I think "no returns" just stops buyers sending things back because they have changed their minds.  It doesn't prevent returns if the item is damaged or not as described.

Dear Corey - Re: Hugh Moss publication:-

2Volls - Voll 1 images, Voll 2 text. The pink ground bowl on the front page is pl. 52, ex Sir Percival David Coll and sold in the early 1960’s, has a four character ‘Kangxi Yu Zhi’ mark, and is of the period. 

This publication is well illustrated and includes a number of pieces attributed  to the Qinglong period, however all these have four character ‘Qinglong Nian Zhi’ marks - non have ’Yu Zhi’ marks. 

Hugh Moss 1976 book was one of the first western publications that attempted to clarify the dating of these ‘Yu Zhi’ marked wares, which were then all thought to date to Douguang, due to the heavy enameling, opaque colour ground and, on some pieces, not very good porcelain refinement. 

Subsequently scholarship has altered this view, with the KX/YZ ‘Yu Zhi’ marked wares now been accepted as period. 

As previously mentioned, there are always exceptions, but my understanding is the same as Giovanni’s, all ‘Yu Zhi Qinglong’ marked examples are later, and not of the period. 

I hope the above is of some help. 

Stuart.

 Thank you dear Stuart.

I was not able to answer in regard to that bowl, because I had those big books, which sadly I have sold a few years back.

I would like to come back on the swastikas detail of the bowl in question.

It is not a secondary, less important detail IMO. The swastikas pattern is not an easy one, and I have been always admired at how precise it is done on spherical ware, like on bowls and the body of the vases, being very difficult to adapt a rigid geometrical pattern onto a rounded surface that is progressively decreasing or increasing in diameter. It means that the overall size of each series of swastikas has to change so to maintain the interlacing with the upper and lower series.

Not easy at all; nevertheless, it is always precisely made, even when incised.

It is the first time that I see it so badly made, where in many points even the simple central cross is not matching, and considering that it is painted, which is easier than incised, and on an object pretending being of Imperial quality, well, it is a non sense.

Best regards

Giovanni

Dear Giovanni,

You are totally right. The mark is not even leading here, it is the quality. I  have been looking at the quality of this bowl with saucer : http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/lot.2843.html/2008/splendours-of-the-qing-court-hk0285

And it is simply breath taking. If you look at the way the flowers are painted...exceptional.  It is by far not comparable to the bowl in question.

But  guess we can stop the discussion. It seems Peter thinks it is ok, the seller got his money and the buyer is happy considering he already gave positive feedback.

We all know what this is 🙂 

Kind regards

Staartmees

Dear Staartmees, thank you for letting me know about the already sent feedback.

In three or four days, an expensive item sold, packed, shipped, received, appreciated, and feedback released.

Hmmm… call me too suspicious, but the thing stinks.

Not normal, highly unusual.

Anyway, you are right, all it has been said, every one of us can take his own conclusions. And I am not referring to the bowl because that is more than clear, I am referring to how things go.

Giovanni

Posted by: clayandbrush

Dear Staartmees, thank you for letting me know about the already sent feedback.

In three or four days, an expensive item sold, packed, shipped, received, appreciated, and feedback released.

Hmmm… call me too suspicious, but the thing stinks.

Not normal, highly unusual.

Anyway, you are right, all it has been said, every one of us can take his own conclusions. And I am not referring to the bowl because that is more than clear, I am referring to how things go.

Giovanni

That means it wasn't sold, which is a good thing. They did that hoax to make it more authentic and give it a history of sale. It will resurface on Ebay soon, they will relist it again hoping others will fight to get it. Once the price was 'achieved' like that they will think now people will be ready to pay few thousands for it. I think that's what they aiming for.

Regards,
Adrian

Dear Giovanni,

I wonder what it means. The buyer has over 1100 feedbacks. He ( or she ) had 25% bidding history with this selller. You mentioned this before but I do not know how to place that. Does it mean he or she bid on over 250 items from this seller but bought only 8 ?

Kind regards

Staartmees

I think its worthwhile to accept this site for what it is.

It is a site where dealers with upcoming sales can, for a fee, promote their auction.    

For example, plan two ($30/week), gets a reminder on Peter's weekly utube video (one wonders if this is the Juice Plan)

https://bidamount.com/promote-your-upcoming-auction-on-bidamout

This site advertises itself as the place to find all the authentic ebay examples, without the fakes.

Well this week there are dodgy items from Jonies being promoted on this site.     At the same time I have 30 something items currently on ebay auction, and not one is mentioned on bidamount!    Clearly they are not doing what they say.

For a $10 fee, Bidamount has now positioned itself to authenticate items directly from the auction listing.   This seems like a conflict of interest, given that it also takes money to promote items for dealers.

The present example highlights this problem.    A questionable item being promoted on a site that claims to be all about authentication.

The only objective assessment of this item on this site, has occurred in this discussion, by those who have no financial connection to the outcome.

I think it's deeply disturbing that a similar discussion did not occur elsewhere on this site.

I also repeat what I've said elsewhere, porcelain is fragile.    Before the advent of aeroplanes, moving porcelain around the world, was a rough experience.     It is very rare to find real 18th Century (or earlier), and first half of the 19th Century examples that are in perfect condition.    Yet some ebay sellers offer 10-100 perfect items every week or two.    I've been in this business since about 1995.    I'm a founding member of our ceramic's circle, I've done antiques roadshows, and attended countless seminars and I can count on 2 hands the number of perfect example's Ive seen.     That said, I've a feeling that the majority of the ebay and catataki items promoted by this site this week, are all perfect!

In reply to the "Returns Not Accepted" ebay option.

I use this option.     It does not mean that misrepresented or damaged items can not be returned.    It is there to discourage other dealers of a particular ethnic persuasion, from attempting to resell your item before they buy it in the first place, and then return it if unsuccessful.

I even had one fellow in China tell me how he had bought several items on ebay.    Took his client to his local post office (or similar).    Kept the one's his client wanted to buy, and refused delivery on the others.

The 30 day returns policy for example, allows these "buyers" to rotate their inventory every 30 days (if it hasn't been sold at their end after 30 days, just return it, and get something else).     Imagine if other auction houses let you do that?     Its a terrible system, but it probably does give ebay higher sales volume (albeit some is returned), which looks good in their quarterly and annual reports.

I say no returns on my listings to try and direct these buyers to other sellers.      I hold up my end, and I expect the buyer to hold up theirs.     If there is a legitimate problem, there doesn't need to be a return policy, I will take care of it.

As for the bidder frequency, I can say that I know I have local dealers that buy from me over and over again (and some that try to).    There is one fellow who is a competitor of mine.    His strategy seems to be to watch what I buy at local auctions, then try to buy it from me cheaper on ebay.    If he witnesses me buy something at an auction for a $1000 for example, and then put it on ebay auction starting at $9.99, he will be all over that item to a certain point.   Sometimes he gets lucky, and pays less than I did.     Most of the time he gets outbid.   It would not surprise me at all, if he has a very high percentage bidder activity on some of my items.

I don’t think anyone was under any illusion that sellers may pay nominal fee for promotion on Bidamount? There are members on this forum who’ve had their items advertised on the newsletter and the weekly video - good for them I say! It’s no different to paying eBay to have an item promoted or, indeed, an auction house. Businesses don’t run on fresh air! There are overheads and staff to pay. Conversely, members of the forum are allowed to promote their items on the forum for free. I also do not think that all sellers have to pay? So any suggestion of shady dealings are somewhat unjustified?

If, however, it is being suggested that Bidamount is willing to promote fakes for a $10 fee, that’s a very serious accusation, along with an earlier statement regarding ‘fake praise from Peter’ regarding the enamel bowl. Such questions should be put directly to Bidamount, via email or telephone, not carelessly thrown about?

As regards the Bidamount authentication service, I have used this a few times and have had great advice regarding items not on the Bidamount list. There is no conflict of interest, I have been advised to avoid an item and have also been advised if something is a good buy. When I have bought an item off the Bidamount list and, after it has arrived, had any concerns, I send an email to Bidamount. I always get a very detailed and helpful response - for free.

I think the suggestion that Bidamount be much stricter with sellers repeatedly selling fakes is a very reasonable one. Having a site protocol could force these sellers to clean up their act.

When I joined the forum, I asked a few times regarding the surety of the authenticity of the items in the newsletter, the general consensus was that it is 99% accurate but that mistakes can happen. This, I think, is not unreasonable, no one is infallible. Admittedly it is very upsetting when you’re the 1%!

My concern is that grievences are being aired on the forum, without restraint, without airing those grievences directly to Peter & Co? Has anyone contacted Peter about this enamel bowl, Chamberlain or Joanie? I think it is unreasonable to expect Peter to come to the forum and answer every single query? A discussion via email would be much less confrontational? 

kind regards,

Nic

Being paid by sellers to promote 

and

Being paid by buyers to authenticate

This is fertile ground for a conflict of interest when the same item is involved.

What does one do when asked about the authenticity of an item that you've already promoted?

The subject item and discussion has naturally led to this question

I don’t understand why anyone would pay Bidamount for an authenticifaction of an item listed in the Bidamount newsletter? The fact that it is on the list  suggests that they already believe it is authentic?

I have only applied for authentification of items I’ve found myself. If I ever wanted authentification of a Bidamount item I would ask elsewhere. So I don’t understand your point.

Regards

Nic

I have to step in and agree with Nic, I was one of the first to sign on to the forum, at that time there was a few of us. Being a novice I truly  appreciated the effort put in by Peter and his staff to separate the wheat from the chaff. 

I find it hard to believe that Peter would knowingly risk his reputation in promoting fakes. As we all know a dealer with a reputation Of promoting fakes is not a professional at all.

as far as paying Bidamount for promotion of real items I have no issue with at all, every one has to cover expenses. We all benefit from the news letter.

i also truly appreciate those smart folks who regularly share their knowledge on the forum pages. We’ve had and still do have some really experienced posters. And for that I am grateful for as well.

Dear Giovanni -

Your more then welcome, my pleasure to help.

As for the drawing/detailing of the swastikas design I totally concur, it is Very Badly executed on the bowl in question - almost incomprehensible - and is laughable on an object which claims to be of "Imperial" quality!! 

Just one more - of many - details that betrays the 'fakers hand'!!

Stuart 

Well said Ronm.