Questionable: Gallery starts wholesaling to other galleries

[lohman]

I've been with a certain gallery going on three years now. When I delivered work this week one of the owners mentioned they were "wholesaling to other galleries now."

I have mixed feelings about this, mostly negative.

On the one hand they might sell more work and that is good. On the other hand I feel I've lost control over what type of gallery my work will be seen in. Is my work going to a gallery (or store) that I would not want my work in. (I'm sure we've all seen galleries we would not want to do business with.)

Does this create another level of distance between the collector and the artist? Do we become as annonymous as the suppliers to K-Mart and such?

I signed a contract with the gallery (consignment) and there was no mention that they would wholesale. Am I right (or wrong) in considering that unless the gallery buys outright the work still belongs to me until it is sold? Shouldn't I have been consulted? Am I sitting on a real high horse and should I get over it.

[Carol]

I signed a contract with the gallery (consignment) and there was no mention that they would wholesale. Am I right (or wrong) in considering that unless the gallery buys outright the work still belongs to me until it is sold? Shouldn't I have been consulted? Am I sitting on a real high horse and should I get over it.[/quote]

Yikes. Personally I haven't heard of this. I'd be concerned and would be contacting them right away to make sure I understood what they were doing and its implicaitons on my work. If you have goods on consignment with them, check and make sure they are not passing those items on to other galleries. If so, you've essentially lost control of items you still own, and I would find that outright unethical. It may be that they are only wholesaling goods they have purchased outright, or perhaps they're brokering sales on behalf of artists, in which case you could choose to participate or not. Keep us posted.

[rosanna gusler]

are you saying that they take your work, pay nothing, and distribute it who knows where with out collecting any money?? i say run away from that scene. rosanna

[Deb Libby]

I signed a contract with the gallery (consignment) and there was no mention that they would wholesale. Am I right (or wrong) in considering that unless the gallery buys outright the work still belongs to me until it is sold? Shouldn't I have been consulted? Am I sitting on a real high horse and should I get over it.

No, you're not on a high horse ... if you have a consignment arrangement with the gallery, you still own and should have control over where and what happens to that work. If they have purchased the work (either outright retail or wholesale), then your rights are relinquished. I'd get in contact with them quickly and work out something agreeable to both or pull your work ... good luck and let us know how it works out![/u]

[Barbara Muth]

Just because I am in the mood to be a devil's advocate here...

If my work is on consignment in a gallery and they sell the piece for me, do I have any control over where it goes? Isn't it possible that a shop could purchase that work and sell it again elsewhere? How is the shop selling my piece to a shop owner rather than a consumer different for me? And is it something that can be controlled? (After all a shop owner could come in and buy up all of my work as a consumer) and then resell it.

And BTW -- wouldn't I like that? If they are reselling my work, it would have to be at a considerably higher price for their purchase to be worthwhile -- doesn't that raise the value of my work?

IMHO both shops are getting the short end of the stick that way, the shop that sells it because obviously if the second shop can sell it at a higher price then the first shop could perhaps have been selling the pieces higher and making more money, the second shoip because they could get a better wholesale price directly from the artist.

Of course the artist could be making more money too, because if a shop is buying your work from the place where you have it on consignment then they are paying more than your wholesale price.

So maybe I am not getting this....

[Cynthia]

Just because I am in the mood to be a devil's advocate here...

If my work is on consignment in a gallery and they sell the piece for me, do I have any control over where it goes?

Isn't it possible that a shop could purchase that work and sell it again elsewhere? How is the shop selling my piece to a shop owner rather than a consumer different for me? And is it something that can be controlled? (After all a shop owner could come in and buy up all of my work as a consumer) and then resell it.

You might be right, but if that is the case then wouldn't it just be better as the gallery to purchase your work at wholesale then sell it to other outlets rather than consigning? In this case they assume no risk, yet get the highest reward. I wonder what the laws concerning consingment are in the different states.

There was a news magazine program on TV last night that did a story about ebay and how one woman who buys Prada bags retail, then sells them on ebay at a huge profit. This would be like wholesaling in the sense that you determine your price, it's purchased and then it's up to the purchaser wether it goes in the gallery, to a designer, the trash...Is it ethical? I don't know.

So, does consignment mean that the product remains the property of the artist, and that the gallery must provide appropriate care and sell to who the recognized client base is, or can they sell to who ever they please?

And BTW -- wouldn't I like that? If they are reselling my work, it would have to be at a considerably higher price for their purchase to be worthwhile -- doesn't that raise the value of my work?

I don't know if it raises the value of your work, or stiffs you out of what you should be getting. Essentially the gallery is adding yet another level of cost to the item in this case.

IMHO both shops are getting the short end of the stick that way, the shop that sells it because obviously if the second shop can sell it at a higher price then the first shop could perhaps have been selling the pieces higher and making more money, the second shop because they could get a better wholesale price directly from the artist.

Or, perhaps the first shop is interested in making more by having a quicker turnaround. The second shop will retail it at the price they know they can get, so it's not relevant to them where they get it...and the saavy artist would be wholesaling at a higher price.

Of course the artist could be making more money too, because if a shop is buying your work from the place where you have it on consignment then they are paying more than your wholesale price.

So maybe I am not getting this....

I think you get it as well as most of us. How do we protect our best interests and get paid what we deserve for our work while maintaining a marketable price? How do we protect ourselves from being abused or misused. It's a dog eat dog world out there...and I want someone else to handle these issues because I'm afraid of those dogs, but thank god we're talking so I can learn and do better at handling them myself.

[Sara]

Methinks Barbara is closest in understanding what sales are all about.

I NEVER consign my work, I am not the bank for a gallery either the gallery likes my work or doesn't. True I often wonder what type of gallery my work is in. Some places I'm sure are the scourge and others are very prestigious and I feel honored to be there. Regardless I have been paid what I feel I need to continue to support myself with my glass.

If the gallery that is now doing wholesale with your work is paying you I'd consider them a representative and be thankful that your work is selling, otherwise I'd find another gallery, there are plenty who will take your work without having to bankroll or show their true respect for the work by actually purchasing it.

Of course to get your work to the place where the galleries can see it to purchase often you'll need to do some handmade trade shows, which I realize can be costly and occasionally suck, I sure know I've had fabulous ones and dogs too. Do your homework and move to the next level.

Take a deep breath and continue.

Sara

[Geri Comstock]

This sounds very peculiar to me. When I've had work in galleries on consignment and another non-competing gallery wanted to sell my work, the original gallery would put them directly in contact with me.

If your work is on consignment and they say they're "wholesaling", I assume money is exchanging hands and you're being paid for your work when it's sold to the other gallery. I'm surprised the other galleries are willing to buy wholesale from this gallery since they MUST be paying some kind of markup to the original gallery, which means they must charge more for the work.

I'd ask for a clarification about what's going on just to ease your own mind about the situation. It sounds very odd to me.

Geri

[Kitty]

odd. initially, i dont see where the profit margin is with a scheme like this. plus, it might lead to problems getting paid. on the other hand, maybe it's friends who own separate galleries, and they're swapping stuff because they have different clientele and are testing the market through exchanging some pieces. if that's the case, and you can get filled in on the details, maybe you'd get some unexpected sales. i'd like to hear about how this story unfolds, as you learn more. good luck with it. kitty.

[Sara]

[quote I don't know if it raises the value of your work, or stiffs you out of what you should be getting. Essentially the gallery is adding yet another level of cost to the item in this case. You work may end up in The Glass Shack rather than Pismo...and if Pismo finds out, they might not want to carry your work anymore if it's appeal is cheapened.]

well Pismo doesn't purchase my work, nor does Seekers although they've both inquired. Both these fine galleries realize that many small shops carry the work of great glass artists. It sounds to me like you are really limiting your self and worrying over small potatoes. Most galleries of that calibur (actually even a 'lower calibur' gallery) have certain restrictions or requests that you as the artist must follow. often they concern selling to another gallery within a certain radius of their gallery. In my case I declined Seekers because I had a conflicting gallery and in Pismo's case my work isn't high priced enough, which is the 'complaint' I hear most from galleries of that ilk.

as for being stiffed, aren't you asking the price you need for your work? why be concerned past that point? each gallery or step or rung asks what they need.

The "Glass Shack" can be equally as valid a resource as "Glass Fusion" for many.

of course I could be wrong . . .

Sara

[Jo Holt]

When I delivered work this week one of the owners mentioned they were "wholesaling to other galleries now."

I signed a contract with the gallery (consignment) and there was no mention that they would wholesale.

Two things come to mind: You're delivering your work so you're saving shipping (breakage - argh!) packing, etc. If the gallery they wholesale to is miles away from you - you get your agreed amount for a lot less aggravation than if you had to travel further or ship.

As long as you get the $$ you want when they sell it, then you're happy.

I can sort of see why this might be happening. If you are in an area that would only be able to sell a piece for $300. but the gallery 200 miles away can sell it for $500. then this makes some sense. In essence your local gallery owner has become a sales rep.

The key is if you are getting the amount you need. Are you comfortable asking them what locations are involved? Maybe a little more info would either ease your mind; or confirm that they should buy it wholesale to begin with; or if you want to stay with them.

[lohman]

Thanks everyone for your replies. You have helped me see this from other perspectives, though I did acknowledge in my original post that maybe I should just come down of my high horse and get over it.

To clarify some questions: Yes, they do pay and each check stub lists all the stock numbers of items sold during that month.

Barbara, your points are well taken, thank you, but I agree with Cynthia that if the gallery is going to wholesale, the work should be purchased outright.

Of course Sara is right about doing more shows. I've got to be more visible.

[Cynthia]

[quote I don't know if it raises the value of your work, or stiffs you out of what you should be getting. Essentially the gallery is adding yet another level of cost to the item in this case. Your work may end up in The Glass Shack rather than Pismo...and if Pismo finds out, they might not want to carry your work anymore if it's appeal is cheapened.]

well Pismo doesn't purchase my work, nor does Seekers although they've both inquired. Both these fine galleries realize that many small shops carry the work of great glass artists. It sounds to me like you are really limiting your self and worrying over small potatoes. Most galleries of that calibur (actually even a 'lower calibur' gallery) have certain restrictions or requests that you as the artist must follow. often they concern selling to another gallery within a certain radius of their gallery. In my case I declined Seekers because I had a conflicting gallery and in Pismo's case my work isn't high priced enough, which is the 'complaint' I hear most from galleries of that ilk.

as for being stiffed, aren't you asking the price you need for your work? why be concerned past that point? each gallery or step or rung asks what they need.

The "Glass Shack" can be equally as valid a resource as "Glass Fusion" for many.

of course I could be wrong . . .

Sara

I don't think you are wrong. I think we might be talking about different directions of how and where we (collectively) take the work we do. I was just speculating from one of my experiences. I had one gallery that asked that I pull my work from another because the price point and clientelle were of different "ranks" and by having my work in the other gallery "cheapened the appeal" because it was a lower end gallery. I ended up pulling out of the "higher caliber" gallery because it felt possessive and icky. Turns out I should have stayed with the elitists.

From what I hear from others who are trying to get the better prices in the higher end galleries, as elitist and snobby as it sounds or is, it matters where you have your work. Many collectors care about where you sell too. They don't want to think they are buying something they can get just any old place...they are paying for a name and some status as well as the work.

I do believe that perception is significant. If you sell at the Glass Shack and Pismo, all the better if your intended market is to be found there. My point was directed at Lohman's concern that s/he is possibly giving up control of where his/her work is being displayed, sold and in what fashion. That is as valid a concern about those selling resources and what and where they are, as is wether or not you are asking enough for your work, or getting paid enough for your work. If you are concerned that the venue doesn't match the work, you shouldn't have to give up your right to chose where your work ends up.

[Bert Weiss]

I'm not sure that we really understand what is happening to Lohman. Is the gallery you consigned to selling your work to another gallery or reconsigning it?

If they are selling it and you get paid your price, you are at least getting paid. You should reevaluate your wholesale price and seek out galleries that can get the higher prices for your work. The value of your work really has nothing to do with time/materials only what the buyer will pay.

To me the sleaziest thing that can happen in the gallery world is that a gallery agrees with you to a 100% markup on consignment. Then they actually mark the piece with a 200% price. When the piece sells, they take your money and actually purchase work from another artist (who refuses to consign). When you call up several months later and demand that they return your work they reluctantly pay you, your original wholesale price. I have heard this story over and over and it is a big reason I haven't pursued this market.

I once had an interesting experience regarding the level of galleries. I went ot see a show of the work of Livio Seguso at Heller Gallery. I loved the show. The work was wonderful and recognizable. The following winter I was in a "gift shop" in Palm Beach Florida. There was a small piece of glass that I immedialely recognized as a Livio Seguso. It was priced at $350. I didn't have $350 to drop on a piece of art glass that day, but I said to myself "If I was in Murano, I could afford this". Several years later I got my butt to Murano and seeked out the gallery that showed Mr Seguzo's work. I bought one of these pieces for $185 shipped home. I was thrilled. As it turned out Livio had quit making these "hockey pucks" because his expensive pieces were selling and of course were more lucrative. I got there in time to get a bargain and I love my piece. I also got to meet Livio at his studio, and see a fabulous exhibition (not open to the public) of work that Ginny Ruffner made in Murano before her disability.

[Sara]

I don't think you are wrong. I think we might be talking about different directions of how and where we (collectively) take the work we do. I was just speculating from one of my experiences. I had one gallery that asked that I pull my work from another because the price point and clientelle were of different "ranks" and by having my work in the other gallery "cheapened the appeal" because it was a lower end gallery. I ended up pulling out of the "higher caliber" gallery because it felt possessive and icky. Turns out I should have stayed with the elitists.

From what I hear from others who are trying to get the better prices in the higher end galleries, as elitist and snobby as it sounds or is, it matters where you have your work. Many collectors care about where you sell too. They don't want to think they are buying something they can get just any old place...they are paying for a name and some status as well as the work.

I do believe that perception is significant. If you sell at the Glass Shack and Pismo, all the better if your intended market is to be found there. My point was directed at Lohman's concern that s/he is possibly giving up control of where his/her work is being displayed, sold and in what fashion. That is as valid a concern about those selling resources and what and where they are, as is wether or not you are asking enough for your work, or getting paid enough for your work. If you are concerned that the venue doesn't match the work, you shouldn't have to give up your right to chose where your work ends up.

Cynthia,

I've had interesting conversations with friends who are going much the same 'route' that you are choosing. They actually have two names and market the lesser expensive under one name and the more expensive under another and have admonished me because in the beginning I did everything under my own name. When I started I thought long and hard and decided to make my work spontaneously affordable to whomever wanted it. This philosophy has worked well for me and my customers, although it's not for everyone. It's all about what you want and are looking for. I wanted to make people happy and reach everyone . . . not just the, as you put it, elitist and snobby gallery types plus I also wanted to make a living completely from glass. I've never regretted my choice, although have considered a second name as a 'test market' last year at BMAC I introduced a new higher priced line (under my same name) and it was well received and, yes it expanded my market. So in my pollyanna way I want and expect it all, so far so good.

as for where my/your/our work ends up, once it's out there we have no control.

Happily melting along,

Sara

[Cynthia]

Cynthia,

I've had interesting conversations with friends who are going much the same 'route' that you are choosing. They actually have two names and market the lesser expensive under one name and the more expensive under another and have admonished me because in the beginning I did everything under my own name. When I started I thought long and hard and decided to make my work spontaneously affordable to whomever wanted it. This philosophy has worked well for me and my customers, although it's not for everyone. It's all about what you want and are looking for. I wanted to make people happy and reach everyone . . . not just the, as you put it, elitist and snobby gallery types plus I also wanted to make a living completely from glass. I've never regretted my choice, although have considered a second name as a 'test market' last year at BMAC I introduced a new higher priced line (under my same name) and it was well received and, yes it expanded my market. So in my pollyanna way I want and expect it all, so far so good.

as for where my/your/our work ends up, once it's out there we have no control.

Happily melting along,

Sara

Getting off topic a bit, but I just wanted to respond to Sara's remarks to me.

It's a good thing that there are many avenues for all of us to choose from as to what kind of work we will produce and for what purposes, personal, for profit, for kicks... and that there is a niche for all of us. Some of us do it for fun as a hobby, some for profit, some of us have fun, but also do this as a profession, like Sara. It's also a good thing that there are some folks who can afford to pay for non essentials so that we can do this as a profession.

Of course, once our work ends up sold, it's out of our control, but we do have control over where we sell and for what price, just like Sara has taken control of where she sells and at what price. Her choice appears well considered, and I interpret her statements to mean that she took control of how she marketed and to whom. Sara stated "When I started I thought long and hard and decided to make my work spontaneously affordable to whomever wanted it. This philosophy has worked well for me and my customers, although it's not for everyone. It's all about what you want and are looking for. I wanted to make people happy and reach everyone . . . not just the, as you put it, elitist and snobby gallery types"

I sense a bit of disdain from Sara about my chosen "route", but it is just a different part of the whole pie that we can each participate in. My work is not priced or available to be affordable or accessible to everyone. It is expensive to produce, is one of a kind and not production work. That doesn't make it better, just more expensive to produce, and therefore is available to a different market, one that has more expendible income. I don't think that is a bad thing. In reality, no ones work will be available to or reach everyone because not everyone has expendible $$$. I do feel a bit miffed about Sara's tone toward me in that post, but I realise that my background and perceptions and approach will differ from others who have different backgrounds, perceptions and approaches. Those differences can cause clashes between us rather that interest. Guess that's what makes this world interesting.

I'm pleased for Sara's success and that her product and her market are a successful match. I hope that my intended audience and my work continue to grow and continue to support me in doing what I love. My desire is to do good work and better work, and to be able to make a living doing so as I progress. I hope we all get what we want, and can have just enough of whatever it takes to keep us going.

[Sara]

Cynthia,

I've had interesting conversations with friends who are going much the same 'route' that you are choosing. They actually have two names and market the lesser expensive under one name and the more expensive under another and have admonished me because in the beginning I did everything under my own name. When I started I thought long and hard and decided to make my work spontaneously affordable to whomever wanted it. This philosophy has worked well for me and my customers, although it's not for everyone. It's all about what you want and are looking for. I wanted to make people happy and reach everyone . . . not just the, as you put it, elitist and snobby gallery types plus I also wanted to make a living completely from glass. I've never regretted my choice, although have considered a second name as a 'test market' last year at BMAC I introduced a new higher priced line (under my same name) and it was well received and, yes it expanded my market. So in my pollyanna way I want and expect it all, so far so good.

as for where my/your/our work ends up, once it's out there we have no control.

Happily melting along,

Sara

Getting off topic a bit, but I just wanted to respond to Sara's remarks to me.

It's a good thing that there are many avenues for all of us to choose from as to what kind of work we will produce and for what purposes, personal, for profit, for kicks... and that there is a niche for all of us. Some of us do it for fun as a hobby, some for profit, some of us have fun, but also do this as a profession, like Sara. It's also a good thing that there are some folks who can afford to pay for non essentials so that we can do this as a profession.

Of course, once our work ends up sold, it's out of our control, but we do have control over where we sell and for what price, just like Sara has taken control of where she sells and at what price. Her choice appears well considered, and I interpret her statements to mean that she took control of how she marketed and to whom. Sara stated "When I started I thought long and hard and decided to make my work spontaneously affordable to whomever wanted it. This philosophy has worked well for me and my customers, although it's not for everyone. It's all about what you want and are looking for. I wanted to make people happy and reach everyone . . . not just the, as you put it, elitist and snobby gallery types"

I sense a bit of disdain from Sara about my chosen "route", but it is just a different part of the whole pie that we can each participate in. My work is not priced or available to be affordable or accessible to everyone. It is expensive to produce, is one of a kind and not production work. That doesn't make it better, just more expensive to produce, and therefore is available to a different market, one that has more expendible income. I don't think that is a bad thing. In reality, no ones work will be available to or reach everyone because not everyone has expendible $$$. I do feel a bit miffed about Sara's tone toward me in that post, but I realise that my background and perceptions and approach will differ from others who have different backgrounds, perceptions and approaches. Those differences can cause clashes between us rather that interest. Guess that's what makes this world interesting.

I'm pleased for Sara's success and that her product and her market are a successful match. I hope that my intended audience and my work continue to grow and continue to support me in doing what I love. My desire is to do good work and better work, and to be able to make a living doing so as I progress. I hope we all get what we want, and can have just enough of whatever it takes to keep us going.

Cynthia,

I do apologize if I've offended you. You misinterpreted what I said. I have no 'disdain' for you or your work, and thought I shared some of my conversations with friends and experiences to show some of the interesting findings regarding exclusivity and marketability, my possible nievete' concerning marketing myself. I simply chose a different path and offered it up for disection, and information. It makes your approach or work no better or worse than mine. As I responded in the private email you sent me, I <i>am</> tired of art speak and gallery owners/clients/glass artists who feel the need to be as you put it "elitist" and "snobby", two words I would not personally use to describe a gallery or client. My point, while misunderstood hopefully only by you, was there are many philosophies and goals to building a business.

enough of this,

S.