Selling [ Off ] Buffalo

Every time I go to places like Olde Good Things (HUGE architectural "salvage" warehouses), I look for pieces of architecture from Buffalo. Time to reverse this trend, save what we have AND get our treasures back (as others have done around the world!) We should go down to Miami to talk to Tom Telesco, who was largely responsible with selling off the objects from the CT.

Also, here is an interesting take on the CT's evolution: http://www.buffalohistoryworks.com/terminal/death/death.html

the darwin martin house has the same problem. that house was stripped and abused, too, and its original windows and furnishings are scattered all over. the difference is that they have a budget for making replicas and the loyal support of donors who will buy pieces for them when they become available.

this is just another example of the strip-mining and liquidation of buffalo. i wouldn't begrudge an out-of-town dealer selling a central terminal piece but it really grates on me when a local shop does it. maybe these dealers don't have a defined code of ethics, i don't know. maybe the threat of a public boycott would help get it returned to the terminal.

This light was LEGALLY sold off, what sort of "code of ethics"
requires someone to return something that they legally purchased ?

CTRC doesn't need replicas of these lights. These belong in the severed train concourse which CTRC doesnt even own. The Main concourse lights are a different style.

I suppose one could argue that historic pieces of art all over the world have LEGALLY been scattered to the highest bidder. But in cases where an object is part of an architectural piece, it is always best at home in its original setting.

I shudder to think that this is going to end up in somebody's living room. Ironically, probably next to some coffee table book about historic preservation.

The code of ethics was obviously breached by the original seller, but reselling it and moving it to locations unknown is no better than tomb robbers selling off bits of pottery or mummy heads they found in their yard.

I can't begrudge CooCooU for wanting to be reimbursed for the the purchase price they paid for it, but the CTRC should have been given priority bidding rights. To sell the object for profit just seems like blood money. It makes the object even more expensive for the CTRC to buy back later.

I'd support a boycott. At least pressure them to make a contribution of the profits toward the current restoration goals.

"The code of ethics was obviously breached by the original seller"

why ? the original seller happened to own this light fair and square.

This light is one of the ones sold by Tony Fedele himself when the train concourse was separated from the main building. He knew the train concourse would be looted and smashed and instead chose to sell off the train concourse lights to help pay the taxes on the REST of the building. IE: trying to sell a little in order to save alot.

All the REST of the terminals lights and decorations however were sold by the next owner of the building, who never even paid for the building, just stripped for profit and skipped town.

Just as an afterthought, this reseller was interviewed in 2008 by BRM:

http://archives.buffalorising.com/story/coocoou_cool_funky_fun

I'm sure this is not one of those pieces that was 'bought for a dollar', but the mention of a lawsuit from the Calder Foundation and the 'savviness' of buyers, in hindsight, kinda makes the entire trade sound like a bunch of scavengers, looters and opportunists.

It's fine to go shopping for antiques and furniture your grandma is selling off. But something like this crosses a line. Next thing you know, somebody's going to be lining their pockets by selling off abandoned churches. Oh wait...

As far as I can tell this piece was open for anyone to buy, including Grad 94 and Travelrrr. Not surprisingly, they didn't. However, a local and longtime businessman, recognizing its value, did. Now, because he may sell it to an out of town resident (or whoever else wins the auction) you want him to pressure him to "donate" it back or you'll organize a boycott of his business? I can't think of a singluarly more concise example of everything wrong with the armchair critics on this site.

I don't really think this is a problem. Even Buffalo Reuse is on ebay. There are antiques bought and brought to Buffalo and there are antiques that are sold and shipped away from Buffalo. When it comes to antique fixtures people everywhere, not just Buffalo, are brutal. If you go to estate sales, especially so if it's in a poor part of town, they will rip the fixtures right of the wall if the house isn't going to be sold right away. It's 2011 and we are connected everywhere by the internet, don't be so insular.

Speaking of which didn't Fontana try to get something passed that says something along the lines of stripping building and leaving them to rot after the entire moving St Gerard to Norcross?

The seller claims this item was "purchased" 20 years ago, but the members of the Restoration Corporation told me during a tour that many of these items were actually STOLEN by antique dealers. Whether purchased or not, I think it is in poor taste to profit from the misfortune of your community.

If this seller wanted to perform a noble deed for the citizens of Buffalo, he should offer to sell this historic piece exclusively to the Restoration Corporation for the price he paid for it. That way, he's out nothing, but the Corporation has a shot at getting back a historic piece that belongs in the Terminal.

These ideas make sense, I would think we as a community should stand pat and make a line in the sand. Furthermore, I think individuals who are lured away by money and greed have an ethical and moral bound duty to replace themselves in our community or pay an annual stipend.

Steel(e), lets start with you, cough up your coffee table book money and write a check for a local cause. Otherwise you represent that light fixture

Hey Jackdaug...Apparently, some members of the Restoration Corporation are misinformed or have formed their own opinion regarding how pieces of these buildings got disbursed..and you chose to take them at their word without doing your own research..I think it in poor taste to be slanderous, on your part.
Obviously this piece is available for sale to anyone who chooses to be passionate about the history of Buffalo architecture, whether the buyer be a BUffalonian or not..come on people...put your money where your mouth is...be part of the solution..not the problem...lots of arm chair critics out there....if your all so concerned...buy it!!! The seller did..years ago..with much foresight at that..you are all just envious you aren't or weren't forward thinkers!

The original seller did what needed to be done at the time. If he didn't these things likely would not even exist now. The current seller is making a living doing what he does and there is nothing wrong with that. It would be great to get these things donated back to the terminal but not everyone including the store owner is in in a position to fork over that kind of money. Hopefully someone who does have the means will see this story and buy the piece for donation.

I would like to think that local dealers would be more interested in authentic restoration than pushing Central Terminal artifacts to anyone outside of the area. Because so much of the original material was stolen...doesn't it seem right to try to collect as much of it as possible and make it at the same time affordable for the Central Terminal to reclaim it? Tax deductions are available! This is shady...not the first time either.

I think you guys misunderstood my point...

First, I never said that the piece was stolen, only that such pieces were -often- stolen. Even if it was stolen, it does not mean the current seller had any knowledge of that being the case. I have heard that some pieces were removed by the previous owner of the building and sold as well; perhaps this is an example. Either way, it is a shame that the building was scavenged like this. You can argue that an individual has a right to do as he or she pleases with his or her property, but when that property is a community landmark, I think a measure of civic responsibility should play a role in such decisions.

As a newcomer to Buffalo, the Central Terminal was one of the first major landmarks I visited and it is one of the most impressive sites I've seen so far. It's most definitely worth preserving and adapting for a new use in my opinion.

My point was that this fixture is a piece of Buffalo's history, removed from a community landmark for profit, that, like many historic treasures displaced from their origin, belongs in its rightful place. My point was that it would be a good deed by the seller to offer the Corporation a reasonable opportunity to acquire it, should they so choose.

grad94>"maybe the threat of a public boycott would help get it returned to the terminal"

I just wonder if boycotting the store on Hertel would be as effective as the boycott against Pano's. That one's been working brilliantly!
"Nobody goes there anymore; it's too crowded."

If you guys can come up w/ the $ for ONE of the train concourse light fixtures, I'll instead donate the CAD files needed to reproduce the 2 gigantic Main Concourse chandeliers.

They are simple enough to make, just large.

http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/62970_491011062424_753007424_6701501_4727638_n.jpg

http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/164361_10150140613177425_753007424_7721601_7826044_n.jpg

http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/163179_10150143838927425_753007424_7766210_134228_n.jpg

There's an obvious difference in scale here: but imagine the outcry if the British Museum needed to raise funds and decided to sell the Elgin Marbles to a wealthy oil tycoon. Or if NYC decided to fill a budget gap by doing the same thing with Cleopatra's Needle. Then compare that to a situation where your Mom decided to pawn the family silver to help cover the mortgage, but was unable to recoup the 'loan' before the silver was resold.

In all cases, the transfers are completely legal (admittedly there are some questions about the Elgin Marbles). But most would agree that, regardless of the circumstances, Greece and Egypt still hold considerable claim to the Marbles and Obelisk. Your Mom, well, she'd be hard pressed to get much more than sympathy.

There is an inherent difference between sentimental items, historical objects, and architectural pieces. This lantern is somewhere between sentimental and historical. But it is definitely architectural, and therefore has ONE singular place that it should rightfully reside.

In the case of a FLW fixture from the Larkin Building, the case is moot, as the building no longer exists. But coming from a building that is ACTIVELY undergoing restoration (even though it's from a section that is part of FUTURE restoration plans), it's just plain shady to be selling it to the highest bidder in locales unknown. If the item had been put up for bid 10 years ago when the Terminal still had barely a dream of restoration, we wouldn't be expressing more than a sigh over this.

I can't imagine what they paid for it, but I sorta doubt it was $7,799. Making that kind of profit off of somebody else's misfortune just adds insult to injury.

The best way for CooCooU to save face here is to add a stipulation to the sale. Either 1) that it remain local and catalogued for future return to the Terminal, or 2) place the item up for charity bids to recover purchase price and any restoration costs, then give the item to the CTRC once they have been reimbursed.

Then they can go back to selling somebody else's Mom's silverware and end tables.

As for St. Gerard's, we are seeing this happen in a much larger scale. The Diocese sold the building for a fraction of what it was worth, just to cut their losses. Instead, they could have at least asked a fairer price and used the profits to stabilize their other properties. Lack of foresight is all too common. But lack of hindsight is just plain unforgivable.

i noticed that buffaloreuse was on ebay, too. i still have reservations about the stripmining and liquidation of buffalo architecture but i want to see reuse thrive so i'll propose a compromise.

if it comes from a non-designated property, meaning nothing from a landmarked building, national register site, or historic district, it is fair game. but if it comes from a designated landmark, national register site, or historic district, it should not be exported.

i think central terminal is on the national register.

Unless 24/7 security is provided, such items returned to their "home" would probably be stolen in short order.

The Ebay auction has been ended early by the seller.

ForestBird, CTRC has a number of items in their possession that are locked away safe. There are other places to store things besides just letting them sit around the main concourse.

Most anything of value thats been returned to the terminal is stored off site anyways. This or any other light would be no different.

Now that it's no longer available for sale on Ebay, thanks to all the naysayers, we may never know what happens to it..Lot's of support..my wonderful Native Buffalonians..all so quick to throw someone under the bus..Did anyone ever think to ask and or approach the seller out right, before you crucified the guy?? You get more bees with honey then you do with vinegar! Rumor has it, it's on it's way to the "NEW" EGYPT to replace the desecrated mummy artifacts!

Lets not be too hard on the people who are very upset and concerned when our local treasures are put in a position to be lost (when they are put on ebay).
I had a number of original artworks, including a painting, that was done by the original artist for the local Bell Airospace Museam. The artist painted many of the original illustrations for their instruction flight manuel - and some of these were those paintings. I was laid off last year and could of sold the paintings ( I certainly could have used the money) but instead I donated it to the museam. Who knows - maybe CooCooU has had second thoughts and is thinking of doing the same. Or maybe a BRO reader has contacted CooCooU and it is being purchased for the CT. I hope so.

Wouldn't it be great if Buffalo took care of their architecture before it was sold off to the highest bidder. The people left in Buffalo have done very little in 50 years and I don't think they'll be anymore successful in the next 50.

I especially liked the comment about all the valuable things for the Central Terminal aren't stored anywhere near the Central Terminal. What's wrong, you don't trust the natives? Don't worry, I wouldn't either and that is why the east side is always going to be a hell hole until they all kill each other off. That's going to take another 50 years and by then the people of Buffalo will be so broke they'll be selling off everything of value.

Actually Jim, the building isnt exactly climate controlled right now, so its only suitable for storing things you wouldn't mind storing in yuor average backyard shed.

As for the "natives" it was actually the white middle class s***heads that were the most trouble at events at the terminal, and it was those same type of s***heads that kicked and smashed their way into the main concourse 2 summers ago via the basement.

How many antique shops are on Hertel? Just wondering. Besides wonder that, I also see this BR entry as a true mistery story.

This topic was featured on BR on 2/21/2011 about 5 PM. Then the lamp sale was ended minus any bids on 2/22/2011. Ohh! How come? How long was it for sale before this BR article? Does that end it? OR, has the plot thickened?

Twenty years ago and longer back, despite who owned any part of the terminal, private, Amtrak, or no one, there was plenty of opportunty for thievery.

Twenty years ago The Central Terminal was wide open to the public and inhabited by the homeless... Twenty years later it may appear safe to claim that anything in it was gotten through legal channels.

Did whomever has possession of anything CTR, but for now that particular lamp, actually have legal permission to have gotten possession of it? What if not? In order to be able to sell it, wouldn't a signed and dated owner's "permission slip" or signed and dated sales receipt to "own" it be needed to sell it?

And that name, coocoou, could it mean crazycrazyyou for buying it now? Just wondering...

Seems to me that since it is being sold as authentic CTR and the CTR is, after all, railroad, choo-choo (the sound of those trains) would have been a better username. lol

Also, and sort of unrelated to the topic, I get a charge out of people on this BR making declarations of sincerity by way of usernames! Not being able to check them out places them into the "trust me" catagory of total strangers in TV ads.

Over several generations, many families made themselves unfetteredly wealthy selling Buffalo short.

There is one thing about this whole thing that I can't figure out. That light was from the passenger waiting concourse, which is owned by Amtrak. Amtrak inherited it from the old railroads that owned the platforms before them, if I'm right. That means that the previous owner who sold the lights never owned the platforms. If that's the case, how did he sell those lights in the first place, since they didn't belong to him? Can anyone correct me on how that worked?
I suppose in a way it's a good thing they were sold, as they would have disappeared a long time ago if they hadn't been.

Simple, Fedele could have owned the building and Amtrak could have owned the property it was on - or more specifically, the right of way for 7 sets of tracks through said property, which makes the rest of the property only useful for supporting Fedele's building.

Once they severed the building, Fedele signs over the train concourse as its no longer accessible to him anyways, gets to keep some stuff out of it, and doesn't have to pay as much in property taxes in the process

The authorities on the matter of whodonewhat at The CT would be the homeless who can't be found, and the contractors who stored supplies there, who won't own up.

I'm not terribly enthused when I read from those who gain by cannibalizing our City's legacy but on the other hand, they are preserved in a manner that's not like what happened to the treasured McKin, Mead and White's Pennsylvania Station which upon demolition, was deposited as fill to a New Jersey swamp. See Lorraine Diehl's excellent account of that heinous travesty in her book, The Late, Great Pennsylvania Station.

Seriously, isn't this fairly common - everywhere. While not preferable, people own antiquities from various locations.

Common cannibalization= "But ma, Johnny's ma lets him!!!"

Oh, someone said something about credentials earlier, so I figured I would post mine. It has since been returned, but I still have the baseball hat and hardhat that went with it with it. lol

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v473/hotrodkid/oldsd/_ICT0087640.jpg