Rudy Kurniawan social aftermath / fraud at auction

[Chris_Blum]

@Maureen Downey

Finally – my colleagues and I work with every major house I mentioned, and currently have consignments at most of them. We are not married to any one or two houses. We negotiate on behalf of clients to get the best possible terms in the best possible market for every bottle. By spreading our business out – we create a competitive advantage for our clients. Sometimes, we land at Christies, sometimes its Bonhams and sometimes, it’s Hart Davis Hart. Sometimes we sell direct to a reputable merchant or broker. The wine and the client needs dictate the venue and that is the only motive that drives us. That’s about as open a model as I can imagine. But yes – we do enough business that we are courted by all. Does that make me evil – or successful?

As far as the houses in question, I’m sure that if they weren’t assiduous about fakes before, they sure as hell got religion when Rudy was arrested. But doing the right thing because you are afraid of going to jail is not the same thing as doing the right thing because it’s right. I believe they have revamped their vetting process in light of recent developments and you are definitely at or near the top of a small group of go-to people who would lend credence to their efforts.

Shifting subjects a bit…I’m sure you are a nice lady and you are definitely super knowledgeable about the subject, but I am not sure it was a good idea for you to recommend a house or retailer without disclosing that you get paid by them for consulting on the very subject you are writing about. I know you would not sacrifice your considerable reputation for a few dollars, but its just maybe not a great idea. I say this out of respect for your reputation and mean it only in a constructive way.

[Don_Cornwell]

I won’t dignify most of the negative statements attributed to me by Maureen except to state that they are either gross distortions of what I said or that I never made any such statements.

As for Acker Merrall, it is true that I did occasionally purchase lots of inexpensive wine on their internet only auction. I did not buy wines from the Acker live auction catalogs. My most recent internet auction purchase was on September 10, 2011. I also periodically consigned wines for sale through Acker, most recently in the summer of 2011.

I continued to buy and sell some lots through Acker after April 25, 2008 based on assurances from John Kapon that Acker hadn’t offered or sold any wines from Rudy Kurniawan after the April 25, 2008 Rosanania/Kurniawan auction. Given Acker’s judgment against Rudy, and its recorded liens and its ongoing enforcement of that judgment, that seemed credible.

However in February of this year, in conjunction with my investigation of the Rudy Kurniawan wines being offered for sale in the Spectrum/Vanquish auction, I learned from a third party about Acker’s sale of an alleged OWC case of 1962 Romanée Conti at its December 8, 2011 auction in Hong Kong. I’ve previously posted about this particular lot many pages back, including a list of several discrepancies which lead me to the conclusion that the wine is counterfeit, but here is a brief refresher as to the other relevant facts:

The catalog represented that the wine was “AN ORIGINAL WOODEN CASE OF THE LEGENDARY 1962 DRC ROMANEE CONTI. This gorgeous case comes to us from deep within the heart of Switzerland, where it has been nestled away safely under ideal conditions, waiting for this moment.” The lot description further stated that “Upon inspection, Gil called me to tell me … that it was ‘the most beautiful case of RC I have ever seen!’”

In truth, the wine had been located in Los Angeles in January of 2011, where it was offered by Antonio Castanos to his customers. The wine was then shipped to the UK, where it was offered by Farr but then withdrawn from sale after Farr learned the source of the wine. The wine then somehow managed to find its way to Switzerland, from which it was then consigned to auction in Hong Kong with Acker. Two different brokers communicated with Acker in November 2011 before the sale to convey the above facts along with photographs of the bottles offered by Castanos and Farr with matching bottle numbers and the identical alleged OWC. Acker refused to withdraw the wine, claiming that Gil Lempert-Schwarz had personally spoken with Aubert de Villaine and that that Aubert knew the owner and was familiar with this particular case of wine and that it was legitimate. When Doug Barzelay and I spoke with Aubert on February 25 in San Francisco, Aubert told us that he has never met Gil Lempert-Schwarz, has never spoken with him on the phone, and most certainly did not vouch for the case of alleged 62 Romanée Conti or their alleged owner in Switzerland.

In light of the above I wrote a letter to John Kapon on March 25, 2012 telling him that I would no longer be doing business as a buyer or a seller with Acker Merrall.

[todd_waldmann]

As an outsider, whose only interest in this entire affair is, at best, extremely peripheral (I’ve never bought a bottle at auction, though I’m sure the escalation in prices that I pay every day are due in part, to increasing auction prices), it strikes me that this squabble is counterproductive. Maureen & Don are two of the most passionate, committed voices in combatting wine fraud. How is it helpful to have the two of you arguing about each others’ motivations?

Taken out of context, it could be argued that Maureen may have ulterior motives. Given the big picture, however, the idea is pretty silly. And, Don, you were okay with John Kapon’s reassurances that he wasn’t dealing with Rudy after April 2008, but Maureen isn’t allowed to give any of the other auction houses a second chance, based on her best judgment? That sounds like a double standard.

For the good of the bigger issues at hand, I would ask that the two of you put your differences about these relatively minor issues aside & move on.

[Eric_LeVine]

As happened once before on this thread, this is a little like watching my parents fight (which they very rarely did). Maureen and Don, you guys are on the same side. The world is not puritanically black and white. The industry will not burn to the ground. Better to find common ground as there are more than enough headwinds already in the righteous battle you are fighting.

[NickWittman]

@Eric LeVine

As happened once before on this thread, this “IS” a little like watching my parents fight (which they very rarely did). Maureen and Don, you guys are on the same side. The world “IS” not puritanically black and white. The industry will not burn to the ground. Better to find common ground as there are more than enough headwinds already in the righteous battle you are fighting.

“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

[WvanGorp]

Don, you have done this community an incredible service. It is absurd that somehow you are now in a position to explain your actions. I, for one, need no explanation, and you have every right to buy/sell wine as you see fit. Thank you for the elaboration above but it is completely unnecessary. Those of us following this thread know who’s on the right side, and you have done us all a service.

[Herwig_Janssen]

and those junior folks that may have made mistakes have learned from them

What a nonsense . Willingly selling counterfit wines after being warned over and over again … and now they are junior people who made a mistake ? Christies ?

Thank you Don for leading this ; finally the truth comes out .

[Jay_Winton]

@Eric LeVine

As happened once before on this thread, this is a little like watching my parents fight (which they very rarely did). Maureen and Don, you guys are on the same side. The world is not puritanically black and white. The industry will not burn to the ground. Better to find common ground as there are more than enough headwinds already in the righteous battle you are fighting.

I agree with Eric. I don’t know Don but I appreciate his efforts. I’ve known and sipped with Maureen over the years and she is a stand up lady. There’s room for both of you and your good works here.

[k_s_h_i_n]

I don’t see anything wrong with Don consigning at AMC. He has no financial gains unless he starts his own rare wine authenticating business. BTW, more often than not, identifying the fakes are not that difficult but if one produces an exceptional counterfeit, the visual inspection will not be enough to identify it as a fake. Just my two cents.

[Nigel_Groundwater]

Eric L and Todd W have it exactly right and despite Don’s truly excellent and praiseworthy work [on this subject and oxidised burgs] IMO it is not helpful to introduce people as ‘friends’ by way of a preamble which then goes on to reveal conflicts of interests and to imply doubtful credibility in the battle against wine fraud.

Does Don really think that MD would continue to deal with auction managers whom she felt were corrupt and who would continue to deal knowingly with counterfeits? Given the tone of his post it seemed to me that Maureen’s comments about his own continued dealings with Acker, despite all the things he knew, were relevant if only to point out the difficulty of separating fact [continued dealings with known counterfeits] from perception [believing they had learned their lesson and ceased] even for him. Of course his dealings with Acker, following his own research, imply no conflict of interest or impropriety, simply questionable judgement.

FWIW if I had a ‘friend’ involved with me in a battle a on a broad front against counterfeit wine I think I might have reminded them that IMO it was a serious omission not to declare a potential conflict of interest when appearing to endorse Christie’s and Zachy’s before deciding to ‘out’ them in a thread like this. In that way Maureen could have declared her involvement and explained her rationale allowing people to attach whatever caveats they wished to her apparent endorsements.
One might wonder why the fairly obvious need for such a declaration required a nudge but, hey, unless you really felt there was something wrong why not help out a ‘friend’?

BTW Don I hope my [minor] criticism of your style [certainly not the substance] does not offend since my appreciation of your personal time and commitment to two major issues in the world of wine is enormous and undiminished.

And Maureen, whatever your feelings of unfairness or even inaccuracies, some of your characterisation of what Don ‘thinks and demands’ might also be considered unhelpful to the general cause you both espouse.

Can we please see you both side by side shooting in the same direction ….please.

As for some of the other comments in this thread one wonders at how they arise.
Where did Maureen Downey say that ‘junior people were the people who made the mistakes and decided on whether wine was authentic or not? Wasn’t it rather that the senior people who were clearly involved had moved/been moved away from the [part of the] organisations with which she now dealt and that junior people [presumably those still there] should have learned from those mistakes/downright bad practice?

[D_Jorgenson]

I understand the Crime Inc. show that profiles Rudy and counterfeit wine is on tonight on CNBC at 9pm ET. Apparently the back half of the show is where the wine stuff is.

[JLLeDu]

@scott c l a f f e e

Maureen Downey’s article on wine fraud in auctions and at retailers just dropped:

Wine Fraud: In Defense of Auction Houses | Wine-Searcher News & Features

FACEBOOK POST BY MAUREEN DOWNEY WEDNESDAY AUGUST 15TH 8.48PM
“Well - some little bitch of a retailer got their panties all in a wad that I didnt name them, so they complained to the owner of W-S and he removed all the lists. I cannot wait to find out who it was… Rather than being a professional - like so many have and reaching out to me to say - Hi, we would love to do business with you, they go crying to the teacher and get the ball taken away so no one can play. Seriously - who ever that is needs to loose the diapers, pacifier and blankey and join the rest of us grown-ups in the real market…”

Dear Maureen,

That “little bitch” was me, Jean-Luc Le Du, owner of Le Du’s Wines and I like to think of myself as a “grown-up” who spends every day in “the real market”.

I requested your list removed because Winesearcher is a commerce site, not an independent publication with an editorial point of view. By listing so-called “trustworthy” retailers, the implication is any not listed are suspect. You also failed to mention you are a paid consultant with two of the listed operations. Your defense of it being listed in your by-line is not acceptable. Any legitimate newspaper or magazine requires any conflict of interest to be listed in the text of the article. For proper journalism, it is not the responsibility of the reader to research or track down conflicts of interest. It is the responsibility of the writer and publication to announce it.

If it’s an Op-Ed piece, then you have every right in the world to state your opinion. But this brings up whether or not a commerce site like Winesearcher.com is an appropriate platform to feature Op-Ed pieces which cast doubt on the honesty of the very clients which it serves. It also begs the question as to your level of qualification to make such claims?

I can only assume that before making such strong statements about the business practices of literally thousands of retailers across the country, you’ve engaged in rigorous and systematic research which indicates that all but the few you listed have had complaints or legal action leveled against them? Or, at the very least, you have testimonials from aggrieved customers which indicate foul play or dissatisfaction?

I’ve spent the last 7 years trying to build a honest business. Before that, I built a Wine Spectator Grand Award and James Beard Award Winning wine program heavily featuring old and rare bottles which was never once questioned for its honesty or the provenance of its wines. I think I speak for the hundreds, if not thousands, of honest retailers across the country when I say it is entirely inappropriate for you to post baseless slander, even if it is implied rather than explicit, on a website which influences our reputation and livelihood.

We all want an honest industry. People like Rudy Kurniawan do immeasurable harm to every ethical wine dealer, whether retail or auction. But a post of the nature of the one you wrote on the Winesearcher site is not the way to do it. Perhaps if I’d done as you suggested in your post (see above) and “reached out to you to say- Hi, we would love to do business with you” then maybe you would have included my store on your list? But is it really your implication that the only way to appear on your lists of honest retailers and auction houses is to pay you? That would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.

In short, your post was irresponsible, unsubstantiated, unprofessionally executed and dubiously ethical.

Sincerely,
Jean-Luc Le Du

[SteveC]

[Chris_Blum]

"FACEBOOK POST BY MAUREEN DOWNEY WEDNESDAY AUGUST 15TH 8.48PM
“Well - some little bitch of a retailer got their panties all in a wad that I didnt name them, so they complained to the owner of W-S and he removed all the lists. I cannot wait to find out who it was… Rather than being a professional - like so many have and reaching out to me to say - Hi, we would love to do business with you, they go crying to the teacher and get the ball taken away so no one can play. Seriously - who ever that is needs to loose the diapers, pacifier and blankey and join the rest of us grown-ups in the real market…”

This was a really bad idea.
And the intimation that the only way to get on the “good” list is by hiring Maureen Downey is problematic.

[Maureen_Downey]

Really Chris? It is my facebook page. I can say what I want. You wanna see scandal - check out my politics!

What is with the complete mis-understanding of the fact that the wine-searcher.com article is an opinion piece, that I was asked to write, to give advice in my area of expertise, on the FREE portion of the site? I could not possibly have listed EVERY SINGLE wine merchant in the USA. If I had and I had listed 30 merchants in manhattan, and left out one, I could see the point of complaining. But Jean-Luc’s point was that he PAYS Wine-Searcher and should thus have been mentioned. I didn’t check to see who pays wine-searcher and who doesn’t when I put that list together, because it was MY list - not theirs. I just mentioned a very few merchants with whom I work, or with whom my clients have had good working relationships. What is the crime in that? I live in a market and I made recommendations - it was not definitive, it was so short - how could have been seen as definitive?

I have has many merchants reach out to me say ‘hi - i know you - lets do business’. Or ‘Hi - I dont know you but I would like to introduce you to our business’. GREAT. My biz dev guy is on all of them. I am happy to spread the business out as I believe that is in the best interest of my clients. ADD - after a considerable working relationship and proven track record, I would consider them a trusted merchant. That is called good business.

I just cannot believe how personally some have taken this!!
So - here is my response from my facebook page:
“Hey Jean Luc - It is an opinion piece - I write because I am in the business of giving advice. You would have done much better to reach out to me and ask to do business than destroy the journalistic integrity of a magazine that until you freaked out - meant something. So congratulations for taking a small list of my personal (and Jancis’ personal) recommendations and being such a baby that you probably got an editor fired and turned the W-S magazine into another wine-spectator pay-for play media outlet. BRAVO!!!”

[Chris_Blum]

You’re absolutely right. It was a good idea to post that on your facebook page and there is absolutely no conflict of interest.

[John_Morris]

@Maureen Downey

You would have done much better to reach out to me and ask to do business than destroy the journalistic integrity of a magazine that until you freaked out - meant something.

Huh? Are you suggesting that he ask to do business with you in order to win your imprimateur in print? Isn’t that pay-to-play? It sure ain’t journalism.

If W-S would run your piece without requiring a disclosure that you worked for some of the businesses you were recommending… and then would take down the story when a W-S customer complains, it doesn’t deserve that label.

(Disclosure: I am a journalist on the payroll of a major news organization.)

[Maureen_Downey]

@JLLeDu

I requested your list removed because Winesearcher is a commerce site, not an independent publication with an editorial point of view. By listing so-called “trustworthy” retailers, the implication is any not listed are suspect. You also failed to mention you are a paid consultant with two of the listed operations. Your defense of it being listed in your by-line is not acceptable. Any legitimate newspaper or magazine requires any conflict of interest to be listed in the text of the article. For proper journalism, it is not the responsibility of the reader to research or track down conflicts of interest. It is the responsibility of the writer and publication to announce it.

I am NOT A PAID CONSULTANT to anyone but private wine collectors. So the notion that I am a “paid consultant” to any retailer, auction house, broker or other vendor is false. I have no institutional clients.

@JLLeDu

If it’s an Op-Ed piece, then you have every right in the world to state your opinion. But this brings up whether or not a commerce site like Winesearcher.com is an appropriate platform to feature Op-Ed pieces which cast doubt on the honesty of the very clients which it serves. It also begs the question as to your level of qualification to make such claims?

It is a monthly opinion article that I write about my OPINIONS. It appears on the free section of the site now known as the magazine. In the interest of journalistic integrity - it was not supposed to be pay-for-play journalism - but you have single highhandedly changed that.

@JLLeDu

I can only assume that before making such strong statements about the business practices of literally thousands of retailers across the country, you’ve engaged in rigorous and systematic research which indicates that all but the few you listed have had complaints or legal action leveled against them? Or, at the very least, you have testimonials from aggrieved customers which indicate foul play or dissatisfaction?

That you imply that because someone is not list they are not trustworthy is your own insecurity. I purposely made a small list, so to be be clear that it was NOT a directory of every reputable merchant in the US. In my 20 years in fine wine, I have not scratched the surface of EVERY retailer in the US - so to assume that was anything other than a short list of recommendations is ridiculous.

@JLLeDu

I’ve spent the last 7 years trying to build a honest business. Before that, I built a Wine Spectator Grand Award and James Beard Award Winning wine program heavily featuring old and rare bottles which was never once questioned for its honesty or the provenance of its wines. I think I speak for the hundreds, if not thousands, of honest retailers across the country when I say it is entirely inappropriate for you to post baseless slander, even if it is implied rather than explicit, on a website which influences our reputation and livelihood.

Again - it was not a personal attack on you. I have known you since my days at Lespinasse in 1996-1998, and i am surprised that you would take this so personally and respond with such vitriol without understanding the article, what they asked me to write and what my purpose was.
fact is that MOST of the fakes I have seen, and the fraud that has been perpetrated in fine & rare - especially in the last few years- has been with retail. I’m dealing with the manhattan DA on $1.3mill retail theft of a storage account this week alone.
Its not about you - but people need to know this issue is about more than just auctions!

@JLLeDu

We all want an honest industry. People like Rudy Kurniawan do immeasurable harm to every ethical wine dealer, whether retail or auction. But a post of the nature of the one you wrote on the Winesearcher site is not the way to do it. Perhaps if I’d done as you suggested in your post (see above) and “reached out to you to say- Hi, we would love to do business with you” then maybe you would have included my store on your list? But is it really your implication that the only way to appear on your lists of honest retailers and auction houses is to pay you? That would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.

Please - its not like I’ll just add people who say hi - but I am always interested in reaching out to new vendors. If we work together and and i like the services and the wines - and we end up having a working realationship - then yes you would be on my recommendations list. What the hell is dishonest or sad about that? Its called business.

@JLLeDu

In short, your post was irresponsible, unsubstantiated, unprofessionally executed and dubiously ethical.

Well - its a good thing you get to post your opinion here.
I promise not to contact Todd French and complain and ask him to take your opinion post down.

[k_s_h_i_n]

@JLLeDu

FACEBOOK POST BY MAUREEN DOWNEY WEDNESDAY AUGUST 15TH 8.48PM
“Well - some little bitch of a retailer got their panties all in a wad that I didnt name them, so they complained to the owner of W-S and he removed all the lists. I cannot wait to find out who it was… Rather than being a professional - like so many have and reaching out to me to say - Hi, we would love to do business with you, they go crying to the teacher and get the ball taken away so no one can play. Seriously - who ever that is needs to loose the diapers, pacifier and blankey and join the rest of us grown-ups in the real market…”

Wow!

[Andrew_L]