poplux
New Member
🗨️ 254
👍🏻 143
June 2017
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by poplux on Oct 10, 2017 21:36:42 GMT 1, has anyone reported it as stolen?
I report every time I see one + cc to Orbi
has anyone reported it as stolen? I report every time I see one + cc to Orbi |
|
|
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by King Robbo Lives on Oct 20, 2017 4:29:14 GMT 1, Wow - this is in the item description:
Please note that INVADER’s representatives recently communicated that this work was created by INVADER, who now objects to the sale or attribution to him as the artist, after the physical artwork was removed from the building where he had installed it. You are bidding on the ownership of the physical artwork only. You are not bidding on, and a winning bid will not result in ownership of, copyright and the right of reproduction which are differentiated from ownership of the physical artwork. Any intellectual property rights, including but not limited to copyrights, moral rights, rights of attribution and publicity, are not part of the sale of this lot. Buyers are responsible for their own due diligence. Further details are available upon request.
www.julienslive.com/m/lot-details/index/catalog/232/lot/95626/?url=%2Fm%2Fview-auctions%2Fcatalog%2Fid%2F232%2F%3Fpage%3D1%26view%3Dlist%26items%3D12%26key%3DInvader%26sale%3Dundefined%26catm%3Dany%26order%3Dorder_num%26xclosed%3Dno%26featured%3Dno
|
|
|
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by Express Post on Oct 20, 2017 4:53:42 GMT 1,
My legalese would have distilled it to:
You are buying a bunch of tiles put up by Invader. The artist has refuted the attribution. Caveat emptor.
My legalese would have distilled it to: You are buying a bunch of tiles put up by Invader. The artist has refuted the attribution. Caveat emptor. |
|
met
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,797
👍🏻 6,771
June 2009
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by met on Oct 21, 2017 13:49:21 GMT 1, This is a fantastic thread. Kudos. I'm sure there are vast numbers of similar lots that would fall flat under the same scrutiny. One issue with street pieces is that the sale becomes the provenance. Something sold through a good house creates its own validity...
Indeed, I can assure you that significant numbers of fakes have been sold by random auction houses. I've seen plenty myself, some of which were quite convincing and sophisticated.
A couple of specific forgeries have been mentioned by me in the past. But I deliberately avoid pointing out each and every one I spot. This is to discourage others from possibly inferring that pieces not mentioned may be genuine.
When it comes to Banksy, collectors are safest by sticking to a default position: For anything other than inexpensive ephemera, buy from source. Or, if buying on the secondary market, make sure it comes with a Pest Control certificate of authenticity. In all other cases, you're on your own.
_________
Many third-tier auction houses that dismiss the need for a Pest Control COA do so consciously.
It's a calculated decision. They look at the potential profits to be made by selling works purported to be by Banksy. This is weighed up against the likelihood of reputational damage. As long as the overall balance is tipped in favour of the bottom line, the possibility of selling a few forgeries every now and then is deemed commercially acceptable.
In these instances, most of the buyers are probably naive, mistakingly assuming the relevant auction house has integrity and rigorous due diligence procedures in place. Other buyers will more knowingly accept the risk of spending large sums of money on potential fakes.
The standing of Lyon & Turnbull took a battering in 2008 when it chose to circumvent Pest Control and rely on authentication from Vermin — a self-appointed body that had no connection with Banksy, but did have a vested interest in offloading street pieces. Since that PR disaster almost a decade ago, how many works by the artist has Lyon & Turnbull sold? Maybe one or two? No collector of sound mind would now ever consign a Banksy with them.
Schadenfreude is indecorous, so let us instead call this a morality tale about sowing and reaping.
_________
In my opinion, Julien's Auctions is not a "good house" and doesn't have a credible reputation when it comes to street art / urban art. Leaving aside questions about the knowledge and sale-curation skills of the specialists working there, I'll focus on two reasons:
1. Overall, its client base appears relatively uninformed about the street art genre — as well as more susceptible to hype than the average buyer at other venues.
2. As alluded to above, Julien's Auctions seems to have a bad-faith approach to authenticity and provenance.
In this respect, I was actually pleased Drill Rat looks to have found a buyer last week for $57,600. Hopefully, that buyer will at some point discover this thread and read the clearcut evidence of photoshop shenanigans. Perhaps negative press coverage and threats of legal proceedings against the auction house could then follow.
I believe scenarios like these to be the most effective way of encouraging Julien's Auctions to reconsider its current policy of selling unauthenticated street pieces.
This is a fantastic thread. Kudos. I'm sure there are vast numbers of similar lots that would fall flat under the same scrutiny. One issue with street pieces is that the sale becomes the provenance. Something sold through a good house creates its own validity... Indeed, I can assure you that significant numbers of fakes have been sold by random auction houses. I've seen plenty myself, some of which were quite convincing and sophisticated. A couple of specific forgeries have been mentioned by me in the past. But I deliberately avoid pointing out each and every one I spot. This is to discourage others from possibly inferring that pieces not mentioned may be genuine. When it comes to Ban ksy, collectors are safest by sticking to a default position: For anything other than inexpensive ephemera, buy from source. Or, if buying on the secondary market, make sure it comes with a Pest Control certificate of authenticity. In all other cases, you're on your own. _________ Many third-tier auction houses that dismiss the need for a Pest Control COA do so consciously. It's a calculated decision. They look at the potential profits to be made by selling works purported to be by Ban ksy. This is weighed up against the likelihood of reputational damage. As long as the overall balance is tipped in favour of the bottom line, the possibility of selling a few forgeries every now and then is deemed commercially acceptable. In these instances, most of the buyers are probably naive, mistakingly assuming the relevant auction house has integrity and rigorous due diligence procedures in place. Other buyers will more knowingly accept the risk of spending large sums of money on potential fakes. The standing of Lyon & Turnbull took a battering in 2008 when it chose to circumvent Pest Control and rely on authentication from Vermin — a self-appointed body that had no connection with Ban ksy, but did have a vested interest in offloading street pieces. Since that PR disaster almost a decade ago, how many works by the artist has Lyon & Turnbull sold? Maybe one or two? No collector of sound mind would now ever consign a Ban ksy with them. Schadenfreude is indecorous, so let us instead call this a morality tale about sowing and reaping. _________ In my opinion, Julien's Auctions is not a "good house" and doesn't have a credible reputation when it comes to str eet art / ur ban art. Leaving aside questions about the knowledge and sale-curation skills of the specialists working there, I'll focus on two reasons: 1. Overall, its client base appears relatively uninformed about the str eet art genre — as well as more susceptible to hype than the average buyer at other venues. 2. As alluded to above, Julien's Auctions seems to have a bad-faith approach to authenticity and provenance. In this respect, I was actually pleased Drill Rat looks to have found a buyer last week for $57,600. Hopefully, that buyer will at some point discover this thread and read the clearcut evidence of photoshop shenanigans. Perhaps negative press coverage and threats of legal proceedings against the auction house could then follow. I believe scenarios like these to be the most effective way of encouraging Julien's Auctions to reconsider its current policy of selling unauthenticated street pieces. |
|
gd79
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,132
👍🏻 1,221
September 2015
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by gd79 on Oct 21, 2017 14:04:39 GMT 1, 57k... Oh my days.
57k... Oh my days.
|
|
visual
New Member
🗨️ 43
👍🏻 37
August 2016
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by visual on Oct 21, 2017 14:50:27 GMT 1, and $2,812.50 for a difaced tenner 
and $2,812.50 for a difaced tenner |
|
|
|
lee3
New Member
🗨️ 832
👍🏻 1,290
November 2009
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by lee3 on Oct 21, 2017 18:01:18 GMT 1, >>>In my opinion, Julien's Auctions is not a "good house" <<<
Met, i concur. Any house that preys on potential customers is not a good house.
>>>In this respect, I was actually pleased Drill Rat looks to have found a buyer last week for $57,600.<<<
Given the previous point, I have no idea why you would believe Julien's when they tell you something purportedly sold for $57k. Better to dismiss these results as fabricated like the lot itself as this nonsense merely helps their scheme in the future.
>>>In my opinion, Julien's Auctions is not a "good house" <<<
Met, i concur. Any house that preys on potential customers is not a good house.
>>>In this respect, I was actually pleased Drill Rat looks to have found a buyer last week for $57,600.<<<
Given the previous point, I have no idea why you would believe Julien's when they tell you something purportedly sold for $57k. Better to dismiss these results as fabricated like the lot itself as this nonsense merely helps their scheme in the future.
|
|
Chrisp
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,842
👍🏻 1,059
July 2011
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by Chrisp on Oct 25, 2017 8:53:22 GMT 1, Would be nice to see building owners come forward to claim ownership of any removed pieces after sales. Probably really discourage removal in the first place.
Would be nice to see building owners come forward to claim ownership of any removed pieces after sales. Probably really discourage removal in the first place.
|
|
met
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,797
👍🏻 6,771
June 2009
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by met on Oct 25, 2017 13:47:39 GMT 1, >>>In my opinion, Julien's Auctions is not a "good house" <<< Met, i concur. Any house that preys on potential customers is not a good house. >>>In this respect, I was actually pleased Drill Rat looks to have found a buyer last week for $57,600.<<< Given the previous point, I have no idea why you would believe Julien's when they tell you something purportedly sold for $57k. Better to dismiss these results as fabricated like the lot itself as this nonsense merely helps their scheme in the future.
Fair comment.
Although my post included the "looks" qualifier, I should have placed greater emphasis on the possibility of this purported sale being a fabrication.
What's clear is that, as a whole, the results of the Street, Contemporary & Celebrity auction were dismal:
(i) 40% of the lots are listed as having been bought in; and
(ii) of the lots recorded as sold (whether genuine or not), more than a third are listed as having gone for less than their low estimate, even with buyer's premium added.
Since Julien's Auctions already acknowledged this overall failure via the sales information on its website, to my mind I suppose there seemed less reason to doubt the below-estimate result recorded for that Diverted Traffic sign. Factored in as well was my lack of faith in their clients' knowledge of street art. Banksy fans still include those who aren't aware of Pest Control's existence or the scale of the problem with forgeries. It therefore would not surprise me if a couple of bidders gave excessive weight to the reassuring patter of the auction house's employees.
That said, the Diverted Traffic sign was promoted as one of the star lots (the image being used for the catalogue cover), meaning the stakes were higher with this particular item. So I could indeed imagine Julien's Auctions wanting people to believe the sign had sold even if the reality was different.
__________
Regarding what "helps their scheme in the future", this is an interesting point, partly because our positions here may diverge slightly.
I appreciate the argument about dismissing reported results as fabricated (instead of giving such results benefit of the doubt, which could help legitimise them).
My own view however is that a few high-profile, high-value sales of works later discovered to be indisputable forgeries may be more effective at undermining and destabilising whatever market still exists for unauthenticated works attributed to Banksy:
1. It would raise the general public's awareness of fakes being in circulation, and of the role held by Pest Control.
2. The pride of the relevant buyers would take a battering, as they will have exposed themselves to public ridicule through their foolishness. This is also likely to have a strong 'but for the grace of god' deterrent effect with others, in particular those who are status-conscious and for whom social embarrassment is seen to be worse than death.
3. Auction houses which (for the time being) continue to accept unauthenticated Banksy works on consignment may feel a greater urgency to review their policies — especially when presented with more patent legal and reputational risks they are exposing themselves to.
>>>In my opinion, Julien's Auctions is not a "good house" <<< Met, i concur. Any house that preys on potential customers is not a good house. >>>In this respect, I was actually pleased Drill Rat looks to have found a buyer last week for $57,600.<<< Given the previous point, I have no idea why you would believe Julien's when they tell you something purportedly sold for $57k. Better to dismiss these results as fabricated like the lot itself as this nonsense merely helps their scheme in the future.Fair comment. Although my post included the "looks" qualifier, I should have placed greater emphasis on the possibility of this purported sale being a fabrication. What's clear is that, as a whole, the results of the Street, Contemporary & Celebrity auction were dismal: (i) 40% of the lots are listed as having been bought in; and (ii) of the lots recorded as sold (whether genuine or not), more than a third are listed as having gone for less than their low estimate, even with buyer's premium added. Since Julien's Auctions already acknowledged this overall failure via the sales information on its website, to my mind I suppose there seemed less reason to doubt the below-estimate result recorded for that Diverted Traffic sign. Factored in as well was my lack of faith in their clients' knowledge of str eet art. Ban ksy fans still include those who aren't aware of Pest Control's existence or the scale of the problem with forgeries. It therefore would not surprise me if a couple of bidders gave excessive weight to the reassuring patter of the auction house's employees. That said, the Diverted Traffic sign was promoted as one of the star lots (the image being used for the catalogue cover), meaning the stakes were higher with this particular item. So I could indeed imagine Julien's Auctions wanting people to believe the sign had sold even if the reality was different. __________ Regarding what "helps their scheme in the future", this is an interesting point, partly because our positions here may diverge slightly. I appreciate the argument about dismissing reported results as fabricated (instead of giving such results benefit of the doubt, which could help legitimise them). My own view however is that a few high-profile, high-value sales of works later discovered to be indisputable forgeries may be more effective at undermining and destabilising whatever market still exists for unauthenticated works attributed to Ban ksy: 1. It would raise the general public's awareness of fakes being in circulation, and of the role held by Pest Control. 2. The pride of the relevant buyers would take a battering, as they will have exposed themselves to public ridicule through their foolishness. This is also likely to have a strong 'but for the grace of god' deterrent effect with others, in particular those who are status-conscious and for whom social embarrassment is seen to be worse than death. 3. Auction houses which (for the time being) continue to accept unauthenticated Ban ksy works on consignment may feel a greater urgency to review their policies — especially when presented with more patent legal and reputational risks they are exposing themselves to. |
|
lee3
New Member
🗨️ 832
👍🏻 1,290
November 2009
|
Julien's to Auction Street Invaders, Banksy, by lee3 on Oct 25, 2017 18:22:22 GMT 1, Met:
>>>My own view however is that a few high-profile, high-value sales of works later discovered to be indisputable forgeries may be more effective at undermining and destabilising whatever market still exists for unauthenticated works attributed to Banksy<<<<
In my mind, anything without a COA is the equivalent of a forgery which is precisely the position the vast majority of potential buyers side on. That's why these tier 4 or grade F auction houses are happy to accept a "Vermin" authenticated street piece whether the artist painted it or not. The primary houses would never tarnish their names steeping to that level so if one buys at auction, make sure you do so at Bonhams, Phillips, Sotheby's and Christie's.
Eventually it becomes a buyer beware scenario and if one is foolish enough to shop at a house that preys upon its customers so be it. We can't stop everyone who decides to step into the street without looking both ways either (i did that as a moronic 11 year old and the result taught me a fine lesson). Long winded point being I don't believe education is the answer at that level of stupidity and some of us need to learn the hard way.
Met:
>>>My own view however is that a few high-profile, high-value sales of works later discovered to be indisputable forgeries may be more effective at undermining and destabilising whatever market still exists for unauthenticated works attributed to Banksy<<<<
In my mind, anything without a COA is the equivalent of a forgery which is precisely the position the vast majority of potential buyers side on. That's why these tier 4 or grade F auction houses are happy to accept a "Vermin" authenticated street piece whether the artist painted it or not. The primary houses would never tarnish their names steeping to that level so if one buys at auction, make sure you do so at Bonhams, Phillips, Sotheby's and Christie's.
Eventually it becomes a buyer beware scenario and if one is foolish enough to shop at a house that preys upon its customers so be it. We can't stop everyone who decides to step into the street without looking both ways either (i did that as a moronic 11 year old and the result taught me a fine lesson). Long winded point being I don't believe education is the answer at that level of stupidity and some of us need to learn the hard way.
|
|
