Urban Art Association

All I have been sent at the moment in terms of conditions is the following:

"Our offer is subject to the following:

- You may only order one of each print;
- The print(s) are for personal use and may not be traded through, or purchased for, a third party.
- We retain the right to revoke your order at any time prior to delivery of the print(s)."

Mine is in the bag and on its way. 10-15 days and it will be all mine. Maw ha ha...

They're clear as day to me, so I can't for the life of me understood why you're suggesting I take another look. You can't purchase them on behalf of a third party. That has nothing to do with resale. 

Hard to enforce, but galleries can and do refuse to sell to known flippers.

There is some case law in the USA regarding these clauses. However, actual enforcement is another issue.

www.artnet.com/magazineus/news/spencer/spencers-art-law-journal-9-2-11.asp

That's what I said about P1 & P2 before they broke £40k. His market is ludicrous in my opinion and he is a master of many styles; personally, I prefer his painted photo works like Uncle Rudi.

 [/quote]Camden Arts and Nottingham Contemporary sold their Glenn Ligon editions under the same signed for conditions. It is a fact that at least 2 lots (Artnet and Phillips) were withdrawn by force.
Do feel the force ...
[/quote]


I have never been asked to sign any conditions, though I've never given them any cause for concern. I wonder if they ask some buyers to sign something?

I picked mine up today; I think they look great. It's great to get something that's ready for hanging without any additional cost.

It looks exactly the same as the images on the site.

I was told earlier in the wekk that they're sold out but the Serpentine shop website doesn't corroborate that claim.

One on eBay with very clear details of the seller. Obviously not fussed about the agreement

There is no terms and conditions except: I confirm that the print(s) are for personal use and not be traded through, or purchased for, a third party.

Wow, didn't see that.  No way it is enforced.  I assume they have always had this up, but people are selling their P8-P12 left and right.

Richter Says He's Shocked by the State of the Art Market

news.artnet.com/people/gerhard-richter-criticizes-art-market-398694?utm_content=bufferfae5a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=socialmedia

The most expensive living artist in Europe, Gerhard Richter, criticized the art market and denounced the hype surrounding contemporary artists, including himself, as a “cult of personality."

Speaking to the German weekly Die Zeit, the 83-year-old painter said the exorbitant prices his artworks achieve at auction were proof of how “insanely the art market has developed," and how the prices have nothing to do with the work.

He expressed his disbelief at the fact that even his signed postcards were being sold on the market and fetching high prices, calling it a “frightening development."

In a previous interview with Die Zeit in March, Richter spoke about the record-breaking $46.3 million sale of his painting Abstraktes Bild (1986), making him one of the most expensive European artists of 2015.

“I am startled [by record prices] even though it's nice, good news. The sum however has something shocking. You know the whole art market is hopelessly excessive […] it is incomprehensible, as incomprehensible to me as Chinese or physics."

He explained that there was a large disparity between quality and price in the art market, citing the $31.7 million sale of his own painting Domplatz, Mailand (1968) as an example.

I found it odd," he said. “I don't think it's so great, although it inspired me to make many other city pictures. When I heard how much it cost at auction, I thought, oh, that is totally overpriced."

He went on to label the increasing importance of auctions in the art market as “pretty shocking."

Richter said “When you look at the catalogs which are becoming increasingly terrible you wouldn't believe what nonsense is being offered at prices that continue to climb upwards. For serious galleries the business is consequently becoming even more difficult."

The artist also had something to say about Germany's controversial cultural protection legislation amendment. “The idea of holding on to [important artworks] is nice, but completely outdated," Richter said. “It really doesn't matter whether the Mona Lisa hangs in Paris or in Rome as long as it can be viewed by the public and everything possible is done to preserve it."

Richter has been a vocal critic of the German government's plans and even joined fellow artist and compatriot Georg Baselitz in threatening to pull his loaned works from German museums should the government go ahead with the plans.

I'll take one off him at cost if he's that upset.