# of whales with unlimited funds 1 1

[vodou]

2 hours ago, Brian Peck said:

Should have blocked out that hat as well.

And the real power broker in the back, with the long straight hair.

[Rick2you2]

11 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

Assuming Gene’s numbers are correct, then it only takes a handful of collectors to perpetuate the high prices of higher end OA. Demographic and economic trends be damned. 

As someone with a bit of knowledge of economics and business, what happens in overpriced markets is a "hollowing out" effect. A price is set for a particular piece (generally based on market conditions which existed at one time), but no one else buys it at that price. The potential seller thinks the piece should sell for that amount, because another one had done so once before, and he/she won't lower it. So it stays off the market--until the seller has so much money tied up in inventory he has to sell at "depressed" prices. That's the "collapse" in the phrase "overshoot and collapse". Everything falls apart sharply (like with the Dutch tulip bulbs).

I once spoke to a dealer in Persian rugs who had a "specimen" piece he bought in the 1980's and which was then worth over $1,000,000, he said. I knew the market for regular oriental rugs has dropped about 30% since then (due to oversupply, more so than "loss of interest"). He also admitted that at current prices, he didn't think he could get $500,000. But, he was willing to hold onto it because he wanted his price. Logically, that doesn't make sense, but that's the way it works.

And, there are already whiffs of it. About 5 years ago, I saw a Neil Adams cover I liked. The dealer wanted $25,000 for it, which he said at the time was really high (no, it wasn't a Batman or GL/GA cover). The dealer is still holding it, but now he wants $80,000 for it because of the price of other Adams covers. By failing to turn over inventory to meet market, he's lost the opportunity to make profits on interim deals, and is essentially taking a piece off the market. 

So, while "sell, sell sell" makes sense, it won't likely happen until things get really, really off-kilter.

[vodou]

4 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

As someone with a bit of knowledge of economics and business, what happens in overpriced markets is a "hollowing out" effect. A price is set for a particular piece (generally based on market conditions which existed at one time), but no one else buys it at that price. The potential seller thinks the piece should sell for that amount, because another one had done so once before, and he/she won't lower it. So it stays off the market--until the seller has so much money tied up in inventory he has to sell at "depressed" prices. That's the "collapse" in the phrase "overshoot and collapse". Everything falls apart sharply (like with the Dutch tulip bulbs).

I once spoke to a dealer in Persian rugs who had a "specimen" piece he bought in the 1980's and which was then worth over $1,000,000, he said. I knew the market for regular oriental rugs has dropped about 30% since then (due to oversupply, more so than "loss of interest"). He also admitted that at current prices, he didn't think he could get $500,000. But, he was willing to hold onto it because he wanted his price. Logically, that doesn't make sense, but that's the way it works.

And, there are already whiffs of it. About 5 years ago, I saw a Neil Adams cover I liked. The dealer wanted $25,000 for it, which he said at the time was really high (no, it wasn't a Batman or GL/GA cover). The dealer is still holding it, but now he wants $80,000 for it because of the price of other Adams covers. By failing to turn over inventory to meet market, he's lost the opportunity to make profits on interim deals, and is essentially taking a piece off the market. 

So, while "sell, sell sell" makes sense, it won't likely happen until things get really, really off-kilter.

That's a good analysis.

Re: until the seller has so much money tied up in inventory he has to sell at "depressed" prices - That speaks a bit vaguely to a wide range of scenarios that ultimately boil down to where the time value of money, previously unimportant to an individual suddenly becomes very important. Stress being on the time and not the money aspect. (And that's where salvage value comes in to play.) I think we are all aware of this (and ultimately subject to anyway one way or another!) The financial/estate planner folks call it The Three D's: Death, Divorce, Debilitation (or Disease or Disability).

It's one thing when only a single individual is affected and reacts in a salvage value manner, but when a whole market segment (perhaps in response to a broad economic decline in a region?) does...no bid to air pocket and gap down to where at least some small handful of falling knife catchers reside. Unfortunately two things also tend to happen at the same point: risk aversion sets in and as credit lines tighten (and disappear), real liquid wealth is required to buy, which most do not have, and those that do get jittery and either wait for even better deals yet to come or just remove themselves from the risk markets altogether. When you're the only buyer at a price point that's half this year vs. last year, even Kirby/Sinnott FF - at 50% fire-sale feels like 'risk'!

None of us have access to the tax returns and balance sheets (which I'm not even sure all are populating or even know what that is!) of the well-known dealers and collector-dealers, so it's hard to say who's really winning the game, but I do wonder...? (None of what follows applies to consignment sellers.) Clearly Anthony Snyder is churning inventory as fast as possible and rolling the proceeds back into fresh inventory. In doing so, he's breaking the comic art is precious and wonderful not a commodity marketing model. But maybe he's just working a lot harder to make the same or less (at the end of the day)? We also don't know how much he's pulling out of the business for himself and how much he's rolling back in, how much of his 'wealth' is in hard to value (illiquid and volatile) inventory. And what debt load/service he may or may not be carrying, along with staff and warehouse overhead. That's what I mean by winning - really and truly or ..?.. hard to figure from the outside.

Anthony is a separate case as he does this stuff full-time (that I'm aware of) and who else is? I don't think anybody else (which is maybe why he's so turnover-friendly??) Is everyone else shielded from non-DDD supply/demand realities by another regular source of income?

[delekkerste]

6 hours ago, Brian Peck said:

Should have blocked out that hat as well.

All you guys may think you know who the guy in the hat is...but, how do you know that it's not this guy?  

 

[SquareChaos]

3 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

As someone with a bit of knowledge of economics and business, what happens in overpriced markets is a "hollowing out" effect. A price is set for a particular piece (generally based on market conditions which existed at one time), but no one else buys it at that price. The potential seller thinks the piece should sell for that amount, because another one had done so once before, and he/she won't lower it. So it stays off the market--until the seller has so much money tied up in inventory he has to sell at "depressed" prices. That's the "collapse" in the phrase "overshoot and collapse". Everything falls apart sharply (like with the Dutch tulip bulbs).

I once spoke to a dealer in Persian rugs who had a "specimen" piece he bought in the 1980's and which was then worth over $1,000,000, he said. I knew the market for regular oriental rugs has dropped about 30% since then (due to oversupply, more so than "loss of interest"). He also admitted that at current prices, he didn't think he could get $500,000. But, he was willing to hold onto it because he wanted his price. Logically, that doesn't make sense, but that's the way it works.

And, there are already whiffs of it. About 5 years ago, I saw a Neil Adams cover I liked. The dealer wanted $25,000 for it, which he said at the time was really high (no, it wasn't a Batman or GL/GA cover). The dealer is still holding it, but now he wants $80,000 for it because of the price of other Adams covers. By failing to turn over inventory to meet market, he's lost the opportunity to make profits on interim deals, and is essentially taking a piece off the market. 

So, while "sell, sell sell" makes sense, it won't likely happen until things get really, really off-kilter.

Loss aversion is a thing, even perceived loss aversion. Humans are not very good at this sort of thing in general.

[glendgold]

2 hours ago, SquareChaos said:

Loss aversion is a thing, even perceived loss aversion. Humans are not very good at this sort of thing in general.

Based on this, my money is on collectors of the future being:

1) AI

2) Dogs

 

 

[SquareChaos]

10 minutes ago, glendgold said:

Based on this, my money is on collectors of the future being:

1) AI

2) Dogs

 

 

#1 is a safe bet, and as always, #2 is a risky proposition. 

[glendgold]

29 minutes ago, SquareChaos said:

#1 is a safe bet, and as always, #2 is a risky proposition. 

I forgot the most likely possibility:

3) Actual whales.

[SquareChaos]

Just now, glendgold said:

I forgot the most likely possibility:

3) Actual whales.

[kbmcvay]

3 minutes ago, glendgold said:

I forgot the most likely possibility:

3) Actual whales.

Based on this, I predict in 950 years the Super Moby of Space will own every existing Kirby/Sinnott FF page.

[Pete Marino]

3 minutes ago, kbmcvay said:

Based on this, I predict in 950 years the Super Moby of Space will own every existing Kirby/Sinnott FF page.

My money is on this guy:

 

[glendgold]

10 minutes ago, Pete Marino said:

My money is on this guy:

 

I think this guy goes to the front of the line. 

[Ironmandrd]

A bit late to this thread.  I generally agree with Gene and John S.   Based on the definition being used**, I think it is between 10-15 excluding dealers.  It would be mildly interesting if someone set up a ballot with the categories identified by Gene to see what % of Board respondents correlate to each category. 

And love the jokes about the Cabal (or are they jokes?!? ).

**By the way, it's seems that the OP's definition has drifted a bit or been interpreted a bit differently later in the thread---in the first posting, it was spend 6 figures on OA frequently--not 6 figures on a single piece of OA frequently.  For purposes of separately the true whales from the rest of the pack, the definition of 6 figures on a single piece of OA frequently is I think probably more appropriate.

[Pete Marino]

11 minutes ago, Ironmandrd said:

A bit late to this thread.  I generally agree with Gene and John S.   Based on the definition being used**, I think it is between 10-15 excluding dealers.  It would be mildly interesting if someone set up a ballot with the categories identified by Gene to see what % of Board respondents correlate to each category. 

And love the jokes about the Cabal (or are they jokes?!? ).

**By the way, it's seems that the OP's definition has drifted a bit or been interpreted a bit differently later in the thread---in the first posting, it was spend 6 figures on OA frequently--not 6 figures on a single piece of OA frequently.  For purposes of separately the true whales from the rest of the pack, the definition of 6 figures on a single piece of OA frequently is I think probably more appropriate.

Dang, looks like when they rebooted the boards, this poll got nuked (not that 8 year old data would really be useful anymore)

 

 

[Pete Marino]

11 minutes ago, Ironmandrd said:

A bit late to this thread.  I generally agree with Gene and John S.   Based on the definition being used**, I think it is between 10-15 excluding dealers.  It would be mildly interesting if someone set up a ballot with the categories identified by Gene to see what % of Board respondents correlate to each category. 

And love the jokes about the Cabal (or are they jokes?!? ).

**By the way, it's seems that the OP's definition has drifted a bit or been interpreted a bit differently later in the thread---in the first posting, it was spend 6 figures on OA frequently--not 6 figures on a single piece of OA frequently.  For purposes of separately the true whales from the rest of the pack, the definition of 6 figures on a single piece of OA frequently is I think probably more appropriate.

Dang, looks like when they rebooted the boards, this poll got nuked (not that 8 year old data would really be useful anymore)

 

https://www.cgccomics.com/boards/topic/164088-whats-the-most-youve-spent-on-one-piece-of-art-cash/

[PhilipB2k17]

1 hour ago, glendgold said:

I think this guy goes to the front of the line. 

You’re both wrong. This guy will dig pages out of their CGC OA cases (started in 2023) after finding them at the bottom of the ocean. He will trade them for gasoline & cigarettes. 

 

[Nexus]

On 10/26/2017 at 4:29 AM, PhilipB2k17 said:

Listen to Felix’s podcast. He interviews a few of them.

Well, one for sure! Not going to say who, but his name rhymes with "Pene Gark".

On 10/26/2017 at 4:29 AM, PhilipB2k17 said:

 But I think Seth Myers is one.

I think he is not one.

Will say, though, that there are certainly whales out there who are largely anonymous. Observed a guy at the HA auction in Beverly Hills last year who dropped mid-six figures on a small handful of lots (with at least a couple in excess of $100K). Was told he was a banking exec. No one in the room knew who he was (he sat in the back of the room and kept to himself), except for one dealer. And even then, had only met him briefly once before. It was fairly obvious he had little interest in talking to other collectors or engaging in the hobby that way. He was there for the art and after he got what he wanted, he left.

So what a certain recent war criminal would call an "unknown known". Which I had previously considered doublespeak nonsense, but somehow, is fitting for this ridiculous hobby.

[vodou]

21 minutes ago, Nexus said:

..for this ridiculous hobby.

Is it ridiculous? I think the hobby's personalities and how they express themselves in words and actions are almost always more intriguing than any fan-favorite issue of [insert your favorite superhero comic] and almost Azzarello's 100 Bullets

[PhilipB2k17]

Seth Myers has Comic Book art on the wall of his office, per the New York Times.

[NelsonAI]

 

 

I recognize those guys .....  it's not the cabal ....  that photo is from the staff luncheon at TGI Friday's in San Diego.

The guy with the hat is in charge of the deep fryer.

While a few of those guys look chubby, I would hardly refer to them as whales.  

 

 

Edited October 28, 2017 by NelsonAI