Forbes article 2 2

[delekkerste]

2 minutes ago, exitmusicblue said:

I think we're pretty much set.  : )  As long as the entertainment powers that be don't F up massively.

30 years from now, if a young Spidey lover is asked if s/he would rather own a toy or coffee mug or blanket or what have you from Disneyland with his likeness, or a key comic, the answer should be the same 9 times out of 10 -- comic book, baby.

But how many of them will be willing to pay 100 or 1000x the cost of a coffee mug for it?  And will Spidey be more or less popular in 30 years than today?  I'll take the under.  In fact, if you set the over/under price of Amazing Fantasy #15 in 2049 as the current price multiplied by 30 years of accumulated inflation, I'll take the under as well.  

[exitmusicblue]

8 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

But how many of them will be willing to pay 100 or 1000x the cost of a coffee mug for it?  And will Spidey be more or less popular in 30 years than today?  I'll take the under.  In fact, if you set the over/under price of Amazing Fantasy #15 in 2049 as the current price multiplied by 30 years of accumulated inflation, I'll take the under as well.  

Given AF15 came out over two decades before I was born, I'm taking the over.  Maybe way over.

A wild card: Quality of Modern comics going forward.  I got hooked because an older friend intro'd me to comics, and while the writing mostly sucked in the late Copper age, I didn't care + the art was incredible for a kid.  The next steps are learning the "lore" and history, an understanding of what has value and why.  My respect for the medium was all I needed as an impetus.

When I see our great Modern artists today, I feel much confidence is this continuing.  Artgerm's impressive following, for example, skews heavily towards youth.  Saw it with my own eyes at cons.

And so we come full circle in the OA section...

Edited July 2, 2019 by exitmusicblue

[delekkerste]

7 minutes ago, exitmusicblue said:

Given AF15 came out over two decades before I was born, I'm taking the over.  Maybe way over.

A wild card: Quality of Modern comics going forward.  I got hooked a because an older friend intro'd me to comics, and while the writing mostly sucked in the late Copper age, the art was incredible for a kid.

When I see our great Modern artists today, I feel much confidence is this continuing.

And so we come full circle in the OA section...

Amazing Spider-Man sells about 75K copies a month these days, vs. many multiples of that back in the '80s.  I don't think many kids are getting introduced to Spidey these days through older friends showing or lending them their comics.  It's mostly going to be the movies, and then videogames, TV and merchandising.  

I don't think this virtuous circle of people getting exposed to the character and comics and then the art exists in any meaningful fashion.  

I think AF #15 is already absurdly overvalued compared to other books/manuscripts and other collectibles.  Over a long enough timeframe (like 30 years), I'm willing to bet that a lot of mean reversion occurs and that it's not going to keep growing to the sky. 

Edited July 2, 2019 by delekkerste

[exitmusicblue]

Just now, delekkerste said:

Amazing Spider-Man sells about 75K copies a month these days, vs. many multiples of that back in the '80s.  I don't think many kids are getting introduced to Spidey these days through older friends showing or lending them their comics.  It's mostly going to be the movies, and then videogames, TV and merchandising.  

I don't think this virtuous circle of people getting exposed to the character and comics and then the art exists in any meaningful fashion.  

Whatever the medium being consumed, comics will remain the cool collectible progenitor of it.  Of this I'm confident.

That Marvel page-flippin' intro to every movie?  It may evolve, but it sure has gotten the point across.

[Bronty]

26 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

I don't believe that people owning cars are going away either, BUT, there are a hell of a lot of smart people who do. 

In any case, annual car sales in the U.S. have not gotten back to the peak levels seen in the mid-80s and again in the late '90s to mid 2000s.  And that's despite it never being easier to move units due to low interest rates, favorable lease terms, fleet sales, securitization, etc. It's already happening...

In any case, we aren't talking about any of this stuff going away completely - we're talking about what happens at the margin.  And, at the margin, the global auto industry is going to go into secular contraction mode. Same with multiple home ownership and the ownership of a lot of physical things.  

That may be, you’re a smart guy and understand macro well, but how does that filter down from homes to actual collectibles?    I’d argue current generations are far more comfortable with the idea of holding part of their wealth in encapsulated collectibles vs previous generations.    Particularly as it’s much easier to convert these items into cash than when we were coming up.  Comics are hooped long term we agree on that because the demographics just aren’t there, but other stuff with stronger demographics can do just fine IMO despite the average family owning , on average, 0.05 less homes or what have you. 

(Better buy that black lotus while you can   )

Edited July 2, 2019 by Bronty

[Bronty]

^ further to that I think you and I come at it from different POVs .   You look at the current gen raised on social media and try to theorize about their willingness and ability to buy.    I look at the empirical evidence and conclude that we’ve all been turned into attention seeking whores, glued to our phones and updating every four seconds to check on likes and response.   Those trophy, attention bestowing collectibles are what it’s all about now right?    And I theorize that there will always be collectors of some kind of material (probably not comics, in time) looking to have ego fulfillment from owning the best.   That’s a more localized driver of pricing than macro concerns.   (Though macro is important of course..).

Edited July 2, 2019 by Bronty

[ESeffinga]

3 hours ago, delekkerste said:

Clothes are now part of the sharing economy!  And the huge pressure that apparel retailers are under would seem to undermine your thesis; even luxury brands have been feeling the pinch. 

 

I posted about this in another thread a while back.

In that thread I brought up Urban Outfitters from a radio program I’d heard. Here’s an article on the same topic...

http://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/urban-outfitters-to-start-renting-its-clothes-11558436401

I’ve heard of more and more rental type clothing programs by large well known luxury brands. They are getting in on these rentals to buoy their business.

As for comics and comic art, I’m with Gene on this one. If kids of the future are looking to collect anything. Inter web social media trophies or what have you, I would expect them to relive their nostalgia the same as we have done. For us it was comics. For them it is the movies, right? So movie props, prop replicas and pricey manufactured collectibles about those movie characters (ala Star Wars).

Full size operational R2d2 droid in the living room? Full size replica of an Infinity Gauntlet? Why not?

What I don’t see is comic art. If they aren’t reading the comics now, why care later? Not to the 5 figure degree that so many pieces are at now. That was our nostalgia. Will there be some kids that are drawn into it, sans nostalgia? For sure.. but the volume of collectors as now?

Just can not see it. There are folks collecting Little Nemo, and Krazy Kat with no nostalgia, so I must be wrong, right?

What I see are folks that started off with collecting from their nostalgia for comics, then comic art for those comics and then digging deeper into the history of that medium. Not folks that saw Spider-Man on Saturday morning cartoons, never read a book, and then wanted to track down the first appearance of the Vulture in comic art form.

For most folks it feels like a bridge too far. Will there be some making that leap? Again, absolutely. But not enough to keep the fiscal climb coming, or even to sustain the status quo, long-term.

I’m not on board with that. And I think most of these characters people see as being long term gold mines will be. Not in the form of comic art. In the form of the mugs, and shirts, and the other cheap doodads that will make the IP owners a fortune for a long time to come.

The ones that survive, anyway.

Conan, Flaming Carrot, Cavewoman, Strangers in Paradise... so many that will have had their time, and some day will be looked back on like Sugar and Spike, and the Phantom, and the Shadow and so on.

Not really saying anything new here. Just my .02 cents. 

Edited July 2, 2019 by ESeffinga

[Rick2you2]

5 hours ago, Bronty said:

‘I want stuff and lots of it.’

Including panties.

[Rick2you2]

4 hours ago, delekkerste said:

I don't believe that people owning cars are going away either, BUT, there are a hell of a lot of smart people who do. 

In any case, annual car sales in the U.S. have not gotten back to the peak levels seen in the mid-80s and again in the late '90s to mid 2000s.  And that's despite it never being easier to move units due to low interest rates, favorable lease terms, fleet sales, securitization, etc. It's already happening...

In any case, we aren't talking about any of this stuff going away completely - we're talking about what happens at the margin.  And, at the margin, the global auto industry is going to go into secular contraction mode. Same with multiple home ownership and the ownership of a lot of physical things.  

Car sales are likely to go down, but not stay down, IMO. First, the cars (incl. trucks) which were built in the 80's-90's and even 2000's to a lesser extent, are simply not that well built. When was the last time you saw a 5 year old car with surface rust, or even a 10 year old car? Remember the GM X bodied cars and horrid Chrysler K cars of the 1980's? Unsurprisingly, there are a lot of older cars (10-12 years old) on the road than there used to be.

On the other hand, the Wall St. Journal reported that young people are now beginning to look again at moving to the suburbs due to the high cost of City living. That will eventually drive up the need for cars (say 10-20 years). It won't take them long to realize that renting, or leasing, is a more expensive option than buying.

But, you will see a turn away by the younger generation from high end luxury cars as a waste of money. They view cars as a way to get around; not something to wrap their ego's into. So, the manufacturers now have their premium brands selling to average income buyers. I still remember seeing some cleaning ladies loading their vaccum cleaners into a 3 Series BMW. Compared to income, they have really come down.

[mtlevy1]

7 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

I posted about this in another thread a while back.

In that thread I brought up Urban Outfitters from a radio program I’d heard. Here’s an article on the same topic...

http://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/urban-outfitters-to-start-renting-its-clothes-11558436401

I’ve heard of more and more rental type clothing programs by large well known luxury brands. They are getting in on these rentals to buoy their business.

As for comics and comic art, I’m with Gene on this one. If kids of the future are looking to collect anything. Inter web social media trophies or what have you, I would expect them to relive their nostalgia the same as we have done. For us it was comics. For them it is the movies, right? So movie props, prop replicas and pricey manufactured collectibles about those movie characters (ala Star Wars).

Full size operational R2d2 droid in the living room? Full size replica of an Infinity Gauntlet? Why not?

What I don’t see is comic art. If they aren’t reading the comics now, why care later? Not to the 5 figure degree that so many pieces are at now. That was our nostalgia. Will there be some kids that are drawn into it, sans nostalgia? For sure.. but the volume of collectors as now?

Just can not see it. There are folks collecting Little Nemo, and Krazy Kat with no nostalgia, so I must be wrong, right?

What I see are folks that started off with collecting from their nostalgia for comics, then comic art for those comics and then digging deeper into the history of that medium. Not folks that saw Spider-Man on Saturday morning cartoons, never read a book, and then wanted to track down the first appearance of the Vulture in comic art form.

For most folks it feels like a bridge too far. Will there be some making that leap? Again, absolutely. But not enough to keep the fiscal climb coming, or even to sustain the status quo, long-term.

I’m not on board with that. And I think most of these characters people see as being long term gold mines will be. Not in the form of comic art. In the form of the mugs, and shirts, and the other cheap doodads that will make the IP owners a fortune for a long time to come.

The ones that survive, anyway.

Conan, Flaming Carrot, Cavewoman, Strangers in Paradise... so many that will have had their time, and some day will be looked back on like Sugar and Spike, and the Phantom, and the Shadow and so on.

Not really saying anything new here. Just my .02 cents. 

Cavewoman, really?

[HouseofComics.Com]

On 7/1/2019 at 3:08 PM, Rick2you2 said:

Just out of curiosity, is he still sanitized and dull, or did they give him some character besides Everyman?

He goes around making very meta comments, like Deadpool, including the fact that Walt will cut off his hands if he ever takes off his gloves. (hope you guys get the reference)

[Rick2you2]

12 hours ago, ESeffinga said:

For us it was comics. For them it is the movies, right? So movie props, prop replicas and pricey manufactured collectibles about those movie characters (ala Star Wars).

Not necessarily. I see toys from their childhood, like Tamagachi's (which still work), old Gameboys and Cabbage Patch Dolls, as well as cartoon cells from shows like Rocco's Modern Life. Some Beanie Babies, even (if prices are finally down to earth).

But, it may be another 20 years out before many of them get the income for it.

Edited July 3, 2019 by Rick2you2

[Jeffro.]

5 hours ago, mtlevy1 said:

Cavewoman, really?

Boobs are timeless

[vodou]

17 hours ago, Bronty said:

Particularly as it’s much easier to convert these items into cash than when we were coming up.  Comics are hooped long term we agree on that because the demographics just aren’t there, but other stuff with stronger demographics can do just fine IMO despite the average family owning , on average, 0.05 less homes or what have you. 

(Better buy that black lotus while you can   )

Entire conversation hinges on whether one is a cycles or a trends type.

Of course one type is right and the other dead wrong, but tell that Larry Summers and the rest of Wall Street and the Fed (not to mention ECB et al).

...

With that out of the way, significant wealth will be stored privately in the future but liquidity will not be readily available.

Depending on the assumption that cashing out will be easier than when we were coming up would be a very dangerous financial commitment to make. Unless one has their Chapter 7 or 13 filing ready to go and doesn't mind starting over from scratch (and possibly homeless too). Or has no extraneous financial obligations in size. The delta on property tax increases over wage/inflation increases should not be ignored as part of in size. Can't keep up there...lose your home.

Now. Everybody knows what they need to know. Have fun!

[Bronty]

Well of course it’s a risk, you can’t take price or liquidity for granted in these markets.    But do you remember how incredibly illiquid it all was 25 years ago (when we were coming up) before internet and grading ?  I know you do.   And that’s what kept prices down back then.   Now things are far more liquid , but higher priced and more risky.    I’m not suggesting anyone put their life savings in it

Edited July 3, 2019 by Bronty

[vodou]

6 minutes ago, Bronty said:

But do you remember how incredibly illiquid it all was 25 years ago (when we were coming up) before internet and grading?

Are we talking art or all collectibles broadly? Specifics mattered back then, versus today (as I was writing "broadly" for all collectibles). Art was tough. But, true story, I financed a move from TX to MA completely on flipping Donruss Gregg Jeffries rookie cards. They were soooo liquid. In 1989. And, well, never again   I still have a full niner page of 'em even. Art wasn't as easy. Now it is. For now. Just toss it up on eBay, ala Malvin, for one cent o reserve and just about everything will sell (often at a loss, if it's liquidity one needs the most). But it will sell. I suggest looking at the categories on eBay where one-centers don't even get that bid...there are more and more of them everyday. For real.

That was fun, especially remembering ol' Jeffries!

I did the same with comics all through the 1990s...flippity-flip-flip-flip...pre-grading and dropped out at around the time CGC holders supplanted Chris Pedrin's Fortress as the way to keep these things looking pretty for years to come. They were liquid.

The truth of it is you could sell just about anything back then for 'something', I'm not sure that will be the case go-fo (see eBay comment above). For many such things, as desirable as they might be they will also be 'no-bid' in times of need (car just died, just lost my job and need to make rent "now" types of situations). That's where you need liquidity -on the spot, not the waiting for that one-right-buyer method of selling. That's the distinction I'm drawing...pull the credit lines you pull the "I'll take it all for 20% of guide" dealers out of the picture. If you need $1500 "now", you can't be one-centing hundreds of pieces (that you paid tens of thousands for), right? Exactly how many trips to the post office is that going to take...without a car?!

[Pete Marino]

Wait until a Justin Roliand drawing of Rick and Morty out-sells Kirby covers.

Then we'll know the shift has taken hold.

[ESeffinga]

6 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

Not necessarily. I see toys from their childhood, like Tamagachi's (which still work), old Gameboys and Cabbage Patch Dolls, as well as cartoon cells from shows like Rocco's Modern Life. Some Beanie Babies, even (if prices are finally down to earth).

But, it may be another 20 years out before many of them get the income for it.

I'm not saying that is what people collect, only that the movies are the younger generation's connection to comics. Ours was to comics. We were the generation that grew up not just having them, but the idea of collecting them as an organized hobby. Not all, but the vast majority of fans of these strong people in tights characters seem to be coming from the movies these days. To me, that's where the disconnect is going to come with the OA hobby, and why I see props as a more natural through line.  I know others here disagree.

Edited July 3, 2019 by ESeffinga

[ESeffinga]

5 hours ago, Jeffro™ said:

Boobs are timeless

And very popular apparently. Look at CAF new art views each day. I've never understood it, but some people tie a lot of money up in that kind of work.

To each their own.

[Rick2you2]

23 minutes ago, ESeffinga said:

And very popular apparently. Look at CAF new art views each day. I've never understood it, but some people tie a lot of money up in that kind of work.

To each their own.

a/k/a Cavewoman