|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by graeme501 on Jan 20, 2008 14:29:20 GMT 1, yeah umbrella, people seem 2 b pissed off about if they get a print, if they dont, if they had to que, if they had to f5, if too few prints are released, if too many are released .... its all very dull
if i like a print, and can afford it, ill try and get it, if i dont, then oh well, i have many other wonderful artworks, maybe i can swap something for it later, maybe ill just leave it, its not the end of the world
yeah umbrella, people seem 2 b pissed off about if they get a print, if they dont, if they had to que, if they had to f5, if too few prints are released, if too many are released .... its all very dull
if i like a print, and can afford it, ill try and get it, if i dont, then oh well, i have many other wonderful artworks, maybe i can swap something for it later, maybe ill just leave it, its not the end of the world
|
|
GD303uk
New Member
🗨️ 601
👍🏻 8
October 2006
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by GD303uk on Jan 20, 2008 14:33:50 GMT 1, it has been interesting to watch, the Micallef story the last year,
i have watcheed his prices go out of reach at Eyestorm from £500 to £3500 in about 12 months, and a lot of people collecting him kept them on their walls,
since the Laz and Mic' teamed up even Eyestorm have lowered their prices by £1000,
confidence in micallefs market(hate using these words) has been knocked, people are selling the inccreased selling activity has also added to the price fall in his work,
i do think that he will rebound, now is a good time to buy his work.
i love his work and would like every print he has made.
cant afford it tho' maybe one or two. 
it has been interesting to watch, the Micallef story the last year, i have watcheed his prices go out of reach at Eyestorm from £500 to £3500 in about 12 months, and a lot of people collecting him kept them on their walls, since the Laz and Mic' teamed up even Eyestorm have lowered their prices by £1000, confidence in micallefs market(hate using these words) has been knocked, people are selling the inccreased selling activity has also added to the price fall in his work, i do think that he will rebound, now is a good time to buy his work. i love his work and would like every print he has made. cant afford it tho' maybe one or two. |
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by Daniel Silk on Jan 20, 2008 14:37:14 GMT 1, I think Laz deserves an award for best effort in sabotaging flippers for that release. I'm sure there are many up on walls but there are definitely a lot of ppl who wanted to make a quick buck who are now in pain. nothing could make me happier. Regrettably, the "sabotaging" which resulted from the September releases was not restricted to flippers. It affected the whole Micallef market, including the personal collections of those who had been following and supporting Micallef's career prior to him signing up with Steve Lazarides. I do not believe this was a case of "grab the cash and run". Steve and Antony have invested far too much time and effort in one another for their interests to be limited to a short term money-making scheme. They certainly both have much more to offer than that. My view is they were very concerned about the hyperinflation that was taking place with the prices for Micallef pieces in the run up to his 'Impure Idols' show in LA. Releasing a large number of prints at relatively high prices in September appears to have been an attempt to cool the market and encourage a slight 'correction' of prices in order to bring them down to a reasonable and sustainable level. This would have been done in the interest of Micallef's medium and long-term career. Where the miscalculation occurred is that Steve's pricing and large edition sizes did not deter the flippers. The latter were convinced that 'Impure Idols' would do for Micallef what 'Barely Legal' did for Banksy. The flippers therefore thought that, notwithstanding the high prices and the number of prints for sale, there was still a great deal of money to be made. The market showed them otherwise. Panic selling then created a snowball effect which more or less halved the prices for Micallef's other prints. This certainly would not have been the intention of either Steve or Antony. It had an adverse impact on confidence at the higher end of the Micallef market as well. How many people are going to buy a £25-£100K Micallef canvas when his print prices are free-falling? What Micallef needs to do now is keep his head down for a year or so, focus on canvases, and do his best to slowly build up his career again.
+Respect 
I think Laz deserves an award for best effort in sabotaging flippers for that release. I'm sure there are many up on walls but there are definitely a lot of ppl who wanted to make a quick buck who are now in pain. nothing could make me happier. Regrettably, the "sabotaging" which resulted from the September releases was not restricted to flippers. It affected the whole Micallef market, including the personal collections of those who had been following and supporting Micallef's career prior to him signing up with Steve Lazarides. I do not believe this was a case of "grab the cash and run". Steve and Antony have invested far too much time and effort in one another for their interests to be limited to a short term money-making scheme. They certainly both have much more to offer than that. My view is they were very concerned about the hyperinflation that was taking place with the prices for Micallef pieces in the run up to his 'Impure Idols' show in LA. Releasing a large number of prints at relatively high prices in September appears to have been an attempt to cool the market and encourage a slight 'correction' of prices in order to bring them down to a reasonable and sustainable level. This would have been done in the interest of Micallef's medium and long-term career. Where the miscalculation occurred is that Steve's pricing and large edition sizes did not deter the flippers. The latter were convinced that 'Impure Idols' would do for Micallef what 'Barely Legal' did for Banksy. The flippers therefore thought that, notwithstanding the high prices and the number of prints for sale, there was still a great deal of money to be made. The market showed them otherwise. Panic selling then created a snowball effect which more or less halved the prices for Micallef's other prints. This certainly would not have been the intention of either Steve or Antony. It had an adverse impact on confidence at the higher end of the Micallef market as well. How many people are going to buy a £25-£100K Micallef canvas when his print prices are free-falling? What Micallef needs to do now is keep his head down for a year or so, focus on canvases, and do his best to slowly build up his career again. +Respect |
|
guest2
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,471
👍🏻 1
December 2006
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by guest2 on Jan 20, 2008 14:44:09 GMT 1, Regrettably, the "sabotaging" which resulted from the September releases was not restricted to flippers. It affected the whole Micallef market, including the personal collections of those who had been following and supporting Micallef's career prior to him signing up with Steve Lazarides. I do not believe this was a case of "grab the cash and run". Steve and Antony have invested far too much time and effort in one another for their interests to be limited to a short term money-making scheme. They certainly both have much more to offer than that. My view is they were very concerned about the hyperinflation that was taking place with the prices for Micallef pieces in the run up to his 'Impure Idols' show in LA. Releasing a large number of prints at relatively high prices in September appears to have been an attempt to cool the market and encourage a slight 'correction' of prices in order to bring them down to a reasonable and sustainable level. This would have been done in the interest of Micallef's medium and long-term career. Where the miscalculation occurred is that Steve's pricing and large edition sizes did not deter the flippers. The latter were convinced that 'Impure Idols' would do for Micallef what 'Barely Legal' did for Banksy. The flippers therefore thought that, notwithstanding the high prices and the number of prints for sale, there was still a great deal of money to be made. The market showed them otherwise. Panic selling then created a snowball effect which more or less halved the prices for Micallef's other prints. This certainly would not have been the intention of either Steve or Antony. It had an adverse impact on confidence at the higher end of the Micallef market as well. How many people are going to buy a £25-£100K Micallef canvas when his print prices are free-falling? What Micallef needs to do now is keep his head down for a year or so, focus on canvases, and do his best to slowly build up his career again. Couldnt have said it better Kiki, I have been reading in the background for a while now and find it both disheartening and amusing in equal measures the ammount of blame / sh1t POW and Laz seem to get. People buy prints and dont make an instant fortune.....Laz is to blame, people F5 for a month of their own volition and miss out on a print......POW are b@stards and shouldnt be allowed to sell anything...... If it wasnt for the moaning vultures bleating and hyping everything printed and promoted by Laz and POW, they wouldnt be in this situation in the first place. I know some folk have a more personal and long standing reason to be less that supportive to POW and Laz, but for those that dont have these reasons, think about what and who POW and Laz have brought to the scene...... Banksy, Hewlett, D-face, Insect, Connor H, Micallef, Lucy Mac, 3D, invader, choe, faile / aiko etc etc etc...... The time and commitment shown by both groups should be an indicator that these parties aint out for a fast buck..... even though some would have you think otherwise. Before people start jumping on any bandwagon, its always nice to stop and THINK FOR YOURSELVES.
We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations.
Same thing could happen to choe with his 450ish print release with 4 to 5 more to follow. You can still buy his new print now and thats only from the outer edge allocation. I'm guessing there is still approx 150 to 200 of these available.
I don't think POW got it wrong though re micallef. An online release of a fantastic image at a fair price that is still selling at a third more than the original price.
One thing I'd def disagree with is the claim that Lazinc has brought Bansky to the scene. I'd have to guess that it was the otherway around.
Banksy is the superstar in this whole thing. Without Banksy it would all be very very different.
Regrettably, the "sabotaging" which resulted from the September releases was not restricted to flippers. It affected the whole Micallef market, including the personal collections of those who had been following and supporting Micallef's career prior to him signing up with Steve Lazarides. I do not believe this was a case of "grab the cash and run". Steve and Antony have invested far too much time and effort in one another for their interests to be limited to a short term money-making scheme. They certainly both have much more to offer than that. My view is they were very concerned about the hyperinflation that was taking place with the prices for Micallef pieces in the run up to his 'Impure Idols' show in LA. Releasing a large number of prints at relatively high prices in September appears to have been an attempt to cool the market and encourage a slight 'correction' of prices in order to bring them down to a reasonable and sustainable level. This would have been done in the interest of Micallef's medium and long-term career. Where the miscalculation occurred is that Steve's pricing and large edition sizes did not deter the flippers. The latter were convinced that 'Impure Idols' would do for Micallef what 'Barely Legal' did for Banksy. The flippers therefore thought that, notwithstanding the high prices and the number of prints for sale, there was still a great deal of money to be made. The market showed them otherwise. Panic selling then created a snowball effect which more or less halved the prices for Micallef's other prints. This certainly would not have been the intention of either Steve or Antony. It had an adverse impact on confidence at the higher end of the Micallef market as well. How many people are going to buy a £25-£100K Micallef canvas when his print prices are free-falling? What Micallef needs to do now is keep his head down for a year or so, focus on canvases, and do his best to slowly build up his career again. Couldnt have said it better Kiki, I have been reading in the background for a while now and find it both disheartening and amusing in equal measures the ammount of blame / sh1t POW and Laz seem to get. People buy prints and dont make an instant fortune.....Laz is to blame, people F5 for a month of their own volition and miss out on a print......POW are b@stards and shouldnt be allowed to sell anything...... If it wasnt for the moaning vultures bleating and hyping everything printed and promoted by Laz and POW, they wouldnt be in this situation in the first place. I know some folk have a more personal and long standing reason to be less that supportive to POW and Laz, but for those that dont have these reasons, think about what and who POW and Laz have brought to the scene...... Banksy, Hewlett, D-face, Insect, Connor H, Micallef, Lucy Mac, 3D, invader, choe, faile / aiko etc etc etc...... The time and commitment shown by both groups should be an indicator that these parties aint out for a fast buck..... even though some would have you think otherwise. Before people start jumping on any bandwagon, its always nice to stop and THINK FOR YOURSELVES. We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations. Same thing could happen to choe with his 450ish print release with 4 to 5 more to follow. You can still buy his new print now and thats only from the outer edge allocation. I'm guessing there is still approx 150 to 200 of these available. I don't think POW got it wrong though re micallef. An online release of a fantastic image at a fair price that is still selling at a third more than the original price. One thing I'd def disagree with is the claim that Lazinc has brought Bansky to the scene. I'd have to guess that it was the otherway around. Banksy is the superstar in this whole thing. Without Banksy it would all be very very different. |
|
stuey09
New Member
🗨️ 49
👍🏻 1
August 2008
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by stuey09 on Jan 20, 2008 14:57:42 GMT 1, An excellent post Kiki. It will be interesting to see what Micallef produces next. He's talented and quite unique in his style, so I believe that he still has an enormous amount to offer.
An excellent post Kiki. It will be interesting to see what Micallef produces next. He's talented and quite unique in his style, so I believe that he still has an enormous amount to offer.
|
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by barry cilit on Jan 20, 2008 14:57:43 GMT 1, Laz should have taken note what Elms did for Neate. A lower print runs but more prints to choose from.
Laz should have taken note what Elms did for Neate. A lower print runs but more prints to choose from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by kiki on Jan 20, 2008 15:10:39 GMT 1, I think the important thing to keep in mind is that if you like the work, it's worth every cent you paid for it if you made a conscious decision to buy it, regardless.There are definitely three types of players here: 1. Buyers who like the work and want it whether it goes up or down in price and have no real concern either way (collectors).2. Flippers (Flippers) 3. Buyers who like the work and are a little concerned as to values as time goes on (investors/ bagger "lite's" or collectors who's budgerigar one day gets an ingrown toenail and must sell because the $$ is needed for vet bills.
gbh,
No offense intended, but I completely disagree. Such an unqualified and categoric statement is based on the unrealistic premise that 'real collectors' buy art simply and only because they like it.
That is fine if you are talking about a piece which may cost £100. Once you pass a certain level, however, nothing could be further from the truth.
No collector, regardless of how 'genuine' and passionate they are, wants to see (or is completely indifferent about) the £9,000,000 Warhol they bought at Christie's dropping in value to £4,000,000 a few months later. No collector buys a £9,000,000 Warhol just because they like the image. If that was their sole concern, they might as well buy a poster.
Once significant sums of money become involved, the 'collector' you refer to in your point 1 above doesn't really exist.
I think the important thing to keep in mind is that if you like the work, it's worth every cent you paid for it if you made a conscious decision to buy it, regardless.There are definitely three types of players here: 1. Buyers who like the work and want it whether it goes up or down in price and have no real concern either way (collectors).2. Flippers (Flippers) 3. Buyers who like the work and are a little concerned as to values as time goes on (investors/ bagger "lite's" or collectors who's budgerigar one day gets an ingrown toenail and must sell because the $$ is needed for vet bills. gbh, No offense intended, but I completely disagree. Such an unqualified and categoric statement is based on the unrealistic premise that 'real collectors' buy art simply and only because they like it. That is fine if you are talking about a piece which may cost £100. Once you pass a certain level, however, nothing could be further from the truth. No collector, regardless of how 'genuine' and passionate they are, wants to see (or is completely indifferent about) the £9,000,000 Warhol they bought at Christie's dropping in value to £4,000,000 a few months later. No collector buys a £9,000,000 Warhol just because they like the image. If that was their sole concern, they might as well buy a poster. Once significant sums of money become involved, the 'collector' you refer to in your point 1 above doesn't really exist. |
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by Daniel Silk on Jan 20, 2008 15:18:56 GMT 1, Very true Kiki ;D
If your very rich and you can afford to spend thousands on originals or and even just prints, does not mean you would spend any amount on it just coz you like the image  I don't think many people become rich by thinking about things like that The more it costs, the more confident you need to be that your not buying something thats over priced, or could half in value within a few months.
Saying that  what about new cars?
Very true Kiki ;D If your very rich and you can afford to spend thousands on originals or and even just prints, does not mean you would spend any amount on it just coz you like the image I don't think many people become rich by thinking about things like that The more it costs, the more confident you need to be that your not buying something thats over priced, or could half in value within a few months. Saying that what about new cars? |
|
guest2
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,471
👍🏻 1
December 2006
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by guest2 on Jan 20, 2008 15:25:44 GMT 1, I think the important thing to keep in mind is that if you like the work, it's worth every cent you paid for it if you made a conscious decision to buy it, regardless.There are definitely three types of players here: 1. Buyers who like the work and want it whether it goes up or down in price and have no real concern either way (collectors).2. Flippers (Flippers) 3. Buyers who like the work and are a little concerned as to values as time goes on (investors/ bagger "lite's" or collectors who's budgerigar one day gets an ingrown toenail and must sell because the $$ is needed for vet bills. gbh, No offense intended, but I completely disagree. Such an unqualified and categoric statement is based on the unrealistic premise that 'real collectors' buy art simply and only because they like it. That is fine if you are talking about a piece which may cost £100. Once you pass a certain level, however, nothing could be further from the truth. No collector, regardless of how 'genuine' and passionate they are, wants to see (or is completely indifferent about) the £9,000,000 Warhol they bought at Christie's dropping in value to £4,000,000 a few months later. No collector buys a £9,000,000 Warhol just because they like the image. If that was their sole concern, they might as well buy a poster. Once significant sums of money become involved, the 'collector' you refer to in your point 1 above doesn't really exist.
Very good post.
I think the important thing to keep in mind is that if you like the work, it's worth every cent you paid for it if you made a conscious decision to buy it, regardless.There are definitely three types of players here: 1. Buyers who like the work and want it whether it goes up or down in price and have no real concern either way (collectors).2. Flippers (Flippers) 3. Buyers who like the work and are a little concerned as to values as time goes on (investors/ bagger "lite's" or collectors who's budgerigar one day gets an ingrown toenail and must sell because the $$ is needed for vet bills. gbh, No offense intended, but I completely disagree. Such an unqualified and categoric statement is based on the unrealistic premise that 'real collectors' buy art simply and only because they like it. That is fine if you are talking about a piece which may cost £100. Once you pass a certain level, however, nothing could be further from the truth. No collector, regardless of how 'genuine' and passionate they are, wants to see (or is completely indifferent about) the £9,000,000 Warhol they bought at Christie's dropping in value to £4,000,000 a few months later. No collector buys a £9,000,000 Warhol just because they like the image. If that was their sole concern, they might as well buy a poster. Once significant sums of money become involved, the 'collector' you refer to in your point 1 above doesn't really exist. Very good post. |
|
gbh
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,595
👍🏻 14
May 2006
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by gbh on Jan 20, 2008 15:26:37 GMT 1, none taken in the slightest. I simply don't agree with you.
I'm certainly not a billionaire but I think you have omitted the consideration of financial relevance across the scale of collectors.
a 100 quid print may be expense to me for example while others would think nothing on dropping 10,000 quid on an object they desired.
I think the person you are talking about is a number "3" in my view.
I consider myself a mix of 1 and 3.
On the "1" side of things, I have a couple of rather expensive bits and some not so expensive that I'm not in the slightest concerned about about in regards to the fluctuation of their monetary value as whilst I am alive, they will not be sold. end of story.
Their value to me is artistic and/or sentimental - this value is set by me, the owner.
My personal valuation for the above reasons does not effect the market price , the market price does nothing to effect my personal valuation.
The above paragraph goes directly to disprove your post above by the very fact that it is true. I know this to be true as I'm typing it.
on the "3" side, sure...I have quite a few pieces I really love but if push came to shove, I'd let them go.
none taken in the slightest. I simply don't agree with you.
I'm certainly not a billionaire but I think you have omitted the consideration of financial relevance across the scale of collectors.
a 100 quid print may be expense to me for example while others would think nothing on dropping 10,000 quid on an object they desired.
I think the person you are talking about is a number "3" in my view.
I consider myself a mix of 1 and 3.
On the "1" side of things, I have a couple of rather expensive bits and some not so expensive that I'm not in the slightest concerned about about in regards to the fluctuation of their monetary value as whilst I am alive, they will not be sold. end of story.
Their value to me is artistic and/or sentimental - this value is set by me, the owner.
My personal valuation for the above reasons does not effect the market price , the market price does nothing to effect my personal valuation.
The above paragraph goes directly to disprove your post above by the very fact that it is true. I know this to be true as I'm typing it.
on the "3" side, sure...I have quite a few pieces I really love but if push came to shove, I'd let them go.
|
|
gbh
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,595
👍🏻 14
May 2006
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by gbh on Jan 20, 2008 15:49:17 GMT 1, if I bought a piece for 500,000 pounds and then donated (not loaned) it to The Tate the next day, will I be concerned as to it's MONETARY value in a week or in a year?
having donated it, it's monetary value to me is now zero.
Should I just have donated a poster of the piece to the Tate then?............
if I bought a piece for 500,000 pounds and then donated (not loaned) it to The Tate the next day, will I be concerned as to it's MONETARY value in a week or in a year?
having donated it, it's monetary value to me is now zero.
Should I just have donated a poster of the piece to the Tate then?............
|
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by damiana2007 on Jan 20, 2008 17:04:26 GMT 1, “We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations. “
Have you actually been to the Micallef LA show? I have, and it was one of the most amazing things I have seen in my life. As far as not “quite live up to expectations”, it was quite clear that the “Impure Idols” LA show would not be like the “Barely Legal”. I had asked Laz this very same question 6 months before the Micallef LA show, and he told me that no-one could make a show like Banksy.
These expectations were made by flippers, who were too greedy to make money before the Micallef LA show. The LA show was hyped as like the next Banksy show, by ebay resellers and secondary art dealers, who thus created the hyperinflation and unrealistic expectations.
You have been spitting poison here about Laz. Perhaps now it would be good to make some scrutiny about your public posts. Here is one example: an excerpt from your post at an earlier thread titled “O little town of Bethlehem”, reply 74 on Dec 7.
”Talking of honest opinions, I think the actual show is rubbish The micaleffs are crap, we've all seen the faile, The ron english is pretty scary, I wouldn't have that on my wall, no biggie on the swoon, I'm a sick boy fan but not liking that one much, bast.....!...The aiko would be ok for the kids bedroom but only if she gave me it!... same old cauty, Ben Turnball - do me a favour! Shine eric the dog and you can keep 'digging for fire!…
www.CampBarbossa.com
Why are you selling Micallef at your gallery if you think his work is crap? If I were an artist, I would not want to have any business with a gallery that publicly ridicules their artists. Certainly, as a collector, I don’t wont to have any dealings with such a gallery; doesn’t give me much confidence to support it. Finally, please be more thankful to Laz. Without his commitment to the street art movement, I suspect that you would be out of art business.
“We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations. “ Have you actually been to the Micallef LA show? I have, and it was one of the most amazing things I have seen in my life. As far as not “quite live up to expectations”, it was quite clear that the “Impure Idols” LA show would not be like the “Barely Legal”. I had asked Laz this very same question 6 months before the Micallef LA show, and he told me that no-one could make a show like Banksy. These expectations were made by flippers, who were too greedy to make money before the Micallef LA show. The LA show was hyped as like the next Banksy show, by ebay resellers and secondary art dealers, who thus created the hyperinflation and unrealistic expectations. You have been spitting poison here about Laz. Perhaps now it would be good to make some scrutiny about your public posts. Here is one example: an excerpt from your post at an earlier thread titled “O little town of Bethlehem”, reply 74 on Dec 7. ”Talking of honest opinions, I think the actual show is rubbish The micaleffs are crap, we've all seen the faile, The ron english is pretty scary, I wouldn't have that on my wall, no biggie on the swoon, I'm a sick boy fan but not liking that one much, bast.....!...The aiko would be ok for the kids bedroom but only if she gave me it!... same old cauty, Ben Turnball - do me a favour! Shine eric the dog and you can keep 'digging for fire!… www.CampBarbossa.comWhy are you selling Micallef at your gallery if you think his work is crap? If I were an artist, I would not want to have any business with a gallery that publicly ridicules their artists. Certainly, as a collector, I don’t wont to have any dealings with such a gallery; doesn’t give me much confidence to support it. Finally, please be more thankful to Laz. Without his commitment to the street art movement, I suspect that you would be out of art business. |
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by graeme501 on Jan 20, 2008 17:07:05 GMT 1, frankie was talking about the micallefs at santas ghetto
having seen them 1st hand, i wasnt that impressed, but i like other micallefs and have some
frankie was talking about the micallefs at santas ghetto
having seen them 1st hand, i wasnt that impressed, but i like other micallefs and have some
|
|
guest2
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,471
👍🏻 1
December 2006
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by guest2 on Jan 20, 2008 17:15:57 GMT 1, “We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations. “ Have you actually been to the Micallef LA show? I have, and it was one of the most amazing things I have seen in my life. As far as not “quite live up to expectations”, it was quite clear that the “Impure Idols” LA show would not be like the “Barely Legal”. I had asked Laz this very same question 6 months before the Micallef LA show, and he told me that no-one could make a show like Banksy. These expectations were made by flippers, who were too greedy to make money before the Micallef LA show. The LA show was hyped as like the next Banksy show, by ebay resellers and secondary art dealers, who thus created the hyperinflation and unrealistic expectations. You have been spitting poison here about Laz. Perhaps now it would be good to make some scrutiny about your public posts. Here is one example: an excerpt from your post at an earlier thread titled “O little town of Bethlehem”, reply 74 on Dec 7. ”Talking of honest opinions, I think the actual show is rubbish The micaleffs are crap, we've all seen the faile, The ron english is pretty scary, I wouldn't have that on my wall, no biggie on the swoon, I'm a sick boy fan but not liking that one much, bast.....!...The aiko would be ok for the kids bedroom but only if she gave me it!... same old cauty, Ben Turnball - do me a favour! Shine eric the dog and you can keep 'digging for fire!… www.CampBarbossa.comWhy are you selling Micallef at your gallery if you think his work is crap? If I were an artist, I would not want to have any business with a gallery that publicly ridicules their artists. Certainly, as a collector, I don’t wont to have any dealings with such a gallery; doesn’t give me much confidence to support it. Finally, please be more thankful to Laz. Without his commitment to the street art movement, I suspect that you would be out of art business.
Wow, I've upset you New Member. Wonder who you used to be
I'm a big fan of micallef sickboy etc etc, huge fan of faile and my comments are related to the prints released and the art at the show. just because I like an artists does not mean I have to love every single thing he/she produces.
And as for the last comment, I think it's Banksy we are thankful too.
anyways Plus 1 dude for being my 1st stalker
“We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations. “ Have you actually been to the Micallef LA show? I have, and it was one of the most amazing things I have seen in my life. As far as not “quite live up to expectations”, it was quite clear that the “Impure Idols” LA show would not be like the “Barely Legal”. I had asked Laz this very same question 6 months before the Micallef LA show, and he told me that no-one could make a show like Banksy. These expectations were made by flippers, who were too greedy to make money before the Micallef LA show. The LA show was hyped as like the next Banksy show, by ebay resellers and secondary art dealers, who thus created the hyperinflation and unrealistic expectations. You have been spitting poison here about Laz. Perhaps now it would be good to make some scrutiny about your public posts. Here is one example: an excerpt from your post at an earlier thread titled “O little town of Bethlehem”, reply 74 on Dec 7. ”Talking of honest opinions, I think the actual show is rubbish The micaleffs are crap, we've all seen the faile, The ron english is pretty scary, I wouldn't have that on my wall, no biggie on the swoon, I'm a sick boy fan but not liking that one much, bast.....!...The aiko would be ok for the kids bedroom but only if she gave me it!... same old cauty, Ben Turnball - do me a favour! Shine eric the dog and you can keep 'digging for fire!… www.CampBarbossa.comWhy are you selling Micallef at your gallery if you think his work is crap? If I were an artist, I would not want to have any business with a gallery that publicly ridicules their artists. Certainly, as a collector, I don’t wont to have any dealings with such a gallery; doesn’t give me much confidence to support it. Finally, please be more thankful to Laz. Without his commitment to the street art movement, I suspect that you would be out of art business. Wow, I've upset you New Member. Wonder who you used to be I'm a big fan of micallef sickboy etc etc, huge fan of faile and my comments are related to the prints released and the art at the show. just because I like an artists does not mean I have to love every single thing he/she produces. And as for the last comment, I think it's Banksy we are thankful too. anyways Plus 1 dude for being my 1st stalker |
|
|
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by Filipino Box Spring Hog on Jan 20, 2008 17:25:27 GMT 1, if I bought a piece for 500,000 pounds and then donated (not loaned) it to The Tate the next day, will I be concerned as to it's MONETARY value in a week or in a year? having donated it, it's monetary value to me is now zero. Should I just have donated a poster of the piece to the Tate then?............
If you donated a piece to any museum, you'd have a tax write off for the current value of the piece - so, even with donations, money most certainly comes into play.
if I bought a piece for 500,000 pounds and then donated (not loaned) it to The Tate the next day, will I be concerned as to it's MONETARY value in a week or in a year? having donated it, it's monetary value to me is now zero. Should I just have donated a poster of the piece to the Tate then?............ If you donated a piece to any museum, you'd have a tax write off for the current value of the piece - so, even with donations, money most certainly comes into play. |
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by kiki on Jan 20, 2008 20:05:45 GMT 1, if I bought a piece for 500,000 pounds and then donated (not loaned) it to The Tate the next day, will I be concerned as to it's MONETARY value in a week or in a year? having donated it, it's monetary value to me is now zero. Should I just have donated a poster of the piece to the Tate then?............
The above argument is flawed since the monetary value of the donated artwork will still be of relevance to almost any donor.
If the piece costing £500,000 halves in value within a few months, the donor will probably feel like a tit since he would have achieved exactly the same result a few months later with £250,000. This means that, if the donor had waited a bit longer, he could have either saved himself £250,000 or made a greater contribution to The Tate by donating even more artwork.
No donor will be indifferent to the fluctuation of the monetary value of his donation, even if his primary concern is simply his bruised ego and/or the social embarrassment of being seen to have made a very poor investment decision for The Tate.
It is similar to donating money to charity. If you donate £500,000 to Cancer Research, you don't want to find out that the positive difference your donation has made to the charity could have been achieved with £250,000 a few months later.
if I bought a piece for 500,000 pounds and then donated (not loaned) it to The Tate the next day, will I be concerned as to it's MONETARY value in a week or in a year? having donated it, it's monetary value to me is now zero. Should I just have donated a poster of the piece to the Tate then?............ The above argument is flawed since the monetary value of the donated artwork will still be of relevance to almost any donor. If the piece costing £500,000 halves in value within a few months, the donor will probably feel like a tit since he would have achieved exactly the same result a few months later with £250,000. This means that, if the donor had waited a bit longer, he could have either saved himself £250,000 or made a greater contribution to The Tate by donating even more artwork. No donor will be indifferent to the fluctuation of the monetary value of his donation, even if his primary concern is simply his bruised ego and/or the social embarrassment of being seen to have made a very poor investment decision for The Tate. It is similar to donating money to charity. If you donate £500,000 to Cancer Research, you don't want to find out that the positive difference your donation has made to the charity could have been achieved with £250,000 a few months later. |
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by darjeeling on Jan 20, 2008 20:27:31 GMT 1, “We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations. “ Have you actually been to the Micallef LA show? I have, and it was one of the most amazing things I have seen in my life.
I didn't make it to the show but form the pictures I've seen the show looked lame and the problem was here comes another british export to LA from LazInc trying to be the next Banksy. The show got write ups on blogs, big deal, but little respect or acknowledgment from any mainstream art rags and the only thing the media was concerned about the show was look at these cute celebs blowing their cash on 'art.' The works in the LA show were weak, plain and simple.
And don't blame POw and LAZ inc. POW released a weak B&W print in a massive edition of 1000 and you chumps ate it up, 1000 prints sold out in about 20 minutes!!! How is it POWs fault that you guys chased after this so hard?
The Micallef Laz prints?!? You guys were getting stify's just talking about it on this forum before they were released. Then you llined up for blocks to buy these prints, got in fights in the queue and most weren't able to get a print because yes there was that much demand for them!!! How is it Laz not having the foresight to see that 1600 prints was too much when you guys are lining up 24 hours in advance and several blocks deep? Laz met the market demand with this release. It's your folks buying without thinking pay any price attitude that drove this frenzy, don't blame POW or LAZ for meeting the market demand. And now people are angry because they can't find another chump to pay double what they paid like they were used to.
What has happened is that finally the consumer has had a realization about things, coupled with—finally— a negative reaction to the over hype of everything in this scene. Coupled with a show that didn't meet the critical acclaim people thought it would.
“We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations. “ Have you actually been to the Micallef LA show? I have, and it was one of the most amazing things I have seen in my life. I didn't make it to the show but form the pictures I've seen the show looked lame and the problem was here comes another british export to LA from LazInc trying to be the next Banksy. The show got write ups on blogs, big deal, but little respect or acknowledgment from any mainstream art rags and the only thing the media was concerned about the show was look at these cute celebs blowing their cash on 'art.' The works in the LA show were weak, plain and simple. And don't blame POw and LAZ inc. POW released a weak B&W print in a massive edition of 1000 and you chumps ate it up, 1000 prints sold out in about 20 minutes!!! How is it POWs fault that you guys chased after this so hard? The Micallef Laz prints?!? You guys were getting stify's just talking about it on this forum before they were released. Then you llined up for blocks to buy these prints, got in fights in the queue and most weren't able to get a print because yes there was that much demand for them!!! How is it Laz not having the foresight to see that 1600 prints was too much when you guys are lining up 24 hours in advance and several blocks deep? Laz met the market demand with this release. It's your folks buying without thinking pay any price attitude that drove this frenzy, don't blame POW or LAZ for meeting the market demand. And now people are angry because they can't find another chump to pay double what they paid like they were used to. What has happened is that finally the consumer has had a realization about things, coupled with—finally— a negative reaction to the over hype of everything in this scene. Coupled with a show that didn't meet the critical acclaim people thought it would. |
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by alsbabar on Jan 20, 2008 20:32:40 GMT 1, Darjeeling - I agree with some aspects, I dont agree that the POW prints were weak. I think POW and Laz priced them right, its just others greed in selling that has caused the issues. Of course they will complain about the price Laz set them at, but in reality in time, the current climate will change and the prices will go back up.
Darjeeling - I agree with some aspects, I dont agree that the POW prints were weak. I think POW and Laz priced them right, its just others greed in selling that has caused the issues. Of course they will complain about the price Laz set them at, but in reality in time, the current climate will change and the prices will go back up.
|
|
Rude Copper
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,051
👍🏻 183
November 2006
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by Rude Copper on Jan 20, 2008 20:47:20 GMT 1, “We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations. “ Have you actually been to the Micallef LA show? I have, and it was one of the most amazing things I have seen in my life. I didn't make it to the show but form the pictures I've seen the show looked lame and the problem was here comes another british export to LA from LazInc trying to be the next Banksy. The show got write ups on blogs, big deal, but little respect or acknowledgment from any mainstream art rags and the only thing the media was concerned about the show was look at these cute celebs blowing their cash on 'art.' The works in the LA show were weak, plain and simple. And don't blame POw and LAZ inc. POW released a weak B&W print in a massive edition of 1000 and you chumps ate it up, 1000 prints sold out in about 20 minutes!!! How is it POWs fault that you guys chased after this so hard? The Micallef Laz prints?!? You guys were getting stify's just talking about it on this forum before they were released. Then you llined up for blocks to buy these prints, got in fights in the queue and most weren't able to get a print because yes there was that much demand for them!!! How is it Laz not having the foresight to see that 1600 prints was too much when you guys are lining up 24 hours in advance and several blocks deep? Laz met the market demand with this release. It's your folks buying without thinking pay any price attitude that drove this frenzy, don't blame POW or LAZ for meeting the market demand. And now people are angry because they can't find another chump to pay double what they paid like they were used to. What has happened is that finally the consumer has had a realization about things, coupled with—finally— a negative reaction to the over hype of everything in this scene. Coupled with a show that didn't meet the critical acclaim people thought it would.
a class post, darjeeling,
something else re lazinc, some of his shows last year were stinkers, zevs, mark jenkins, if he has to buy in all the work,& if it does'nt sell, the money has to be recouped somehow.
theres only a certain amount of banksy ap's you can dig up,
“We all have to give lazinc credit where credit is due. I think all of us realise lazinc and POW's achievements. But on the mass release of Micallef, I feel Lazinc got it wrong and should have seen it coming. 2 many prints, 2 higher price and poorly received images, badly organised with some awful PR and a show in LA that didn't quite live up to expectations. “ Have you actually been to the Micallef LA show? I have, and it was one of the most amazing things I have seen in my life. I didn't make it to the show but form the pictures I've seen the show looked lame and the problem was here comes another british export to LA from LazInc trying to be the next Banksy. The show got write ups on blogs, big deal, but little respect or acknowledgment from any mainstream art rags and the only thing the media was concerned about the show was look at these cute celebs blowing their cash on 'art.' The works in the LA show were weak, plain and simple. And don't blame POw and LAZ inc. POW released a weak B&W print in a massive edition of 1000 and you chumps ate it up, 1000 prints sold out in about 20 minutes!!! How is it POWs fault that you guys chased after this so hard? The Micallef Laz prints?!? You guys were getting stify's just talking about it on this forum before they were released. Then you llined up for blocks to buy these prints, got in fights in the queue and most weren't able to get a print because yes there was that much demand for them!!! How is it Laz not having the foresight to see that 1600 prints was too much when you guys are lining up 24 hours in advance and several blocks deep? Laz met the market demand with this release. It's your folks buying without thinking pay any price attitude that drove this frenzy, don't blame POW or LAZ for meeting the market demand. And now people are angry because they can't find another chump to pay double what they paid like they were used to. What has happened is that finally the consumer has had a realization about things, coupled with—finally— a negative reaction to the over hype of everything in this scene. Coupled with a show that didn't meet the critical acclaim people thought it would. a class post, darjeeling, something else re lazinc, some of his shows last year were stinkers, zevs, mark jenkins, if he has to buy in all the work,& if it does'nt sell, the money has to be recouped somehow. theres only a certain amount of banksy ap's you can dig up, |
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by kiki on Jan 20, 2008 21:05:39 GMT 1, none taken in the slightest. I simply don't agree with you. I'm certainly not a billionaire but I think you have omitted the consideration of financial relevance across the scale of collectors. a 100 quid print may be expense to me for example while others would think nothing on dropping 10,000 quid on an object they desired. I think the person you are talking about is a number "3" in my view. I consider myself a mix of 1 and 3. On the "1" side of things, I have a couple of rather expensive bits and some not so expensive that I'm not in the slightest concerned about about in regards to the fluctuation of their monetary value as whilst I am alive, they will not be sold. end of story.Their value to me is artistic and/or sentimental - this value is set by me, the owner. My personal valuation for the above reasons does not effect the market price , the market price does nothing to effect my personal valuation. The above paragraph goes directly to disprove your post above by the very fact that it is true. I know this to be true as I'm typing it. on the "3" side, sure...I have quite a few pieces I really love but if push came to shove, I'd let them go.
Regarding specifically the expensive pieces you refer to in your collection, indeed you may not sell them during your lifetime. However, I don't think you can be completely indifferent to fluctuations in their monetary value (even if, should their value go up, it is simply to quietly congratulate yourself for having bought something you love which also turned out to be a wise investment).
If you are truly "not in the slightest concerned", then (with respect to those pieces) you are the only person I know who satisfies your requirements of a real collector.
In my case, if I paid £100,000 on a work of art that I was attached to and planned to keep until death did us part, I would still take an interest in its monetary value. Upon my death, the artwork would go to my heirs. If at that time I knew the piece would end up being worth £20,000, this information would certainly not leave me indifferent.
none taken in the slightest. I simply don't agree with you. I'm certainly not a billionaire but I think you have omitted the consideration of financial relevance across the scale of collectors. a 100 quid print may be expense to me for example while others would think nothing on dropping 10,000 quid on an object they desired. I think the person you are talking about is a number "3" in my view. I consider myself a mix of 1 and 3. On the "1" side of things, I have a couple of rather expensive bits and some not so expensive that I'm not in the slightest concerned about about in regards to the fluctuation of their monetary value as whilst I am alive, they will not be sold. end of story.Their value to me is artistic and/or sentimental - this value is set by me, the owner. My personal valuation for the above reasons does not effect the market price , the market price does nothing to effect my personal valuation. The above paragraph goes directly to disprove your post above by the very fact that it is true. I know this to be true as I'm typing it. on the "3" side, sure...I have quite a few pieces I really love but if push came to shove, I'd let them go. Regarding specifically the expensive pieces you refer to in your collection, indeed you may not sell them during your lifetime. However, I don't think you can be completely indifferent to fluctuations in their monetary value (even if, should their value go up, it is simply to quietly congratulate yourself for having bought something you love which also turned out to be a wise investment). If you are truly "not in the slightest concerned", then (with respect to those pieces) you are the only person I know who satisfies your requirements of a real collector. In my case, if I paid £100,000 on a work of art that I was attached to and planned to keep until death did us part, I would still take an interest in its monetary value. Upon my death, the artwork would go to my heirs. If at that time I knew the piece would end up being worth £20,000, this information would certainly not leave me indifferent. |
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by darjeeling on Jan 20, 2008 21:23:12 GMT 1, Darjeeling - I agree with some aspects, I dont agree that the POW prints were weak. I think POW and Laz priced them right, its just others greed in selling that has caused the issues. Of course they will complain about the price Laz set them at, but in reality in time, the current climate will change and the prices will go back up.
Well of course my comment on GIWTTB is opinion—I don't see that print as being anything average folks would ever want to hang in their home. Creapy little boy with angel wings, devil horns, looking obnoxiously into a mirror?
And I don't dislike Micallef, I thought his stuff was good but I'm unimpressed with his LA show. Although I actually i thought the Laz prints were good except for peacekeeper - don't know why you'd want a huge poster of a soldier on your wall? But the works in the show were recycled and or poorly executed and or just weird.
As for the current climate changing, it certainly can and will but assuming prices will go back up. Why? Only way Mic's prices will go back up is if he has another show that is not just good - but groundbreaking and outstanding. It's a big if and there will be a lot of scrutiny given to it.
Darjeeling - I agree with some aspects, I dont agree that the POW prints were weak. I think POW and Laz priced them right, its just others greed in selling that has caused the issues. Of course they will complain about the price Laz set them at, but in reality in time, the current climate will change and the prices will go back up. Well of course my comment on GIWTTB is opinion—I don't see that print as being anything average folks would ever want to hang in their home. Creapy little boy with angel wings, devil horns, looking obnoxiously into a mirror? And I don't dislike Micallef, I thought his stuff was good but I'm unimpressed with his LA show. Although I actually i thought the Laz prints were good except for peacekeeper - don't know why you'd want a huge poster of a soldier on your wall? But the works in the show were recycled and or poorly executed and or just weird. As for the current climate changing, it certainly can and will but assuming prices will go back up. Why? Only way Mic's prices will go back up is if he has another show that is not just good - but groundbreaking and outstanding. It's a big if and there will be a lot of scrutiny given to it. |
|
|
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by tomjedimaster on Jan 21, 2008 0:50:53 GMT 1, i went to the LA show and found that the building was more memorable than the art work. unfortunately, the artwork did not progress from his previous show at laz (now that was a fantastic body of work). it's really too bad, i hope that he can bounce back from this and produce something spectacular and not just work for the celebrity market.
i went to the LA show and found that the building was more memorable than the art work. unfortunately, the artwork did not progress from his previous show at laz (now that was a fantastic body of work). it's really too bad, i hope that he can bounce back from this and produce something spectacular and not just work for the celebrity market.
|
|
|
|
Rude Copper
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,051
👍🏻 183
November 2006
|
Micallef LazInc prints hit the bay instantly!, by Rude Copper on Jan 21, 2008 11:15:57 GMT 1, *spurts coffee over computer screen* quote of the day/month/year/lifetime! someone I know got a complimentary print from the US when their transaction faile-d (see what I did there?!)
yeh, faile-d to be funny!, (see what i did there?)
are you antoine from the dead zone?
*spurts coffee over computer screen* quote of the day/month/year/lifetime! someone I know got a complimentary print from the US when their transaction faile-d (see what I did there?!) yeh, faile-d to be funny!, (see what i did there?) are you antoine from the dead zone? |
|
I don't think many people become rich by thinking about things like that 
what about new cars? 
