Well - have they all gone!?!? Its gone from the site! Anyone get a pic of it?

I cannot understand what all the fuss and indignation is about. BRP sell prints to AR, who then decide at what price to sell them at - so what? BRP can't set the price that AR sell at as this is illegal. BRP could decide not to sell them future runs, but there is clearly reason as to why they do.
Maybe BRP agreed some time ago to give AR a certain % of prints to support them in their early days, and have found the relationship succesful. AR took a punt on BRP being a success and are now benefitting from their backing. Maybe AR have a stake in BRP, maybe they invest in the printing process and BRP, who knows - I'm just offering other reasons as to why BRP may do this.

Shame to see the original of this has now been completely buffed down on Old Street

Shipping Prints Tuesday next week..... ;D ;D

i think there is a fair amount of hypocracy goin on here. we are all happy to pay 450 for a nick walker because we know damn well that it is worth way more; it is, in essence, a bargain. If it came out at 900 how many would buy knowing they won't have bought something that is worth more instantly? people moan because something is for sale for more - i say who cares if you've already got one.

the ebay thing is more that someone is selling privately something that do not have yet.

Art Republic print now sold ,at least the crunch is'nt affecting Lawrenc

hi all bought 5 prints from art republic (Ratatouille) looking to sell 4 of them open to offers over 1 grand
cash or credit accepted

that is one kind man!

what a load of cobblers! I think you're all making a fuss over a non-issue. BRP have every right to choose how and with whom they do their business (although I admit I find that Panambabe business very unsavoury and would hope that BRP have learned to distance themselves from her/him). AR is a secondary gallery which carries a large stock of lots of artists' prints. If they are given a blessing to sell certain prints by the primary gallery, this has absolutely nothing to do with the primary gallery prefering their customers not to flip/buy to resell. This is not news and it is not limited to just these galleries. I've always been under the impression that if a gallery finds you're buying art from them for your own short-term gain and not to put on the wall, that most galleries will avoid future dealings with you. There is no double standard here imo. POW even state in their terms that they reserve the right to cancel and refund orders and, as some on this thread have found out 1st hand, they also block IP addresses if they think you're trying to cheat their system/rules. I think BRP were spot on to flip the bird at a few flippers and I hope they continue to do this. Maybe I'll end up with a print for the wall at cost that I otherwise would not have been able to buy at 2-3 times the price.

as i have said before i would rathe put my money in jo bloggs pocket than a big company

Banksy says the pet shop came from a diamond necklace dog walking past a homeless guy
Wow hang on how many people walked past that guy that had loads in the bank including probably banksy
How much did the whole propoganda in ny cost that could of gone to charity he must have enough in the bank by now not to worry about spending millions on propoganda

I think you'll be lucky to get cost.

ha ha im gonna be rich

I think you're being a tad cynical with that point. And I think you know you are too. Banksy is very well known to give plenty of his own money to charity. More to the point, every member here is aware of SOME of his good deeds, including donating a huge sum to help build schools in Palestine last winter (SG'07). As it happens I do also have it on good authority that he gives surprisingly large proportion of his personal earnings to charitable causes.

This comment is totally out of order! -

"Wow hang on how many people walked past that guy that had loads in the bank including probably banksy
How much did the whole propaganda in ny cost that could of gone to charity he must have enough in the bank by now not to worry about spending millions on propoganda" -

Why should he not invest some of his own money in self-promotion (if indeed it is his money and not Laz's - I have no idea who laid all this on)? He's an artist and the more popular his work becomes the more successful he will be and the more people he can reach with his messages, which would seem to be a driving force for those artists looking to comment on social and/or political issues as he does. (a no-brainer one would think!) More to the point, the more money he earns, the more charitable causes he can support. Why, have you some reason to believe that Banksy has become less of a philanthropist of a sudden? I'm not a sycophant by any means, but I have a lot of respect for what he does and how he appears to go about it. If you don't, how come you're a member here? What is it you find so unpalatable about the propaganda, that he/they have dropped a load of cash to share some free art and promote his career? Because I'm not understanding your beef at all.

nick walker Ratatouille wanted,
anyone thinking of selling please pm me!
ta
ratzi