Records Christie's

[Сергей Дородный]

Сообщение от bykinist

It seems to me that the market for contemporary art is an attempt to create a new segment of the economy like the dotcom 90s . Everyone knows the outcome of the event. Of course contemporary art market is not going anywhere , but the bubble inevitably burst, and there will be a serious price adjustment . In this connection it is interesting example of Japanese investors and their passion for art investment in 80 years , sadly ended . Given the location of the Japanese economy in the top four of the world , the activity of the Japanese contemporary art market is insignificant when compared with the U.S., China , and Brazil. The dog ate and still digesting .

An interesting analysis . Almost - a detailed explanation of why the picture is not a commodity in the narrow sense of the word (which I tried to do in " Art as a commodity " ) .

And here's a piece of me with percents do not agree.
Why do you think that only now zapytayut someone to make him a new segment of the economy? Arguments against:
1. For " Sunflowers " by Van Gogh had been paid more than 40 (? Feel like now specify a number) ) million in the mid 80s . Also not seeds.
2 . Large institutions art market before settling for the position except " shops "?
4 . The volume of long- och art market . decent. A small, but the sector .
5 . No one in the fast profit from buying the painting for 100-140 million can not seriously expect . To add decently , any picture of " rest up " for about 10 years at least .
5 . Those who do you try to do it , he out of pocket "extra" 40 million (or the entire amount of 140 million (with Bacon ) ) - takes to raskochegarivaniya ?
6. Generally in a systemic crisis, invest such sums in pictures of 10-15 years in a business project ? Obviously, the more likely it is saving money if it's only money.
I am a very romantic , I believe that the main motive of the purchase of pictures - this is love. (Although in the case of Bacon is not clear to me ) .