vodou Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 1 hour ago, Rick2you2 said: I tend to agree, but it's not listed for that and is no longer on eBay. So what I'm "hearing" is that their basic stock is, in many cases, quite old, and they apparently have no reason to turn it over quickly? Yes. I'd be shocked if they acquired this any more recently that mid-90s (for $100...maybe?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick2you2 Posted January 4, 2018 Author Share Posted January 4, 2018 11 minutes ago, vodou said: Yes. I'd be shocked if they acquired this any more recently that mid-90s (for $100...maybe?) Well, they still buy things. I had seen a mediocre Miignola piece listed for $600 about 6 months ago which they are now selling. And, they do have new stock which shows up. So they must be injecting new capital. As a generic business model, I still don't get some of the pricing out there. Let's say someone buys a piece for $100 and is able to sell it for $150 in 3 months. That's a rate of return of 200%. Allowing for down time (say, only 3 transactions per year instead of 4), and overhead, would still produce a darn good net profit. It's the reverse of what some people do on the stock market. They buy a stock, it goes down, and even if it has little chance of going back up (Sears stock, for example), people stick with it. Just rambling on an Winter's day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhamlau Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 The issue with them really is the "alternate" covers. They love to buy a piece of art similar to a printed cover for a fraction of the price, put some stats on it and call it an "alternate" or "first take" cover. They then proceed to charge as if it was the actual published cover. Thats really my biggest concern with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malvin Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 1 hour ago, zhamlau said: The issue with them really is the "alternate" covers. They love to buy a piece of art similar to a printed cover for a fraction of the price, put some stats on it and call it an "alternate" or "first take" cover. They then proceed to charge as if it was the actual published cover. Thats really my biggest concern with them. yeah, that concerns me too. Another phrase they use is "redrawn cover" example on ebay Pricing high is one thing, slapping trade dress on a modern con sketch and calling it a vintage unused cover is a whole other level. Malvin zhamlau 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilipB2k17 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 7 hours ago, Rick2you2 said: I was hoping someone could explain a business model to me. More than a few people, besides myself, have noticed that the prices Coollines wants for its OA can be really high, sometimes by multiples of the market. I did buy something from Coolines once, which was at an "okay" price, but a lot of the others they have....I'll pass. Now everyone certainly has the right to try and get whatever they can for what the own. I understand that. But the raw volume of art they apparently have suggests a huge inventory. And if their pricing is generally really high, how does that business model work? Commission only? Ultra high mark-up to cover a small number of sales? Or maybe they are really collectors and don't care? I typed in Coollines in the search box here, and one person theorized they are preying on the new and uneducated. I find that hard to believe. It's a lot easier for the new and uneducated to find CAF and look at published prices than to make inquiry of what something costs. Again, this is not a knock on the Donnellys. When I met one at a show, he was a perfectly nice, likable guy, and he seemed to know how his pricing was viewed. I just can't fathom the business model and I'm intellectually curious about it. If you're a collector, you have to pay taxes on the capital gains of any art you sell. If you're a "dealer," who is in "the business of buying and selling original art," you only pay taxes on your overall profits. So.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilipB2k17 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 4 hours ago, Rick2you2 said: But I'm not bidding on the thing--really. I think the page could definitely hit $2,500 to $3,000, however. I'm a particular fan of clever panel design, and this one has a terrific splash. How much time is left in that auction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panelfan1 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 1 hour ago, PhilipB2k17 said: If you're a collector, you have to pay taxes on the capital gains of any art you sell. If you're a "dealer," who is in "the business of buying and selling original art," you only pay taxes on your overall profits. So.... I dont think they are faking the selling thing. They post and repost daily on ebay and caf. They actively buy and create fake logos and such. Then they fo a few shows too. I think they are definetely running a business. Cant be sure how they sleep at night - but I dont think its a ruse just to save taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick2you2 Posted January 4, 2018 Author Share Posted January 4, 2018 2 hours ago, malvin said: Pricing high is one thing, slapping trade dress on a modern con sketch and calling it a vintage unused cover is a whole other level. I would be hard-pressed to believe a dealer is doing that, or at least intentionally doing that. I've seen things saying they were similar to something else, or a recreation, but actually? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilipB2k17 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 35 minutes ago, Panelfan1 said: I dont think they are faking the selling thing. They post and repost daily on ebay and caf. They actively buy and create fake logos and such. Then they fo a few shows too. I think they are definetely running a business. Cant be sure how they sleep at night - but I dont think its a ruse just to save taxes. Didn’t say they weren’t running a business. The IRS requires businesses to actually do things like that in order to treat their sales as business revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panelfan1 Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 10 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said: Didn’t say they weren’t running a business. The IRS requires businesses to actually do things like that in order to treat their sales as business revenue. Probably the smartest collection as a business model I have seen is the guillermo del toro exhibit. It is awesome chalk full of incredible artwork. And since its a travelling art show its also a write off. While I have no insider knowlwdge - imagine buying art with pretax dollars and not having to sell it. Just show it from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malvin Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Rick2you2 said: I would be hard-pressed to believe a dealer is doing that, or at least intentionally doing that. I've seen things saying they were similar to something else, or a recreation, but actually? they are doing it. Don't buy any "unused covers" from them. Malvin thehumantorch and Twanj 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theflashunc Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 I just assume anything the Donnellys have -- and they have some Paul Ryan FF art I'd be thrilled to own -- as just having been lost in a fire somewhere. They're not dealers in any traditional sense, between the altered covers, outrageous pricing and all the rest. They're more collectors using the veneer of the business to their own advantages. Kohei and Twanj 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodou Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 3 hours ago, Panelfan1 said: ... - but I dont think its a ruse just to save taxes. Keep in mind they have other business interests, which if established in that manner also, they can wash all allowable deductions in comic art against. (Very valuable if comic art deductions exceed revenue!) I heard somewhere that at least one long-running interest has been CA real estate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodou Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 3 hours ago, Rick2you2 said: I would be hard-pressed to believe a dealer is doing that, or at least intentionally doing that. I've seen things saying they were similar to something else, or a recreation, but actually? 2 hours ago, malvin said: they are doing it. Don't buy any "unused covers" from them. Malvin They are absolutely positively doing this. Just search for any Donnelly or San Mateo Comic Art or Coollines or ? (there's another business name too but can't remember it anymore!) complaint thread, you'll be tripping over examples of exactly this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeezy McSphincter Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 The most recent one I remember was the New Mutants 87 fake cover thread, posted probably in 2017. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twanj Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 11 hours ago, Rick2you2 said: It's not ethically challenged, in my view. It's just not comprehensible. I should think that someone would want to flip their inventory over every year, what with new stuff always becoming available. If you can pick up a 50% rate of return in one year, you're doing a killing. To let it sit for years on end just doesn't sound like a good business practice. you sound like you're describing a conventional business. don't confuse the DBs with that theflashunc and alxjhnsn 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alxjhnsn Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 I need to put together a DB Q&A. I started one once, but ... I believe that they are really collectors in disguise. They do enough business to keep the IRS happy and buy comic art for themselves. Just my opinion. They do special things to make a cover. No doubt. Here's my favorite I'd like to preface this with that my relationship with Coollines Art has been only through e-mail and while we've never struck a deal they have always been prompt and polite. That said, they do things differently than I would and one of those is "restoration" of their art. One example is Curt Swan's cover for Superman Annual #7. This Curt Swan piece was sold on Heritage in 2007 - As I understand it, the Heritage buyer sold/traded it to the Donneleys. They now show it on their site as: A conversation on the Curt Swan FB fan page led to an e-mail conversation with Steve. Steve told me in that note that: Steve Donneley said: As our web site mentions, the large center Superman figure by Curt Swan was the only original art ever created for this cover. The four side images were stats taken from images of earlier reprinted stories and were missing from the original when I bought it. "The 4 side images on the 1963 annual were originally stat'ed from earlier Superman stories and were hand redrawn for this cover" So, I had the missing stats redrawn and placed on the original art board in the exact position that the DC production material would have gone! They "restored" the cover to its original state by re-creating stats. An interesting point was made on the Swan FB page by Ray Cuthbert about Steve's assumption: Ray Cuthbert said: Steve's information to Alex above shows an incorrect assumption. All of the images for that cover were drawn especially for that cover by Swan & Klein. They were not stats unless they were drawn by Swan and Klein and then statted for publication purposes. The stories reprinted were not all drawn by Swan, let alone all inked by Klein. There is no way that those were stats from story panels originally. I have no idea if it was done on two separate boards, but I suspect so, since only the "statue" part was done in ink wash, to make it look distinctive. While I would not have mounted "replacement stats" on the original Swan piece, I might have done it on an overlay. There are several takeaways here: People do try to "restore" art and Coollines is one place that does. Proper restoration is hard. Be an informed buyer One man's restoration is another man's fake. By the way, this piece was not originally designed for the cover of Superman Annual #7. Ray Cuthbert says: The statuette image was originally used prior to SUPERMAN ANNUAL #7 - as the Independent News Initiative Award. This is why the actual original art has a different inscription than on the ANNUAL cover. Here’s that original image: The Shoveler, Andahaion, vodou and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodou Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 7 hours ago, alxjhnsn said: They "restored" the cover to its original state by re-creating stats. Alex, excellent write-up overall. I'm just going to correct you on this one point, per Steve's own admission: 7 hours ago, alxjhnsn said: So, I [Steve Donnelly] had the missing stats redrawn and placed on the original art board in the exact position that the DC production material would have gone! Redrawn. As in giving the appearance to any/all future casual and/or uniformed interested parties that the piece is now: all original art by Curt Swan. Unless you ask exactly: Is everything here drawn personally by the hand of Curt Swan? I'm pretty sure, only under further specific questioning would Steve admit that only the central figure is "known/general knowledge" Curt Swan and the rest is "unknown" artist/s. Does this feel like more of an interrogatory line of inquiry instead of what we all usually do when trying to buy some "cool lines" for our collection? Well...yes it is So, further, I'm also pretty sure that unless specifically asked about "who, what, where, when, why" Steve would never otherwise admit that he himself commissioned the re-drawing from contemporary mystery artist x. The point being, to anybody that ever reads this, when dealing with the DBs never take at face value or assume anything, ever ever ever, question everything. You'll know you're pulling at the right thread if the responses turn toward sullen, rude, or if the other party becomes non-responsive. Awesome. That's your clue to just....walk away alxjhnsn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick2you2 Posted January 5, 2018 Author Share Posted January 5, 2018 Hmmm... I simply wanted to say that it was not my intention to create a dumping ground on the DB's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vodou Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 20 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said: I simply wanted to say that it was not my intention to create a dumping ground on the DB's. Oh c'mon. This is clearly all news to you (and whoever else reads this thread in the future that's newer to the hobby.) Would you rather not know? The Donnelly Brothers (aka The Brothers, The DBs) created the perma dumping ground with their behavior. Has nothing to do with you, except you put their name out there (this week). It would have come up, again, anyway. Probably sometime or other this month. Just like their atypical (and that's being very kind) behavior has probably raised the subject for some collector somewhere every month for years upon years. I'm happy to rain all over their parade at every opportunity. This, and they've never even directly burned me! It's one of my give-backs to the hobby Do yourself a favor and read this thread, if you somehow still feel horrible about bringing The DBs to the fore. And then let me know, here or via pm, if you haven't changed your mind (?!!!) I'd be curious and want to know your reasoning. If it's because you still hope to do business with them in the future and don't want to harm those chances...don't worry...as long as you pay full* 3x-5x fmv freight...they will always take your money. Please set a reminder to bring them up again in February, in came I'm busy and forget to do so myself *Not that you'd have a chance at a lower markup anyway dirtymartini1 and chrisco37 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
