| JGW- Published papers | |||||
| Art | Furniture | Art & Antique Market | Law Enforcement | Insuance Industry | Resume |
The discussion covers the Georgian furniture market and its
relationship to other chattels and economic conditions focusing on the last
decade. To arrive at a define set of reasons to why a value was reached at
auction is not achievable as only economic and Macro effects can provide a
background to the conditions of the time. Dealers or buyers fighting or forcing
a higher price at any one auction bidding on one lot may create fluctuations in
the final hammer price, without outside affects being accounted for. The
document does not cover all of these economic factors but the mainstream
national and international events that may cause variations over a period.
The market for Georgian or Hanoverian furniture has had a
number of drivers to increase the awareness and subsequent investment for its
aesthetic or monetary value. Without the ability to perform historical market
research over the three millenniums, achieving an understanding of the habits
of what has been sold new and second-hand is only available through a number of
assumptions. The demands of the buyers
in the 20th century for newly produced furniture provide an insight
to the supply for historical taste. “As first time buyers emulated the taste of
their social superiors, the styles of the sixteenth, seventieth and eighteenth
centuries were adapted to early twentieth century living.”[1] The issue of public demand verses furniture
maker’s capabilities or desires is covered well in Edwards book. The government
for sometime had imposed various controls such as the Utility Scheme replaced
later by the D scheme[2]
had an effect on the market for new purchases. Even with the intervention of
the Daily Mail “The Ideal Home Exhibition”[3]
in 1908 and the BBC in the 1930’s[4].
“It is therefore no surprise to that was a demand for furniture that emulated
past styles, and by interference, conferred some respectability on the owners”[5]
In marketing a new term has been added covering all the
demographic groups, objects for sale or auction sales which feature buyers such
as pop stars and other famous people will drive the “esteem seekers”[6]
to purchase copies or the real thing[7]. The background to the demand for copies was
high in the post war years and there are a number of arguments for the
manufactures creating a market, by the short supply of new styles or the lack
of investment in tooling the workshop of this period.
There are various reasons to why this furniture is so
popular, smaller properties, aesthetic and historical research through various
genealogical programs, such as clarification of the maker or proof of original
ownership [8].
The question is that apart from aesthetic appreciation[9]
at some point the object will be converted into a currency so this expectation
requires some form of comparison. As for an investment it of course has to be
compared to some form of monetary relationship, the question of which could be
argued till the end of time. So does one take the financial markets or compare
it with other antiques. These are marketing points for those selling antiques
fine art or otherwise as an investment for the future. For those connoisseurs
the style is much as a personal judgement as in art being painted to which
style or genre is preferred.
Changes in the classification systems or ‘cannons’ have
widened the parameters of the many sub categories seen in the mid nineties in
the printed catalogues[10]
to those of the parent group now accessible on the internet. The availability
of objects originally dated from the Georgian period has decreased over a
number of years[11], simply by
damage, decay and the volume shipping demands driven by the North American[12]
collectors’ demands from the eighties[13]
and nineties. The continuing reduction in volume should under normal supply and
demand theories increase the price. The Georgian furniture market is placed on
a higher plane than some other furniture genres[14].
The grouping of which was to promote clusters of objects that either fell
between categories or deemed as other effects within the auction trade, mainly
driven by what was known as the ‘Big Four’ in the auction market, created
further niche groups within the entire market frame.
The high volume of reproduction or copies placed on the
market knowingly[15] or by
unscrupulous auctioneers created a lack of trust in the buying public[16].
But a drive for known provenance (such as branded shop, or current
manufacturer).
The collecting of 18th century furniture is seen
as a stable market[17]
for a different range of buyers/investors[18].
There are constant reports of a diminishing market[19]
of original objects from the period[20],
browsing the following table, a small percentage can be seen between 1999-2003
in the volume of objects.
|
Source |
Year |
All items |
All 18th Century |
18th Century Furniture |
|
18th Century Furniture expressed against all objects |
18th Century Furniture expressed against all 18th century
objects |
|
ATG |
1999 |
1,800 |
139 |
33 |
|
1.8% |
24% |
|
ATG |
2000 |
2,698 |
476 |
183 |
|
6.8% |
38% |
|
ATG |
2001 |
7,953 |
1,145 |
445 |
|
5.6% |
39% |
|
ATG |
2002 |
28,582 |
3,940 |
1,182 |
|
4.1% |
30% |
|
ATG |
2003 |
49,861 |
6,652 |
1,652 |
|
3.3% |
25% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data
Extract is taken other 93 days 9-Jan-02 till 14-Apr-02 |
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IG |
2002 part |
204,910 |
|
1,978 |
|
1.0% |
|
|
Offered for sale but did not obtain a realized price |
|
46,636 |
|
492 |
|
1.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23% |
|
25% |
|
|
|
|
|
Sold |
|
77% |
|
75% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
IG |
|
IG |
|
ATG |
|
|
Number of sales |
127 |
Per sale |
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
Number of days |
34 |
Per day |
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average per day |
2,203 |
|
21 |
|
3 |
|
|
The lack of a transparent market breeds information that is
driven normally by dealers overstocking or maintaining large volumes of dead
stock. The fine art market presided in an oligopolistic form with the perceived
control by Sotheby’s and Christie’s[21]
continual branding and organised release of particular cannons or categories
into the market place. An assumption could be created, that the temporary loss
of control by the two larger auction houses created a release of period objects
on the market increasing the volume to 6.8%. The ACC and other sources often
consider the London markets as the main source of information[22],
which will typically contain the large auction rooms, and the upper crust of
dealers in New Bond street and the various arcades around the museum
areas. Previous studies have shown that
art fine or otherwise runs in fads, painting, pictures known as flat art tends
to be in line with the stock market (8-10 year cycles), whereas furniture and
best quality ceramics have a shorter cycle of 5-7 years. Collectables run
between 3-5 years.[23]
We see a five-year period when the volumes were low in 1999
and rose to a high in 2000 around the time of the much-commented shortage. Then
dropping off over a three-year period. The Invaluable Group (IG) data snapshot
shows a lower percentage content of 18th century furniture that
reflects a wider source of data (nearly 40 fold of the ATG on line data). The information
does support the fact that 18th century furniture is sold on a
parallel with the other prices captured. It must be commented that all of the
sources provide no record of the volume of objects offered for sale. Volume
offered, volume recorded as sold and quantity unsold which would provide a set
of market statistics, similar to the money markets. Previous work with data
sets from Invaluable group show a slight rise generally from 48% in 1997 to 59%
in 2000 of lots offered for sale and sold in addition to the fact that prices
increased when volumes were high. Other factors must be considered such as the
authenticity of the object, the text provided by the auctioneer/lotter has to
be taken as true description without disputing the incorrect description of a
fake or chopped piece that the auctioneer has miss described[24].
The Antique Collectors guide provides a form of price caparison of purchases since 1948 showing an overall increase until 2000. It provides no comparison with the Retail Price Index and the author questions the fluctuations and the mentioned manipulation of prices provides an unstable index. However, taking the relevant segments of the index such as removing house prices or only using them, or perhaps the old statement that one once of gold will buy a suit (sometimes the value of the suit varies throughout history) as a norm provides some stability in looking back over three to four centuries. Slightly obscure that the financial institute uses this index to invest billions of pounds each day as one of its primary data sources, yet the art and antique market withdraws from any connection with the same.
The antiques market has changed, long gone are the huge
historic house sales with good provenance of the 1950’s and 60’s with chattels
being sold to circumnavigate either taxation brought in by the British
government. However, the occasional sale still brings the keen bidders to buy
objects with a known provenance pushing the prices excessively high.
|
Source |
Year |
All items |
All 19th Century |
19th Century Furniture |
|
19th Century Furniture expressed against all objects |
19th Century Furniture expressed against all 19th century
objects |
|
ATG |
1999 |
1,800 |
535 |
131 |
|
7% |
24% |
|
ATG |
2000 |
2,698 |
1,249 |
405 |
|
15% |
32% |
|
ATG |
2001 |
7,953 |
3,873 |
1,204 |
|
15% |
31% |
|
ATG |
2002 |
28,582 |
11,877 |
3,417 |
|
12% |
29% |
|
ATG |
2003 |
49,861 |
20,034 |
9,752 |
|
20% |
49% |
The pieces chosen are to offered are to show the diverse
range of furniture available in the often quoted ‘Golden years’ of
British furniture; Night tables, Side Chairs, Desk on Stand. Apart from the
chairs the development of concise practical furniture during this period
brought on by the reducing size of property and the subsequent room both in
England and France (the apartment) due to increased city population and the
rebuilding ACT 1776 in England.
The Night
or bedside table[i] being
developed in France around 1765[25]
“Numerous new types of furniture appeared in France in the 1700s with varied
and specialized functions. This bedside cabinet was decorated on all four sides
so that it could be placed wherever it was needed in the room.”[26]
The object shows a similar the Hepplewhite version to that found described
in his patent design book[27]
dated around 1788. Typically the English version included handles in the galley
sides.
Night Cabinet (ACC Reference 797) 3,000 pair adjustment
6,000. Realize price 33,600, Hammer price 26,880 GBP
See also “The Dictonary of British Furniture” vol3 (p263)
Night Table in the sale has no galley sides; the ACC index
table has galley sides with tray handles, two drawer fronts. There is a
difference in material and the doors.
The maximum realized price reached for lot 53 “A matched pair of Regency mahogany night tables early
19th century, attributed to Gillows” was 13,200 GBP at Sotheby’s on the 3rd
July 2003, Sotheby’s, Bond Street, with a known provenance trail including the
information that the pair were brought in 1961 for 110 GBP from a dealer. ACC
show 65 GBP as an average in 1968. Sold at Bonham’s
Leeds lot 630 4th February 2003 for 6,000 GBP. Sotheby’s indicate a
similar lot (158) sold at Christie’s 11th Nov 1999 for 27,600 GBP.
Yet we see the other Night Tables sold by
Sotheby’s average around 4,500 GBP double the value of the higher lots shown on
the Antique Trade Gazette and Invaluable Group websites when browsing the
result information for the generic term Night Table. From this the conclusion of the ACC index is that the price
mainly contains dealer stock pricing (unknown if sold or unsold otherwise).
Using a calculation of adding 17 percent for restoration and doubling the price
for retail purposes as their margin.
The description and provenance detail offered by Sotheby’s
provides no clues to why such a high price was reached; such as maker, house or
previous owners inventory details. The assumption of the maker being
Hepplewhite (providing some provenance by referring to his published works) or
from his workshops could be primed to why the price was so high. The Christie’s
lot with its attribution to Gillows for some later night tables and a known
provenance underwrites a value of 13,200 GBP doubling within a six-month
period, from a Leeds saleroom to London high end auction may provide strength
in the argument that exposure of objects by the main salerooms adds value.
The Side
Chair[ii]
developed from the stool to back-stool and into chairs as a sub section of
seating designs vary according to many intended uses. The plain splat and
proportional seat size prior to those typical over sizing by Chippendale and
alike from the middle of the same century. The chairs lack of raking hints at
its English origins continuing from the Queen Anne style including cabriole
legs and the wealth of tapestry available from East Anglia region implies
connections with High Wycombe or London.
Side chair (ACC number 129) 3,181 rough pair adjustment
6,400. Realize price 5,520, Hammer price 4,416 GBP
Pricing a pair of objects is often based on doubling price
of a single piece. ACC have multiplied the value by 2.75 between 4,000 and
5,500. To this end the pair of chairs reached their expected levels. However
the lack of ornate detail on the cabriole legs and the simple splat carving
would reduce the price to that similar of plate 128 in the ACC book 900-1,110
(single), 2,475-3,025 (a pair [x 2.75]). This early period and transition from
the Queen Anne to Georgian is little researched and the buyer may have located
some form of provenance that dated and qualified a region or maker intending to
resell at a higher value. The period prior to 1714 previously ignored has
recently been reviewed by Adam Bowett in his English furniture 1660-1714 and is
potentially a new growth area, the buyer maybe looking at this future
opportunity.
The Desk
on Stand[iii]
has connections with its believed French origins[28].
The Burr Walnut provides a unique finish to the exterior and now become rare in
these pieces. The low curves indicate the reluctance of English designers to
take on the fuller enhancements the French offered on their pieces at the time.
The reduced size being more practical and relates to the space available in
accommodation of the period as opposed to the cumbersome Bureau plat.
Desk on Stand (acc nbr 29, 31,32 for comparison)
12,000-20,000. Realize price 21,600, Hammer price 17,280 GBP
There is no direct comparison available like the chair this
early piece is in the transition between 1700 (Queen Anne) and 1720 (Georgian).
The hammer price came mid range for the similar desk with
x-stretcher (29 ACC) and well above others. Recently Burr woods such as Walnut
have come back into the market as well as the slopping front bureau[29]
demanding higher prices than previous visits the unique patterns of the woods[30]
provide a appeal not dissimilar to those appreciating Boulle or complex
marquetry. The lack of stretcher and thinly shaped legs show the British maker
becoming familiar with the strength of these recently imported or vernacular
materials.
The rarity of the finish and the design of the piece
Searches on the internet and through other publications did not provided any
similar objects for direct comparison.
Conclusion
The sale of these objects from a major saleroom with an
underwritten provenance would have increased the value by a reasonable
percentage. However the demand or perceived lack of furniture from the period
would have increased the final price.
Referring to simple valuations such as Antique Collectors
Club publication “British Furniture Price guide and the reasons for Values” the
Night table and Desk far exceed the averages quoted for 2001. This raises the
question to validity of the ACC index with such large variants in the values
even with the 20 percent buyers premium removed. Some of the issues lie in the
descriptive terms, side chair verses dining chair, Night Cabinet verse Night
table, bedside cabinet or bedside commode. The decoration or mechanics of the
device all show some differences. The Antique Collectors Club index provides an
average from various sources without the intimate detail of realized verses
hammer price or explanation of dealer’s additional cost etc. But does provide
the reader/user with a reasonable approximation and sight of similar pieces,
whilst providing a degree of fluctuation for decoration and additional
attributes of lack of the same.
Bibliography
Army & Navy Stores Limited, general price list 1939-40. Trident
Press.
The Cabinet maker and complete household Furnisher
established 1880 Year book. 1954 edition.
Andrews J. British Antique Furniture, price Guide and
Reasons for Values. Woodbridge: Fourth edition 2001.
Beard G. Dictionary of English Furniture Makers
1660-1840. Leeds: 1986.
Bowett A. English Furniture 1660-1714. Woodbridge: 2002.
Edwards C.D. Twentieth Century Furniture. Manchester:
1994.
Edwards R. The Dictionary of English Furniture Vol 1-3. New
York: Second revised edition 1954, reprint 1999,2000.
Hamlyn P. World Furniture. London: 1965.
Payne C. 19th Century European Furniture. Aberdeen:
1985 second edition reprinted.
Payne C. Sotheby’s Concise Encyclopedia of Furniture. London:
1989.
Strange T.A. English Furniture, decoration woodwork and
allied arts. London: 1995.
Ramsey L.G.G. The Concise Encyclopaedia of Antiques. Ipswich
& London: 1954.
Thornton P. Form & Decoration innovation in the
decorative arts 1470-1870. Great Britain: 1998.
Wilk C. Western Furniture 1350 to the present day. London:
1996.