it seems crazy to me to steal a famous painting from a museum. the number of people willing to purchase a black market painting worth ~$millions is probably like a dozen, and the transaction would be super high risk.
"Hey, I don't have any idea how it got there, but I heard some guy talking about a famous stolen painting that's stashed right here in this neighborhood. Apparently a Renoir."
In the USA, at least, almost all criminal convictions end in a plea negotiation with the government. The criminal and the government go back and forth trying to work out a deal that is acceptable for both (shortest sentence for criminal, least work for the government). Having something the government (or a specific politian) wants can be used in your side of the negotiation.
Or, since it’s a Renoir, maybe they were planning to distribute them as punishment.
“Thought you were going up in the world, did you Salvo? Oh no, no Armand Guillaumin for you. The boss ain’t pleased and he wants you to know about it. One more screwup and you’ll end up with a face like that”
The numbers are higher than you'd expect. The trade in illegal (and so high rarity and limited access) goods is ongoing and flourishing via the use of third party intermediaries like free port systems [1] as well as networks of morally grey curatorial and preservation staff. Several notable archaeological "missing links" of the past few years came from said staff mediating access to private collections of undescribed provenance.
I don't understand why anyone would want to buy something outside of its legal socio-economic context, when that thing's entire value is derived from that context and is otherwise worth very little intrinsically based purely on aesthetic value.
Any market value it sells for is then based on some shared mental deficiency which prevents people from understanding that.
"Possession is nine-tenths of the law." That's the "legal socio-economic context". If it's worth having, and there's only one, so that if you have it nobody else does, then some people will want to have it with or without legal sanction.
And, a thing's economic value is derived from what someone else will pay for it, and only that. If someone else (or several someones) will buy it, whether or not the law agrees that it's legal, then the thing is valuable. (See drugs for an example.)
I wouldn't say that such people have a mental deficiency. A moral deficiency, yes, absolutely, but not a mental one.
For bragging rights? Somehow I imagine that when the uber wealthy entertain other uber wealthy, they eventually show their rarest collections to a few select guests.
I mean, it only takes the cooperation of 4 parties to create an economic incentive in these cases.
One owner who knows the value but won't sell at that or any value, one willing to pay a thief less than that value, the thief, and a buyer willing to pay more than the thief was payed.
"Wow, the museum payed a million dollars for this? I'd be willing to pay 5."
"Oh? Suppose I know a guy who'll nick it? Now, it'd be stolen so I couldn't charge quite as much, but the guy takes his cut up front, so let's call it 2?"
> the number of people willing to purchase a black market painting worth ~$millions is probably like a dozen
Right, but what about your local brick dealer who has 10-50K to waste on whatever? Definitely way more common and easier than you think to unload these sort of things, once you go down in price a lot because of the circumstances.
There are some “criminals” and criminal gangs and such, but I think the increase we have seen is due to Russia, Iran, and others who are giving extra resources and intelligence to some of these groups to deprive western institutions of their cultural heritage as part of the “hybrid war”.
Notice how things aren’t being stolen at this magnitude in China? Japan? If we’re Russian or Iranian for example I think this would be a great strategy if you view yourself at a civilizational war. Most of Europe is still asleep or in denial.
> Notice how things aren’t being stolen at this magnitude in China
Stealing from a Chinese museum would be extremely difficult. Cameras and security staff monitor exhibits during the day, and even after hours, extensive surveillance everywhere, makes it hard to get away unnoticed.
The risk is simply too high
> the number of people willing to purchase a black market painting worth ~$millions is probably like a dozen
You only need one.
With something like this I imagine you could hold on to it for years or even a lifetime waiting for the right connection to come along. Maybe some of them are even commissioned or pre-sold.
I can’t say I know anyone with stolen art, but over my lifetime I’ve known people across a range of wealth classes who got a thrill out of acquiring and owning something that was risky contraband.
If you can wait out the statute of limitations you can of course sell it. It seems that in France that is not a thing in stolen art from a public collection
I know someone in LA with a piece like this. I was invited with a couple of close friends to their house to view it. This person didn't buy it, though, they took it with their own hands (and explained how simple it was). There were four of these pieces made. I'm pretty certain one is on public display. I don't know about the other two.
I always wondered if these sorts of people actually existed, with a Mona Lisa tucked away in a secret room, or something. And it turns out, yes, they really do.
You reported it I would hope? Art theft is a crime against humanity, not to mention the artist. Sort of like saying, “I know this serial killer in LA, he showed me and some other guys his severed head collection, it was wild.” Ymmv
Whoa, that's crazy. Did they rationalize it by saying they were preserving it? Were they an art collector/lover in general? or just someone who committed a theft of opportunity decades ago and has been carrying it around ever since, like in The Goldfinch? (I guess I assume the theft was long ago and overseas in some country without an extradition treaty, otherwise I feel like you'd be nuts to be parading millions of dollars of art around random people). Very curious
One of their rationalizations was preservation. They love the piece. They're a recognized expert on this piece. Maybe the expert. I would hazard they are probably one of the best custodians of it, for now. They have it sealed in a display case. The last time I saw pics of the other one on public display it is also sealed in a display case in the lobby of a multi-billion dollar corp.
It had a very low value when it was purloined, but if it were to appear on the open market right now I have no idea what the price would be. Seven digits, easily. It's like snatching a Banksy from his first gallery show in 2001 when his stuff was like $100 on the wall of a restaurant.
It's not quite as romantic as a Goldfinch style heist. Although I feel in some ways it might be to the same point where they can no longer return it since it's become bigger than they thought. I don't believe they need the money, so it might be a Thomas Crown situation and it might just end up being anonymously dropped back off one day.
There is specific Italian law about return of art. This would normally apply to people who stole the art but a careful lawyer could use this law to negotiate a reduced punishment for organized crime charges. If the art theft is described as a part of a larger criminal enterprise, then the return of that art could trigger a 2/3 reduction in punishment. See below (translated by google).
"is committed by the person who has collaborated in identifying the co-conspirators or has ensured evidence of the crime or has effectively worked to prevent the criminal activity from being carried to further consequences or has recovered or had recovered the cultural property subject to the crime (penalty reduced from one third to two thirds)."
From the documentaries I've watched it's usually the other way around. There's either already a known buyer, or the thief has someone in their circles that already knows how to sell it. So there's a middleman between already trusted entities.
Maybe I've seen too many movies—but you can now sell fakes of those paintings to all dozen of your customers (so long as the customers keep their purchase secret from the other purchasers).
What are you talking about? Those are some of the best paintings ever created. Anyone trying to tell you different is probably a fascist or communist. Both authoritarian and hate-filled ideologies that have no place in modern or future societies.
It’s an actual position. These kinds of ideologies hate “the good life” and consider such paintings either decadent (fascists) or supportive of the bourgeoisie (communists).
that fascists and communists disliked them, does not imply that only fascists and communists disliked them
Having different opinion on whether this specific paintings are beautiful at all, and whether they are "some of the best paintings ever created" specifically is going to a boor indicator of being fascist or communist.
> that fascists and communists disliked them, does not imply that only fascists and communists disliked them
Sure but the fascists and communists are the ones spoiling our collective breakfast.
> Having different opinion on whether this specific paintings are beautiful at all, and whether they are "some of the best paintings ever created" specifically is going to a poor indicator of being fascist or communist.
They are objectively some of the best. It’s not a matter that can be debated. But that is besides the point. The point is that authoritarian losers (fascists, commies) specifically hate them for ideological reasons.
You can look at the Mona Lisa and say eh not my favorite, but you can’t deny it’s one of the greatest artworks ever created. If someone is trying to convince you otherwise it’s only for ideological reasons - it has nothing to do with understanding or appreciate of artwork.
Hitler probably helped an old lady cross the street once too. Terrible people or those supporting authoritarian ideologies can still do nice things. They pet dogs and eat ice cream too.
"It was through interrogation work that investigators were able to get the receiver of the stolen goods to admit that he had indeed taken possession of the paintings."
Humans are always the hole in the security you build, no matter how good the wall is.
It was an "organized gang" who already had a police tracking GPS on their vehicle from another criminal investigation
> In addition to DNA, the investigators were also able to benefit from a happy combination of circumstances since “the burglars, after abandoning in the hinterland, near the ski resort of Gréolières, the stolen vehicle that was used for the breakage, took back theirs which was, possibly in the context of another case, equipped with a police beacon,” the lawyer told AFP. The police were thus able to track the car.
The story was kind of wild. I have never understood art theft as its very hard to move it. Now if they had made really good forgeries, then swapped them in the original museum frames and hid those to be "found", well that then would be a NY Times best seller.
I also think so, but that makes you question the buyer.
Who are these people that want priceless art they can't show anyone?
Remember when Kim Kardashian accidentally took a picture of herself next to some stolen statue? So it was uncovered because of her negligence.
It sort of hints that there's this class of ultra rich people who move in their own stratosphere and look at each other's possibly stolen art without snitching each other out.
I friend suggested that often fine art is "on loan" to museums from some rich person's estate and that having it 'stolen' allows the estate to collect the value of the insurance claim rather than taking the painting back and selling it on the market (which may or may not return the value of the insurance). Also it probably looks bad if "The Frobotz estate has asked for this painting to be returned so they can sell it."
Turns an otherwise illiquid asset into cash that the estate could use.
68 comments
[ 0.27 ms ] story [ 151 ms ] thread“Thought you were going up in the world, did you Salvo? Oh no, no Armand Guillaumin for you. The boss ain’t pleased and he wants you to know about it. One more screwup and you’ll end up with a face like that”
[1] https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2015/07/01/experts-identify-...
I don't understand why anyone would want to buy something outside of its legal socio-economic context, when that thing's entire value is derived from that context and is otherwise worth very little intrinsically based purely on aesthetic value.
Any market value it sells for is then based on some shared mental deficiency which prevents people from understanding that.
And, a thing's economic value is derived from what someone else will pay for it, and only that. If someone else (or several someones) will buy it, whether or not the law agrees that it's legal, then the thing is valuable. (See drugs for an example.)
I wouldn't say that such people have a mental deficiency. A moral deficiency, yes, absolutely, but not a mental one.
One owner who knows the value but won't sell at that or any value, one willing to pay a thief less than that value, the thief, and a buyer willing to pay more than the thief was payed.
"Wow, the museum payed a million dollars for this? I'd be willing to pay 5."
"Oh? Suppose I know a guy who'll nick it? Now, it'd be stolen so I couldn't charge quite as much, but the guy takes his cut up front, so let's call it 2?"
"Really? Gee, that's a steal"
cue: looney tunes
Right, but what about your local brick dealer who has 10-50K to waste on whatever? Definitely way more common and easier than you think to unload these sort of things, once you go down in price a lot because of the circumstances.
Notice how things aren’t being stolen at this magnitude in China? Japan? If we’re Russian or Iranian for example I think this would be a great strategy if you view yourself at a civilizational war. Most of Europe is still asleep or in denial.
Stealing from a Chinese museum would be extremely difficult. Cameras and security staff monitor exhibits during the day, and even after hours, extensive surveillance everywhere, makes it hard to get away unnoticed. The risk is simply too high
You only need one.
With something like this I imagine you could hold on to it for years or even a lifetime waiting for the right connection to come along. Maybe some of them are even commissioned or pre-sold.
I can’t say I know anyone with stolen art, but over my lifetime I’ve known people across a range of wealth classes who got a thrill out of acquiring and owning something that was risky contraband.
I always wondered if these sorts of people actually existed, with a Mona Lisa tucked away in a secret room, or something. And it turns out, yes, they really do.
That’s how this would go. How do you expect it would go?
It had a very low value when it was purloined, but if it were to appear on the open market right now I have no idea what the price would be. Seven digits, easily. It's like snatching a Banksy from his first gallery show in 2001 when his stuff was like $100 on the wall of a restaurant.
It's not quite as romantic as a Goldfinch style heist. Although I feel in some ways it might be to the same point where they can no longer return it since it's become bigger than they thought. I don't believe they need the money, so it might be a Thomas Crown situation and it might just end up being anonymously dropped back off one day.
You don’t know anyone who downloaded a movie?
https://documenti.camera.it/leg18/dossier/testi/gi0031b.htm
"is committed by the person who has collaborated in identifying the co-conspirators or has ensured evidence of the crime or has effectively worked to prevent the criminal activity from being carried to further consequences or has recovered or had recovered the cultural property subject to the crime (penalty reduced from one third to two thirds)."
1: The stolen art sits around for a LONG TIME.
2: The provenance (papers) is forged
3: The buyer usually doesn't look too closely. They're either willing to fool themselves, gullible, or otherwise should know better.
https://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-case-of-the-4-million-g...
Missed opportunity IMO. It was where it belongs.
are you serious and it is your actual position or is it also a joke?
Having different opinion on whether this specific paintings are beautiful at all, and whether they are "some of the best paintings ever created" specifically is going to a boor indicator of being fascist or communist.
Sure but the fascists and communists are the ones spoiling our collective breakfast.
> Having different opinion on whether this specific paintings are beautiful at all, and whether they are "some of the best paintings ever created" specifically is going to a poor indicator of being fascist or communist.
They are objectively some of the best. It’s not a matter that can be debated. But that is besides the point. The point is that authoritarian losers (fascists, commies) specifically hate them for ideological reasons.
You can look at the Mona Lisa and say eh not my favorite, but you can’t deny it’s one of the greatest artworks ever created. If someone is trying to convince you otherwise it’s only for ideological reasons - it has nothing to do with understanding or appreciate of artwork.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raoul_Rigault
Humans are always the hole in the security you build, no matter how good the wall is.
> In addition to DNA, the investigators were also able to benefit from a happy combination of circumstances since “the burglars, after abandoning in the hinterland, near the ski resort of Gréolières, the stolen vehicle that was used for the breakage, took back theirs which was, possibly in the context of another case, equipped with a police beacon,” the lawyer told AFP. The police were thus able to track the car.
https://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/le-principal-suspect-...
I guess they were going to share the one PC.
Who are these people that want priceless art they can't show anyone?
Remember when Kim Kardashian accidentally took a picture of herself next to some stolen statue? So it was uncovered because of her negligence.
It sort of hints that there's this class of ultra rich people who move in their own stratosphere and look at each other's possibly stolen art without snitching each other out.
Turns an otherwise illiquid asset into cash that the estate could use.