Auction Anonymity Ended By Courts in New York
FINANCIAL TIMES
By Georgina Adam
NEW YORK---In New York, the Supreme Court has dropped a bombshell. In a recent judgement, it ruled that New York auctioneers will have to reveal the names of both consignors and buyers to ensure a sale contract is binding. Until now, such information was covered by the sacrosanct “confidentiality” clauses of the auction houses, and revealing it could be a disaster for them. Remember that the art trade is supply-driven, dependent on wooing vendors, who are the shyest of beasts. For various reasons – fiscal, family matters and so on – they generally insist on the deepest anonymity when they put something up for sale. In addition, auction houses can be vendors as well – they sell material they have acquired through failed, guaranteed sales, and they certainly wouldn’t want to publicise that either. [link]
By Georgina Adam
NEW YORK---In New York, the Supreme Court has dropped a bombshell. In a recent judgement, it ruled that New York auctioneers will have to reveal the names of both consignors and buyers to ensure a sale contract is binding. Until now, such information was covered by the sacrosanct “confidentiality” clauses of the auction houses, and revealing it could be a disaster for them. Remember that the art trade is supply-driven, dependent on wooing vendors, who are the shyest of beasts. For various reasons – fiscal, family matters and so on – they generally insist on the deepest anonymity when they put something up for sale. In addition, auction houses can be vendors as well – they sell material they have acquired through failed, guaranteed sales, and they certainly wouldn’t want to publicise that either. [link]
