I wish I could address that your phrase to some of our members of the forum, guess who?
:)

Of course, no one who will be there to argue. But in buying pharmaceutical herstni no visionary there is none - a collector buys a "ready" Hirst and Koons, they "made" other people (who has since had to resell them). What is already here message? As they say, about to jump out of the question, how would peel :D

P.S. In fact, the collection - it's not what you think :)
Collection - is much more expensive than mechanical cluster purchased item (see property Berger /Saint-Laurent), it is valuable coherence, completeness of coverage of interest period or genre, originality, choice and, of course, a real collector collects what you like.
If you forget about it now, it does not mean that the principle of making the collections has changed, it means that these collectors is not enough - you know, like trams :)

Dearest LCR, do not judge Vladimir so strictly. First, do not forget about the name of this site. Secondly, I think that collectors who assigns goal - to invest correctly in time may well turn into nostoyaschih collectors in the same sense of where you're talking about. Third, if we reject imposed on us sovermennogo understanding of art as "contemporary art" (the rest is, therefore, not relevant), then it is all right poses. Joy of discovering a true artist and that is important too, the process of persuasion in the other - this is hardly what one can replace

Oh no, do not think I do not judge and do not forget :)

But recognize that from a purely investment point of view, buying the well hyped contemporary artists - a risky venture, will not give examples, they all know.

Now something else: the very "social shopping" leads to the fact that the new collection is precisely because of such artists as the new rich want recognition immediately, and buying another nobody famous artist, the collector puts the future: Read the life story of Paul Guillaume, a look of the collection (http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showth...%D0%BE%D0%BC): six Cezanne, Renoir fifteen, eight Rousseau, Matisse seventeen, eighteen Modigliani, nine, Soutine, Utrillo twelve and over thirty Deren. We admire, can not help but admire? But we admire today, and at a time when he bought these things a lot more people slyly grinned and mentally spit finger to his temple.

A more recent and modest example: a few days before our departure Lena Talochkin borrowed money, went and bought a Roginsky about 20 works (which if anyone in FIG were not needed). Now the situation has changed somewhat.

And another thing: we know about Matisse and Soutine from the Collection Guillaume. Here, history has confirmed the correctness of the collector. But in the collection of William were both artists and remaining unclaimed or those whose success was ephemeral (Marie Laurence). Here you are two sides of one coin: the prize collector for the superiority of his tastes, the risk of a mistake, for which he is the belief that superiority. But both sides of the coin demand independence in the judgments and developed a taste for what can not expect from people who buy art to enhance their social Standing :)

Yes, probably, but we can not and does not recognize that buying neraskruchennogo modern artist - the company no less, and perhaps more risky. By the way, say, here's a recent example - just returned from the opening of the exhibition of Oleg Yakovlev Lazarev Gallery (you know it). Name in Russia quite neraskruchennoe, although it is promising. Whether there exist investors on its share? The big question ... (Tomorrow will try to lay out a report about the opening).

But there is no way for the new rich do not - 99%after some time say: No, it bryuliki collected and will be right, but 1%- that's for the sake of this interest and tries to let Vladimir, quite naturally couching their calls in a form appropriate content.

What are you so angry at Marie - a very nice artist for blondes, incidentally, is not so cheap. And as for improving social services. status, really, let them buy Hirst. The good news is that the man is proud of Hearst, not rings

So do they.

Yes, the characters are, of course, colorful.
But I think that until they are ripe Hirst ...
:)

fabosch, Rings, it is not even yesterday, day before yesterday is the day! Just "something" No point nelepodorogoe, transient (perishable) and show a "real" status quo ... There's big, and there is no investment ... (and for Ponte) (IMHO)

Added after 1 minutes
spigo, and where there is (and who are they?)

Added after 6 minutes

fabosch, not mature enough (and mature).
Those who bought Hirst behave modestly and gray (never say that telenochek formalin-house "grazing "...)

That's Nate, you are luckily not caught.
For me, this picture is quite familiar to a dashing 90-93 m. :mad:

?
(It goes without saying), "Bratka" in the law?

This is what they are so earnest equips?
And now?

What is common sense does not fit ...