While Peter Lik is a very talented photographer who produces beautiful images, he is a non-entity in the art world. Prices of this magnitude are paid for collectibility much more often than for actual aesthetics of the item itself. Where the item is an easily replicable digital print, from a photographer without any established resale history at serious art auctions, collectibility is almost nil.
Moreover, ask yourself this: would Lik have sold that print for $2 Million? Or $3 million? ..... all to double or treble his previous "high sale"? Damn right he would have. So why would a buyer offer three or four times MORE than that gratuitously. None of this has a shred of credibility or reality to it. To a mental walk-through on this:
"Nice print Peter. Give you a $1m for it."
"No, it's $6.5m".
"Hmm. It would look great in my living room, but $1.5m's the highest I can go."
"Now you're just insulting me, mate. I said $6.5m. If you want bargain art, we have some Adams prints in the back."
"Well, ok, since my sixth wife also really likes it, I'll go $2m for you, Peter. But that's the limit."
"Piss off."
"I have my lawyer on the phone ready to initiate a wire to your account in the Channel Islands."
"No, sod off you cheap cunt."
Not to say truly stupid rich people, ignorant of virtually every principle applicable to the realm in which they are operating, don't exist. Just saying that the odds of M. Lik finding two of them seems statistically improbable.
Just sayin'.
- N.
I raised some questions earlier in this thread based on the limited factual information available to us via the press release. I questioned then why the purchaser (wanting to remain anonymous) would agree to a press release and my reasoning was very much along the same lines as your "conversation" above. Perhaps it provides no insight into the (in)credibility of the claimed price paid, but I still wonder about the motive of any "anonymous" purchaser who agrees to PR that will obviously put at risk (at least to some tangible degree) the purchaser's anonymity. Since then I've looked up some information about the purchaser's lawyer. What's interesting is that he concentrates his practice in art law and representation of artists and patrons. He's also a serious (albeit young) collector of contemporary LA art and comes from a family of well known museum and art patrons. The guy is obviously tapped into the art scene and, as a collector himself, surely knows his way around the funny stuff associated with valuations of works of art. So, in the spirit of your humorous hypothetical conversation between Lik and the purchaser, let's continue with the phone call from the purchaser to his lawyer the next day:
"Hi Josh, I'd like you to represent me on a substantial purchase of three photos by Peter Lik."
"Mr X., I'm glad you called because I remember hearing about Lik Galleries being the subject of a number of consumer complaints, and the secondary market for his work is notoriously poor. I seem to recall there was a claimed sale of one of his works for a million or so that raised a number of eyebrows. So, how much are we talking?"
"Well, the whole deal is $10 million and the one I really want is priced at $6.5 million. I tried to get the price down, but Peter drives a hard bargain. I really was up against the wall on this one."
[Long pause]
"Ummm...wow...Mr. X. That's a lot for a couple of photos. You do realize that $6.5 million is well above the highest amount ever paid at auction for a photograph, right? Have you had any expert appraisals done? Can I direct you to a few art investment advisors I trust?"
"Well, these are each unique works. For instance the really expensive one is a one-of-a-kind print. Well, I mean sort of. There are a bunch of the same print at smaller sizes but they're all in color. This one is in black and white! So it's special, you know? Like, really unique. I mean the fact that the color versions are selling for about 1/100th of the asking price is irrelevant, right? How would an appraiser be able to give me a good valuation for such a one-of-a-kind work?"
"Trust me, they can do it."
"Well, my wife thinks the photos will look awesome in our Malibu beach house and I really like the works too. Besides, with the right press release, the publicity will be so great that there will be a feeding frenzy for Peter's work, and they'll surely appreciate in value as a result. By the way, that's where you come into the equation. I want to remain anonymous, but I need you to put your professional credibility on the line by attesting to the legitimacy of the sale. I know that the prior Lik record-breaking sale was questioned by many, so I figure if I have my mouthpiece...eerrr, I mean, 'my lawyer'...listed in the press release nobody will be able to question the legitimacy of the transaction. Smart thinking, right?"
"Ummm, yeah, I suppose so. Considering my stature as a savvy young art collector of contemporary art, putting my personal credibility on the line with no ability to actually say anything of substance about the bona fides of the deal won't be an embarrassment for me. I'm sure that nobody in the art world will make fun of me for getting involved in what will be widely derided as a sham. It'll actually be a great chance for me to advance my career as a valued advisor to art purchasers, I'm sure, so I'm happy to help out. Now, let's discuss details..."