In recent days, I’ve talked to three people at the top of the decision-making in the bankruptcy process. All said, without question, that at least part of the collection will have to be — their word — “monetized” before the bankruptcy is resolved.But he wonders how much of the DIA collection will be up for grabs.
Monday, September 30, 2013
Should the DIA Start Renting a Moving Van?
Nolan Finley, of the Detroit News,
Christie’s, the New York auction house, is assessing the collection. If the value is pegged at $2 billion to $3 billion, the DIA likely will escape relatively unscathed. If, as expected, it comes in at $10 billion to $15 billion, the half-billion Orr wants is reasonable. But if the number is more astronomical — $25 billion or above — somebody call Roger Penske and order a moving van.I guess this is one time when an art collector wants the value of her collection to be assessed as low as possible. But then, what are the consequences of that gesture?
Thursday, September 12, 2013
Roberta Smith Is Way Off the Mark on the DIA
NY Times arts writer, Robert Smith, weighs in on the DIA and the possible sale of part of its collection. I read the story on my flight back from Texas, and underlined so many conclusory statements and legal misstatements that my pen ran out of ink.
Donn Zaretsky does a great point-by-point analysis of Smith's inflated and fictional account, highlighting Smith's gluttunous use of hyperbole. Normally I would dismiss Smith's off-the-cuff comments given that on occasion she does hit the nail on the head. But since the ongoing DIA situation is of key public concern with major consequences, many readers who respect Smith's position as a Times writer will allocate significant truth and weight to her unfounded allegations, then turn around and disseminate these same ridiculous arguments.
I don't think I would be too crazy to say that some of Smith's comments border on being unethical and severely lacking in fact-checking skills, to the extent that I would encourage readers to contact the Times' public editor, Margaret Sullivan, and ask her to take a look into Smith's lack of journalistic integrity.
Donn Zaretsky does a great point-by-point analysis of Smith's inflated and fictional account, highlighting Smith's gluttunous use of hyperbole. Normally I would dismiss Smith's off-the-cuff comments given that on occasion she does hit the nail on the head. But since the ongoing DIA situation is of key public concern with major consequences, many readers who respect Smith's position as a Times writer will allocate significant truth and weight to her unfounded allegations, then turn around and disseminate these same ridiculous arguments.
I don't think I would be too crazy to say that some of Smith's comments border on being unethical and severely lacking in fact-checking skills, to the extent that I would encourage readers to contact the Times' public editor, Margaret Sullivan, and ask her to take a look into Smith's lack of journalistic integrity.
Friday, August 30, 2013
We Don't Need No Stinkin' AAMD Police
Donn Zaretsky reports that we have another art lover calling for the Deaccessioning Police to back off.
This is one petition I'll gladly sign. Now, who could we get fired? Lee Rosenbaum?
This is one petition I'll gladly sign. Now, who could we get fired? Lee Rosenbaum?
Monday, August 26, 2013
The DIA and Its Collection Are Now Genuine Celebrity Figures
My good friend, Michael Bennett, on why art matters to Detroit, and why Detroit should use this opportunity--it's 15 minutes of fame--to garner support for the DIA and its collection.
Friday, August 23, 2013
Law Prof: Selling DIA's Art Collection "a huge mistake."
Georgetown Law professor and bankruptcy expert, Adam Levitin, thinks selling the Detroit Institute of Art's collection to pay creditors is wrong legally and culturally.
1. If Detroit is to be rebuilt, it needs a cultural base, not just an economic base.
2. It would also be wrong legally. Bankruptcy law has no provision that requires cities to sell their assets to satisfy creditors.
3. Detroit’s creditors may complain that it is unfair for the city to hold on to a valuable asset while not paying them in full. The truth, though, is that liquidating the art collection would represent a giant windfall for creditors. No creditor ever relied on being able to seize the DIA collection when extending credit to the city.
I have a couple of questions for Professor Levitin.
One, we must assume Detroit can be rebuilt, and by this I mean rebuilt to the extent that it can support an institution the size of the DIA. Additionally, would it even make sense to have burned down buildings, a decreased police and fire department force, and potholes the size of moon craters for the sake of having cultural classics?
Two, why would liquidating part--or all--of the DIA's collection represent "a giant windfall for creditors"? What if you owe me $10 and you allege you are broke, but then you find a $5 bill in your pocket that you "didn't know" you had. Does that mean I would be getting a "windfall" if you paid me half of what you owe me? What if you find a $20, would it be so wrong to walk down to the corner store and get two $10s, one for you and one for me?
Sacrificing Detroit’s art would be an urban planning mistake of the first order that would unjustly enrich creditors. It doesn’t have to happen. Michigan can, and should, take the legal steps necessary to prevent this from happening.Donn Zaretsky also pointed out Levitin's three main reasons,
1. If Detroit is to be rebuilt, it needs a cultural base, not just an economic base.
2. It would also be wrong legally. Bankruptcy law has no provision that requires cities to sell their assets to satisfy creditors.
3. Detroit’s creditors may complain that it is unfair for the city to hold on to a valuable asset while not paying them in full. The truth, though, is that liquidating the art collection would represent a giant windfall for creditors. No creditor ever relied on being able to seize the DIA collection when extending credit to the city.
I have a couple of questions for Professor Levitin.
One, we must assume Detroit can be rebuilt, and by this I mean rebuilt to the extent that it can support an institution the size of the DIA. Additionally, would it even make sense to have burned down buildings, a decreased police and fire department force, and potholes the size of moon craters for the sake of having cultural classics?
Two, why would liquidating part--or all--of the DIA's collection represent "a giant windfall for creditors"? What if you owe me $10 and you allege you are broke, but then you find a $5 bill in your pocket that you "didn't know" you had. Does that mean I would be getting a "windfall" if you paid me half of what you owe me? What if you find a $20, would it be so wrong to walk down to the corner store and get two $10s, one for you and one for me?
Monday, August 19, 2013
What's the Value of Detroit Institute of Arts' Collection?
We'll soon find out.
More via The Detroit Free Press.
Christie’s will only appraise works bought directly by the city that are unencumbered by donated funds or other covenants that cloud clear legal title, said Bill Nowling, spokesman for Detroit emergency manager Kevyn Orr. The appraisal will unfold in phases. Officials will start with the art on view before evaluating art in storage with an estimated market value of $50,000 or more and, finally, art in storage presumed to be worth less than $50,000.Final results are due in October or November. The city is paying Christie’s a $200,000 fee. However, it appears that if there is a sale, it won't necessarily be made through Christie's.
More via The Detroit Free Press.
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
Deaccessioning Police plans 'Day for Detroit'
Can blogs wear Birkenstocks?
A few art blogs are rallying around the web-o-sphere to bring attention to Detroit's financial plight and the potential deaccessioning of DIA's art collection. Because, you know, it's not like Detroit's been in the news lately.
I'm a bit hurt. Why wasn't The Deaccessioning Blog invited? (wink, wink...)
A few art blogs are rallying around the web-o-sphere to bring attention to Detroit's financial plight and the potential deaccessioning of DIA's art collection. Because, you know, it's not like Detroit's been in the news lately.
I'm a bit hurt. Why wasn't The Deaccessioning Blog invited? (wink, wink...)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
