IMPORTANT INFO for anyone buying "unused/rejected" covers esp. from Cool Lines 2 2

[comix4fun]

 

As a means of informing the collecting public, and to perhaps assist in righting what seems like a wrong, I feel compelled to post the following:

 

For the “TL:DR” crowd:

 

My friend was sold a piece of artwork by Stephen Donnelly as an “unused/rejected” cover to New Mutants #87 and, in fact, sincere and profound doubts have been raised as to the accuracy of the “unused/rejected” claim, and in the opinion of the artist identified as working on the piece the piece was called “a fake” and in no way his work nor an unsued/rejected cover. To date, Stephen Donnelly, supplied with all of this information, has rejected all attempts to obtain a refund by my friend.

 

 

 

Longer Version:

 

At San Diego Comic Con 2016 the following piece of artwork (see links below) was sold, for cash not trade, to a friend of mine by Coollines artwork, specifically Stephen Donnelly. It was unequivocally identified and attributed to Rob Liefeld as an artist on the piece. As well it was unequivocally identified and attributed as an “Unused/Rejected Cover” to New Mutants #87. In identifying it as “Unused/Rejected” the claim and implication is that the piece was created as a predecessor or contemporary to the final, actual, legitimate cover art which was penciled by Liefeld and Inked by McFarlane. That meant the piece would have been created sometime at or before late 1989 and January 1990, which was the newsstand time frame of New Mutants #87, in order to be “rejected” as the cover to New Mutants #87.

 

After being induced, in his opinion, to purchase the piece based entirely on these claims of attribution of artists, time frame for creation, intent for use upon creation, and overall legitimacy, my friend returned to his own booth at San Diego with the piece and showed it to several respected colleagues who uniformly doubted the claims made by Stephen Donnelly on all accounts, but especially that it was an “Unused/Rejected” cover for Marvel Comics New Mutants #87. Wanting to be sure before going back to Stephen Donnelly for a refund, he decided to do some independent research on the piece and the claims made about it.

 

Upon receiving this unanimous reaction from several experienced art collectors, and doing some background research after San Diego all of which pointed to the piece not being worked on by Rob Liefeld and not being the unused/rejected cover to any published cover, my friend reached out to Stephen Donnelly asked for a refund given the doubts surrounding the piece that had now been made known and his research into the claims made about its use and attribution. Initially he was rebuffed entirely, and Stephen doubled down on his claims of legitimacy and attribution. Eventually, after confronting his brother Rich in New York at a convention, my friend was offered “trade” for the piece.

 

Even though he really just wanted a refund, he tried to make the best of the situation and examined the possibility of trade. However, he was unable to take them up on this offer of trade because everything he looked at, at the New York convention, was owned by Rich and not Stephen, so it was off the table for trade. As well, being that nothing on their site is priced and Stephen has not returned any of the several phone calls or emails my friend has made to rectify this issue, it became obvious that trade was impossible and he repeated his request for a full refund.

 

As for the research and authentication of the piece, in the months that followed, my friend, with some assistance from others, researched the attribution and the claims of time frame and “unused/rejected” intention in the creation of this piece and discovered the truth from the artists who purportedly created this piece.

 

-Guang Yap (The Yap in the “Liefeld/Yap” signature and the only Yap ever to work on New Mutants) clearly stated that he does not remember ever working on this piece, and that he had done no work for Marvel until a year after this piece would have been created. He clearly stated that the editors at Marvel would not have even met him yet at the time this piece would have had to have been created to truly be a first draft or rejected cover to New Mutants #87.

 

-Rob Liefeld, when contacted regarding this piece, was even more to the point. He clearly imparted that not only was this NOT a rejected or unused piece, but that it was “FAKE” and he had to warn off at least one other collector from buying it previous to my friend buying it.

 

ALL of this information was relayed to both Stephen and Rich Donnelly. Rich Donnelly was notified of this in person at the aforementioned convention in New York, where he claimed it was “his brother’s piece” and he couldn’t help beyond calling him and passing on the information. Then, thereafter, they were both informed of all the information regarding the validity of this piece by email, and more than once, to given Stephen a chance to do the right thing now that he knew he had sold what Rob Liefeld considers a fake piece of artwork under what now would seem to be false or mistaken pretenses.

Several weeks have gone by since the last email and neither brother has responded to requests and demands for refund. With that as the background, you have this post.

 

The piece has remained in my friend’s possession and is still in his possession.

However, the piece can still be viewed here, in Stephen Donnelly’s CAF gallery:

 

http://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=392611

 

and here on CoollinesArtwork.com

 

http://www.coollinesartwork.com/featured.asp?Piece=281478

 

And again, according to the artists that are purported to have created this piece it is NOT “unused/rejected” it was NOT created by them at the time of the real New Mutants #87, and according to Rob Liefeld the piece is, in his words, "FAKE".

 

Stephen still has a chance to do the right thing but he’s obviously extinguished any good will between my friend and himself and this informational post is a final form of demand for refund before my friend makes use of any and all other means of remedy.

 

[comicdonna]

[comix4fun]

Here's an image of the piece, in case anyone wants to take a peek without clicking links.

 

 

[Twanj]

color me surprised

 

ouch that looks awful

Edited December 31, 2016 by Twanj

[chrisco37]

Yikes! Hope your friend ultimately gets his money back.

 

Something that I find strange is that this "rejected" cover is identical to the published cover. Layout is identical, characters identical. Even the wristband on Cable is identical.

 

Most rejected/unused covers I've seen have some differences between them and the published version.

 

 

[comicwiz]

I noticed this recreation from a blog that refers to it as a recreation, and in comparison (despite having slight differences with the headshot in the UPC box and more detail than the one posted by Chris), agree with chrisco37 that it looks more along the lines of a published cover than anything unused/rejected.

 

[Mephisto]

They have A TON of mess on their site pimped in the way. Half the site has art notes as "first version" etc and in most cases is likely pure BS.

Edited December 31, 2016 by Mephisto

[Mephisto]

Chris I am guessing you never had a conversation regarding this seller with your friend prior to his purchase. I can't imagine he would have gone through with this had he.

[comix4fun]

That's true. I was only consulted after the fact and after he had trouble getting S. Donnelly to respond.

[batman_fan]

wow, that is truly terrible. How are these guys still in business???

[Columbia Comics]

And why hasnt' your friend sued them yet?

[comix4fun]

And why hasnt' your friend sued them yet?

 

 

He believes, and he's correct, that the fastest way to be made whole is for the seller to acknowledge his error in identification and attribution and refund his money voluntarily.

 

If the seller doesn't act voluntarily then all options available to to the buyer may be employed.

[mister_not_so_nice]

wow, that is truly terrible. How are these guys still in business???

 

Because people keep buying from them and putting up with their B.S.

 

Sure, they have a lot of art people want (and a lot people don't want unless it's dressed up in some fake pretense).

 

Until collectors resist patronizing them unless they run the art through a REPUTABLE auction house they will continue with business as usual and we'll have a thread devoted to them every six weeks.

[malvin]

You know, I just realized I have six legit unused covers (two rejected, four done before the titles were cancelled). The brothers are giving all the legit "intended" covers out there a bad name (IMO).

 

I was thinking the same thing, I was going to try and sell one but now I might hold off due to this mess.

 

Malvin

[Superhero]

Chris,

 

I would advise your friend to bring a lawsuit for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and fraudulent inducement against these guys. Frankly, I would do it for free if I were licensed in the jurisdiction. It shows how good a man you are to have outed those crooks here for your friend. They have a pattern of doing this type of conduct and I think they should be forced to answer for it.

 

These men are experienced art dealers and have some obligation to authenticate the works they are sellng. It seems that it was easy to establish provenance for the piece. They hide behind each other when things go wrong but they all operate under the same company name.

 

Due to their pattern of criminal conduct, you may have something you can bring to the attorney general of the state they are in.

 

I would be extremely aggressive against these con-men. Unfortunately, I can tell by the interactions you have relayed that is the only way they are going to do anything to make this right.

Edited December 31, 2016 by Superhero

[Meeley Man]

wow, that is truly terrible. How are these guys still in business???

 

Because people keep buying from them and putting up with their B.S.

 

Sure, they have a lot of art people want (and a lot people don't want unless it's dressed up in some fake pretense).

 

Until collectors resist patronizing them...

 

[JadeGiant]

Thanks for posting.

 

Is this not a clear case of fraud?

 

Is the actual artist of this pieces known?

 

Are there pictures of these guys? I have strolled by their display but couldn't tell you which on e is Stephen and which is Rich.

Edited December 31, 2016 by JadeGiant

[Superhero]

Chris,

 

In thinking about it, in addition to what I wrote above, you may be able to bring wire fraud and other claims under the consumer protections act and UCC of the state in which your friend lives or, more likely, where the Donnely's are doing business. I am happy to help in any way.

Edited December 31, 2016 by Superhero

[zhamlau]

wow, that is truly terrible. How are these guys still in business???

 

Because people keep buying from them and putting up with their B.S.

 

 

Honestly I don't know of more than 2-3 times in the last 5 years anyone I know has bought anything from them. Their Ebay ID's show little/no sales completed. I don't know who these phantom uninformed or "don't mind getting ripped off' folks are who are supposedly keeping them in business. I think they actually might not exist. Its seems as if the brothers make few if any sales each year, its just i remember these guys as buying a lot back in the 20 bucks a page days. I think they just sank a ton in back then and now can afford to have 2-5 sales a year at insanely over market prices.

 

That's probably why no one can really punish them for their games, they don't need the money more than the art because they effectively have nothing into the art. They can play these games because it doesn't matter to them if they sell or not. Its almost like they have nothing to lose, so you cant really push em so on these antics go for decades.

[thehumantorch]

A pair of crooks and con men.