RUDY KURNIAWAN & GLOBAL WINE AUCTION FRAUD THREAD (MERGED)

[Don_Cornwell]

Don - I’ve forgotten what the relationship is today of Acker HK to Acker NY. I dimly recall that the NY company sold a majority stake in the HK auction operation a few years ago. Is that right?

John:

I’m not sure at this point. It has changed back and forth a couple of times.

[Don_Cornwell]

Don, why don’t the DRC people get involved in this kind of thing to call our the counterfeits? It’s certainly not in their best interest to let fake bottles be sold. Is it because this is Hong Kong, and the Chinese pretty much don’t care?

Hi John:

This has been one of my great frustrations. The short answer is that DRC does not like publicity about the sale of counterfeits of their wines because they think it is bad for the Domaine’s reputation.

At various times Aubert de Villaine has gotten actively involved in trying to stop the counterfeiters. As you will recall he testified at Rudy’s trial, and he publicly outed Christie’s when they tried to sell a counterfeit big bottle produced by Rudy and claimed that Aubert had authenticated it – when he absolutely had not.

Several years ago, when I stumbled upon a new source of DRC counterfeits in Italy, I reported it to DRC and they got involved in a major way. We worked together to get the Italian merchant to identify the source of the counterfeit wines purchased and then DRC filed complaints with the Italian and French governments to open investigations. This eventually lead to arrests of several people in Italy and the seizure of a bunch of counterfeit bottles in Italy and Germany. All of the people who were arrested in Italy, including the father-son team who produced the fakes (who I suspect was the same father-son team behind the manufacture of the recent fake Sassacia), were placed on “house arrest” and later released. (It’s kind of a joke in Italy. They arrest people, put them under house arrest, and then later drop the charges.) The investigation by the French Gendarmerie ultimately led to the arrest and conviction of Alexander Anikin, the alleged ring leader who operated out of Milan and Moscow. He got arrested when he made a trip to Beaune and the French police were waiting for him. Along the way the French and Italian governments clashed over extraditing the people arrested in Italy and the Italian government refused to do so. Anikin came to trial in France and got convicted, but the Judge sentenced him to time served while he was awaiting trial. Aubert was justifiably absolutely furious about that and the failure of the Italian government to ultimately do anything about the counterfeiting. I know that experience cost DRC quite a bit of time and money and absolutely soured DRC about devoting extensive efforts to stop the counterfeiters – other than their efforts to code the recently-produced bottles in ways intended to make it more difficult to produce counterfeits without detection.

DRC generates huge revenues from the sale of its wines, so yes it is very difficult to understand the lack of effort on this. But it doesn’t necessarily take huge money to stop this. So, for example, why doesn’t DRC announce to the world that they have zero confidence any DRC wines sold by Acker – that Acker has sold so many known counterfeit DRC bottles over so many years, without ever resolving their obvious inability or unwillingness to properly authenticate wines, that the Domaine feels it must warn the world not to trust the sale of any DRC bottles sold by Acker?

From a personal perspective, sometimes I ask myself why bother? If DRC doesn’t care enough to protect it’s reputation as the producer of the world’s most ridiculously expensive wines from counterfeiters, why should I? I continue to report on what I find because it’s the right thing to do.

[John_Danza]

Don, why don’t the DRC people get involved in this kind of thing to call our the counterfeits? It’s certainly not in their best interest to let fake bottles be sold. Is it because this is Hong Kong, and the Chinese pretty much don’t care?

Hi John:

This has been one of my great frustrations. The short answer is that DRC does not like publicity about the sale of counterfeits of their wines because they think it is bad for the Domaine’s reputation.

At various times Aubert de Villaine has gotten actively involved in trying to stop the counterfeiters. As you will recall he testified at Rudy’s trial, and he publicly outed Christie’s when they tried to sell a counterfeit big bottle produced by Rudy and claimed that Aubert had authenticated it – when he absolutely had not.

Several years ago, when I stumbled upon a new source of DRC counterfeits in Italy, I reported it to DRC and they got involved in a major way. We worked together to get the Italian merchant to identify the source of the counterfeit wines purchased and then DRC filed complaints with the Italian and French governments to open investigations. This eventually lead to arrests of several people in Italy and the seizure of a bunch of counterfeit bottles in Italy and Germany. All of the people who were arrested in Italy, including the father-son team who produced the fakes (who I suspect was the same father-son team behind the manufacture of the recent fake Sassacia), were placed on “house arrest” and later released. (It’s kind of a joke in Italy. They arrest people, put them under house arrest, and then later drop the charges.) The investigation by the French Gendarmerie ultimately led to the arrest and conviction of Alexander Anikin, the alleged ring leader who operated out of Milan and Moscow. He got arrested when he made a trip to Beaune and the French police were waiting for him. Along the way the French and Italian governments clashed over extraditing the people arrested in Italy and the Italian government refused to do so. Anikin came to trial in France and got convicted, but the Judge sentenced him to time served while he was awaiting trial. Aubert was justifiably absolutely furious about that and the failure of the Italian government to ultimately do anything about the counterfeiting. I know that experience cost DRC quite a bit of time and money and absolutely soured DRC about devoting extensive efforts to stop the counterfeiters – other than their efforts to code the recently-produced bottles in ways intended to make it more difficult to produce counterfeits without detection.

DRC generates huge revenues from the sale of its wines, so yes it is very difficult to understand the lack of effort on this. But it doesn’t necessarily take huge money to stop this. So, for example, why doesn’t DRC announce to the world that they have zero confidence any DRC wines sold by Acker – that Acker has sold so many known counterfeit DRC bottles over so many years, without ever resolving their obvious inability or unwillingness to properly authenticate wines, that the Domaine feels it must warn the world not to trust the sale of any DRC bottles sold by Acker?

From a personal perspective, sometimes I ask myself why bother? If DRC doesn’t care enough to protect it’s reputation as the producer of the world’s most ridiculously expensive wines from counterfeiters, why should I? I continue to report on what I find because it’s the right thing to do.

Thanks Don. I would think that knowing there are counterfeits being sold by a prominent auction house wouldn’t be any better for their reputation than ignoring it.

[Don_Cornwell]

I was informed by someone from the press, who followed up on the comments in the thread and asked for Acker’s comment, that the world record sale of the 2002 Romanee Conti 6 Liter has now been “rescinded.” According to Acker, “We have a longstanding practice that if we find a bottle to be inauthentic, we will refund the buyer.” The only reasonable inference here is that Acker agrees that the bottle was counterfeit.

Acker also informed them that “The 6L of 2000 DRC Romanee Conti was printed in the auction catalogue, but once our final inspection came through, we withdrew the lot prior to the auction."

I suggested that they ask Mr. Kapon for proof that the $398,400 purchase price has been refunded.

[YLee]

I was informed by someone from the press, who followed up on the comments in the thread and asked for Acker’s comment, that the world record sale of the 2002 Romanee Conti 6 Liter has now been “rescinded.” According to Acker, “We have a longstanding practice that if we find a bottle to be inauthentic, we will refund the buyer.” The only reasonable inference here is that Acker agrees that the bottle was counterfeit.

Acker also informed them that “The 6L of 2000 DRC Romanee Conti was printed in the auction catalogue, but once our final inspection came through, we withdrew the lot prior to the auction."

I suggested that they ask Mr. Kapon for proof that the $398,400 purchase price has been refunded.

Nicely done by the press to apply some pressure.

[Brady_Daniels]

Thanks Don. Great work.

I’d honestly be too nervous about counterfeits to buy DRC on the secondary market or at auction, even from houses I trust more. I can’t be alone.

[Rich_K0rz_nk0]

This thread is just angering to read.

[HoosJustinG]

Note to self: If I ever fall on hard times and decide to counterfeit goods to make ends meet, move to Italy first.

[Mark_Golodetz]

ACKER MERRALL SELLS COUNTERFEIT 2002 DRC ROMANÉE CONTI 6 LITER BOTTLE FOR WORLD RECORD PRICE OF $398,400 …
and five weeks later, offered another counterfeit 2000 Romanée Conti 6L from the same consignor (and the same counterfeit source) for $160,000 to $240,000

On September 25, 2021 Acker Merrall sold a 6 Liter bottle of 2002 DRC Romanée Conti at an auction held in Hong Kong for the world record price of $398,400 (US). There’s just one problem – that world record Methuselah of 2002 Romanée Conti was, in my opinion, for the reasons explained below, clearly a counterfeit bottle. On November 6, 2021, Acker offered another 6 liter bottle of Romanée Conti from the 2000 vintage – from the very same consignor according to the catalog. Just like its predecessor, the 2000 vintage 6 Liter bottle shared the same defects and was also (in my opinion) clearly counterfeit. The real mystery here is how did these two bottles ever get offered in the first place?

Sotheby’s - France Nov. 2, 2021_______Acker Auction HK Nov. 6, 2021_____Acker Auction HK Sept. 25, 2021_____Sotheby’s Auction HK October 3, 2020

The first red flag, and to me it is always a major red flag with jeroboams and methuselahs of DRC, was that neither 6 liter bottle of DRC included the original wooden case. No collector buys DRC in jeroboams or methuselahs, discards the original wooden case and then tries to sell the bottle. Every auction house in the world knows that and the warning sirens should have been sounding as soon as the first bottle was offered to Acker on consignment. In this instance, the 2002 Romanée Conti six liter was included in a section of the Acker catalog from a large group of consignors. There was no description of the consignor, no indication as to which lots were his, and the Acker catalog referred only the bottles from the group of consignors as containing “an epic Methuselah of 2002 Romanée Conti.” Here, we can add the complication that the same consignor had not one, but two, 6 liter bottles of Romanée Conti without original wooden cases, and that Acker proceeded to offer a second one for sale.

But the lack of an original wooden case was just the tip of the proverbial iceberg here. Both bottles had a series of identical defects – including a hugely oversized neck labels with the word MONOPOLE printed on a flat line instead of on a curved line on an offset printer. Both of the Acker 6 Liter bottles had short wax capsules of mixed brown and violet color (with obvious dark mottling from the mixed wax) with a flat finish instead of the 3 plus inch long violet colored glossy wax finish on the original DRC 6 liter bottles from the 2000 and 2002 vintages. Both of the Acker bottles had significant printing and printing alignment errors which should have been obvious to anyone who regularly inspects DRC bottles, and in other instances would have been revealed by comparing the Acker bottles with other known authentic bottles from the vintages in question, as I did.

I compared the Acker 6 liter of 2002 Romanée Conti with the 2002 6 liter sold in the Joseph Lau Cellar sale at Sotheby’s Hong Kong on October 3, 2020. (See the photos below). In the case of the Sotheby’s Joseph Lau bottle, the same bottle had been authenticated at Zachy’s when it was originally purchased by Mr. Lau and had provenance traceable to the importer.

Comparing the 2002 6 liter sold by Acker with the 2002 6 liter from the Sotheby’s Joseph Lau Cellar sale, the following discrepancies appear:

1. No original wood case
2. Acker bottle has incorrect approximately 1.6 inch long mixed brown and violet wax capsule with a flat finish (instead of glossy violet 3”+ capsule for legitimate bottles)
3. Acker bottle has a grossly oversized (and incorrectly shaped) neck label
4. Neck label has the word MONOPOLE printed on a flat line (computer composition like Rudy) instead of printed on a curve with an offset printer (as the Sotheby’s bottle is)
5. 2002 on neck label on the Acker bottle appears to be in a non-bold font or smaller sized font than the Sotheby’s bottle
6. 2002 on the Acker bottle is aligned slightly too far to the right of center on the neck label
7. Last 2 on the 2002 on the neck label on the Acker bottle is skewed and misaligned
8. Way too much distance between the 2002 and the double crescent lines below compared with Sotheby’s bottle
9. Extremely faint poor quality print on the interior crescent line on Acker neck label
10. Right dot on the neck label on the Acker bottle is aligned slightly too far to the right. Straight line should touch right edge of the third O in MONOPOLE
11. Main label – second 0 on the 2002 is printed in a smaller font
12. Main label - second 2 on 2002 is aligned too high
13. Mis en Bouteille au Domaine is not aligned correctly against the end of vintage 2002 and edges of the signatures vs. Sotheby’s bottle
14. Aigu accent mark on Acker bottle is notably smaller/different than Sotheby’s bottle
15. MATHUSALEM NO. is probably in too small a font – should be approx. ¾ of size of ANNÉE (but poor photo, so hard to be sure)
    When you compare the Acker Methuselah of 2002 Romanée Conti with the Methuselah of the same vintage sold by Sotheby’ and Zachy’s, or for that matter compare the Acker bottle with other Methuselahs of DRC wines from the late 90s through the mid 2000s, it’s very obvious that the Acker bottle is counterfeit.

2002 Romanée Conti sold at Acker Hong Kong Sept. 25, 2021 - Discrepancies)____________________2002 Romanée Conti sold at Sotheby’s Nov. 2, 2021
Here is a link to an enlargeable pdf form of the discrepancies on the Acker bottle. Dropbox - 2002 RC 6L from Acker press release re world record price - defects.pdf - Simplify your life

2002 Romanée Conti sold at Sotheby’s Nov. 2, 2021 - Note the different alignment of the vintage and signature vs. Mis en bouteille au domaine

On November 6, 2021 Acker offered another 6 liter bottle of Romanée Conti, this time allegedly from the 2000 vintage, from the very same consignor. Once again the bottle was offered in the midst of offerings by other consignors. The Acker catalog stated “we culminate with a magnificent Methuselah of 2000 Romanée Conti, Romanée Conti from the same consignor who set the world record last month!!!” And yes, this bottle had the same obvious defects when compared with another 6 liter of 2000 Romanée Conti sold by Sotheby’s four days earlier, on November 2, 2021 in France. I was told that the Sotheby’s bottle had documented provenance back to the domaine. The Acker bottle of 2000 was offered in the auction with an estimate range of US$160,000 to $240,000, but I cannot find any record as to whether it was sold. It was not mentioned in the Acker post-auction press release.

While it is not possible to fully compare the main labels of the two bottles because the 6 liter bottle sold at Sotheby’s had a large portion of the main label obscured, the Acker Methuselah had had the following problems which in my opinion indicate it is counterfeit:

1. No OWC
2. Brown and violet mixed wax capsule with flat finish wax capsule approx. 1.6” long vs. 3” violet glossy wax capsule for DRC from Sotheby’s
3. Hugely oversized (and incorrectly shaped) neck label
4. MONOPOLE on neck label was flat-printed (via computer) rather printed on curve on offset printer
5. 2000 is aligned slightly too far to the right of center on the neck label
6. Right dot on the neck label is aligned too far to the right. Straight line should touch right edge of the third O in MONOPOLE
7. Too much distance between the 2000 and the double crescent lines below compared with Sotheby’s bottle.
8. This may be different glass. Not much taper on the bottom on Acker bottle vs. standard highly rounded bottoms on DRC 6L (See photos above). Lip on Acker bottle seems larger, but hard to be certain without physical examination.

2000 Romanée Conti 6L from Acker HK Auction Nov. 6, 2021 - Discrepancies__________________________________________2000 Romanée Conti 6L from Sotheby’s France Nov. 2, 2021

Acker consistently claims to be the number one wine auction house in the world – even in years when they’re not. Acker claims that it holds more world records for prices obtained than anyone. But most importantly, Acker now unquestionably holds the world record for selling counterfeit wine.

Acker, Merrall & Condit – the company that brought you Rudy Kurniawan, admitted knowing seller of counterfeit wines Eric Greenberg, counterfeit Krug Champagne from Rob Rosania, counterfeit Buffalo Trace whisky and the world record price obtained for selling a single bottle (6 Liter) of counterfeit wine.

Thank you, a great analysis, and a primer for knowing DRC bottles.

[Jerry_Hey]

More excellent investigation by Don Cornwell - thanks. Great write up on the continuing Acker mess.

[Richard_Foxall]

It’s great that Acker pulled the bottle, but there’s not nearly enough reputational damage for them to not try again. And, until they agree to an audit by a third party of their purchasing practices, including access to the names of sellers, there’s no way to know that other bottles aren’t counterfeits, unless there’s a Don Cornwell willing to apply that knowledge to Bordeaux, Tuscany, Piemonte, etc. Why wouldn’t Rudy and his partners (no way he’s acting alone) not start counterfeiting old Monfortino, Biondi-Santi, etc? Sure, the numbers aren’t as stratospheric, but knowing that the focus is on the Burgundies, why not make fake LaLaLas? We’ve already seen one of his drinking buddies sell fake Krug.

[lucaslabelle]

Once again. Kapon should be in prison. The fact that he’s still in business is shocking and appalling. Love that Jancis commented too. It’s no longer a secret that his operation is comfortable selling fake bottles and the fact that actual reputable wine insiders are calling him out is some of that Karma I mentioned earlier.

[Maureen_Downey]

I know what causes a buyer of real estate to hire experts to complete pre-purchase due diligence. What would it cost a wine buyer? Asking for not me, as these far exceed my lifetime wine purchases.

Depends on how many bottles there are to inspect: My team/colleagues would charge between $150 - several thousand dollars. Much easier to inspect in advance than wait until you have a problem. We now have TCM Certified Authenticators (independents - not my employees) in top markets - CA, NY, London, Paris, Beaune, Zurich, Geneva & HK. Oh and Brazil.

[Paul_Jaouen]

Once again. Kapon should be in prison. The fact that he’s still in business is shocking and appalling. Love that Jancis commented too. It’s no longer a secret that his operation is comfortable selling fake bottles and the fact that actual reputable wine insiders are calling him out is some of that Karma I mentioned earlier.

It looks like Kapon just celebrated his 50th BD in grand style. Only reason I know this is I saw a photo on social media of someone I know at the event. It doesn’t appear he’s going to prison anytime soon.

[HoosJustinG]

I know what causes a buyer of real estate to hire experts to complete pre-purchase due diligence. What would it cost a wine buyer? Asking for not me, as these far exceed my lifetime wine purchases.

Depends on how many bottles there are to inspect: My team/colleagues would charge between $150 - several thousand dollars. Much easier to inspect in advance than wait until you have a problem. We now have TCM Certified Authenticators (independents - not my employees) in top markets - CA, NY, London, Paris, Beaune, Zurich, Geneva & HK. Oh and Brazil.

Is the large variation due to number of bottles to inspect or amount of research required for a specific bottle? Assuming I approach you to authenticate a bottle before a given auction, if I win that lot, do I receive any sort of proof of authenticity? How, then, would I tie that authenticity certification to that specific bottle (assuming the chateau doesn’t number bottles)?

[Maureen_Downey]

I know what causes a buyer of real estate to hire experts to complete pre-purchase due diligence. What would it cost a wine buyer? Asking for not me, as these far exceed my lifetime wine purchases.

Depends on how many bottles there are to inspect: My team/colleagues would charge between $150 - several thousand dollars. Much easier to inspect in advance than wait until you have a problem. We now have TCM Certified Authenticators (independents - not my employees) in top markets - CA, NY, London, Paris, Beaune, Zurich, Geneva & HK. Oh and Brazil.

Is the large variation due to number of bottles to inspect or amount of research required for a specific bottle? Assuming I approach you to authenticate a bottle before a given auction, if I win that lot, do I receive any sort of proof of authenticity? How, then, would I tie that authenticity certification to that specific bottle (assuming the chateau doesn’t number bottles)?

The pre-purchase inspection service cost variation is depended on number of bottles.

Pre-purchase inspection is a lot faster than full authentication for a Chai Vault Ledger (digital proof of authenticity & provenance - www.chaivault.com) to be created. Pre-purchase inspection is quick as it is an inspection only robust enough to state a degree of “safe purchase” or “advise not to purchase.”

Formal inspection, to create a ledger or craft a report in the event bottles are CFT, is exhaustive and thus takes more time. Formal inspection results can be used in marketing to support sales (for current and future owners - the Chai Vault Ledger can be transferred for the life of the bottle) when authentic, or substantiate findings in litigation/court if needed - i.e. to attain remuneration for bad purchases.
NOTE: We’ve never had a report made to attain remuneration for bad purchases end up in court. (Reports for the Kurniawan case were for sentencing - not remuneration- and were definitely used by the DOJ in court!) Every vendor - except Benchmark who decided to lawyer a man that had purchased demonstrably counterfeit d’Yquem from them, into submission - has made people whole following presentation of our reports. Benchmark didn’t contend (edited from content) that the bottles were authentic - they just wouldn’t pay the guy back without him filing a lawsuit & the victim didn’t want to do it. Buyer beware indeed!

As the person requesting the pre-purchase inspection isn’t the owner - we cannot cut capsules which is often needed to definitively authenticate certain bottles, nor can we apply the chipped caplet that ties the bottle to its blockchain-supported ledger. Following a successful purchase, bottles that had been pre-vetted can be certified in the Chai Vault quite quickly - and again, the services are charged either by the bottle for small quantities or by time for larger quantities. In reality, we can ask/suggest auction houses cut capsules to determine authenticity/prove inauthenticity for borderline bottles and MOST will comply as they too want to be sure they are not selling fakes. If they wont cut capsules - you shouldn’t buy the bottles anyway.
Hope that helps.

[ToddFrench]

Once again. Kapon should be in prison. The fact that he’s still in business is shocking and appalling. Love that Jancis commented too. It’s no longer a secret that his operation is comfortable selling fake bottles and the fact that actual reputable wine insiders are calling him out is some of that Karma I mentioned earlier.

He’s obviously one of those people who walks through a rain storm and doesn’t get wet. You’d think that even if he isn’t pursued legally, he would be civilly, or, at MINIMUM, buyers would realize how many fakes he gladly puts out there and STOP BUYING FROM THAT HOUSE

[todd_waldmann]

Once again. Kapon should be in prison. The fact that he’s still in business is shocking and appalling. Love that Jancis commented too. It’s no longer a secret that his operation is comfortable selling fake bottles and the fact that actual reputable wine insiders are calling him out is some of that Karma I mentioned earlier.

He’s obviously one of those people who walks through a rain storm and doesn’t get wet. You’d think that even if he isn’t pursued legally, he would be civilly, or, at MINIMUM, buyers would realize how many fakes he gladly puts out there and STOP BUYING FROM THAT HOUSE

THIS is what I find so mystifying. It isn’t as if it’s difficult to find information that ties Acker and Kapon to sales of high end counterfeits. I mean, Google, FFS.

[Don_Cornwell]

Once again. Kapon should be in prison. The fact that he’s still in business is shocking and appalling. Love that Jancis commented too. It’s no longer a secret that his operation is comfortable selling fake bottles and the fact that actual reputable wine insiders are calling him out is some of that Karma I mentioned earlier.

He’s obviously one of those people who walks through a rain storm and doesn’t get wet. You’d think that even if he isn’t pursued legally, he would be civilly, or, at MINIMUM, buyers would realize how many fakes he gladly puts out there and STOP BUYING FROM THAT HOUSE

THIS is what I find so mystifying. It isn’t as if it’s difficult to find information that ties Acker and Kapon to sales of high end counterfeits. I mean, Google, FFS.

I think that for many of the buyers in Asia Acker’s bad reputation is completely unknown to them. A good friend of mine in Hong Kong who also engages in wine authentication and advice to collectors says he runs into this problem all the time.

[Siun_O_Connell]

But we also see people here mention buying from Ackers or sellling through them. Always shocks me that anyone would do business with them.