juni0209
New Member
🗨️ 788
👍🏻 558
February 2018
|
Nice article! Thanks for sharing |
|
Carl Cashman
Artist
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,775
👍🏻 3,147
August 2017
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Carl Cashman on Sept 10, 2019 18:13:22 GMT 1,
If anyone can buy a one off "original photograph" of Banksy for £500 i say grab it. I really can't see these photographs coming on the market anytime soon. This is mine, not a one off, but a small edition of 15 http://instagr.am/p/Bk-7GAMlIbJ
They were a nice buy, I think £150 ? When I was tempted a few years ago.
If anyone can buy a one off "original photograph" of Banksy for £500 i say grab it. I really can't see these photographs coming on the market anytime soon. This is mine, not a one off, but a small edition of 15 http://instagr.am/p/Bk-7GAMlIbJ They were a nice buy, I think £150 ? When I was tempted a few years ago. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 18:29:57 GMT 1, That's a cool piece. If he has 12,000 photographs it would be a shame to see them split up. They should be archived and kept for a Banksy Museum. If these are split its a part of Banksy history lost forever.
I guess he has the negatives so will do editions etc?
That's a cool piece. If he has 12,000 photographs it would be a shame to see them split up. They should be archived and kept for a Banksy Museum. If these are split its a part of Banksy history lost forever. I guess he has the negatives so will do editions etc? |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 18:31:29 GMT 1, Does anyone know if Lazinc will still be selling Banksy prints and originals on consignment?
On consignment?
I know that word to mean you have it and try to sell it, dont pay me until its sold?
Is this what you mean?
If so, nope, no idea
If not, then nope, no idea
Does anyone know if Lazinc will still be selling Banksy prints and originals on consignment? On consignment? I know that word to mean you have it and try to sell it, dont pay me until its sold? Is this what you mean? If so, nope, no idea If not, then nope, no idea |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 18:34:32 GMT 1, Errrr that was banksy not Laz? Lovely sentiment though thanks Right i am referring to the banks man constantly complaining pf profiteering.
where does he constantly complain about profiteering?
Do You mean when he has a rant about the museums that charge entrance to see works that galleries have rented off of owners pretending it's an official 'Banksy authorised Museum?
Or something else? Do You have links?
Errrr that was banksy not Laz? Lovely sentiment though thanks Right i am referring to the banks man constantly complaining pf profiteering. where does he constantly complain about profiteering? Do You mean when he has a rant about the museums that charge entrance to see works that galleries have rented off of owners pretending it's an official 'Banksy authorised Museum? Or something else? Do You have links? |
|
sgolby
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,890
👍🏻 2,892
November 2012
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by sgolby on Sept 10, 2019 18:42:58 GMT 1, Right i am referring to the banks man constantly complaining pf profiteering. where does he constantly complain about profiteering? Do You mean when he has a rant about the museums that charge entrance to see works that galleries have rented off of owners pretending it's an official 'Banksy authorised Museum? Or something else? Do You have links?
Right i am referring to the banks man constantly complaining pf profiteering. where does he constantly complain about profiteering? Do You mean when he has a rant about the museums that charge entrance to see works that galleries have rented off of owners pretending it's an official 'Banksy authorised Museum? Or something else? Do You have links? Yes indeedy, that is what I mean. NO need for anger, I am a big Banksy fan, I just think it is all fair in love and Banksy, museums charge entrance fees as well. Galleries don't as they pay their rent selling stuff. Reality is mate, it isn't as though Banksy is doing any of his own shows, his residencies are dope when they happen, his random street work is king, but it isn't like most people can get to see those pieces before someone removes it or it gets vandalized especially they live in say... anywhere other than the UK. If the Banks man cares about his fans, why not sanction a show, a gallery, or better yet sanction a world tour. Guests to my home freak when they see one of my two remaining Banksy's and they aren't even the ones that are worth a lot of money. They freak because they are seeing an actual Banksy, you know why, because they never have and many never will. |
|
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 18:48:09 GMT 1, where does he constantly complain about profiteering? Do You mean when he has a rant about the museums that charge entrance to see works that galleries have rented off of owners pretending it's an official 'Banksy authorised Museum? Or something else? Do You have links? Yes indeedy, that is what I mean. NO need for anger, I am a big Banksy fan, I just think it is all fair in love and Banksy, museums charge entrance fees as well. Galleries don't as they pay their rent selling stuff. Reality is mate, it isn't as though Banksy is doing any of his own shows, his residencies are dope when they happen, his random street work is king, but it isn't like most people can get to see those pieces before someone removes it or it gets vandalized especially they live in say... anywhere other than the UK. If the Banks man cares about his fans, why not sanction a show, a gallery, or better yet sanction a world tour. Guests to my home freak when they see one of my two remaining Banksy's and they aren't even the ones that are worth a lot of money. They freak because they are seeing an actual Banksy, you know why, because they never have and many never will.
I promise You, no anger, apologies if that's how it came across
I have no issue with Museums charging Money either,
But lets say, and this is possibly not a great analogy.
You thought Led Zepp were playing in your town and you paid top dollar to see them, you get all dressed up, rock and roll baby, and Led Vepp turn up pretending to be Led Zep, and even worse you still think its Led Zepp ? And then to compound issues You buy some Led Zep editions that they did just for this show, and you contact them to say hey maan can You sign this . s**t for me, and they say whooaaaaaaaaa man we didn't do no show
However if Led Vep were playing and you like Led Zep, then all good pay your money and have a blast
I am rambling :-)
where does he constantly complain about profiteering? Do You mean when he has a rant about the museums that charge entrance to see works that galleries have rented off of owners pretending it's an official 'Banksy authorised Museum? Or something else? Do You have links? Yes indeedy, that is what I mean. NO need for anger, I am a big Banksy fan, I just think it is all fair in love and Banksy, museums charge entrance fees as well. Galleries don't as they pay their rent selling stuff. Reality is mate, it isn't as though Banksy is doing any of his own shows, his residencies are dope when they happen, his random street work is king, but it isn't like most people can get to see those pieces before someone removes it or it gets vandalized especially they live in say... anywhere other than the UK. If the Banks man cares about his fans, why not sanction a show, a gallery, or better yet sanction a world tour. Guests to my home freak when they see one of my two remaining Banksy's and they aren't even the ones that are worth a lot of money. They freak because they are seeing an actual Banksy, you know why, because they never have and many never will. I promise You, no anger, apologies if that's how it came across I have no issue with Museums charging Money either, But lets say, and this is possibly not a great analogy. You thought Led Zepp were playing in your town and you paid top dollar to see them, you get all dressed up, rock and roll baby, and Led Vepp turn up pretending to be Led Zep, and even worse you still think its Led Zepp ? And then to compound issues You buy some Led Zep editions that they did just for this show, and you contact them to say hey maan can You sign this . s**t for me, and they say whooaaaaaaaaa man we didn't do no show However if Led Vep were playing and you like Led Zep, then all good pay your money and have a blast I am rambling :-) |
|
sgolby
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,890
👍🏻 2,892
November 2012
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by sgolby on Sept 10, 2019 18:51:19 GMT 1, @runt All good mate. I agree with your analogy, and when it is unsanctioned it should be stated, and to my knowledge Steve always makes a point to state that it is unofficial. However you are right "unofficial," should always be included. However the photographs for example, are quite official as Steve took them and they were the initial reason Steve and the Banks man linked up.
@runt All good mate. I agree with your analogy, and when it is unsanctioned it should be stated, and to my knowledge Steve always makes a point to state that it is unofficial. However you are right "unofficial," should always be included. However the photographs for example, are quite official as Steve took them and they were the initial reason Steve and the Banks man linked up.
|
|
dotdot
Junior Member
🗨️ 3,658
👍🏻 1,030
December 2006
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by dotdot on Sept 10, 2019 18:53:38 GMT 1, change is good for him.
change is good for anyone.
as is loose change... though it doesn't buy much nowadays.
.. change the record  side two beckons.
change is good for him. change is good for anyone. as is loose change... though it doesn't buy much nowadays. .. change the record side two beckons. |
|
denzil
New Member
🗨️ 703
👍🏻 398
April 2009
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by denzil on Sept 10, 2019 19:33:38 GMT 1, I think there is going to be a Legal Battle over who owns the Copyright to the Photos' Even though Steve took them if he was employed by Banksy to take them They belong to Banksy
I think there is going to be a Legal Battle over who owns the Copyright to the Photos' Even though Steve took them if he was employed by Banksy to take them They belong to Banksy
|
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 20:51:56 GMT 1, @runt All good mate. I agree with your analogy, and when it is unsanctioned it should be stated, and to my knowledge Steve always makes a point to state that it is unofficial. However you are right "unofficial," should always be included. However the photographs for example, are quite official as Steve took them and they were the initial reason Steve and the Banks man linked up.
I have no issue with Steve doing what he likes with the photos, they are his as far as i am concerned and he always seems to do it the right way, no idea if banksy gets the arse with him or not, it seems to me they both benefited from their relationship in the early days?
Museum wise i think we agree that if parasites like CAT put on shows under the Banksy banner and mislead people into thinking its a genuine 'Banksy' endorsed show and charging money that Banksy who has never charged for a show (has he?) tandhaving had nothing to do with it, should be able to spit the dummy over it, and let people know that its not 'his' show
I dont know of him ranting over anything else in so far as people profiting over his art? not lately anyway, maybe a decade or so ago
@runt All good mate. I agree with your analogy, and when it is unsanctioned it should be stated, and to my knowledge Steve always makes a point to state that it is unofficial. However you are right "unofficial," should always be included. However the photographs for example, are quite official as Steve took them and they were the initial reason Steve and the Banks man linked up. I have no issue with Steve doing what he likes with the photos, they are his as far as i am concerned and he always seems to do it the right way, no idea if banksy gets the arse with him or not, it seems to me they both benefited from their relationship in the early days? Museum wise i think we agree that if parasites like CAT put on shows under the Banksy banner and mislead people into thinking its a genuine 'Banksy' endorsed show and charging money that Banksy who has never charged for a show (has he?) tandhaving had nothing to do with it, should be able to spit the dummy over it, and let people know that its not 'his' show I dont know of him ranting over anything else in so far as people profiting over his art? not lately anyway, maybe a decade or so ago |
|
|
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Coach on Sept 10, 2019 20:58:44 GMT 1, So I am clear, it is ok for everyone else to sell photos, to do parodies of works for sale, promote the sale of "fakes" and to sell and buy merchandise from unauthorised shows of works all by Banksy, but its not for Steve Lazarides, who was his manager, agent, who happened to document most of the artists works, which incidentally most are still used in Wall & Piece? Also don't forget the artists that Steve Lazarides brought to all of our attention, JR, Invader, Vhils, Micallef, Hewlett, Bast, Insect, Yeo, Blu, just to name a few.
It’s fine as far as I’m concerned.
So I am clear, it is ok for everyone else to sell photos, to do parodies of works for sale, promote the sale of "fakes" and to sell and buy merchandise from unauthorised shows of works all by Banksy, but its not for Steve Lazarides, who was his manager, agent, who happened to document most of the artists works, which incidentally most are still used in Wall & Piece? Also don't forget the artists that Steve Lazarides brought to all of our attention, JR, Invader, Vhils, Micallef, Hewlett, Bast, Insect, Yeo, Blu, just to name a few. It’s fine as far as I’m concerned. |
|
|
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Coach on Sept 10, 2019 21:01:19 GMT 1, They were a nice buy, I think £150 ? When I was tempted a few years ago.
Hello Carl. I hope all is good with you.
I honestly can’t remember what I paid for it.
Quality is very good. Large size too. The photograph comes nowhere near doing it justice; I found it difficult to take a satisfactory photograph of it.
They were a nice buy, I think £150 ? When I was tempted a few years ago. Hello Carl. I hope all is good with you. I honestly can’t remember what I paid for it. Quality is very good. Large size too. The photograph comes nowhere near doing it justice; I found it difficult to take a satisfactory photograph of it. |
|
|
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by jimbofatz on Sept 11, 2019 1:19:21 GMT 1, The photos are available for free on Laz”s Instagram. So who gives a toss. They mostly will only add to the banksy legend. The whole bristol scene is 35 years old + now be thankful there are still people alive who have interesting new content to release for this board to bash.
At this point you’re basically just saying there’s not going to be enough left on the bone for us to make cash flipping these photos. That’s your complaint.
The photos are available for free on Laz”s Instagram. So who gives a toss. They mostly will only add to the banksy legend. The whole bristol scene is 35 years old + now be thankful there are still people alive who have interesting new content to release for this board to bash.
At this point you’re basically just saying there’s not going to be enough left on the bone for us to make cash flipping these photos. That’s your complaint.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Rouen Cathedral on Sept 11, 2019 2:57:31 GMT 1, I think there is going to be a Legal Battle over who owns the Copyright to the Photos' Even though Steve took them if he was employed by Banksy to take them They belong to Banksy
Banksy suing claiming he owns the photos would be the most banksy thing ever
I think there is going to be a Legal Battle over who owns the Copyright to the Photos' Even though Steve took them if he was employed by Banksy to take them They belong to Banksy Banksy suing claiming he owns the photos would be the most banksy thing ever |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Deleted on Sept 11, 2019 9:00:41 GMT 1, I think there is going to be a Legal Battle over who owns the Copyright to the Photos' Even though Steve took them if he was employed by Banksy to take them They belong to Banksy Banksy suing claiming he owns the photos would be the most banksy thing ever
Why?
Your not trolling are you?
I think there is going to be a Legal Battle over who owns the Copyright to the Photos' Even though Steve took them if he was employed by Banksy to take them They belong to Banksy Banksy suing claiming he owns the photos would be the most banksy thing ever Why? Your not trolling are you? |
|
nex
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,573
👍🏻 1,819
February 2009
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by nex on Sept 11, 2019 9:00:58 GMT 1, There’s some very odd statements in that article from laz, well perhaps not odd, but at least lacking reflection on how well he’s done out of the ‘monetary side’ of it.... actually perhaps he’s realised that and feels some sort of guilt and as he suggests wants to make amends? I guess we’ll see. Anyway he’s got some lovely pictures of banksys and he was there, so they are special at least to me.Good luck Steve I hope you find the peace you’re looking for, as I hope we all do.
There’s some very odd statements in that article from laz, well perhaps not odd, but at least lacking reflection on how well he’s done out of the ‘monetary side’ of it.... actually perhaps he’s realised that and feels some sort of guilt and as he suggests wants to make amends? I guess we’ll see. Anyway he’s got some lovely pictures of banksys and he was there, so they are special at least to me.Good luck Steve I hope you find the peace you’re looking for, as I hope we all do.
|
|
pollz66
New Member
🗨️ 321
👍🏻 199
May 2008
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by pollz66 on Sept 11, 2019 11:08:01 GMT 1,
Whatever you think of Steve, he has helped Banksy become a part of art history. Documenting that photographically is invaluable and will only serve to prop up Banksy's profile for decades to come. I for one am looking forward to seeing the book.
Whatever you think of Steve, he has helped Banksy become a part of art history. Documenting that photographically is invaluable and will only serve to prop up Banksy's profile for decades to come. I for one am looking forward to seeing the book.
|
|
beicoblack
New Member
🗨️ 739
👍🏻 913
September 2018
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Daniel Silk on Sept 12, 2019 7:40:57 GMT 1,
|
|
|
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Daniel Silk on Sept 14, 2019 8:47:58 GMT 1,
|
|
met
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,797
👍🏻 6,766
June 2009
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by met on Sept 15, 2019 0:02:36 GMT 1, i am going to reserve judgement until i see the photos. Reality is, i am torn. This whole “profiteering,”s**t is garbage. Dude auctioned a canvas of his own for over a million pounds and then shreds it in a publicity stunt. He made a million quid off that sale whether through proxy or directly. In any case, everyone in banksy or owing a banksy is profiteering these days.
From the tone of this sentence, it sounds like you disapprove (perhaps for ethical reasons) of the situation you've described.
By "everyone", I assume you're just talking about some people. Or even a large number of people.
What's less clear, however, is what you mean by "profiteering" — especially in the context of expensive and non-essential decorative goods.
Take a specific example:
There are plenty of dealers and private individuals selling Banksy artwork for very high prices. Their pricing, while prohibitive to many collectors, may still reflect the overall demand for the artist and current market value.
Do you consider such persons to be profiteers?
If so, what different approach would you take if you were in their shoes?
i am going to reserve judgement until i see the photos. Reality is, i am torn. This whole “profiteering,”s**t is garbage. Dude auctioned a canvas of his own for over a million pounds and then shreds it in a publicity stunt. He made a million quid off that sale whether through proxy or directly. In any case, everyone in banksy or owing a banksy is profiteering these days.From the tone of this sentence, it sounds like you disapprove (perhaps for ethical reasons) of the situation you've described. By "everyone", I assume you're just talking about some people. Or even a large number of people. What's less clear, however, is what you mean by "profiteering" — especially in the context of expensive and non-essential decorative goods. Take a specific example: There are plenty of dealers and private individuals selling Ban ksy artwork for very high prices. Their pricing, while prohibitive to many collectors, may still reflect the overall demand for the artist and current market value. Do you consider such persons to be profiteers? If so, what different approach would you take if you were in their shoes? |
|
|
|
sgolby
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,890
👍🏻 2,892
November 2012
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by sgolby on Sept 15, 2019 2:07:43 GMT 1, i am going to reserve judgement until i see the photos. Reality is, i am torn. This whole “profiteering,”s**t is garbage. Dude auctioned a canvas of his own for over a million pounds and then shreds it in a publicity stunt. He made a million quid off that sale whether through proxy or directly. In any case, everyone in banksy or owing a banksy is profiteering these days.From the tone of this sentence, it sounds like you disapprove (perhaps for ethical reasons) of the situation you've described. By "everyone", I assume you're just talking about some people. Or even a large number of people. What's less clear, however, is what you mean by "profiteering" — especially in the context of expensive and non-essential decorative goods. Take a specific example: There are plenty of dealers and private individuals selling Ban ksy artwork for very high prices. Their pricing, while prohibitive to many collectors, may still reflect the overall demand for the artist and current market value. Do you consider such persons to be profiteers? If so, what different approach would you take if you were in their shoes?
True, you are right. I should say profiting. And to clarify i meant anyone who was an early banksy owner. To be clear i do not disapprove at all of people profiting. What i find comical is Banksy taking aim at folks profiting off showing his work, when i believe he could stifle this by doing more of his own shows or retrospectives, or perhaps a traveling retrospective.
i am going to reserve judgement until i see the photos. Reality is, i am torn. This whole “profiteering,”s**t is garbage. Dude auctioned a canvas of his own for over a million pounds and then shreds it in a publicity stunt. He made a million quid off that sale whether through proxy or directly. In any case, everyone in banksy or owing a banksy is profiteering these days.From the tone of this sentence, it sounds like you disapprove (perhaps for ethical reasons) of the situation you've described. By "everyone", I assume you're just talking about some people. Or even a large number of people. What's less clear, however, is what you mean by "profiteering" — especially in the context of expensive and non-essential decorative goods. Take a specific example: There are plenty of dealers and private individuals selling Ban ksy artwork for very high prices. Their pricing, while prohibitive to many collectors, may still reflect the overall demand for the artist and current market value. Do you consider such persons to be profiteers? If so, what different approach would you take if you were in their shoes? True, you are right. I should say profiting. And to clarify i meant anyone who was an early banksy owner. To be clear i do not disapprove at all of people profiting. What i find comical is Banksy taking aim at folks profiting off showing his work, when i believe he could stifle this by doing more of his own shows or retrospectives, or perhaps a traveling retrospective. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 11:09:42 GMT 1, From the tone of this sentence, it sounds like you disapprove (perhaps for ethical reasons) of the situation you've described. By "everyone", I assume you're just talking about some people. Or even a large number of people. What's less clear, however, is what you mean by "profiteering" — especially in the context of expensive and non-essential decorative goods. Take a specific example: There are plenty of dealers and private individuals selling Ban ksy artwork for very high prices. Their pricing, while prohibitive to many collectors, may still reflect the overall demand for the artist and current market value. Do you consider such persons to be profiteers? If so, what different approach would you take if you were in their shoes? True, you are right. I should say profiting. And to clarify i meant anyone who was an early banksy owner. To be clear i do not disapprove at all of people profiting. What i find comical is Banksy taking aim at folks profiting off showing his work, when i believe he could stifle this by doing more of his own shows or retrospectives, or perhaps a traveling retrospective.
But....there is some hope on the horizon, the changes that have taken place at PC HQ will go along way to stemming that flow of works to those "private collectors/come dealers".
Some used to say Steve Lazarides was the shady one, he is a choirboy in comparison to what has been going on over a PC HQ for the last 10+ years.
From the tone of this sentence, it sounds like you disapprove (perhaps for ethical reasons) of the situation you've described. By "everyone", I assume you're just talking about some people. Or even a large number of people. What's less clear, however, is what you mean by "profiteering" — especially in the context of expensive and non-essential decorative goods. Take a specific example: There are plenty of dealers and private individuals selling Ban ksy artwork for very high prices. Their pricing, while prohibitive to many collectors, may still reflect the overall demand for the artist and current market value. Do you consider such persons to be profiteers? If so, what different approach would you take if you were in their shoes? True, you are right. I should say profiting. And to clarify i meant anyone who was an early banksy owner. To be clear i do not disapprove at all of people profiting. What i find comical is Banksy taking aim at folks profiting off showing his work, when i believe he could stifle this by doing more of his own shows or retrospectives, or perhaps a traveling retrospective. What a profoundly naive statement to make, the biggest profiteers from all of this was and still is Banksy and his team and they do it with full knowledge, their eyes are wide open. Pest Control was set up, to do exactly this, to control the entire market, and now with the selling of secondary, they control primary and secondary. If you decide when applying for a CoA, you tick you do not wish to sell it, they still will ask you if you want to sell it, and they know who owns what and where it is, and can satisfy enough demand through their database. You don't play by their rules, you can't play their game. Which other living artist do you know of, with the profile of Banksy where the primary market higher than the secondary? Which other living artist do you know of where, from one side of his mouth statements are made about unauthorised shows or people profiteering by reselling works, but from the other side of that same mouth, they are selling primary works to the very same private individuals and galleries who rent or sell works to those who run these very shows/museusm. Some will call this behaviour a monopoly and pretty messed up, but hey it's Banksy and he can do no wrong. But....there is some hope on the horizon, the changes that have taken place at PC HQ will go along way to stemming that flow of works to those "private collectors/come dealers". Some used to say Steve Lazarides was the shady one, he is a choirboy in comparison to what has been going on over a PC HQ for the last 10+ years. |
|
Deleted
🗨️ 0
👍🏻
January 1970
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 16:00:06 GMT 1, True, you are right. I should say profiting. And to clarify i meant anyone who was an early banksy owner. To be clear i do not disapprove at all of people profiting. What i find comical is Banksy taking aim at folks profiting off showing his work, when i believe he could stifle this by doing more of his own shows or retrospectives, or perhaps a traveling retrospective. What a profoundly naive statement to make, the biggest profiteers from all of this was and still is Banksy and his team and they do it with full knowledge, their eyes are wide open. Pest Control was set up, to do exactly this, to control the entire market, and now with the selling of secondary, they control primary and secondary. If you decide when applying for a CoA, you tick you do not wish to sell it, they still will ask you if you want to sell it, and they know who owns what and where it is, and can satisfy enough demand through their database. You don't play by their rules, you can't play their game. Which other living artist do you know of, with the profile of Banksy where the primary market higher than the secondary? Which other living artist do you know of where, from one side of his mouth statements are made about unauthorised shows or people profiteering by reselling works, but from the other side of that same mouth, they are selling primary works to the very same private individuals and galleries who rent or sell works to those who run these very shows/museusm. Some will call this behaviour a monopoly and pretty messed up, but hey it's Banksy and he can do no wrong. But....there is some hope on the horizon, the changes that have taken place at PC HQ will go along way to stemming that flow of works to those "private collectors/come dealers". Some used to say Steve Lazarides was the shady one, he is a choirboy in comparison to what has been going on over a PC HQ for the last 10+ years.
Hats off to pc and the staff involved up until now, they've undoubtedly worked tirelessly with personal sacrifice to build and maintain the artist status with certain limitations due to unique circumstances, they've done well. Not perfect but what is.
All being well the changes taking place will continue with the same standards and level of trust.
They're a long way from controlling secondary market, a long way, but the fact they're wanting to have some control of secondary breeds confidence, there's plenty representative's in the artworld that don't want to know when it comes to secondary, Bob Dillons market is a prime example. Primary actually wanting secondary back is a positive.
Pest control was set up to look after the artist and to look after those who purchase the work because that in turn is looking after the artist.
Their games simple and effective.
They are selling primary works knowing they'll be loaned to unauthorised shows? if they knew anyone was doing that it would be unlikely they'll be offered anything else.
Their stance on unauthorised shows listed on the site is clear.
Plenty love a good conspiracy theory, it's just that though.
True, you are right. I should say profiting. And to clarify i meant anyone who was an early banksy owner. To be clear i do not disapprove at all of people profiting. What i find comical is Banksy taking aim at folks profiting off showing his work, when i believe he could stifle this by doing more of his own shows or retrospectives, or perhaps a traveling retrospective. What a profoundly naive statement to make, the biggest profiteers from all of this was and still is Banksy and his team and they do it with full knowledge, their eyes are wide open. Pest Control was set up, to do exactly this, to control the entire market, and now with the selling of secondary, they control primary and secondary. If you decide when applying for a CoA, you tick you do not wish to sell it, they still will ask you if you want to sell it, and they know who owns what and where it is, and can satisfy enough demand through their database. You don't play by their rules, you can't play their game. Which other living artist do you know of, with the profile of Banksy where the primary market higher than the secondary? Which other living artist do you know of where, from one side of his mouth statements are made about unauthorised shows or people profiteering by reselling works, but from the other side of that same mouth, they are selling primary works to the very same private individuals and galleries who rent or sell works to those who run these very shows/museusm. Some will call this behaviour a monopoly and pretty messed up, but hey it's Banksy and he can do no wrong. But....there is some hope on the horizon, the changes that have taken place at PC HQ will go along way to stemming that flow of works to those "private collectors/come dealers". Some used to say Steve Lazarides was the shady one, he is a choirboy in comparison to what has been going on over a PC HQ for the last 10+ years. Hats off to pc and the staff involved up until now, they've undoubtedly worked tirelessly with personal sacrifice to build and maintain the artist status with certain limitations due to unique circumstances, they've done well. Not perfect but what is. All being well the changes taking place will continue with the same standards and level of trust. They're a long way from controlling secondary market, a long way, but the fact they're wanting to have some control of secondary breeds confidence, there's plenty representative's in the artworld that don't want to know when it comes to secondary, Bob Dillons market is a prime example. Primary actually wanting secondary back is a positive. Pest control was set up to look after the artist and to look after those who purchase the work because that in turn is looking after the artist. Their games simple and effective. They are selling primary works knowing they'll be loaned to unauthorised shows? if they knew anyone was doing that it would be unlikely they'll be offered anything else. Their stance on unauthorised shows listed on the site is clear. Plenty love a good conspiracy theory, it's just that though. |
|
Pipes
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,438
👍🏻 2,883
January 2012
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by Pipes on Sept 20, 2019 16:51:42 GMT 1, Lazarides site up . . .
www.banksycaptured.com
Here’s the thing with the book...the initial print run compromises 5000 individually numbered copies. The first 50 sales through the gate (restricted to one person per sale) will receive a Banksy Di-faced tenner and one lucky person in the first print run will find a golden ticket for an unsigned Banksy Bomb Middle England screenprint.
Lazarides site up . . . www.banksycaptured.comHere’s the thing with the book...the initial print run compromises 5000 individually numbered copies. The first 50 sales through the gate (restricted to one person per sale) will receive a Banksy Di-faced tenner and one lucky person in the first print run will find a golden ticket for an unsigned Banksy Bomb Middle England screenprint. |
|
moron
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,711
👍🏻 1,051
September 2017
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by moron on Sept 22, 2019 18:22:47 GMT 1, I think there is going to be a Legal Battle over who owns the Copyright to the Photos' Even though Steve took them if he was employed by Banksy to take them They belong to Banksy
I wonder if any of those thousands of snaps incriminate Banksy in criminal activity?
I think there is going to be a Legal Battle over who owns the Copyright to the Photos' Even though Steve took them if he was employed by Banksy to take them They belong to Banksy I get the impression they had an informal agreement. I can't see that Laz signed a contract giving Banksy full copyright over all the photos or that Laz was an employee. I wonder if any of those thousands of snaps incriminate Banksy in criminal activity? |
|
moron
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,711
👍🏻 1,051
September 2017
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by moron on Sept 22, 2019 18:26:22 GMT 1, Looks like Laz had the thought of moving away from street art for a few years when reading his twitter.
"Steve Lazarides
@stelazarides
22 june 2016
Plus
Street art is the worst.A bunch of artists put it on the line for decades, so a bunch of stupid twats can insult the streets with shite"art"
@stelazarides
22 june 2016
Plus
Seriously this amazing thing called art is being gentrified. Rise up and do something that fucking says something!.
@stelazarides
22 june 2016
Plus
Right now feels like the art world is being run by accountants and solicitors are doing the paintings Where is the fire and passion fuckers?
twitter.com/stelazarides
Looks like Laz had the thought of moving away from street art for a few years when reading his twitter. "Steve Lazarides @stelazarides 22 june 2016 Plus Street art is the worst.A bunch of artists put it on the line for decades, so a bunch of stupid twats can insult the streets with shite"art" @stelazarides 22 june 2016 Plus Seriously this amazing thing called art is being gentrified. Rise up and do something that fucking says something!. @stelazarides 22 june 2016 Plus Right now feels like the art world is being run by accountants and solicitors are doing the paintings Where is the fire and passion fuckers? twitter.com/stelazarides |
|
moron
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,711
👍🏻 1,051
September 2017
|
Steve Lazarides, is stepping away from the gallery world, by moron on Sept 24, 2019 20:33:55 GMT 1, “It’s got to the stage where [the gallery world] is about nothing other than monetary value and I just can’t work on those terms any more,” Lazarides says. He has now taken on new Soho offices, a few blocks from where he opened his first gallery, on Greek Street, in 2004. Since then there have been galleries on Charing Cross Road and in Fitzrovia.
It is tough in the middle market too, he laments. “I maintain that 75% of galleries will be gone within five years. It’s too expensive,” he says. “The only way for them to keep going is from secondary market sales and there’s only a finite number of people who can be flipping Warhols and Basquiats.”
www.theartnewspaper.com/news/citing-snobbery-and-the-death-of-street-art-subculture-banksy-s-former-agent-quits-the-art-world
“It’s got to the stage where [the gallery world] is about nothing other than monetary value and I just can’t work on those terms any more,” Lazarides says. He has now taken on new Soho offices, a few blocks from where he opened his first gallery, on Greek Street, in 2004. Since then there have been galleries on Charing Cross Road and in Fitzrovia.
It is tough in the middle market too, he laments. “I maintain that 75% of galleries will be gone within five years. It’s too expensive,” he says. “The only way for them to keep going is from secondary market sales and there’s only a finite number of people who can be flipping Warhols and Basquiats.”www.theartnewspaper.com/news/citing-snobbery-and-the-death-of-street-art-subculture-banksy-s-former-agent-quits-the-art-world
|
|
tab1
Full Member
🗨️ 8,519
👍🏻 3,679
September 2011
|
|
|
side two beckons.
