Are there really lots of new collectors, and do they care about the older stuff? 1 1

[inovrmihd]

I apologize in advance as this is going to come off as a stream of consciousness question, because it really is two questions; are there a stream of new collectors coming into the market, and if so, what do they want and how is it affecting the hobby.  When I joined about 11 years ago, the conventional wisdom was that this hobby was on borrowed time.  New readers were fewer and reading comics that were digitally drawn.  Movie goers weren’t going to be interested in becoming comic collectors, let alone OA collectors.   Key high grade comics might jump in front of a movie, but it was all speculation.  No one, certainly no one new to the hobby, is going decide to pay $10,000 or more for a JLA 1 comic because they saw the movie (maybe a bad example).  There might be a few real keys that can be sold to investors as an asset class (Action Comics #1, Hulk 182 maybe, a few obvious others), but otherwise comic collectors would die off as well .  There might always be interest in owning the first appearance of Spider-Man, but tell a non-collector you own the issue where Gwen Stacey or Jean Grey dies (137, I don’t know if she has died and come back again since) and it will mean nothing to them, nor does the second appearance of Lex Luther.  The same should hold true for OA, as aside from the picture, the context is much less accessible.  Which brings me back to what prompted this question... of course, Sal Buscema.  I thought he was a meme or a joke.  A nice cover image sells for big bucks, than another one, and all of a sudden decent panel pages are selling for $1000’s and now it is not a joke.  You have a handful of collectors that got in really early, and a subset of those who are extremely wealthy, and I can understand why high end can continue to break records, and the 1990’s/ early 2000 stuff can do well because of the nostalgia factor.  Are there in fact new collectors getting involved from the last few years though, and are they sticking to the very recent stuff as I can’t imagine what possible reason they would have for buying a Sal Buscema panel page? I get that the high end pieces are increasingly out of people’s price range so they are forced to choose among lesser pages, but is there a new demographic that are looking for images with no nostalgia value nor considered by the entrenched collector community to be of any importance?  I recently saw a fantastic Miller DD page were he fights the Punisher sell at auction, and the second thing that came to my head was that it wouldn’t mean anything to someone who started reading Jim Lee comics, and it was stylistic Miller, not photorealistic, so the old time collectors and some others who just got into the hobby at a time when it was considered to be cream of the crop might want it, but someone new?  I am sure there has been plenty of discussions about Sal cabals and manipulation of prices on individual pieces to mark up inventory, but is there a new breed of collectors entering this hobby that have totally different motivations?  I hear the occasional rumor that Hugh Jackman or some other rich/famous person might want a few highly sought after pieces, but despite the prices, is this hobby still a walking dead man?  I don’t really want to focus on Sal if he is an aberration, but ultimately when I look at the better pieces of my collection (assume a decent Byrne x-men page for example or if X-men fall under a different category, assume a decent Jim Starlin Adam Warlock or Thanos page), am I holding a depreciating asset (and I get the buy art that gives you pleasure aspect, I am just asking about the economics)?  Again, sorry for the stream of consciousness way I worded these questions.

[Twanj]

Yes.

[batman_fan]

I will give an example I am familiar with

Charles Schulz Peanuts strips.

Strip stopped being printed January 3rd 2000 (21 years ago).  There has been limited exposure although that may change now that Apple has the rights to the characters.

The highest prices every paid in a public venue occurred in 2020 for two pieces of material (Daily from 1950s at $192k and a group or early character drawings at $288k).

This is for a strip art that has about 8,000 items in the open market and hasn't been published in over 20 years.

[grapeape]

When I was a child I read comics from the seventies into the early eighties. As I grew older I found that despite my nostalgic sweet spot I became fascinated with the earlier  appearances of the sixties. 
Eventually I became a fascinated with the Golden age.

So for me..... a huge want was to get comics from my sweet spot 1974-1986. But my fever grew and I bought an ASM 1 and a FF 1. Then to the golden age a Submariner 1.

My art habits are the same. I have my loves from the seventies but it turns out my appreciation grew from reading sixties comics and so I perused sixties art.

New collectors who appreciate art no matter their sweet spot will be lured into other categories. The kids with money may cause high prices in nineties art. They are likely to also be intrigued by the art before their sweet spot.

it’s like baseball cards. I grew up loving Nolan Ryan the Mets in the seventies and eighties. But I damn sure would by Mickey Mantle, Babe Ruth Willie Mayes and Hank Aaron.

if I could afford them😀

[New School Fool]

I'm not sure I fully understand your ramblings so forgive me if I come across the wrong way or have misinterpreted what your saying. But it seems you have a total dislike (or disdain?) for Sal Buscema. He's certainly not the greatest artist out there but he drew The Spectacular Spider-Man long enough to trigger that 'Nostalgia kick' in collectors that were reading his comics at the time.

I think  @grapeape hit the nail on the head. I have similar story, yet I guess I could be considered a new collector, I bought my 1st piece in 2017. I grew up reading 80s comics handed down to me, then started buying my own in the 90s. The art from artist I would like to purchase from my 'sweet spot' are either too expensive or extremely rare (Byrne, Todd McFarlane, Erik Larsen). Sal Buscema is the consolation prize I guess, but I've learnt to appreciate his art since I've become a collector.

In addition to this, I also love the art beyond the nostalgic feeling it gives. It was a modern artist that made me realise that comic art is available to buy and got me collecting in the first place.

[vodou]

4 minutes ago, Shin-Kaiser said:

I've learnt to appreciate

that's the exactly the problem with Sal Buscema...nobody but nobody likes it out of the gate...except editors with tight deadlines.

[filmboyuk]

To provide a slightly different perspective... My own interest has never really gone further back than books that were produced during the 90s when I was a teenager. A few titles that I read during the 90s - such as Frank Miller's Daredevil - were produced in earlier decades, but while I'd be quite happy to own a Frank Miller Daredevil page, it's not really on my agenda the same way that Sandman or From Hell pages are, so I'm never going to stretch myself to acquire one - and thus at current prices will never own one. What that means for the future pricing of those pages would depend on how unique or not my perspective is, and how many other relatively new collectors share it. It seems to me that truly A-level pages will always be important to someone, but a lot of the other material with rise and fall in value as demographics shift over time.

I've been collecting for a few years now, and still have no interest in acquiring any Golden Age art - to be honest, I don't even really recognise some of the artist names that are regularly discussed here - and I don't see that changing. I totally appreciate that for some people the older stuff is really important, it's just not for me - and the very few things that I might be interested in are so far out of my purchasing ability that I've given up looking at it - heresy in some circles, I'm sure... 

[vodou]

2 minutes ago, filmboyuk said:

What that means for the future pricing of those pages would depend on how unique or not my perspective is, and how many other relatively new collectors share it.

For you and similar newer collectors - two questions.

1. If prices were lower, would you be interested?
2. How much lower? (50%, 75%, etc.)

When a genre -here comics/comic art- is collected overall, there is "some" price for everything, not simply zero, even when it's junk (bad con sketches by unknown artists). Your answers will tell those ancient holders with dreams of cashing out at all time highs -but only and exactly when they "need to"- what reality may look like in a decade or two, and how much of a haircut buyers at today's prices can expect to clear out at.

[filmboyuk]

I agree that there's always a price, never zero, for these kinds of collectibles. But those are extremely difficult questions to answer comprehensively, given the range of stuff that we're discussing.

There are multiple potential drivers of art purchasing - practical factors such as price, access to cash (or credit), alternative options, etc. but also less definable qualitative factors such as nostalgia, perceived artistic quality, "historical" importance, collective competition, etc. Most of my purchases involve some degree of all the qualitative factors: I have feelings about the book, the art looks great, it's an artist I follow, will display nicely, it's a key moment for the character or the story, if I don't pick it up somebody else will and I may never see it again.... (and for one book in particular just because I've got so much of it that I'll hover up anything else I encounter at a reasonable price).

In terms of older art, as the nostalgic driver would be massively reduced for me (or more likely entirely absent), it is hard to imagine how much lower the prices would need to be in order for the other aspects to still motivate a purchase decision. I often see pieces that are kind of okay, by artists that are perhaps historically important to the medium, but it doesn't really matter how cheap they are - because there's always going to be a Frank Quitely page just around the corner that I'll love more, and (sadly) there's a finite amount of money to be deployed, so I'm not going to pick them up just on the basis of perceived value.

If that's a common position amongst more recent entrants to the hobby - that they'd rather buy multiple modern pages in the $2-5k range that they think are really cool, from recent books, than spend $20k or $30k buying a "classic" page by a Golden Age artist (I don't know what the pricing really is, as I don't pay that much attention, the range is obviously much broader than that, but I give it for the sake of illustration) then you might anticipate that the downward pressure on Golden Age pages would increase - possibly also driven by the increased availability of contemporary art, compared to the really strong older pieces that presumably seldom leave the collections they've been in for some time.

(It may also be that when some of the larger collections are liquidated, the flood on the market will find very little price support as a result. And if at that point I can get a cool early Doctor Doom page for a good price, I reserve the right to change my mind!)

But then I've also seen some new collectors try to secure what I infer are more "prestige" pieces by artists I don't recognise (Toth?), for which they are applauded by more experienced collectors who approve of their taste, so maybe it's just me. 

[exitmusicblue]

I learned long ago not to overthink the hobby.  There are plenty of things I can overthink about... work, real estate, family relations, and the like.  Here, I spare myself.

Plus in agreement with many others in this thread, nostalgia is a primary but -not- the only driver for me.  "Incredible art in my eyes" is another driver that can easily make up for the absence of nostalgia.  With many of my favorite pieces, I had no idea who the artist was growing up.  

Off the top of my head... Frazetta, Royo, Lightle, Sienkiewicz, etc.

Also, nostalgia can derive from a much later period in life.  Doesn't need to be childhood.

That said, I haven't picked up anything new since Nov... this has to be a personal record. Complacency.  : > What oh what will break the dry spell?

Edited February 8, 2021 by exitmusicblue

[cstojano]

1 hour ago, exitmusicblue said:

Also, nostalgia can derive from a much later period in life.  Doesn't need to be childhood.

 

This^ 

I have found my tastes change in line with nostalgia for different times in my life. When I started seriously collecting in the late 90s it was material related to stuff I had between the ages of 4 and 10. Now I am collecting stuff that occupied me in my mid to late teens. Ironically, I I had pretty much anything I could want for the 4-10 years old stuff due to Christmas, birthdays, and general lack of stuff out there to covet. But the "damn I remember when I couldn't afford this" stuff was when I was in my late teens buying what I could afford from my part-time job. Of course, I'm not buying that stuff itself, but rather the art that was on those packages.

[Etreiw]

We are the last in line....and thanks to the media like youtube, the collectors out there can showcase their wares cause today's kids are not buying comics the way we did when were were young.  They not gonna spend 20 bucks for 4 current print comics...they might buy the digital version but that's a big "Might".  I have decided when it comes to unbox my CGC returns to try get my nephews and niece involved because when it comes time to had off my collection I want them to know the art as well as the value of some of those CGC slabs...  

[Rick2you2]

I am certainly one of the older collectors here, both in terms of age and collecting (first pieces bought around 1980), so I don't know how you want to view this. But in my opinion, most of the old Silver Age art, let alone earlier art, and a fair amount of Bronze Age art, just isn't very good and ought not be bought on that basis. Oh, the artists could be skilled, but the medium was build around the text selling the story while the art illustrated it. Now, the art often drives the issue with the story and text taking a back seat. So, way back when, you might see a page with a text box saying "Superman picks up Lois", and sure enough, the art would have Superman picking up Lois. Whoopie. Pages were often done in classic 6 panel (Marvel gets credit for being better on that score), and the artist worked under severe constraints (including lousy pay and no royalties until the late 1970's). 

The world changed with Neal Adams. Over time the art became transcendant to the text and then the story itself, which, incidentally, resulted in some really awful story lines. That's where we are now (with high book prices to boot). So what's next at DC? They've been through the Universe, and the Multiverse, which was then collapsed into a single universe and then expanded to a mini-multiverse, and now we have the omniverse? What next? How about the Song-and-verse? 

I generally just buy to the character, but I rarely buy Silver or Bronze age work (even though that's when the Phantom Stranger shows up). My sense of nostalgia doesn't extend to buying repetitive images by the same artists in the relatively same dull way. I count myself fortunate in that those early artists (like Aparo) were more creative than the Curt Swan type of the 1960's, but still and all, my limit has been reached. Now, I generally buy stuff which is less than 20 years old, and when I get an urge to find my past, I get out the reprints or originals and look at them. 

As to the future, I wouldn't waste a chunk of money (over $5K) on anything over 20 years old. It is likely to keep its value or go up for the next 10-15 years. But honestly, so many dealers have so much inventory already, which moves slowly, you have to wonder when they will decide enough is enough. And then, you'll have the collectors cashing out, too.  

I don't honor collectors who spend, say $50,000 on a page of Whatchamacallit 204 with the first appearance of Whocares. As far as I'm concerned, a fool and his money are soon parted. If you aren't planning to move it in a few years, you are asking for trouble.

Enjoy the hobby. But treat it as a hobby or you're playing with fire.

 

Edited February 8, 2021 by Rick2you2

[vodou]

14 hours ago, filmboyuk said:

I agree that there's always a price, never zero, for these kinds of collectibles. But those are extremely difficult questions to answer comprehensively, given the range of stuff that we're discussing.

To clarify, what I was trying to get at for everyone in your 'tranche' (so not just you, others can/should step up too) was at what price point would you be willing to catch a falling knife "for the art" or even "for the love of the form" if the character/era/artist was not otherwise of any interest to you? At what point (price) would you do this to such an extent that it would be a distraction financially away from what you'd otherwise be collecting? Where is the intersection of opportunity cost with "the stuff I will always chase" and obvious "oh that's just cool, fun" where the latter wins more often the former? Many of us that have been at this for a good chunk of time (some just 5-10 years, more after 10 years) eventually do expand outward and backward. I mean a lot of us will always love Seinfeld but we've also moved over to ...Raymond and King of Queens too...right? (Ancient references there for the youngsters, but that's the best I could come up with on the fly! -I am O L D  )

Or...maybe you could pull an example or two of things you wouldn't never look twice at currently but if prices were cut by "x%" you would "look" and by "x*y%" you would "likely buy": for the fun of it?

I'm trying to get a sense of how others (especially the younger/newer collectors) would approach the path I've already been on for a long time. I don't want to assume others would follow it, so I ask, and then even IF...what their draw would be to begin with (which pieces) and what would drive that draw (price, price breakdown, something else?)

I just struck me, duh, I should add my example of this!

This is a piece that:

1. I wouldn't have looked at "at all" the first 20 years of my collecting journey. However,
2. The following 5 years "I'd look -costs nothing- and only put a lowball/tracking bid on" and,
3. The immediate last 5 years "I'll go for it -within reason- and hope to win but only 'cheap'".

That's what happened - I was actively interested, I looked, I bid within 'reason', and I won.

Now $228 plus some shipping (no sales tax for me) and I'm pretty happy. I appreciate the era/the style, the gag, the size, the condition, etc etc. This works. BUT...I'm always aware of opportunity cost (what else I can buy instead with that same clutch of cash) and...I wouldn't have gone over $300. Just not that big of a deal for what I'm after in original art these days.

Hope this helps, and I'm really hoping we can see some robust discussion and more examples from you/others to follow...  

Edited February 8, 2021 by vodou
add: My example section

[New School Fool]

40 minutes ago, vodou said:

Or...maybe you could pull an example or two of things you wouldn't never look twice at currently but if prices were cut by "x%" you would "look" and by "x*y%" you would "likely buy": for the fun of it?

I'm trying to get a sense of how others (especially the younger/newer collectors) would approach the path I've already been on for a long time. I don't want to assume others would follow it, so I ask, and then even IF...what their draw would be to begin with (which pieces) and what would drive that draw (price, price breakdown, something else?)

Hmm, this is still a difficult question to answer as I feel (as a newbie) prices are all over the place. There's always collectors who seem to have unlimited funds, who I'm sure are driving prices up. Todd McFarlane and Jim Lee, while excellent artists, have extremely bloated prices IMHO. Mainly due to their popularity and the deep pockets of collectors who chase them. Even if their prices were slashed in half I still feel they would be too expensive. Same goes for the art from the John Romita Sr era. Whether they're worth it or not, they're out of my price range. But then again, I'm a conscientious collector, I hunt for the right piece at the right price. It's half the fun of collecting I need to find a very good piece at a very good price. It's boring if I can just throw whatever amount at anything and get whatever I want.

What draws me to a piece is the art primarily. I love splash pieces and covers but if sequential frames show good action sequences I'm all for it, I need to clearly 'see' the hero, none of this 'back of the head' business! The artist comes after that, I would not buy any old piece from an artist I like though. The pieces still has to give me that 'this is great art' feeling. Nostalgia factor comes 3rd, but if a nostalgic page doesn't fulfil the first 2 criteria, I'm reluctant to really go for it. 

The amount in what I'm willing to put down for a piece is limited, though steadily going up. I have other commitments, and this is just a hobby. My limit is currently around $6500, and for that's for a top art piece with great composition....the price I'm willing to pay goes down depending on if it fulfils my criteria or not. Anything above that, I feel is just not worth it, whether I like it or not.

Looking at the example you sent @vodou tells me that we are very different collectors. I prefer cleaner splashes/covers. Images you can see clearly from across the room. That piece is way too busy for and I would never purchase it, even if I was a fan of the comic and it was dirt cheap.

Edited February 8, 2021 by Shin-Kaiser

[Latverian Tourism Board]

I’ve actually come to the conclusion that the market will be healthy going forward. I’ve spent the last year in a balancing process on my overall collection (comics, toys, and art, too), trying to look into that crystal ball to guide my moves. It’s not a finished conclusion yet, but I think I’ve drawn some market parallels. Excuse me if this isn’t exactly the discussion, but I feel it’s where the discussion will eventually go. I am not going to talk about what I’m excising and selling, because that would just confuse the message, and start a debate on what to move away from.

First, the OA market. It’s finally here. What do I mean? I mean, it’s followed a similar value trajectory as the other, older collectible markets, and is finally maturing. My grandpa used to tell my dad he was nuts to spend $5 on a comic, now the market values are fully appreciated and realized from a mature market. The prices have moved to create a striated market, with value points from $1 to $1,000,000. People can buy in their range, get what they want, and gripe about what’s “too expensive,” as they do. A fully realized market with price points for all collectors established over decades of sales and corrections.

Not so long ago, the most expensive art and cheaper art were close to each other in price. 30 years ago, you had $10 dollar pages and $5000 Kirby splashes (A decade or two before that, and Art was still being thrown out). That was a growing, immature market, imo. Now, OA has the same market price stratification that you find in comics; a robust, mature market. I’ve been hearing about the collapse of “enter collectible type here” market for decades because “enter price-based and supply-based argument here.” We all talk, and the message spreads.

The major difference between the markets, is that OA is a one-of-a-kind art market, and comics/toys is only scarcity/demand based. That is why they are starting to look so different. So, I think we are in the end of the Wild West purchasing period, with lots of material and prices shooting up to properly reflect the quality art on the market, both new and old. IMO, we are 5-15 years away from a new market paradigm with mostly new art on the market, and dealers or collectors having to entice out a lot, or most, of the expensive A older stuff. We’re almost there now, it seems. New stuff will realize it’s market price more quickly, like Tradd or Sean Murphy. It’s not a death-knell, imo, but a sign of mature stabilization.

As for the new collectors, look at your own trajectory, if you’re reading this and have lots of 5 figure or 6 figure value art. You learn, you age into bigger purchase ranges (there is a hint of that purchase maturation process in the posts above), and your “eye” changes. As Grape Ape pointed out above, he entered the art market, then moved to his segment. We all do, and now there are segments for us all. I did not see that as I started years ago only looking for Secret Wars or a Kirby/Byrne. If a comic book can be worth $1 million, why not the original art that comic book is made from?

It’s uncomfortable, and changing, but I see us all adjusting. Stuff is getting snapped up like crazy, and creating the value we all need, over time, to keep growing our collections. Obviously, I could be 100% wrong, but I don’t see the heat death of our collecting universe on the immediate horizon, for the overall market. I would start balancing, tho. 

 

[vodou]

1 hour ago, Shin-Kaiser said:

Looking at the example you sent @vodou tells me that we are very different collectors. I prefer cleaner splashes/covers. Images you can see clearly from across the room. That piece is way too busy for and I would never purchase it, even if I was a fan of the comic and it was dirt cheap.

 

2 hours ago, vodou said:

Or...maybe you could pull an example or two of things you wouldn't never look twice at currently but if prices were cut by "x%" you would "look" and by "x*y%" you would "likely buy": for the fun of it?

 

[Rick2you2]

1 hour ago, Shin-Kaiser said:

Looking at the example you sent @vodou tells me that we are very different collectors. I prefer cleaner splashes/covers. Images you can see clearly from across the room. That piece is way too busy for and I would never purchase it, even if I was a fan of the comic and it was dirt cheap.

I’m more in keeping with vodou’s approach because I feel it honors the form. Cartoon and comic art is designed to tell a story; it is a key difference with that of fine art where the story is basically a single panel, and the viewer is sometimes left to guess at what goes before or after. The clutter is part of the limits inherent in that particular type of cartoon art. In fact, I will downgrade art if I feel a panel page is being used by an artist to show off instead of move the story along. Sometimes, I will even look at the whole story to see if the page fits in properly to the overall story. 

[zhamlau]

20 hours ago, inovrmihd said:

  Which brings me back to what prompted this question... of course, Sal Buscema.  I thought he was a meme or a joke.  A nice cover image sells for big bucks, than another one, and all of a sudden decent panel pages are selling for $1000’s and now it is not a joke.  You have a handful of collectors that got in really early, and a subset of those who are extremely wealthy, and I can understand why high end can continue to break records, and the 1990’s/ early 2000 stuff can do well because of the nostalgia factor.  Are there in fact new collectors getting involved from the last few years though, and are they sticking to the very recent stuff as I can’t imagine what possible reason they would have for buying a Sal Buscema panel page?

THE COMMITTEE IS WELL AWARE OF THESE TRANSGRESSIONS!!!

THE GUILTY WILL BE CAUGHT AND PUNISHED!!!

Thank you for speaking your "two minutes' citizen!

[RBerman]

I bought my first piece two years ago. I have seen some creep my purchasing habits during that short interval. I've paid four digits for a few pieces, but it would take a special piece for me to cross the $5k threshold, which I have not so far. For those pieces which do come my way, I am likely a black hole.