Michael Jackson Portrait by Andy Warhol

On May 13 of this year an Andy Warhol portrait of Michael Jackson went up for auction at Sotheby's for $278,500. Almost two months later, including the unfortunate death of Michael Jackson, the current owner of this portrait will most likely make a HUGE profit- If taken the right measures. Except my opinion, as a consultant, is that they're taking the wrong steps for the painting in the method of auctioning/selling this precious consignment.

First of all the current owner of the portrait is an unidentified New York collector (this is not a problem, it'll simply add mystery to the current owner and might actually act in favor of the portrait.) However, it will be auctioned off through a silent auction at an art gallery in the Hamptons at the Vered Gallery. Yes, it might bring more publicity and benefit this venue in the long run, but not many people will know about this gallery's existance to begin with, and frankly if not all interested parties are contacted to let them know about the existence of an Andy Warhol Michael Jackson portrait, then there won't be many bidders participating.

The next mistake is that there isn't enough time for advertising and publicizing this important event. Michael Jackson memorabilia is more popular than ever now and can make huge profits, except his death came abruptly, so the fever to own Michael Jackson items is stronger than ever. However you still have to advertise well, otherwise poeple in the international art scene will be left in the dark. Michael Jackson is an international phenomenon, he's a pop idol like no other, and to auction off his portrait well, EVERYONE needs to know about it, and frankly Sotheby's and Christie's know how to do this best- so why were they not contacted?

My third point is the silent auction. These are good for keeping business covert. Michael Jackson is mostly everyone's obsession, why keep it to phone bids or internet bids? This seems nonsensical, I would want to see an actual physical auction fight to drive the value and price of this portrait up, and that would surely happen in the appropriate atmosphere. It's actually quite ridiculous it's being done through a silent auction with days of bidding (from July 3rd to July 12). This leaves too much time for people to think whether it's rational for them to bid or not. A lot of impulse decisions go on at an auction, you want to take advantage of this within a few minutes, not a few days.

By keeping it so anonymous, there's going to be a lot of confusion as to who gets the legitimate final bid, because I know when you put the king of pop and the king of pop art together, it's going to be an explosion of desire within art collectors. This piece is incredibly valuable, and will be for the future as well. Whoever, wins it at this silent Hamptons auction will most likely get huge profits once it's put on the auction market for real. I can feel Christie's and Sotheby's already looking at this event in amazement- if they are going to be smart about this one, they would in fact try to be the highest bidder at this silent auction.

The minimum bid is $800,000 for the Michael Jackson portrait. It's also going to close at the last day of the Art Hamptons International Art fair which is another problem in my book. Who has ever heard of the ArtHamptons Art Fair? Who goes to this fair? I mean if it's going to host such a fantastic piece, their website should at least look a little more exciting. Or maybe by having this Michael Jackson portrait, it will bring more attention to the fair itself since it is competing for a larger public and hasn't given up in the weak economy.

I guess it's good that a portion of the proceeds will go to supporting Shderot, a town in Israel that got bombed for eight years by the Palestinians. Then again this is bringing politics, a complicated and delicate politics not necessarily directly affiliated with Andy Warhol and Michael Jackson. As noble and great it always is when proceeds are given to charities, this one may drag more complications and deter bidders- again not the best move for the auctioning of this painting.

It's sad so much value has been injected into this portrait due to the death of the celebrity, but the demand is definitely there, this is a historic event and people want to remember him in many ways not just through his dancing and music. What will be the outcome?

My advice for the mysterious NYC collector owning this portrait is be the highest bidder and give it a proper auction, because someone else will just like Michael Jackson is getting a proper funeral.