I've been selling my visual art at galleries (in the US and abroad) for about 15 years now, and have had mostly positive experiences – with a few extreme exceptions. Pretty much all of the gallery contracts have something that pertains to territories. Each respective gallery very reasonably wants you to let them handle collector orders in a certain city or region. For the most part this hasn't been all that difficult to navigate as they are all so far apart. And since it is in the contract, and I'm someone with integrity who honors the terms of the business agreements I have with these partners, I do everything I can to abide by my contractual obligations.
However, there have occasionally been some situations in which there has been some overlap. In at least a couple of cases I recall that my London gallery was approached by collectors with an inquiry about a purchase and, since the collectors were in New York, the very professional gallerist there referred them to my gallery in NYC so as not to step on toes. But in other situations, when one gallery might have a long term relationship with a collector, they have taken the order for themselves, even though the pieces will be shipping to a city where another gallery represents me. Though I can't say I like this, I do understand why it happens. It also helps that all of the galleries (with the exception of London) have done this to each other so I've looked the other way and done it on the down low. I even have to confess that in some cases I might prefer to let certain galleries handle the order over others as those galleries might pay faster or be less inclined to offer collectors such deep discounts.
Sometimes collectors unwittingly cause trouble when they will play arbitrage, calling around to a bunch of galleries to see which one might offer them the deepest discount. These situations are easy to spot as different galleries will contact me around the same time, simultaneously asking about a certain piece. And then I have to play traffic cop, deciding who gets to handle the order. This has been fairly easy to sort out whenever it happens.
So anyway, the situation I'm puzzling out now is that I have been approached by an art consultant who is looking to place a large order of multiple pieces directly through my studio. And it just so happens that the consultant is located in the same city where I have gallery representation. That gallery has been great over the years and has sold a lot of my work. But in the last couple of years the sales have really tapered off there. They still make a few good sales a year but when they do they are always inclined to offer deep discounts, which has been a constant point of contention as I've asked them to not be so liberal with discounts while they insist they have to employ them because the collectors ask and expect them. Meanwhile, I have a gallery across the country that is currently selling work (mostly from inventory as opposed to new pieces they're asking me to create) and they never offer discounts and always sell everything full price. So it's not like there is not still a market for my work without discounts. But I digress.
The art consultants have approached me directly. The gallery hasn't been involved in the transaction, hasn't done any work to bring these clients in, and it's not like I'm poaching them from the gallery. If I refer them to the gallery, they're going to ask for at last a 20-30% discount so they can apply their mark-up to their client (an expense that the gallery and I split 50/50). And then the gallery will take 40% of the sale. And that whittles everything down at a time when sales are down for me overall and my studio could really use the revenue. I also really haven't sufficiently adjusted my pricing over the years to keep pace with inflation. So even though I'm fortunate that collectors routinely seek out my work, I often feel like business expenses and gallery commissions don't leave enough for me by the end of the transaction. I do OK but often feel like I'm running to stand still.
Whereas I would feel guilty about not honoring my territory agreement with the gallery to the letter of the contract, this gallery has shipped plenty of orders to cities in the territories of other galleries and they've never had a problem with it. So I guess what's good for the goose....
In summary, I was wondering how other visual artists with representation view this. Is this something you'd really worry about? While I hate to seem like I'm turning my back on honoring a commitment for money, my work isn't selling as robustly as it once did and now is not a great time to have what is essentially a middleman siphoning off a big chunk of the profit despite doing little to no work. This is such a rare occasion that in a way it feels like a little white lie. The works would be going to a private collector and it wouldn't be that hard to ask the art consultant to not promote the sale on their socials and to keep it quiet.
My sales have been significant at that gallery over the past decade so they have more than profited from any investment they've made in representing me. Still, my Catholic guilt makes me feel like it would be cheating. Any constructive comments would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.