The Sotheby's Price Fixing Scandal

Vincent Anthony Falkiewicz

Even though the price fixing scandal of the early 2000's was damaging to not only the players involved, but also the market in general, it still has not changed the perception of the auction house in the art market.  Under the economic conditions of the price-fixing period, the market would have slowed anyway.  This explains the slowing production of the time.  One way it is shown this has not affected the perception of the auction house is, as have seen in recent readings, the auction house's increasing popularity.  More than its increasing popularity is its increasing success.  The auction house continues to succeed in properly connecting buyers and sellers.  More and more buyers are entering the market with the bettering market conditions, and no complaints about overpriced art have been made in recent years.  Additionally, the way the situation was handled by not only the law enforcers, but by others in the art community, shows how serious of an offense this way.  More specifically, it displays how serious everyone takes events like this in the art world, and how it was only a few bad people, not the whole scene.  It is even showed where Taubman tells how sick he felt for letting the whole community down.  The auction house in general has definitely not been affected by this small yet serious event. 

Erica Gilbert-Levin  

While the Sotheby's price-fixing scandal led to professional and even emotional damage for particular individuals involved – Sotheby's Alfred Taubman (who did wind up going to jail) and Dede Brooks resigned their positions at the auction house, and Sotheby's employees suffered cuts in their stock options, experienced increased lay-offs, and "reported [...feeling] physically ill because of the betrayal" from their superiors (Ashenfelter and Graddy, 12) – ultimately, it does not appear that the scandal significantly affected the larger perception within the art world of the auction house as a necessary place to do its business. Because the brunt of the direct and immediate burden of the scandal effectively fell on Sotheby's little-known employees, who, as non-integral players in the art world, could be replaced, and because Christie's, the other powerful auction house involved, was largely unaffected, it appears all too easy for life to go on as always in the art community – and this life included using the auction house as a primary forum for selling and buying art. Perhaps this is because the auction house removes some of the "politicking" from art sales, allowing for more inclusive and even "democratic" process, according to some of those Thornton interviewed, and perhaps it is because "an auction is a staggeringly swift way to sell art" (Thornton, 19). Perhaps it is because the auction house serves as a place to see and be seen within the art community in the all-important competition for status. Or because in a recessive economy, art is a wise investment (Thornton, 17), and people can buy art directly at an auction, which "gets rid of [...] hierarchical [waiting] lists" for art that favor the wealthy and well-positioned (Thornton, 14). But whatever the causes, today's reality is that Sotheby's and Christie's continue to reign as successful and powerful places to do business in the art world. In 2005, the two auction houses made "somewhere in the neighborhood of a half-billion dollars' worth of art over a two-week period" on "Impressionist, modern, and contemporary art in New York," writes Kelly Thomas in Art News. In 2004, Sotheby's out-sold Christie's (Thomas). Christie's continues to exceed Sotheby's in sales, but according to The Economist, Sotheby's is "creeping up on its rival." What is more, says Marion Maneker of Art Market Monitor, "Auction sales represent 20-25% of all sales." It does not appear, then, that the price-fixing scandal effectively altered the role of the auction as a primary place to do business in the art world.

References:

http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=15522452

http://www.artnews.com/issues/article.asp?art_id=1890

http://www.artmarketmonitor.com/2009/10/01/how-big-is-the-art-market/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1391957/Taubman-is-jailed-for-Sothebys-price-fixing.html

http://nymag.com/arts/art/features/30620/

http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/b/diana_d_brooks/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._Alfred_Taubman

Kimberly Ann Phoenix  

It does not seem like the scandal have had a negative affect on the art auction.  In November 2010 during the evening sale at Sotheby's the 49 lots sold for a total value of $222,454,500 (Ferreira).    The evening sale at Christie's of 70 lots had a value of $272,873,000.  The auction attracts big money and a group of buyers who like the thrill of the win.  In the art world the auctions at Sotheby's and Christie's are the place to be, as pointed out in the reading from Monday a good seat is a coveted thing, this has not changed since the scandal. The major players in the scandal have all moved on and not into hiding, Alfred Taubman has written his memoir.  At the book signing release he was surrounded by powerful people (Peers).  Patricia Hambrecht is a mover and shaker in the jewelry world (Peers).  DeDe Brooks retired to her Florida home but had recently been spotted at art auctions (Peers).   Christopher Davidge is living well partly because of the severance package he received and moved on to speculating in contemporary Asian painting (Peers).  The auction house is just one more way that people with money can purchase contemporary art work.  Those with connection and relationship with dealers can purchase from the galleries other prefer the auction.  The Auction houses have been around for over 200 years and if the resent sales are any indication they will still be around for a long time.  

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5377/is_201103/ai_n57241264/

 http://nymag.com/arts/art/features/30620/