- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
<TABLE id=msgUN border=0 cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD id=msgUNsubj vAlign=top>
Coffeeshop Chit Chat - antique dealer stands by $$15m valuation</TD><TD id=msgunetc noWrap align=right> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=msgtable cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="96%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msg vAlign=top><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgbfr1 width="1%"> </TD><TD><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead vAlign=top><TD class=msgF width="1%" noWrap align=right>From: </TD><TD class=msgFname width="68%" noWrap>dragonclaws2 <NOBR></NOBR> </TD><TD class=msgDate width="30%" noWrap align=right>Apr-17 11:51 pm </TD></TR><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgT height=20 width="1%" noWrap align=right>To: </TD><TD class=msgTname width="68%" noWrap>ALL <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgNum noWrap align=right> (1 of 1) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgleft rowSpan=4 width="1%"> </TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>31880.1 </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgtxt>so today in the straits times an antique dealer a 65 year old bachelor stands by his 15 million valuation of the peranakan items orginally donated to the museum and then returned back to them on the donors requests when the valuation was subjected to question criticism and scrutiny.
Now the valuer claims he wass paid 17,000 to value te artifacts. The chap Peter Wee is known to himsdelf ahve a collection of perankan items too. Now he says he stands by the evaluation, but does not give the formula how he comes up with such an exhorbitant vlaution .
Surely the valuation of items must depend upon not jst one instanc eof 'willing buyer and willing seller" but rathe r the combine averages of prices of such transactions that hav etaken place here and as wella s in the region lik emelaka penang etc..
HOW could the heritage board depended upon the valuation of one man with a vested interest himself( as he has a collection too!)
</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msgleft width="1%"> </TD><TD class=msgopt width="24%" noWrap>
Options</TD><TD class=msgrde width="50%" noWrap align=middle>
Reply</TD><TD class=wintiny width="25%" noWrap align=right> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgbfrbot> </TD><TD colSpan=3> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Now the valuer claims he wass paid 17,000 to value te artifacts. The chap Peter Wee is known to himsdelf ahve a collection of perankan items too. Now he says he stands by the evaluation, but does not give the formula how he comes up with such an exhorbitant vlaution .
Surely the valuation of items must depend upon not jst one instanc eof 'willing buyer and willing seller" but rathe r the combine averages of prices of such transactions that hav etaken place here and as wella s in the region lik emelaka penang etc..
HOW could the heritage board depended upon the valuation of one man with a vested interest himself( as he has a collection too!)
</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msgleft width="1%"> </TD><TD class=msgopt width="24%" noWrap>