E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Christie's, New York
Freed from their bank vault by the executor of the estate, the jewels of copper heiress Huguette Clark were sold on April 17, including a rare pink diamond and these emerald, pearl and diamond ear pendants. See the photos for final sale prices.
NEW YORK — The jewelry collection of Huguette M. Clark, the mysterious heiress to a copper fortune, was sold at auction Tuesday afternoon at Christie's New York, fetching $18.3 million, far above the pre-sale estimate of $8.5 million to $12 million.
The jewels had been recovered from the bank vault of the reclusive heiress, who lived the last 20 years of her life in Manhattan hospitals and who had rarely been seen since the 1930s.
The last surviving child of U.S. Sen. William Andrews Clark (1839-1925), who made his fortune in mining, railroads and other ventures, Huguette Clark has been the subject of a series of reports on msnbc.com about her vacant properties and the management of her fortune. Born in Paris in June 1906, she died in May 2011 at age 104.
Hundreds of people filed through Christie's at Rockefeller Center to see her jewels over the weekend.
The highlight was a rare 9-carat purplish-pink diamond ring, with a pre-sale estimate of $6 million to $8 million.
"Four million dollars," started the elegant auctioneer, Rahul Kadakia.
"Seven point five million dollars?" Kadakia added, hearing a bid. "All right, why waste time."
It was hammered home at $14 million, plus commission, for a total outlay of $15,762,500.
The buyer of the "Clark pink" was identified as Brett Stettner of Stettner Investment Diamonds.
The pace was set with the first two items, onyx photo frames estimated at about $6,000. They each sold for $60,000.
A pair of art deco bracelets sold for $90,000 and $480,000.
The total for all Clark items, with commissions, was $20.8 million.
See the accompanying slideshow for details on the Clark jewels and their final sale prices.
"It was like chasing a rainbow and you had this big pot of gold at the end. It was fantastic," auctioneer Kadakia, head of jewelry for Christie's, said on the TODAY TV show about opening the Clark vault. (See the accompanying video.) "They were all in this original boxes, in this bank vault, since the 1940s."
In addition to bidders at Christie's at Rockefeller Center in New York, bidders were online and on the telephone in Texas, Bahrain, Japan. They were alerted that parties with a potential financial interest were bidding on several of the less-expensive items. Possibly these were Clark relatives.
Many non-Clark items in the jewelry auction also sold well above their estimates, including a 24.68-carat diamond that sold for $420,000, or more than twice its high estimate.
An apartment already sold
One of her three mysterious apartments on New York's Fifth Avenue found a buyer soon after they hit the market in March. The top-floor apartment, listed at $24 million, sold in less than a month for an undisclosed price. The two others remain on the market, at $19 million and $12 million. Each apartment has about 5,000 square feet of space. Also on the market: her country home in New Canaan, Conn., at $19.8 million.
Rahul Kadakia of Christie's Auction House displays jewels discovered in heiress Huguette Clark's safe deposit box.
How can anything be sold now?
Proceeds from the properties and jewelry will be used to pay estate expenses, with the rest held for the eventual winner of the legal battle over her $400 million fortune. On one side are members of the Clark family, grandchildren of her father from his first marriage, whom she included in one will and then cut out of her last. On the other side are her attorney, accountant and nurse, all named in the last will, which left nothing to her relatives.
Her oceanfront home in Santa Barbara, Calif., with an estimated value of $100 million, is not on the market, because her second will designates it as a public museum and home for her art collection. The fate of that property is tied up in the legal battle. The largest chunk of the estate is left to that museum in the second will.
Also not for sale: her doll collection, with an estimated value of $4 million, which the second will leaves to her nurse.
The full story
More on the Huguette Clark mystery is at http://clark.msnbc.com/.
Do you have information on the Clark family?
Reporter Bill Dedman is writing a nonfiction book about the Clark family. If you have information, you can reach him at bill.dedman@msnbc.com.
Leave a Comment:
How weird. That money could feed a lot of people and build a lot of schools.
They're just pretty things to the very wealthy. Remember what a stir John McCain's wife's jewels caused when he was running for President?
It could also buy a lot of hats. What's your point?
You don't know who bought them, or how they earned their money, or how they spend it.
Do you go by ice cream parlors telling people they should have eaten broccoli instead?
Nice to hear they got a bundle for them...problem is who 'OWNS' the jewels..the will isn't final until it goes to court!
Selling others property is against the law I believe.
To Mike277: All of these items are owned by, and were sold by, a legal entity known as the Estate of Huguette Clark. Even though Marilyn Monroe has been dead nearly 50 years, the Estate of Marilyn Monroe is still "alive," so to speak, and will sue you if you misuse, or use without a license, the likeness of the deceased movie star. The executor of Huguette Clark's will is acting properly by selling items at auction and using part of the proceeds of these sales to pay for expenses such as taxes and the upkeep of those properties still owned by the estate. (Just one example: her houses in California and Connecticut need to have the lawns and trees regularly maintained). Of course, if the executor acted improperly and pocketed the proceeds then it would be stealing from the estate and against the law.
There's always some liberal who has to make a stink about people who have more money than them purely due to envy. But do they sacrafice their own fun spending to give to the poor? No, that's the government's job to do with other people's money.
I don't know about NY but in GA the executor is entitled to 10% of the estate.
Mike-1890098 -
Yes, we do actually know how they spend their money. They spend millions on small rocks. So we're pretty sure those $millions aren't going for feeding hungry people or building schools. And I would venture that conspicuous consumption to indulge their egos probably isn't limited to pricey rocks. As to how they earned their money, yeah, we don't know that...
I remember reading a lot of stories about this lady in 2010 and 2011 and she fascinated me by how much history she had seen and how much her father could have shared with her, having been born in 1839 himself. I imagine from what I had read, that she didn't give a dam* about the value of these things she owned. I always imagined they had so much sentimental value to her because of the family she loved. Now I see, as with most deaths, the vultures are out to see what, and how much they can get for whatever is left. It saddens me.
I remeber when my grandfather died and left his home to his 4 children. I had to chide them about how eager they were to sell his house and get their share. I felt ashamed to be part of their family after they acted like such greedy bastiches. I sincerely hope my children learn better from me, and even though I know none of you, I hope the same for all of you. Sorry for the long post. I think too deeply about these things, I know.
Jerry
Well, some of their money goes to buying small rocks. You don't know that they don't also donate money to charities, including those that feed the poor and build schools. I'm sure there are some who think only of themselves, but those people exist at every economic level.
sdmom-716153 yes it could but its not public money. Its private and she does have family even though she hadn't seen them in many years.
I love the communist mindset. Simply because someone else owns it and they think they have a better use for it,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,they should be allowed to steal it for the "public good".
Many a person has been send to a gulag or gas chamber for similar reasons.
It was as if she never lived at all....
lol - and there's always a DunkinH to turn an observation into a "stink" while licking someone's shiny, hand-made shoe and promising to protect their right to pay less in taxes than he does.
Some of those items brought ten times the estimated value. Some people have more money than sense. Then leaving a 100 million dollar estate for as a public museum: good bye property taxes to that county, and hello million dollar annual upkeep to the tax payer...sell the freaking place and build a beautiful museum in the city for one-tenth that amount. There seems to be enough money in the pockets of the uber rich to fetch two hundred million for the house.
It is the custom of auction houses to set low estimates, as those prices will traditionally attract bidders who would not participate if expected prices were published.
It is also possible that funds for the upkeep of her Santa Barb. estate/art museum are included in the gift of the house and the art collection. If it were not for the wealthy presenting such museums to the public, most people would never be able to view and appreciate the items in the collections.
What a mess. So many questions. Sad thing is that we will never know definitely what were her personal and true intentions as late in life... no one was "allowed" to see her. Where were the extended family during her life when she was younger and were any of them sincere in building a relationship? What changed with family to cause her to change her will so drastically as to not include any family? To me... seems the introduction of those benefiting now with the last will. Shame on them, if so. As if there is not enough for all?
In many of the articles I read, it stated that they weren't 'allowed' to see her. The people surrounding her, maybe her lawyer, accountant and nurse, said she doesn't want to see them anymore. I may have misunderstood, but there could have been possible court proceedings on this back then already. It's so very sad that family forgets they are family when money is involved. She was a person. And probably a very lonely person.
SIGH! Those ear pendants would go great w/ my beautiful hazel eyes.
i would have changed her diapers for 10 yr's to get some of tat loot.
Christies needs to hire some new appraisers. Many of these items sold for much, much more than the estimate. Beautiful collection though. So sad it just sat in a vault for all those years, and no one enjoyed them. Maybe the new owners will.
The "fudge" factor comes from the fact that these are quite unique and desirable antique pieces of jewelry. An appraiser can tell you what an item SHOULD fetch, but as with any auction if you have more than one interested buyer then it just becomes a matter of who wants it more. Especially when you're talking about interested buyers like these who have a lot of disposable income.
At those prices replicas will be made and the originals right back in the vault.
The appraisals were probably right on....you just never know who is behind these investment cartels, there is a lot of cash out there that needs to be put to work legally. So if they pay way to much for something it doesn't matter....just like laundering cash.
Its a free market. If people are prepared to pay that much then let it be. I surely wouldnt plus i dont have that kind of resources.
I think I saw a special on this lady awhile back. I think a stink was made over her lawyer(s) changing her will and declaring they were king of the land and her bank roll
Tha attorney, accountant and nurse got everything but the art museum. And this doesn't raise any red flags????
Leroy-
You need to keep up with the story- you are way behind!
I remember reading all these stories from Mr. Dedman. He kept up with it pretty good as he is writing a book about it. I think a lot of the money went to the museum in DC & creating a museum out of her $100 million Pacific home, if my memory is correct.
He kept up with it pretty well...
Beware! Grammar nazis are out regarding the article. No offense intended ABC. I am actually a defender of proper grammar and spelling, but for some reason, the minute I start posting something, mistakes are everywhere. I assume it is that way for many of us. So, for that reason, I correct NO ONE's grammar or spelling.
I like "good", good is good. Pretty damn good, thats good ain't it.
I thought the secret service agents were the best of the best in law enforcement. Top of the line in every way including education. So I'm really wondering why they would be stupid enough not to simply diffuse the situation or neutralize it in thier jargon by just paying the fee. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that this is routine behaviour for some agents. And especially in a country where prostitution is legal. At the end of the day every single one of these agents and esecially the supervisors should be FIRED. This is simply inexcusable. I just hope that the American public is kept informed on what ultimately happens with them. Since all taxpayers pay their salary and pension, we have every right to know. Maybe we should get a refund of the amount they refused to pay the hooker.
Derrickk, I think you may have posted in the wrong thread. However, I do know what started the hooker melee'. One of the agents lost it when the madam refused to validate his parking for him.
Uh, Hello!
Yes, Derrikk is commenting on the wrong article, but since he brought it up, wth is wrong with people? I have never been with a hooker, because I am terrified of std's, but even I know you don't mess with $50 whores. Maybe someone can clarify, but isn't that like rule number one?
Wrong turn.
What troubles me is the outrageous money that Christys makes. $1.5M on the sale. One night of work. Sickening, disgusting. I hate to see this kind of rip off.
A government museum could have had the same auction and had the money go to some good.
Ole, all auction houses work for a percentage of the sale. I guess by your way of thinking if a real estate agent sells a $100,000 house their commission is fair. But sell a $1,000.000 house and the agent is a sickening, disgusting rip off artist.
The used to be a saying that one should make sure the brain was in gear before the mouth was set into motion. You might consider that to be good advice.
I agree w ith lisa
I agree with Denzell, plus thats a cool name...Lisa is "good" too. In fact yanks changed the name of our mullet fish to Lisa fish so people would like them.
Why not let the courts fight it out and make their final decision. Often times people tend to leave their worldly processions to the ones who spent time with them and showed them love. It is so awful that in the world in which we live money , sex and greed seem to over take our souls. I truly hope that the courts make the right decision and award to those that deserve the fortune according to their works and love. May she rest in peace!
Her family tried for years to see her, but the attorney kept fending them off. They've been sniffing that money for a long time.
Isn't it wonderful as we Americans respect our
dead........SELL SELL SELL!
Are you instead proposing that all her stuff should have been buried with her? What's your point?
WOW - just wait till those auctioneers get a hold of my stuff one day,, to think what it'd be Worth ?? I have an old Wheel barrow with rust and broken wheels , an old shovel with a broken handle, a rusty old tool that doesn't work, a drill thats broke, a wrench, a screwdriver, an old 1940's or 1950's Jadite original Malt maker by hamilton beach, a 1960's waffle iron, a 1957 original VENDO coca cola machine, an old bed from the 1940's or 50's era, pair of old shoes, wore out socks, my dog, an old couch, several old TV's that are outdated, WOW I'm wealthy & Rich !! Bidding starts out at $1.50 any takers ???
I'll give you $10 for the dog as long as it doesn't have worms......
Hugette Clark obviously did not really care about money and wealth. I believe the article said most (if not all) the pieces were in their original boxes locked up in a safe.
I would love to see some designers make "copies" of the jewelry to sell - those pieces are just lovely. I would definitely wear a replica of those emerald earrings!
For all of you who are whining about the poor and the homeless/helpless/less fortunate, why don't you get off your tails and go help them out, instead of demanding someone else take care of them?
According to the founding fathers a large chunk of this wealth would go to the state.
But I guess the modern neo cons Know better than the founding fathers
Death brings out the WORST in people!
And garage sales.
Slothfulness is not limited to the poor. Here we have a situation where a member of society basically did nothing her whole life. She did have a family, raise children or to the best of my knowledge engage in any charitable endeavors. Her wealth did not seem to have done her any good.
You should give you children enough to do something not enough to do nothing. She had too much money. Her life was nothing.
As a society we should discourage slothfulness whether it is by the poor or by the rich. We should increase estate taxes considerably so that wealth does not concentrate at the top where it does no good. If you make millions then you be able to keep it. But it does society no good to let people inherit large amount of wealth. People need to work.
The only equality we need is equality of opportunity. Everyone in America should have the opportunity to work hard and succeed. Everyone should have the opportunity to fail. If we as a nation get to the point where the poor cannot succeed and the rich cannot fail then it will be our doom.
It is best for the future of our country if we can let talent and hard work rise to the top and let slothfulness and mediocracy fall to the bottom regardless of the circumstances of your birth.
I'll wait for you to make your millions.....then.....I'll just take it from you before you even think that you're going to give any of it to you snotty nosed kids........ thanks buddy......
Wouldn't it be nice to see some of the money from the will be used to build and operate a couple of public libraries and some city parks in underserved neighborhoods in NY, Chicago, LA, etc..That would be a great use of the money. As to the three pigs who are in the second will, I'd give them each one dollar.
Wealth means nothing to you at death. We all poop on the same thrones. Spend the time with your kids.
The loot from Hugette Clark's estate should rightly go for reparations to Butte and Anaconda, Montana. Miss Clark's father W.A. Clark in Butte and his partner in crime Marcus Daly in Anaconda pillaged the hills of Butte for copper and with the smelter in Anaconda created a waste land that will last for centuries. To those who doubt this, "Google" Berkeley Pit, Butte Montana. I speak from experience as I was born in Anaconda; my father and grandfathers worked for the Anaconda Copper Mining Company (ACM) and it subsidiary the Butte Anaconda & Pacific Railroad (BA&P). ACM also totally controlled the gas & electric company Montana Power. ACM owned about 90% of the mineral rights in Montana and all of the water rights in Western Montana. Bear in mind that Montana encompasses nearly 146,000 square miles; roughly equal to all of New England, New York State, Delaware, New Jersey and a tidy chunk of Pennslyvania.
In the early 1970's, ARCO bought up the failing ACM as the mines were "playing out." When faced with the havoc left behind ARCO absolved itself of corporate responsibility for any clean up because it had not caused the damage. What clean up that has occurred comes from the designation of the area as an EPA "Super Fund Site" paid for by American taxpayers. But, what the heck, according to those fair minded chaps on the United States Supreme Court corporations are citizens so it must be ginger peachy. A dissident to this doctrine opined, "I'll believe that corporations are citizens, when Texas executes one."
So what you're trying to say is that your forefathers were pillagers and collaberators of pillagers....and that the food that filled your round baby belly was purchased with the fruits of those terrible men???
The longer the lawyers can draw this out the more they make. i am sure when this is over we will be astonded by the amount paid to the sharks
How sad to be so rich with possessions and money yet destitute of the most important things in life. The only thing we can truly take with us, and the most valuable thing we can leave behind for others when we die, is the love you give and are given back. Don’t get me wrong. I am not being unrealistic. Having money definitely makes things easier. You don’t have to worry about a roof over your head, food to eat and paying the bills etc. I think it is sad that the people Huguette Clark had in her life were strangers she hired who were paid to ‘care’ for her.
My husband is dying of cancer. I am watching him slip away. The company I worked with for 12 years, and assured me that I would never have to worry about my job when my husband got sick, made me redundant. I am truly heartbroken about my husband and worried about being able to pay my bills etc. But, this experience has taught me some valuable lessons about what is really important. I am not a rich person financially but if I were I would give it all up if I could keep my sweet husband with me. He tells me he loves me many times a day and has truly taught me what it is to love and be loved. I have lovely children, step-children, four beautiful grandchildren and a boxer dog that jumps on my bed, sticks his face in mine every morning to wake me up, and thinks I am the best thing in the world. I feel sorry for Huguette Clark she obviously couldn’t buy those luxuries.
Good work Mr Dedman.
Honestly - its easy to say what one should do with their families money.... How dare anyone step up and say that this lady should do anything she doesnt want to do with it. Why should the family start a huge money making legal battle over her estate.....where were they when she was living. To me, obviously not with her. Its sad, she was alone except for the company of a few select employees (doesnt matter if they were hired or not) and none of the precious family that is now bickering over her belongings...... Now to be fair, it is possible that they tried to be with her and she just wanted nothing to do with them.... however, to me that is highly unlikely... Let her leagally binding will be the final word on her estate and be done with it.
This woman lived her life EXACTLY as she wanted to, because she had all the money to do so.
She bought jewels, dolls, property, etc. She could have had anything she wanted. She chose what she chose.
She lived a very long life and had folks kissing her ass for many years. She didn't want a family and liked her solitude. She was a rich recluse. Now she's gone. RIP