ToddLevin

5 ms·

1.
by ToddLevin 1y ago
"...on top of a chimney..." wait - what?!?
2.
by ToddLevin 1y ago
You are incorrect - it was not Sotheby's who decided "not to sell", it was the consigner who set their reserve at $70 million, and would not lower it, even though Sothebys actively suggested that they do so a day or two befor
3.
by ToddLevin 1y ago
No worries, always glad to be of service if I can! I've worked in the art world (I have a private art advisory) for about 45 years now, and worked at Sotheby's for five years in the 1990s as well, so I know this territory extraor
4.
by ToddLevin 1y ago
Just for clarity - this was not an "enhanced hammer" deal. It was a simple fact that the consigner set their reserve at $70 million, and the consigner would not lower their reserve, even knowing the risk that the work would public
5.
by ToddLevin 1y ago
There's nothing remotely deceptive. Everybody understands there is a publicly available printed pre-auction estimate, and everybody understands that there is a reserve existing, only known to the consigner and the auction house, which
6.
by ToddLevin 1y ago
This is Todd Levin, who is quoted in the New York Times article above. People seem to be very confused about how public auctions legally work. Here is a short lesson, being that I worked at Sotheby's for five years in the 1990s. An auc
7.
by ToddLevin 1y ago
This is Todd Levin, who is quoted in the NYT article you have referenced. No one was willing to pay $64.25 million. That was just a chandelier bid by the auctioneer Ollie who was trying to get somebody up to open with a minimum bid of $70