Advice please: Blue Chip vs. Diversity 4 4

[PhilipB2k17]

6 hours ago, romitaman said:

I got the ASM 59 for a 1960s kirby thor cover......and another Large art cover  and a fair amount of cash in 2016....

i could be off a little. but I dont see how any of this correlates to today and perceived values of art........

what i do know is.......TIMING is EVERYTHING........ (whether you are selling..or buying)

Yep. Because I’d much rather have a 60’s Kirby Thor cover in the long run than the Romita ASM 59. Have a feeling that will hold its value much better

[Rick2you2]

56 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

Yep. Because I’d much rather have a 60’s Kirby Thor cover in the long run than the Romita ASM 59. Have a feeling that will hold its value much better

I agree, but taste is personal, even for a dealer. Look who wanted the Romita cover. 

[oakman29]

I dont really have a say in this, because lets be honest I can only afford the D-F list art. I like to have many pieces that I love from artists I admire than 1 blue chip piece. 

[stinkininkin]

4 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

Yep. Because I’d much rather have a 60’s Kirby Thor cover in the long run than the Romita ASM 59. Have a feeling that will hold its value much better

Much too broad a statement IMO.  Depends on the Kirby Thor cover, wouldn't you agree?  All Kirby Thor covers are not equal.  I am a Kirby collector, and not really a Romita collector, but that ASM 59 cover is SWEET.  I'd rather have the ASM 59 cover than MANY Kirby Thor covers I could think of.

[delekkerste]

2 hours ago, stinkininkin said:

Much too broad a statement IMO.  Depends on the Kirby Thor cover, wouldn't you agree?  All Kirby Thor covers are not equal.  I am a Kirby collector, and not really a Romita collector, but that ASM 59 cover is SWEET.  I'd rather have the ASM 59 cover than MANY Kirby Thor covers I could think of.

Kirby > Romita but Spidey > Thor   

 Me, I'd rather have the ASM #59 than any Kirby Thor cover off the top of my head outside of JIM #83 and Thor #126.  

There actually are not a lot of Romita ASM 2-up covers that I really *love* (like, yes; love, no).  ASM #59 would make my personal Romita twice-up shortlist that you can count on one hand.  And, the others on the list would all be (much) more expensive!  Which is why I spent a very long time earlier this year deliberating whether to approach Mike about the #59 cover.  In the end, I decided not to, as it would have blown my budget for everything else (and cost me some of my best pieces either via trade or liquidating them to raise cash).  But, boy, when I saw JR post the cover on Facebook last week, I have to admit that I started to feel some regret...   

[Mr. Machismo]

I believe smaller* pieces are a better investment than bigger** because the buyer pool is substantially larger, but I will pretty much always trade multiple smaller for a bigger as it’s my collecting preference. I just prefer to keep my collection tight and focus on the best examples from those stories or artists. There will be some bigger pieces that will produce an incredible yield if you find the right buyer at the right time, but if you’re talking investments, it’s better to go with the consistency and liquidity of smaller, in my opinion.

*mid-high four figures

**low to low-mid five figures

[buyatari]

Less art is easier to manage, keep save and sell. 

 

[Rick2you2]

20 hours ago, oakman29 said:

I dont really have a say in this, because lets be honest I can only afford the D-F list art. I like to have many pieces that I love from artists I admire than 1 blue chip piece. 

What the market treats as "D-F" "ain't necessarily so." A published piece of work by the Big 2 is rarely, if ever, garbage. It just doesn't command a high price. And honestly, I think the way OA has moved from an artistic perspective from the early 70's forward has improved its story-telling roll. So, in that sense, you are getting a better "art bargain". 

[jjonahjameson11]

16 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

What the market treats as "D-F" "ain't necessarily so." A published piece of work by the Big 2 is rarely, if ever, garbage. 

Oh, I don’t think I can agree with this statement, especially as it pertains to the time in the 90’s when both Marvel and DC were vying for shelf space and pumping out title after title containing dreck.  Sooooooo many titles with horrible stories and hideous artwork!  

[jjonahjameson11]

22 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

I agree, but taste is personal, even for a dealer. Look who wanted the Romita cover. 

In the long run?  As far as I’m aware, Spidey is King and has been so for several decades now.  I honestly don’t see the popularity of Thor coming close to Spidey, ever. So from a nostalgia perspective, Spidey has the upper hand.

regarding artists, I’ve said it several times on this board: I am not a fan of Kirby’s artwork (but I do appreciate his contributions to the industry and the numerous characters he’s created/co-created).  Having said that, I really, really like his Thor 158 cover and would prefer it over a few Romita Spidey covers, if they were priced the same.

Edited August 27, 2018 by jjonahjameson11
Damn autocorrect!

[delekkerste]

1 hour ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

Having said that, I really, really like his Thor 158 cover and would prefer it over a few Romita Spidey covers, if they were priced the same.

Thor #158?  Only the small Thor figures even look like Kirby; I don't see any Kirby at all in the large Thor image. 

[JadeGiant]

1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

Thor #158?  Only the small Thor figures even look like Kirby; I don't see any Kirby at all in the large Thor image. 

Ditto. Has the large figure ever been brought into question? 

[lb jefferies]

13 minutes ago, JadeGiant said:

Ditto. Has the large figure ever been brought into question? 

I believe the large figure has always been thought to be Marie Severin's work

[JadeGiant]

14 minutes ago, LB JEFFERIES said:

I believe the large figure has always been thought to be Marie Severin's work

I wondered the same. Thanks

[stinkininkin]

3 hours ago, delekkerste said:

Thor #158?  Only the small Thor figures even look like Kirby; I don't see any Kirby at all in the large Thor image. 

Well, he said he's not a Kirby fan, so it would make sense that the cover he admires the most looks the least Kirby like of them all.  No disparagement in this observation by the way, makes perfect sense.

[PhilipB2k17]

I'd say 90% of the Kirby JIM & Thor covers are better than ASM #59, IMHO. 

You go through these and tell me with a straight face that I'm wrong.

http://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/thor/2

http://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/thor/3

http://www.coverbrowser.com/covers/thor/4

While I agree that Spidey is  > Thor, the ASM 59 cover is a big giant Doc Ock with a tiny Spidey reflected in his glasses.

Not feeling it.

 

UPDATE: Whoops, we're talking about ASM #59. Mush better than #55, but still not as good as the Kirby 2x Thor covers, IMHO.

Spidey punching some nondescript hoodlum, with Mary Jane gogo dancing on the side? I guess. But I like the Kirby Thor stuff better.

 

 

Edited August 27, 2018 by PhilipB2k17

[Rick2you2]

10 hours ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

Oh, I don’t think I can agree with this statement, especially as it pertains to the time in the 90’s when both Marvel and DC were vying for shelf space and pumping out title after title containing dreck.  Sooooooo many titles with horrible stories and hideous artwork!  

I think you are setting too high a standard. "Cookie cutter" quality and unimaginative, but not dreck.  

[jjonahjameson11]

2 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

I think you are setting too high a standard. "Cookie cutter" quality and unimaginative, but not dreck.  

Nope, I stand by my previous statement...dreck!

[Stefanomjr]

I'd rather have the best examples of stories/ artists I appreciate. 

Seems the popular rationale for picking up smaller examples is use them to trade or flip the art for a profit and work your way up towards the blue chip stuff.

However,  when you buy smaller examples that you like and then attempt to sell (maybe unsuccessfully) don't you then run the risk of having that art turn into just "inventory"? Won't your perception of the piece change? That would be my concern.

I'd just as soon invest in the stock market.  Highly liquid, valuations readily available. Make money there,  then buy your blue chip art... that's my plan. 

As far as downside protection... I'd assume,  on a long enough time horizon,  the smaller pieces are a safer bet.

[PhilipB2k17]

7 hours ago, Stefanomjr said:

I'd rather have the best examples of stories/ artists I appreciate. 

Seems the popular rationale for picking up smaller examples is use them to trade or flip the art for a profit and work your way up towards the blue chip stuff.

However,  when you buy smaller examples that you like and then attempt to sell (maybe unsuccessfully) don't you then run the risk of having that art turn into just "inventory"? Won't your perception of the piece change? That would be my concern.

I'd just as soon invest in the stock market.  Highly liquid, valuations readily available. Make money there,  then buy your blue chip art... that's my plan. 

As far as downside protection... I'd assume,  on a long enough time horizon,  the smaller pieces are a safer bet.

Stock market analogy? So, wouldn’t buying a lot of different art, some small caps etc., some foreign stocks, some fast growth, constitute diversifying your portfolio rather than rolling all of your funds into one or two blue chips?