanding at Heritage Auctions is at least an order of magnitude more than I can contemplate.

It depends on what you are looking at for $6000. It seems to me that Top Quality Kirby stuff is in the tens of thousands of dollar range. Where are low quality, late Kirby is probably overpriced. But, there is some very good mid-tier stuff, like his 70's stint on Cap, his 4th world stuff for DC, some of which goes into the top tier, and I think some of his eternals stuff back at Marvel. I think 2001 pages can be great, as can Machine Man pages. Not sure about Devil Dinosaur, or the like. It all depends. 

[PhilipB2k17]

1 hour ago, Rick2you2 said:

Seeing this raised a particular artist in my mind: Neal Adams. Excellent artist, huge production levels, high prices, but seemingly a result of natural demand (which he does partly control by keeping some things).  He still churns out so many sketches, however. Is that affecting his OA pricing for typical Adams? (Not special pieces like the Batman/Joker cover, or GL/GA).

Then, we have Aparo. Again, excellent artist, but until about a year and a half ago, not commonly sold given the huge volume of his work. My understanding is that two large collections were sold around then, and more good pieces came on the market. But are they generally holding up, price wise (I will exclude his Spectre run in Adventure which was special)? I know some of his lesser pieces don’t seem to move too quickly.

I'd guess that Aparo's Batman and the Outsiders pages from the 80's are probably very undervalued, considering their relative quality, and subject matter.

[PhilipB2k17]

1 hour ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

Especially for Romita Jr?

how so? 

What's the basis for it, other than his name? I know he had a good run on X-Men and Daredevil, but....anything with his name on to seems to get a premium.

[NC101]

6 hours ago, vodou said:

Another reason newer collectors don't adopt what their older brethren collect is because they just don't trust it, just as many are now questioning that FF #41 page 11 example if not the larger chunk of the elder market it may be representative of. A newer collector, exactly as one or two have made their voices known on the Board recently might just say "pass" and buy fresh art of a table in artist alley or go the commission/sketch route instead. Wouldn't you? That's exactly what I did when I entered the market so many years ago, I saw what the old guys had run up and it didn't seem to compare favorably, on a cost:benefit analysis, to the next two decades following of similar material they hadn't run up...so being that I wanted the most and best art I could get, I went whole hog on those decades instead and left the geezers to their (then) four figure price tags that just yellowed over time but never seemed to revise downward to meet the actual "demand" market

This is exactly how I feel, even if I could afford a beautiful prime Kirby cover at current prices there's absolutely no way I'd spend that much money on one, or really anything above a small fraction of what that work's getting now. And believe me, I love Kirby.

Edited February 19, 2020 by NC101

[alxjhnsn]

7 hours ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

Especially for Romita Jr?

how so? 

I think JRjr tells a good story, but it takes a strong inker to make his work attractive to me. Bob Layton's inking over him in Iron Man was wonderful. The recent Superman stuff - not so much, IMHO.

[RBerman]

I'd consider a JRJr page early X-Men page for the story set it represents, but that's the extent of my interest in his work.

[christosgage]

16 hours ago, RBerman said:

How is Simonson going to realize top dollar for his oeuvre, if he doesn't start gradually unloading it now?

I had heard that Simonson intends to donate his body of work to his alma mater, the Rhode Island School Of Design, after his passing. Not sure if that's true or not, my only point is that some artists may have other priorities.

[davidtere]

On 2/19/2020 at 6:47 AM, vodou said:

Exactly. Point to any well-represented institutionally (museums) Old Master (or heck Picasso!) and I'll show you three Warhols that could have been bought in the 1990s that can now be swapped for that Old Master (or Picasso). But at the time the 'ink' was still drying in Andy's screens (early-mid 1960s)...you could barely trade ONE of his pieces for a new car , OLD MASTERS and even 'new' Picassos (he was still -barely- alive then, still producing) were not in the equation. In just the lifetimes of us reading this the trajectory of two markets has flattened greatly while the other has skyrocketed. Old Masters is so flat we just group them all together that way, except for Rembradt, Da Vinci and a few others....most don't even know the names of 'the rest'. How far are we away from that in Silver Age Artists (Kirby, Ditko, Kane and 'the rest')?

Kirby is King but...not at $14,000

You are right. Kirby is King but that page is not worth $14,000 or it would have sold long ago. I say that because a Kirby FF page is on my 'want list' and I could pay that much if I thought the page (or some others) was worth it (and I absolutely love Medusa). Good art at a fair price will sell. Good art at a not so fair price usually won't. A lot of 'fishing' goes on all the time and by a lot of folks (OA dealers, eBay sellers, etc.). I told an art dealer at SDCC 10 years ago when he asked me if there was anything good out there with other dealers; I said, 'yes, however the pricing seems to reflect what the market might be in 3 - 5 years'. I haven't seen that changing much. I am as perplexed as others seem to be on OA that is desirable but the pricing from the sellers doesn't seem to generate interest at those prices and since it never comes down it becomes a bit of a 'museum piece'. Everyone likes to think that they struck a good deal,  meaning that they paid a price which was fair to them and they walked away happy. I have made some good deals and I have overpaid on a few where the art really 'spoke' to me. Hard to argue with the 'experts' though so my point of view is purely from a fan of OA and if the price doesn't match what I am willing to pay, I just walk on by. 

[aokartman]

14 minutes ago, davidtere said:

You are right. Kirby is King but that page is not worth $14,000 or it would have sold long ago. I say that because a Kirby FF page is on my 'want list' and I could pay that much if I thought the page (or some others) was worth it (and I absolutely love Medusa). Good art at a fair price will sell. Good art at a not so fair price usually won't. A lot of 'fishing' goes on all the time and by a lot of folks (OA dealers, eBay sellers, etc.). I told an art dealer at SDCC 10 years ago when he asked me if there was anything good out there with other dealers; I said, 'yes, however the pricing seems to reflect what the market might be in 3 - 5 years'. I haven't seen that changing much. I am as perplexed as others seem to be on OA that is desirable but the pricing from the sellers doesn't seem to generate interest at those prices and since it never comes down it becomes a bit of a 'museum piece'. Everyone likes to think that they struck a good deal,  meaning that they paid a price which was fair to them and they walked away happy. I have made some good deals and I have overpaid on a few where the art really 'spoke' to me. Hard to argue with the 'experts' though so my point of view is purely from a fan of OA and if the price doesn't match what I am willing to pay, I just walk on by. 

The long time dealers with deep inventory are not in a big rush to sell at fire sale prices.  What would be the point?  Because of the rising market, they can stand to wait for the buyer 

that really desires that specific piece.  This approach has worked for them in the past, and will continue as long as the model works.

David

[vodou]

14 minutes ago, aokartman said:

they can stand to wait for the buyer that really desires that specific piece.

11 years and counting...

[davidtere]

39 minutes ago, aokartman said:

The long time dealers with deep inventory are not in a big rush to sell at fire sale prices.  What would be the point?  Because of the rising market, they can stand to wait for the buyer 

that really desires that specific piece.  This approach has worked for them in the past, and will continue as long as the model works.

David

Yes, I agree that dealers are not in a rush to sell at 'fire sale prices' nor should they be. A good deal for a buyer can (and should) be a good deal for the seller as well, and doesn't have to be a 'fire sale'. And it does appear that the 'model works' at least on the surface because that is what many sellers do. I would say that in a lot of businesses good 'turns' are good business models. Perhaps OA dealers are different (I can't speak to that since I have never been an OA dealer) but keeping your money in motion, generating income and letting your money work for you will usually benefit your bottom line better than letting an asset sit and not generate income which then you use to buy more inventory and pocket the rest. Of course the perception of it 'gaining value' as it sits can be a driver. I would say that 11 years and counting as Vodou points out 'in this case' might make this at least the exception. I guess some of my OA has accrued value as it has just been in my possession but I am not a seller nor am I in business.  Those guys in that business are experts in that business and that is where they make their living and I don't. I don't feel comfortable stating more regarding that than I already have. 

I also agree that a buyer may come out and purchase that specific piece at that specific price. It just may be 5 more years down the road. 

I further recognize that most if not all OA dealers will discount items that they have had for awhile. I believe that is adjusting somewhat closer to what is considered to be a fairer market value. For example two years ago I purchased a piece from a OA dealer. It had a list price of 4K and had only been in the seller's inventory for less than a year. When I inquired about the piece he immediately, without my asking, dropped it to 3.5K more than a 20% discount. It was a stunning piece and I was happy to buy it. The seller was happy to sell it. This probably happens all of the time. 

 

[jjonahjameson11]

On ‎2‎/‎19‎/‎2020 at 2:26 PM, PhilipB2k17 said:

What's the basis for it, other than his name? I know he had a good run on X-Men and Daredevil, but....anything with his name on to seems to get a premium.

Well, I don't think everything he does has a premium price attached to it.  Quite the contrary.

For example, comparable pages from his 1st run X-Men stuff certainly sell for less than pages from his predecessor on the title, Paul Smith, and they also sell for less than his successors' pages, Marc Silvestri.

Likewise, pages from his 1st run ASM stuff sells for a comparable about to pages from his predecessor, Kieth Pollard, and his successor, Ron Frenz.

So, no premium attributed to Romita Jr pages on the aforementioned title.

I can't speak to any premium for his work on DD because I never collected the title, however his work on the DD Man Without Fear mini-series commands a premium, and rightly so as the definitive account of his origin, and his relationship with Elektra.  Great story by Miller, and excellent inks by Williamson.

 

Edited February 21, 2020 by jjonahjameson11

[Varanis]

I think Kirby still has enormous future growth potential from a market perspective. I'm probably one of the youngest collectors on this board and when it comes to pre-modern art, Kirby is one of the only artists I care about. His art is a massive influence on not only modern comics, but the MCU. Thor: Ragnarok was oozing with Kirby inspiration. I expect the movies to continue to latch onto this style as well as they continue with their cosmic storytelling. I've also seen Disney start to promote Kirby as one of the key artistic masterminds behind Marvel and the MCU. If a company like Disney continues to promote something like that, Jack Kirby will easily be a household name before long. All in all, this is probably a pretty terrible take, but I thought I'd share my perspective.

Edited February 21, 2020 by Varanis

[NC101]

37 minutes ago, Varanis said:

I think Kirby still has enormous future growth potential from a market perspective. I'm probably one of the youngest collectors on this board and when it comes to pre-modern art, Kirby is one of the only artists I care about. His art is a massive influence on not only modern comics, but the MCU. Thor: Ragnarok was oozing with Kirby inspiration. I expect the movies to continue to latch onto this style as well as they continue with their cosmic storytelling. I've also seen Disney start to promote Kirby as one of the key artistic masterminds behind Marvel and the MCU. If a company like Disney continues to promote something like that, Jack Kirby will easily be a household name before long. All in all, this is probably a pretty terrible take, but I thought I'd share my perspective.

I think that's a good point, maybe Disney legitimizing him further artistically would also translate to helping him be accepted by the mainstream fine art world too.

Edited February 21, 2020 by NC101

[Rick2you2]

47 minutes ago, Varanis said:

I think Kirby still has enormous future growth potential from a market perspective. I'm probably one of the youngest collectors on this board and when it comes to pre-modern art, Kirby is one of the only artists I care about. His art is a massive influence on not only modern comics, but the MCU. Thor: Ragnarok was oozing with Kirby inspiration. I expect the movies to continue to latch onto this style as well as they continue with their cosmic storytelling. I've also seen Disney start to promote Kirby as one of the key artistic masterminds behind Marvel and the MCU. If a company like Disney continues to promote something like that, Jack Kirby will easily be a household name before long. All in all, this is probably a pretty terrible take, but I thought I'd share my perspective.

A good portion of OA art pricing is nostalgia-based, not influence based. If it were influence- based, Eisner’s Spirit pages would be through the roof. Also, don’t forget this is a relatively small hobby, which is one reason that shilling is so bad: inflated prices on a small number of pieces can have an oversized effect. Good luck, for example, trying to move the market for muscle cars (typical versions). 

[Varanis]

9 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

A good portion of OA art pricing is nostalgia-based, not influence based. If it were influence- based, Eisner’s Spirit pages would be through the roof. Also, don’t forget this is a relatively small hobby, which is one reason that shilling is so bad: inflated prices on a small number of pieces can have an oversized effect. Good luck, for example, trying to move the market for muscle cars (typical versions). 

I agree, but I think influence is both a strong variable in calculating nostalgia as well as being a less important but still non-zero variable in pricing. I think nostalgia is and will be the primary driver for Kirby still; it just won't necessarily always be direct nostalgia for the Kirby comics themselves. The x-factor for Kirby is that Marvel is going to be nostalgic for more generations than essentially any IP in history. If Disney decides and promotes the idea that Kirby is the progenitor of the IP, then Kirby originals are suddenly a collectible understood and desired by the mainstream. 

While Eisner and Kirby are probably fair to compare in terms of influence, I think the nostalgia engines behind each are totally different beasts and are patently incomparable.

A side thought: Generally I'd think influence would be a strong factor in long term value and nostalgia a stronger factor for short term value or fluctuations. Influence is more akin to inherent worth whereas nostalgia reflects emotional value.

[glendgold]

9 minutes ago, Varanis said:

I agree, but I think influence is both a strong variable in calculating nostalgia as well as being a less important but still non-zero variable in pricing. I think nostalgia is and will be the primary driver for Kirby still; it just won't necessarily always be direct nostalgia for the Kirby comics themselves. The x-factor for Kirby is that Marvel is going to be nostalgic for more generations than essentially any IP in history. If Disney decides and promotes the idea that Kirby is the progenitor of the IP, then Kirby originals are suddenly a collectible understood and desired by the mainstream. 

While Eisner and Kirby are probably fair to compare in terms of influence, I think the nostalgia engines behind each are totally different beasts and are patently incomparable.

A side thought: Generally I'd think influence would be a strong factor in long term value and nostalgia a stronger factor for short term value or fluctuations. Influence is more akin to inherent worth whereas nostalgia reflects emotional value.

About Eisner: my hunch is that the market is stronger and narrower than you might think.  Sure, he was an early adopter of graphic novels in the '70s, but the work that people actually want is for one character in one short time period. Plenty of pages from The Spirit, 1946-52, have shown up but very few A+ pages, much less stories, have traded publically.  So I'm not sure what that market actually looks like.

Disney looks like they're talking a lot about Jack as The Eternals winds up. Curious to see how that pans out, but it's not going to move the needle for fine art folks one bit. Since Kirby drew for commercial purposes, fine art folks might understand he can be studied, like drive-in movies, or prized, like old French advertising posters, but he's never going to be embraced.

[Rick2you2]

4 hours ago, glendgold said:

About Eisner: my hunch is that the market is stronger and narrower than you might think.  Sure, he was an early adopter of graphic novels in the '70s, but the work that people actually want is for one character in one short time period. Plenty of pages from The Spirit, 1946-52, have shown up but very few A+ pages, much less stories, have traded publically.  So I'm not sure what that market actually looks like.

Disney looks like they're talking a lot about Jack as The Eternals winds up. Curious to see how that pans out, but it's not going to move the needle for fine art folks one bit. Since Kirby drew for commercial purposes, fine art folks might understand he can be studied, like drive-in movies, or prized, like old French advertising posters, but he's never going to be embraced.

I used to have an A level Spirit page, including one of his famous title blocks. Gone with a basment flood. Ex-wife at fault. I repeat, ex-wife at fault.

[Unstoppablejayd]