Author Topic: Post-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev.... (Read 2838029 times)

erik1925 · « **Reply #7800 on:** September 09, 2015, 12:51:00 PM »

EMP amended the ROTJ quad description this morning, it seems.

http://auctions.emovieposter.com/Bidding.taf?_function=detail&Auction_uid1=3968716

CSM · « **Reply #7801 on:** September 09, 2015, 03:27:09 PM »

Quote from: erik1925 on September 09, 2015, 12:51:00 PM

EMP amended the ROTJ quad description this morning, it seems.

http://auctions.emovieposter.com/Bidding.taf?_function=detail&Auction_uid1=3968716

POST sale again. This, as others have pointed out, somewhat dilutes the accuracy of the price results recorded in the auction history database.

erik1925 · « **Reply #7802 on:** September 09, 2015, 03:30:25 PM »

Quote from: CSM on September 09, 2015, 03:27:09 PM

POST sale again. This, as others have pointed out, somewhat dilutes the accuracy of the price results recorded in the auction history database.

Yup. Up until the auction closed, the descrip. remained unchanged.

paul waines · « **Reply #7803 on:** September 09, 2015, 04:20:41 PM »

And the full sized ones are NOT printers proofs, I have no idea where he got that from.. To be honest, I've seen many more full size ones than the short versions, which would make the shorter one more scarce.

Also, the 27x40 size was used for a much longer time period than the early 80's...

Maybe he should stop asking "Star Wars experts", and start asking Poster people.

CSM · « **Reply #7804 on:** September 09, 2015, 10:50:22 PM »

Quote from: paul waines on September 09, 2015, 04:20:41 PM

Maybe he should stop asking "Star Wars experts", and start asking Poster people.

Ari · « **Reply #7805 on:** September 09, 2015, 10:53:55 PM »

FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!

eatbrie · « **Reply #7806 on:** September 09, 2015, 11:35:17 PM »

Quote from: paul waines on September 09, 2015, 04:20:41 PM

And the full sized ones are NOT printers proofs, I have no idea where he got that from.. To be honest, I've seen many more full size ones than the short versions, which would make the shorter one more scarce.

Also, the 27x40 size was used for a much longer time period than the early 80's...

Maybe he should stop asking "Star Wars experts", and start asking Poster people.

So the question is, does it make a difference whether the 27x40in were printed that way or cut to fit the subway standard afterward? Whether it was one way or the other, it was done by the printer. So one is printed smaller and the other one is trimmed. It's the same bullshit in my book and it is missing 3 inches of poster. Why not buy the full one and be done with it?

T

erik1925 · « **Reply #7807 on:** September 09, 2015, 11:36:37 PM »

Quote from: Ari on September 09, 2015, 10:53:55 PM

FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!
FARKING PRINTERS PROOFS!

We should have remembered your disdain for so-called Printer's Proofs, Ari!! (just untrimmed posters)

eatbrie · « **Reply #7808 on:** September 09, 2015, 11:38:07 PM »

Quote from: erik1925 on September 09, 2015, 11:36:37 PM

We should have remembered your disdain for Printer's Proofs, Ari!!

I so agree with Ari. Collecting printer's proof makes zero sense to me. How about collecting the white paper the posters were printed on and the ink they used on the poster. Isn't that even rarer?

T

erik1925 · « **Reply #7809 on:** September 09, 2015, 11:54:26 PM »

Quote from: eatbrie on September 09, 2015, 11:38:07 PM

I so agree with Ari. Collecting printer's proof makes zero sense to me. How about collecting the white paper the posters were printed on and the ink they used on the poster. Isn't that even rarer?

T

And anyone that touts and sells untrimmed, (PP) posters with the color bars attached, is a rare thing, too!

paul waines · « **Reply #7810 on:** September 10, 2015, 01:53:50 AM »

Quote from: eatbrie on September 09, 2015, 11:35:17 PM

So the question is, does it make a difference whether the 27x40in were printed that way or cut to fit the subway standard afterward? Whether it was one way or the other, it was done by the printer. So one is printed smaller and the other one is trimmed. It's the same bullshit in my book and it is missing 3 inches of poster. Why not buy the full one and be done with it?

T

Quite right, always go for the correct size.
The shorter ones were printed that way, as on the folded examples, the folds match up perfectly. and there's the missing text on the shorter one too.

Roughoutline · « **Reply #7811 on:** September 17, 2015, 06:05:09 PM »

Someone just got a real bargain.

Some Like It Hot US 1sh on linen for £350/$550.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SOME-LIKE-IT-HOT-Marilyn-Monroe-original-vintage-advertising-film-movie-poster-/321857609857?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2047675.l2557&nma=true&si=7YNjuvAMLAG0fEINqU1FknyA9Qc%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

erik1925 · « **Reply #7812 on:** September 17, 2015, 06:26:43 PM »

That looks very nice. Great color, too!

And with a NICE price, indeed!

erik1925 · « **Reply #7813 on:** September 20, 2015, 04:30:53 PM »

Such a great looking French RR poster for Dracula.. and it certainly performed well the other night, too!

Closing at $512.00

http://auctions.emovieposter.com/Bidding.taf?_function=detail&Auction_uid1=3979384

erik1925 · « **Reply #7814 on:** September 23, 2015, 01:01:40 PM »

$775.00

http://auctions.emovieposter.com/Bidding.taf?src=itm&wle=http://auctions.emovieposter.com/&e=rb&id=3983905

And one reads EMP's description -- "There is much fold and border wear and there is tiny paper loss in the center crossfold. There are some creases scattered in various areas. There are tape remnants or stains in each corner, with some associated paper loss in the corners at right." --

it certainly did very well.

Neo · « **Reply #7815 on:** September 23, 2015, 01:22:13 PM »

Some people probably bid more on stuff with wear and/or damage like that one. That kind of aging likely indicates that it's not "hot off the presses," and surely a lot of folks appreciate the character of something that looks like it may have been used in a theater.

erik1925 · « **Reply #7816 on:** September 23, 2015, 01:24:06 PM »

Yes.. it's lived a life so far, and was not just stored away in a box or file cabinet someplace, from day 1.

MoviePosterBid.com · « **Reply #7817 on:** September 23, 2015, 01:53:16 PM »

Quote from: erik1925 on September 09, 2015, 12:51:00 PM

EMP amended the ROTJ quad description this morning, it seems.

http://auctions.emovieposter.com/Bidding.taf?_function=detail&Auction_uid1=3968716

Quote from: CSM on September 09, 2015, 03:27:09 PM

POST sale again. This, as others have pointed out, somewhat dilutes the accuracy of the price results recorded in the auction history database.

this is so wrong.. so so wrong.
the items should have been ended and relisted with the proper data later
how many times has this been done?

facts are that when you edit your database to show different data, you are not showing reality as you sold the item differently

there are hundreds or thousands of post-auction corrections that do not show the truth in that database

I think the right move when you find such issues is do a screen capture of the page with the incorrect data and post it later with a screen cap of the edited data.

eatbrie · « **Reply #7818 on:** September 23, 2015, 01:59:05 PM »

Quote from: Neo on September 23, 2015, 01:22:13 PM

Some people probably bid more on stuff with wear and/or damage like that one. That kind of aging likely indicates that it's not "hot off the presses," and surely a lot of folks appreciate the character of something that looks like it may have been used in a theater.

Um, I respectfully disagree, Brandon. I don't think anyone is going to be bid on something because it is damaged and has character. Collectors bid on this Nightmare poster because it is scarce (to use Ari's wording) and God only knows when the next one will pop up. Had it been in mint condition, it would have probably sold north of $1k.

T

Neo · « **Reply #7819 on:** September 23, 2015, 02:22:20 PM »

Quote from: eatbrie on September 23, 2015, 01:59:05 PM

Um, I respectfully disagree, Brandon. I don't think anyone is going to be bid on something because it is damaged and has character. Collectors bid on this Nightmare poster because it is scarce (to use Ari's wording) and God only knows when the next one will pop up. Had it been in mint condition, it would have probably sold north of $1k.

T

Totally disagree. What one person considers something as damaged another person considers it a piece of history. Additionally, a lot of people think something that is "mint" is too good to be true, and is a repro., commercial poster, etc., especially for a popular title like this, and they would rather have something like the quad above.

MoviePosterBid.com · « **Reply #7820 on:** September 23, 2015, 02:26:54 PM »

there is no such thing as mint.
Though my grading system goes up to C-10, I think I have used it 5 times (or less) in over 110,000 listings
in general my highest grade posted is C-9 or C-9/10..

as to posters with 'character'

those who linenback stuff just to get rid of folds apparently don't like character
however, I would say that more collectors prefer unrestored to restored posters and that speaks more to the liking of character than a lack of folds.

Crazy Vick · « **Reply #7821 on:** September 23, 2015, 02:33:09 PM »

This is bigmike's poster
http://www.allposterforum.com/index.php/topic,9514.msg186336.html#msg186336

Bigmike - we happy?

eatbrie · « **Reply #7822 on:** September 23, 2015, 02:36:47 PM »

Quote from: Neo on September 23, 2015, 02:22:20 PM

What one person considers something as damaged another person considers it a piece of history.

A piece of history because it has tears and pieces of tape on it, now that's funny. I own a near mint (there you go, Rich) rolled copy of the Nightmare quad and - I'm going to go out on a limb here - I do think it could have fetched more money.

T

Neo · « **Reply #7823 on:** September 23, 2015, 02:39:16 PM »

Quote from: MoviePosterBid.com on September 23, 2015, 02:26:54 PM

there is no such thing as mint.
Though my grading system goes up to C-10, I think I have used it 5 times (or less) in over 110,000 listings
in general my highest grade posted is C-9 or C-9/10..

as to posters with 'character'

those who linenback stuff just to get rid of folds apparently don't like character
however, I would say that more collectors prefer unrestored to restored posters and that speaks more to the liking of character than a lack of folds.

I know of at least one person who appreciates the character of a piece that was originally folded, and opted it to have it linenbacked.

One could argue that the linen backing/restoration added character to it.

MoviePosterBid.com · « **Reply #7824 on:** September 23, 2015, 02:42:00 PM »

Quote from: Neo on September 23, 2015, 02:39:16 PM

One could argue that the linen backing/restoration added character to it.

that's reaching

News:

Author Topic: Post-auction analysis - OMGs!, LOLs!, WTFs!, whatev.... (Read 2838029 times)