Hi Alan,

Great post and not that long, I always look forward to reading your informative posts. I agree with your comments therein.

I did look at the said item and the listing comments. I was a bit purtbed at his comment as to whether it was or was not said age. That is why I did not leave a bid. Too much info without any documentation to back up his claims.

If he wanted to sell said item or at least get a bid at the starting price of $3000 he should have in my opinion at least  posted a copy of the report from Sotheby's blotting out his personal details. I don't see the problem there and or why he feels uneasy about disclosing the report.

This is not an attack on Giovanni or his item. It is just my opinion as to how the listing on ebay was conducted. I have never seen any of his listing in the past and I can understand totally the hesitation that Alan had in placing bids.

Maybe one for Xin. I would appreciate his opinion on said item and the wording of the listing 

Mark

Dear Mark,

if you were in my place, you had an estimate from Sotheby's but you are not convinced and you think that it is indeed Guangxu, how will you list it? As being genuine Kangxi?

I am convinced that saying that it can either be one way or the other, excluding that it is a modern copy, as I did, is the more correct way. If I have provided in the sale the documentation from Sotheby’s, it would have been by most of the watchers like a valid proof that it was Kangxi. In total honesty I didn’t find that correct. Note, that Sotheby’s opinion was not based on pictures, a very well known Sotheby’s expert handled the pot and he said that it was Kangxi. I told him that I was not convinced but he said that he had no doubts. One of the reasons for not giving them the pot for sale at the time was just that I was not convinced and I didn’t took the risk to spend money to send it to London and then spend money again for the return if a colleague of him was not of the same opinion.

Most of the ebay sellers, if in my place, would have surely listed the pot with Sotheby’s evaluation, claiming it as being surely Kangxi.

I provided both possibilities, leaving to the purchaser the decision, as it normally is.

Kind regards

Giovanni

Hi Giovanni,

If Sotheby's gave you a written evaluation, then of course I would use that. You can't get much better that that unless you also got one from Christie's. Then it would be set in stone.

What you think or may think about an item is not a concern once the major auction gives their thumbs up for your item. It may be that what you thought was wrong.

It is the way your listing was worded (the uncertainty) that I believe made people think twice. If you list it again include the valuation and THEN leave it to the bidders to decide.

Mark

Dear Mark,

A sensible post from you, as always. There is a snag, though, as always!

The 'big boys' can accept an item as authentic, and then change their minds just before the auction happens. Usually the reason for this is that they show the upcoming lots to visiting experts for their final blessing. But if these express express doubts on something, that lot, previously accepted, is withdrawn at the last minute. So Giovanni may have got the thin end of the wedge in this respect, I'm not clear, he doesn't go into details.

It all depends upon what kind of written confirmation Giovanni has. He hasn't fully revealed the nature of it, and seems to be reticent to do so, perhaps for good reason. But if the documentation to which he refers had been, let's say, a written contract for a forthcoming sale with Sotheby's that he could have posted with his eBay listing, then that would certainly have removed the element of uncertainty from his description. It was this uncertainty that I believe deterred bidders who weren't prepared to risk a $3,000 opening bid.

Anyway, for my part, without physically inspecting Giovanni's pot, and as I explained previously, I wouldn't have enough confidence that it was Kangxi mark and period, based solely on what I could see of it in the pictures.

I'm glad it doesn't really matter to Giovanni that it didn't sell, because he loves it and can now keep it in his family. His experience may provide a general lesson for how to go about listing items on eBay, about what is likely to attract bidders and what is likely to deter them.

Alan 

Dear Mark,

I do not agree. If you look at my sales, I say that I date a piece only if I am sure. If I have doubts, I will say that.

Since I do not believe in the dating provided by them, I do not think correct to hide myself behind something that is not trustable in my opinion.

If you think that the major auction houses never fail, you are wrong. They fail, and especially in the last years, having gone the old experts.

Now they mainly believe in provenance. Is it necessary to be expert for reading a paper? Anyone can do that.

Dear Alan, you understood perfectly some things. Yes I had a written proposal from them. But it already happened that I have sent something to London and then I had to take it back.

What you said about the visiting expert is true. And what is really bad, is that it is not granted that the visiting expert is a real expert.

It happened to me. That is the reason why I am furious with Sotheby’s. In a “Important Chinese Art” auction in NY there was only two snuff bottles, one being mine, a fabulous 18^th century Imperial Qianlong bottle.

Superb quality, superb patina. One hour before the sale they withdraw it because someone told them that it was new. New, would you believe that, with a superb, impossible to fake patina? And with a top quality carving, clearly made by scalpel and not by rotary modern tools? Are they blind?

The fact is that I know who told that to them, a super respected dealer in the snuff bottles field. Note that in a previous sale they listed and sold a similar bottle, not so nice, really average actually, of much lesser quality, which was clearly brand new. They listed it as 18^th C. and it fetched 38,200 dollars! A new bottle, ridiculous. They should be sued for that. Who bought that bottle will realize one day the truth. Ah, of course, it belonged from a known collection, that is the important factor, isn’t it?

The conclusion is that I become crazy for sending the bottle to NY, to take it back, with relevant costs, and now I have a bottle that is worth at least 50,000 dollars, that is “fired” because it was listed by Sotheby’s and then withdrawn. Thank you Sotheby’s, you have such great experts! You should be ashamed.

Kind regards

Giovanni

Hi Giovanni

Thank you for your reply and I note comments therein.

No I do not believe any auction house, big or small are always correct in their evaluation, and yes they have made mistakes in the past or though they are very coy about admitting same.

That also applies to collectors and dealers. Nobody knows everything, and the very best can be caught out.

My point was the way your listing was worded. If you could stand back at look at the listing not from a subjective point of view but that of an objective point you may see other.

 It is very difficult at the best-of-times to have items accepted by Sotheby's/Christie's. Having said THAT ANY VALUATION/APPRAISAL by the fore mentioned is an obvious selling point regardless of what you personally think and or believe.

Sorry to hear about your experience with Sotheby's. They more so than Christies can be very difficult to deal with. Being a respected dealer/collector and having the added bonus of provenance is all they are really looking for.

I like you have had some unfavourable dealings with both of them spanning back to the early 80's.

Mark

Dear Mark,

sorry to hear that you too had bad experiences with them. It is very frustrating.

It happens also that they sell let say a Song bowl for incredible high price and then you offer them the same bowl and then they refuse it alleging that it is not reaching their minimum estimate.

Note that it is not matter of authenticity. The matter is that they privilege some clients.  

Kind regards

Giovanni

Dear Giovanni and Mark,

Much of what you both have to say about the practices of the major auction houses is perfectly correct. The word of some experts is taken as the word of God, and when a pronouncement is made by them, then everyone falls silent in awe.

I have argued the case on a number of occasions with representatives at Bonhams, Christies, and Sotheby's, that because some high-end fakes are so extremely sophisticated, and because even those same God-like experts can be and have been taken in (they are by no means beyond being fooled, however much they pride themselves on their abilities), then forensic, scientific analysis is the only decisive way forward in certain cases.

Such analysis has long been conducted on some artefacts, as for example when TL testing is applied to determine a date, but not all artefacts are capable of being tested in this way. Bonhams made much of a partnership that they had established with the Cranfield Laboratory a few years ago, whereby XRF testing would be developed and a database established against which objects tested could be assessed, but as far as I'm aware, this partnership seems to have fizzled out. A pity, because this development might have offered a forensic and objective approach to the assessment of porcelain that at present is left solely to those same God-like experts who, as some of us know from personal experience, are not quite so God-like after all.

The respect shown at the big auction houses for the skills of connoisseurship alone may be all very well, provided that such respect does not turn into blind idolatry. Sometimes, connoisseurship alone reaches the limit of its capacity to make accurate and meaningful assessments. 

I too could cite examples - at least four, in fact - from personal experience to add to those that you've both already alluded to. Indeed, the experiences have been not only with Sotheby's, but also with the other two big London-based auction houses. But that would be another day's work. Suffice it to say that your views both have much to be said for them.

Alan

Hi Alan thanks for your post an comments therein. Very much appreciated.

Giovanni with respect to the 'song bowl' comment you are correct. Money talks especially if you are in the big league.

I recently sent a USA$100 incised full length cigarette case to christies for possible sale. They had sold one in Kensington (now closed) in their sale 28/04/2105 sale # 10645 lot # 246 for the unreal price of GB4375.

They agreed the one I had was real and same etc but they declined putting it up in their auction. There reasoning was simple (by phone/no email) they informed me that the auction room had closed and because it attained a very high price no other room was prepared to take it on.

If you have a chance Giovanni I have posted a youtube video of fakes coming out of China. It is worth watching if you have not already done so.

Kindest regards to both of you,

Mark

Dear Giovanni, I have found that a watermark in all of your photos can help avoid this sort of buyer. It is not very difficult...you can either use a special watermark program, or use regular photo editing software. It's not a perfect solution, but as you develop a following, buyers will recognize the name and then find your item on ebay.

For this example, I created the text, raised the "transparency" to 72%, then saved it as a .png file. I then used "insert" and placed it over your photo (hope you don't mind!).

Best regards,

Bill

Dear Alan and Mark,

sorry to hear that you too had bad experience with he major auction houses.

Dear mark I don’t know which is the video about the fakes that you are talking about, but I am well aware about the really dangerous level reached by the fake industry in the last years. Now everything is faked, regardless the quality. I mean not only high level pieces are faked.

Dear Bill, I did that before, until some months back, but now that is no more allowed on eBay. And not only watermark, any artwork, or texts, are allowed. For example, I can’t anymore highlight by an arrow a barely seen hairline on a porcelain. That is a crazy policy, I am convinced that for certain type of objects it is almost impossible to continue selling on eBay because of that.

Kind regards

Giovanni

Hello Giovanni, did ebay actually remove your listings or photos? On ebay USA, there was such an uproar that they changed their minds, and decided not to enforce the watermark rule. I'm wondering if they did the same thing for Italy. 

-Bill

Dear Bill,

I am very interested about what you said. Do you have more information about that? It is a big problem to me to be not allowed to insert arrows pointing toward damages etc. I had problems because of that.

Months ago I did contact ebay Italy by phone and they confirmed the rule.

I saw that some sellers still have watermarks in the pictures, but I thought that they simply escaped the control.

Now, if there are chances that the rule is not that strict, I will come back with the watermarks.

Thank you if you will provide some more information.

Kind regards

Giovanni

Hi Giovanni,

The u-tube video I posted can be found following the links 'fake china antiques' from www.chungantiques.com

Report by Steve Chao from aljazeera.

Mark