Topic: Is this genuine Lalique

[scimiman]

I stand corrected .
Thanks Mike

[scimiman]

I am absolutely speechless after being told by at least three experts that he did not have a Lalique bowl this person allowed the auction to carry on.
8 Bidders have managed to rack the price up to £155.
This person was told that what he had was 'Musling' bowl by Per Lütken for Holmegaard in c.1995. but it made no difference.

It really is about time that Ebay who are always banging on about Fair and honest trading opened up a portal so that things like this can be reported and the sale stopped until such times as a proper provenance is established.

:huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh: :huh:

[Pip]

Sadly, this is the way it goes with *some* sellers - being honest and scrupulous isn't part of their agenda.  I was once contacted by someone who wanted to sell a load of Holmegaard Carnaby range - I asked him to email me a photo, when he did there were 6 genuine HG Carnaby pieces out of a collection of around 40 pieces of glass - the remaining pieces were Far Eastern copies.  The shapes, colours and quality were all wrong for HG.  I told him this as gently as I could - he refused to believe me, I tried to point him in the direction of a few reliable online resources where he could check for himself (including this one) but he wouldn't listen.  His words were 'I don't want to get that anal about it' - I told him it wasn't a matter of being 'anal' but of being HONEST - he put the phone down on me (after a few insults about my knowledge and my taste!)

All you can do about these types of sellers really is to give them the benefit of your knowledge and then move on.  It's unfortunate that buyers get unwittingly duped but I'd say that some responsibility also lies with the buyers to do their research, know what they're buying and how much to pay.

[Lustrousstone]

Ebay don't care if you do report it. At least this one is decent quality "not Lalique", unlike this one http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,27669.msg150984.html#msg150984

[obscurities]

It appears that you are operating under the mistaken impression that they (ebay) actually care....  

I gave that concept up years ago.....

It also appears that you may believe that he (the seller) did not know what he has..... or that he actually cares.... 

I also gave that concept up years ago.....

IMHO any guy that responds with the threat of coming to see you and also to sue you knows exactly what he is doing....  You would have a tough time convincing me otherwise....

ebay allows listings like that, and even if you reported it to them it would be allowed to continue.....  Yet I ran a book for sale ($29 fixed price) which I described the condition in the title as "As New" and they pulled it immediately for using "As New", since it was used. I stated it was used.  The book had never been opened before I got it.  

It was, in their words "Search Engine Manipulation" !!

Yet you can report every "several hundred dollar" glass listing with multiple brands (ie: Tiffany Loetz Durand Steuben Vase  -  Loetz Kralik Tiffany Vase) in the titles to them (a combination of misrepresentation of a product, keyword spamming, and blatant search engine manipulation), and they will not stop a one.  I actually did an experiment after the book incident to see what they would do....  

I am a power seller and finally sent them an email after the book was pulled explaining to them that I used to mistakenly believe that they were merely incompetent, but the book incident made me realize that they were actually hopeless idiots!!

They thanked me for the suggestion!!!

Craig

[Lustrousstone]

I hadn't actually realised that  

I wonder if we could report him to trading standards

[obscurities]

You could, but if they are anything like ebay US... they really really really really really really really don't give a crap!!

Their stock is so depressed that they seem to accept just about any practice that generates revenue.....  

Their position is that they merely offer a platform for selling goods and that they cannot be held accountable for the authenticity of individual items for sale on their venue.

That was their position when the courts in Europe ordered them to pay Louis Vuitton $63 Million dollars in damages for allowing the sale of counterfeit goods. The courts found that the approx 3.8 million a year in fees they made for the sale of counterfeit Vuitton made them culpable...  IMHO, they are closer to complicit than they are just culpable....  Looking the other way as they do carries a price.... according to European courts, that price was $63 million in relationship to Vuitton alone!!     Not surprisingly, they are appealing....  a final finding not in their favor will seriously jeopardize their ability to stay alive... as fake everything abounds.....

[Lustrousstone]

UK trading standards might be interested in the seller though.

[obscurities]

What is UK Trading standards??

[scimiman]

Ebay don't care if you do report it. At least this one is decent quality "not Lalique", unlike this one http://www.glassmessages.com/index.php/topic,27669.msg150984.html#msg150984

This is the very same seller and it looks as though the sig is the same scrawl as the Per Lutkin dish.
Mike