pulpos
New Member
Posts • 6
Likes • 22
November 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by pulpos on Oct 17, 2020 1:02:29 GMT 1, Since I am on a roll to sell some of my art collection, I might as well post this one here. (I have also offered this to Christies & Phillips).
Last year I found out a Space Invader mosaic on the side of a private property in Bilbao. The space belongs to the owners of the flats (it was not in a "public" space) and as such they are entitled to own the art as per legal Spanish law. I know people in Paris were stealing them from public places, but this was not stolen and it was not in a public space.
I contacted the representative of the owners of the building and I asked if they would be interested in parting with the mosaic. He spoke to the owners of all the flats in the building and they agreed for me to remove it.
Obviously is not authenticated but I can provide a document from the President of the association of the flats confirming that they gave me authorisation to remove the piece from their estate.
You can see on Space Invader's website the art piece (BBO_17), the location, and the date (2007). Click here to see it on his website: www.space-invaders.com/world/bilbao/
I attach here the photos that I took from the building, removing it and ensembled together again.
Happy to hear offers from any potential buyer.
As you can see from the sell of my Stik's, I am a serious person, not a scammer, not a thief and a genuine seller.
Since I am on a roll to sell some of my art collection, I might as well post this one here. (I have also offered this to Christies & Phillips). Last year I found out a Space Invader mosaic on the side of a private property in Bilbao. The space belongs to the owners of the flats (it was not in a "public" space) and as such they are entitled to own the art as per legal Spanish law. I know people in Paris were stealing them from public places, but this was not stolen and it was not in a public space. I contacted the representative of the owners of the building and I asked if they would be interested in parting with the mosaic. He spoke to the owners of all the flats in the building and they agreed for me to remove it. Obviously is not authenticated but I can provide a document from the President of the association of the flats confirming that they gave me authorisation to remove the piece from their estate. You can see on Space Invader's website the art piece (BBO_17), the location, and the date (2007). Click here to see it on his website: www.space-invaders.com/world/bilbao/I attach here the photos that I took from the building, removing it and ensembled together again. Happy to hear offers from any potential buyer. As you can see from the sell of my Stik's, I am a serious person, not a scammer, not a thief and a genuine seller.
|
|
J0NNY
Junior Member
Posts • 1,024
Likes • 691
December 2014
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by J0NNY on Oct 17, 2020 1:06:13 GMT 1, Is this a joke?
Is this a joke?
|
|
tab1
Full Member
Posts • 8,519
Likes • 3,678
September 2011
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by tab1 on Oct 17, 2020 1:08:51 GMT 1,
Only two posts , so understandable
Only two posts , so understandable
|
|
jluhiex
New Member
Posts • 402
Likes • 223
December 2016
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by jluhiex on Oct 17, 2020 1:35:45 GMT 1, Christie's and Sotheby's will tell you no.
Most people here will say you are a thief, worse than the rags they use to clean cum off prostitutes.
If you consign it to lesser known, unscrupulous auction houses like Julien's in Los Angeles you will probably get 8000-12000 usd (minus any fees). An authentic Alias of this size will fetch 35-40k (signed, titled, dated with certificate).
You will also get offers from lurkers here in the range of $100-3000...depending on how much of a scum they think you are (lower the offer the higher they are on the scum scale?)
Christie's and Sotheby's will tell you no.
Most people here will say you are a thief, worse than the rags they use to clean cum off prostitutes.
If you consign it to lesser known, unscrupulous auction houses like Julien's in Los Angeles you will probably get 8000-12000 usd (minus any fees). An authentic Alias of this size will fetch 35-40k (signed, titled, dated with certificate).
You will also get offers from lurkers here in the range of $100-3000...depending on how much of a scum they think you are (lower the offer the higher they are on the scum scale?)
|
|
pulpos
New Member
Posts • 6
Likes • 22
November 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by pulpos on Oct 17, 2020 2:11:41 GMT 1, NO, it is not a joke. A thief is someone who steals things. I did pay for this to the owners of the building who under Spanish law owned the piece. They wanted to get rid of the "graffiti" as they called it and I just happened to have a friend who lives there and contacted me (I live in London) asking me if I was interested in this before they removed it. I got someone to remove it for me and all was done in day light and without any masks.
I don't see what is so "unscrupulous" about this. To all the holy people here, please tell me what you would have done..."piss off, chuck it"? or "well, I might as well get it"?
Of course, I am not going to send it to the US to Los Angeles, I am not going to give it for nothing, but I am also not looking at retiring from the sale. I simply own it legitimately and there is nothing wrong with this.
Simply up to someone to see if they want it or not. If yes, fine. If not, happy to keep it. I couldn't care less. And...if I was a scammer a thief or a c*nt, I don't think I would have publicly posted it in here unless there is a genuine explanation about this, which I think I have very clearly explained in my original post in regards of how & why I got this one.
NO, it is not a joke. A thief is someone who steals things. I did pay for this to the owners of the building who under Spanish law owned the piece. They wanted to get rid of the "graffiti" as they called it and I just happened to have a friend who lives there and contacted me (I live in London) asking me if I was interested in this before they removed it. I got someone to remove it for me and all was done in day light and without any masks.
I don't see what is so "unscrupulous" about this. To all the holy people here, please tell me what you would have done..."piss off, chuck it"? or "well, I might as well get it"?
Of course, I am not going to send it to the US to Los Angeles, I am not going to give it for nothing, but I am also not looking at retiring from the sale. I simply own it legitimately and there is nothing wrong with this.
Simply up to someone to see if they want it or not. If yes, fine. If not, happy to keep it. I couldn't care less. And...if I was a scammer a thief or a c*nt, I don't think I would have publicly posted it in here unless there is a genuine explanation about this, which I think I have very clearly explained in my original post in regards of how & why I got this one.
|
|
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by That Print Guy on Oct 17, 2020 2:26:02 GMT 1, Zero things unscrupulous about this IMHO. But yeah, historically these pieces are not obtained in the way you describe. People get excited.
Zero things unscrupulous about this IMHO. But yeah, historically these pieces are not obtained in the way you describe. People get excited.
|
|
|
pulpos
New Member
Posts • 6
Likes • 22
November 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by pulpos on Oct 17, 2020 3:01:57 GMT 1, No, but I can get them to sign a paper from the flat's association confirming that they gave me permission to remove it. That's better than the signature on the back. I guess?
No, but I can get them to sign a paper from the flat's association confirming that they gave me permission to remove it. That's better than the signature on the back. I guess?
|
|
buffin
New Member
Posts • 209
Likes • 248
September 2015
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by buffin on Oct 17, 2020 3:48:54 GMT 1,
Sadly it would seem not.
|
|
Wisconinla
New Member
Posts • 627
Likes • 585
September 2017
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Wisconinla on Oct 17, 2020 3:57:38 GMT 1, This is terrible.
Putting aside the ugliness of removing invaders, would anyone really want this on their wall? They look awful after being removed and pieced back together.
This is terrible.
Putting aside the ugliness of removing invaders, would anyone really want this on their wall? They look awful after being removed and pieced back together.
|
|
jakecskis
New Member
Posts • 65
Likes • 119
September 2020
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by jakecskis on Oct 17, 2020 4:05:07 GMT 1, What else is in your collection on offer?
What else is in your collection on offer?
|
|
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Charlie Bronson on Oct 17, 2020 5:03:35 GMT 1, Wrong place. Nothing to see here. Move along. Please don’t call me Shirley.
Wrong place. Nothing to see here. Move along. Please don’t call me Shirley.
|
|
mehor
New Member
Posts • 561
Likes • 429
July 2015
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by mehor on Oct 17, 2020 5:54:11 GMT 1, if invader approves this, your piece is legit. otherwise it is just a piece you stole of the street. should have not paid for it because nobody will give you any credit for it.
if invader approves this, your piece is legit. otherwise it is just a piece you stole of the street. should have not paid for it because nobody will give you any credit for it.
|
|
Lazarus II
Junior Member
Posts • 1,799
Likes • 2,427
August 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Lazarus II on Oct 17, 2020 7:13:09 GMT 1, No longer available?? This sold ?? Christies or Phillips would have snapped it up when they woke up this morning, the 3rd picture would have clinched the deal, nice...
No longer available?? This sold ?? Christies or Phillips would have snapped it up when they woke up this morning, the 3rd picture would have clinched the deal, nice...
|
|
Winks
Junior Member
Posts • 2,772
Likes • 3,581
April 2016
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Winks on Oct 17, 2020 7:28:04 GMT 1, Think the owners of the building might want to give that door a lick of paint rather than worrying about graffiti.
Think the owners of the building might want to give that door a lick of paint rather than worrying about graffiti.
|
|
|
marcomax
New Member
Posts • 37
Likes • 13
September 2020
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by marcomax on Oct 17, 2020 9:02:46 GMT 1, You have not to remove a mosaic with this technique! Now it has zero value.
You have not to remove a mosaic with this technique! Now it has zero value.
|
|
fm1975
Junior Member
Posts • 1,164
Likes • 327
Location: Good dealings with: turntored, pndk, Catman 74, damenaz, Average Joe, Patrick 01... References available from: Sotheby’s, Christie’s, Phillips, Bonhmas, New Art Editions, Jeallous Gallery, Artnet Auctions, Piasa, Subastas Segre,
February 2018
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by fm1975 on Oct 17, 2020 9:05:18 GMT 1, Since I am on a roll to sell some of my art collection, I might as well post this one here. (I have also offered this to Christies & Phillips). Last year I found out a Space Invader mosaic on the side of a private property in Bilbao. The space belongs to the owners of the flats (it was not in a "public" space) and as such they are entitled to own the art as per legal Spanish law. I know people in Paris were stealing them from public places, but this was not stolen and it was not in a public space. I contacted the representative of the owners of the building and I asked if they would be interested in parting with the mosaic. He spoke to the owners of all the flats in the building and they agreed for me to remove it. Obviously is not authenticated but I can provide a document from the President of the association of the flats confirming that they gave me authorisation to remove the piece from their estate. You can see on Space Invader's website the art piece (BBO_17), the location, and the date (2007). Click here to see it on his website: www.space-invaders.com/world/bilbao/I attach here the photos that I took from the building, removing it and ensembled together again. Happy to hear offers from any potential buyer. As you can see from the sell of my Stik's, I am a serious person, not a scammer, not a thief and a genuine seller.
Fucking Joke
Since I am on a roll to sell some of my art collection, I might as well post this one here. (I have also offered this to Christies & Phillips). Last year I found out a Space Invader mosaic on the side of a private property in Bilbao. The space belongs to the owners of the flats (it was not in a "public" space) and as such they are entitled to own the art as per legal Spanish law. I know people in Paris were stealing them from public places, but this was not stolen and it was not in a public space. I contacted the representative of the owners of the building and I asked if they would be interested in parting with the mosaic. He spoke to the owners of all the flats in the building and they agreed for me to remove it. Obviously is not authenticated but I can provide a document from the President of the association of the flats confirming that they gave me authorisation to remove the piece from their estate. You can see on Space Invader's website the art piece (BBO_17), the location, and the date (2007). Click here to see it on his website: www.space-invaders.com/world/bilbao/I attach here the photos that I took from the building, removing it and ensembled together again. Happy to hear offers from any potential buyer. As you can see from the sell of my Stik's, I am a serious person, not a scammer, not a thief and a genuine seller. Fucking Joke
|
|
GMA
Junior Member
Posts • 1,962
Likes • 2,994
October 2015
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by GMA on Oct 17, 2020 9:21:47 GMT 1, I wonder how much you paid to remove it. If they had no idea, I bet it wasn't much. I know you might feel that you haven't stolen it as it isn't on a public building, but the reality is not many buildings are. Does Invader only put pieces on public owned buildings? No. Does Banksy? No. It's a bullshit justification. It was meant to be on public display for the public and you've removed that for everyone and then have tried to shift it on here, you must have expected the response you've got, surely.
I wonder how much you paid to remove it. If they had no idea, I bet it wasn't much. I know you might feel that you haven't stolen it as it isn't on a public building, but the reality is not many buildings are. Does Invader only put pieces on public owned buildings? No. Does Banksy? No. It's a bullshit justification. It was meant to be on public display for the public and you've removed that for everyone and then have tried to shift it on here, you must have expected the response you've got, surely.
|
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Deleted on Oct 17, 2020 9:30:43 GMT 1, All this talk over the mosaic and not one mention of the cracking jumper. Let me know if that’s for sale.
All this talk over the mosaic and not one mention of the cracking jumper. Let me know if that’s for sale.
|
|
Lazarus II
Junior Member
Posts • 1,799
Likes • 2,427
August 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Lazarus II on Oct 17, 2020 9:36:32 GMT 1, All this talk over the mosaic and not one mention of the cracking jumper. Let me know if that’s for sale. can get cold in bilbao, cant beat a nice wooly jumper.
All this talk over the mosaic and not one mention of the cracking jumper. Let me know if that’s for sale. can get cold in bilbao, cant beat a nice wooly jumper.
|
|
.dappy
Full Member
Posts • 9,835
Likes • 9,443
December 2010
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by .dappy on Oct 17, 2020 9:44:08 GMT 1, All this talk over the mosaic and not one mention of the cracking jumper. Let me know if that’s for sale. ... did he wear it especially to match the mosaic ... green with yellow/gold? ... I think these questions need to be answered ...
All this talk over the mosaic and not one mention of the cracking jumper. Let me know if that’s for sale. ... did he wear it especially to match the mosaic ... green with yellow/gold? ... I think these questions need to be answered ...
|
|
Lazarus II
Junior Member
Posts • 1,799
Likes • 2,427
August 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Lazarus II on Oct 17, 2020 10:06:00 GMT 1, Did he take the jumper to B&Q to get a Dulux match pot for the door ?
Did he take the jumper to B&Q to get a Dulux match pot for the door ?
|
|
bigtlt
Junior Member
Posts • 1,644
Likes • 737
July 2009
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by bigtlt on Oct 17, 2020 10:09:39 GMT 1, Christie's and Sotheby's will tell you no. Most people here will say you are a thief, worse than the rags they use to clean cum off prostitutes. If you consign it to lesser known, unscrupulous auction houses like Julien's in Los Angeles you will probably get 8000-12000 usd (minus any fees). An authentic Alias of this size will fetch 35-40k (signed, titled, dated with certificate). You will also get offers from lurkers here in the range of $100-3000...depending on how much of a scum they think you are (lower the offer the higher they are on the scum scale?)
Based solely on this scale, I offer you $5
Christie's and Sotheby's will tell you no. Most people here will say you are a thief, worse than the rags they use to clean cum off prostitutes. If you consign it to lesser known, unscrupulous auction houses like Julien's in Los Angeles you will probably get 8000-12000 usd (minus any fees). An authentic Alias of this size will fetch 35-40k (signed, titled, dated with certificate). You will also get offers from lurkers here in the range of $100-3000...depending on how much of a scum they think you are (lower the offer the higher they are on the scum scale?) Based solely on this scale, I offer you $5
|
|
|
bestdj777
New Member
Posts • 439
Likes • 335
January 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by bestdj777 on Oct 17, 2020 12:48:17 GMT 1, I don’t get the hostility towards you for this. I think people forget that, at the end of the day, Invader is just vandalizing property. Most of us would be ecstatic to wake up and find a piece of his on the side of our house, but what if it was some neighborhood kid tagging our garage? We’d be less excited then. And, for those that don’t like urban art like we do, there isn’t a meaningful distinction between a neighbor kid and his uninspired work and Invader or Banksy. If an owner of the building wants this stuff gone, I don’t see the harm in someone who actually appreciates it lawfully removing it. What is annoying, however, are the idiots that constantly try to deface art when the building owners really like it and go through great pains to protect it.
I don’t get the hostility towards you for this. I think people forget that, at the end of the day, Invader is just vandalizing property. Most of us would be ecstatic to wake up and find a piece of his on the side of our house, but what if it was some neighborhood kid tagging our garage? We’d be less excited then. And, for those that don’t like urban art like we do, there isn’t a meaningful distinction between a neighbor kid and his uninspired work and Invader or Banksy. If an owner of the building wants this stuff gone, I don’t see the harm in someone who actually appreciates it lawfully removing it. What is annoying, however, are the idiots that constantly try to deface art when the building owners really like it and go through great pains to protect it.
|
|
Pipes
Junior Member
Posts • 2,430
Likes • 2,857
January 2012
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Pipes on Oct 17, 2020 12:53:01 GMT 1, I don’t get the hostility towards you for this. I think people forget that, at the end of the day, Invader is just vandalizing property. Most of us would be ecstatic to wake up and find a piece of his on the side of our house, but what if it was some neighborhood kid tagging our garage? We’d be less excited then. And, for those that don’t like urban art like we do, there isn’t a meaningful distinction between a neighbor kid and his uninspired work and Invader or Banksy. If an owner of the building wants this stuff gone, I don’t see the harm in someone who actually appreciates it lawfully removing it. What is annoying, however, are the idiots that constantly try to deface art when the building owners really like it and go through great pains to protect it. Street art is for the street and the masses - and for free.
Stealing it and profiteering is frowned upon.
This is why Banksy doesn't issue COA's for street pieces - so thieves find it harder to make money.
I don’t get the hostility towards you for this. I think people forget that, at the end of the day, Invader is just vandalizing property. Most of us would be ecstatic to wake up and find a piece of his on the side of our house, but what if it was some neighborhood kid tagging our garage? We’d be less excited then. And, for those that don’t like urban art like we do, there isn’t a meaningful distinction between a neighbor kid and his uninspired work and Invader or Banksy. If an owner of the building wants this stuff gone, I don’t see the harm in someone who actually appreciates it lawfully removing it. What is annoying, however, are the idiots that constantly try to deface art when the building owners really like it and go through great pains to protect it. Street art is for the street and the masses - and for free. Stealing it and profiteering is frowned upon. This is why Banksy doesn't issue COA's for street pieces - so thieves find it harder to make money.
|
|
esfer
New Member
Posts • 363
Likes • 303
November 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by esfer on Oct 17, 2020 13:07:25 GMT 1, I don’t get the hostility towards you for this. I think people forget that, at the end of the day, Invader is just vandalizing property. Most of us would be ecstatic to wake up and find a piece of his on the side of our house, but what if it was some neighborhood kid tagging our garage? We’d be less excited then. And, for those that don’t like urban art like we do, there isn’t a meaningful distinction between a neighbor kid and his uninspired work and Invader or Banksy. If an owner of the building wants this stuff gone, I don’t see the harm in someone who actually appreciates it lawfully removing it. What is annoying, however, are the idiots that constantly try to deface art when the building owners really like it and go through great pains to protect it.
Well said.
I don’t get the hostility towards you for this. I think people forget that, at the end of the day, Invader is just vandalizing property. Most of us would be ecstatic to wake up and find a piece of his on the side of our house, but what if it was some neighborhood kid tagging our garage? We’d be less excited then. And, for those that don’t like urban art like we do, there isn’t a meaningful distinction between a neighbor kid and his uninspired work and Invader or Banksy. If an owner of the building wants this stuff gone, I don’t see the harm in someone who actually appreciates it lawfully removing it. What is annoying, however, are the idiots that constantly try to deface art when the building owners really like it and go through great pains to protect it. Well said.
|
|
Lazarus II
Junior Member
Posts • 1,799
Likes • 2,427
August 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Lazarus II on Oct 17, 2020 13:16:37 GMT 1, Lots of dfferences of opinion on here and some circles will never be squared but nobody can be surprised when a new member comes on here selling an Invader that has been removed from the street (nomatter what the circumstances) gets some stick.
Lots of dfferences of opinion on here and some circles will never be squared but nobody can be surprised when a new member comes on here selling an Invader that has been removed from the street (nomatter what the circumstances) gets some stick.
|
|
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by That Print Guy on Oct 17, 2020 14:03:47 GMT 1, I don’t get the hostility towards you for this. I think people forget that, at the end of the day, Invader is just vandalizing property. Most of us would be ecstatic to wake up and find a piece of his on the side of our house, but what if it was some neighborhood kid tagging our garage? We’d be less excited then. And, for those that don’t like urban art like we do, there isn’t a meaningful distinction between a neighbor kid and his uninspired work and Invader or Banksy. If an owner of the building wants this stuff gone, I don’t see the harm in someone who actually appreciates it lawfully removing it. What is annoying, however, are the idiots that constantly try to deface art when the building owners really like it and go through great pains to protect it. Street art is for the street and the masses - and for free. Stealing it and profiteering is frowned upon. This is why Banksy doesn't issue COA's for street pieces - so thieves find it harder to make money. People understandably have an issue when something is stolen. Doesn't apply in this case though since there's no one stealing! Maybe you replied to the wrong thread?
Guaranteed the OP found a buyer here.
I don’t get the hostility towards you for this. I think people forget that, at the end of the day, Invader is just vandalizing property. Most of us would be ecstatic to wake up and find a piece of his on the side of our house, but what if it was some neighborhood kid tagging our garage? We’d be less excited then. And, for those that don’t like urban art like we do, there isn’t a meaningful distinction between a neighbor kid and his uninspired work and Invader or Banksy. If an owner of the building wants this stuff gone, I don’t see the harm in someone who actually appreciates it lawfully removing it. What is annoying, however, are the idiots that constantly try to deface art when the building owners really like it and go through great pains to protect it. Street art is for the street and the masses - and for free. Stealing it and profiteering is frowned upon. This is why Banksy doesn't issue COA's for street pieces - so thieves find it harder to make money. People understandably have an issue when something is stolen. Doesn't apply in this case though since there's no one stealing! Maybe you replied to the wrong thread? Guaranteed the OP found a buyer here.
|
|
Pipes
Junior Member
Posts • 2,430
Likes • 2,857
January 2012
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by Pipes on Oct 17, 2020 14:16:04 GMT 1, Street art is for the street and the masses - and for free. Stealing it and profiteering is frowned upon. This is why Banksy doesn't issue COA's for street pieces - so thieves find it harder to make money. People understandably have an issue when something is stolen. Doesn't apply in this case though since there's no one stealing! Maybe you replied to the wrong thread? Guaranteed the OP found a buyer here. Thanks for heads up - but it was the correct thread.
My point still stands. The art was meant for the masses and for free. The owner of the property wasn't deliberately picked as the recipient of the piece by invader. Its outdoor for the people - not in the guys kitchen.
Consider the Banksy pieces removed with owners permission. They dont get COA's. Its not a question of whether it was stolen or granted permission to remove. No COA.
The question was raised "I dont get he hostility" so I am explaining the widely held belief that the street art should stay on the street.
Street art is for the street and the masses - and for free. Stealing it and profiteering is frowned upon. This is why Banksy doesn't issue COA's for street pieces - so thieves find it harder to make money. People understandably have an issue when something is stolen. Doesn't apply in this case though since there's no one stealing! Maybe you replied to the wrong thread? Guaranteed the OP found a buyer here. Thanks for heads up - but it was the correct thread. My point still stands. The art was meant for the masses and for free. The owner of the property wasn't deliberately picked as the recipient of the piece by invader. Its outdoor for the people - not in the guys kitchen. Consider the Banksy pieces removed with owners permission. They dont get COA's. Its not a question of whether it was stolen or granted permission to remove. No COA. The question was raised "I dont get he hostility" so I am explaining the widely held belief that the street art should stay on the street.
|
|
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by That Print Guy on Oct 17, 2020 14:21:29 GMT 1, People understandably have an issue when something is stolen. Doesn't apply in this case though since there's no one stealing! Maybe you replied to the wrong thread? Guaranteed the OP found a buyer here. Thanks for heads up - but it was the correct thread. My point still stands. The art was meant for the masses and for free. The owner of the property wasn't deliberately picked as the recipient of the piece by invader. Its outdoor for the people - not in the guys kitchen. Consider the Banksy pieces removed with owners permission. They dont get COA's. Its not a question of whether it was stolen or granted permission to remove. No COA. The question was raised "I dont get he hostility" so I am explaining the widely held belief that the street art should stay on the street. except when the owner of the building that had been vandalized wants the art removed. Like the op said, would you rather it be in the bin or go to someone that may find joy in owning such a thing? That kind of person is to be found here. Some people would just like to have something like this and I would bet as long as the seller isn't asking for thousands that it's already gone.
People understandably have an issue when something is stolen. Doesn't apply in this case though since there's no one stealing! Maybe you replied to the wrong thread? Guaranteed the OP found a buyer here. Thanks for heads up - but it was the correct thread. My point still stands. The art was meant for the masses and for free. The owner of the property wasn't deliberately picked as the recipient of the piece by invader. Its outdoor for the people - not in the guys kitchen. Consider the Banksy pieces removed with owners permission. They dont get COA's. Its not a question of whether it was stolen or granted permission to remove. No COA. The question was raised "I dont get he hostility" so I am explaining the widely held belief that the street art should stay on the street. except when the owner of the building that had been vandalized wants the art removed. Like the op said, would you rather it be in the bin or go to someone that may find joy in owning such a thing? That kind of person is to be found here. Some people would just like to have something like this and I would bet as long as the seller isn't asking for thousands that it's already gone.
|
|
bestdj777
New Member
Posts • 439
Likes • 335
January 2019
|
NO LONGER AVAILABLE. , by bestdj777 on Oct 17, 2020 14:27:05 GMT 1, People understandably have an issue when something is stolen. Doesn't apply in this case though since there's no one stealing! Maybe you replied to the wrong thread? Guaranteed the OP found a buyer here. Thanks for heads up - but it was the correct thread. My point still stands. The art was meant for the masses and for free. The owner of the property wasn't deliberately picked as the recipient of the piece by invader. Its outdoor for the people - not in the guys kitchen. Consider the Banksy pieces removed with owners permission. They dont get COA's. Its not a question of whether it was stolen or granted permission to remove. No COA. The question was raised "I dont get he hostility" so I am explaining the widely held belief that the street art should stay on the street.
I appreciate the friendly exchange of opinions here, which is one of the reasons this forum is great. And, I understand the lack of desire from the artists to issue COAs for street pieces. But, I put myself in the owner of the property’s shoes. The idea that a property owner shouldn’t remove a piece because an artist wants it there, doesn’t sit right with me. I think we all wish the owners would keep the art there for everyone’s benefit, but their personal interest in their property prevails in my opinion.
As for the OP, I think most of us would have taken the piece if the owner wanted it gone. I don’t think it has a huge resale value—despite the pictures there is no way to authenticate it, they don’t look as good once removed as the Invasion kits given the cracks and mortar, and the varied opinions. But, it’s a cool piece and I’m glad the OP salvaged it instead of it ending up in the trash.
People understandably have an issue when something is stolen. Doesn't apply in this case though since there's no one stealing! Maybe you replied to the wrong thread? Guaranteed the OP found a buyer here. Thanks for heads up - but it was the correct thread. My point still stands. The art was meant for the masses and for free. The owner of the property wasn't deliberately picked as the recipient of the piece by invader. Its outdoor for the people - not in the guys kitchen. Consider the Banksy pieces removed with owners permission. They dont get COA's. Its not a question of whether it was stolen or granted permission to remove. No COA. The question was raised "I dont get he hostility" so I am explaining the widely held belief that the street art should stay on the street. I appreciate the friendly exchange of opinions here, which is one of the reasons this forum is great. And, I understand the lack of desire from the artists to issue COAs for street pieces. But, I put myself in the owner of the property’s shoes. The idea that a property owner shouldn’t remove a piece because an artist wants it there, doesn’t sit right with me. I think we all wish the owners would keep the art there for everyone’s benefit, but their personal interest in their property prevails in my opinion. As for the OP, I think most of us would have taken the piece if the owner wanted it gone. I don’t think it has a huge resale value—despite the pictures there is no way to authenticate it, they don’t look as good once removed as the Invasion kits given the cracks and mortar, and the varied opinions. But, it’s a cool piece and I’m glad the OP salvaged it instead of it ending up in the trash.
|
|