Attending SDCC? Please post OA dealer wall photos here
4 4

117 posts in this topic

119 posts

how much was the xmen 113 cover? who had it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,058 posts
4 hours ago, Yurgo said:

how much was the xmen 113 cover? who had it?

I think it was Albert Moy. Not sure of price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,802 posts
9 hours ago, Yurgo said:

how much was the xmen 113 cover? who had it?

Pete Koch.  Think it was 275K as it was 250K last year.  Also, his Amazing Heroes Watchmen team cover was up to 275K this year and I think he's been pricing the two covers at the same level. 

Edited by delekkerste

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
119 posts
8 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

Pete Koch.  Think it was 275K as it was 250K last year.  Also, his Amazing Heroes Watchmen team cover was up to 275K this year and. I think he's been pricing the two covers at the same level. 

My goodness, is it even worth that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,538 posts
12 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

Pete Koch.  Think it was 275K as it was 250K last year.  Also, his Amazing Heroes Watchmen team cover was up to 275K this year and I think he's been pricing the two covers at the same level. 

Not to take anything away from the Xmen 113 cover, but wasn't it at one time discounted because 1-the relative size of the figures, and 2-more importantly, did not have Austin inks (even with Layton considered to be an above average inker on Byrne)?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,802 posts
3 hours ago, Yurgo said:

My goodness, is it even worth that?

The UXM 113 cover has been at the SDCC for years now, and seems to go up $25-50K every year. I suspect the market has caught up to where it was priced a few years ago, but, $275K is, um, hella aggressive.  

As for $275K on the AH Watchmen cover...let's not mince words - not realistic would be the understatement of the year on that one. 

8 hours ago, Panelfan1 said:

I think it was Albert Moy. Not sure of price.

Albert has the #127, which is also stickered at $275K. I think this is the more desirable cover of the two.

I think the problem with the Byrne UXM cover market is that all the sellers seem to be at $225K+ and all the buyers seem to be stuck at $150-200K (I'm talking about the good-but-not-great covers like the #113 and #127; obviously the really good and great examples are worth even more and occasionally do move at those levels).  I think the market would probably clear on these covers around $175K, but, the sellers don't want to come down, and the buyers don't want to come up into the $200Ks, so you get asking prices going up every year but no sales happening on these kinds of covers. 

I guess the owners think that prices will keep going up and that they'll be able to get these $250-275K levels a few years from now if need be, given that the market has caught up to the $150-175K these things were priced at a few years ago. I guess we'll see... 

3 hours ago, stinkininkin said:

Not to take anything away from the Xmen 113 cover, but wasn't it at one time discounted because 1-the relative size of the figures, and 2-more importantly, did not have Austin inks (even with Layton considered to be an above average inker on Byrne)?  

Both factors definitely still apply. 

Edited by delekkerste

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,489 posts
9 hours ago, Yurgo said:
9 hours ago, delekkerste said:

Pete Koch.  Think it was 275K as it was 250K last year.  Also, his Amazing Heroes Watchmen team cover was up to 275K this year and. I think he's been pricing the two covers at the same level. 

My goodness, is it even worth that?

Was this question rhetorical?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,489 posts
6 hours ago, delekkerste said:

 

I guess the owners think that prices will keep going up and that they'll be able to get these $250-275K levels a few years from now if need be, given that the market has caught up to the $150-175K these things were priced at a few years ago. I guess we'll see...  

But by then, won't they be asking for $300k+?

I guess it's always nice to be in a position where you're way in the money on an investment and you have absolutely no need to sell.

Edited by tth2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
811 posts
49 minutes ago, tth2 said:

I guess it's always nice to be in a position where you're way in the money on an investment and you have absolutely no need to sell.

Too true.

I think it would truly take a lot to actually put financial pressure on most of our OA dealer friends to the point where they needed to make lots of concessions on their pricing.  We went through the Great Recession a decade ago, and I don't recall prices being much affected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,208 posts
Quote

In any case, while I believe that the OA market will soften during the next recession, I think it is more likely that any economic-related downturn will prove to be cyclical.  It's the secular tipping point caused by aging/demographic changes that I am more worried about (which hopefully is still a decade or more away).  I'm confident we'll see a softening of Byrne X-Men cover prices by then...but will any of us be young enough to still care?   

 

Have you experienced and seen younger collectors entering the market? I've seen a large amount of younger ones myself from sites like Twiter and Instagram but not sure if they seem to deal exclusively with modern art and artists and would have an interest in older art pieces. Either because they have no connection to it, too pricey for them, or because they wouldn't care about artists from the period that weren't famous now or did A ranked titles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,821 posts
On 7/28/2018 at 2:50 PM, Yurgo said:

My goodness, is it even worth that?

Neither one has sold so that should answer your question...:bigsmile:

Edited by pemart1966

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,489 posts
10 hours ago, delekkerste said:

The OA market was ebullient in the summer of 2008; SDCC that year was positively giddy for art collectors.  By early 2009...not so much.  Prices may not have visibly tanked, because the market just froze up for the most part, but, I'm pretty sure no one was paying more for art in February 2009 than they would have in July 2008.  Certainly if the recession had lasted longer than the span of an eye blink, I'm confident you would have seen more obvious signs of distress.  As it was, I got some of the best deals I've ever had on art in the first half of 2009 - I can think of one private deal, one purchase from a dealer and one purchase at auction in particular (the latter two were resold for some of the biggest gains I've ever realized on art).  I'm metaphysically certain that these pieces would have cost me a lot more in mid-2008 and that the competition would have been much tougher, to the point where I probably wouldn't even have been able to get all of them.  Bottom line:  it's only because prices came soaring back (not just on art, but pretty much all assets) so quickly after the Great Recession that the narrative has become "OA prices weren't affected at all".  It is a myth - does anyone really believe that they could have liquidated their collections in the first quarter of 2009 for as much as you could have in mid-2008?  It's not just the data points you see, but also those that never happened that tell the real story.  

It's kind of like the question "if a tree falls in forest but no one hears it, does it make a sound?"  If prices would have gone down if people had been forced to sell in 2009, but no one was forced to sell, did prices go down?

Being relatively new to the art market, I've been impressed by how financially solid the collectors and dealers seem to be.  They can sit on big ticket pieces for seemingly forever and don't need constant turnover to pay the bills.  During the Financial Crisis, there were no fire sales in OA like we saw on the comic side by overly leveraged collectors/dealers.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,003 posts
1 hour ago, tth2 said:

Being relatively new to the art market, I've been impressed by how financially solid the collectors and dealers seem to be.  They can sit on big ticket pieces for seemingly forever and don't need constant turnover to pay the bills.  During the Financial Crisis, there were no fire sales in OA like we saw on the comic side by overly leveraged collectors/dealers.    

Welcome to the OA collecting fold :applause:

The strong holding power of OA collectors & dealers may be due to the fact that unlike for comic books, the initial exponential explosion of OA prices only occurred over the past 20 years or so. Therefore, almost all OA dealers and many established collectors were able to accumulate big-ticket pieces for pennies on the dollar, either before or early in this period. These folks' realized profits are now so high, and/or buy-in costs are so low, that they can afford to hold onto their current collections/inventory regardless of further financial considerations :acclaim:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,802 posts
9 hours ago, tth2 said:

It's kind of like the question "if a tree falls in forest but no one hears it, does it make a sound?"  If prices would have gone down if people had been forced to sell in 2009, but no one was forced to sell, did prices go down?

Of course prices went down. You don't have to rely solely on public market comps to ascertain value impairment.  And it wasn't just that there wasn't widespread liquidation, it was also that buyers largely went to the sidelines as well.  Doesnt sound like a situation where value wasn't impaired to me. (shrug)

But, in any case, your presumption that no one was forced to sell is flawed.  It was a buyer's market and I got some of the best deals of my collecting career in the first half of 2009 - and that's following a period of then-crazy prices seen in mid-2008 when I was getting shut out left and right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,489 posts
1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

Of course prices went down. You don't have to rely solely on public market comps to ascertain value impairment.  And it wasn't just that there wasn't widespread liquidation, it was also that buyers largely went to the sidelines as well.  Doesnt sound like a situation where value wasn't impaired to me. (shrug)

But, in any case, your presumption that no one was forced to sell is flawed.  It was a buyer's market and I got some of the best deals of my collecting career in the first half of 2009 - and that's following a period of then-crazy prices seen in mid-2008 when I was getting shut out left and right. 

Of course I have to rely on public market comps.  Yes, I can factor in reports from private sales, but who knows how reliable they are because guess what--people lie.

I'm sure there were some good deals, and it was a buyer's market, relatively speaking.  But I was watching prices on Heritage and CC during this period and there was no Gary Keller OA-equivalent getting his face ripped off in front of the world as far as I could see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25,802 posts
On 7/28/2018 at 2:41 PM, delekkerste said:

Pete Koch.  Think it was 275K as it was 250K last year.  Also, his Amazing Heroes Watchmen team cover was up to 275K this year and I think he's been pricing the two covers at the same level. 

$275K is the new $65K

:insane: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
4 4