Keskustelujen arkisto

> Still, this is great news to get on December 24th. I for one am very
> glad to see you back in business. Merry Christmas to everyone who
> celebrates it!

I don't either celebrate Christmas nor is it my birthday, but yes, this *is*
great news.

Georges

HorizonHSE WROTE:

> "Kindly remember that without dealers and a secondary market, not
> only would
> the artwork have little or no value -- we all know what happened
> to original
> pages when publishers thought they were worthless after the comic
> was issued
> -- but more important, older material would be difficult if not impossible
> to find."

AND I RESPOND:

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding you, but are you suggesting that it was
the DEALERS that made old comics and original comic art valuable, rather
than the buyers and collectors who wanted to obtain the items for their
private use? Or that the art itself, no matter who its creator happens to
be, has no value unless some dealer somewhere decides that it does (and how
much it is worth)?

Your comment also suggests that it was impossible for collectors to find
each other or whoever possessed a sought-after item to obtain the product
they sought before dealers came along? (Oh, I forgot, we didn't want the
stuff until the dealers told us we did.)

In my personal experience as a collector of comics, art, View-Masters,
soundtrack LPs, or old toys, dealers sometimes proved useful. But usually
they were an impediment to getting what I wanted for the price I wished to
pay. It was the dealers who began grabbing up everything they could get
their hands on so they could make a profit before true fans had a chance to
add to their collections for aesthetic or altruistic purposes.

Barks may not have minded dealers selling the art he produced for Western
Publishing (which never belonged to him once he turned it over to the
editors), but I don't think anyone would want to have risked asking him how
well he enjoyed being exploited in his later years.

The dealers certainly played a part in feeding my collecting gene, but if I
could ever work around them I always tried to do that. Today that has
become so easy to do (thanks to eBay) that dealers are looking like they may
either become a thing of the past or will just join the ranks of everyone
else who has something to sell without needing a license to do so.

Hello,

I'm not as good as many other people on this list at drawing, so I
"stole" a panel from a Gatto story from the 50ties to with you all
merry Christmas and a happy 2003!!!!

http://digilander.iol.it/inducks/nat.htm

and for our Italian friends:

http://digilander.iol.it/inducks/nat_i.htm

Ciao,

- Paolo

http://digilander.libero.it/inducks mailto:p.castagno at libero.it

PAOLO:

> I'm not as good as many other people on this list at drawing

Being hopeless with drawing, and not particlularly proficient with
computers, I'll have to settle for a hand-written note:

http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis/pics/greetings.gif

:-)

Kriton (e-mail: kyrimis at cti.gr)
(WWW: http://dias.cti.gr/~kyrimis)
-----
"Well, Ivan, you're the one in the navigator's seat. What are you doing?"
"Sir, I am instructed to keep this seat warm until Chekov returns."
-----

Merry Christmas to all the members and friends in the list
Georgios
gbalanik at med.auth.gr

In a message dated 12/25/02 3:04:50 AM Pacific Standard Time,
dcml-request at stp.ling.uu.se writes:

> Correct me if I'm misunderstanding you, but are you suggesting that it was
> the DEALERS that made old comics and original comic art valuable, rather
> than the buyers and collectors who wanted to obtain the items for their
> private use? Or that the art itself, no matter who its creator happens to
> be, has no value unless some dealer somewhere decides that it does (and how
> much it is worth)?

You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that the dealers made old comics and
original comic art valuable. Collectors did that. I'm also not saying that
the art itself has no value unless some dealer decides that it does. Supply
and demand determines the value; I have a small collection of original
drawings that has no value whatsoever because no one wants pictures I drew in
the 4th grade. Ultimately the value of anything is decided by the seller and
the buyer agreeing on a price; no agreement, no sale. All I'm saying is that
dealers create a marketplace for buyers and sellers (sometimes both are
dealers, sometimes one is a dealer and one is a collector; sometimes neither
is a dealer).

>
> Your comment also suggests that it was impossible for collectors to find
> each other or whoever possessed a sought-after item to obtain the product
> they sought before dealers came along? (Oh, I forgot, we didn't want the
> stuff until the dealers told us we did.)

I never said that no one wanted comics or original artwork before there were
dealers. I only said that older material was difficult if not impossible to
find. how many of you who collected before there were any dealers bought or
obtained original comic art?

I certainly never said that it was impossible for collectors to find each
other. i knew lots of comics collectors growing up. unfortunately, we all
pretty much collected the same comics, new ones from the magazine stand, and
some older ones that older siblings had bought and still had.
>
> In my personal experience as a collector of comics, art, View-Masters,
> soundtrack LPs, or old toys, dealers sometimes proved useful. But usually
> they were an impediment to getting what I wanted for the price I wished to
> pay. It was the dealers who began grabbing up everything they could get
> their hands on so they could make a profit before true fans had a chance to
> add to their collections for aesthetic or altruistic purposes.

Its certainly been my experience, too, that dealers get to some things first,
waiting for toy stores to open on delivery days to get the new, hot items. It
got so bad around here that Target limited the number of some toys people
could buy, so the kids for whom they were made at least had a chance to buy
them. That's not creating a real secondary market.

I wish I could find the missing items in my collection at the prices I'd like
to pay. sometimes I think the seller is very much out of line, anticipating
what the item might sell for 10 years from now. it depends on the item, of
course, but before you say the price is ridiculous, ask yourself, "Can I find
it for less?" If the answer is "No," I still might not like the price, but it
may be a fair one. I'll pass because of affordability, but someone probably
will pay the amount.

We certainly all complained about an item being overpriced, which makes the
dealer a gouger, but we never offer more for something when a dealer makes a
mistake and underprices an item.

There also seems to be some confusion, at least in my mind, about Don Rosa
objecting to people selling his artwork. Maybe all of you got your convention
drawings for free, but I had to pay Don for the ones I own.

Happy holidays to all.

Regards,

William Price

WILLIAM WRITES IN RESPONSE TO MY TIRADE ABOUT DEALERS:

> You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that the dealers made old comics and
> original comic art valuable. Collectors did that. I'm also not
> saying that
> the art itself has no value unless some dealer decides that it
> does. Supply
> and demand determines the value;

AND I REPLY:

I figured that your intended meaning was something akin to that, but I
thought some clarification was due. Your original post gave the appearance
that dealers deserved all or most of the credit for the desirability and
value of comics and art. Glad to get that cleared up.

WILLIAM CONTINUES:

> There also seems to be some confusion, at least in my mind, about
> Don Rosa
> objecting to people selling his artwork. Maybe all of you got
> your convention
> drawings for free, but I had to pay Don for the ones I own.

AND I CONTINUE:

Maybe I can do something to relieve your confusion on this issue. I've
heard Don bemoan his dilemma with convention drawings. When he is in Europe,
he never charges for such drawings because he knows that it's a different
culture of collectors -- no one would ever ask for a drawing unless they
wanted it personally (or at least it's very rare), so he is more assured he
is working for fans.

In America the situation is different. Here he does charge a fee, like all
other American comic artists who choose to do fan drawings, especially when
they are as detailed as Don's. His fan drawings are painstaking and
publication-quality, usually in full-color. But since he takes great pride
in his work and wants fans to get something worthwhile for their money, I
have seen him work furiously the entire time the convention was open, never
stopping for rest or breaks, creating as many drawings as possible and
giving up any time he would have to enjoy the convention himself.

He knows there are easier ways to make more money, if money is what he
wants, by simply selling his signature on prints, as many other artists do.
He's told me in the past that he does not object in principal to people
selling something they pay for, but he dislikes seeing drawings that he
thought he was doing for a "fan" being put up for sale on eBay for 10-20
times what Don was paid for it, sometimes within 24 hours of the drawing
being done! I saw this happen a few weeks ago. I was on eBay one evening
when I knew Don to be out of town at a convention, and I saw a "fan" drawing
appear for sale. I found out when Don returned home that he had just
created that piece at that very show. He had not even made it back home
before the "fan" had tried to cash in at posted price that was many times
what he had just paid!

His reaction to such abuse is to simply not do fan drawings at conventions
except in sketchbooks or for people he personally knows. Otherwise he now
sits at his table and still signs anything that is presented to him, no
limit, and chats and relaxes. And this is obviously his right -- he is not
obligated to do drawings simply because he's a convention guest. Many other
artists do not do drawings, and their reasons are exactly the same as Don's.
(In Europe, Don still does as many free drawings as each situation or
timeframe allows... I think I saw some of you mentioning personally seeing
him doing so during Don's recent trip to some convention in Norway.) This
system has worked well, he tells me... he has a more relaxing and enjoyable
time at American conventions while still fulfilling some people's wishes for
sketches, many for free, on a more limited basis... though he has told me of
a lone incident when a boorish fellow showed up at a convention insisting
that Don was obligated to do drawings for convention-goers on demand,
whether he wanted to or not, and having a childish fit of pique when Don
would not comply.

DON:

Funny. Don't know why I come to think about it, but this entire affair
reminds me of elder rockbands claiming that they are about to stop their
touring or their recordings. The rockband in question is of course
famous enough to drag world publicity, TV coverage, fan mobs and a
sufficient amount of screaming teens. The world would not be the same
without this milestone band. The press agrees, a loss to the human kind
as we know it.

Now, this famous rockband gets second thoughts, and during the fare-well
cheering they decide to continue their act anyway after consulting
wifes, producers and wallet thickness.

A few weeks after the band is back with a larger and more profound
audience than ever.

Well, Don, my question is simple: Was that your plan? And if not, how
come everyone knew about it? I mean, this was supposed to be between you
and Egmont, right. But it leaked...quite conveniently, didn't it? :-)

S?ren