Fine Art from the investment point of view
 

In addition to exorbitant prices at the Salon was very interesting, in my opinion, from the investment point of view of things.

Insanely beautiful, Nicolas de Staël 1954-1955, on the stand Schmitt. The latter asked him 2 million euro. Excellent price, one of the best works in the creation of de Stael. The investment potential is huge. She even now should be worth around 3 million euros. The reason for the price I think Schmitt is the liquidity problem.

Three works on the stand Tsalkova gallery "Minotaur." For each of them asked for 55 thousand euro. I think if you haggle, you could reduce to 45. Work is interesting, bright and, in my opinion, quite liquid. A beautiful object for investment.

2,8 million euros asked for Kandinsky 26 years. The work of museum value, worth the money train, probably more. Again, the problems are, in order to find the lover of his work, ie issue of liquidity. It appeared at auction, would probably have found a buyer. Although with 100%certainty that I can not.

Pictures: de Stael, Tselkov, Tselkov, Tselkov, Kandinsky.

Two works by modern Chinese. Yes, this is modern art. Yes, they are very big money. But I believe that the potential they have very big. Now the Chinese are actively buying his art from European collections, are trying to restore cultural heritage. I do not think that all the works of contemporary Chinese investment attractive, but it was these two: Ling Jian, and Yue Minjun (Chinese laughing) - will grow in the near future very much. We asked for them for 450 thousand dollars. Do not be surprised if by the end of this year, one million for each of these works would be consistent with the market. Generally, the Chinese contemporary art has a very high investment potential, but it is very risky. Roughly speaking, out of 100 artists who will grow and will remain only 10, but their prices will increase tenfold. And ten million of them will not be the limit.

In general, is something to think about for the purchase as an investment.

why, if de Stael so good, it will not sell at auction? and price, as you say, it is normal?

and now from all those you listed, who, in your opinion, most will grow in price?

Meister, I was not at the cabin, as well as many nemoskvichi, therefore, looking kindly laid out your photos, but without knowing the size, technology, year of creation, it is difficult to conclude whether a particular purchase.

Unfortunately the size I can only say to the eye. What is your interest?
but the dates can say everything except the Chinese. de Staël 1954-1955, Tsalkova 1970, Kandinsky, 1926. Appliances last three - oil.

Price of Nicholas de Stael
 

Two million - a little expensive for such work, although it is good.

In June 2008, at the auction in Paris work "LA SEINE A PARIS" 1954, oil on canvas in the same style was sold for 530 000 euros well, plus interest.

In my opinion, is that at the Salon was stronger and more striking)

It seems to me, Meister rights that now turns out that de Stael huge potential.
I will particularly dwell on the fact that in my opinion, this is one of the greatest artists of the 20 th century, but 10 years ago it was thought that he was already very expensive. Works on the market came out very little, and they generally cost several orders of magnitude higher than that of its counterparts in the Second School of Paris (Polyakov, Lanskoy, etc.) - quite deservedly.
But now it turns out that this breakneck growth of the market it is practically not affected. It seems that Russian buyers ignore it, which is also clear - much more advantageous to untwist Lansky, whose work is not hard to find, or even pull artists out of nothingness (Baranov-Rossine, and now Shapoval) - itself a remarkable phenomenon, and is welded to the mediators more .

However, when collecting art collection mid-20 th century or even the art of the 20 th century as a whole, we can dispense with the names that I listed in the preceding paragraph, then without de Stael, this collection will be flawed.

LCR, nothing you Baranova with Shapoval one bench sat, totally different values ... And specified that de Stael only need 50-ies.

"that without de Stael, this collection is flawed"

Through this agreement in full.