martin swan Posted February 9 Report Posted February 9 18 hours ago, GeorgeH said: Apparently not if you were the buyer. No I think the price was pretty realistic. The problem for me lies elsewhere … very public sales create spurious data. With any auction result, unless you know the specific instrument intimately that result is relatively meaningless. And yet it’s shouted from the rooftops.
martin swan Posted February 9 Report Posted February 9 23 hours ago, matesic said: Why exactly is an astronomical price "good" unless you're an investor who values profit over any musical consideration? I’ve never come across an “investor” who wasn’t extremely interested in musical considerations. Most high level investor sales involve extensive blind trials and jurys … Of course there are unscrupulous dealerships who will flog a wormy knackered ship of theseus to an old myopic deaf foggy under the aegis of an investment scheme, but that’s increasingly rare. This is an age of extreme scepticism.
GeorgeH Posted February 9 Author Report Posted February 9 1 hour ago, martin swan said: No I think the price was pretty realistic. As you know, in a fair auction where all bidders have the same information, the winner generally pays too much. In cognitive bias terms, this is called the “winner’s curse.” There is also a cognitive bias called “anchoring” where the first party in a negotiation to mention a number tends to anchor the negotiation toward achieving that number. Auction estimates serve as a strong anchor towards a final price. From this observer’s point of view, it was interesting that the bidders overcame the anchoring bias of the estimate. As the final price was so much lower than the low estimate, the buyer may feel they got a great deal, but they still may be a victim of the winner’s curse. Only time will tell. Funny that Tarisio subtly (or maybe not so subtly) kind of rubbed it in Sotheby’s face that the price was so low relative to Sotheby’s estimate. That’s the second time in a year or so that a major art auction house has had a poor result selling a Strad relative to their estimates.
martin swan Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 10 hours ago, GeorgeH said: As you know, in a fair auction where all bidders have the same information, the winner generally pays too much. In cognitive bias terms, this is called the “winner’s curse.” There is also a cognitive bias called “anchoring” where the first party in a negotiation to mention a number tends to anchor the negotiation toward achieving that number. Auction estimates serve as a strong anchor towards a final price. From this observer’s point of view, it was interesting that the bidders overcame the anchoring bias of the estimate. As the final price was so much lower than the low estimate, the buyer may feel they got a great deal, but they still may be a victim of the winner’s curse. Only time will tell. There is a world of difference between the behaviour of professional bidders and that of amateurs. There is also a world of difference between the Joachim Ma and the lady Blunt, which might have given Tarisio pause …
GeorgeH Posted February 10 Author Report Posted February 10 4 hours ago, martin swan said: There is a world of difference between the behaviour of professional bidders and that of amateurs. I think that Sotheby’s and Christie’s are quite familiar with the behavior of professional bidders. All of us human beings suffer from (or benefit from) our cognitive biases, even if we don’t want to believe that we do.
martin swan Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 3 minutes ago, GeorgeH said: I think that Sotheby’s and Christie’s are quite familiar with the behavior of professional bidders. All of us human beings suffer from (or benefit from) our cognitive biases, even if we don’t want to believe that we do. Well, generally with an item like this it’s a compromise between the algorithms of the auction house and the expectations of the seller. And then there’s internal competition between auction houses to get the high profile sales. So I don’t believe it’s quite as failsafe as you make it out to be …
GeorgeH Posted February 10 Author Report Posted February 10 2 hours ago, martin swan said: So I don’t believe it’s quite as failsafe as you make it out to be … To be clear, I don’t think it is at all failsafe. The cognitive biases of buyers and sellers ensure that. And “professionals” are not excluded, as can also be seen in securities trading. There is no escaping the foibles of our own brains.
martin swan Posted February 10 Report Posted February 10 1 hour ago, GeorgeH said: To be clear, I don’t think it is at all failsafe. The cognitive biases of buyers and sellers ensure that. And “professionals” are not excluded, as can also be seen in securities trading. There is no escaping the foibles of our own brains. I don’t disagreed with you, but if you’re in business it makes sense to learn about your biases and overcome those which aren’t profitable. With bitter experience you learn what you can sell something for and can therefore assess what you should buy it for. If you do that with a degree of rigour then this “winner’s curse” concept doesn’t apply. One might say that any purchase is cursed since there’s always a theoretical possibility that you might have used the money better. Looking at estimates is a fool’s game.
Altgeiger Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 Christopher Reuning's opinion might be interesting here: Quote The hammer price of $10M may have been well below the over hyped publicity surrounding the sale, but it was a very strong result for this violin by all measures. Most importantly, it was great for the New England Conservatory who will put these funds to important use. We have cared for this violin since the weekend of Sihon Ma’s death when I was summoned to collect the violin from his home in Philadelphia and store it in my vault for safe keeping. After that, I arranged for it to be exhibited at the museum in Cremona and ultimately aided in its acquisition by NEC. From that point, we cared for the violin during the loan periods of several of NEC’s best violinists until it finally came time to advice that it be pulled out of circulation in order to receive a much needed restoration. This very big restoration job was done at my recommendation by John Becker of Chicago who did a tremendous transformation of the top which ranks as one of the most genius jobs I have ever seen. While I am not in favor of the exaggerations of the auction house, I am thrilled that it sold ultimately for a price that was exactly in line with what most knowledgeable professionals including myself believed it should. It was a good day for a lucky buyer and a great day for the New England Conservatory. https://slippedisc.com/2025/02/what-happened-to-a-strad-between-death-and-sale/
Blank face Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 23 minutes ago, Altgeiger said: Christopher Reuning's opinion might be interesting here: https://slippedisc.com/2025/02/what-happened-to-a-strad-between-death-and-sale/ Thanks! Just reading the comments below this and thinking "what a safe and warm place Maestronet has become".
match Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 31 minutes ago, Blank face said: "what a safe and warm place Maestronet has become". As long as there are no rude comments, yes.
Blank face Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 25 minutes ago, match said: As long as there are no rude comments, yes. Are you implying I was rude, are you?
martin swan Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 the slipped Disc comments section is a uniquely warm environment … if you’re into burning witches
Wood Butcher Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 It's amazing reading comments in various places around the web about this violin. The keyboard warriors are really frothing at the gills, and almost all of them seem to think they know better how to sell a Strad, than the people who do.
martin swan Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 1 hour ago, Wood Butcher said: It's amazing reading comments in various places around the web about this violin. The keyboard warriors are really frothing at the gills, and almost all of them seem to think they know better how to sell a Strad, than the people who do. I have some experience in failing to sell Strads. Does that count?
Wood Butcher Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 Its a rarified group to be in, so consider it a success of sorts
martin swan Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 23 minutes ago, Wood Butcher said: Its a rarified group to be in, so consider it a success of sorts I was thinking that for every person who has sold a Strad there are probably a hundred who haven’t … but then it occurred to me that every time a Strad is sold at least 20 people claim to have sold it.
henrypeacham Posted February 13 Report Posted February 13 22 hours ago, martin swan said: I was thinking that for every person who has sold a Strad there are probably a hundred who haven’t … but then it occurred to me that every time a Strad is sold at least 20 people claim to have sold it. Reminds me of the Los Angeles studio session scene back in the 80s when there was a sudden influx of Russian players, each claiming to have been a former concert master at the Bolshoi.
feelingfaceform Posted March 11 Report Posted March 11 On 2/7/2025 at 11:42 PM, GeorgeH said: Prices in the world of fine arts aren’t setting records like they were a few years ago. https://www.thestrad.com/news/record-breaker-baron-knoop-stradivari-violin-sells-for-23-million/19394.article
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now