JR,
I have been attending auctions for 45+ years. Auctions are fast paced
and auctioneers are obliged to state pertinent information before an
item is to be auctioned, however, auctioneers are not obligated to
engage in what may seem as 'hand-holding' to novice bidders. I have
yet to attend an auction whereby the auction displayed similar items
to be used as reference material, (possibly to avoid confusion as to
which item is currently being auctioned, though I have noted price
guides/reference books that were provided as a courtesy). As the
apparent value of items in any respective auction are increased, all
prospective/interested bidders should have done some type of
'homework' before committing to any purchase that is beyond the realm
of an 'impulse buy'. It is plain common sense as well as good business
acumen.
After reading and re-reading your message, methinks there are some
responses with possible 'out of context' referencing / slight
inaccuracies in your reply ... I'll try to address some (not all) of
those by highlighting/italicizing in your reply copied below ...
In any case, if offense was taken in my original reply, I apologize,
as I meant no personal affront.
Regards,
ad
--- On *Tue, 9/1/09, James Richard /<jrl...@mediabearonline.com>/* wrote:
From: James Richard <jrl...@mediabearonline.com>
Subject: Re: [MOPO] FRANKENSTEIN 1/2 sheet vs TC from Heritage
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Date: Tuesday, September 1, 2009, 3:17 AM
Allen,
Oh really... how silly... your ridiculously exaggerated examples
/(your original message contained a statement copied below .../
But by the same measure of value you cite, doesn't the fact
that there were no other known examples mean that
extraordinary measures were called for prior to and during
the auction of this particular item?
/In hindsight, I should have noted that future posters with
greater estimated values may need greater measures, hence the lead
phrase ..."By extension") /are nothing like the sensible
suggestion I made so, what is the point of bringing them up as a
reason for not doing what I suggested? Nor did I suggest "unending
disclosure". Nor did I suggest such reasonable, prudent and
appropriate measures would necessarily be called for in all
cases /(nor did I)/, or even most cases (they clearly are not) but
only in the cases of very pricey and rare, not-often-seen items
where such sensible measures become more critical and important.
So please take down your straw man, he's obscuring the view.
What you really seem to think is that the auction house/dealer
should take no responsibility to verify a pricey item themselves
/(not stated or intimated)/, independent of the current owner's
statement /(previous owner expired, no statement entered)/, or
provide additional vital information (such as a comparison photo
of a known genuine item) to aid and educate those people bidding
$10,000... $20,000... $30,000 or more on the items they are
offering? You feel it is sufficient for them to simply pass on
"what the previous owner said" about what some unnamed restoration
expert said? In this case the description didn't even mention the
name of this expert /(Carol Tincup was noted)/ (who was obviously
not quite so expert in retrospect). You think that's good enough
where such dollar amounts are concerned? /(I will copy my original
message, as I cannot grasp your reply ... /
There was no hype, the description stated a previous owner and a
restoration expert, as well as the previous availability in the
market.
/I am unsure how to respond to the rhetorical questions in your
paragraph above, as they are beyond the scope of my message.)/
But what the hey, it's only money... people can do with it what
they will and as I said, there ain't no law saying Heritage or any
other auction house or retail dealer owes any bidder anything
beyond putting up a picture and description of the item, bringing
down the hammer, collecting the loot and shipping the stuff out
the door. But if that's the way it's going to continue to be done
then nobody should be shocked... shocked, I tell you... to
discover that some fraud is perpetrated from time to time if the
auction houses/dealers are just going to be shills for the
consigners/suppliers and accept no responsibilities to the buyers
for verification and comparison information.
As for your concerns that what I suggest "could create
disinterest, devalue the poster, harm the consignor, and negate
future business..." Hmmm... just how is honesty and verification
and full disclosure going to cause that? And what does it say
about this business if it does? Perhaps the real concern should be
how many more $25,000 and up posters are going to be sold if this
sort of scandal keeps cropping on up, as it has more and more
often in recent years? Kirby estimated there have already been as
much as $2 million in fraudulent sales already.
I hardly think doing nothing, changing nothing, and simply
continuing to carry on as usual is the best approach to this
situation. But, of course, others may think differently.
-- JR
allen day wrote:
By extension, Heritage Auctions could have provided scans of each
square inch at 30x, and someone would/could note that 60x scans
at each centimeter square should have been provided. If an
additional poster (with some restoration) may be provided for
comparison, why not 2 additional depending on amount of restoration?
There was no hype, the description stated a previous owner and a
restoration expert, as well as the previous availability in the
market. It is the job of the buyer to distill any / all
information when making an informed decision.
Grey Smith / Heritage Auctions certainly need no assistance from
me to defend their business model, but to imply/suggest that the
auctioneer should be tasked with (apparent unending) disclosure
could create disinterest, devalue the poster, harm the consignor,
and negate future business (from consignors and buyers).
ad
--- On *Mon, 8/31/09, James Richard
/<jrl...@mediabearonline.com>/* wrote:
From: James Richard <jrl...@mediabearonline.com>
Subject: Re: [MOPO] FRANKENSTEIN 1/2 sheet vs TC from Heritage
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Date: Monday, August 31, 2009, 5:37 AM
Grey (and others commenting on this aspect),
I sympathize with you in this situation. I really do. I've
auctioned items worth many thousands before myself and
agonized over writing the descriptions. I did point out in my
post that virtually ALL auctioneers and sellers engage in
this kind of thing to one degree or another -- it's part of
doing business. And I think it's important to remember and
acknowledge that you seem to have been instrumental in
uncovering the extent of this current scandal.
Note I said that the half sheet description made it "sound"
like a silk purse, not that it "claimed" it was a silk purse.
Technically, there was nothing "wrong" with the description,
it's just that the overall effect did a lot to make it sound
like it was worth the estimated $25,000 to $35,000. OK, sure,
that *is* what a good auctioneer is supposed to do: hype the
consignment. But at some point that part of the job
description can come into a conflict of interest with other
responsibilities of the job description. My real point was
that if a good picture of the title card (which had the same
art) had been shown with the auction, then the bidders could
have made a direct comparison themselves at the time and so
made a "more educated" evaluation. But, then, there ain't no
law saying auctioneers or dealers need to accommodate their
bidders to that extent.
But by the same measure of value you cite, doesn't the fact
that there were no other known examples mean that
extraordinary measures were called for prior to and during
the auction of this particular item? I do personally feel
that the higher the hammer price is likely to be, that a
greater responsibility must logically fall upon on the
auctioneer/dealer to do more to insure accuracy and
authenticity. I also think there has to be some consideration
given to the fact that we are now in the 21st century, with
all this new technology, and so "let the buyer beware" can't
continue to be the Golden Rule (and ultimate rationale) it
once was.
As for the other questions you asked about how far one should
go and where it all ends -- I think those answers are
something only your own organization (and all the others)
will have to decide upon for themselves.
It's a challenge, no doubt. I wish you and everyone else all
the best in grappling with this issue.
-- JR
Smith, Grey - 1367 wrote:
JR
You mention "silk purse from a...", perhaps, but when it is
the only sow's ear on earth, it is assuredly, in many
people's eyes, a silk purse!
Concerning including an image of the title card next to the
half sheet, not a bad idea but where does that end? Should
we end up trying to offer comparisons on all we sell. This
is exactly why we continue to offer the service of high res
images forever on our site and are the only poster seller
that does so. As Heritage has always suggested, educate
yourself on anything you purchase. Thus the reason for the
link to comparables on every page of our auctions. This is
also something that only Heritage offers to their bidders.
*From:* MoPo List [mailto:mop...@listserv.american.edu] *On
Behalf Of *James Richard
*Sent:* Sunday, August 30, 2009 2:40 PM
*To:* MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
*Subject:* Re: [MOPO] FRANKENSTEIN 1/2 sheet vs TC from Heritage
I might be so audacious and impertinent as to suggest that a
responsible and highly-regarded auction house catering to
the very well-to-do and regularly selling tens of millions
of dollars of high-priced collectibles every year would have
taken it upon themselves to include a high resolution
picture of the title card along with the half sheet auction
so that the bidders could have made the comparison
themselves at the time of the sale.
But I guess I'm just being naive... despite the cries of
shock and horror over the last few days, "let the buyer
beware" is still the Golden Rule in our society.
-- JR
Douglas Ball wrote:
Side by side, yes, but when the auction took place it looked
damn good!
Doug
----- Original Message -----
*From:* JOHN REID Vintage Movie Memorabilia
*To:* MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
*Sent:* Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:04 PM
*Subject:* Re: [MOPO] FRANKENSTEIN 1/2 sheet vs TC from
Heritage
There is indeed a very big difference between the two.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its
content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its
content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
