July Hake's Auction
1 1

70 posts in this topic

22,955 posts
9 minutes ago, zhamlau said:

They hit 20k without being exceptional issues or pages.


https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/dave-cockrum-and-bob-layton-x-men-105-story-page-17-phoenix-original-art-marvel-1977-/a/7204-93035.s

also multi pages from 100 sold 20k recently. Just being from the issue BEFORE the big issue I don’t think is enough of a boost to disqualify it as a special page outside of the norm.

 

Good X-men 94 pages I’ve seen 30-38k a few times but I’m not counting those.

What made me feel this was well bought was the 95 cover selling for over 2x as much as the splash, but over 3 years earlier. With the huge inflation in prices over the last 3 years I figured the cover would do 200k today and this piece would hit 90-100k.

Would this piece have hit 90+ in Heritage?

 

First, $19.2K is sub-20K! Second, I think that's an overpay on that page. That said, some of the Phoenix pages get a premium (the #100 pages are very memorable, to boot), as do Wolvie pages (Phoenix tax?) I don't think you can say that 1st run Cockrum pages are solidly in the 20Ks, not even close - the ones that are in that range (or higher) have to have a reason to be there. 

IMO, there's been far less inflation at the high end over the past few years than some think - there are only so many players there and, to beat out everyone at auction these days generally means the piece having to catch up to the auction price somewhat. As such, I see the 95 cover as being more like 150-180K now, not 200K. IIRC, even the 102 cover that sold last year was barely more than where it previously traded hands privately (after HA's cut, I suspect the consignor may have actually lost a little). 

I could see the 95 splash hitting 90K (75K hammer) at Heritage. I don't see this being a 100K piece, though. I think you guys are far overestimating its value and desirability among the people likely to go for something like this. I mean, barring a personal/nostalgic connection, I don't see any big hitters being willing to shell out 100K+ for this when the 102 cover only went for 131K and when that kind of money can still buy some exceptional interiors from the run (both Cockrum and Byrne). 2c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,374 posts
On 7/12/2019 at 6:51 AM, delekkerste said:

Well...good-but-not-great panel pages from the two keys, GSXM #1 and X-Men #94, are going for more than $20K a page, but, I don't see that happening for X-Men #95-107.  I think good-but-not-great pages from the 1st Cockrum run are more like mid-teens, plus or minus a little bit (say, broadly, $13-$19K).  

I think this splash is cool, but, I didn't think for a second that it was a 6-figure piece.  As Dan M. said, even the #95 cover underwhelmed at auction; I see the splash being worth around half of the Kane/Cockrum cover (which I would peg in the $150-$180K range these days), hence...$75-$90K feels right to me.  

My feeling is that a few of the upper-end sales of Byrne X-Men art have created the impression that (nearly) all of 1st run Cockrum and Byrne X-Men art is worth more than it actually is.  The reality is that there are a lot of pieces that end up selling for less than what many people expect. 2c  

I never really thought about the cover/splash price ratio in such basic terms.  Is that a pretty standard calculation?  Splash pages=half cover prices (not counting all the variable that go into OA pricing like quality, characters, key images, facing forward or backward, eye appeal, etc, etc, etc.)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,239 posts
1 minute ago, stinkininkin said:

I never really thought about the cover/splash price ratio in such basic terms.  Is that a pretty standard calculation?  Splash pages=half cover prices (not counting all the variable that go into OA pricing like quality, characters, key images, facing forward or backward, eye appeal, etc, etc, etc.)?

All things being equal (as you said, quality, characters, key images, facing forwards) I think there is some general rules of thumb such as covers being 2x splashes and splashes being 2.5x to 5x of panel pages, etc.

It does sometimes get compressed as values get higher.

Malvin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
164 posts
7 minutes ago, stinkininkin said:

I never really thought about the cover/splash price ratio in such basic terms.  Is that a pretty standard calculation?  Splash pages=half cover prices (not counting all the variable that go into OA pricing like quality, characters, key images, facing forward or backward, eye appeal, etc, etc, etc.)?

The cover vs splash debate is a really interesting one and might actually deserve a thread on its own.  A few considerations.  First, I understand why covers would attract a premium over a splash with similar content.  Sticking to X-Men Cockrum, nobody would argue that the covers to GS and to XM 101 would capture a major, major premium to their interior counterparts , even though the content is quite similar (the splash to GS XM is very, very similar and the Phoenix splash in the interior is almost the same as the cover).  But there is no doubt that certain splashes can be extremely high quality, on par if not superior to the relative cover.  SS 6,  which I have brought up in a separate thread on the (in)famous Buscema debate, is an example where the splash is IMHO infinitely superior to the cover, and would actually command a premium.

FInally, and I would like some expert's input on this one, I feel that comparing the two is not entirely appropriate.  Because of the medium on which they were printed (glossy paper) and the commercial role they have, covers are "intrinsically" different from splashes.  They tend to have simpler content, aiming more at impact than subtlety.  They also tend to have less backgrounds.  Finally, and here I am threading on unfamiliar grounds - I feel the inks tend to have a different style.  Inks on covers must have less texture, less shading, less cross hatching, less zip-a-tone.  Al this in favour of clarity and impact.  I have not checked, but I suspect inkers like Palmers and Janson have done fewer covers relative to their interior production precisely for this reason.  As an example, look at the cover to Avengers 57 and the relative splash.  The splash has richer texture, what with the shading on the characters and the rain effect, while the cover is obviously much more impactful.  So it will always also come down to personal tastes, and what one wants from their OA.

Personally, I like both, but have in fact bought more splashes than covers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
197 posts
2 hours ago, delekkerste said:

 

So, I, personally, wouldn't go so far as to prefer the XM 107 splash over any 1st run Cockrum XM cover, but, I agree that it is an A+ example (it would undoubtedly fetch a greater price than many covers from the run) and, really, the kind of splash that is the exception to the rule.  And the rule is that, for late Silver Age-present (i.e., the era in which covers are known to nearly all exist), splashes are not, by and large, the kind of "bragging trophies" for which "Alpha-irrational bank rollers" generally go to the mat. Again, there are of course exceptions that prove the rule, but, by and large, for art from the past 50 years or so, covers are where the BSDs and "wannaBSDs" (tm) throw down. :slapfight:

And that is another reason why I couldn't see this one hitting even $100K, not when the XM 102 cover sold for "only" $131K just last year.  I mean, sure, this splash has more team members, including Wolverine, but, the 102 cover has by far the more memorable image (more desirable as well, IMO - it doesn't have the awkward poses and copious blank space that the 95 splash does) and carries far more bragging rights.  For me, the presence of the full team & Wolverine on the 95 splash is why I pegged it even at $75-90K instead of, say, $60-75K.

$76K is at the lower end of my FMV estimate, so, I think a "good buy" label could fairly be attached to the purchase.  That is, unless the buyer wasn't a dealer or otherwise able to escape the sales tax...if they had to add, say, 8.875% (as in NYC) to the price, bringing it close to $83K, I'd still say it was a decent buy, but, nowhere near the "steal" that some are making it out to be. 2c 

You are the voice of reason on this splash no doubt. Would you concede that it was at least possible that the splash hits 100k if  as you said below,

Quote

  I thought it was $75-90K and that the lower end was more likely unless two people really went for it. (shrug) 

As for the "alpha male" comment forgive me. Hah! I'm a writer at heart and get carried away. I have seen collectors get carried away and thought, "how much of this bid action is a genuine desire to take ownership of art? vs. trying to outlast your unseen bidding rival known or unknown. 

Now sales tax is the ugly new grip on our wallets with internet auctions. This was coming for a long time and now that it's here I'm hearing about it. My brother won a page off the last HA auction and received his invoice. "$200 sales tax?" He had a melt down. Somehow I hadn't shared with him this new taxing on the buyer. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
197 posts
34 minutes ago, stinkininkin said:

I never really thought about the cover/splash price ratio in such basic terms.  Is that a pretty standard calculation?  Splash pages=half cover prices (not counting all the variable that go into OA pricing like quality, characters, key images, facing forward or backward, eye appeal, etc, etc, etc.)?

I've heard that calculation in one form or another since i started paying attention in 1996. The things you mention "quality, characters" absolutely matter. Isn't this hobby crazy Scott? As an artist and a collector I imagine you catch yourself shaking your head quite a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,955 posts
3 hours ago, stinkininkin said:

I never really thought about the cover/splash price ratio in such basic terms.  Is that a pretty standard calculation?  Splash pages=half cover prices (not counting all the variable that go into OA pricing like quality, characters, key images, facing forward or backward, eye appeal, etc, etc, etc.)?

I don't think there's a standard calculus when it comes to the cover/splash ratio. That said, I'm guessing in most cases it's more than 2x, but, as Malvin noted, there's probably some multiple compression the higher $$$ you go, the quality of content being comparable.

I'm curious what the average ratio looks like for a Lee/Williams collaboration?  If you guys price a cover at, say, 30K, where would a comparable splash from that book likely be priced? hm

Regarding Carlo's comments above, there are definitely times when splashes may have superior elements than the corresponding cover due to the limitations of the latter (e.g., the space constraints on 70s Marvel picture frame covers). That said, if it was just about the quality of art or amount of content on a piece, there are plenty of interiors that would give covers a run for their money. 

At the end of the day, people remember the covers. I could probably tell you what's on 95%+ of X-Men covers from GS1 through #143 from memory. The same is not true of splashes...hence the large valuation disparity.  I'm the opposite of Carlo in that I have far more covers and panel pages than splashes...I actually think most splashes are overpriced compared to the interiors and would rather pony up for a cover if we're anywhere near a 2:1 price ratio. 

As for Grapeape's query...sure, I'm not saying that it was impossible that the 95 splash could have hit 100K, just that I would have handicapped it at maybe 8/1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,861 posts
7 hours ago, delekkerste said:

First, $19.2K is sub-20K! 

Sales tax ftw! :flipbait:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
533 posts
Posted (edited)
On 7/12/2019 at 9:51 AM, delekkerste said:

Well...good-but-not-great panel pages from the two keys, GSXM #1 and X-Men #94, are going for more than $20K a page, but, I don't see that happening for X-Men #95-107.  I think good-but-not-great pages from the 1st Cockrum run are more like mid-teens, plus or minus a little bit (say, broadly, $13-$19K).  

I think this splash is cool, but, I didn't think for a second that it was a 6-figure piece.  As Dan M. said, even the #95 cover underwhelmed at auction; I see the splash being worth around half of the Kane/Cockrum cover (which I would peg in the $150-$180K range these days), hence...$75-$90K feels right to me.  

My feeling is that a few of the upper-end sales of Byrne X-Men art have created the impression that (nearly) all of 1st run Cockrum and Byrne X-Men art is worth more than it actually is.  The reality is that there are a lot of pieces that end up selling for less than what many people expect. 2c  

which kane / cockrum cover do you refer to? 95?

Edited by romitaman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,955 posts
10 hours ago, romitaman said:

which kane / cockrum cover do you refer to? 95?

Yes. Sold for 155K in 2016.  For it to be 200K+ now, that would mean it went up by more % in less time than the X-Men 137 DPS which sold and resold in 2015/2019.  

I'm not saying it's not possible that someone would pay 200K for it, especially if trade is involved, but, I see it more likely to end below that if it hit the auction block again today (around 180K would be my guess).  I personally like the cover a lot (unfortunately it hit the auction block after I started to slow my roll post-kids), but, if given the choice between that and the X137 DPS which just resold for $204K, I'm liking more, valuing higher, and taking the latter all day long. 2c

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
1 1