| Author |
|
Lars Sandmark
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 05 October 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3144
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 3:53pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
If a John Byrne page comes up for sale, I'm buying it directly because it's his artwork, and he should benefit from that sale.
The seller should not be the only entity to profit, when they literally have nothing to do with WHY that page is desirable.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Kip Lewis
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 March 2011
Posts: 2880
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 3:54pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
No, but if I had to pay an extra 10% (above the ask price) to the house's
original owner, I would be less inclined to buy that house.
—
You wouldn't be responsible for paying that; the seller would.
------
Never underestimate someone ability to figure out how to pass that on to the buyer, like in the form of fees.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133266
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 3:54pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
The percentage comes out of the sellers end. NOT an addition to the buyer's price.••• That would create a variant on the old story of Achilles racing the turtle. Since Achilles is ten times faster than the turtle, he gives the turtle a 100 yard lead. The race starts and, zoom! Achilles covers the hundred yards. But the turtle has gone ten yards. Achilles cover the ten yards, but the turtle has gone a yard. Achilles covers the yard, but the turtle has gone a tenth of a yard. Achilles covers that, but the turtle has gone 100th of a yard...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Lars Sandmark
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 05 October 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3144
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 3:59pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
That's capitalism in a nutshell, JB, You're right.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Anthony J Lombardi
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9410
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 3:59pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Never underestimate someone ability to figure out how to pass that on to the buyer, like in the form of fees.~~~~~ It's not that hard to figure out. Figure out how much you want to get for selling the art. Figure how much you have to see it so that the artist gets his percentage and you end up with the price you wanted. There is the price you set for the piece.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Lars Sandmark
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 05 October 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3144
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 4:02pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
I hadn't given much thought to it before now but art dealers are a little scuzzy, imo.
They make a living by creating/producing nothing.
I'd like to see them do an honest day's work.
(edit to clarify:
I don't include fellows like Jim Warden. He is an art AGENT)
Edited by Lars Sandmark on 30 December 2013 at 4:05pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Matt Reed
Byrne Robotics Security
Robotmod
Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 35926
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 4:06pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Bill Conway wrote:
| I believe that this practice would devastate the original art market. Imagine if you are a professional art dealer and suddenly a new law cuts 10% of the profit out of your business? Yikes. And, as a buyer, it would make me less inclined to buy art knowing I would always take a 10% hit on the resale (on top of state & local taxes). |
|
|
This baffles me. Is it so hard to believe, as Andrew pointed out so well a page or two back, that one would factor this payment into the sale? If I want $5,000 for my piece, why couldn't I up it to $5,500 and give the artist $550? Or would someone also complain that they actually "only" got $4,950 for their sale? If we're dealing with big ticket items selling for tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars, sorry but I neither worry or trouble myself with concern that the seller is "only" getting $450,000 for their original piece of art instead of $500,000.
As JB notes (and supports I might add), this isn't retroactive. This wouldn't affect the sale of a single piece of original Kirby art already on the open market for example. I would assume that this would be a case of "from this point forward" in the purchase of original art the second time it's sold "from that point forward" (the first time it was sold would presumably be by the artist, the artist's family or their representative). It would also only be on items sold at auction. Those houses aren't in the business of selling art collections where the pages sell for an average of $100 a piece. They deal in huge sales of big ticket items that can generate the most money for themselves as well as their seller. In that case, are people on the side of no money for the artist after a sale really saying they're standing on principle for the people who are making huge profits off the sale of a JB/Austin X-Men splash page or an iconic Kirby FF page or a Kubert Hawkman page at the expense of throwing a relatively few bucks to the artist commanding those prices?
Color me dumbfounded.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Anthony J Lombardi
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9410
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 4:09pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
I hadn't given much thought to it before now but art dealers are a little scuzzy, imo.
They make a living by creating/producing nothing.
I'd like to see them do an honest day's work.~~~~~~~~~~ I don't think I'd call them scuzzy. They serve a purpose I think. Obviously as a fan. An art dealer is a good place to buy art you like. As an artist I think I'd like to have someone that would go thru the trouble of selling the art for me. They should get paid for the work they do in order to get the work sold.
One of the logo jobs I had I got thru someone I was doing other work for he asked how much I wanted I gave him my price. He asked If I would mind if he charged the person a hundred dollars more. I didn't mind since I got paid what I wanted and he was the one who set the job up and did all the leg work.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mark Haslett
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6412
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 4:15pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
I wish one of the detractors here would actually specify what the downside of a system that pays royalties to the artist would be.
All the complaints here have been about the complications, the unconnected notion that it would lead to OTHER people getting royalties (which, I guess, we have to assume is a BAD thing), and the idea that since no artists have had such monetary support in the past, they don't deserve to have it going forward.
These are all points, but why do they mean that artists getting royalties would be BAD?
This idea for artists is not as singular as some people seem to think. Royalties are paid for reprints. Why should the art after-market be so OFF LIMITS to this idea?
I'm in the WGA. Whenever a WGA writer's credited work is resold to a new market, the writer gets a royalty. These royalties are what most successful WGA writers count on in their old age. LESS successful WGA writers (ahem) may still receive royalties-- a pitance here and there. But even though it isn't enough to live on, it's still paid out and still welcome.
The writers of the early days of TV didn't foresee the world of reruns. There are legions of writers who never benefited from the royalties that would have kept them in their old age. But they entered what turned out to be a bad deal. Later writers benefited from that bad experience.
When this was instituted, I'm sure the studios said all the things we're hearing here.
But, you know, screw the comic artists. Not that we don't love them or wish them ill-- it's just that the idea of paying royalties on a piece of original art that's gone up in value is WRONG and anyone should be able to see that. It's just wrong wrong wrong!
...Until it becomes standard practice-- at which point it will seem just as sensible and equitable as the royalties we see other artists receiving.
Edited by Mark Haslett on 30 December 2013 at 4:18pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jodi Moisan
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 February 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6832
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 4:39pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
If the comic book community does not treat original art with the same reverence that is afforded fine art, then we are contributing to the disrespect the form receives from the general public.
Tim my understanding is this, fine art is NOT sold with a fee going to the original artist.
I just think it is awesome that everyone on the pro side of this discussion will now be sending a percentage of their proceeds to the original artist. Unless you all already do this since this has been a long time problem and you all feel so strongly. I don't resale, that is why everything I get is personalized.
Edited by Jodi Moisan on 30 December 2013 at 4:56pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Tim O Neill
Byrne Robotics Security
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10935
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 4:50pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Jodi - "Tim my understanding is this, fine art is NOT sold with a fee going to the original artist."
***
Right - that's what this news story is all about. A painting, a page from a comic book - it's all original art.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jodi Moisan
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 February 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6832
|
| Posted: 30 December 2013 at 4:53pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
There is something about the original art that transcends mere collectibles or arts and crafts.
And is this directed at the fact I do arts and crafts? Because to Teddy Bear collectors they value that artist talent on the same level as you do comic book art. In fact a woman bought 2 bears in the same week for over 30,000.00 both were made by good friends of mine.
And if you go to this page you will see a mouse I made for Lisa, she loved my mice and asked me to contribute to a Disney piece.
Fans spend their hard earned money making an artist hot. I just believe when I sell an item, it belongs to that fan 100%.
Edited by Jodi Moisan on 30 December 2013 at 5:09pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Topic Closed)
