Links:
Estimate: $2,800,000 - 3,500,000
CERA - Juvenile Triceratops Skeleton
Estimate: $2,500,000 - 3,500,000
This market resolves to the artwork which sells for a higher value at their upcoming Phillips auction.
Resolution details
Example from a past auction: this Patek Philippe watch lists "SOLD FOR CHF304,800". This is the equivalent number I will use.
Note that the final listed sale price typically includes the buyer's premium (and potentially other fees).
Edge cases:
If one is pulled before it is put up for auction, resolves N/A.
If one goes up for auction but fails to sell for any reason, it resolves to the other.
If there's a tie or they both fail to sell, both resolve at 50%.
Jackson Pollock - Untitled
Exploding with linear vitality, Untitled captures the pivotal moment when Jackson Pollock fused drawing, painting, and action into a single, radical language. Executed circa 1947, the work is among the earliest on paper to prelude the “drip” paintings that, as Willem de Kooning remarked, “broke the ice” for American painting and transformed the course of twentieth-century art. Echoing the radical technique of pouring, dripping, and flinging paint that Pollock developed in these years, the intricate layering of flicks, stains, and splatters demonstrates his ability to harness physical movement into a masterly balance of chaos and control. Each gesture preserves the immediacy of his action while coalescing into a delicate web of rhythmic energy, engaging the viewer with its spatial complexity and compositional sensitivity. (Lot essay)
CERA - Juvenile Triceratops Skeleton
Cera, a beautifully preserved juvenile Triceratops, is a singular example of this rarity. Measuring approximately 4.40 m in length and retaining over 70% original bone, the skeleton offers an intimate view of this iconic genus during an early stage of development. Its preservation, anatomical integrity and museum-quality mounting place it among the most significant juvenile dinosaur specimens ever offered and likely the finest juvenile Triceratops yet discovered. (Lot essay)
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ2,417 | |
| 2 | Ṁ1,738 | |
| 3 | Ṁ866 | |
| 4 | Ṁ685 | |
| 5 | Ṁ484 |
The auction is tomorrow! (I think the livestream will be here). Some bonus context:
The Pollock was previously sold at auction in 2015 for $3.5 million. It's unusual (& bad!) to sell art for a loss after holding it for a decade. You could interpret this as implying a higher floor (it has already sold for millions, so this is a lock to do well), or implying downward momentum (the estimates might be anchored too high). The lot essay describes it mostly as a piece that's significant for its historical context (it's one of the earliest to show his developing signature style).
The market for dinosaur skeletons is very very niche, so it's particularly hard to get meaningful estimates. Rich people are unlikely to display it for themselves (most donate to museums, and perhaps some just store it long term). There have been some recent dino sales that have crushed estimates (hence betting on the dino myself), but I have no idea if the estimates incorporate that recent history (surely they would?).
The art market has been fairly wobbly this year, but so far the big auction week is going well (as in, "people are spending lots of money"). A few hours ago, a Gustav Klimt painting sold for $236 million, the second largest sale at auction, ever. That's probably good news for the Pollock.
The next big week of high end art auctions won't be until 2026, but as a fun diversion in the meantime, here's another dino matchup, this time against the Batpod from "The Dark Knight"
/Ziddletwix/dino-vs-batman-will-this-dinosaur-s
(unfortunately nothing worth $5m is on auction atm so I have to use a 10x for the prices to work out)
@MindBenderMads thanks! i post auction markets fairly often, so i see you already followed my account & you should get a notification when i post new ones.
unfortunately, while i'd love to follow up with more right away, the constraint is the availability of high quality auctions. these markets are most fun when the pieces are famous/notable/expensive. those pieces almost all sell at the major auction weeks (usually with christies + sothebys holding auctions in the same city) that happen every couple of months (& this was the biggest of the year). in between, there's lots of smaller/less expensive stuff, so if something catches my eye in december i could make more markets but next major round of auctions likely won't be until january. (but people should feel free to make markets if anything catches their eye, i just try to wait for the more notable auctions)
It was not very close—5.37m for Cera, 3.48m for Pollock. The Pollock seller takes a large loss on their purchase a decade ago, the dino buyer now needs somewhere to put a 60 million year old skeleton.
hopefully they announce who the dino buyer is, and what they'll do with it—i'll add to this market if there's any reporting
@prismatic yup was going to wait for some reporting about the triceratops but might as well just resolve now & can add that later
One takes 66 million years to make, the other 66 minutes
@Ziddletwix The guy writing things down with pen and paper while selling things for hundreds of thousands is hilarious.
@Bayesian yeah thanks unfortunately i can't withdraw liquidity from this market type and i don't feel like losing the 10k so this is perfect to have a clone
The auction is tomorrow! (I think the livestream will be here). Some bonus context:
The Pollock was previously sold at auction in 2015 for $3.5 million. It's unusual (& bad!) to sell art for a loss after holding it for a decade. You could interpret this as implying a higher floor (it has already sold for millions, so this is a lock to do well), or implying downward momentum (the estimates might be anchored too high). The lot essay describes it mostly as a piece that's significant for its historical context (it's one of the earliest to show his developing signature style).
The market for dinosaur skeletons is very very niche, so it's particularly hard to get meaningful estimates. Rich people are unlikely to display it for themselves (most donate to museums, and perhaps some just store it long term). There have been some recent dino sales that have crushed estimates (hence betting on the dino myself), but I have no idea if the estimates incorporate that recent history (surely they would?).
The art market has been fairly wobbly this year, but so far the big auction week is going well (as in, "people are spending lots of money"). A few hours ago, a Gustav Klimt painting sold for $236 million, the second largest sale at auction, ever. That's probably good news for the Pollock.
These are cool, but chump change compared to the big ticket items. Last chance to place your bets on this 9 figure auction: /Ziddletwix/will-this-gustav-klimt-portrait-sel . (Auction starts in a few hours)
@AmmonLam even more surprising is that he is selling himself off at an auction just so we can bet on it in here. I admire the dedication
this market is such obvious whalebait. the art market, i mean
@Eliza it's a good question—i picked two items from the same auction, precisely because i would expect that makes it much more likely that fees are equivalent. but i wouldn't be 100% confident in that. (i.e., i think the buyer's premium formula is likely the same, but i'm not confident there couldn't be some other asymmetric fees)