Keeping your collection private 4 4

[glendgold]

4 hours ago, AnkurJ said:

They want a xerox of your art? I think a simple sorry but no would work well here ?

Yeah, you might want to look up Richard Rae in the search engine.

[mtlevy1]

Post or Not - I vote Post!

I have my grail because I posted on CAF - so if you want yours you might want to do the same.

That said, I don't post every piece. When I get a piece, if it fits well in one of my galleries - and it is not too repetitive - then I generally post it.

Most probably know, but CAF has a default by artist listing now so you don't need to organize your CAF by artist - I found organizing in themes helps focus my buying as well.

In terms of inquiries, I don't get so many that I can't write appropriate responses - and have some fun with it sometimes.

In terms of fresh to market effect,  I haven't seen any data but I imagine it depends on a variety of factors I am not investing any time in thinking about just now

My 2 cents!

Mark

 

 

 

 

[ESeffinga]

I think a lot of the "fresh to market" business is largely a case of the virgin/whore psychological reasoning that Felix touched on.

There are clearly people who want to feel like they are the "only one", or at least the only one people remember as being associated with a given piece of art. The idea that someone else was there first and has a rep for having been the owner of it previously lessens the new owner's joy, or thrill they get out of having it. And when as Felix interjected, work has been passed around, it gives off the stigma of there something being wrong with it.

The other thing that has a similar psychological effect is having work from a given artist be readily accessible or not at any given time. To give an example, there are plenty pieces that are listed seemingly permanently on eBay, CAF, etc. We've all seen examples.  Or pieces that seem to endlessly sit on a dealer's or rep's website for years. Could be out of "high" pricing", or it could be out of disinterest in the material. But being around collecting long enough, you do find that just about everything ticks a box for someone and sells eventually. Buyer finds art and a match is made.

Being around long enough, I remember when plenty of pieces that are fought over now were readily and easily available. Preacher, The Long Halloween, Sandman, days when it seemed like every other month someone was breaking up a book by Jack Kirby or Neal Adams. Today these things seldom happen. 20+ years ago it was a regularity.

The objective truth here is that the work is the work. X-Men 1 is X-Men 1. It always will be, The content of those pages and their historical implications does not change because one person owned it, or a dozen have. It might change in someone's personal estimation of the work, if it came from the collection of someone well respected, or it may loose value in people's minds because it has been passed around over the years. I'd argue that part is all luck of the draw. though

There have been plenty of pieces bought over the years and tucked away in collections to not be seen for decades, only to arise at some auction or in an individual's collection. SOme are crappy. Some are gems. Those works are what those works are and will always be. It's that seeing them and not knowing you could have had them... that tantalizing accumulation of the unobtainable. The piece the market didn't know was available seems to give some collectors an extra charge to obtain, or the auction that extra bit of bidding exuberance.

In that regard, fresh to market is something more like nostalgia, which I think most agree is where much of the money is at in comic OA collecting.
So while the work is always the same (unless some knucklehead's altred it), it's desirability as a piece of art theoretically shouldn't grow or diminish, excepting of course that it does. It does with nostalgia, and it does in that extra sense of being the first there, or being the one that dug it up, pried it loose, or otherwise got in ahead of the hundreds of others that would have done if they had seen it first or had the fatter wallet.

 

 

 

[ESeffinga]

That all said, I tend to post a fair amount of my collection on CAF. I was a very late adopter, given that I was aware of it within days of it's inception. I avoided it out of privacy concerns and the like. I'll occasionally swirl things around in the gallery a bit as to what's up or not, but I do find participating very rewarding. Especially as someone that doesn't do comic shows hardly at all anymore. Mostly because I find the shows all terribly alike, and thus boring. And I have a pretty severe antisocial streak to me. It's taken me decades to totally understand that.

Having an active CAF has led me to making a handful of good friends with folks from around the country (and globe), and even more acquaintances that have made for some wonderful art deals to boot. Though it's the slightly removed social connection aspects of the board that have been most appealing. I've had many wonderful conversations with folks about artwork where we have shared mutual interest. I've learned a ton about artists I wasn't totally aware of, or even aware of at all. I've tried to inform some folks who didn't know as much or where looking to get into collecting, and I've had to wave off some other folks where were annoying me on occasion, or wouldn't take a hint regarding pieces not for sale.

I've generally felt that the good that has come from my CAF gallery exposure outweighs the bad by a very large margin. That said, this all makes sense to me and my situation. If I had bought up all that Kirby instead of so much other art thta spoke to me personally on a deeper level, I would be sitting on a gold mine of potential fresh to market goodness. But then I wouldn't have had the more spiritually rewarding experience of living with the art that I do have a much deeper love of. And that's why I got into collecting. It wasn't to eek out every last dollar of potential future value. When I bought the work I have, it was never with future value in mind. And I know that makes me an aberration, but it's what's always worked for me.

I can totally understand why some folks keep their work to themselves. The only thing that gets me are the folks that use CAF regularly to look for work, and buy work, and just view it for their own personal enjoyment, but don't contribute to the visual conversation themselves. I do understand that it's a practical way to be with certain types of art. But it's also a self-benefitting one. And hey, that's cool if that works for people that do that. No one's forcing anyone to participate or not. It's just that as someone who wants to actively engage with other collectors with similar interests, it always feels odd being pumped for information about an artist, where to find their work, etc. by someone who doesn't put themselves out there or contribute as well.

Yeah, there are the comment fishers, the art flippers, and the comment miners (who seemingly get life affirmations by acquiring work though purchase or trade, post for tons of comments on their ability to pry work away from this person or that dealer, only to turn around and sell within 3 months so they can do the same with the next piece.)

All of this is par for the course, but nothing take away from getting Christmas cards and emails out of the blue from friends you've made over the decades from just having posted up some of your artwork to the internet. And like Felix, I agree, I like the seeming permanence of the display, the comments, and the commitment to and from the site that Bill Cox has afforded us all with CAF. Facebook is fine for getting the latest updates/news from folks you know or whatever. But it is not a depository for Comic Art fandom. The only thing permanent about Facebook is it's ultimate impermanence.

 

 

[Rick2you2]

11 hours ago, Nexus said:

I would be careful to assume that you're more protected when dealing with a collector. There are plenty of "collectors" who will mimic (or attempt to mimic) the worst behavior of dealers when it comes time to sell/trade.

As for posting on CAF, as I've said over the years, because I do enjoy the site so much via updates from other collectors, I feel I have an obligation to share. Do I post everything? No. But it's a representative sample of my collection. Some of which may seem quite redundant if I posted it all.

I understand. To be candid, however, I think barter is always risky. Buying or selling requires the selection of a pair of firm fixed prices. You know what you can get, and what you will have to give up to get it, because hard money is on the table. So, bad valuations by an owner are clearer. On the other hand, personal taste is not always reflective of market prices—I love some things way more than their dollar value. So, when a collector overvalues a piece, it may not be bad behavior, just not “marketplace” behavior. That is another reason why the collector’s valuation seems nutty. Barter just doubles up the problem. 

[MyNameIsLegion]

4 hours ago, mtlevy1 said:

Post or Not - I vote Post!

I have my grail because I posted on CAF - so if you want yours you might want to do the same.

That said, I don't post every piece. When I get a piece, if it fits well in one of my galleries - and it is not too repetitive - then I generally post it.

Most probably know, but CAF has a default by artist listing now so you don't need to organize your CAF by artist - I found organizing in themes helps focus my buying as well.

In terms of inquiries, I don't get so many that I can't write appropriate responses - and have some fun with it sometimes.

In terms of fresh to market effect,  I haven't seen any data but I imagine it depends on a variety of factors I am not investing any time in thinking about just now

My 2 cents!

Mark

 

 

 

 

this x 1000.  Why do people do that still?  But I'm much more of a stickler for organizing my CAF.  Its 50% of the reason I use CAF and post my collection. It's easier to keep organized, and as a Premium member it provides even more features to support keeping things organized and it does it all for you so you don't have to waste your time setting up galleries by artist, or type of art, medium, etc.  

Fresh to market: as someone else said, if it's NFS, it's on display, and to my thinking is somewhat immune to the "fresh to market" label. That's just a concern of dealers and flippers who wish to hide recent sales history.  When it bounces from eBay to Clink to HA in 6 months, it's been rode hard and put away wet.  When it's been automatically re-listed on eBay for 2 years, whether it's a sketch of an anthropomorphic emu or listed by the Donnely's for 5x FMV for a dubious prelim of a cover that's been re-inked and redressed to look like a cover, yeah, it's about as fresh as a Hostess Cupcake in a gas station in New Mexico. The worst thing eBay eve did was allow unsold listings to be be automatically re-listed for free.

When people contact me out of the blue through CAF to inquire about art- particularly if it's NFS (and I have nothing currently FS) I immediately look at their CAF gallery, If they don't have one, I completely dismiss them. They have no credibility, no reputation, no history as far as a I can see. If they have a CAF gallery, and it has like 5 things in it, none of which have anything to do with the art they are inquiring about, I also pause and if I vaguely recognize the name from 20 years in the hobby, and know damn well they have a lot more art than that, I also ignore them. If they are cagey and don't want others to know what they have, but want to buy sell or trade art with you, and offer things FS or trade that where not in their CAF- that's a red flag. Could be a scam, could be a guy working to flip something he doesn't even own, whatever- I don't have time or interest to run a background check on you so to speak, so I also dismiss them without a second thought.  

Dopamine Rush-  CAF view and comments are waaaaaay down, of A nd B list items, this has been trending downward for about 18 months. It's the FB effect.  Many have chosen to only interact through FB groups. You get that dopamine rush of instant feedback on FB, though I struggle to see how it differs substantially from CAF in that regard. FB absolutely sucks as medium to browse after the fact- you can't even control your own view of a FB group in mobile or desktop without FB constantly trying to feed you what THEY think you want to see and in what order.  I can only attribute this downward trend on CAF  to the simple fact that FB isn't better, it's just EASY and it MOBILE FRIENDLY.  I'm afraid Bill might need to address that and come up with a mobile platform or risk further erosion.  

[The Voord]

8 hours ago, Brian Peck said:

He is a scammer! He has stolen art from golden age artists and tried to steal money from at least one collector.

Not forgetting his (Keif Fromm's) shoplifting excursions . . .

Edited September 10, 2018 by The Voord

[The Voord]

6 hours ago, glendgold said:

Yeah, you might want to look up Richard Rae in the search engine.

. . . and your sanity may never be the same.

[AnkurJ]

36 minutes ago, The Voord said:

Not forgetting his (Keif Fromm's) shoplifting excursions . . .

Not trying to diverge from the topic of this thread, but having known Keif for a few years, I find much of what people are saying very surprising. He has always been a great guy when I have met or spoken to him. We all have a history of issues and problems, eventually I would hope we grow out of them. But lets put an end discussing specific people here as its not the intention of the thread.

[AnkurJ]

43 minutes ago, MYNAMEISLEGION said:

 

When people contact me out of the blue through CAF to inquire about art- particularly if it's NFS (and I have nothing currently FS) I immediately look at their CAF gallery, If they don't have one, I completely dismiss them. They have no credibility, no reputation, no history as far as a I can see. If they have a CAF gallery, and it has like 5 things in it, none of which have anything to do with the art they are inquiring about, I also pause and if I vaguely recognize the name from 20 years in the hobby, and know damn well they have a lot more art than that, I also ignore them. If they are cagey and don't want others to know what they have, but want to buy sell or trade art with you, and offer things FS or trade that where not in their CAF- that's a red flag. Could be a scam, could be a guy working to flip something he doesn't even own, whatever- I don't have time or interest to run a background check on you so to speak, so I also dismiss them without a second thought.  

 

Oddly enough, last year a collector emailed me to buy a piece. He had nothing in his CAF. Turned out he is a big collector who lives in the same town as me! We had a nice long conversation and we did the transaction in person. Many people don't have a CAF for the reasons discussed here, but you never know how big a collector they actually are. I am always open to making new contacts and friends with fellow collecting nerds who understand the madness. 

[Mephisto]

14 hours ago, AnkurJ said:

We all get offers. Just politely decline or say not looking to sell. Not sure why this would prevent you from posting your collection. 

Some people do get obnoxious though. I have had someone trying to buy the same piece for about 7 years now.

At one point they asked what my crazy price would be. I told them 20K since I don’t really have a desire to sell. I get back the response “You’re right that is crazy.”

Since that time they have offered 6K and 7K. I now have their direct email sent to the spam box and do not respond to their CAF messages. Kind of wish there was just a block feature on CAF like Facebook.

[Nexus]

4 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

I think a lot of the "fresh to market" business is largely a case of the virgin/whore psychological reasoning that Felix touched on.

There are clearly people who want to feel like they are the "only one", or at least the only one people remember as being associated with a given piece of art. The idea that someone else was there first and has a rep for having been the owner of it previously lessens the new owner's joy, or thrill they get out of having it. And when as Felix interjected, work has been passed around, it gives off the stigma of there something being wrong with it.

Yeah, not sure if I mentioned that here, or on the podcast (possibly both if my tendency to repeat myself remains consistent!). The sexual undertones in collecting can be fairly obvious and easy to read. Being "first" owner, etc. I remember someone equating having a piece of art personalized to a previous owner to a tattoo of a former boyfriend on one's wife. No further introspection required, art personalized to previous owner is verboten! Yet another example of how emotions rule this hobby.

[inovrmihd]

43 minutes ago, AnkurJ said:

Oddly enough, last year a collector emailed me to buy a piece. He had nothing in his CAF. Turned out he is a big collector who lives in the same town as me! We had a nice long conversation and we did the transaction in person. Many people don't have a CAF for the reasons discussed here, but you never know how big a collector they actually are. I am always open to making new contacts and friends with fellow collecting nerds who understand the madness. 

I am more likely to put a piece up in my gallery that I purchased from a dealer for no other reason than that prospective contacts can contact the dealer and check out my credibility (did I pay on time, was I easy to deal with, did I make an offer than try to renegotiate, etc.).

[ESeffinga]

9 minutes ago, Nexus said:

Yeah, not sure if I mentioned that here, or on the podcast (possibly both if my tendency to repeat myself remains consistent!). The sexual undertones in collecting can be fairly obvious and easy to read. Being "first" owner, etc. I remember someone equating having a piece of art personalized to a previous owner to a tattoo of a former boyfriend on one's wife. No further introspection required, art personalized to previous owner is verboten! Yet another example of how emotions rule this hobby.

For clarity I was just referencing this bit. The sexual undertone thing was my extrapolating from what you said. Though maybe you have mentioned it and it subconsciously stuck. You're right either way though.

 

13 hours ago, Nexus said:

I've noticed that art that has been previously offered (let alone previously seen) hasn't suffered the same penalty as it might have in the past at auction. There just isn't the same stigma attached anymore to art that ISN'T "fresh-to-market". This is quite different, though, from art that has bounced around a lot in a short period. That art needs to be buried and forgotten before ever being offered again.

 

Edited September 10, 2018 by ESeffinga

[Nexus]

1 hour ago, MYNAMEISLEGION said:

Dopamine Rush-  CAF view and comments are waaaaaay down, of A nd B list items, this has been trending downward for about 18 months. It's the FB effect.  Many have chosen to only interact through FB groups. You get that dopamine rush of instant feedback on FB, though I struggle to see how it differs substantially from CAF in that regard. FB absolutely sucks as medium to browse after the fact- you can't even control your own view of a FB group in mobile or desktop without FB constantly trying to feed you what THEY think you want to see and in what order.  I can only attribute this downward trend on CAF  to the simple fact that FB isn't better, it's just EASY and it MOBILE FRIENDLY.  I'm afraid Bill might need to address that and come up with a mobile platform or risk further erosion.  

So why not do both? FB for the instant gratification, CAF to display/curate a collection? Too much work? Just curious. I AM absolutely biased, can't stand FB, so this is all very new/interesting to me.

[Nexus]

5 minutes ago, ESeffinga said:

For clarity I was just referencing this bit. The sexual undertone thing was my extrapolating from what you said. Though maybe you have mentioned it and it subconsciously stuck. You're right either way though.

 

 

Yes, that, too. I wonder if it may not be the stigma waning (although I hope it is) so much as newer collectors just not following the hobby day in/day out like older collectors have in the past. Which, if they're on FB and don't monitor CAF constantly, then they wouldn't be so hyper-aware of a piece's history. OTOH, they may simply not care, which would be refreshing.

HA has told me over the years that they've observed a large pool of bidders who AREN'T like us, who don't live/breathe the hobby 24/7. They simply pop up when it's auction time and bid. It would seem that all these other common concerns are just noise to them, they just focus on the art. Where I once scoffed at the notion...I'm believing it more now.

[delekkerste]

41 minutes ago, Nexus said:

Yeah, not sure if I mentioned that here, or on the podcast (possibly both if my tendency to repeat myself remains consistent!). The sexual undertones in collecting can be fairly obvious and easy to read. Being "first" owner, etc. I remember someone equating having a piece of art personalized to a previous owner to a tattoo of a former boyfriend on one's wife. No further introspection required, art personalized to previous owner is verboten! Yet another example of how emotions rule this hobby.

LOL, a dealer friend of mine recently brokered a piece that I would have been very interested in had he offered it to me.  He asked me what I would have paid for it and I threw out some numbers that were higher than what he had sold the piece for.  He comes back to me later and says, if I can get it back for $X, would you be game?  I tell him, no, I might have been interested at $X if you had contacted me beforehand, but, now that the new owner has posted it on CAF and all over social media and had his metaphorical way with it (the terms I used with my friend were more colorful), it wasn't worth as much to me anymore!  Not only did the sexual parallel apply, but, also, who wants to pay up for something that you could have gotten for a lot less a week ago (this might have been the bigger deterrent)?  I would still have been interested in buying the piece at what the other guy paid plus maybe a small premium, but, not at a big premium.  Now, granted, this piece wasn't a true must-have, so, I wasn't willing to pay up big for it after the new owner had already posted it online in multiple places.  In the past, though, I did pay up enormously (probably one of the biggest premiums ever offered to get someone to flip a recently acquired piece) to get something that actually was a must-have.  I guess it was true love, LOL... 

However, I don't mind personalizations on art at all and get annoyed when people have them whited out or removed.  I guess in the end, I don't mind and even appreciate that a piece has history.  That said, for a piece that isn't a true must-have, loss of immediate freshness may lower my willingness to pay up for something.  

[The Voord]

1 hour ago, AnkurJ said:

Not trying to diverge from the topic of this thread, but having known Keif for a few years, I find much of what people are saying very surprising. He has always been a great guy when I have met or spoken to him. We all have a history of issues and problems, eventually I would hope we grow out of them. But lets put an end discussing specific people here as its not the intention of the thread.

I didn't bring Keif Fromm up, but have my own history with him, which is not good.  Collectors not aware of his history, ought to be made aware.  You may have had a good experience with him; quite a few of us haven't.

Edited September 10, 2018 by The Voord

[eewwnuk]

30 minutes ago, Nexus said:

So why not do both? FB for the instant gratification, CAF to display/curate a collection? Too much work? Just curious. I AM absolutely biased, can't stand FB, so this is all very new/interesting to me.



Social media platforms are very intuitive for taking and posting pics.  Takes a few seconds to upload something onto IG and I presume FB (I'm not a FB user).  I'm an active CAF user, but struggle with it when posting using my mobile - I usually have to rev up my desktop to post on there. 

[Mephisto]

I’m not a fan of posting too much of my stuff on Facebook. Don’t want that much stuff so easily traced to me under my real name and other personal stuff.

I don’t use my real name on CAF for this reason but when using contact on CAF I’ll always respond with my real name.