Jay Leno's advice on collecting Original Comic Art 2 2

[vodou]

27 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

A) My point there is still valid. You may make money, break even, or lose money on monetizing your experiences. But, you generally paid the money for those experiences primarily for the experience, not to monetize your memories.

B) I think virtually everyone in this hobby hopes their art appreciates in value. But, that's different from expectation of appreciation, and making money, being the primary motivation for buying the art. I'm not talking about dealers, here. Dealers buy inventory, and that includes art they don't personally like, or have a connection with, because they know there's a market for it and they can sell it to someone who does want it. Collectors rarely do that. This doesn't mean dealers don't also collect - many do. But, a dealer's mindset is completely different than your average collector.

Do I have a statistical analysis or survey that shows this? Nope. I can only go by the sampling on this board, Felix's podcast, talking to other collectors at shows, etc. But, outside of dealers, I rarely hear any collector saying their primary motivator for buying art is to make money off of it. I think it is a fair, and reasonable, estimate to say that "most" do not.

"They are not paying for an object of value, per se. They are paying for the experience." Your words. I think collectors are paying for an object of value and for the experience of owning it [an object of value] personally not just looking at it in a book (AE) or mass production format (comic). As rare as those buying only for object of value would be those buying only for experience, imo

[PhilipB2k17]

17 minutes ago, vodou said:

"They are not paying for an object of value, per se. They are paying for the experience." Your words. I think collectors are paying for an object of value and for the experience of owning it [an object of value] personally not just looking at it in a book (AE) or mass production format (comic). As rare as those buying only for object of value would be those buying only for experience, imo

An "object of value" that may, or may not, retain its "value" over time.

[Lucky Baru]

5 hours ago, vodou said:

Third sentence makes you guilty of the first sentence. Takes one to know one? (and be wrong anyway)

If you don't have five, six, seven figures in cost basis (nevermind present value) in the "hobby" then while your opinion on big picture hobby economics may be valid (of course), it's going to be immaterial to those that do.

Do you?

Last you posted, that I remember, about art you'd recently bought and were excited about was some (nice, no doubt) Matt Wagner early oughts Batman panel pages. Of the $150-$300 variety. Nothing warm, fuzzy, harshed or otherwise about that or my statement re: whether you have a significant stake in the game or you don't. If recent Wagner Batman pages and similar are most of the cards in your hand, I don't think you do.

It's a fallacy of false dilemma  that those concerned about hobby economics cannot also love something, anything other than money/economics. LOL. We all love comic art; not everybody that loves comic art loves economics (subset within the set).

Do I?...hmmm.

I think the Matt Wagner pages were a few years ago (2 maybe?).  However, using your “I’m gonna belittle you with the value of Matt Wagner pages example” we can do the following math based upon the 50+ pages of art I’ve purchased in just the last 2 years.  I started collecting long before that though.

Average cost per page (according to your example = $ 225.00)
50 pages x $ 225.00 =  $ 11250.00.

Wow, I made it into your exclusive 5 figure club (on the low end) without breaking a sweat.  Do I get a cookie now or do you want to play let’s compare this or that in another misguided attempt to “shame me"?

Go back and read what you wrote.  In your opinion, only someone with more dollars on the table has an opinion that others with a big stake at the table might be interested in.  Thank you for providing a perfect example of what could only be written by someone that values money.  Using your logic only someone with a large amount of money invested in comic art could have a voice worth listening to by those in the same category.  Pretty narrow minded if you ask me.  In my world, the opinion of the small fish who struggles to buy that first page/splash/cover outside of their comfort zone is as valuable than the guy/gal who is buying art to get a positive return on their investment or to impress their friends with their latest piece.  I don't look down my nose at someone who doesn't have as much capital to spend on this or that as the next guy.  I don't hang out with, have a mind set, nor want to project that air of Thurston Howell III.  Just ain't me.  I don't worship cash.  Cash/dollars isn't how I look at the art in my collection either.  I collect it because I like it.

 

 

Edited May 3, 2018 by Lucky Baru

[vodou]

2 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

An "object of value" that may, or may not, retain its "value" over time.

And completely unlike "experiences" that are one and done leaving only the memory of in their wake. Even some "value" means greater than zero.

[vodou]

29 minutes ago, Lucky Baru said:

...using your “I’m gonna belittle you with the value of Matt Wagner pages example”...

Not at all. I was complimentary of your choices then and on that basis took the time to re-evaluate that part of Wagner's career, something I'd previously been unaware of.

If you took the time to get to know me other than taking cheap shots, you'd know that my collection was formed "long before" also on mostly $150-$300 panel pages. I've nothing but respect for the eye that culls the best pieces out of the commons stack. We both know (I think?) that what once was common doesn't always remain so, and the better pieces are more fun to own/appreciate and will appreciate better too. Anybody (with the money) can write a really big check after the hobby has created the distorted price hierarchy for them to buy into. That will never impress me.

35 minutes ago, Lucky Baru said:

Wow, I made it into your exclusive 5 figure club (on the low end) without breaking a sweat.  Do I get a cookie now or do you want to play let’s compare this or that in another misguided attempt to “shame me"?

Ho-hum. More hot air and cheap shots. Buy your own cookies.

43 minutes ago, Lucky Baru said:

Go back and read what you wrote.  In your opinion, only someone with more dollars on the table has an opinion that others with a big stake at the table might be interested in.  Thank you for providing a perfect example of what could only be written by someone that values money.  Using your logic only someone with a large amount of money invested in comic art could have a voice worth listening to by those in the same category.  Pretty narrow minded if you ask me.  In my world, the opinion of the small fish who struggles to buy that first page/splash/cover outside of their comfort zone is as valuable than the guy/gal who is buying art to get a positive return on their investment or to impress their friends with their latest piece.  I don't look down my nose at someone who doesn't have as much capital to spend on this or that as the next guy.  I don't hang out with, have a mind set, nor want to project that air of Thurston Howell III.  Just ain't me.  I don't worship cash.  Cash/dollars isn't how I look at the art in my collection either.  I collect it because I like it.

More hot air. Most women don't want to hear a man's thoughts on rape or abortion either. Not because men don't have thoughts too, that are valid, but because they're not considered exceptionally relevant to those with a vested interest (women) on the subject. Maybe we should thank all the women's writers for writing something like that from such a narrow women's perspective? Now replace that collectors with oversized stakes in the hobby regarding concerns about current prices, trends, liquidity and what the delta on each of those may be in the future.

Are you equating me with Thurston Howell III? If so, again you've proven how little you know me. And that means it's all bluster without substance. Fine for the soapbox as generalization about "some folks", but not if it's aimed specifically at me.

[Lucky Baru]

40 minutes ago, vodou said:

Not at all. I was complimentary of your choices then and on that basis took the time to re-evaluate that part of Wagner's career, something I'd previously been unaware of.

If you took the time to get to know me other than taking cheap shots, you'd know that my collection was formed "long before" also on mostly $150-$300 panel pages. I've nothing but respect for the eye that culls the best pieces out of the commons stack. We both know (I think?) that what once was common doesn't always remain so, and the better pieces are more fun to own/appreciate and will appreciate better too. Anybody (with the money) can write a really big check after the hobby has created the distorted price hierarchy for them to buy into. That will never impress me.

Ho-hum. More hot air and cheap shots. Buy your own cookies.

More hot air. Most women don't want to hear a man's thoughts on rape or abortion either. Not because men don't have thoughts too, that are valid, but because they're not considered exceptionally relevant to those with a vested interest (women) on the subject. Maybe we should thank all the women's writers for writing something like that from such a narrow women's perspective? Now replace that collectors with oversized stakes in the hobby regarding concerns about current prices, trends, liquidity and what the delta on each of those may be in the future.

Are you equating me with Thurston Howell III? If so, again you've proven how little you know me. And that means it's all bluster without substance. Fine for the soapbox as generalization about "some folks", but not if it's aimed specifically at me.

Poor Vodou, didn't get the answer he expected and had to switch gears and resorted to "hot air' and writing something about his opinion of what women want to hear or not hear.  Neither have anything to do about what I responded to and what you stated in your previous post.  Let's we forget...

1 hour ago, Lucky Baru said:

If you don't have five, six, seven figures in cost basis (nevermind present value) in the "hobby" then while your opinion on big picture hobby economics may be valid (of course), it's going to be immaterial to those that do.

Do you?

Right, I'm the narrow minded one.

Oh, and Vodou goes into vectors,concerns about liquidity, current prices, yada, yada, yada...I'm suprised you didn't write about "in the money", "at the money", and "out of the money" . 

Edited May 3, 2018 by Lucky Baru

[vodou]

[PhilipB2k17]

1 hour ago, vodou said:

And completely unlike "experiences" that are one and done leaving only the memory of in their wake. Even some "value" means greater than zero.

Sigh. I’ll let my previous comments speak for themselves, since we are now going round in circles. 

[chrisco37]

On 5/2/2018 at 6:56 PM, vodou said:

 

I think a true "big loss" would be if the owner of ASM 328 cover tried to sell it next HA. Does anybody think it would net even $400k back to the seller? If not - that's a quarter mil loss, over (now) a fair number of years too!

I’m still a bit surprised it sold for more than the McSpidey #1 cover.

[vodou]

1 hour ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

Sigh. I’ll let my previous comments speak for themselves, since we are now going round in circles. 

Sorry man, you're just really sloppy with words. Words matter. Especially when one favors black/white, sweeping or absolute sorts of statements. You make it too easy to call you out on the slop.

[PhilipB2k17]

35 minutes ago, vodou said:

Sorry man, you're just really sloppy with words. Words matter. Especially when one favors black/white, sweeping or absolute sorts of statements. You make it too easy to call you out on the slop.

Ummm, no. As I said, I’ll let what I previously wrote speak for itself. Your reading comprehension skills, notwithstanding. 

[vodou]

11 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

Ummm, no. As I said, I’ll let what I previously wrote speak for itself. Your reading comprehension skills, notwithstanding. 

More slop. Keep it coming. I have a big mop.

[PhilipB2k17]

20 minutes ago, vodou said:

More slop. Keep it coming. I have a big mop.

[stinkininkin]

You guys need to chill.  This is not why I come to these boards, and you're doing nothing positive for the hobby.

[ESeffinga]

 

If at a certain point, the conversation breaks down and the other party just can't (or doesn't want to) hear you... probably time to just leave it?

Or

 

All this really is all a sliding scale, and we are all drawing lines in the sand for ourselves. Buy this stuff. Never buy that. Never deal with so and so.

The number of rules we make up in our own minds to draw up barriers, draft support, or even enable our time and money spent in the hobby is going to vary from one individual to the next, obviously. Even if I don't agree with someone else's take the a topic, I at least make a note of the opinion (around here these are often of the financial variety). I've found my own attitudes have shifted on certain points as the years have gone on, and it's a little interesting to recognize when I've softened by stance on one topic or another, and catch myself in it. A bit like wearing a certain prescription of glasses for so long, when you get a fresh pair you don't realize how off they were until the new ones bring things back into crisper focus again. Sometimes so much so, the first reaction is to think there's something wrong with them. Even if I do think their veiwoint is skewed, or wrong, I can at least learn from it myself. It might be as simple as knowing who thinks what, or how they think, so I get a gauge of who they are. Anything to look at myself objectively and realistically. Sometimes hard for people to do.

If nothing else, I've learned more from listening to the other guy than I've gained by shouting them down. Or if someone's flat out wrong and floating disinformation, I try to be diplomatic in my saying so.

And maybe that all makes me soft / milquetoast, but at least I don't violate one of my own personal rules of the hobby (and life) which is to try and not be a  d i c k.
 

 

Edited May 4, 2018 by ESeffinga

[Stefanomjr]

I'm uncomfortable with the stock market analogy. Both in terms of asset valuations as well as cash flow needs. First off, there isn't enough of an active market with quoted prices for similar assets or other inputs which can be corroborated by observable market data. In other words, original art is less like Apple stock and more like private equity. Secondly, if you're valuing your collection as part of your "portfolio" of assets, OA would have the same liquidity and overhang concerns as private equity. Meaning, in a downturn it would be the LAST asset class you'd look to sell. 

 

I used to collect wine. Original art seems to have more in common with the wine collecting hobby than anything else.  Quantities are limited.  Vintages are to individual issues, and cases of wine from that vintage are like individual pages of an issue.