Fellow appraiser Susan Tarman sent me another article from artnet news, with more details on the recent judges ruling in the Macklowe divorce and the division/sale of the art collection. Yesterday I posted on some of the differences in the valuation of the important artwork. The artnet news names the appraisers, Gurr Johns for Mrs Macklowe and Winston Fine Art for Mr Macklowe.
artnet news reports on the division of property and appraisals
Source: artnet newsLinda’s appraiser—Christopher Gaillard of the firm Gurr Johns—valued the work by comparing it to two versions of a different sculpture by Giacometti sold in 2010 and 1990, as well as the sale of another version of Le Nez from 1992, with prices ranging from $25 million to less than $1 million. As a result, he determined the market value of the work would be $35 million.
Meanwhile, Harry’s expert, Elizabeth von Habsburg of Winston Fine Art, used two different auction sales of Giacometti sculptures that sold in the $50 million range in 2010 and 2013. She also referenced more recent Giacometti sculptures sold privately for between $50 million and $100 million, and the recent surge of interest in his work. She concluded the market value of the work would be, conservatively, $65 million.
Further complicating matters, although Harry’s expert “ascribed a higher value to more of the art” than Linda’s expert, “that was not always the case,” according to the ruling. For example, Gaillard estimated the value of Pollock’s Number 17 at $35 million, while Von Habsburg calculated $15 million. Once again, the difference was driven by their reliance on different combinations of comparable auction and private sales and prices for other works from the same series.
As a result of the disparity in valuations, Drager divided the works into different groupings, or “schedules,” in her decision. The art in the first and second grouping has been assigned specific values on which both sides could agree. The third grouping has not.
 |
No comments:
Post a Comment