Показать сообщение отдельно
Старый 23.12.2011, 12:05 Язык оригинала: Русский       #4
Гуру
 
Аватар для Seriy
 
Регистрация: 26.03.2009
Адрес: Москва-Киев
Сообщений: 7,078
Спасибо: 4,985
Поблагодарили 6,613 раз(а) в 2,177 сообщениях
Репутация: 12970
По умолчанию

such a comparison is not clear for whom intended , with the shares of the players are not idiots , must be regarded as a commission when buying and selling , one must consider the costs of storage and insurance costs (purchase of shares are equal to zero) , and we must compare comparable - if the overall index, the general index of art market with the general index of the shares, if the most successful artists , from the most successful company shares . I guess in all parameters paintings lose.
 When Lloyd Weber sold his Picasso bought twenty years ago , I figured that if he invested in anything other than pictures, it would be more vyigrashe .
 In painting , there are other benefits , short-lived stock , compared with the paintings . After 100 years, 90 %of companies will disappear, and there is no Picasso .
__________________
художник Ixygon - http://artnow.ru/ru/gallery/3/9765/picture/0/0.html



Seriy вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Эти 6 пользователя(ей) сказали Спасибо Seriy за это полезное сообщение:
artcol (23.12.2011), Fed (23.12.2011), NATA NOVA (23.12.2011), Peter (23.12.2011), Samvel (23.12.2011), Wladzislaw (28.12.2011)