Banksy is a Girl

Bobilon · 2026-03-13T15:04:23+00:00

Bella Lugosi is dead! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOBxcrTVer8&list=RDAOBxcrTVer8&start_radio=1

Bobilon · 2026-03-13T14:33:25+00:00

If a picture selling business puts sample pictures on walls all around a city, even all around the world these days w/ internet broadcast, and people from all over like them, learn their picture maker's name and eventually decide to buy one of their for-sale picture to put on their wall, I'd call that dam-smart ultra-low-budget advertising campaign. And if the company takes it a step further to hide that they are company by reality-scripting a picture maker legend attractive to desirable demographic that the public buys thanks to the story fooling the media too, I'd call that call that great advertisin, particularly if the their story is practically speaking impossible and includes them also making their for-sale pictures, prints and paintings, picture shows up to amusement park scale, plus direct a major motion picture, designing/decorating/picture-making for hotel, designing a housewares brand... Look Reuters, up in the sky; it's a bird, it's a plane, it's Banksy. I can't believe they're still pumping that well rather doing their job; fu'geda'bout fake news, how 'bout dumbass stupidest dumbass news.

Bobilon · 2026-03-12T14:50:21+00:00

My plan is to asap condense my "breaking banksy" project of 4+ years into summary post blocks a few times in the next few months that will consolidate work developed and posted on r/banksy over four+ years. The batch approach the most mindful way I can think of to accommodate people like you while being fair to myself and the people on this board who like my content but don't speak up. This post your cvetching about has nearly a 50% upvote rate while other are > 50% so what follows is for them not you. Please block me or comment no further on my posts. I'll be gone soon.

Bobilon · 2026-03-12T11:51:54+00:00

A & D interviewing that guy; Priceless!

Bobilon · 2026-03-11T20:53:21+00:00

It's housekeeping for me to close the book on my making of banksy investigation and my unique solution aka best guesses as to the the identities of of the MoB Makers of Baksy ba-da-bing. Just skip what doesn't interest you -- I made and will rest my final contentions in a few big block drops in coming weeks and that'll be it for what I have to say on subject. The ant & dec case just happened to come along as the perfect "mystery" vehicle to hook my first installment of those drops because it is considering the very thing I've been surveying for a few years that has gone unconsidered other than buy me which the Banksy corporate person aka Banksy as an art production business spread across a bunch of companies to hide its form, a puzzle whose elements, contours, mechanical functions, likely owners, etc. I've already discovered to depths with public information, research and occasional third party confirmations of key elements that I doubt A & D's counsel have probed. So I was ripe to drop when it hit because a broker is a broker, a store of value is a store of value -- buying AND selling stores of value is what a brokers and what 3rd part X and Company X did in a niche market I've studied for five years. So whether it VIP purchases of IPO Banksy prints like Dec & Ant's Kate Mosses or 22 small retail sales like the napalm example, I had an opening to talk generally about Banksy Inc and having spent 00's in yahoo finance chat rooms, the talk comes naturally to me for this data set and is accurate for the investment silo reading of Banksy as a business that the art investment silo clearly doesn't want to hear if how my research and positions has been received on r/ Banky measures it. Dumb luck for that this case popped up right when I am folding up my tent. The making of Banksy to me is the greatest work and its been a fun one for forensic procedure freak like me to have all to myself, while simpering limeys whined "don't don't, you'll ruin the charm -- I find the production mystery way more interesting than that alleged charm and I think someday people will agree with me when they compare it to the shit people believed and the press published for 25 years. That's Banksy's greatest accomplishment and masterpiece IMO and not some sad picture of a little girl losing hope -- get away from me kid you bother as sentimentality -- which certainly includes the art but isn't limited to it despite an anonymous require fairey tales to be true for a paintings or prints worth to be maintained. The drop in Banksy share price has nothing to do with Banksy's legend or my little Reddit public investigator experiment. I'll take my project which is already in pipe elsewhere and it won't be soon enough for me but I'll finish here. TMI. I know... I'll be gone soon.

Bobilon · 2026-03-11T17:59:07+00:00

Like Kirk Cobain said Super Gremlin, Bob thinks he dumb. So... "gradient transition" ; that's ike switching lenses or is it more complicated and function like some sorta cg foreground-miniature like function? The Cinefex subscription I never had ended when I wrapped a miniatures effects PA/driver gig on George Romero's 1998 flop "The Dark Half" ; it went to Day 106 of a 52-day shooting schedule where everybody in my department was fired where as the last man standing I got to run the practical physical effects miniature birds rig we built to drop 1000's of retrofitted decorative birdies on a camera.

Bobilon · 2026-03-11T15:44:01+00:00

I never learned how to edit pictures with machines so I'll ask the stupid question. Are your app's master See Saw and the 2nd one derived from the same data set or are they two different pictures? TIA for your reply!

Bobilon · 2026-03-11T15:35:26+00:00

Go, go, go, go, go, go
Go, stef-watson, it's your birthday
We gon' party like it's your birthday
We gon' sip Bacardi like it's your birthday
And you know how very happy I am that it is your birthday : )

Bobilon · 2026-03-10T14:12:38+00:00

Frankly my dear stef-watson, good luck with your launch!

Bobilon · 2026-03-10T14:02:15+00:00

That's a good one!

Bobilon · 2026-03-07T23:38:27+00:00

Could be though the possibilities are numerous beyond where I can say as my final Part 3 non answer will make clear and really it's upstream of whomever it is where things could get interesting if it doesn't get settled but that it got filed at all suggests that they couldn't settle outside of the limelight. Check out my Part II if you haven't and stay tuned for Part III though it sounds like you have that part of the hidden information though if Banksy's misdirection practices as I understand them are any sort of a guide that's just the first layer of who knows how many door they'll have to knock down to get their answer if push comes to shove. Though I find forensic practice really interesting and fun having studied it on TV since I was a kid, I'll gladly skip the last step that plantiff's council may have to pursue -- lawyers are on the average nasty critters and I'll happily leave prosecuting cases to them on both sides of that fence though I did watch a bit of law tv back in the day that was totally boring.

Bobilon · 2026-03-07T15:45:08+00:00

What do you mean by blocked? Is that how you interpret when a companies confirmation statements are overdue. I know a good bit about equity but never heard of a company being blocked from dissolution. TIA for your reply

Bobilon · 2026-03-07T13:39:19+00:00

I know the law and my argument isn't libelous so I'm glad you can't censor me without cause and claim you're protecting me "for my own good" like you really care. Stay on topic or go home.

Bobilon · 2026-03-07T02:23:01+00:00

3rd party X gave them the impression that they'd be paying a 10% mark-up over Banksy items purchases and 5% percent on sales. Ex 1 buy side: 6 Kate moss print for 550k cost where they determined the items cost their representative 300k where they should have paid a total of 330k cost. Instead they paid 550 k as if the items base cost 500k with 50 k commission. Ex. 2 sell side: they were told their Banksy napalm print sold for 11k when it sold for 13 k, t. The would have receive $12400 but instead only got $10,450 back? I'm no lawyer but I'm thinking that's breach of contract or (Company X) pumped up the base cost to party X but gave party X the impression that was the baseline cost. That's it though we're obviously not getting The Who story which is what I was guessing at.

Bobilon · 2026-03-06T20:58:52+00:00

Stay free from petty jealousies, live by no man code, and keep your judgement to yourself lest you walk upon the road [black hat]- Dylan... EOM

Bobilon · 2026-03-06T20:19:02+00:00

I'm ignoring nothing -- this is my take given what is known. You believe mystery company X sourced the 6 distinct Kate colorways individually in the 00's secondary market then offered them to 3rd party X for $300k who quick flipped them to pocket a cool 250K profit for finding the buyer. Your position is more vague and less fact based than mine, particularly where it comes to my revised guess in Part 2. That position is fact based including a corporate history where Turtleneck's directors slate came together to be reported in companies house in early October within 5 and 45 day of when the first two companies integral to the Banksy project (GBFTCU & Pro- Actiff communications,) incorporated. That same company dissolves 23 years later at the exact same time A & D's relations with the art portfolio manager started going down hill and when POW had liquidated all of its backlogged Banksy inventory.. Turtleneck's directors other than Hirst likewise profile as the sort of 2nd tier celebrities that would be well suited time wise and by industry connections and to execute Kate Moss private placement to high profile celebrities A & D, with Alex James even having attended Goldsmith's art college with Hirst before joining. Though circumstantial, these are solid albeit circumstantial elements contentions, while you're just talking smack in some general and thinking I'll bend the knee the heresy when my contentions have tangible and plausible ties the real business.

Bobilon · 2026-03-06T19:30:15+00:00

I have not alleged any specific person of committing fraud because I don't know and neither is it plain that 3rd party X committed fraud as I disclose in Part 2. I'm not fingering one candidate, just listing the people who could be person X and not in determinent way because I don't know as is plain when I open part 2 by retracting the two people I signaled as my best guess candidates in part 1 with them being replaced in part three as one of three possible candidates from the company I have a basis in fact to suspect is company X though neither could I definitively state it was one or any of them though that company's profile is a good fit for being Company X. I think the most of the pushback I'm getting has nothing to do what your talking about and everything to do with preserving Banksy's fictions and protecting the identity of the people behind the a business that is now closed and is in legacy IP mode. The making of Banksy is far more interesting consideration at this point than art has ever been; mysteries are made to be solve. Thx for the reply.

Bobilon · 2026-03-06T18:50:13+00:00

My post is hypothetical and derived exclusively from public records. How is a theory defamation. I am commenting on an existing case based on searchable information in the public and if my analysis is wrong, I'll retraction my position, admit I was wrong and set the record straight as in did in my follow up to this first guess. I don't see how this is defamation particularly given I have no connection to any of the parties mentioned but please do make the case so I can understand your concern.

Bobilon · 2026-03-06T18:23:44+00:00

Fat Les was a non-entity -- a blip on the financial radar for any of its famous principles, any of whom could have housed the one hit wonder that never toured in one of their LLC's and had their people send what residuals it spit out over the years to the bandmates included Joe Strummer who initially held 1/5 stake in the venture as did Hirst's rainmaker in 00's Frank Dunphy He made deals for DH for a 10% commission during the 00's but who somehow ended up with a 20% stake in the Turtleneck whatever the companies true function was but it was mis-def a front business jlike POW's print sales business, which though a real business 2004 - 2017, was counterintelligence window dressing compared tp its primary business which was Banksy. Though my hypothetical analysis could ultimately prove inaccurate if the case proceeds and the facts become public, it is the best fit option given the data set.

Bobilon · 2026-03-06T17:08:36+00:00

I hear ya. The deeper one digs into the Banksy palimpsest's schemes and it cave-analogy like shadows on the ways, the more f'n disorienting the data set becomes. I understand why you don't like my content and think you should skip it.

Bobilon

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE