Ned Ludd on sat 20 jul 02
Tony Ferguson wrote
>I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
>sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of the
>60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
>real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have similiar
>issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
>need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
IMHO, the gallery's 40 percent is their own business... literally.
Yours is what you would have received if the piece had been sold,
namely 60 percent of the sticker price.
I wouldn't have a problem with this.
best
Ned
L. P. Skeen on sat 20 jul 02
Tony,
What they pay you for damage is dependent on your contract. Dig out the
contract and look it up. My insurance company will only pay the wholesale
value of the piece, and that's in the contract. If you consign with me, you
sign the contract, no exceptions. I would think that if you don't have a
clause in your contract that addresses damage or loss to your work, they
would pay you the 60% they'd owe you if it sold.
L
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Ferguson"
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 10:41 PM
Subject: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
> hi,
>
> I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
> sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of
the
> 60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
> real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have similiar
> issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
> need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> Tony Ferguson
> Stoneware, Porcelain, Raku
> www.aquariusartgallery.com
> 218-727-6339
> 315 N. Lake Ave
> Apt 312
> Duluth, MN 55806
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Hesselberth"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 8:11 AM
> Subject: Rutile quality
>
>
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > One of the things we get from people who buy our book is a lot of
> > feedback--mostly positive, but a few problems duplicating our results
> > here and there.
> >
> > One problem I am becoming quite certain of is that there is some really
> > bad rutile in the hands of some of our suppliers--it must be grossly
> > contaminated with iron. If you are finding ANY of your glazes going
> > toward a yucky-yellowy-tan when they should be some other color, try
> > replacing any rutile in the recipe with the same amount or slightly less
> > of TiO2.
> >
> > This has shown up several times in our Spearmint glaze which is a cool
> > green, but you may see the same color problem in a glaze you got from a
> > friend or in a book or wherever. In the cases where I heard back,
> > replacing the rutile with TiO2 in Spearmint has solved the problem.
> >
> > Just one more reason why glazes sometimes don't travel well. I hope this
> > info helps someone, somewhere solve a problem.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > John
> >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> __
> > Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
> >
> > You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> > settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
> >
> > Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
> melpots@pclink.com.
> >
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
Paul Lewing on sat 20 jul 02
Sorry, Tony, but you get only the 60% you would have gotten if they'd sold
it. And it makes no difference whether they collected the full price from
the person who broke it or not. In fact, they owe you the 60% whether they
collected a dime from the breaker or not. That's the law in many states,
and the ethical thing to do everywhere. You agreed to a price that you
wanted for that pot, and that's what you get, whether the piece was broken,
sold, lost, stolen, sold for a lesser retail price, or given away by the
gallery owner. It's up to them if they want to collect less than the full
100% in those situations, but you get either 60% of the retail price you
set, or you get your work back in saleable condition. Those are the only
two allowable outcomes in consignment.
Paul Lewing, off tomorrow for the first backpack trip of the year, even
though I'm in the middle of the largest commission I've ever done. I did
the 14th firing out of a probable 18 on it today.
Snail Scott on sat 20 jul 02
At 07:41 PM 7/20/02 -0700, Tony F wrote:
>I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
>sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of the
>60/40 split...
This is a remarkably ambiguous point, believe it
or not, both for this sort of issue and for
related insurance questions. MY perception of the
most general practice is:
For insurance, it's 'full value' only, whether
the claimant (you) is the artist or an 'owner'.
For gallery breakage, they only owe you your
share (the 60%, I assume), whether it's a sale or
a breakage.
It's best to have this stuff (and other specific
details) specified in your gallery contract, but a
contract that specifies everything can run a dozen
pages, so it's no wonder that many things get
omitted from most versions. That's fine if you've
got a gallery with your best interest in mind, but
those are rare, mythical beasts. Even the best
business relationship can go sour over differing
assumptions. And this is the real world.
-Snail
Gary Ferguson on sat 20 jul 02
I would tend to agree with the gallery. If the piece would have sold you
would only get 60% so why if it breaks should the gallery compensate you for
more than 60%? Even if it was an insurance item and the gallery was
compensated at 100% for the loss, I think you would still only be entitled
to 60%. The gallery still has bills that have to be covered with the 40%.
If this wasn't the case, I would send a Bull into the gallery and have all
my work compensated for 100% :)
Gary Ferguson
Clay Artist
www.garyrferguson.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Ferguson"
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 8:41 PM
Subject: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
> hi,
>
> I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
> sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of
the
> 60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
> real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have similiar
> issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
> need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> Tony Ferguson
> Stoneware, Porcelain, Raku
> www.aquariusartgallery.com
> 218-727-6339
> 315 N. Lake Ave
> Apt 312
> Duluth, MN 55806
>
>
Tony Ferguson on sat 20 jul 02
hi,
I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of the
60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have similiar
issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
Thank you.
Tony Ferguson
Stoneware, Porcelain, Raku
www.aquariusartgallery.com
218-727-6339
315 N. Lake Ave
Apt 312
Duluth, MN 55806
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hesselberth"
To:
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 8:11 AM
Subject: Rutile quality
> Hi Everyone,
>
> One of the things we get from people who buy our book is a lot of
> feedback--mostly positive, but a few problems duplicating our results
> here and there.
>
> One problem I am becoming quite certain of is that there is some really
> bad rutile in the hands of some of our suppliers--it must be grossly
> contaminated with iron. If you are finding ANY of your glazes going
> toward a yucky-yellowy-tan when they should be some other color, try
> replacing any rutile in the recipe with the same amount or slightly less
> of TiO2.
>
> This has shown up several times in our Spearmint glaze which is a cool
> green, but you may see the same color problem in a glaze you got from a
> friend or in a book or wherever. In the cases where I heard back,
> replacing the rutile with TiO2 in Spearmint has solved the problem.
>
> Just one more reason why glazes sometimes don't travel well. I hope this
> info helps someone, somewhere solve a problem.
>
> Regards,
>
> John
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
Philip Poburka on sat 20 jul 02
My guess is that the price you should recieve from them, should be the same
as if the Piece had sold.
If they sold it, or if they busted it, if one of their walk-ins or
customers' busted it, or if it got 'stolen', it really does not matter so
far as the settle-up with you, I don't think.
If the piece 'went-away', they settle up the same regardless of 'how' it
went away.
Now if they were returning it to you, and in doing so are releasing it to
you from the Gallery-Split-Deal, and it were broken or lost in the shipping,
I should think that the settlement-for-value, in that event, or rather the
Insurance taken out, ought to reflect the 'full' value as is of both halves
of the 'split'.
My 'ethics' guess...
Phil
Las Vegas...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Ferguson"
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 7:41 PM
Subject: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
> hi,
>
> I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
> sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of
the
> 60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
> real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have similiar
> issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
> need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> Tony Ferguson
> Stoneware, Porcelain, Raku
> www.aquariusartgallery.com
> 218-727-6339
> 315 N. Lake Ave
> Apt 312
> Duluth, MN 55806
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Hesselberth"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 8:11 AM
> Subject: Rutile quality
>
>
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > One of the things we get from people who buy our book is a lot of
> > feedback--mostly positive, but a few problems duplicating our results
> > here and there.
> >
> > One problem I am becoming quite certain of is that there is some really
> > bad rutile in the hands of some of our suppliers--it must be grossly
> > contaminated with iron. If you are finding ANY of your glazes going
> > toward a yucky-yellowy-tan when they should be some other color, try
> > replacing any rutile in the recipe with the same amount or slightly less
> > of TiO2.
> >
> > This has shown up several times in our Spearmint glaze which is a cool
> > green, but you may see the same color problem in a glaze you got from a
> > friend or in a book or wherever. In the cases where I heard back,
> > replacing the rutile with TiO2 in Spearmint has solved the problem.
> >
> > Just one more reason why glazes sometimes don't travel well. I hope this
> > info helps someone, somewhere solve a problem.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > John
> >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> __
> > Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
> >
> > You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> > settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
> >
> > Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
> melpots@pclink.com.
> >
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
Earl Brunner on sat 20 jul 02
Your normal split would be the 60%, correct? If the gallery required
the parent to pay, did they make them pay "their cost, i.e. 60% or the
whole amount? If they only required the parent to pay their cost, then
at least you are out nothing. If they didn't require the parent to pay,
and they are covering the cost, it is still costing them the 60%. If
you only would get the 60% off of a sale I think that that is aqll that
you could expect.
Earl Brunner
mailto:bruec@anv.net
http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec
-----Original Message-----
From: Ceramic Arts Discussion List [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On
Behalf Of Tony Ferguson
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 7:41 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
hi,
I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of
the
60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have
similiar
issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
Thank you.
Tony Ferguson
Stoneware, Porcelain, Raku
www.aquariusartgallery.com
218-727-6339
315 N. Lake Ave
Apt 312
Duluth, MN 55806
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hesselberth"
To:
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 8:11 AM
Subject: Rutile quality
> Hi Everyone,
>
> One of the things we get from people who buy our book is a lot of
> feedback--mostly positive, but a few problems duplicating our results
> here and there.
>
> One problem I am becoming quite certain of is that there is some
really
> bad rutile in the hands of some of our suppliers--it must be grossly
> contaminated with iron. If you are finding ANY of your glazes going
> toward a yucky-yellowy-tan when they should be some other color, try
> replacing any rutile in the recipe with the same amount or slightly
less
> of TiO2.
>
> This has shown up several times in our Spearmint glaze which is a cool
> green, but you may see the same color problem in a glaze you got from
a
> friend or in a book or wherever. In the cases where I heard back,
> replacing the rutile with TiO2 in Spearmint has solved the problem.
>
> Just one more reason why glazes sometimes don't travel well. I hope
this
> info helps someone, somewhere solve a problem.
>
> Regards,
>
> John
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
____
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
________________________________________________________________________
______
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
Michele Williams on sun 21 jul 02
I think the cutest U Broke It sign I've seen was this:
"U break it, U break my heart,
But when you pay
You get to keep every part."
On the door was another sign:
"By entering this establishment, you consent to pay for any damage your
presence and those with you may cause. By keeping this establishment, I
consent to provide merchandise for your pleasure. May we each keep our
vows!"
Michele Williams
Richard Jeffery on sun 21 jul 02
agreed
unless the pot was already out of display and waiting for you to collect and
take somewhere else, there is no reason why you should make more from an
accident than from a sale? leaving artistic aspiration and the broader
cultural enrichment behind, you wanted rid of the pot in exchange for 60% of
the agreed retail price....
i'm sure there are a few gallery owners out there [hi Janet - has summer
reached North Wales yet?] who will be thinking they would be doubly punished
by the accident if they had to pay more than if they had sold the piece.
breakages - like theft - are part of the risk they carry, but unless the
pot is extremely high value, it is unlikely they will be able to make any
useful claim to their insurance, so unless they can recoup something from
the parents, they are carrying the major burden.
somewhere in here you need to think about your long term relationship with
the gallery, and how this incident might affect it. that doesn't mean 'not
annoying them' - just thinking it through.
still a pain in the butt though - i think it's the thought of the breakage
and the waste of energy that hurts most, or has been when it has happened to
me, rather than the money....
Richard in Bournemouth UK - where summer has finally put in a brief
appearance. strange - working in shorts and t shirt all day, assembling
[big] clocks in the garden, then went to an outdoor Shakespeare production -
Richard III - in the grounds of a local craft centre. Once the sun went
behind the trees, a north wind sprang up, and although the paving blocks
underfoot were still warm to the touch, by the intermission everyone was
huddled under car blankets and fleece jackets. i had my ski jacket in the
car, and i was still cold. even glimpsed one [sensible] spectator in a
duvet jacket..... very strange
Richard Jeffery
Web Design and Photography
www.theeleventhweb.co.uk
Bournemouth UK
-----Original Message-----
From: Ceramic Arts Discussion List [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG]On
Behalf Of Earl Brunner
Sent: 21 July 2002 03:47
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
Your normal split would be the 60%, correct? If the gallery required
the parent to pay, did they make them pay "their cost, i.e. 60% or the
whole amount? If they only required the parent to pay their cost, then
at least you are out nothing. If they didn't require the parent to pay,
and they are covering the cost, it is still costing them the 60%. If
you only would get the 60% off of a sale I think that that is aqll that
you could expect.
Earl Brunner
mailto:bruec@anv.net
http://coyote.accessnv.com/bruec
-----Original Message-----
From: Ceramic Arts Discussion List [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG] On
Behalf Of Tony Ferguson
Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 7:41 PM
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
hi,
I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of
the
60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have
similiar
issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
Thank you.
Tony Ferguson
Stoneware, Porcelain, Raku
www.aquariusartgallery.com
218-727-6339
315 N. Lake Ave
Apt 312
Duluth, MN 55806
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hesselberth"
To:
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 8:11 AM
Subject: Rutile quality
> Hi Everyone,
>
> One of the things we get from people who buy our book is a lot of
> feedback--mostly positive, but a few problems duplicating our results
> here and there.
>
> One problem I am becoming quite certain of is that there is some
really
> bad rutile in the hands of some of our suppliers--it must be grossly
> contaminated with iron. If you are finding ANY of your glazes going
> toward a yucky-yellowy-tan when they should be some other color, try
> replacing any rutile in the recipe with the same amount or slightly
less
> of TiO2.
>
> This has shown up several times in our Spearmint glaze which is a cool
> green, but you may see the same color problem in a glaze you got from
a
> friend or in a book or wherever. In the cases where I heard back,
> replacing the rutile with TiO2 in Spearmint has solved the problem.
>
> Just one more reason why glazes sometimes don't travel well. I hope
this
> info helps someone, somewhere solve a problem.
>
> Regards,
>
> John
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
____
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
________________________________________________________________________
______
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
____________________________________________________________________________
__
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
The Chapel of Art / Capel Celfyddyd on sun 21 jul 02
Sorry, Tony, but I do not understand why you would expect to receive MORE
for a breakage, than you would for the piece if it sold? How does the
breakage affect your agreement with the gallery? They "dispose" of the item
and you get paid the price agreed... There is the implicit understanding
they actually do sell a piece, but in fact there is no legal reason for them
not to hammer it, play baseball with it or send it to outer-space with the
next NASA mission. Whatever they do, you will only ever be entitled to your
percentage as agreed.
You also presume that the gallery has suffered no loss in the situation. It
is easy to underestimate what the presence of your pot has indeed cost the
gallery, but every square inch costs money and has to generate income. If
there is no return for the investment in that space, there is indeed a loss
incurred. In this case a sale has been denied by breakage... You are not the
only one who needs compensation!
If the gallery/artist split is 40/60, then you will naturally be entitled to
your 60%. However, it depends on who is paying you? Your own, the gallery's
or the child's parents' insurance? Or is the gallery doing the decent thing?
Or the parents out of their own or their child's pocket money? In the UK, no
one would be legally required to pay for accidental damage personally, but
the value would dictate whether it is covered by insurance or not. Under £50
is often excluded. Which is why a piece broken at a gallery, usually ends up
being paid for by the gallery themselves and NOT by any insurance company.
Yes, we personally pay for breakages out of our own pocket, because most are
under the minimum exclusion value and others are just not "worth" the hassle
of months of paperwork, endless phone calls, visiting insurance agents, etc,
etc. Just another added overhead, but very annoying, especially in the
situation you describe... IMHO children should never be in a position to
break work on exhibition!! But that is another issue...
If your loss is being paid for by insurance, you may find they will only pay
for the "cost of replacement" which naturally _excludes_ any profit. The
gallery will actually not receive a bean, because they have quite obviously
not suffered any real "loss" in the eyes of the insurer. It is as well to
remember, you as an artist/maker may find you will only get your price MINUS
any profit you would have made whenever claiming on any insurance policy.
Depends on the fine print, but I have known artists only receive the
cost of the materials that they would need to remake the damaged piece.
Insurance companies do not "fracture in" time, skill or artistic talent
unless you can prove otherwise (a very difficult thing to do). In one case,
the artist got the full cost of the frame (upon presentation of a shop
receipt) but only the cost of canvas and paints for a painting which was
really large and complicated... Maybe two months' work was lost. Note that
this the universal policy of the insurance industry and not those big bad
galleries!
The only exception, would be if the parents pay the gallery the full price
for the pot, take it home and then claim on their home insurance. They will
get the full "value" or final retail price, i.e. the cost of replacing the
pot for them. Alternatively, if they pay by credit card, it may be covered
by insurance. This route involves being economical with the truth, but is
the only way both gallery and maker will get their full whack. When faced
with a similar situation, this would be my response to the parent and I
would facilitate their claim by giving them a full written receipt. It may
just act as a timely reminder that galleries require extra vigilance when
parents bring children along. They have social as well as parental
responsibilities, which an increasing number of parents seem to ignore.
Janet Kaiser - And it wasn't me either... That universally rudest person...
I don't know who BVCuma thinks it is, but I bet Top Cat is banking on
it being Larry! :-)
The Chapel of Art . Capel Celfyddyd
Home of The International Potters' Path
8 Marine Crescent, Criccieth LL52 0EA, Wales, UK
Tel: (++44) 01766-423570
http://www.the-coa.org.uk
> I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
> sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of
the
> 60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
> real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have similar
> issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
> need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
The Chapel of Art / Capel Celfyddyd on sun 21 jul 02
"Nice to touch, nice to hold,
But if it's broken, consider it sold"
Yes, variations on the theme, Richard, BUT... In the UK it is just a fancy
sign. It has no legality. There is no way a gallery (shop or whatever) can
enforce such action. And thanks to various consumer groups, TV programmes
and media coverage, more of the public than ever are aware of this. "My kid
broke that pot? Well, tough mate... Your loss not mine."
They have a much healthier sense of responsibility in Germany (for example).
"Eltern haften für ihre Kinder"... Parents are responsible for their
children... If a child hurts itself or causes damage, the parents are
legally responsible at all times. Here it is always someone else's "fault".
We even had a doctor, who broke a pot turn around and had the utter nerve to
say, "I only brushed against it and it fell over and broke... Must have been
a bad pot... You shouldn't sell this work..." and then walk out. No word of
apology. Not a flicker of a conscience. In fact, just the reverse. Our
fault, not his.
And by the way... What is "appropriate display" these days? We are
encouraged by government (indeed there are now new accessibility laws in the
UK) to provide low level displays for people in wheelchairs to see. This is
naturally the height small children feel is specially set up for them to
play at... Two to three year olds make a bee-line for them, no matter what
is being displayed... If parents are on their toes, it is fine, but so many
are not. Or there are those dopey ones who say "don't touch dear", but know
damn well that their little darlings will absolutely ignore them.
Then there is the glass cabinet... What happens when a pushchair is knocked
into it and a shelf (usually the top one) collapses and causes considerable
damage? Was it the fault of the cabinet maker, the gallery for putting it
where someone could run into it or the person pushing the chair? Or the guy
who leans against a cabinet and pushes it over... Should it have been bolted
to the floor or should he have known it is not a good idea to lean on glass
cases? And where we have a sprung, wood floor, is it wrong of us to have
shelving which bounce with it? Was the man who started jumping up and down
to show us how "unsafe" our displays are, doing us a favour or being
irresponsible?
The idea that there are spaces which are suitable for children and those
which are not, those where restrained behaviour is required and not just
optional... Well, how old-fashioned can we get!? This is the generation
where wailing babies are not taken out of church, never mind a public
place. Bringing ice-creams, fish-and-chips, dogs, muddy boots, dripping
beach togs into a gallery seems to be the new fashion around here and you
should see the amazement, dawning annoyance and petulant flouncing out when
politely told they are not allowed in! What? IT IS MY RIGHT... How dare you
impose on my rights and freedoms.
Yes, we are big on rights, but not so hot on responsibilities these days.
Appropriate behaviour? Ha-ha!
Janet Kaiser - on the day a child expected to roller-blade around the
gallery and the parents where "surprised you don't encourage children..."
The Chapel of Art . Capel Celfyddyd
Home of The International Potters' Path
8 Marine Crescent, Criccieth LL52 0EA, Wales, UK
Tel: (++44) 01766-423570
http://www.the-coa.org.uk
> many galleries have a prominent sign with some variation on the theme of
> "break it - you bought it" - perhaps more gracefully phrased. there are
> issues here about suitability of display areas, management of customers
> while in gallery, and whether the gallery is attracting the right sort of
> client [and if the right sort of client is family sized, then are display
> fixtures and fittings designed to cope with that sort of client group?]
Dannon Rhudy on sun 21 jul 02
In general, if a work is broken in a gallery, they pay the artist
the value less the gallery's cut. That is reasonable. If they'd
sold it, that is the sum you would get. If the gallery is insured,
that's how the insurance would pay. If they are self-insured,
the same holds true: you could not expect them to pay you
more than they would pay you if the item had indeed been sold.
regards
Dannon Rhudy
At 07:41 PM 07/20/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>hi,
>
>I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
>sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of the
>60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
>real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have similiar
>issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
>need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
>
>
>Thank you.
>
>Tony Ferguson
>Stoneware, Porcelain, Raku
>www.aquariusartgallery.com
>218-727-6339
>315 N. Lake Ave
>Apt 312
>Duluth, MN 55806
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Hesselberth"
>To:
>Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 8:11 AM
>Subject: Rutile quality
>
>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> One of the things we get from people who buy our book is a lot of
>> feedback--mostly positive, but a few problems duplicating our results
>> here and there.
>>
>> One problem I am becoming quite certain of is that there is some really
>> bad rutile in the hands of some of our suppliers--it must be grossly
>> contaminated with iron. If you are finding ANY of your glazes going
>> toward a yucky-yellowy-tan when they should be some other color, try
>> replacing any rutile in the recipe with the same amount or slightly less
>> of TiO2.
>>
>> This has shown up several times in our Spearmint glaze which is a cool
>> green, but you may see the same color problem in a glaze you got from a
>> friend or in a book or wherever. In the cases where I heard back,
>> replacing the rutile with TiO2 in Spearmint has solved the problem.
>>
>> Just one more reason why glazes sometimes don't travel well. I hope this
>> info helps someone, somewhere solve a problem.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>____________________________________________________________________________
>__
>> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>>
>> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>>
>> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
>melpots@pclink.com.
>>
>
>___________________________________________________________________________
___
>Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
>You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
>settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
>
Richard Jeffery on sun 21 jul 02
difficult.
this is why we pay gallery owners commission
they either sort it or they get money from culprit and sort it
many galleries have a prominent sign with some variation on the theme of
"break it - you bought it" - perhaps more gracefully phrased. there are
issues here about suitability of display areas, management of customers
while in gallery, and whether the gallery is attracting the right sort of
client [and if the right sort of client is family sized, then are display
fixtures and fittings designed to cope with that sort of client group?]
i fear for a society where we would hesitate to ask the parents of a child
who had caused damage [or a dog, or a shopping basket] to make good the
loss. what we do after starting that conversation is then down to
negotiation, but the initial presumption of all parties should be that the
loss should be made good. unless the pot was clearly poorly displayed,
wasn't stable, or was at an inappropriate height. eventually a commercial
decision has to be taken about where to draw the line.
tactful way of introducing the subject where the parent doesn't volunteer?
hard - suggests parent isn't going to assume responsibility. hence reason
for signs - discrete that prominent - that set the context without argument.
i also think the approach to the parent should be for the full retail price.
sets the wrong attitude to expect wrong doer to only take partial
responsibility, and the gallery owner has incurred a loss as well as the
artist.
Richard Jeffery
Web Design and Photography
www.theeleventhweb.co.uk
Bournemouth UK
-----Original Message-----
From: L. P. Skeen [mailto:lpskeen@living-tree.net]
Sent: 21 July 2002 11:59
To: richard.jeffery@theeleventhhour.co.uk
Subject: Re: Re: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
unless they can recoup something from the parents [of child who broke pot in
gallery], they are carrying the major burden.
>>>>What is a tactful way of handling this situation? On one hand you don't
wanna tick 'em off. If they were in your HOME and their kid broke
something, you prolly wouldn't make them pay for it. {Put your Byron Temple
pieces up on a high shelf when friends bring their kids over} OTOH, this is
not your home, and the work they broke doesn't belong to you, and they
should have kept a better eye on their kid.........So how do you get them to
pay up? What if they refuse to pay? Send the coppers on 'em?
L
Tony Ferguson on sun 21 jul 02
Thanks to everyone's opinions on this thread. The gallery seemed a little
unsure what to do as well and I will suggest we treat it as a sale.
Thank you
Tony Ferguson
Stoneware, Porcelain, Raku
www.aquariusartgallery.com
218-727-6339
315 N. Lake Ave
Apt 312
Duluth, MN 55806
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dannon Rhudy"
To:
Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 4:35 AM
Subject: Re: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
> In general, if a work is broken in a gallery, they pay the artist
> the value less the gallery's cut. That is reasonable. If they'd
> sold it, that is the sum you would get. If the gallery is insured,
> that's how the insurance would pay. If they are self-insured,
> the same holds true: you could not expect them to pay you
> more than they would pay you if the item had indeed been sold.
>
> regards
>
> Dannon Rhudy
>
>
> At 07:41 PM 07/20/2002 -0700, you wrote:
> >hi,
> >
> >I child broke one of my works in a gallery. Now the work had not been
> >sold, so wouldn't the total value of the work be compensated instead of
the
> >60/40 split 60/40 has to do if the work was sold and it was not, so the
> >real value of the work should be 100% I am thinking? Anyone have
similiar
> >issue? I think the gallery is thinking they only need to pay me 60%. I
> >need to discuss this with them next week. Any advice is appreciated?
> >
> >
> >Thank you.
> >
> >Tony Ferguson
> >Stoneware, Porcelain, Raku
> >www.aquariusartgallery.com
> >218-727-6339
> >315 N. Lake Ave
> >Apt 312
> >Duluth, MN 55806
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "John Hesselberth"
> >To:
> >Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 8:11 AM
> >Subject: Rutile quality
> >
> >
> >> Hi Everyone,
> >>
> >> One of the things we get from people who buy our book is a lot of
> >> feedback--mostly positive, but a few problems duplicating our results
> >> here and there.
> >>
> >> One problem I am becoming quite certain of is that there is some really
> >> bad rutile in the hands of some of our suppliers--it must be grossly
> >> contaminated with iron. If you are finding ANY of your glazes going
> >> toward a yucky-yellowy-tan when they should be some other color, try
> >> replacing any rutile in the recipe with the same amount or slightly
less
> >> of TiO2.
> >>
> >> This has shown up several times in our Spearmint glaze which is a cool
> >> green, but you may see the same color problem in a glaze you got from a
> >> friend or in a book or wherever. In the cases where I heard back,
> >> replacing the rutile with TiO2 in Spearmint has solved the problem.
> >>
> >> Just one more reason why glazes sometimes don't travel well. I hope
this
> >> info helps someone, somewhere solve a problem.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >>
>
>___________________________________________________________________________
_
> >__
> >> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
> >>
> >> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> >> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
> >>
> >> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
> >melpots@pclink.com.
> >>
> >
>
>___________________________________________________________________________
> ___
> >Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
> >
> >You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> >settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
> >
> >Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
> melpots@pclink.com.
> >
> >
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
Catherine White on sun 21 jul 02
There was a recent article in Parade, I believe, about money mistakes we
make. One item was about the sign saying "if you break it, you bought it."
The article said that breakage is considered part of the overhead and the
customer had no legal responsibility. I heartily disagree, but that's
according to the law.
Catherine in AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Jeffery"
To:
Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 5:23 AM
Subject: Re: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
> difficult.
>
> this is why we pay gallery owners commission
>
> they either sort it or they get money from culprit and sort it
>
> many galleries have a prominent sign with some variation on the theme of
> "break it - you bought it" - perhaps more gracefully phrased. there are
> issues here about suitability of display areas, management of customers
> while in gallery, and whether the gallery is attracting the right sort of
> client [and if the right sort of client is family sized, then are display
> fixtures and fittings designed to cope with that sort of client group?]
>
> i fear for a society where we would hesitate to ask the parents of a child
> who had caused damage [or a dog, or a shopping basket] to make good the
> loss. what we do after starting that conversation is then down to
> negotiation, but the initial presumption of all parties should be that the
> loss should be made good. unless the pot was clearly poorly displayed,
> wasn't stable, or was at an inappropriate height. eventually a commercial
> decision has to be taken about where to draw the line.
>
> tactful way of introducing the subject where the parent doesn't volunteer?
> hard - suggests parent isn't going to assume responsibility. hence reason
> for signs - discrete that prominent - that set the context without
argument.
>
> i also think the approach to the parent should be for the full retail
price.
> sets the wrong attitude to expect wrong doer to only take partial
> responsibility, and the gallery owner has incurred a loss as well as the
> artist.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Richard Jeffery
>
> Web Design and Photography
> www.theeleventhweb.co.uk
> Bournemouth UK
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: L. P. Skeen [mailto:lpskeen@living-tree.net]
> Sent: 21 July 2002 11:59
> To: richard.jeffery@theeleventhhour.co.uk
> Subject: Re: Re: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
>
>
> unless they can recoup something from the parents [of child who broke pot
in
> gallery], they are carrying the major burden.
>
> >>>>What is a tactful way of handling this situation? On one hand you
don't
> wanna tick 'em off. If they were in your HOME and their kid broke
> something, you prolly wouldn't make them pay for it. {Put your Byron
Temple
> pieces up on a high shelf when friends bring their kids over} OTOH, this
is
> not your home, and the work they broke doesn't belong to you, and they
> should have kept a better eye on their kid.........So how do you get them
to
> pay up? What if they refuse to pay? Send the coppers on 'em?
>
> L
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
__
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
>
Richard Jeffery on mon 22 jul 02
indeed - like the sign that says "no responsibility taken if you trip over
our stairs" or similar - there is no legal protection.
However, it can start an unspoken conversation which can be verbalised as
needed. a warning to be careful.
i do agree such signs are cheesy though - and off putting for many buyers.
I have never used them myself.
i believe better management of space and customer is the only real answer
Richard Jeffery
Web Design and Photography
www.theeleventhweb.co.uk
Bournemouth UK
-----Original Message-----
From: Ceramic Arts Discussion List [mailto:CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG]On
Behalf Of The Chapel of Art / Capel Celfyddyd
Sent: 21 July 2002 23:03
To: CLAYART@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
Subject: Re: Works breaking in Gallery: insurance question
"Nice to touch, nice to hold,
But if it's broken, consider it sold"
Yes, variations on the theme, Richard, BUT... In the UK it is just a fancy
sign. It has no legality. There is no way a gallery (shop or whatever) can
enforce such action. And thanks to various consumer groups, TV programmes
and media coverage, more of the public than ever are aware of this. "My kid
broke that pot? Well, tough mate... Your loss not mine."
They have a much healthier sense of responsibility in Germany (for example).
"Eltern haften für ihre Kinder"... Parents are responsible for their
children... If a child hurts itself or causes damage, the parents are
legally responsible at all times. Here it is always someone else's "fault".
We even had a doctor, who broke a pot turn around and had the utter nerve to
say, "I only brushed against it and it fell over and broke... Must have been
a bad pot... You shouldn't sell this work..." and then walk out. No word of
apology. Not a flicker of a conscience. In fact, just the reverse. Our
fault, not his.
And by the way... What is "appropriate display" these days? We are
encouraged by government (indeed there are now new accessibility laws in the
UK) to provide low level displays for people in wheelchairs to see. This is
naturally the height small children feel is specially set up for them to
play at... Two to three year olds make a bee-line for them, no matter what
is being displayed... If parents are on their toes, it is fine, but so many
are not. Or there are those dopey ones who say "don't touch dear", but know
damn well that their little darlings will absolutely ignore them.
Then there is the glass cabinet... What happens when a pushchair is knocked
into it and a shelf (usually the top one) collapses and causes considerable
damage? Was it the fault of the cabinet maker, the gallery for putting it
where someone could run into it or the person pushing the chair? Or the guy
who leans against a cabinet and pushes it over... Should it have been bolted
to the floor or should he have known it is not a good idea to lean on glass
cases? And where we have a sprung, wood floor, is it wrong of us to have
shelving which bounce with it? Was the man who started jumping up and down
to show us how "unsafe" our displays are, doing us a favour or being
irresponsible?
The idea that there are spaces which are suitable for children and those
which are not, those where restrained behaviour is required and not just
optional... Well, how old-fashioned can we get!? This is the generation
where wailing babies are not taken out of church, never mind a public
place. Bringing ice-creams, fish-and-chips, dogs, muddy boots, dripping
beach togs into a gallery seems to be the new fashion around here and you
should see the amazement, dawning annoyance and petulant flouncing out when
politely told they are not allowed in! What? IT IS MY RIGHT... How dare you
impose on my rights and freedoms.
Yes, we are big on rights, but not so hot on responsibilities these days.
Appropriate behaviour? Ha-ha!
Janet Kaiser - on the day a child expected to roller-blade around the
gallery and the parents where "surprised you don't encourage children..."
The Chapel of Art . Capel Celfyddyd
Home of The International Potters' Path
8 Marine Crescent, Criccieth LL52 0EA, Wales, UK
Tel: (++44) 01766-423570
http://www.the-coa.org.uk
> many galleries have a prominent sign with some variation on the theme of
> "break it - you bought it" - perhaps more gracefully phrased. there are
> issues here about suitability of display areas, management of customers
> while in gallery, and whether the gallery is attracting the right sort of
> client [and if the right sort of client is family sized, then are display
> fixtures and fittings designed to cope with that sort of client group?]
____________________________________________________________________________
__
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.
| |
|
