Bad experience with MGA 2 2

[dichotomy]

53 minutes ago, vodou said:

Yes. 100% no BS. There isn't anybody in this hobby, even very old hands that couldn't learn something from him re: professionalism. Folks that have me blocked or otherwise can barely control their temper every time I post...know that I do not hand out blanket compliments lightly or...ever

Anybody that's ever had a bad experience with Felix should post it. I just don't think it's ever happened otherwise!

He does talk about Dark Knight an awful lot...

[comix4fun]

14 hours ago, Mmehdy said:

if he comes back and gets approval for $4500 so be it, it appears it a consignment  piece....wait and see what happens and if you get your 10% off

He's a rep for artists. 

[vodou]

1 hour ago, dichotomy said:

He does talk about Dark Knight an awful lot...

I stand corrected.

[Nexus]

On 7/7/2019 at 10:39 AM, dichotomy said:

He does talk about Dark Knight an awful lot...

Guilty as charged!

Thanks for the kind words, guys. Much appreciated.

[Mighty Hal]

This could have been handled better, I agree.

I had a better experience. Like West, I offered less than the full asking price on a piece I'd been watching for almost a year. I liked the cover a lot, but it was pricey. Mike responded quickly and professionally. He checked with the artist, all was well, and I received the artwork promptly.

I wouldn't hesitate to deal with him again.

[NelsonAI]

I've never had a problem with Mike.  I actually think he is one of the nicest and friendliest dealers.

If there was a communication issue, it sounds like it can be resolved.

[Rick2you2]

Any resolution yet?

[Timely]

I decided it's best to put this experience behind me and move on. I wish the best for Mike and hope he does better with the next guy. No one is perfect, this deal went south but I'm sure he has lots of satisfied customers.

[vodou]

Thank you for making the matter public. Based on Mike's responses here an unfortunate (imo) part of his business model is to resolve mistakes/confusion reactively (and privately) instead of proactively striving to never have them happen to begin with. I'm sure everybody knows which I think is the better (best) way to run a small business.

[MOStateSuperman]

I too have had positive dealings with Mike. He doesn’t handle deals in quite the same way as most other reps I’ve dealt with, but certainly handles them better than some I have come across. I actually like the “offer” function on the MGA site, but if you initiated talks through CAF the system would definitely be less clear.

Mike falls into my “would do business again” category. 

[PhilipB2k17]

On 7/6/2019 at 5:46 PM, Rick2you2 said:

Let me suggest, respectfully, that if you want it and they come back at anything other than $4,500, you say no. You were probably given a quote at what MGA thought they could sell it for, and that MGA must confirm it can be sold for that price. MGA should have told you that up front.

Legally, you would be correct, there is an offer and acceptance, so there would be a contract for the price, but that's not going to do you much good in the real world.

You do have a right to be pissed off; I would be, too. 

Incorrect. There is only a contract if the person he was negotiating with had authorization (I assume from the artist) to make that deal. This gets into concepts of agency, and whether the person he negotiated with had the actual or apparent authority to strike the bargain. 

[PhilipB2k17]

On 7/6/2019 at 8:31 PM, dichotomy said:

I agree, definitely an irritating position. I would definitely wait, as suggested by others, to see what they come back. Hopefully it’s all good in the hood. 

I’ll now hijack/expand upon this because it’s a topic I’ve been dwelling upon. 

I’ll hold up Felix as an idea rep - responsive, proactive, efficient. And overall my experiences have been GREAT in this hobby. 

BUT...

1) This has been driving me crazy. Before Como I contacted a rep about a cover their artist had done that I really liked. They said they’d talk to the artist at Como and get back to me.  I still haven’t heard back. I’ve sent a polite reminder once a week (after a long gap) but nothing. WTF?!? This is a mid to high 4 figure purchase too. Do I have to send a CAF link to establish my “legitimacy”? Additionally, IMHO, the rep asked way too much for the piece in question. I have a fair grasp of the market, and this was beyond the pale.

2) Another extremely talented artist had a rep who is overpricing the art and, frankly, being a bit sketch at cons. I commissioned a two figure con sketch and paid accordingly, and the result was a double bust. It is a PHENOMENAL piece and the artist really poured their effort into executing it and I love it, but it’s a double bust, not two full figures - and the rep should have explained or compensated for it. And currently, this artist had amazing pieces of work unsold for many months because it is overpriced. 

3) This is minor, I purchase a piece and the rep was just slow about updating me as to why it was not shipping. And I only start asking after minimum 2 weeks. It turns out the artist was moving and obviously in flux about their possessions - no problem a perfectly acceptable explanation, but please tell me that instead of not replying or telling me something else. I work as an agent in an unrelated field and I understand the many nuances of representing someone to a customer, and communication is basically your job. I will say, after a couple snafus, the artist sent me, at no additional cost, a superior piece. 

End of the day, I’m patient and always polite, but don’t think I won’t remember if you tried to pull something on me. 

Have a great weekend everyone. 

I think Rilke become artist reps without understanding the requirements of the job to be effective at it. Communication and efficiency are the two more important parts of that kind of a job. If you’re juggling too many balls in the air, and you let your Rep responsibilities slack, then you’re doing a disservice not only to the potential buyers but to the artists as well. 

As for pricing the art, it may not always be the rep’s fault. The artist may be driving that train, but a good rep will let an artist know that he or she is overpricing and the material won’t sell at that level. An artist might disagree and say the rep should do a better marketing job. 

Felix has openly talked about keeping his stable of represented artists at a manageable level so he can do his job well. Some reps lose site of that, I think. 

[Rick2you2]

1 hour ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

Incorrect. There is only a contract if the person he was negotiating with had authorization (I assume from the artist) to make that deal. This gets into concepts of agency, and whether the person he negotiated with had the actual or apparent authority to strike the bargain. 

Good grief, this isn't a law school class in contracts law or the law of agency. For you nonlawyers who find this interesting, here is the way it should generally play out:

A dealer of art has either "express" or "implied" authority to sell the art from an artist freely given to him (probably express authority). Good luck arguing against that point. If the dealer deals with a third party (potential buyer) and is willing to accept a price, then he will at least have "apparent authority" to sell at that price, which, for you nonlawyers, is a little different than express or implied authority. He will have been placed in a position by the artist in which a third party dealing with the dealer will have been led to believe the dealer has authority to sell at the accepted price. If the dealer makes a deal, and the dealer has not expressly qualified that authority to the third party ("I can do it at $4,500 if the artist approves"), the artist is going to get stuck. The artist could still sue the dealer for breaching his agency relationship, and in this hypothetical, recover $500 back (difference between offered price and sales price), but the deal to the third party is a valid one. Finally, to close the loop, there is also a concept of ratification in which no express or implied authority originally existed, but the artist agrees to it after the fact (thereby surrendering the right to sue for $500)