Can OA prices be manipulated?

[Mister Trent]

Someone can ask anything they want.

 

Tell me about it.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Unknown-SATANIC-Priest-Preacher-SATAN-Evil-GOTH-art-666_W0QQitemZ150152155574QQcmdZViewItem?_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116

 

Is this considered market manipulation?

 

No, just a worthless piece of s.h.i.t. of interest to collectors of drek . . .

[malvin]

 

The way I see it . . . in an auction situation, I like to think that collectors are competing for artwork destined to be cherished parts of their collections.

 

When a dealer competes for the art, he's looking to snag the OA (if not for his own collection, if he collects), to re-offer at some future point for a higher price.

 

Genuine collectors lose out . . .

 

Next time they see the art, the price will be jacked-up (with the opportunity of meeting the 'new price' through time-payments, trade/cash or trade) . . .

 

I see this process as a way of dealers pushing-up (manipulating) prices.

 

If it was a public auction, the fans had a chance to win the page. If someone buys it later;

 

1. If the guy saw the auction and lost, he should bid more, or not pay the new price

2. If the guy didn't see the auction, well, what he paid was his max anyways. At least now he has a chance to own it.

 

Malvin

[Mister Trent]

2. If the guy didn't see the auction . . . At least now he has a chance to own it.

 

At a huge mark-up in price over what the OA recently sold for (and for the most part, I'm thinking specifically of art being offered through high-profile auction outfits, which most people should be aware of).

 

Once the re-priced OA (seemingly) sells on a dealer's site, a higher value has been established.

[Silow]

That is manipulation! The dealer is trying (or the auction house) to make us believe that it is worth much more than it is. Again, you can't argue with the price of the art (is a monet worth 77 million dollars) but you can argue how the price got there!!!!

 

The collectors wind up in the cold or at least paying more than they should have.

[malvin]

That is manipulation! The dealer is trying (or the auction house) to make us believe that it is worth much more than it is. Again, you can't argue with the price of the art (is a monet worth 77 million dollars) but you can argue how the price got there!!!!

 

The collectors wind up in the cold or at least paying more than they should have.

 

Under that logic, what is it called if someone buys a stock one day and sells it the next day for more? I don't want to get into a debate that OA is not art and not an investment, but I'm wondering how people that daytrade are viewed.

 

Malvin

[Mister Trent]

That is manipulation! The dealer is trying (or the auction house) to make us believe that it is worth much more than it is. Again, you can't argue with the price of the art (is a monet worth 77 million dollars) but you can argue how the price got there!!!!

 

The collectors wind up in the cold or at least paying more than they should have.

 

Under that logic, what is it called if someone buys a stock one day and sells it the next day for more? I don't want to get into a debate that OA is not art and not an investment, but I'm wondering how people that daytrade are viewed.

 

Malvin

 

This is a hobby for me, so I can't really equate to viewing my hobby as a business.

 

At the end of the day, I have my own views on the kinds of practices that constitute price manipulation. Maybe I'm in a minority on this one, I don't know . . . I don't really care.

 

If people think it's fine to pay (dealers') huge mark-ups in price (over what the art had recently hammered at, which they themselves have bought), so be it. I view it differently, that's all.

 

End of story . . . I'm not repeating myself anymore.