GColan's IM & SM #1 cover gone on hold at Romitaman 2 2

[Carlo M]

I am sorry this thread created some tension. It was certainly not my intention! The piece is truly historical and I thought it might be of interest in case some people did not notice it was sold.  Should we in the future in general refrain from commenting dealers’ activity and just stick to auctions? Just asking what the right etiquette should be. 
 

[grapeape]

12 minutes ago, Carlo M said:

I am sorry this thread created some tension. It was certainly not my intention! The piece is truly historical and I thought it might be of interest in case some people did not notice it was sold.  Should we in the future in general refrain from commenting dealers’ activity and just stick to auctions? Just asking what the right etiquette should be. 
 

No I'm glad you did. That part of this board is most vital. Sharing info.

[grapeape]

1 hour ago, AnkurJ said:

Yes let grapeape and my friend Jean Michelle He's-No-Basquiat join you AnkurJ  in a slow hand clap for Vodou (it's ok to use his username here as I did not name the unmentionable).

[Timely]

9 hours ago, vodou said:

Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Matthew 7:16, KJV

He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. John 8:7

[batman_fan]

2 hours ago, Timely said:

He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. John 8:7

where the heck is that pile of rocks ? 

[Rick2you2]

3 hours ago, Carlo M said:

I am sorry this thread created some tension. It was certainly not my intention! The piece is truly historical and I thought it might be of interest in case some people did not notice it was sold.  Should we in the future in general refrain from commenting dealers’ activity and just stick to auctions? Just asking what the right etiquette should be. 
 

Personally, I like the stone throwing. Yes it is a “historical piece”, and a historical oddity, too. It reminds me, without being specific, that there are market shenanigans here in terms of pricing, and prospective buyers, particularly newer ones, should take it with a grain of salt. And despite the view of some, no, someone is not supposed to essentially act as a shill for their own merchandise whether they are caught or not, or whether it is illegal. That is the point of no reserve bidding, and I expect it breaks the house rules unless that conduct is clearly allowed. Maybe we all just need a basic class in ethics or “good faith”, and I don’t mean the philosophy subject. I’ve read Mike’s view on the subject, and I disagree with him. But, at least he was honest when he expressed it, and that deserves notice.

I don’t bid in that weight class no matter what I can afford. But, I do think it causes an uptick in overall pricing, and specific artist’s pricing as well, so I don’t like it. How many times have I seen pieces sitting in dealer’s inventory for years, because an auction price was X, and the dealer thinks his piece is good or better? Quite a few. That’s bad for the long term of the hobby, and frustrating for buyers like me who just want to have a little fun.

I’m no one’s nanny, but throwing a little shade, or light, on the subject is a positive good. I would ask, however, for some different examples and targets. This one has been chewed to death.

[vodou]

10 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

I would ask, however, for some different examples and targets.

Bill Mastro.

https://www.nydailynews.com/sports/i-team/sports-memorabilia-exec-bill-mastro-20-months-prison-article-1.2332680

[vodou]

10 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

I would ask, however, for some different examples and targets.

Jim Halperin.

https://www.ha.com/c/ref/halperin.zx?type=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org

[The Voord]

14 hours ago, Timely said:

He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. John 8:7

 

[ShallowDan]

14 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

Personally, I like the stone throwing. Yes it is a “historical piece”, and a historical oddity, too. It reminds me, without being specific, that there are market shenanigans here in terms of pricing, and prospective buyers, particularly newer ones, should take it with a grain of salt. And despite the view of some, no, someone is not supposed to essentially act as a shill for their own merchandise whether they are caught or not, or whether it is illegal. That is the point of no reserve bidding, and I expect it breaks the house rules unless that conduct is clearly allowed. Maybe we all just need a basic class in ethics or “good faith”, and I don’t mean the philosophy subject. I’ve read Mike’s view on the subject, and I disagree with him. But, at least he was honest when he expressed it, and that deserves notice.

I don’t bid in that weight class no matter what I can afford. But, I do think it causes an uptick in overall pricing, and specific artist’s pricing as well, so I don’t like it. How many times have I seen pieces sitting in dealer’s inventory for years, because an auction price was X, and the dealer thinks his piece is good or better? Quite a few. That’s bad for the long term of the hobby, and frustrating for buyers like me who just want to have a little fun.

I’m no one’s nanny, but throwing a little shade, or light, on the subject is a positive good. I would ask, however, for some different examples and targets. This one has been chewed to death.

With regards to the bolded, one of the ironies of Mike generally being a good guy and having a fairly thick skin is that it seems to encourage more dog-piling at times than he might deserve.  I'll note here that I've never bought anything from him and (in case anyone is wondering) yes I am aware of the generalities of the situation from a few years ago concerning his consignments with Heritage.  I'm not sure if folks are more apt to pick at him because he's a good sport, or just because he's a dealer who is semi-active in threads here, but it seems like he takes more that his fair share of grief.

Having said that, any sale of a piece at this end of the market naturally attracts attention and curiosity, thus the creation of this thread in the first place.  

[comicnoir]

Congrats to Mike. Having dealt with him recently, he made the transaction smooth and painless.

[PhilipB2k17]

On 12/6/2020 at 3:53 PM, Carlo M said:

This has to be one of the major sales of 2020.  Beautiful beautiful cover, must be super impressive in person. Congrats to the seller and the buyer!

I saw the cover in person when Mike brought it to a con in Mt. Pleasant Michigan a couple years ago just after the Heritage sale.  It it very cool. And, of course, I said: “So YOU’RE the one who bought it” to Mike, like a insufficiently_thoughtful_person. 

Edited December 17, 2020 by PhilipB2k17

[PhilipB2k17]

On 12/13/2020 at 8:06 PM, batman_fan said:

where the heck is that pile of rocks ? 

[Rick2you2]

9 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

I saw the cover in person when Mike brought it to a con in Mt. Pleasant Michigan a couple years ago just after the Heritage sale.  It it very cool. And, of course, I said: “So YOU’RE the one who bought it” to Mike, like a insufficiently_thoughtful_person. 

I don’t think someone should be demonizing Mike just because a market practice of his was attacked. He is a nice guy. But that doesn’t mean one can’t criticize or attack a market practice he has apparently used, nor does it mean the market practice is right. Shilling, I think we generally agree, is wrong. Driving up a market price by bidding on your own pieces to create or protect a price is a form of misrepresentation (at least where the winning bid becomes a price point, like with Heritage auctions). It taints all future sales by creating a false image of true demand, leaving too many eventually spending more than they should based on it. 

Let me add that I watched the sales prices for various Aparo art pieces pretty carefully the last few years, at auction, and there is no question in my mind that this type of conduct would have a real effect on prices, until the market became saturated with new product. So no, I don’t like it all.

Edited December 17, 2020 by Rick2you2

[Day Stripper]

9 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

I don’t think someone should be demonizing Mike just because a market practice of his was attacked. He is a nice guy. But that doesn’t mean one can’t criticize or attack a market practice he has apparently used, nor does it mean the market practice is right. Shilling, I think we generally agree, is wrong. Driving up a market price by bidding on your own pieces to create or protect a price is a form of misrepresentation (at least where the winning bid becomes a price point, like with Heritage auctions). It taints all future sales by creating a false image of true demand, leaving too many eventually spending more than they should based on it. 

Let me add that I watched the sales prices for various Aparo art pieces pretty carefully the last few years, at auction, and there is no question in my mind that this type of conduct would have a real effect on prices, until the market became saturated with new product. So no, I don’t like it all.

How are you separating/distinguishing the person from the act here?  The "market practice" (i.e., "shill bidding") is performed by, or directed by (if more than one person was involved), a person; it is not an accident, a naturally occurring event or an "act of God" in which the consignor/shill bidder just happened to be "in the wrong place at the wrong time" or was only peripherally involved.  If the collecting community considers the "market practice" of shilling to be wrong (ethically if not criminally), then how did the person who performed/directed the shill bidding not commit a wrong (whether in general or against the community), regardless of whether (or not) they are a "nice guy"? 

I cannot draw, or agree with, the distinction which is apparently being drawn here...criticize/demonize the act, but not the actor.  Sorry, but "hate the game, not the player" sounds like a cool phrase, but in any society, the individual must take responsibility for (and suffer the consequences of) his or her actions.  

Frankly, when someone commits a "misrepresentation" (which some may consider a form of fraud), it is not unreasonable to question/challenge all subsequent actions/statements of that person.  Check out the legal concept of "falsus in uno".      

Let me offer an admittedly extreme analogy...should we not criticize/demonize Bill Cosby simply because he's an otherwise "nice guy", even if we think his former "dating practices" were wrong (not to say, criminal and/or horrific)?  

[grapeape]

9 hours ago, Captain Calamity said:

How are you separating/distinguishing the person from the act here?  The "market practice" (i.e., "shill bidding") is performed by, or directed by (if more than one person was involved), a person; it is not an accident, a naturally occurring event or an "act of God" in which the consignor/shill bidder just happened to be "in the wrong place at the wrong time" or was only peripherally involved.  If the collecting community considers the "market practice" of shilling to be wrong (ethically if not criminally), then how did the person who performed/directed the shill bidding not commit a wrong (whether in general or against the community), regardless of whether (or not) they are a "nice guy"? 

I cannot draw, or agree with, the distinction which is apparently being drawn here...criticize/demonize the act, but not the actor.  Sorry, but "hate the game, not the player" sounds like a cool phrase, but in any society, the individual must take responsibility for (and suffer the consequences of) his or her actions.  

Frankly, when someone commits a "misrepresentation" (which some may consider a form of fraud), it is not unreasonable to question/challenge all subsequent actions/statements of that person.  Check out the legal concept of "falsus in uno".      

Let me offer an admittedly extreme analogy...should we not criticize/demonize Bill Cosby simply because he's an otherwise "nice guy", even if we think his former "dating practices" were wrong (not to say, criminal and/or horrific)?  

Captain Calamity you are new here so I want to help you out. You probably have some good things to bring to the chat and I look forward to those future contributions. But.....Referencing Pill Cosby 💊 to flesh out your thoughts on shill bidding missed the mark. I think your need to write “admittedly extreme analogy” as a preface should have been your own clue not to go to the  💊 Cos reference. 
Lately I’ve been coming to the CGC punch bowl hoping for a tasty drink but can’t get past the dumps some of the commenters are dropping in it. Let’s be thoughtful before posting. 

Edited December 18, 2020 by grapeape

[Xatari]

Mike, I know there was a Yahoo group that was shut down.  To which platform did the new group migrate?

[MagnusX]

More drama here that "days of our lives"
with all the covi19 lockdowns sure I take it..!

 

[Rick2you2]

11 hours ago, Captain Calamity said:

How are you separating/distinguishing the person from the act here?  The "market practice" (i.e., "shill bidding") is performed by, or directed by (if more than one person was involved), a person; it is not an accident, a naturally occurring event or an "act of God" in which the consignor/shill bidder just happened to be "in the wrong place at the wrong time" or was only peripherally involved.  If the collecting community considers the "market practice" of shilling to be wrong (ethically if not criminally), then how did the person who performed/directed the shill bidding not commit a wrong (whether in general or against the community), regardless of whether (or not) they are a "nice guy"? 

I cannot draw, or agree with, the distinction which is apparently being drawn here...criticize/demonize the act, but not the actor.  Sorry, but "hate the game, not the player" sounds like a cool phrase, but in any society, the individual must take responsibility for (and suffer the consequences of) his or her actions.  

Frankly, when someone commits a "misrepresentation" (which some may consider a form of fraud), it is not unreasonable to question/challenge all subsequent actions/statements of that person.  Check out the legal concept of "falsus in uno".      

Let me offer an admittedly extreme analogy...should we not criticize/demonize Bill Cosby simply because he's an otherwise "nice guy", even if we think his former "dating practices" were wrong (not to say, criminal and/or horrific)?  

You seem to be taking an over-arching view of what I wrote; I did not say it has no effect on me. It does, but more so on bidding in general. Shill bidding is rampant, as is evident by a quick trip to Google News. Here is a tip of the iceberg. https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2020/12/04/arizona-ag-sues-auction-nation-consumer-fraud-after-republic-investigation/3825400001/ So are other bad auction practices. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/10-things-auction-houses-wont-tell-you-2014-01-03.

After a few more hours of reading, I have come to the conclusion that the run up of prices at auction sites is at least partially, and maybe substantially, illegimate. Yes, I understand that people buy collectables when the dollar effectively drops in value, and the excessive Federal debt load and private debt load should be having that impact, but inflation remains low with no major signs of increase. Housing stock is legitimately low, so prices have been rising there for good reason, but baseball cards and comic art? Really? An illegitimate run up in prices should eventually produce a drop in prices, but if not, I still won't contribute to it by paying what I think is too much. I see no good reason why pricing should legitimately be jumping past, say 2019 pricing, or earlier, and if that keeps me out of the market, I will survive. What I buy is not at the high end anyway, so my actions are not likely to be noticed. But, it should effect you and every other prospective buyer--perhaps, in the aggregate, the statement can be made by "we, the people".

Getting to your specific subject, shill bidding is not rape. It is a bad economics practice that is generally illegal even while being rampant. We don't put people in jail for life for it, not even "serial" shill bidding. So, I look at how it effects me. If I see something Mike is selling that I want which I think is too high, then I would try to negotiate down to a lower price that I think is a fair reflection of its value. And since I will be seriously discounting auction pricing as a basis to set benchmarks, I won't generally agree to use them for what I want (unless backed up by a lot of other data I have found). Maybe he agrees, maybe he doesn't. If not, there is always another piece around the corner. He does score points for customer service and  communications, so that factors into the equation, too, and no one has ever accused him of selling "re-dressed" art as alternative unpublished covers like "they who need not be named (again)".

And yes, I do understand the legal concept of "falsus in uno" (False as to one, false as to all). But it must be viewed in context, and scope, which is what I am doing.

 

 

[Rick2you2]

6 hours ago, romitaman said:

LOL.....Now we have another low on these boards with this guy above comparing me to Bill Cosby who raped women FOR YEARS and is spending years in jail for it!

Even my pal Vodou doesn't stoop that low...........

Like i posted earlier to Scott W,  This again, is why I and many other long term serious art collectors will post less and less on these boards about art as it's just not worth sharing art stories on these boards anymore.

 

I urge all serious comic art fans to sign up for THE NEW COMIC ART L GROUP and start posting there about art also. maybe it will work.... maybe it won't over time? But give it a try.

 But you have to show your actual email address to post there about art, so those sh#t flingers on these boards cant have 5 different hidden screen names to post there like what is allowed here.

 

But all in all..........I do want to say that during this wonderful holiday season, Life is a true blessing....And i'm very blessed and thankful for my life always .....And I hope all of the art collectors here reading this feel that same way about their lives as well

I truly wish Happy Holidays & A VERY Merry Christmas to all of the decent people on these boards......... And a blessed healthy 2021 for everyone!  

Mike

Mike, 

I have said my piece above in response to the Captain, but that doesn't address the implicit threat to these boards that "serious collectors" should migrate elsewhere because some people have comments that aren't bright-and-shiny love stories about comic art. If people find your actions disturbing, then it is best to get the air cleared so we can move on. Allowing unaddressed claims just produces festering and long term damage to a hobby which I think is substantially dependent on a fairly narrow base. This is an excellent board and I hope it stays that way.

And if people want to remain anonymous, that's their business. Frankly, I don't care, except I just don't want to have my in-box filled with even more ads and spam, thank you.

Rick Baron