DCML digest, Vol 1 #1196 - 6 msgs

[HorizonHse@aol.com]

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://nafsk.se/pipermail/dcml/attachments/20021225/d55a60d8/attachment.html