Ebay abstract painting - something fishy going on
Mr. Mike
Mr. Mike
>Could you summarize this? I don't want to have to register with the NY Times
>just for one article. Thanks...
What is fishy is that one of the bidders, who lives near the seller,
wanted to see it, and the guy wouldn't let him. The seller now has a
lawyer and is answering questions about the painting in a very generic
manner.
castagato...@hotmail.com.invalid
in the NG lately? Do you have a link to the auction item?
W@YS?
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Mr. Mike
<castagato...@hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>Is this regarding the same painting we've been discussing here
>in the NG lately? Do you have a link to the auction item?
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=320408444
The guy has taken the photos off line.
I put a copy of it at this URL:
Mike W.
>Could you summarize this? I don't want to have to register with the NY Times
>just for one article. Thanks...
Basically it points out that the art could be a scam. I guess it
points out that it is probably a scam.
************
Michael Kaiser, a private art dealer in Medford, Ore., bid the
painting up to $128,600 on Sunday but then changed his mind. He
withdrew his offer after the seller, who Mr. Kaiser said was a lawyer
who lived in the Sacramento area, refused to let him see the painting.
"It made me suspicious when he would not let me see it when I'm making
the effort to drive five hours down there," said Mr. Kaiser, who added
that he "buys a lot of art online."
*************
Sounds like it might be offered again as the picture Elian made on
this raft.
Mr. Mike
>Sounds like it might be offered again as the picture Elian made on
>this raft.
No, it is the raft!! ";-/
Dexter
I just registed...you can use my registration if it works.
dexter53
aaron
castagato...@hotmail.com.invalid
Rickjn
>Basically it points out that the art could be a scam. I guess it
>points out that it is probably a scam.
----------------------------------------------
The San Jose Mercury News story leads you to think that the painting is real
and the seller has retained a lawyer because of the very high price it is now
at. There were issues of people stealing the painting from his home,etc. This
guy does not seem like a scam artist at all and most people are "scam-happy"
these days.... you judge...
--------------------------------------
Published Tuesday, May 9, 2000, in the San Jose Mercury News
From 25¢ To $135,805
Painting sold in eBay auction
BY JUDITH DOBRZYNSKI
New York Times
On April 28, a California man who uses the handle ``golfpoorly'' put a
half-dozen items up for sale on eBay, the online auction company. Along with an
unopened roll of twine, a never inflated basketball, a Mexican voodoo mask, a
Netgear network card and a pewter frame, he offered a ``great big wild abstract
painting'' that he said was bought years ago at a garage sale in Berkeley and
has a small hole inflicted by a son wielding a plastic tricycle.
The opening bid for each of the items was a quarter.
By 6:50 p.m. Monday, when the auction closed, there had been 95 bids posted for
the painting and the high bid had soared to $135,805.
The run-up was fueled by speculation that the painting, which on a computer
screen looks vaguely like a landscape swathed in red, orange and a pinkish
accent, may be a 1952 work by Richard Diebenkorn, the late California painter
known for his sublime use of color in abstract and representational works.
If the sale goes through, it would be one of the highest prices paid online for
art. And, it would be powerful testimony to the ability of the Internet to
ignite a sales frenzy, even for expensive items that may or may not be what
people think they are.
``I'm still astonished that anyone would pay that much for something they
hadn't seen,'' said John Elderfield, the chief curator at the Museum of Modern
Art in New Nork and an expert on Diebenkorn.
A real painting by Diebenkorn, who died in 1993, could be worth millions. The
record price at auction was set in November 1998, when his 1959 painting
``Horizon: Ocean Park'' sold at Sotheby's for $3.9 million.
But eBay does not vouch for the authenticity of anything people sell on its
site. It considers the deals to be private transactions. And for now at least
no one knows for sure whether ``golfpoorly's'' painting is by Diebenkorn or
not.
``The palette is right, and the signature is right on,'' said Will Ameringer, a
New York dealer who has sold work by Diebenkorn. ``It's either a good fake or
the real thing.'' Other experts agreed, but they and Ameringer said they could
not give definitive opinions about its authenticity without seeing the
painting.
Which is impossible.
Michael Kaiser, a private art dealer in Medford, Ore., bid the painting up to
$128,600 Sunday but then changed his mind. He withdrew his offer after the
seller, who, according to Kaiser, is a lawyer who lives in the Sacramento area,
refused to let him see the painting. ``It made me suspicious when he would not
let me see it when I'm making the effort to drive five hours down there,'' said
Kaiser, who added that he ``buys a lot of art online.''
``Golfpoorly,'' responding to an e-mail message, declined to comment, citing
the advice of his lawyer, the possibility of theft and tax consequences. He
signed the message, ``Ken.'' The name associated with the e-mail address is
K.A. Walton, and a phone message left at the home of Kenneth Walton in
Sacramento was not returned. That left open questions such as why he did not
withdraw the painting once people began attributing it to Diebenkorn in favor
of selling it through the established art market, where it could presumably
attract a much higher price.
But ``golfpoorly'' told his story of the painting online when he put it up for
sale. He bought it, he said, before he got married. ``My wife has never let me
keep it in the house,'' he explained -- though he ``always kind of liked it''
-- so he decided to sell.
He never said it was a Diebenkorn, but along with a picture of the entire
painting -- incorrectly oriented vertically, which he noted in his posting --
he posted a close-up of the hole. The signature, ``R.D. '52,'' was easily
discernible in the close-up, and it stirred up the interest and skepticism.
Richard Ward
painting, evidently he took them down immediately after the auction
ended. That's a trifle strange in itself.
Richard Ward
"What's...@You.Say?" wrote:
>
> Is this regarding the same painting we've been discussing here
> in the NG lately? Do you have a link to the auction item?
>
> W@YS?
Dave Sacerdote
> >this raft.
>
> No, it is the raft!! ";-/
No, it's the sail from the raft...it blew off with the canvas that was
covering the straw <g>
Mark C. Orton
wrote:
> The link was posted yesterday, but it won't show you the photos of the
> painting, evidently he took them down immediately after the auction
> ended. That's a trifle strange in itself.
I've seen lots of people do that. I can think of two reasons for it:
1. They don't want to give unscrupulous sellers even more opportunity
to steal their pictures for their own use. (Hardly likely in this case,
though, as nobody else is going to have a similar painting to sell.)
2. They have a limited amount of web space, and want to free it up for
the next batch of auctions.
-Mark-
jd...@san.rr.com
feedback,so what?
"Mr. Mike" wrote:
>
> See
> http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/05/biztech/articles/09ebay.html
jd...@san.rr.com
cause I won the
auction.Let me see it first! Now the ball is in his court. He risks
having to go crawling to the next highest
bidder and asking,"he didn't want it,how about you"? And so on and so
on. All the others
will wonder why the first one passed on it,as if the first bidder had
proof of worthlessness.
But then again,maybe it's the real thing :)
jdc
Adrienne $
somewhere public to look at something that valuable. For all the seller
knows, the bidder who wanted to see it could have been planning to pull a
gun on him and steal the painting. I'm not saying that's what was going to
happen, but I can see the guy's reasoning behind not wanting any personal
contact. But answering questions in an ambiguous manner.. that does seem a
little odd.
--
Adrienne $
Your shoes and socks are there to stop spam.
Please remove them when replying. :)
See where your money goes!
Visit http://www.wheresgeorge.com
Mr. Mike wrote in message ...
Mr. Mike
<scullyyours...@localnet.com> wrote:
>I personally would not want someone coming to my house, or even meeting me
>somewhere public to look at something that valuable. For all the seller
>knows, the bidder who wanted to see it could have been planning to pull a
>gun on him and steal the painting.
Well, assuming that the buyer didn't kill him, the buyer could still be tracked
down through his Ebay e-mail address... ";-/
Mike W.
<scullyyours...@localnet.com> wrote:
>I personally would not want someone coming to my house, or even meeting me
>somewhere public to look at something that valuable. For all the seller
>knows, the bidder who wanted to see it could have been planning to pull a
>gun on him and steal the painting. I'm not saying that's what was going to
>happen, but I can see the guy's reasoning behind not wanting any personal
>contact. But answering questions in an ambiguous manner.. that does seem a
>little odd.
If someone is offering me over $100,000.00 for a painting that has
been laying around in my garage then they can come look at it. They
can spend the night, I'll fix up the sofa for them... hell, I'll sleep
on the sofa they can have my bed!
To me the refusal to allow someone to examine an item for THAT price
is out of line.
Dexter
the way he answers questions about it... To the way he won't let
anyone come look at it...
The guy is just doing a spectacular job of playing dumb, and
hoping it will earn him a couple hundred grand.
If it was me and the painting was real... I would pull the thing off
of eBay and take it to a real art gallery, find out what it was really
worth... Eventually sell it for the 2-3 million it is supposed to be
worth if it is legit.
Dreaming about being as lucky (or brilliant) as this jerk...
Dexter
Rickjn
>If it was me and the painting was real... I would pull the thing off
>of eBay and take it to a real art gallery, find out what it was really
>worth... Eventually sell it for the 2-3 million it is supposed to be
>worth if it is legit.
>
>Dreaming about being as lucky (or brilliant) as this jerk...
>
>Dexter
That's exactly what he could have done but he didn't. He says he go through
with the deal at $135,000 or whatever it was at when he closed the auction if
the appraisals prove the painting is the real McCoy. Why not go for the
$500,000 ? Maybe he has a shred of honor in him?
The part about him embellishing the item description with wife and kids must be
a VERY common thing on eBay and other online auctions. I know that most of the
"in person" autograph sellers on eBay must be lying to get more for their
autographs for instance.......