• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Art dealers struggling to get supply ?
0

65 posts in this topic

I have noticed more and  more when I want to buy a piece of art
from eBay, Clink or Heritage 
I have to compete with so and so dealers.

Days or weeks after that 
the art is for sale for a premium.

It looks like the old good days 
when they have access to premium material for cheap
are gone.
And now they are trying to keep on the business  
with the old model...

Thoughts ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I can tell, dealers can still get discounts, particularly if they are buying up lower end stuff, but it is so easy for individuals to market things right now on places like HA they probably don’t have the leverage they used to. I don’t care about high end material since I won’t buy it. So, they can add all the premiums they want.

Personally, I would love it if all my competitors were dealers at auctions. They have to make money at something to buy it for sale. I don’t. So logically, if I lose to a dealer, I have undervalued the piece, and that is my fault, or the dealer has way overvalued it. And yes, dealers do make mistakes. Just look at the dealers’ piles of stuff that sits around for years until the market has caught up. I have seen some pieces sit around for almost a decade without selling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For dealers, strong auction prices bring fewer private consignments but higher prices for inventory pieces.  It’s natural for dealers to buy at auction and mark-ups range from 30-70% depending on the dealer— each with a unique approach to timing and pricing.  Great flip if it sells right away but that’s rare, but eventually— 6 months or 6 years later— the piece does sell, is traded away or consigned to a future auction.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

Definitely part of it. It boils down to shilling.

Not shilling.    A dealer bidding on kirby's when they have an interest in the kirby market is not shilling.   

If it is, you'd better lock up anyone that bids on an Amazing Fantasy 15 when they already own one.    That's the closer analogy.    

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bronty said:

Not shilling.    A dealer bidding on kirby's when they have an interest in the kirby market is not shilling.   

If it is, you'd better lock up anyone that bids on an Amazing Fantasy 15 when they already own one.    That's the closer analogy.    

As far as I'm concerned, it boils down to the same thing. Bidding on a piece for the purpose of maintaining a price support, and without any interest in really owning it, has the same effect regardless whether the person is employed by the seller or not. It is preventing the free market from working properly where prices fluctuate with demand based on an interest in purchasing. Of course, if the dealer ends up paying that price, I'm fine with that. There is only so much money available to do that until the effort collapses.

Some auctions are conducted in states that permit shilling, so long as the practice is disclosed in the auction terms--including Heritage where the laws of Texas apply. We hve been through this earlier. Texas' interpretation of the free market is already drawing enough attention in the news these days. See how well that's working out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

As far as I'm concerned, it boils down to the same thing. Bidding on a piece for the purpose of maintaining a price support, and without any interest in really owning it, has the same effect regardless whether the person is employed by the seller or not. It is preventing the free market from working properly where prices fluctuate with demand based on an interest in purchasing. Of course, if the dealer ends up paying that price, I'm fine with that. There is only so much money available to do that until the effort collapses.

Some auctions are conducted in states that permit shilling, so long as the practice is disclosed in the auction terms--including Heritage where the laws of Texas apply. We hve been through this earlier. Texas' interpretation of the free market is already drawing enough attention in the news these days. See how well that's working out.

We will always fundamentally disagree.    A) you can't prove intent and B) sometimes (most times!) the buyer is perfectly happy to own another example. 

Regardless of whether its 'bad' or not, its not shilling.    Call it price support if you want to, but bidding on something I don't own if I have every intention of paying, I think its crazy to have any issue with that.

Edited by Bronty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bronty said:

We will always fundamentally disagree.    A) you can't prove intent and B) sometimes the buyer is perfectly happy to own another example. 

You absolutely can prove intent. I have done it in other situations in court; neither judges nor juries are stupid. They can connect the dots. In fact, I would wager that most cases where fraud is proven are done without an admission of intent to perpetrate a fraud. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

As far as I'm concerned, it boils down to the same thing. Bidding on a piece for the purpose of maintaining a price support, and without any interest in really owning it, has the same effect regardless whether the person is employed by the seller or not. It is preventing the free market from working properly where prices fluctuate with demand based on an interest in purchasing. Of course, if the dealer ends up paying that price, I'm fine with that. There is only so much money available to do that until the effort collapses.

Some auctions are conducted in states that permit shilling, so long as the practice is disclosed in the auction terms--including Heritage where the laws of Texas apply. We hve been through this earlier. Texas' interpretation of the free market is already drawing enough attention in the news these days. See how well that's working out.

There is no such thing as a free market

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, vodou said:

This is the weakest part of your argument. I think most bidders, most of the times, are bidding up to a level they would be willing and able to own "it" at, if things end there. Thrill bidding above the comfort zone is really dangerous: you can and will get stuck with the win. And if you don't follow through, don't be surprised if you're cut off temporarily or forever. As we all know 'rep' matters in this small, cliquish hobby; I think most understand this and bid accordingly favoring continuing to collect than be banned.

A bit of hyperbole on my part. If the primary purpose is to raise the price or create a floor on the price, that would have been more precise. But yes, overbidding leaves people with things they should buy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

There is no such thing as a free market

Technically, you are correct. A true free market naturally gravitates to monopoly because it is in the sellers' interests. The issue is how far away from one are you, and is it being deliberately manipulated or an accident of circumstance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

As far as I'm concerned, it boils down to the same thing. Bidding on a piece for the purpose of maintaining a price support, and without any interest in really owning it, has the same effect regardless whether the person is employed by the seller or not. It is preventing the free market from working properly where prices fluctuate with demand based on an interest in purchasing. Of course, if the dealer ends up paying that price, I'm fine with that. There is only so much money available to do that until the effort collapses.

Some auctions are conducted in states that permit shilling, so long as the practice is disclosed in the auction terms--including Heritage where the laws of Texas apply. We hve been through this earlier. Texas' interpretation of the free market is already drawing enough attention in the news these days. See how well that's working out.

I think you don't understand the term "free market".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, vodou said:

Thrill bidding above the comfort zone is really dangerous: you can and will get stuck with the win. And if you don't follow through, don't be surprised if you're cut off temporarily or forever. As we all know 'rep' matters in this small, cliquish hobby; I think most understand this and bid accordingly favoring continuing to collect than be banned.

...and yet people joke occasionally about 'punishment bids' (a practice which I would resent, if actually attempted).

Just another type of 'shill bid?'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Hockeyflow33 said:

As a buyer of lower-end art, (under $300), it's become very tough over the last 6-8 months to get anything on Heritage. Lots more flips showing up on ebay or dealer sites a few months after a heritage sale that will sit unsold for years to come. 

Search eBay (make an offer)and dealer sites for art at the price point. No reason you should miss out on the fun. I honestly find art in that range all the time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0