[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

The item in question amounts to approximately 0.25% of the gross of the auction, truly a de minimus amount. It would be beyond imbecilic for a profit-maximizing auction house to consciously misrepresent such an item, the ramifications of which could materially impact the future profitability of the company. That's not to say it can't happen, or that companies don't do stupid things. But between choosing between that scenario or an alternative one (i.e., oversight in need of improvement) that does not involve intent to defraud, I would choose the latter. As to the point that the auction in question had only 80 or so lots, I am certain Mastro Auctions at the time the authenticity issue came up was also dealing with the thousands of lots to appear in its other upcoming auctions.

Presumably the company will have learned from this episode and will going forward implement better oversight procedures.