|
Post by steveinca on Mar 14, 2009 13:03:39 GMT -8
Great article....thanks for posting it. I wonder how much capital the Mugrabi family needed to start their empire. Seems that having a collection of mostly Warhol, Basquiat and Hirst would mean that they had to drop a lot of money to get their foot in the door. It's a no brainer though. If you have the money to buy art by these type of artists you will make a profit. Forget about the stock market, real estate or commodities. If i had $2 million to invest i can honestly say that i would take a long hard look at buying a high priced piece. That segment in the article about the guy who paints the nurse paintings was absolute insanity. In '03 they went for $50k, $1million in '06, and now in '08 they're fetching $8million! Blows my mind. I guess those that purchased one for $50k knew something everyone else didn't, or they luckily liked the artwork.
|
|
|
Post by sleepboy on Mar 14, 2009 15:21:54 GMT -8
Yah, I remember that article. I was thinking how interesting it was that they almost seem like they are manipulating the art market. I guess with money, you can. Anytime an artist they collect has something to sell, they have to buy it, just to keep the market up... But I don't understand how it works exactly, I guess if they control all the supply, they can charge more?
|
|
|
Post by richardtharbaugh on Mar 14, 2009 15:43:52 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by sleepboy on Apr 28, 2009 7:45:54 GMT -8
Hirst weighs in with this semi-comedic statement. "The reason why you make art is not financial... It's not about how much something is worth or how much it costs, it's about whether it's good or not." I always thought he made if for financial reasons... www.nationalpost.com/arts/story.html?id=1531426
|
|
|
Post by travislouie on Apr 29, 2009 2:10:08 GMT -8
On the other hand, . . . for struggling artists, . . .it's difficult to keep the idea that you have to be in the position to cover your living expenses to be free enough to think in those terms. Coming from Hirst, it seems easy for him to say.
|
|
|
Post by ziggy1 on Apr 29, 2009 3:48:04 GMT -8
Good point Travis. I wonder how Hirst would have felt if the economy was this bad when he started. How would he have supported himself and funded his art? After all, dead sharks and jeweled skulls don't grow on trees....
It just seems so disingenuous coming from him when a couple of years ago he sold $250 million of his art in one show and his 75% share was $187.5 million. In a bad economy, there is no way that a collector could afford the periodic $700,000 embalming fluid change that some of his art requires.
At the same time, it is nice to be able to actually get a chance to buy pieces that I love now that shows are not instantly selling out. Having 10 minutes to decide to purchase a piece of art never seemed conducive to developing a collection full of artists and paintings that I truly loved. The glut of Banksy and Faile limited editions on the market shows that most people were speculating as opposed to collecting. Did Rembrandt ever run auctions for his art when the Dutch art market was bubbling?
On the other hand, many collectors will now cut back and only collect pieces from established artists and that will certainly hurt the development of new artists. I know that I was growing tired of all the crap that was out there and galleries that were lowering their standards and pushing artists they knew were sub-par to beginning collectors or informally requiring collectors to purchase the lesser art in order to have a shot at buying from the "hot" artists' shows. However, when I see amazing growth and development this year from artists like Van Arno and Natalia Fabia, I wonder if they would have had a shot to develop in this environment.
I'll end this long email by saying that I endeavor to continue buying art that I strongly connect with (as opposed to buying art I think might appreciate rapidly) and to dedicate part of my budget (like I ever stick to it!) to purchasing art from promising young artists as long as I am financially able. May the next year be kind to caring galleries and all passionate and talented artists!
|
|
|
Post by commandax on Jul 27, 2009 19:03:58 GMT -8
Well, a few months have passed since we last visited this topic. I figure maybe enough time has passed that some observations can be made. One thing I've been noticing is that now I have a shot at some really strong work that would have been sold to more important collectors in last year's economic climate. Perhaps some of that is relationships, but I'm sure there's also an element of decreasing demand and greater hesitancy even among those who are still buying. I've also noticed that galleries which once would have given me that blank "what are you talking about" stare when I asked to be on the preview list now send me previews for shows I have no interest in whatsoever. Even galleries I've never bought a single painting from now send me multiple show reminders with links to the work. So perhaps the elitist veneer is rubbing off the scene a bit, as well. Here's an article from the LA Times talking about how although some galleries have closed, others have viewed this recession as a unique opportunity to expand. "Collectors continue to buy art in Los Angeles, dealers say. Some gallery owners are most successful at the high end of the market, but many potential buyers expect big discounts and set firm limits. For Louis Stern, the "reasonably priced" pieces that move cost less than $25,000. For Solomon, who watches for promising graduates of Southern California's art schools, $10,000 tends to be the cutoff point.
Distressing as the economic downturn is, many dealers say that their unwanted problems foster -- or force -- thinking creatively.
Here's Mary Leigh Cherry's philosophy: "I think you just get leaner and keep going for it. . . . You have to be smart and strategic, but you also have a chance to try different things. It's a time to not be so safe, because what do you have to lose?""Has anyone else noticed changes in their dealings with galleries?
|
|
|
Post by mokaneshu on Aug 4, 2009 19:51:59 GMT -8
I've also noticed that galleries which once would have given me that blank "what are you talking about" stare when I asked to be on the preview list now send me previews for shows I have no interest in whatsoever. Even galleries I've never bought a single painting from now send me multiple show reminders with links to the work. I've actually noticed this too. Sometimes in the past I felt like I had to pull teeth to get on certain galleries preview lists. I remember emailing one gallery and the resonse I got back felt like they were saying, "Really, I have to go through the trouble of putting your name on this list." as if they didn't really want to sell me anything anyways. The funny thing now, that exact same gallery puts me on a bunch of their lists that I never asked to be on. It's similar to what my company was doing when the recession started to hit, when times were good they figured people would naturally just come back on their own. But when times get lean, and things aren't selling, they reach out to anyone they have ever talked to in the past hoping that someone still has some money to spend. If anything it made me happy that the particular gallery that I was being snubbed by in the beginning is at least working more at being nice to their patrons. If the recession brings back customer service then I can't complain about that.
|
|
|
Post by chetzar on Aug 4, 2009 20:20:24 GMT -8
I've also noticed that galleries which once would have given me that blank "what are you talking about" stare when I asked to be on the preview list now send me previews for shows I have no interest in whatsoever. Even galleries I've never bought a single painting from now send me multiple show reminders with links to the work. I've actually noticed this too. Sometimes in the past I felt like I had to pull teeth to get on certain galleries preview lists. I remember emailing one gallery and the resonse I got back felt like they were saying, "Really, I have to go through the trouble of putting your name on this list." as if they didn't really want to sell me anything anyways. The funny thing now, that exact same gallery puts me on a bunch of their lists that I never asked to be on. It's similar to what my company was doing when the recession started to hit, when times were good they figured people would naturally just come back on their own. But when times get lean, and things aren't selling, they reach out to anyone they have ever talked to in the past hoping that someone still has some money to spend. If anything it made me happy that the particular gallery that I was being snubbed by in the beginning is at least working more at being nice to their patrons. If the recession brings back customer service then I can't complain about that. Very stupid of any gallery to blow somebody off that requests to be on a preview list. Collectors, customers and fans should always be treated like gold. You guys make our little world go round. I guess now some galleries are learning this simple rule the hard way. I have gotten many emails requesting prices of artwork and I always respond, even though most of them never pan out. A lot of them are kids (college age) and can't afford the work. But there have been a few that were able to buy a piece and have since become collectors. I love it when that happens. It's exciting to get somebody started collecting and to subsequently hear back how they can't stop! I feel like a drug dealer. ;D
|
|
cgriffin
New Member
too new to be clever
Posts: 32
|
Post by cgriffin on Aug 5, 2009 7:41:31 GMT -8
Such a good addiction, eh? Personally, as a freelance illustrator, my client flow hasn't slowed a bit. And that's been, at once, perplexing and a relief!
Have the prices on the paintings come down? I've heard it said you should never decrease your prices, but perhaps offer smaller paintings for the budget-conscious instead. I think it's perhaps a little easier for fine artists to flex with their pricing than illustrators/commercial artists. Am I waaaay off-base?
|
|