THE ART OF THE AUCTION

Most people would assume when you put a watch auction catalog together, it’s just a matter of grouping brands or styles until each item has a lot and then print. If only it were so simple, or rather, if you want a successful auction, it takes much more thought. Take for example Aurel Bacs, who has dominated this field at both Christies then Phillips for decades now. If you look at his past catalogues you’ll notice the first lots are usually modern Rolex estimated at well below market value or no reserve. There’s a reason for this. Aurel wants people to be in the room when the auctioneer steps onto the podium, nothing more enticing then the potential for a bargain to get people motivated, then, as always, due to their low reserve that attracts so much interest, the first lots sell very strongly, it sets the whole auction up as buoyant. Take on the other hand November Geneva when Sothebys failed to sell their first lot and just squeezed the second lot under the estimate, sure they had a few good results in the sale, but it made people pay attention that maybe the specialist’s weren’t on the ball with estimates.

Screenshot of Phillips first three lots offered in their November 2023 Geneva auction, the first lot was no reserve. Impressive results vs estimates to set the tone of the auction. This is almost identical every Phillips Geneva auction for a reason. Interestingly, Phillips, Sothebys and Christies all had identical Rolex 116508 watches in the auction, Phillips and Sothebys selling for the same amount and Christies for CHF550 less.

The catalog also has to flow, now this is only a personal opinion but if I had a lot that might have trouble selling, then I would try and put it between two lots that should sell so there wasn’t a run of unsold items. Similarly you could also put it after a lot that you knew would sell really well as the room would be taking about it while you quietly passed the lot. Personally, ideally, if I had a really big lot that you wanted to do well, don’t put difficult sellers in the preceding lots as phone bidders will usually call the client 5 lots prior to make sure they are ready, if those 5 lots, or even part of those lots don’t sell, it can make an inexperienced bidder nervous the market has changed and they might not bid as strongly as they intended. We were always told if a phone bidder asks how the sale is going, say it’s going well.

Screenshot from Sotheby’s first three lots offered in their November 2023 Geneva auction, the first lot failed to sell and the second hammered below the estimate, making the auctioneer clearly nervous; the third, I’ll confess, did really well. As expected it would.

The auctioneer also has a responsibility and can greatly affect the outcome of a sale; from first hand experience I can tell you, often when you’re watching an auction and a certain lot seems to take ages to sell as the auctioneer is waiting for a response from a phone bidder, as the auctioneer, who’s role it is to get the highest price, time moves much faster. Similarly for the employee on the phone and bidder themselves, its rarely just someone sitting thinking ‘should I bid?’ Its more like currency calculations, questions about condition etc that take the time. One instance that comes to mind where an auctioneer changed the outcome was a very, very rare slip by Mr Bacs and possibly the only one I have ever seen him do. He was selling the Marlon Brando GMT in New York. Here, for me, he should never have let Alex Ghotbi bid in such small increments while Nathalie Maboron was bidding in sensible figures making the process take a crazy 20 minutes and most likely frustrate Nathalie’s client.

It’s probably also worth pointing out here that the auctioneer can ‘bounce’ bids up to the reserve, that means if the reserve is say $20,000 they can start at $10,000 and create fictional bids in the room until $19,000, but no higher. One of the best examples of this in action was while working at Bonhams, one of the last lots in the sale, with no absentee bids (bids left pre-auction) and only one person in the room, I had the only phone bidder. The auctioneer, as he opened the lot, looked at me then started very low taking fast consecutive ‘bounced’ bids that I relayed to my bidder, each time my bidder would shout to me “bid”, of course, he had already missed it, until the reserve, at that point when I asked him if he wanted to bid and he shouted yes and put my hand up, the auctioneer took my bid and the watch sold, a little smirk at his genius cunning appearing on the auctioneers face and a very bewildered sole participant in the room wondering who the other bidders were. This is also how auctioneers try to catch you out that the sale isn’t going well. By bouncing non-existent bids, which again is perfectly legal, until they reach just under the reserve hoping someone will jump in, if no-one does, they pass the lot, only, they don’t then have to say the lot is passed. If the sale is going well then often they will, otherwise “Down it goes” , “Same as the last” are popular comments. From memory in America, or certainly New York, where you need an auctioneer’s license prior,  the rules state you can’t strike the gavel on a passed lot, however I note in other places they do strike the gavel. What you can’t say, although during the May Geneva auctions the Sotheby’s auctioneer was saying, is “Sold!” when a lot is passed. The trick here for the curious trying to work out what is sold and what isn’t, and remember the auctioneer will often try to fool you, and many are brilliant at it, is to listen for a paddle number, if no paddle number is called out, no sale. No matter what the auctioneer says otherwise.

Video of Aurel selling the famous Maron Brando Rolex GMT in New York, 2019. Usually, the auction increments should increase by 10 percent each time, so at a million dollars, the bid should increase by $100,000, not $10,000. A very rare error in my opinion.

This brings us to the famous paddle 1013 from Christie’s Geneva in November 2023, the paddle that bought most of the sale and I personally speculated was Christie’s protecting themselves from a guarantee provided to the seller (where the auction house guarantees the seller a set amount for this collection). According to Christies, they received a guarantee form a third party, paddle 1013, and so had to change all the reserves to reflect that guaranteed figure. A bit like someone leaving an absentee bid on the entire sale. To give an example though, the pre-sale printed low estimate for the collection was CHF19,305,000. The revised reserve, apparently based on the third parties guarantee, was a whopping CHF29,204,500.

The curious thing here though, for me, was, well, two things. Firstly, the auctioneer, who is insanely experienced, kept changing how he would call out paddle 1013 from English to French and in varying ways. ‘SOLD, paddle ten thirteen”, then “SOLD, paddle one thousand and thirteen, then the same in French, then “SOLD, paddle one zero one three, then back to French. If this was a genuine and legit situation, why the cloak and dagger? Or why the troubled look on his face? I’ve seen Christie’s auctions where one person, Saudi Royalty, bought a significant portion of the watch sale and no-one tried to hide his paddle number. The next thing from this sale, which brings more questions than answers; was the famous Marlon Brando GMT, again offered publicly after selling in New York in 2019 for US$1.95 million, the new reserve, as apparently put in place by the mysterious last minute guarantor, was an insane CHF3,750,000. If Christie’s explanation was correct, then this meant the guarantor had left an absentee bid of 3.75m for the lot and as per every other lot, if no-one bid higher, the guarantor, again paddle 1013, bought it. Only, for the ex-Brando GMT, the underbidder at 3.7m was in the front row and the winning bid of CHF3,750,000, the same as the reserve and guarantors absentee bid, was on the phone (keep in mind absentee bids always take priority over live bids.) So, well, what? How? Something was amiss as that contradicts the story Christie’s told Hodinkee post auction.

Christie's infamous paddle 1013 at it again, noticed how the auctioneer takes the bidding to CHF160,000 looking for 170k, then moves up to 165k before the paddle comes down. Of course, the sale was 100% sold but results should be dismissed.

Keeping with auction shenanigans, I recall years ago how Aurel at Christie’s was immensely proud and frequently used in PR how every sale had above 90 percent of the lots sold. A notable achievement. Although I haven’t read about it in the same way, Phillips maintains a similar figure. You know how he did that? Pre-sale, by looking at the absentee bids and phone bids booked, you can have a pretty good idea of how the sale is going to go. At that time, in the 2010’s, you wanted to stand on that podium for lot number one with around 50 percent of the sale already sold via absentee bids, today, it’s probably more like 70 percent not including phone bidders. So if Aurel has a watch that didn’t receive much interest or the consignor won’t lower the reserve to meet a low absentee bid, he withdraws it from the sale. That means, when auction stats are calculated, as the lot was withdrawn rather than passed, it doesn’t count and his high-sell rate maintained. Sounds shady? Not at all, just maybe, sneaky. He’s been doing it for decades though with no objections. I recall sitting in a Christies New York auction during the 2009 difficult years when the first session didn’t go well, then in the second session the auctioneer announced a number of lots were withdrawn, all the top lots in fact, mostly likely either as they belonged to one seller who got nervous, or Christie’s were concerned they wouldn’t sell so removed them. It’s a funny business this.

Working out the flow of an auction catalog the old fashioned way; shoes off, everything on the floor laid out for you to visualise.

Finally, a story. I’ll try to make it quick. While at Bonhams in 2007, I received a CD with various pictures on it, one of those was a Rolex triple calendar in steel, a reference 8171. These are rare and I really wanted it so immediately called the sender to discuss, who told me he had sent the same disc to Sotheby’s and Christies and would I please post him a proposal. I wrote one up for the whole collection with an estimate for the 8171 of US$30,000-50,000, which was the standard estimate at the time. Putting my letter in the outgoing mail, after I returned to my office and stared at my computer screen, zooming into the image of the 8171, transfixed, I just couldn’t believe it was genuine, the condition too good, but it looked genuine. Thinking then, wait, if it is this good and correct, it’s unlike anything we’ve seen before. I ran back to the mailroom, retrieved my letter, tore it up and sent another with a $50,000-70,000 estimate. Sure enough both my competition had used the market excepted $30-50k estimate and I won the contract. I was so happy I promptly drove to Las Vegas, without security, to a trade show in order to drum-up interest (pre instagram days!) And showed the watch to known VIP dealers who might bid on it. This was a mistake. Firstly, soon random people I didn’t know were asking to see the watch, then one dealer, the biggest of them all (an Italian) told me too many people knew I had the watch on my person and it was no longer safe for me. I left immediately, fast, running in fact. Secondly, and this brings us back to the auctions. There is a thing called ‘ringing’ in auctions, it’s illegal as it used to happen a lot in the early days, basically, you call everyone who you think will bid on the lot and you agree, pre-auction, a price between you, then one of you bids instead of you all bidding against each other and each pays out the other to avoid higher auction fees. When my spectacular Rolex 8171 came up for sale, all the big guys who had lusted after it had changed their mind, all of them, leaving only one who said he would bid but only within the estimate as he didn’t really want it anymore. Luckily, a client outside the known collective ring was bidding and so it sold for an impressive US$200,000.

Sometimes, albeit rarely, not everything that seems to good to be true, is. Exceptional Rolex Ref.8171 on its original felt strap with original buckle sold by Bonhams in 2007 hasn’t reappeared. Photo credit Bonhams auctioneers.