Fresh Links!

What was he thinking? Seriously. He re-sells a Dumas ptg through the gallery (normally galleries updates resale the prices to correlate with the primary market, so that means he made $$ as of course Dumas’ prices have gone up since joining Zwirner. I think the issue here is that he could have potentially made more money selling the ptg at auction but he chose to sell it through the gallery which means less $$. And then could not keep the “relationship”.

Also at the time, that was probably done through Zwirner& Wirth, no? She wasn’t represented by DZ at the time of the resale. She’s had a longstanding relationship with Zwirner & Wirth. Zwirner has always said his relationships with artists are more important than with collectors…isn’t he a top collector…he should know that resale – even with the primary gallery – is NOT cool.

If you want it so badly, go buy a ptg at auction…he probably made money the first time but probably didn’t want to spend the profit the second time around…

…That is not cool, suing a gallery because they would not sell him something, after he SOLD something off…especially Dumas, who has a notoriously “vibrant” secondary market…Zwirner is not stupid!!!

PS: I know this is a pro-DZ post but it IS NOT coming from the gallery. Only an opinion.

Wait, ‘resale – even with the primary gallery – is NOT cool’? What a disingenuous crock, especially for discussion of someone with a secondary market like Dumas.

It’s entirely Dumas’ prerogative to not want to sell to someone who she perceives/decides is speculating in her work. Fine. And it’s totally legit for DZ to promise he’d crack down and help her get her market and prices under control. If that means cutting Robins out, so be it.

But unless there’s a clause or an agreement to never resell, or only ever donate work to museums, with restrictions that it never be deaccessioned–see how absurd it can get?–Robins selling back to/through the artist’s gallery was entirely the ‘right’ thing to do. Suing his way to the top of the waitlist, not so much.

So where does speculation fit into that? How, or why does someone sell the work of an artist they later will SUE to have the rights to buy? IMHO he thought he had a bit more control of her market than what he actually has. THAT’S BECAUSE DZ HAD DONE A GREAT JOB – to protect the artist’s interests. The claim seems to be that he was DENIED PRIMARY ACCESS because he SOLD ON THE SECONDARY. It may be true that selling through the primary gallery is the right thing to do under most circumstances but it is COMMON KNOWLEDGE that once collectors start selling off works of LIVING artists any top gallery – Zwirner is a very very high level gallery will not like them all that much. Why? BECAUSE AT HER LEVEL THERE ARE CHOICES. Dumas is not prolific and there are others who are willing to buy. So a dealer – if they are looking after the artist – will sell to the person (or institution) of highest confidence who is LESS LIKELY TO FLIP. As most people know, primary prices, at even at boom time level, are lower than the high prices fetched at auction. This person, I bet, made money the first time around with the resale and now is complaining. Dumas’ market level is one of the highest for any living female artist it has been pointed out many times. It’s a very logical decision rationale for this. It’s amazing what galleries have to deal with, seriously. I have great respect for Zwirner.

Sorry another addendum with clarification. In my opinion these are the facts below. There is some confusion about resale & the role of a secondary market vs. primary market gallery:

Step 1: Collector sells work by Dumas to Zwirner & Wirth which did not represent Dumas at the time.
Note A: Zwirner and Wirth was exclusively a secondary market gallery which re-sells work and does not represent artists
Note B: As per above, there should have been NO re-sale first right of refusal contract as it makes no sense. Z+W, did not represent the artist.

Step 2: David Zwirner – A SEPARATE BUSINESS ENTITY from Zwirner& Wirth – becomes the primary dealer for Dumas.

Note A: The role of a gallery now changes. We are talking PRIMARY market which has a very different goal. In the case of Zwirner, it is to support and protect the artist’s career and market.
Note B: Dumas’ popularity in Auction rooms and high critical standing (i.e.MOMA retrospective) are widely discussed in the press at the time between the time of the collector’s resale and the supposed “blacklisting”.
Note C: The high prices of Dumas are subject also of press articles and bafflement in some quarters.

Step 3: NOW, after Zwirner becomes the primary dealer, collector tries to purchase Dumas picture from Zwirner. DZ, who is clearly not stupid, puts the two and two together and sees a collector who has sold him a Dumas picture and now would like to buy one. OK.
ConsiderA: Experience with collector was that collector had previously sold picture to HIM. Meaning that DZ did not make assumptions or speculated, he simply relied on fact and experiences he himself had with collector.
ConsiderB: As a primary dealer, again, one of his main concerns would be to sustain the artist’s career and to minimize needless speculation.
Consider C: Using COMMON SENSE one gathers that collector, is among many persons and institutions who are willing to purchase a picture by Dumas. DZ, during a highly speculative moment in Dumas’ market, is careful to not let pictures by Dumas out onto the auction rooms. DZ decides to veto purchase by collector, who is among many other collectors and institutions, not because of personal issues BUT BECAUSE HE IS INTELLIGENT.
Considering all the above: Collector is upset because dealer is doing his job, which is to protect the artist’s career. Collector cannot grasp how his previous sale of a Dumas picture might be at odds with the gallery’s vision and handling of the artist’s sales and market.

Sorry another addendum with clarification. In my opinion these are the facts below. There is some confusion about resale & the role of a secondary market vs. primary market gallery:

Step 1: Collector sells work by Dumas to Zwirner & Wirth which did not represent Dumas at the time.
Note A: Zwirner and Wirth was exclusively a secondary market gallery which re-sells work and does not represent artists
Note B: As per above, there should have been NO re-sale first right of refusal contract as it makes no sense. Z+W, did not represent the artist.

Step 2: David Zwirner – A SEPARATE BUSINESS ENTITY from Zwirner& Wirth – becomes the primary dealer for Dumas.

Note A: The role of a gallery now changes. We are talking PRIMARY market which has a very different goal. In the case of Zwirner, it is to support and protect the artist’s career and market.
Note B: Dumas’ popularity in Auction rooms and high critical standing (i.e.MOMA retrospective) are widely discussed in the press at the time between the time of the collector’s resale and the supposed “blacklisting”.
Note C: The high prices of Dumas are subject also of press articles and bafflement in some quarters.

Step 3: NOW, after Zwirner becomes the primary dealer, collector tries to purchase Dumas picture from Zwirner. DZ, who is clearly not stupid, puts the two and two together and sees a collector who has sold him a Dumas picture and now would like to buy one. OK.
ConsiderA: Experience with collector was that collector had previously sold picture to HIM. Meaning that DZ did not make assumptions or speculated, he simply relied on fact and experiences he himself had with collector.
ConsiderB: As a primary dealer, again, one of his main concerns would be to sustain the artist’s career and to minimize needless speculation.
Consider C: Using COMMON SENSE one gathers that collector, is among many persons and institutions who are willing to purchase a picture by Dumas. DZ, during a highly speculative moment in Dumas’ market, is careful to not let pictures by Dumas out onto the auction rooms. DZ decides to veto purchase by collector, who is among many other collectors and institutions, not because of personal issues BUT BECAUSE HE IS INTELLIGENT.
Considering all the above: Collector is upset because dealer is doing his job, which is to protect the artist’s career. Collector cannot grasp how his previous sale of a Dumas picture might be at odds with the gallery’s vision and handling of the artist’s sales and market.