met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
THE MET LOTTERY, by met on May 23, 2022 0:09:15 GMT 1, COMPETITION 50
A.
B.
Dead Kennedys - Kill the Poor [Live at Sproul Plaza, Berkeley, California, 20 August 1978.] - uploaded by MBSS20
Dead Kennedys - Too Drunk to Fuck [Live at Mabuhay Gardens, San Francisco, California, 9 February 1980.] - uploaded by LambruscoKid
Dead Kennedys - Rawhide [Live in studio during the first, ill-fated attempt to record the In God We Trust, Inc. EP, June 1981*.] - uploaded by alcporvida321
Dead Kennedys - Moon Over Marin [Live at The Island, Houston, Texas, probably 25 May 1983 (concert apparently originally scheduled for 14 May).] - uploaded by quecoisaabsurda
Dead Kennedys - Police Truck [Live at the Grand Olympic Auditorium, Los Angeles, California, 10 August 1984. Show later followed by a riot.] - uploaded by machinist
C.
Dead Kennedys - Nazi Punks Fuck Off [Live at The Ritz, Austin, Texas, 7 August 1982.] - uploaded by NudeAvenger
Dead Kennedys - Nazi Punks Fuck Off [Live at The Ace, Brixton, London, 2 December 1982.] - uploaded by smeetie1
Dead Kennedys - Nazi Punks Fuck Off [Live at the On Broadway, San Francisco, California, 16 June 1984.] - uploaded by BadReligion1966
Dead Kennedys - Nazi Punks Fuck Off [Live at WUST Radio Music Hall, Washington, DC on 18 November 1985.] - uploaded by Margin Walker
________________
At around 19:00 UK time on Friday 27 May, I'll quote this post and add one or more questions or instructions. The first eligible member to answer correctly, wins a poster — one that would make an appropriate gift for an ageing (or just old) punk.
COMPETITION 50
A.
B.
Dead Kennedys - Kill the Poor [Live at Sproul Plaza, Berkeley, California, 20 August 1978.] - uploaded by MBSS20
Dead Kennedys - Too Drunk to Fuck [Live at Mabuhay Gardens, San Francisco, California, 9 February 1980.] - uploaded by LambruscoKid
Dead Kennedys - Rawhide [Live in studio during the first, ill-fated attempt to record the In God We Trust, Inc. EP, June 1981*.] - uploaded by alcporvida321
Dead Kennedys - Moon Over Marin [Live at The Island, Houston, Texas, probably 25 May 1983 (concert apparently originally scheduled for 14 May).] - uploaded by quecoisaabsurda
Dead Kennedys - Police Truck [Live at the Grand Olympic Auditorium, Los Angeles, California, 10 August 1984. Show later followed by a riot.] - uploaded by machinist
C.
Dead Kennedys - Nazi Punks Fuck Off [Live at The Ritz, Austin, Texas, 7 August 1982.] - uploaded by NudeAvenger
Dead Kennedys - Nazi Punks Fuck Off [Live at The Ace, Brixton, London, 2 December 1982.] - uploaded by smeetie1
Dead Kennedys - Nazi Punks Fuck Off [Live at the On Broadway, San Francisco, California, 16 June 1984.] - uploaded by BadReligion1966
Dead Kennedys - Nazi Punks Fuck Off [Live at WUST Radio Music Hall, Washington, DC on 18 November 1985.] - uploaded by Margin Walker
________________
At around 19:00 UK time on Friday 27 May, I'll quote this post and add one or more questions or instructions. The first eligible member to answer correctly, wins a poster — one that would make an appropriate gift for an ageing (or just old) punk.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Space Invader FOR SALE on ebay, by met on May 22, 2022 19:16:20 GMT 1, Heads-up regarding the counterfeit Invader currently listed on eBay.
It is a fake Pictures On Walls Rubik Kubrik print, being sold by the Spain-based, recidivist fraudster, visualgallery*.
So as to not better educate the scammer, it's preferable to avoid disclosing the tells of this fake. But informed, attentive collectors here will have spotted at least some of them.
Bidding is currently at US$3,600 (eBay item number 314002031898):
www.ebay.com/itm/314002031898
Heads-up regarding the counterfeit Invader currently listed on eBay.
It is a fake Pictures On Walls Rubik Kubrik print, being sold by the Spain-based, recidivist fraudster, visualgallery*.
So as to not better educate the scammer, it's preferable to avoid disclosing the tells of this fake. But informed, attentive collectors here will have spotted at least some of them.
Bidding is currently at US$3,600 (eBay item number 314002031898):
www.ebay.com/itm/314002031898
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Kaws • Sponge Bob KawsBob Set, Yellow, Black, Red, by met on May 22, 2022 19:04:48 GMT 1, If there exists a member who has any doubt whatsoever about the bad faith of the Spain-based, recidivist eBay fraudster, visualgallery*, the latter is currently selling a counterfeit Invader.
So as to not better educate the scammer, it's preferable to avoid disclosing the tells of this fake Rubik Kubrik print. But informed, attentive collectors here will have spotted at least some of them.
Bidding is currently at US$3,600 (eBay item number 314002031898):
www.ebay.com/itm/314002031898
Keep well away from visualgallery.
If there exists a member who has any doubt whatsoever about the bad faith of the Spain-based, recidivist eBay fraudster, visualgallery*, the latter is currently selling a counterfeit Invader.
So as to not better educate the scammer, it's preferable to avoid disclosing the tells of this fake Rubik Kubrik print. But informed, attentive collectors here will have spotted at least some of them.
Bidding is currently at US$3,600 (eBay item number 314002031898):
www.ebay.com/itm/314002031898
Keep well away from visualgallery.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Kaws • Sponge Bob KawsBob Set, Yellow, Black, Red, by met on May 22, 2022 17:50:21 GMT 1, I really am grateful for the help everybody. I did report the seller to eBay and my return was approved but eBay barely seems to care about counterfeits on their platform. I sent them a link to this thread and told them the seller had sold other forged pieces of art on their platform and they haven’t taken any action besides approve my return. eBay expects me to pay express international return shipping insured for the sale amount all the way back to the seller. The seller said he wanted to make an account on here and comment and I told him to feel free to make an account and try to defend this piece and the others he sold. Regardless, he lied about the original owner in the first place which is just unacceptable. The piece is definitely counterfeit. Here is my advice: 1. Do not allow yourself to be bullied by eB ay. They will naturally try to go with the option that causes the least hassle for them. This means their initial default stance will always be to get you to return the item, regardless of the circumstances — giving you the impression there are no alternatives, and that you have no choice in the matter. You need to be more forceful, to push back, while at the same time remaining calm, polite, and demonstrating you are being reasonable. 2. Do not liaise with eB ay via the messaging system. Get a representative to call you. The employees who man the telephones are generally less useless, more senior, and have greater discretion and decision-making powers. Ask to be transferred to the department specialising in counterfeits or fraud (or have the representative get someone from that department to ring you back). 3. Once you have a competent individual on the line, explain once again the situation — including the seller's history with patent fakes on eB ay, and how you are genuinely concerned that returning the fake KA WS print will only result in the seller offloading it to yet another (and this time perhaps less-informed and less-experienced) buyer. If need be, point out that for eB ay to ask that you return a forgery to a scammer, who will then use it to defraud another victim, is unethical and immoral on the part of the company. It would, in effect, force you to be an accomplice and to facilitate fraud. That is clearly not acceptable. 4. If, for whatever reason, the above approach doesn't succeed, then circumvent eB ay. Just contact your payment card issuer instead, and ask that they initiate a chargeback for fraud. 5. Please do not return the fake KA WS print to the seller.
I really am grateful for the help everybody. I did report the seller to eBay and my return was approved but eBay barely seems to care about counterfeits on their platform. I sent them a link to this thread and told them the seller had sold other forged pieces of art on their platform and they haven’t taken any action besides approve my return. eBay expects me to pay express international return shipping insured for the sale amount all the way back to the seller. The seller said he wanted to make an account on here and comment and I told him to feel free to make an account and try to defend this piece and the others he sold. Regardless, he lied about the original owner in the first place which is just unacceptable. The piece is definitely counterfeit. Here is my advice: 1. Do not allow yourself to be bullied by eB ay. They will naturally try to go with the option that causes the least hassle for them. This means their initial default stance will always be to get you to return the item, regardless of the circumstances — giving you the impression there are no alternatives, and that you have no choice in the matter. You need to be more forceful, to push back, while at the same time remaining calm, polite, and demonstrating you are being reasonable. 2. Do not liaise with eB ay via the messaging system. Get a representative to call you. The employees who man the telephones are generally less useless, more senior, and have greater discretion and decision-making powers. Ask to be transferred to the department specialising in counterfeits or fraud (or have the representative get someone from that department to ring you back). 3. Once you have a competent individual on the line, explain once again the situation — including the seller's history with patent fakes on eB ay, and how you are genuinely concerned that returning the fake KA WS print will only result in the seller offloading it to yet another (and this time perhaps less-informed and less-experienced) buyer. If need be, point out that for eB ay to ask that you return a forgery to a scammer, who will then use it to defraud another victim, is unethical and immoral on the part of the company. It would, in effect, force you to be an accomplice and to facilitate fraud. That is clearly not acceptable. 4. If, for whatever reason, the above approach doesn't succeed, then circumvent eB ay. Just contact your payment card issuer instead, and ask that they initiate a chargeback for fraud. 5. Please do not return the fake KA WS print to the seller.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Kaws • Sponge Bob KawsBob Set, Yellow, Black, Red, by met on May 22, 2022 17:48:20 GMT 1, Thanks everybody. I’m just waiting for The Aldrich registrar to confirm what I suspect. That it’s a forgery. I’ll be able to get a refund from eBay and the seller agreed to a return with no problem really. The seller didn't have to agree. You're covered. Report the item as a fake / counterfeit. It should be destroyed. Of course, he wants it back so he can sell it to someone else. Let everyone know the edition number. double uo globe — The above post is key. Once you receive confirmation from The Aldrich, forward it to eB ay, then cease all communications with the seller, visualgallery*. You will no longer need the latter. Crucially, please do not return the fake KA WS print to the seller. As recommended by DAVID HOCKNEY, report it as a counterfeit. Separately, access the 'Help & Contact' page on eB ay, and request a telephone call from a customer representative. Be clear and firm about the print having officially been declared fake. Let them know as well that, if the print were sent back to the seller, you have good reason to fear it would be re-sold to another unsuspecting buyer — especially given the seller's existing eB ay history with fake Ban ksy items. In case you sense any resistance from the customer representative, ask for the case to be escalated and for somebody more senior to contact you. __________ I have gone through this process myself with eB ay. While it took a bit of time and effort, I did receive a full refund reasonably promptly, without having to return the fakes (thus ensuring I never placed my fellow collectors at risk). But even if I had encountered any serious hurdles with eB ay, out of principle I would simply have bypassed the company — liaising instead with my payment card issuer, explaining the fraud, and requesting a chargeback. __________ And, yes, once confirmation arrives from The Aldrich, do let us know the print edition number. Separately, since online fraudsters typically use multiple accounts and different usernames, it would be very helpful if, by way of reciprocity for the assistance you've received here, the name of the seller, their address details, and (if available) their email address could also be disclosed. Good luck going forward.
Regrettably, the original post was deleted in this thread.
That amounts to a (completely unnecessary) destruction of evidence.
Query the motivation for erasing the historical record, which only serves the interest of scammers.
It makes things all the more difficult for other members here to:
(i) understand what actually happened;
(ii) learn from the mistakes made; and therefore
(iii) reduce the likelihood of getting ripped off themselves.
__________
double uo globe — An update on the outcome of the fake KAWS transaction would be much appreciated.
I am hoping your fortitude allowed you to step up and resist sending the counterfeit back to visualgallery*, your recidivist fraudster-seller on eBay.
[This is the kind of minor life event that can become disproportionately valuable — a little uncomfortable in the moment, but especially memorable in hindsight. Because the decisions and actions we take on such occasions are in fact tests of our own mettle. And they set precedents for each of us, helping to forge our respective characters and future paths.
Remain steadfast because it's the right thing to do and in the broader, collective interest? Or choose the easier, selfish option, by capitulating to an unreasonable request that will facilitate the defrauding of another art enthusiast?
These choices we make allow each one of us to prove to ourselves, and demonstrate to others, what we are truly made of.]
Thanks everybody. I’m just waiting for The Aldrich registrar to confirm what I suspect. That it’s a forgery. I’ll be able to get a refund from eBay and the seller agreed to a return with no problem really. The seller didn't have to agree. You're covered. Report the item as a fake / counterfeit. It should be destroyed. Of course, he wants it back so he can sell it to someone else. Let everyone know the edition number. double uo globe — The above post is key. Once you receive confirmation from The Aldrich, forward it to eB ay, then cease all communications with the seller, visualgallery*. You will no longer need the latter. Crucially, please do not return the fake KA WS print to the seller. As recommended by DAVID HOCKNEY, report it as a counterfeit. Separately, access the 'Help & Contact' page on eB ay, and request a telephone call from a customer representative. Be clear and firm about the print having officially been declared fake. Let them know as well that, if the print were sent back to the seller, you have good reason to fear it would be re-sold to another unsuspecting buyer — especially given the seller's existing eB ay history with fake Ban ksy items. In case you sense any resistance from the customer representative, ask for the case to be escalated and for somebody more senior to contact you. __________ I have gone through this process myself with eB ay. While it took a bit of time and effort, I did receive a full refund reasonably promptly, without having to return the fakes (thus ensuring I never placed my fellow collectors at risk). But even if I had encountered any serious hurdles with eB ay, out of principle I would simply have bypassed the company — liaising instead with my payment card issuer, explaining the fraud, and requesting a chargeback. __________ And, yes, once confirmation arrives from The Aldrich, do let us know the print edition number. Separately, since online fraudsters typically use multiple accounts and different usernames, it would be very helpful if, by way of reciprocity for the assistance you've received here, the name of the seller, their address details, and (if available) their email address could also be disclosed. Good luck going forward.
Regrettably, the original post was deleted in this thread.
That amounts to a (completely unnecessary) destruction of evidence.
Query the motivation for erasing the historical record, which only serves the interest of scammers.
It makes things all the more difficult for other members here to:
(i) understand what actually happened;
(ii) learn from the mistakes made; and therefore
(iii) reduce the likelihood of getting ripped off themselves.
__________
double uo globe — An update on the outcome of the fake KAWS transaction would be much appreciated.
I am hoping your fortitude allowed you to step up and resist sending the counterfeit back to visualgallery*, your recidivist fraudster-seller on eBay.
[This is the kind of minor life event that can become disproportionately valuable — a little uncomfortable in the moment, but especially memorable in hindsight. Because the decisions and actions we take on such occasions are in fact tests of our own mettle. And they set precedents for each of us, helping to forge our respective characters and future paths.
Remain steadfast because it's the right thing to do and in the broader, collective interest? Or choose the easier, selfish option, by capitulating to an unreasonable request that will facilitate the defrauding of another art enthusiast?
These choices we make allow each one of us to prove to ourselves, and demonstrate to others, what we are truly made of.]
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
THE MET LOTTERY, by met on May 19, 2022 23:02:14 GMT 1, COMPETITION 49
A.
I trust there is at least a couple of fans of Camille Vasquez on this message board.
And then he showed me a photograph... - video creator: tiktok.com/@pettyparrot*
My dog stepped on a bee. - video creator: tiktok.com/@pettyparrot*
B.
Massive Attack, Young Fathers - Voodoo In My Blood (2016) - uploaded by massiveattack
C.
Young Fathers - In My View (2018) - uploaded by YOUNG FATHERS
Young Fathers - Toy [Live on Later... with Jools Holland, 29 May 2018.] - uploaded by BBC Music
D.
Coleman Hughes on How to Think with Julia Galef [S2 Ep.13] [1:32:00] - uploaded by Coleman Hughes on 6 May 2021
[Already posted in Competition 43, but repeated here for emphasis.]
Welcome to another episode of Conversations with Coleman.
My guest today is Julia Galef. Julia Galef is an author and podcaster. She's the Co-founder of the Centre for Applied Rationality and the host of the podcast "Rationally Speaking".
In this episode, we discuss her new book, "The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don't". We talked about the difference between intelligence and open-mindedness, the tension between pursuing the truth dispassionately and belonging to a tribe, the notion of instrumental rationality, the trade-off between building a larger audience and remaining true to one's principles, and whether affiliating with a political party makes it harder to form true beliefs.
Discover also Julia Galef's Rationally Thinking podcast — including episode 249: The case for racial colorblindness (Coleman Hughes)*.
E.
________________
At around 19:00 UK time on Monday 23 May, I'll quote this post and add one or more questions or instructions. The first eligible member to answer correctly, wins an offset lithograph poster.
COMPETITION 49
A.
I trust there is at least a couple of fans of Camille Vasquez on this message board.
And then he showed me a photograph... - video creator: tiktok.com/@pettyparrot*
My dog stepped on a bee. - video creator: tiktok.com/@pettyparrot*
B.
Massive Attack, Young Fathers - Voodoo In My Blood (2016) - uploaded by massiveattack
C.
Young Fathers - In My View (2018) - uploaded by YOUNG FATHERS
Young Fathers - Toy [Live on Later... with Jools Holland, 29 May 2018.] - uploaded by BBC Music
D.
Coleman Hughes on How to Think with Julia Galef [S2 Ep.13] [1:32:00] - uploaded by Coleman Hughes on 6 May 2021
[Already posted in Competition 43, but repeated here for emphasis.]
Welcome to another episode of Conversations with Coleman.
My guest today is Julia Galef. Julia Galef is an author and podcaster. She's the Co-founder of the Centre for Applied Rationality and the host of the podcast "Rationally Speaking".
In this episode, we discuss her new book, "The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don't". We talked about the difference between intelligence and open-mindedness, the tension between pursuing the truth dispassionately and belonging to a tribe, the notion of instrumental rationality, the trade-off between building a larger audience and remaining true to one's principles, and whether affiliating with a political party makes it harder to form true beliefs.
Discover also Julia Galef's Rationally Thinking podcast — including episode 249: The case for racial colorblindness (Coleman Hughes)*.
E.
________________
At around 19:00 UK time on Monday 23 May, I'll quote this post and add one or more questions or instructions. The first eligible member to answer correctly, wins an offset lithograph poster.
|
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
atelier maser Dublin Ireland, by met on May 16, 2022 15:02:18 GMT 1, What's the guy up to in the corner? Was he naughty?
Not 100% sure, but it could be Mike.
Last I heard about Mike was over two decades ago. He was in the basement of some abandoned house, deep in the woods of Burkittsville, Maryland.
At the time, Heather was trying to find him.
What's the guy up to in the corner? Was he naughty?
Not 100% sure, but it could be Mike.
Last I heard about Mike was over two decades ago. He was in the basement of some abandoned house, deep in the woods of Burkittsville, Maryland.
At the time, Heather was trying to find him.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Katsu 🇺🇸 BTM Graffiti Crew • Art For Sale, by met on May 16, 2022 13:55:19 GMT 1,
Whilst fond of Katsu's willingness to experiment and push the boundaries of graffiti, I have real difficulty getting past the decade-old video of him tagging a homeless person who was sleeping in the street*.
Query what it says about an individual's soul, about their very being, when they behave in such a manner towards the most vulnerable members of our society.
And not by accident, mind you, but in a conscious, deliberate act — all the while knowing they were being filmed at the time.
Whilst fond of Katsu's willingness to experiment and push the boundaries of graffiti, I have real difficulty getting past the decade-old video of him tagging a homeless person who was sleeping in the street*.
Query what it says about an individual's soul, about their very being, when they behave in such a manner towards the most vulnerable members of our society.
And not by accident, mind you, but in a conscious, deliberate act — all the while knowing they were being filmed at the time.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Arno Beck 🇩🇪 Typewriter Art • Digital Art • Bonn, Germany, by met on May 13, 2022 18:51:33 GMT 1, It’s a print of a Super Mario game box then? Except it cleverly says "Super Marketing Bros."... I'm not sure who this appeals to. People who love working in marketing? Or people who don't like Nintendo or the Super Mario franchise, but do want a big print of them on the wall !?
You left out repellant individuals with undisclosed vested interests.
Imagine how the climax of their obituaries might read:
"Driven by an ethos of profit-before-probity, they could always be relied upon to pump and dump the print equivalents of penny stocks onto easily-led, inexperienced art collectors."
It’s a print of a Super Mario game box then? Except it cleverly says "Super Marketing Bros."... I'm not sure who this appeals to. People who love working in marketing? Or people who don't like Nintendo or the Super Mario franchise, but do want a big print of them on the wall !?
You left out repellant individuals with undisclosed vested interests.
Imagine how the climax of their obituaries might read:
"Driven by an ethos of profit-before-probity, they could always be relied upon to pump and dump the print equivalents of penny stocks onto easily-led, inexperienced art collectors."
|
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Photography releases thread, by met on May 12, 2022 1:38:52 GMT 1,
I would always recommend Photo London to anyone.
Spent over three hours at Somerset House on Wednesday, and only saw about a third of the fair.
For those who can attend before it closes this Sunday 15 May, make sure to visit the excellent homage to Frank Horvat (1928–2020), curated by his daughter, Fiammetta.
A few taster images (which exclude a noteworthy portrait of Fellini from 1962):
Centre image: 1961, Paris, France, British Vogue
1958, Paris, France, Coco Chanel, rue Cambon, watching her fashion show
1956, Paris, France
1961, New York, USA, Harper's Bazaar
1961, New York, USA, Harper's Bazaar
I would always recommend Photo London to anyone.
Spent over three hours at Somerset House on Wednesday, and only saw about a third of the fair.
For those who can attend before it closes this Sunday 15 May, make sure to visit the excellent homage to Frank Horvat (1928–2020), curated by his daughter, Fiammetta.
A few taster images (which exclude a noteworthy portrait of Fellini from 1962):
Centre image: 1961, Paris, France, British Vogue
1958, Paris, France, Coco Chanel, rue Cambon, watching her fashion show
1956, Paris, France
1961, New York, USA, Harper's Bazaar
1961, New York, USA, Harper's Bazaar
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Backdoor Banksy Prints, by met on May 6, 2022 18:15:32 GMT 1, Not necessarily, it may have been given as a gift long before they became valuable. They didn't sell out immedietely and were available for quite some time at £150 signed. Although if it doesn't have PC COA its just a nice print of a girl letting go of a love heart shaped balloon...no need to accuse anyone of theft. Noted, but you're referring to a gift — which is completely different. My focus is solely on backdoor prints, i.e. stolen property. Definition of false accusation is a claim or allegation of wrongdoing, which is not true and, or otherwise, not supported by facts. It is also known as an unfounded accusation or groundless accusation and sometimes false allegations and false claims.
Sorry, I don't understand your comment.
Do you believe I'm making a false accusation?
If a print is a backdoor print, then, once again, it is by very definition stolen property.
I cannot see any real scope for good-faith disagreement here. But there are certainly plenty of ways for somebody to rationalise being in possession of stolen property.
Perhaps there's just a misunderstanding here as to what technically constitutes a backdoor print.
Authorised gift prints outside of the regular edition (and by "authorised", I mean approved or sanctioned by their legal owner) are obviously not "backdoor prints".
It would be nonsensical to describe them as such.
Not necessarily, it may have been given as a gift long before they became valuable. They didn't sell out immedietely and were available for quite some time at £150 signed. Although if it doesn't have PC COA its just a nice print of a girl letting go of a love heart shaped balloon...no need to accuse anyone of theft. Noted, but you're referring to a gift — which is completely different. My focus is solely on backdoor prints, i.e. stolen property. Definition of false accusation is a claim or allegation of wrongdoing, which is not true and, or otherwise, not supported by facts. It is also known as an unfounded accusation or groundless accusation and sometimes false allegations and false claims.
Sorry, I don't understand your comment.
Do you believe I'm making a false accusation?
If a print is a backdoor print, then, once again, it is by very definition stolen property.
I cannot see any real scope for good-faith disagreement here. But there are certainly plenty of ways for somebody to rationalise being in possession of stolen property.
Perhaps there's just a misunderstanding here as to what technically constitutes a backdoor print.
Authorised gift prints outside of the regular edition (and by "authorised", I mean approved or sanctioned by their legal owner) are obviously not "backdoor prints".
It would be nonsensical to describe them as such.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Backdoor Banksy Prints, by met on May 6, 2022 17:34:59 GMT 1, A friend of mine has just rediscovered a Banksy GWRB backdoor print (at his parents house) that he has owned for many years. PC not available. The print has some issues from previous damaged framing. I understand it is only worth what someone is prepared to pay, but does anyone have a ballpark figure please? I would love one of these!! Does he know for sure it's a backdoor print and not a fake or WCP version ?No idea of value though I'm afraid ! As I've yet to come across a backdoor Girl with Balloon, and had not previously heard of their existence, it would be interesting to see in-focus photos of the print — both full shots (front and back) and close-ups. Handling stolen goods. (1)A person handles stolen goods if (otherwise than in the course of the stealing) knowing or believing them to be stolen goods he dishonestly receives the goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realisation by or for the benefit of another person, or if he arranges to do so. (2)A person guilty of handling stolen goods shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years. The insinuation here is accurate. If the Girl with Balloon really is an authentic backdoor print, then by very definition it would be stolen property. And anyone in possession of or acquiring it would consequently be a handler of stolen goods. Not necessarily, it may have been given as a gift long before they became valuable. They didn't sell out immedietely and were available for quite some time at £150 signed. Although if it doesn't have PC COA its just a nice print of a girl letting go of a love heart shaped balloon...no need to accuse anyone of theft.
Noted, but you're referring to a gift — which is completely different.
My focus is solely on backdoor prints, i.e. stolen property.
A friend of mine has just rediscovered a Banksy GWRB backdoor print (at his parents house) that he has owned for many years. PC not available. The print has some issues from previous damaged framing. I understand it is only worth what someone is prepared to pay, but does anyone have a ballpark figure please? I would love one of these!! Does he know for sure it's a backdoor print and not a fake or WCP version ?No idea of value though I'm afraid ! As I've yet to come across a backdoor Girl with Balloon, and had not previously heard of their existence, it would be interesting to see in-focus photos of the print — both full shots (front and back) and close-ups. Handling stolen goods. (1)A person handles stolen goods if (otherwise than in the course of the stealing) knowing or believing them to be stolen goods he dishonestly receives the goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realisation by or for the benefit of another person, or if he arranges to do so. (2)A person guilty of handling stolen goods shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years. The insinuation here is accurate. If the Girl with Balloon really is an authentic backdoor print, then by very definition it would be stolen property. And anyone in possession of or acquiring it would consequently be a handler of stolen goods. Not necessarily, it may have been given as a gift long before they became valuable. They didn't sell out immedietely and were available for quite some time at £150 signed. Although if it doesn't have PC COA its just a nice print of a girl letting go of a love heart shaped balloon...no need to accuse anyone of theft.
Noted, but you're referring to a gift — which is completely different.
My focus is solely on backdoor prints, i.e. stolen property.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Backdoor Banksy Prints, by met on May 6, 2022 17:20:02 GMT 1, Below is an April 2017 post from a separate thread, Love rat on the bay*.
It features some considered arguments that are relevant, and may be of interest to newer members of this forum:
Thanks so much Met, clears it all up. Any opinions on this ebay print? I haven't seen the eB ay listing you're referring to. But I would also argue it doesn't matter. Based on your description alone, the Love Rat print will be one of two things: 1. CounterfeitFor what it's worth, over the years I've personally examined a number of counterfeit Ban ksy prints, some more convincing than others, including with fake blind stamps. Almost inevitably, counterfeits are accompanied by plausible-sounding, fabricated back stories (and perhaps an email trail, which may or may not be genuine, but could easily have been widely circulated, printed off in the hundreds, and used by anyone to prop up any forgery). One or two specific names will generally be thrown into the mix — like that of a printer or an ex-Pictures on Walls employee — to lend credence to a made-up story. [Crossing out the edition number can serve a similar purpose and, opportunely for a fraudster, it takes the print outside the parameters for opining which Pest Control has set for itself.] This plays as well into the desperation or greed of potential buyers, who are looking for every excuse to believe the story being peddled. They very much want to believe, which of course can cloud their judgement and lead them to disregard basic due-diligence red flags. A capable con artist will be fully aware of this and exploiting it. They'll be pushing the right psychological buttons of potential buyers, the inexperienced buyers tending to be the easiest marks. 2. Genuine, and therefore stolenIf genuine, then clearly the print should never have left POW's premises. It is highly unlikely the rightful owner of the work (whether Ban ksy or POW as a company) would have sanctioned this, since its presence on the open market compromises the integrity of the authorised edition. So if this scenario is correct, it seems fair to assume a theft took place at some point — and that the eB ay seller is consequently dealing in stolen goods. Here we can rely on first principles: Is knowingly trading in, handling, or buying stolen goods acceptable? Would a decent person answer "Yes", if considering the issue honestly? I believe most people would find it morally objectionable. And perhaps even more so given it relates to property belonging to an artist whom the seller and potential buyers presumably admire. What you'll often find among dealers and collectors who choose to partake in sleaziness involving so-called backdoor prints are attempts to excuse their behaviour — mental contortions allowing them to trick their own conscience and sleep at night. They justify themselves in different ways. For example, by the fact the initial theft took place many years ago. Or that the stolen goods have exchanged hands on numerous occasions, the multiple links in the chain making the connection to the theft less direct. No doubt individuals and institutions dealing in artworks looted during wartime also make generous use of these self-serving rationalisations. But here again, first principles allow us to see through the disingenuousness, obfuscation attempts, and convenient self-delusion. ____________ Here's an analogy which may better illustrate the principle: (i) If I knowingly bought artwork that was stolen from your home, that would make me vile. (ii) The fact the theft may have taken place over a decade ago is irrelevant. It wouldn't make me any less vile, because the artwork rightfully still belongs to you. (iii) The fact your artwork may have traded hands a few times over the years (allowing the initial theft to seem more remote to people handling the stolen property) is irrelevant. It wouldn't make me any less vile, because the artwork rightfully still belongs to you. (iv) The fact you may have a successful career and be financially well off is irrelevant. It wouldn't make me any less vile, because the artwork rightfully still belongs to you. Now, a couple of questions using the same analogy (which could equally apply to so-called backdoor prints): Should this forum be used as a platform to sell or advertise the sale of artwork that was stolen from your home? Would this be ethically defensible? For both questions, I would say "No". ____________ As a rule of thumb, I'd advise anyone against purchasing a Ban ksy original or limited edition print unless it is accompanied by a Pest Control certificate of authenticity.
Below is an April 2017 post from a separate thread, Love rat on the bay*.
It features some considered arguments that are relevant, and may be of interest to newer members of this forum:
Thanks so much Met, clears it all up. Any opinions on this ebay print? I haven't seen the eB ay listing you're referring to. But I would also argue it doesn't matter. Based on your description alone, the Love Rat print will be one of two things: 1. CounterfeitFor what it's worth, over the years I've personally examined a number of counterfeit Ban ksy prints, some more convincing than others, including with fake blind stamps. Almost inevitably, counterfeits are accompanied by plausible-sounding, fabricated back stories (and perhaps an email trail, which may or may not be genuine, but could easily have been widely circulated, printed off in the hundreds, and used by anyone to prop up any forgery). One or two specific names will generally be thrown into the mix — like that of a printer or an ex-Pictures on Walls employee — to lend credence to a made-up story. [Crossing out the edition number can serve a similar purpose and, opportunely for a fraudster, it takes the print outside the parameters for opining which Pest Control has set for itself.] This plays as well into the desperation or greed of potential buyers, who are looking for every excuse to believe the story being peddled. They very much want to believe, which of course can cloud their judgement and lead them to disregard basic due-diligence red flags. A capable con artist will be fully aware of this and exploiting it. They'll be pushing the right psychological buttons of potential buyers, the inexperienced buyers tending to be the easiest marks. 2. Genuine, and therefore stolenIf genuine, then clearly the print should never have left POW's premises. It is highly unlikely the rightful owner of the work (whether Ban ksy or POW as a company) would have sanctioned this, since its presence on the open market compromises the integrity of the authorised edition. So if this scenario is correct, it seems fair to assume a theft took place at some point — and that the eB ay seller is consequently dealing in stolen goods. Here we can rely on first principles: Is knowingly trading in, handling, or buying stolen goods acceptable? Would a decent person answer "Yes", if considering the issue honestly? I believe most people would find it morally objectionable. And perhaps even more so given it relates to property belonging to an artist whom the seller and potential buyers presumably admire. What you'll often find among dealers and collectors who choose to partake in sleaziness involving so-called backdoor prints are attempts to excuse their behaviour — mental contortions allowing them to trick their own conscience and sleep at night. They justify themselves in different ways. For example, by the fact the initial theft took place many years ago. Or that the stolen goods have exchanged hands on numerous occasions, the multiple links in the chain making the connection to the theft less direct. No doubt individuals and institutions dealing in artworks looted during wartime also make generous use of these self-serving rationalisations. But here again, first principles allow us to see through the disingenuousness, obfuscation attempts, and convenient self-delusion. ____________ Here's an analogy which may better illustrate the principle: (i) If I knowingly bought artwork that was stolen from your home, that would make me vile. (ii) The fact the theft may have taken place over a decade ago is irrelevant. It wouldn't make me any less vile, because the artwork rightfully still belongs to you. (iii) The fact your artwork may have traded hands a few times over the years (allowing the initial theft to seem more remote to people handling the stolen property) is irrelevant. It wouldn't make me any less vile, because the artwork rightfully still belongs to you. (iv) The fact you may have a successful career and be financially well off is irrelevant. It wouldn't make me any less vile, because the artwork rightfully still belongs to you. Now, a couple of questions using the same analogy (which could equally apply to so-called backdoor prints): Should this forum be used as a platform to sell or advertise the sale of artwork that was stolen from your home? Would this be ethically defensible? For both questions, I would say "No". ____________ As a rule of thumb, I'd advise anyone against purchasing a Ban ksy original or limited edition print unless it is accompanied by a Pest Control certificate of authenticity.
|
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Backdoor Banksy Prints, by met on May 6, 2022 16:55:36 GMT 1, A friend of mine has just rediscovered a Banksy GWRB backdoor print (at his parents house) that he has owned for many years. PC not available. The print has some issues from previous damaged framing. I understand it is only worth what someone is prepared to pay, but does anyone have a ballpark figure please?
I would love one of these!!
Does he know for sure it's a backdoor print and not a fake or WCP version ?No idea of value though I'm afraid !
As I've yet to come across a backdoor Girl with Balloon, and had not previously heard of their existence, it would be interesting to see in-focus photos of the print — both full shots (front and back) and close-ups.
Handling stolen goods. (1)A person handles stolen goods if (otherwise than in the course of the stealing) knowing or believing them to be stolen goods he dishonestly receives the goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realisation by or for the benefit of another person, or if he arranges to do so. (2)A person guilty of handling stolen goods shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.
The insinuation here is accurate.
If the Girl with Balloon really is an authentic backdoor print, then by very definition it would be stolen property.
And anyone in possession of or acquiring it would consequently be a handler of stolen goods.
A friend of mine has just rediscovered a Banksy GWRB backdoor print (at his parents house) that he has owned for many years. PC not available. The print has some issues from previous damaged framing. I understand it is only worth what someone is prepared to pay, but does anyone have a ballpark figure please?
I would love one of these!!
Does he know for sure it's a backdoor print and not a fake or WCP version ?No idea of value though I'm afraid !
As I've yet to come across a backdoor Girl with Balloon, and had not previously heard of their existence, it would be interesting to see in-focus photos of the print — both full shots (front and back) and close-ups.
Handling stolen goods. (1)A person handles stolen goods if (otherwise than in the course of the stealing) knowing or believing them to be stolen goods he dishonestly receives the goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realisation by or for the benefit of another person, or if he arranges to do so. (2)A person guilty of handling stolen goods shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.
The insinuation here is accurate.
If the Girl with Balloon really is an authentic backdoor print, then by very definition it would be stolen property.
And anyone in possession of or acquiring it would consequently be a handler of stolen goods.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
«Sleepwalker» for sale, by met on May 6, 2022 16:06:16 GMT 1, Thanks for this. Was this his last release with Chief? I actually loved the Chief Print, wish I never sold it. If anyone has one for sale please reach out.
Correct.
It was the 12 May 2015 release by Handmadeposters / HMP:
Thanks for this. Was this his last release with Chief? I actually loved the Chief Print, wish I never sold it. If anyone has one for sale please reach out.
Correct.
It was the 12 May 2015 release by Handmadeposters / HMP:
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
«Sleepwalker» for sale, by met on May 6, 2022 11:48:33 GMT 1, Selling my main edition of «Sleepwalker» ed. of 300 from 2015. The print measures 67x87 cm and is kept flat. It has never been framed. Asking 1150 USD. Price includes fees and shipping. Please DM if interested.
A number of works by Dolk do resonate with me.
Sleepwalker has always been an exception, a source of confusion.
Query what this sensitive and thoughtful depiction could mean.
What might the artist be saying with his totally-non-cloddish, non-ham-fisted piece?
There follows a possible interpretation which, based on the image before us, seems fair and reasonable (or at least not unreasonable):
When conscious, the individual is confined to his wheelchair. But when unconscious, in a dreamlike state, he is able to walk. It is surprising. Nay, amazing. The message to other wheelchair users is therefore hopeful and most encouraging.
Indeed, perhaps the sleepwalker is showing us that paralysis is all in the head. That it's a psychological barrier, not a physiological one.
Maybe the single thing needed to overcome the disability, if we can even call it that, is a change of attitude. A positive mindset.
In fact, those who remain reliant on their wheelchairs might only have themselves to blame. They should be trying harder. Wishing, praying harder. Actually wanting to get better. And focusing on getting back up on their feet.
Selling my main edition of «Sleepwalker» ed. of 300 from 2015. The print measures 67x87 cm and is kept flat. It has never been framed. Asking 1150 USD. Price includes fees and shipping. Please DM if interested.
A number of works by Dolk do resonate with me.
Sleepwalker has always been an exception, a source of confusion.
Query what this sensitive and thoughtful depiction could mean.
What might the artist be saying with his totally-non-cloddish, non-ham-fisted piece?
There follows a possible interpretation which, based on the image before us, seems fair and reasonable (or at least not unreasonable):
When conscious, the individual is confined to his wheelchair. But when unconscious, in a dreamlike state, he is able to walk. It is surprising. Nay, amazing. The message to other wheelchair users is therefore hopeful and most encouraging.
Indeed, perhaps the sleepwalker is showing us that paralysis is all in the head. That it's a psychological barrier, not a physiological one.
Maybe the single thing needed to overcome the disability, if we can even call it that, is a change of attitude. A positive mindset.
In fact, those who remain reliant on their wheelchairs might only have themselves to blame. They should be trying harder. Wishing, praying harder. Actually wanting to get better. And focusing on getting back up on their feet.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Blowpop Records, Capoeira Twins , by met on May 4, 2022 18:39:17 GMT 1, I know there are a lot of fakes around, but i hope i have learned to recognize an original, and to stay away from some galleries. But anyway have you for sale?
Provided you can:
(a) recognise an original; and
(b) equally important, distinguish an original from a well-executed, artificially-aged counterfeit,
then you are on the right track.
The key requirement is being completely independent, knowledge-wise.
In other words, that you be in a position where you can avoid the mistake of placing full reliance on the authenticity assurances of a third party — regardless of their credibility or reputation, and whether that person or entity be a private collector, dealer, gallery, or auction house.
Elaborating further
1. Sellers lacking integrity, including dishonest ones, will happily sell you items:
(i) they know to be fake; (ii) they suspect might be fake; or (iii) in relation to which they've shown reckless disregard as to genuineness.
2. Honest and reputable sellers could easily sell you fakes too — since they themselves may have been unknowingly duped.
__________
While I don't possess one of these hand-sprayed Capoeira Twins records, I've seen a few in person, and have a couple of acquaintances who are owners.
There are surely dozens of people in a similar position to mine when it comes to access.
Now, my own stencil-cutting and spraypainting skills are relatively basic. In addition, the list of contacts I have in the record industry is largely non-existent.
But notwithstanding these limitations, I am confident that (if I were so inclined) I could secure the requisite source materials and churn out fakes of a calibre that would fool many experienced Banksy collectors.
For this reason, and especially given the absence of a COA safety net from Pest Control Office, I myself would be a little nervous if spending a four-figure sum on one of these records today.
__________
Good luck with your continued search.
I know there are a lot of fakes around, but i hope i have learned to recognize an original, and to stay away from some galleries. But anyway have you for sale?
Provided you can:
(a) recognise an original; and
(b) equally important, distinguish an original from a well-executed, artificially-aged counterfeit,
then you are on the right track.
The key requirement is being completely independent, knowledge-wise.
In other words, that you be in a position where you can avoid the mistake of placing full reliance on the authenticity assurances of a third party — regardless of their credibility or reputation, and whether that person or entity be a private collector, dealer, gallery, or auction house.
Elaborating further
1. Sellers lacking integrity, including dishonest ones, will happily sell you items:
(i) they know to be fake; (ii) they suspect might be fake; or (iii) in relation to which they've shown reckless disregard as to genuineness.
2. Honest and reputable sellers could easily sell you fakes too — since they themselves may have been unknowingly duped.
__________
While I don't possess one of these hand-sprayed Capoeira Twins records, I've seen a few in person, and have a couple of acquaintances who are owners.
There are surely dozens of people in a similar position to mine when it comes to access.
Now, my own stencil-cutting and spraypainting skills are relatively basic. In addition, the list of contacts I have in the record industry is largely non-existent.
But notwithstanding these limitations, I am confident that (if I were so inclined) I could secure the requisite source materials and churn out fakes of a calibre that would fool many experienced Banksy collectors.
For this reason, and especially given the absence of a COA safety net from Pest Control Office, I myself would be a little nervous if spending a four-figure sum on one of these records today.
__________
Good luck with your continued search.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy Welcome Mat, by met on May 4, 2022 14:38:26 GMT 1, pawns do actually unite, organise and resist! the pawns are the only ones who can change their status, becoming what they want except the king, who is condemned to die anyway... they are the ones fighting the status quo
this is probably their most famous political manifesto
Based on a quick search, that manifesto seems to be a classic.
To my embarrassment, I never previously heard of it. Yet it looks to have the potential to disrupt and revolutionise some of my opinions.
Until now, I had dismissed pawns as willing cannon fodder, i.e. Private Beasley types, as shown in the Monkey Dust clip below. Moreover, I dismissed them with scorn (which, admittedly, is unattractive as an attitude).
Ebola Army Doctors | Monkey Dust | BBC Studios - uploaded by BBC Studios
A pivotal question remains, to which the manifesto will hopefully provide an answer:
When pawns unite, organise and resist, in whose interest do they do so?
If it turns out to be in their own interest — as opposed to that of some monarch — then my present world will indeed be thrown upside down.
pawns do actually unite, organise and resist! the pawns are the only ones who can change their status, becoming what they want except the king, who is condemned to die anyway... they are the ones fighting the status quo
this is probably their most famous political manifesto
Based on a quick search, that manifesto seems to be a classic.
To my embarrassment, I never previously heard of it. Yet it looks to have the potential to disrupt and revolutionise some of my opinions.
Until now, I had dismissed pawns as willing cannon fodder, i.e. Private Beasley types, as shown in the Monkey Dust clip below. Moreover, I dismissed them with scorn (which, admittedly, is unattractive as an attitude).
Ebola Army Doctors | Monkey Dust | BBC Studios - uploaded by BBC Studios
A pivotal question remains, to which the manifesto will hopefully provide an answer:
When pawns unite, organise and resist, in whose interest do they do so?
If it turns out to be in their own interest — as opposed to that of some monarch — then my present world will indeed be thrown upside down.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Recommended Art Books, by met on May 4, 2022 13:08:35 GMT 1, The wonderful Bäst! [...]
Somebody is looking sharp.
Joe Jackson - Got the Time [Live at Hatfield Polytechnic, Hertfordshire, UK, 29 November 1979. Filmed for the BBC programme, Rock Goes to College.] - uploaded by Daniele Omiccioli
The wonderful Bäst! [...]
Somebody is looking sharp.
Joe Jackson - Got the Time [Live at Hatfield Polytechnic, Hertfordshire, UK, 29 November 1979. Filmed for the BBC programme, Rock Goes to College.] - uploaded by Daniele Omiccioli
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Blowpop Records, Capoeira Twins , by met on May 4, 2022 12:26:51 GMT 1, Hello I am looking for Capoeira Twins, if you have please PM
Assuming your search is for the Four (4x3) / Truth Will Out 12" promo, then hopefully you really know what you're doing.
Over the past decade, this has become landmine territory, exclusive to two types of collectors:
(i) the exceptionally well-informed, in possession of a trained eye; and
(ii) fools (or, if being generous, naive people) who often place excessive faith in both the honesty and knowledge of others — including private individuals, dealers, gallerists, and auction house staff.
Hello I am looking for Capoeira Twins, if you have please PM
Assuming your search is for the Four (4x3) / Truth Will Out 12" promo, then hopefully you really know what you're doing.
Over the past decade, this has become landmine territory, exclusive to two types of collectors:
(i) the exceptionally well-informed, in possession of a trained eye; and
(ii) fools (or, if being generous, naive people) who often place excessive faith in both the honesty and knowledge of others — including private individuals, dealers, gallerists, and auction house staff.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy Welcome Mat, by met on May 3, 2022 10:00:34 GMT 1, Here is a picture of my wall. I'll bet you'll see a lot of local/unknown artists that I support in buying their art. Anyways, thanks for letting me know that I don't get the point of art. Now I'll stay awake the whole night because of this. You also own the worlds most pointless chess table… I know. Comes from the heritage of my wifes family. The black knights are on the wrong squares A King and Queen the wrong way too. Can anyone spot any more mistakes?
I believe the pawns are mistaken in mindset.
What's the deal with their subservience, their willingness to self-sacrifice?
And for what exactly — the Pyrrhic victory of somebody they've never met, who couldn't care less about them? That is not honourable; it is tragically obscene.
The pawns need to organise. To collectively resist, perhaps after first establishing a strategic alliance with the rooks.
Together, united, they'd be strong. A force to be reckoned with.
It would allow them (and their families, of course) to lead far more fulfilling lives.
Here is a picture of my wall. I'll bet you'll see a lot of local/unknown artists that I support in buying their art. Anyways, thanks for letting me know that I don't get the point of art. Now I'll stay awake the whole night because of this. You also own the worlds most pointless chess table… I know. Comes from the heritage of my wifes family. The black knights are on the wrong squares A King and Queen the wrong way too. Can anyone spot any more mistakes?
I believe the pawns are mistaken in mindset.
What's the deal with their subservience, their willingness to self-sacrifice?
And for what exactly — the Pyrrhic victory of somebody they've never met, who couldn't care less about them? That is not honourable; it is tragically obscene.
The pawns need to organise. To collectively resist, perhaps after first establishing a strategic alliance with the rooks.
Together, united, they'd be strong. A force to be reckoned with.
It would allow them (and their families, of course) to lead far more fulfilling lives.
|
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Kaws • Sponge Bob KawsBob Set, Yellow, Black, Red, by met on May 3, 2022 1:17:01 GMT 1, I really am grateful for the help everybody. I did report the seller to eBay and my return was approved but eBay barely seems to care about counterfeits on their platform. I sent them a link to this thread and told them the seller had sold other forged pieces of art on their platform and they haven’t taken any action besides approve my return. eBay expects me to pay express international return shipping insured for the sale amount all the way back to the seller. The seller said he wanted to make an account on here and comment and I told him to feel free to make an account and try to defend this piece and the others he sold. Regardless, he lied about the original owner in the first place which is just unacceptable. The piece is definitely counterfeit.
Here is my advice:
1. Do not allow yourself to be bullied by eBay.
They will naturally try to go with the option that causes the least hassle for them. This means their initial default stance will always be to get you to return the item, regardless of the circumstances — giving you the impression there are no alternatives, and that you have no choice in the matter.
You need to be more forceful, to push back, while at the same time remaining calm, polite, and demonstrating you are being reasonable.
2. Do not liaise with eBay via the messaging system.
Get a representative to call you. The employees who man the telephones are generally less useless, more senior, and have greater discretion and decision-making powers.
Ask to be transferred to the department specialising in counterfeits or fraud (or have the representative get someone from that department to ring you back).
3. Once you have a competent individual on the line, explain once again the situation — including the seller's history with patent fakes on eBay, and how you are genuinely concerned that returning the fake KAWS print will only result in the seller offloading it to yet another (and this time perhaps less-informed and less-experienced) buyer.
If need be, point out that for eBay to ask that you return a forgery to a scammer, who will then use it to defraud another victim, is unethical and immoral on the part of the company. It would, in effect, force you to be an accomplice and to facilitate fraud. That is clearly not acceptable.
4. If, for whatever reason, the above approach doesn't succeed, then circumvent eBay. Just contact your payment card issuer instead, and ask that they initiate a chargeback for fraud.
5. Please do not return the fake KAWS print to the seller.
I really am grateful for the help everybody. I did report the seller to eBay and my return was approved but eBay barely seems to care about counterfeits on their platform. I sent them a link to this thread and told them the seller had sold other forged pieces of art on their platform and they haven’t taken any action besides approve my return. eBay expects me to pay express international return shipping insured for the sale amount all the way back to the seller. The seller said he wanted to make an account on here and comment and I told him to feel free to make an account and try to defend this piece and the others he sold. Regardless, he lied about the original owner in the first place which is just unacceptable. The piece is definitely counterfeit.
Here is my advice:
1. Do not allow yourself to be bullied by eBay.
They will naturally try to go with the option that causes the least hassle for them. This means their initial default stance will always be to get you to return the item, regardless of the circumstances — giving you the impression there are no alternatives, and that you have no choice in the matter.
You need to be more forceful, to push back, while at the same time remaining calm, polite, and demonstrating you are being reasonable.
2. Do not liaise with eBay via the messaging system.
Get a representative to call you. The employees who man the telephones are generally less useless, more senior, and have greater discretion and decision-making powers.
Ask to be transferred to the department specialising in counterfeits or fraud (or have the representative get someone from that department to ring you back).
3. Once you have a competent individual on the line, explain once again the situation — including the seller's history with patent fakes on eBay, and how you are genuinely concerned that returning the fake KAWS print will only result in the seller offloading it to yet another (and this time perhaps less-informed and less-experienced) buyer.
If need be, point out that for eBay to ask that you return a forgery to a scammer, who will then use it to defraud another victim, is unethical and immoral on the part of the company. It would, in effect, force you to be an accomplice and to facilitate fraud. That is clearly not acceptable.
4. If, for whatever reason, the above approach doesn't succeed, then circumvent eBay. Just contact your payment card issuer instead, and ask that they initiate a chargeback for fraud.
5. Please do not return the fake KAWS print to the seller.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Kaws • Sponge Bob KawsBob Set, Yellow, Black, Red, by met on May 2, 2022 22:38:16 GMT 1, Thanks everybody. I’m just waiting for The Aldrich registrar to confirm what I suspect. That it’s a forgery. I’ll be able to get a refund from eBay and the seller agreed to a return with no problem really. The seller didn't have to agree. You're covered. Report the item as a fake / counterfeit. It should be destroyed. Of course, he wants it back so he can sell it to someone else. Let everyone know the edition number.
double uo globe — The above post is key.
Once you receive confirmation from The Aldrich, forward it to eBay, then cease all communications with the seller, visualgallery*. You will no longer need the latter.
Crucially, please do not return the fake KAWS print to the seller.
As recommended by DAVID HOCKNEY, report it as a counterfeit.
Separately, access the 'Help & Contact' page on eBay, and request a telephone call from a customer representative.
Be clear and firm about the print having officially been declared fake. Let them know as well that, if the print were sent back to the seller, you have good reason to fear it would be re-sold to another unsuspecting buyer — especially given the seller's existing eBay history with fake Banksy items.
In case you sense any resistance from the customer representative, ask for the case to be escalated and for somebody more senior to contact you.
__________
I have gone through this process myself with eBay. While it took a bit of time and effort, I did receive a full refund reasonably promptly, without having to return the fakes (thus ensuring I never placed my fellow collectors at risk).
But even if I had encountered any serious hurdles with eBay, out of principle I would simply have bypassed the company — liaising instead with my payment card issuer, explaining the fraud, and requesting a chargeback.
__________
And, yes, once confirmation arrives from The Aldrich, do let us know the print edition number.
Separately, since online fraudsters typically use multiple accounts and different usernames, it would be very helpful if, by way of reciprocity for the assistance you've received here, the name of the seller, their address details, and (if available) their email address could also be disclosed.
Good luck going forward.
Thanks everybody. I’m just waiting for The Aldrich registrar to confirm what I suspect. That it’s a forgery. I’ll be able to get a refund from eBay and the seller agreed to a return with no problem really. The seller didn't have to agree. You're covered. Report the item as a fake / counterfeit. It should be destroyed. Of course, he wants it back so he can sell it to someone else. Let everyone know the edition number.
double uo globe — The above post is key.
Once you receive confirmation from The Aldrich, forward it to eBay, then cease all communications with the seller, visualgallery*. You will no longer need the latter.
Crucially, please do not return the fake KAWS print to the seller.
As recommended by DAVID HOCKNEY, report it as a counterfeit.
Separately, access the 'Help & Contact' page on eBay, and request a telephone call from a customer representative.
Be clear and firm about the print having officially been declared fake. Let them know as well that, if the print were sent back to the seller, you have good reason to fear it would be re-sold to another unsuspecting buyer — especially given the seller's existing eBay history with fake Banksy items.
In case you sense any resistance from the customer representative, ask for the case to be escalated and for somebody more senior to contact you.
__________
I have gone through this process myself with eBay. While it took a bit of time and effort, I did receive a full refund reasonably promptly, without having to return the fakes (thus ensuring I never placed my fellow collectors at risk).
But even if I had encountered any serious hurdles with eBay, out of principle I would simply have bypassed the company — liaising instead with my payment card issuer, explaining the fraud, and requesting a chargeback.
__________
And, yes, once confirmation arrives from The Aldrich, do let us know the print edition number.
Separately, since online fraudsters typically use multiple accounts and different usernames, it would be very helpful if, by way of reciprocity for the assistance you've received here, the name of the seller, their address details, and (if available) their email address could also be disclosed.
Good luck going forward.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Kaws • Sponge Bob KawsBob Set, Yellow, Black, Red, by met on May 2, 2022 20:50:25 GMT 1, Where do you see that they sold 2 Soup Can posters? I only see one sold in their history. Anything you see wrong with that Soup Cans poster in particular besides it’s origin country? There were quite a few of them made and POW was even selling 5 packs of them at one point so it’s not hard to imagine that some legit ones ended up in Spain but then again I’m not an expert and I have seen the fakes for sale on eBay by sellers in Spain. Also, he shouldn’t have advertised that canvas as a Banksy original but we all know and I’m sure whoever bought it knew they weren’t getting a $100,000 signed print with Pest Control COA. It’s pretty obvious that it was a cheap copy and it’s well known that they were sold by tons of street vendors on the outskirts of Dismaland. The soup cans is fake, I'm not going into why because the seller is no doubt on this forum. You've come on here for a legit check on your print, yet seem extremely reluctant to accept the advice you've asked for, including the 2 very detailed posts from met and you now seem to be trying to convince yourself that the fake items the seller has previously sold are somehow not fake or not a big deal. Everything points to the print being fake.
The efforts the seller puts into producing fakes (i.e dismaland) tells me there is less than 1% chances the print is legit
double uo globe
This post, covering certain past transactions by the eBay seller visualgallery, reiterates many of the comments recently made by geester and ca.
I trust you'll forgive the repetition, which is deliberate and for emphasis.
__________
1. FAKE BANKSY SOUP CANS**
1.1 "Where do you see that they sold 2 Soup Can posters? I only see one sold in their history."
Sorry, my mistake.
Only one poster appears to have actually sold. This was for $1,475.00 (starting price of $1.00) on 20 March 2022. eBay item number 313912446094*:
Given the positive eBay feedback left for visualgallery, the buyer is presumably still oblivious of the fact they were scammed.
$1,475.00 = A lot of money which could have been better spent.
The seller later listed a second poster. That auction had a starting price of €1,250.00, ending on 9 April 2022 but with zero bids. eBay item number 313940840758*:
It is worth noting that, of the 12 photos from the March eBay listing for the first poster, 10 of the same photos were used in the April eBay listing for the second poster.
But the total number of fakes sold shouldn't draw attention away from what's more important — the fact that, within just three months of registering their account, visualgallery had already exploited eBay to defraud collectors (the winning bidders) and deceive many others (all the underbidders).
1.2 "Anything you see wrong with that Soup Cans poster in particular besides it’s origin country? There were quite a few of them made and POW was even selling 5 packs of them at one point so it’s not hard to imagine that some legit ones ended up in Spain but then again I’m not an expert and I have seen the fakes for sale on eBay by sellers in Spain."
As this is a side issue, we should avoid allowing it to become a distraction.
geester also raised an important matter:
It would hardly be surprising if the eBay seller, visualgallery, were a forum member, or at least accessed this place as a guest. They certainly wouldn't be alone. Other fraudsters have previously registered, using their accounts to spread disinformation and sell counterfeit art. Some may well have used photos and technical details posted here in order to churn out forgeries.
So there's often a balance to be struck between competing concerns.
Helping out less-informed, honest collectors is an honourable goal. But I have no interest in educating scammers. And publicly identifying the mistakes of the latter will often help them to produce evermore convincing fakes.
Regarding the poster sales, their location country at best offers circumstantial evidence. This may point to the existence of a counterfeit risk, but nothing more. It would therefore be irresponsible (if not idiotic) for anyone to suggest sale items were fake for location reasons alone.
I confirm that my own assessment as to the Soup Cans was based on direct evidence — having spotted obvious tells of fakery in the photos of both the poster(s) and accompanying documentation. I suspect geester went through a similar exercise, proceeding with diligence before arriving at the same conclusion.
2. FAKE DISMALAND PIECES, INCLUDING CANVAS*
2.1 "Also, he shouldn’t have advertised that canvas as a Banksy original [...]"
The above downplays the significance of the fake Dismaland pieces, including the counterfeit Banksy Girl with Balloon canvas.
On the basis of that statement, one could mistakenly think the eBay seller, visualgallery, was just being opportunistically dishonest, e.g. as if they:
(a) randomly stumbled upon an opportunity; and
(b) in a moment of impulse, described the pieces as "original" rather than as reproductions or fakes.
However, this would be a gross mischaracterisation.
It wasn't at all a crime of opportunity. On the contrary, serious thought and a great deal of effort — over a lengthy period of time — went into deceiving the auction buyer and underbidders:
For this purpose, let's leave aside the work involved in painting the canvas.
Instead, focus on the counterfeit Dismaland receipt for the fake VISA transaction, with the sale pieces separately itemised. The receipt even includes a canvas reference number (101507), which corresponds to the barcode number on the fake price tag affixed to the back of the canvas.
Close-ups of two photos from the eBay listing*:
This was a significant, calculated endeavour — carried out with a clear objective to defraud.
2.2 "[...] but we all know and I’m sure whoever bought it knew they weren’t getting a $100,000 signed print with Pest Control COA. It’s pretty obvious that it was a cheap copy [...]"
Because many of us are proactive when it comes to informing ourselves about contemporary art — including via regular visits to this forum and similar platforms; by seeking out news articles, talks, panel discussions, programmes and documentaries; and by keeping up to date on primary and secondary market sales — we are constantly bombarded with data, opinions and insights on the subject.
That is our norm. A norm to which we're hyper-acclimatised. So familiar to us that we hardly even question it. We are immersed. Moreover, many of us often surround ourselves with likeminded individuals.
It is therefore very easy to forget just how specialised this environment is. How, from an outsider's perspective, much of the information in our heads would be considered geeky. And how, despite the fact we often take it for granted, much of the knowledge we hold is esoteric.
I would posit the following, all of which I believe to be true:
The majority of Banksy fans (and probably the vast majority, if we include casual enthusiasts of his work):
(i) are unfamiliar with this forum;
(ii) have no idea what Pest Control Office is;
(iii) do not know what provenance means, or what "COA" stands for;
(iv) if notified accordingly, would readily accept (without serious question or pushback) that Banksy created the Panda waving handguns, Elizabeth II as Aladdin Sane, Begging for Change, Super Mario being questioned by a police officer, and other images frequently misattributed to the artist; and
(v) are either under the impression or would not be doubtful if informed that Banksy mini-canvases and Dismaland currency were available for sale in 2015 at the Dismaland gift shop (especially bearing in mind the high-profile sales of $60 canvases at Central Park two years prior).
Would you accept the above as accurate? Or at least potentially accurate for a not-insubstantial number of Banksy's millions of fans?
If yes, then, focusing on point (v), imagine the same ignorant fans being asked to estimate the value of a small (40 x 30 cm), very basic, stencil-sprayed canvas with a Banksy stencil tag on it — one that was seemingly originally sold at Dismaland for £250.
Many would probably have no idea whether such a rudimentary painting was now worth three, four, five or six figures.
In fact, the £250 stated on the fake Dismaland receipt could well act as a price anchor — to the extent that (again, in the mind of uninformed enthusiasts) paying a three or four-figure sum might not seem unreasonable. A fortiori, this could also be the case if the buyer were a clueless family member, using eBay to find a gift for, say, their Banksy-loving child or grandchild.
My longwinded objective here is to challenge your suggestion that everyone has a good understanding of Banksy's market and is up-to-speed with his current prices. I believe that premise to be false.
Similarly, the comment "It's pretty obvious that it was a cheap copy" may be projecting — an assumption that what is obvious to you must be obvious to everybody else as well.
But even on this forum, where the collective knowledge regarding all things Banksy is relatively high, poorly-executed knockoffs are occasionally referred to as possible creations by the artist.
This would demonstrate there are people who cannot tell the difference between the real McCoy and a bad fake. Just read some of the speculative comments found on threads dedicated to parasites like the West Country Prince or Mrs Banksy.
[Admittedly, a number of those comments were probably cynical attempts by those with vested interests to hype their rubbish and dupe other members. But a handful did feel sincere, as if posted by individuals lacking a trained eye and led astray by wishful thinking.]
By way of complementary argument, are you aware of anyone who would spend $910.00 plus shipping on a small stencil painting attributed to Banksy (complete with provenance documentation confirming the same) if they knew it was fake?
I have yet to encounter such a person.
Nobody in my list of contacts, even among those living more than comfortably, has a predilection for flushing money down the toilet.
2.3 "[...] and it’s well known that they were sold by tons of street vendors on the outskirts of Dismaland."
I attended Dismaland on four occasions during two separate trips to Weston-super-Mare in August and September 2015.
Your description of fake Banksys having been "sold by tons of street vendors on the outskirts of Dismaland" isn't something I witnessed on any of my visits.
The reference to this fact being "well known" also came as a surprise to me, because I had never heard it before, despite being reasonably well-informed. From what I could see at the time on eBay and other sale platforms, the vast bulk of fake pieces with fake accompanying Dismaland paperwork was churned out after the event closed.
Did you yourself see street vendors selling fake Banksys outside Dismaland?
Where do you see that they sold 2 Soup Can posters? I only see one sold in their history. Anything you see wrong with that Soup Cans poster in particular besides it’s origin country? There were quite a few of them made and POW was even selling 5 packs of them at one point so it’s not hard to imagine that some legit ones ended up in Spain but then again I’m not an expert and I have seen the fakes for sale on eBay by sellers in Spain. Also, he shouldn’t have advertised that canvas as a Banksy original but we all know and I’m sure whoever bought it knew they weren’t getting a $100,000 signed print with Pest Control COA. It’s pretty obvious that it was a cheap copy and it’s well known that they were sold by tons of street vendors on the outskirts of Dismaland. The soup cans is fake, I'm not going into why because the seller is no doubt on this forum. You've come on here for a legit check on your print, yet seem extremely reluctant to accept the advice you've asked for, including the 2 very detailed posts from met and you now seem to be trying to convince yourself that the fake items the seller has previously sold are somehow not fake or not a big deal. Everything points to the print being fake.
The efforts the seller puts into producing fakes (i.e dismaland) tells me there is less than 1% chances the print is legit
double uo globe
This post, covering certain past transactions by the eBay seller visualgallery, reiterates many of the comments recently made by geester and ca.
I trust you'll forgive the repetition, which is deliberate and for emphasis.
__________
1. FAKE BANKSY SOUP CANS**
1.1 "Where do you see that they sold 2 Soup Can posters? I only see one sold in their history."
Sorry, my mistake.
Only one poster appears to have actually sold. This was for $1,475.00 (starting price of $1.00) on 20 March 2022. eBay item number 313912446094*:
Given the positive eBay feedback left for visualgallery, the buyer is presumably still oblivious of the fact they were scammed.
$1,475.00 = A lot of money which could have been better spent.
The seller later listed a second poster. That auction had a starting price of €1,250.00, ending on 9 April 2022 but with zero bids. eBay item number 313940840758*:
It is worth noting that, of the 12 photos from the March eBay listing for the first poster, 10 of the same photos were used in the April eBay listing for the second poster.
But the total number of fakes sold shouldn't draw attention away from what's more important — the fact that, within just three months of registering their account, visualgallery had already exploited eBay to defraud collectors (the winning bidders) and deceive many others (all the underbidders).
1.2 "Anything you see wrong with that Soup Cans poster in particular besides it’s origin country? There were quite a few of them made and POW was even selling 5 packs of them at one point so it’s not hard to imagine that some legit ones ended up in Spain but then again I’m not an expert and I have seen the fakes for sale on eBay by sellers in Spain."
As this is a side issue, we should avoid allowing it to become a distraction.
geester also raised an important matter:
It would hardly be surprising if the eBay seller, visualgallery, were a forum member, or at least accessed this place as a guest. They certainly wouldn't be alone. Other fraudsters have previously registered, using their accounts to spread disinformation and sell counterfeit art. Some may well have used photos and technical details posted here in order to churn out forgeries.
So there's often a balance to be struck between competing concerns.
Helping out less-informed, honest collectors is an honourable goal. But I have no interest in educating scammers. And publicly identifying the mistakes of the latter will often help them to produce evermore convincing fakes.
Regarding the poster sales, their location country at best offers circumstantial evidence. This may point to the existence of a counterfeit risk, but nothing more. It would therefore be irresponsible (if not idiotic) for anyone to suggest sale items were fake for location reasons alone.
I confirm that my own assessment as to the Soup Cans was based on direct evidence — having spotted obvious tells of fakery in the photos of both the poster(s) and accompanying documentation. I suspect geester went through a similar exercise, proceeding with diligence before arriving at the same conclusion.
2. FAKE DISMALAND PIECES, INCLUDING CANVAS*
2.1 "Also, he shouldn’t have advertised that canvas as a Banksy original [...]"
The above downplays the significance of the fake Dismaland pieces, including the counterfeit Banksy Girl with Balloon canvas.
On the basis of that statement, one could mistakenly think the eBay seller, visualgallery, was just being opportunistically dishonest, e.g. as if they:
(a) randomly stumbled upon an opportunity; and
(b) in a moment of impulse, described the pieces as "original" rather than as reproductions or fakes.
However, this would be a gross mischaracterisation.
It wasn't at all a crime of opportunity. On the contrary, serious thought and a great deal of effort — over a lengthy period of time — went into deceiving the auction buyer and underbidders:
For this purpose, let's leave aside the work involved in painting the canvas.
Instead, focus on the counterfeit Dismaland receipt for the fake VISA transaction, with the sale pieces separately itemised. The receipt even includes a canvas reference number (101507), which corresponds to the barcode number on the fake price tag affixed to the back of the canvas.
Close-ups of two photos from the eBay listing*:
This was a significant, calculated endeavour — carried out with a clear objective to defraud.
2.2 "[...] but we all know and I’m sure whoever bought it knew they weren’t getting a $100,000 signed print with Pest Control COA. It’s pretty obvious that it was a cheap copy [...]"
Because many of us are proactive when it comes to informing ourselves about contemporary art — including via regular visits to this forum and similar platforms; by seeking out news articles, talks, panel discussions, programmes and documentaries; and by keeping up to date on primary and secondary market sales — we are constantly bombarded with data, opinions and insights on the subject.
That is our norm. A norm to which we're hyper-acclimatised. So familiar to us that we hardly even question it. We are immersed. Moreover, many of us often surround ourselves with likeminded individuals.
It is therefore very easy to forget just how specialised this environment is. How, from an outsider's perspective, much of the information in our heads would be considered geeky. And how, despite the fact we often take it for granted, much of the knowledge we hold is esoteric.
I would posit the following, all of which I believe to be true:
The majority of Banksy fans (and probably the vast majority, if we include casual enthusiasts of his work):
(i) are unfamiliar with this forum;
(ii) have no idea what Pest Control Office is;
(iii) do not know what provenance means, or what "COA" stands for;
(iv) if notified accordingly, would readily accept (without serious question or pushback) that Banksy created the Panda waving handguns, Elizabeth II as Aladdin Sane, Begging for Change, Super Mario being questioned by a police officer, and other images frequently misattributed to the artist; and
(v) are either under the impression or would not be doubtful if informed that Banksy mini-canvases and Dismaland currency were available for sale in 2015 at the Dismaland gift shop (especially bearing in mind the high-profile sales of $60 canvases at Central Park two years prior).
Would you accept the above as accurate? Or at least potentially accurate for a not-insubstantial number of Banksy's millions of fans?
If yes, then, focusing on point (v), imagine the same ignorant fans being asked to estimate the value of a small (40 x 30 cm), very basic, stencil-sprayed canvas with a Banksy stencil tag on it — one that was seemingly originally sold at Dismaland for £250.
Many would probably have no idea whether such a rudimentary painting was now worth three, four, five or six figures.
In fact, the £250 stated on the fake Dismaland receipt could well act as a price anchor — to the extent that (again, in the mind of uninformed enthusiasts) paying a three or four-figure sum might not seem unreasonable. A fortiori, this could also be the case if the buyer were a clueless family member, using eBay to find a gift for, say, their Banksy-loving child or grandchild.
My longwinded objective here is to challenge your suggestion that everyone has a good understanding of Banksy's market and is up-to-speed with his current prices. I believe that premise to be false.
Similarly, the comment "It's pretty obvious that it was a cheap copy" may be projecting — an assumption that what is obvious to you must be obvious to everybody else as well.
But even on this forum, where the collective knowledge regarding all things Banksy is relatively high, poorly-executed knockoffs are occasionally referred to as possible creations by the artist.
This would demonstrate there are people who cannot tell the difference between the real McCoy and a bad fake. Just read some of the speculative comments found on threads dedicated to parasites like the West Country Prince or Mrs Banksy.
[Admittedly, a number of those comments were probably cynical attempts by those with vested interests to hype their rubbish and dupe other members. But a handful did feel sincere, as if posted by individuals lacking a trained eye and led astray by wishful thinking.]
By way of complementary argument, are you aware of anyone who would spend $910.00 plus shipping on a small stencil painting attributed to Banksy (complete with provenance documentation confirming the same) if they knew it was fake?
I have yet to encounter such a person.
Nobody in my list of contacts, even among those living more than comfortably, has a predilection for flushing money down the toilet.
2.3 "[...] and it’s well known that they were sold by tons of street vendors on the outskirts of Dismaland."
I attended Dismaland on four occasions during two separate trips to Weston-super-Mare in August and September 2015.
Your description of fake Banksys having been "sold by tons of street vendors on the outskirts of Dismaland" isn't something I witnessed on any of my visits.
The reference to this fact being "well known" also came as a surprise to me, because I had never heard it before, despite being reasonably well-informed. From what I could see at the time on eBay and other sale platforms, the vast bulk of fake pieces with fake accompanying Dismaland paperwork was churned out after the event closed.
Did you yourself see street vendors selling fake Banksys outside Dismaland?
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
THE MET LOTTERY, by met on May 1, 2022 19:30:44 GMT 1, COMPETITION 48A.Bérurier Noir - Porcherie [Live at L'Olympia, Paris, 9, 10 or 11 November 1989.]- uploaded by TinarkB.The four-letter code to selling anything | Derek Thompson | TEDxBinghamtonUniversity [21:09]- uploaded by TEDx Talks on 8 May 2018Why do we like what we like? Raymond Loewy, the father of industrial design, had a theory. He was the all-star 20th-century designer of the Coca-Cola fountain and Lucky Strike pack; the modern sports car, locomotive, Greyhound bus and tractor; the interior of the first NASA spaceship; and the egg-shaped pencil sharpener. How did one man understand what consumers wanted from so many different areas of life? His grand theory of popularity was called MAYA: Most advanced yet acceptable. He said humans are torn between two opposing forces: neophilia, a love of new things; and neophobia; a fear of anything that’s too new. Hits, he said, live at the perfect intersection of novelty and familiarity. They are familiar surprises. In this talk, I’ll explain how Loewy’s theory has been validated by hundreds of years of research — and how we can all use it to make hits.
Derek Thompson is a senior editor at The Atlantic, where he writes about economics, technology and media. He is a news analyst with NPR's afternoon show “Here and Now," appearing weekly on Mondays, and an on-air contributor to CBS News. The recipient of several honors, including the 2016 Best in Business award for Columns and Commentary from the Society of American Business Editors and Writers, he is the author of the national bestselling book Hit Makers: How to Succeed in an Age of Distraction.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community.C.D.Facts Don't Win Fights: Here’s How to Cut Through Confirmation Bias | Tali Sharot | Big Think [5:41]- uploaded by Big Think on 19 September 2017If you want someone to see an issue rationally, you just show them the facts, right? No one can refute a fact. Well, brain imaging and psychological studies are showing that, society wide, we may be on the wrong path by holding evidence up as an Ace card. Neuroscientist Tali Sharot and her colleagues have proven that reading the same set of facts polarizes groups of people even further, because of our in-built confirmation biases—something we all fall prey to, equally. In fact, Sharot cites research from Yale University that disproves the idea that the social divisions we are experiencing right now—over climate change, gun control, or vaccines—are somehow the result of an intelligence gap: smart people are just as illogical, and what's more, they are even more skilled at skewing data to align with their beliefs. So if facts aren't the way forward, what is? There is one thing that may help us swap the moral high ground for actual progress: finding common motives. Here, Sharot explains why identifying a shared goal is better than winning a fight. Tali Sharot's newest book is out now: The Influential Mind: What the Brain Reveals about Our Power to Change Others.E.Why you think you're right -- even if you're wrong | Julia Galef[TEDxPSU, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, 28 February 2016.] [11:37]- uploaded by TED on 8 August 2016Perspective is everything, especially when it comes to examining your beliefs. Are you a soldier, prone to defending your viewpoint at all costs — or a scout, spurred by curiosity? Julia Galef examines the motivations behind these two mindsets and how they shape the way we interpret information, interweaved with a compelling history lesson from 19th-century France. When your steadfast opinions are tested, Galef asks: "What do you most yearn for? Do you yearn to defend your own beliefs or do you yearn to see the world as clearly as you possibly can?"________________ At around 19:00 UK time on Thursday 28 April, I'll quote this post and add one or more questions or instructions. The first eligible member to answer correctly, wins. Competition eligibility and answer requirements here *. QUESTIONS1. Part B[Recommended, insightful TED Talk.]1.1 Raymond Loewy's theory of popularity is called MAYA. In three or more sentences, explain what that acronym stands for and what it actually means. 1.2 Applying the theory to the art market, post an image of an artwork for which MAYA could (at least in part) help to explain that work's current or former popularity. 2. Part D: Dr. Tali Sharot talks about giving people with different beliefs the same factual information — and the phenomenon where, instead of bringing those people closer together in their beliefs, the facts led to their polarisation. Sharot also refers to research by Dan Kahan at Yale University. In three or four sentences, describe the experiments carried out by Kahan and his colleagues, and the conclusions they reached. 3. Part E: When discussing the Dreyfus Affair, Julia Galef refers to Georges Picquart as being a poster child for what she calls "scout mindset". How does Galef then go on to describe the scout mindset? ________________ In case no eligible member correctly responds to all questions beforehand, the answers will be posted in three days — at around 19:00 UK time on Sunday 1 May.
Sadly, there was no winner for Competition 48.
REFERENCE ANSWERS — COMPETITION 48
1. Part B
1.1 Raymond Loewy's theory of popularity is called MAYA. In three or more sentences, explain what that acronym stands for and what it actually means.
MAYA stands for "Most advanced yet acceptable".
According to Loewy, humans are torn between two opposing forces: neophilia (a love of new things) and neophobia (a fear of anything that is too new). He added that, for something to be a hit, it needs to exist at the intersection of novelty and familiarity. Hit products are "familiar surprises".
[This is mostly a straight cut-and-paste of the TED Talk video description.]
1.2 Applying the theory to the art market, post an image of an artwork for which MAYA could (at least in part) help to explain that work's current or former popularity.
The not-infrequent commercial success of recognisably-derivative art (conceptually, thematically, stylistically, etc.) may in part be attributable to MAYA. Likewise for works of art that are based on familiar source images — such as parodies, pastiches, and pieces consisting of juxtapositions of known imagery.
2. Part D: Dr. Tali Sharot talks about giving people with different beliefs the same factual information — and the phenomenon where, instead of bringing those people closer together in their beliefs, the facts led to their polarisation.
Sharot also refers to research by Dan Kahan at Yale University. In three or four sentences, describe the experiments carried out by Kahan and his colleagues, and the conclusions they reached.
Dan Kahan and his colleagues first gave the participants in their experiment some analytical and math questions to solve. Participants were then given data about gun control: Is gun control actually reducing violence?
It was found that the more intelligent among the participants were also more likely to twist data at will, to make it conform to what they already believed. People were therefore using their intelligence, not necessarily to find the truth, but to take in the information and change it so it conformed to their existing beliefs.
3. Part E: When discussing the Dreyfus Affair, Julia Galef refers to Georges Picquart as being a poster child for or what she calls "scout mindset". How does Galef then go on to describe the scout mindset?
Galef describes the scout mindset as the drive, not to make one idea win or another lose, but just to see what's really there — as honestly and accurately as one can, even if it's not pretty or convenient or pleasant.
COMPETITION 48A.Bérurier Noir - Porcherie [Live at L'Olympia, Paris, 9, 10 or 11 November 1989.]- uploaded by TinarkB.The four-letter code to selling anything | Derek Thompson | TEDxBinghamtonUniversity [21:09]- uploaded by TEDx Talks on 8 May 2018Why do we like what we like? Raymond Loewy, the father of industrial design, had a theory. He was the all-star 20th-century designer of the Coca-Cola fountain and Lucky Strike pack; the modern sports car, locomotive, Greyhound bus and tractor; the interior of the first NASA spaceship; and the egg-shaped pencil sharpener. How did one man understand what consumers wanted from so many different areas of life? His grand theory of popularity was called MAYA: Most advanced yet acceptable. He said humans are torn between two opposing forces: neophilia, a love of new things; and neophobia; a fear of anything that’s too new. Hits, he said, live at the perfect intersection of novelty and familiarity. They are familiar surprises. In this talk, I’ll explain how Loewy’s theory has been validated by hundreds of years of research — and how we can all use it to make hits.
Derek Thompson is a senior editor at The Atlantic, where he writes about economics, technology and media. He is a news analyst with NPR's afternoon show “Here and Now," appearing weekly on Mondays, and an on-air contributor to CBS News. The recipient of several honors, including the 2016 Best in Business award for Columns and Commentary from the Society of American Business Editors and Writers, he is the author of the national bestselling book Hit Makers: How to Succeed in an Age of Distraction.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community.C.D.Facts Don't Win Fights: Here’s How to Cut Through Confirmation Bias | Tali Sharot | Big Think [5:41]- uploaded by Big Think on 19 September 2017If you want someone to see an issue rationally, you just show them the facts, right? No one can refute a fact. Well, brain imaging and psychological studies are showing that, society wide, we may be on the wrong path by holding evidence up as an Ace card. Neuroscientist Tali Sharot and her colleagues have proven that reading the same set of facts polarizes groups of people even further, because of our in-built confirmation biases—something we all fall prey to, equally. In fact, Sharot cites research from Yale University that disproves the idea that the social divisions we are experiencing right now—over climate change, gun control, or vaccines—are somehow the result of an intelligence gap: smart people are just as illogical, and what's more, they are even more skilled at skewing data to align with their beliefs. So if facts aren't the way forward, what is? There is one thing that may help us swap the moral high ground for actual progress: finding common motives. Here, Sharot explains why identifying a shared goal is better than winning a fight. Tali Sharot's newest book is out now: The Influential Mind: What the Brain Reveals about Our Power to Change Others.E.Why you think you're right -- even if you're wrong | Julia Galef[TEDxPSU, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, 28 February 2016.] [11:37]- uploaded by TED on 8 August 2016Perspective is everything, especially when it comes to examining your beliefs. Are you a soldier, prone to defending your viewpoint at all costs — or a scout, spurred by curiosity? Julia Galef examines the motivations behind these two mindsets and how they shape the way we interpret information, interweaved with a compelling history lesson from 19th-century France. When your steadfast opinions are tested, Galef asks: "What do you most yearn for? Do you yearn to defend your own beliefs or do you yearn to see the world as clearly as you possibly can?"________________ At around 19:00 UK time on Thursday 28 April, I'll quote this post and add one or more questions or instructions. The first eligible member to answer correctly, wins. Competition eligibility and answer requirements here *. QUESTIONS1. Part B[Recommended, insightful TED Talk.]1.1 Raymond Loewy's theory of popularity is called MAYA. In three or more sentences, explain what that acronym stands for and what it actually means. 1.2 Applying the theory to the art market, post an image of an artwork for which MAYA could (at least in part) help to explain that work's current or former popularity. 2. Part D: Dr. Tali Sharot talks about giving people with different beliefs the same factual information — and the phenomenon where, instead of bringing those people closer together in their beliefs, the facts led to their polarisation. Sharot also refers to research by Dan Kahan at Yale University. In three or four sentences, describe the experiments carried out by Kahan and his colleagues, and the conclusions they reached. 3. Part E: When discussing the Dreyfus Affair, Julia Galef refers to Georges Picquart as being a poster child for what she calls "scout mindset". How does Galef then go on to describe the scout mindset? ________________ In case no eligible member correctly responds to all questions beforehand, the answers will be posted in three days — at around 19:00 UK time on Sunday 1 May.
Sadly, there was no winner for Competition 48.
REFERENCE ANSWERS — COMPETITION 48
1. Part B
1.1 Raymond Loewy's theory of popularity is called MAYA. In three or more sentences, explain what that acronym stands for and what it actually means.
MAYA stands for "Most advanced yet acceptable".
According to Loewy, humans are torn between two opposing forces: neophilia (a love of new things) and neophobia (a fear of anything that is too new). He added that, for something to be a hit, it needs to exist at the intersection of novelty and familiarity. Hit products are "familiar surprises".
[This is mostly a straight cut-and-paste of the TED Talk video description.]
1.2 Applying the theory to the art market, post an image of an artwork for which MAYA could (at least in part) help to explain that work's current or former popularity.
The not-infrequent commercial success of recognisably-derivative art (conceptually, thematically, stylistically, etc.) may in part be attributable to MAYA. Likewise for works of art that are based on familiar source images — such as parodies, pastiches, and pieces consisting of juxtapositions of known imagery.
2. Part D: Dr. Tali Sharot talks about giving people with different beliefs the same factual information — and the phenomenon where, instead of bringing those people closer together in their beliefs, the facts led to their polarisation.
Sharot also refers to research by Dan Kahan at Yale University. In three or four sentences, describe the experiments carried out by Kahan and his colleagues, and the conclusions they reached.
Dan Kahan and his colleagues first gave the participants in their experiment some analytical and math questions to solve. Participants were then given data about gun control: Is gun control actually reducing violence?
It was found that the more intelligent among the participants were also more likely to twist data at will, to make it conform to what they already believed. People were therefore using their intelligence, not necessarily to find the truth, but to take in the information and change it so it conformed to their existing beliefs.
3. Part E: When discussing the Dreyfus Affair, Julia Galef refers to Georges Picquart as being a poster child for or what she calls "scout mindset". How does Galef then go on to describe the scout mindset?
Galef describes the scout mindset as the drive, not to make one idea win or another lose, but just to see what's really there — as honestly and accurately as one can, even if it's not pretty or convenient or pleasant.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Kaws • Sponge Bob KawsBob Set, Yellow, Black, Red, by met on May 1, 2022 14:05:07 GMT 1, Can somebody give me a legit check on this KAWSBOB? I can’t really find anything wrong with it and I know the signature can differ from piece to piece but my friend has this same print and the signature is a little different. The signature on 2 of my more recent KAWS prints is a little different as well. I sent pics to a gallery and they wanted to buy it so I’m guessing it’s legit but if anybody with more expertise can chime in, I’d appreciate it. [...]
I saw this before I purchased but it looked like a legit soup cans print to me. I could be wrong. I’ve seen a lot of the fake Banksy prints shipping from Spain on eBay but isn’t it possible there are some legit collectors in Spain? Like I said the print looks spot on compared to another I’ve seen except the signature. I have seen his signature differ from print to print but obviously I’m not an expert. I sent the same photos to a gallery to get an insurance estimate and they wanted to purchase it from me.
It would interest me to learn which gallery this was — to add to my list of establishments with whom I need to be extra cautious on matters of authenticity.
Would you mind confirming?
Yeah interesting one. Provenance is pretty solid, but the signature isn’t as close to the edge as any of the other examples I see on the internet. I’ve actually seen some with the signature further from the edge than this one. The signature itself is the only thing I’m questioning.
Re. the fact you've seen some prints with the signature (and date) positioned further away from the right edge than they are on the eBay print (photo attached below):
I assume you're referring to other yellow KAWSBOB prints from the regular edition of 100. Otherwise, that comment would lack relevance, since it only makes sense to compare like with like.
1. By "some", how many did you actually see?
2. Could you post a photo of another yellow KAWSBOB where the signature and date are further away from the right edge of the paper?
After reading your post, I did spend time searching online pretty extensively for examples of such prints, but sadly failed to find any.
The hardness of the signature is really what’s making me suspicious. The placement is fine on it as it’s different on different KAWSBOB’s and I’ve found some KAWS signatures on other prints and canvases that look very similar to this one but I can’t get over the hardness of it. The actual print itself looks identical to an authentic one besides the signature. Either way, I also submitted it to Sotheby’s, Christie’s, and Tate Ward to see if they could authenticate it for me. If anybody else knows anywhere in the NYC area where I could take it to be authenticated, I’d appreciate it. I will be able to recover my money if it’s not authentic but I just don’t want to return it unless I’m sure. People have been messaging the seller asking to buy it if I return it ever since I made this post on here which is pretty shady.
Step back, pause, and re-read that last sentence. Then think it through.
From a position of detachment and healthy scepticism, query how wise it is to accept at face value this kind of assertion by the eBay seller, visualgallery.
With an eBay account registered less than three months ago, the seller already has previous form when it comes to defrauding their fellow eBayers.
They also have an incentive to suggest to you — i.e. the winning bidder who recently paid them $12,100 + $250 shipping — that the KAWS print is authentic, as well as highly sought-after by other collectors. And in case that incentive isn't clear, it is to discourage you from initiating a full refund through eBay, PayPal, and/or your payment card issuer.
My suspicion is that, for visualgallery, the issue then becomes a question of assessing how naive you might be, and how open you are to manipulation.
__________
Will post additional comments tonight or tomorrow.
Can somebody give me a legit check on this KAWSBOB? I can’t really find anything wrong with it and I know the signature can differ from piece to piece but my friend has this same print and the signature is a little different. The signature on 2 of my more recent KAWS prints is a little different as well. I sent pics to a gallery and they wanted to buy it so I’m guessing it’s legit but if anybody with more expertise can chime in, I’d appreciate it. [...]
I saw this before I purchased but it looked like a legit soup cans print to me. I could be wrong. I’ve seen a lot of the fake Banksy prints shipping from Spain on eBay but isn’t it possible there are some legit collectors in Spain? Like I said the print looks spot on compared to another I’ve seen except the signature. I have seen his signature differ from print to print but obviously I’m not an expert. I sent the same photos to a gallery to get an insurance estimate and they wanted to purchase it from me.
It would interest me to learn which gallery this was — to add to my list of establishments with whom I need to be extra cautious on matters of authenticity.
Would you mind confirming?
Yeah interesting one. Provenance is pretty solid, but the signature isn’t as close to the edge as any of the other examples I see on the internet. I’ve actually seen some with the signature further from the edge than this one. The signature itself is the only thing I’m questioning.
Re. the fact you've seen some prints with the signature (and date) positioned further away from the right edge than they are on the eBay print (photo attached below):
I assume you're referring to other yellow KAWSBOB prints from the regular edition of 100. Otherwise, that comment would lack relevance, since it only makes sense to compare like with like.
1. By "some", how many did you actually see?
2. Could you post a photo of another yellow KAWSBOB where the signature and date are further away from the right edge of the paper?
After reading your post, I did spend time searching online pretty extensively for examples of such prints, but sadly failed to find any.
The hardness of the signature is really what’s making me suspicious. The placement is fine on it as it’s different on different KAWSBOB’s and I’ve found some KAWS signatures on other prints and canvases that look very similar to this one but I can’t get over the hardness of it. The actual print itself looks identical to an authentic one besides the signature. Either way, I also submitted it to Sotheby’s, Christie’s, and Tate Ward to see if they could authenticate it for me. If anybody else knows anywhere in the NYC area where I could take it to be authenticated, I’d appreciate it. I will be able to recover my money if it’s not authentic but I just don’t want to return it unless I’m sure. People have been messaging the seller asking to buy it if I return it ever since I made this post on here which is pretty shady.
Step back, pause, and re-read that last sentence. Then think it through.
From a position of detachment and healthy scepticism, query how wise it is to accept at face value this kind of assertion by the eBay seller, visualgallery.
With an eBay account registered less than three months ago, the seller already has previous form when it comes to defrauding their fellow eBayers.
They also have an incentive to suggest to you — i.e. the winning bidder who recently paid them $12,100 + $250 shipping — that the KAWS print is authentic, as well as highly sought-after by other collectors. And in case that incentive isn't clear, it is to discourage you from initiating a full refund through eBay, PayPal, and/or your payment card issuer.
My suspicion is that, for visualgallery, the issue then becomes a question of assessing how naive you might be, and how open you are to manipulation.
__________
Will post additional comments tonight or tomorrow.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Kaws • Sponge Bob KawsBob Set, Yellow, Black, Red, by met on Apr 30, 2022 11:42:08 GMT 1, The hardness of the signature is really what’s making me suspicious. The placement is fine on it as it’s different on different KAWSBOB’s and I’ve found some KAWS signatures on other prints and canvases that look very similar to this one but I can’t get over the hardness of it. The actual print itself looks identical to an authentic one besides the signature. Either way, I also submitted it to Sotheby’s, Christie’s, and Tate Ward to see if they could authenticate it for me. If anybody else knows anywhere in the NYC area where I could take it to be authenticated, I’d appreciate it. I will be able to recover my money if it’s not authentic but I just don’t want to return it unless I’m sure. People have been messaging the seller asking to buy it if I return it ever since I made this post on here which is pretty shady.
I've yet to see a KAWS 'W' look like the one on the eBay print.
But, regardless, the appearance of KAWS's signature on different prints or canvases is far less relevant than his signature on other copies of the regular numbered edition of the yellow KAWSBOB print.
Again, all of these will have been signed at the same time, one after the other, and probably in a manner similar to the way Dabs Myla are working below. The whole exercise could have been completed in 20 minutes.
Under such conditions, one would normally expect KAWS's signatures and dates to be almost identical throughout this edition. And as mentioned in my earlier post, that does seem to be the case with the yellow KAWSBOB prints sold by the major auction houses.
Among the numbered edition of 100, the only "odd man out" I've witnessed would be the print you recently purchased on eBay.
__________
Admittedly, the choice of "visualgallery" as an eBay user ID is rather good.
For many novice art collectors, a name with the word "gallery" in it will convey signals of legitimacy, trustworthiness and credibility — even if the person behind the veil is just some man-child living in mom's basement.
But when we scratch the surface and examine details of visualgallery's eBay account*, things become less reassuring:
1. Newly-registered account, dated from 6 February 2022.
2. Seller based in Spain, the source country for what seems to be a disproportionate amount of the fake artwork sold on eBay.
3. Very limited feedback received as a seller, for only six eBay sales, including purported Neverland memorabilia and an autograph supposedly by Michael Jackson.
4. As previously posted by geester, this eBayer already has a history of selling counterfeits:
(i) at least two "Banksy" Soup Cans posters; and (ii) rubbish described as having been purchased at Dismaland, including embellished dollar bills and a "Banksy" Girl with Balloon canvas* (see images below).
Note these items were also accompanied by a fake invoice or debit/credit card receipt, along with emphatic assurances regarding their genuineness ("BANKSY 100% ORIGINAL", "authentic BANKSY", etc.):
The hardness of the signature is really what’s making me suspicious. The placement is fine on it as it’s different on different KAWSBOB’s and I’ve found some KAWS signatures on other prints and canvases that look very similar to this one but I can’t get over the hardness of it. The actual print itself looks identical to an authentic one besides the signature. Either way, I also submitted it to Sotheby’s, Christie’s, and Tate Ward to see if they could authenticate it for me. If anybody else knows anywhere in the NYC area where I could take it to be authenticated, I’d appreciate it. I will be able to recover my money if it’s not authentic but I just don’t want to return it unless I’m sure. People have been messaging the seller asking to buy it if I return it ever since I made this post on here which is pretty shady.
I've yet to see a KAWS 'W' look like the one on the eBay print.
But, regardless, the appearance of KAWS's signature on different prints or canvases is far less relevant than his signature on other copies of the regular numbered edition of the yellow KAWSBOB print.
Again, all of these will have been signed at the same time, one after the other, and probably in a manner similar to the way Dabs Myla are working below. The whole exercise could have been completed in 20 minutes.
Under such conditions, one would normally expect KAWS's signatures and dates to be almost identical throughout this edition. And as mentioned in my earlier post, that does seem to be the case with the yellow KAWSBOB prints sold by the major auction houses.
Among the numbered edition of 100, the only "odd man out" I've witnessed would be the print you recently purchased on eBay.
__________
Admittedly, the choice of "visualgallery" as an eBay user ID is rather good.
For many novice art collectors, a name with the word "gallery" in it will convey signals of legitimacy, trustworthiness and credibility — even if the person behind the veil is just some man-child living in mom's basement.
But when we scratch the surface and examine details of visualgallery's eBay account*, things become less reassuring:
1. Newly-registered account, dated from 6 February 2022.
2. Seller based in Spain, the source country for what seems to be a disproportionate amount of the fake artwork sold on eBay.
3. Very limited feedback received as a seller, for only six eBay sales, including purported Neverland memorabilia and an autograph supposedly by Michael Jackson.
4. As previously posted by geester, this eBayer already has a history of selling counterfeits:
(i) at least two "Banksy" Soup Cans posters; and (ii) rubbish described as having been purchased at Dismaland, including embellished dollar bills and a "Banksy" Girl with Balloon canvas* (see images below).
Note these items were also accompanied by a fake invoice or debit/credit card receipt, along with emphatic assurances regarding their genuineness ("BANKSY 100% ORIGINAL", "authentic BANKSY", etc.):
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy £10 • Di-Faced Tenner, by met on Apr 30, 2022 7:27:20 GMT 1, The issue I have is I can't be sure that even the photos they have on the ebay listing is what I will receive, even if there's is a real one! Especially as they listed the same item a few weeks prior. Bowing out of this one - I may pull the trigger from Laz at some point for 2k GBP.
You have good reason at least to be wary.
Of potential concern is something I just noticed with the eBay-listing photos (item number 403612144862*, for which you were the winning bidder on 26 April, UK time).
These show a framed tenner and Lazarides letter that are different to the ones featured in the post-auction follow-up photos you received from the eBay seller.
Listing photo for eBay item number 403612144862 (plus cropped close-up)
Two follow-up photos sent by the eBay seller (2nd photo rotated and cropped)
__________
Also worth considering is the feedback dimet57 has received as an eBay seller.
Their feedback shows 13 previous sales, all in the last six months, and all for postcards with sale prices ranging from £1.00 to £1.80*.
Now, that isn't damning per se, but it would be consistent with the type of framework typically put in place in the lead up to an exit scam.
The issue I have is I can't be sure that even the photos they have on the ebay listing is what I will receive, even if there's is a real one! Especially as they listed the same item a few weeks prior. Bowing out of this one - I may pull the trigger from Laz at some point for 2k GBP. You have good reason at least to be wary. Of potential concern is something I just noticed with the eBay-listing photos (item number 403612144862 *, for which you were the winning bidder on 26 April, UK time). These show a framed tenner and La zarides letter that are different to the ones featured in the post-auction follow-up photos you received from the eB ay seller. Listing photo for eBay item number 403612144862 (plus cropped close-up)Two follow-up photos sent by the eBay seller (2nd photo rotated and cropped)__________ Also worth considering is the feedback dimet57 has received as an eB ay seller. Their feedback shows 13 previous sales, all in the last six months, and all for postcards with sale prices ranging from £1.00 to £1.80 *. Now, that isn't damning per se, but it would be consistent with the type of framework typically put in place in the lead up to an exit scam.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Kaws • Sponge Bob KawsBob Set, Yellow, Black, Red, by met on Apr 29, 2022 19:23:06 GMT 1, I'm sorry to say, but this isn't looking good. My mom has a Kawsbob AP that she got directly from The Aldrich and I studied all the images I have. I wish I were in person so I could get an even better look, but I can definitely tell you that the signature on hers is signed/numbered with green pencil. Maybe this was only done for the APs, but I would suspect not. The color plays off the color of Spongebob's spots. The signature on the one you're showing also does look a bit wonky. I've seen Kaws do less than perfect signatures before, but this one just feels sloppy and lacks some of the very subtle characteristics that his letters have. There's almost always a very tight and lean look with a sharp angle to the right in his print signatures (my mom also has the Ups and Downs portfolio and the signatures are the same in quality). The line/slash between the edition number (xx/100) is also suspect. The one you're showing sort of bows out to the left, where my mom's appears straight, but actually has an extremely subtle S shape to the line. Like imagine the general curve of an S, flipped the other way, and stretched out as thin as you could make it. A super super slight bow to the right in the upper half, and super super slight bow to the left in the lower half. These kind of subtleties are usually very unique to a particular person's handwriting, and don't often change so drastically, especially when the writing is done all at the same time as is done with prints like these. It's also important to note that my mom's number ascends diagonally from left to right. The number on the left is lower than the number on the right. The one you're showing has the number on the left very oddly higher than the number on the right. This is uncharacteristic of the way Kaws writes. I'm also concerned about the texture of the paper in these photos. The photos of my mom's make the print look far more smooth, where yours looks oddly textured, and just sort of "cheaper" in comparison. The printing also seems off. This is supposed to be a multi layer screenprint, and on the real thing, there is a very subtle bit of texture for every printed element. On yours it seems to be one even surface, as if the ink has been printed *into* the paper, rather than *onto* the paper. The colors also just seem more dull than what I'm seeing in my own photos. I don't claim to be any sort of professional authenticator, but I'm an extremely visual and detail-oriented person, and love "find the difference" sort of games because I notice the small things. Things just don't seem right when I compare your photos to mine. If I get a chance to see my mom's again soon, I can give another impression, but I'm really leaning towards this being a fake (this is supported by the other suspect Banksy things this person has sold), and you should take action sooner than later because the sale just happened and you're still very protected. I'm sorry you've gotta deal with such a situation, but I hope all will be resolved in the end without much headache. Edit: I found this: www.artspace.com/kaws/kawsbobThe number on the left does appear higher on the left than the right, unlike my mom's, however the line in between the numbers is exactly the same. Look at the close up images and there's just such a noticeable difference in the quality of the writing. The pencil color also seems to be a green tone, though it's pretty subtle in the images here. I also found this: www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/original-fake-kaws-kawsbob-for-the-aldrich-museum-c-9154501984I wonder if it's in any way related to what you ended up with. Edit 2: Found this as well, a recent sale: fineart.ha.com/itm/prints-and-multiples/kaws-b-1974-kawsbob-yellow-2011screenprint-in-colors-on-wove-paper20-x-20-inches-508-x/a/8075-66065.s?type=ArtNet-UrbanArt-8075-03112022Zoom in to the signature and it's definitely got a green tone to it. The pencil color in yours is just totally wrong, and that alone should tell you to fuck this guy and get your money back.
Excellent effort.
I'm not especially interested in KAWS' work. That said, I too am observant and pretty good at spotting inconsistencies.
The execution of both the signature and "11" date is completely off with double uo globe's piece.
Likewise (as you've mentioned) with the choice of pencil — but also the hardness of the pencil, and the force with which it's been applied to the paper. The physical placement of signature and date seem wrong as well.
All 100 prints from the regular edition will have been signed and dated at the same time. Their appearance should therefore be near identical. And that does seem to be the case with past lots of yellow KAWSBOB prints sold by Sotheby's*, Christie's*, Phillips**, Bonhams*, and Heritage Auctions*.
But with the eBay print, the signature and date stick out like sore thumbs. There is a visible absence of muscle memory and fluidity of hand movement. One example to illustrate:
Sotheby's New York print from its 22 October 2021 sale*:
eBay print:
Besides reaching out to The Aldrich in case the museum has retained buyer records, double uo globe may wish to consider sending KAWS an email or Instagram message attaching a couple of photos (of the full print and a close-up of the signature and date).
With luck, the artist or somebody on his team might even respond.
__________
geester already showed the eBay seller, visualgallery, as lacking credibility. They previously sold counterfeit Banksy artwork. This in itself is a bright red flag.
Has the seller, who's apparently based in Barcelona, explained how they even acquired the print at Editions/Artists’ Books Fair in 2010? Former US resident? Good timing with a holiday?
Query too the likelihood of an honest KAWS collector listing a five-figure print on eBay using the auction format and a starting price of $1.
I'm sorry to say, but this isn't looking good. My mom has a Kawsbob AP that she got directly from The Aldrich and I studied all the images I have. I wish I were in person so I could get an even better look, but I can definitely tell you that the signature on hers is signed/numbered with green pencil. Maybe this was only done for the APs, but I would suspect not. The color plays off the color of Spongebob's spots. The signature on the one you're showing also does look a bit wonky. I've seen Kaws do less than perfect signatures before, but this one just feels sloppy and lacks some of the very subtle characteristics that his letters have. There's almost always a very tight and lean look with a sharp angle to the right in his print signatures (my mom also has the Ups and Downs portfolio and the signatures are the same in quality). The line/slash between the edition number (xx/100) is also suspect. The one you're showing sort of bows out to the left, where my mom's appears straight, but actually has an extremely subtle S shape to the line. Like imagine the general curve of an S, flipped the other way, and stretched out as thin as you could make it. A super super slight bow to the right in the upper half, and super super slight bow to the left in the lower half. These kind of subtleties are usually very unique to a particular person's handwriting, and don't often change so drastically, especially when the writing is done all at the same time as is done with prints like these. It's also important to note that my mom's number ascends diagonally from left to right. The number on the left is lower than the number on the right. The one you're showing has the number on the left very oddly higher than the number on the right. This is uncharacteristic of the way Kaws writes. I'm also concerned about the texture of the paper in these photos. The photos of my mom's make the print look far more smooth, where yours looks oddly textured, and just sort of "cheaper" in comparison. The printing also seems off. This is supposed to be a multi layer screenprint, and on the real thing, there is a very subtle bit of texture for every printed element. On yours it seems to be one even surface, as if the ink has been printed *into* the paper, rather than *onto* the paper. The colors also just seem more dull than what I'm seeing in my own photos. I don't claim to be any sort of professional authenticator, but I'm an extremely visual and detail-oriented person, and love "find the difference" sort of games because I notice the small things. Things just don't seem right when I compare your photos to mine. If I get a chance to see my mom's again soon, I can give another impression, but I'm really leaning towards this being a fake (this is supported by the other suspect Banksy things this person has sold), and you should take action sooner than later because the sale just happened and you're still very protected. I'm sorry you've gotta deal with such a situation, but I hope all will be resolved in the end without much headache. Edit: I found this: www.artspace.com/kaws/kawsbobThe number on the left does appear higher on the left than the right, unlike my mom's, however the line in between the numbers is exactly the same. Look at the close up images and there's just such a noticeable difference in the quality of the writing. The pencil color also seems to be a green tone, though it's pretty subtle in the images here. I also found this: www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/original-fake-kaws-kawsbob-for-the-aldrich-museum-c-9154501984I wonder if it's in any way related to what you ended up with. Edit 2: Found this as well, a recent sale: fineart.ha.com/itm/prints-and-multiples/kaws-b-1974-kawsbob-yellow-2011screenprint-in-colors-on-wove-paper20-x-20-inches-508-x/a/8075-66065.s?type=ArtNet-UrbanArt-8075-03112022Zoom in to the signature and it's definitely got a green tone to it. The pencil color in yours is just totally wrong, and that alone should tell you to fuck this guy and get your money back.
Excellent effort.
I'm not especially interested in KAWS' work. That said, I too am observant and pretty good at spotting inconsistencies.
The execution of both the signature and "11" date is completely off with double uo globe's piece.
Likewise (as you've mentioned) with the choice of pencil — but also the hardness of the pencil, and the force with which it's been applied to the paper. The physical placement of signature and date seem wrong as well.
All 100 prints from the regular edition will have been signed and dated at the same time. Their appearance should therefore be near identical. And that does seem to be the case with past lots of yellow KAWSBOB prints sold by Sotheby's*, Christie's*, Phillips**, Bonhams*, and Heritage Auctions*.
But with the eBay print, the signature and date stick out like sore thumbs. There is a visible absence of muscle memory and fluidity of hand movement. One example to illustrate:
Sotheby's New York print from its 22 October 2021 sale*:
eBay print:
Besides reaching out to The Aldrich in case the museum has retained buyer records, double uo globe may wish to consider sending KAWS an email or Instagram message attaching a couple of photos (of the full print and a close-up of the signature and date).
With luck, the artist or somebody on his team might even respond.
__________
geester already showed the eBay seller, visualgallery, as lacking credibility. They previously sold counterfeit Banksy artwork. This in itself is a bright red flag.
Has the seller, who's apparently based in Barcelona, explained how they even acquired the print at Editions/Artists’ Books Fair in 2010? Former US resident? Good timing with a holiday?
Query too the likelihood of an honest KAWS collector listing a five-figure print on eBay using the auction format and a starting price of $1.
|
|