you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 10 months ago* (11 children)

They think they'll dismantle and melt them and try to fence the stones (stones, especially famous ones are pretty worthless). They should get about 200 k€ for the lot if they're lucky. At least according to art specialists debating on news channels.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    If they're sophisticated thieves, they will be sold intact to some overseas billionaire for much more than that. You'd be surprised (or maybe not that surprised) how much stolen art and artefacts winds up in the private collections of rich assholes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    For some reason, this is not considered likely by the investigators. Don't ask me why.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    Feels like that would be super high risk for relatively low reward. I would have guessed if you wanted some relatively anonymous gems you'd do just as well with much less risk finding a couple of much lower profile jewelry stores or something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (4 children)

    You seem to think criminals have actually reflected upon this. They might actually be idiots.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    I suppose I may be overestimating Louvre security. I guess I would assume a criminal might have to be somewhat smart to overcome what I presumed to be higher security than you might find at a typical target for idiot criminals.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Oh yes, there's basically no security. At least nothing to deal with a quick grab like that. The only concern seems to have been terrorism. And even then,it was clearly not very well taken into account.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    Curious why you got a downvote, if there's a good reason, I would have found a reply more informative...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    Presumably because I said "no security ", which is a bit of an exaggeration. Very inadequate security would have been better. Supposedly there's a plan to upgrade the whole thing, but that should take a year or two still.

  • source
  • parent