how to invest $ million - Форум по искусству и инвестициям в искусство

Artdealer · 27-05-2008, 13:39

I was so interested. Forum has existed for some time, written a lot of thinking about investing in art, about profitability. But, if in practice? Even let them virtually? Suppose you have a million dollars, where would you have to invest and for how long?

Сергеич · 27-05-2008, 15:59

Two years ago the answer would be unequivocal - in the sixties. We need to think about.

Vladimir · 27-05-2008, 22:13

Nothing in the two years is not changed, think nothing. With this budget line for investment only to the sixties. Per million with a certain luck will buy 5.8 first-class canvases representatives "other art" of the first magnitude with high investment potential. Sergeyitch, and what you have been offered? Why doubted?

Сергеич · 27-05-2008, 23:42

The sixties, which cost two /five years ago, 20 000-100 000 $ now in the hundreds, and under a million.
Hence the question:
- Will also grow rapidly?
Most likely on individual artists, rather than on the phenomenon in general.
Maybe easier to buy a Picasso, graphics, or that there is enough.
At least get to "falshak" complicated provenance, etc. - will be understandable. And since the sixties is the most painful issue.

Vladimir · 28-05-2008, 10:59

Sergeyitch, Picasso - a bad example, he basically can not grow as fast as the "venture" artists, favorites emerging market. Picasso is unlikely to buy for speculative purposes, at best maintain or slightly increase. And for the sake of prestige. Considerably faster than the market he is unlikely to grow. "Fire", ie a sharp rise in price considerably faster than the market can only things that contain risks and therefore undervalued. I'm not talking about the risks of origin (authenticity), but about the risks of recognition, market career. If you guess an artist, you can expect "a shot." Among the sixties still have such. Among modern art have names, but there are too high risks. Among the antique vystrelevshih artists can recall the German and Austrian ekspressonistov - some pictures can be seen at the Salon now in the arena.

Vladimir · 28-05-2008, 11:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sergeyitch

of the sixties, which cost two /five years ago, 20 000-100 000 $ now in the hundreds, and under a million.
Hence the question:
- Will also grow rapidly?

To the sixties grew at the same pace - it is extremely unlikely. And this is normal. At that rate, you can grow under two conditions: 1) underestimation of 2) growth with low initial base. Option to make the ruble ten rubles was always much easier than a hundred thousand to a million.

qwerty · 28-05-2008, 11:05

Sergeyitch, I do not understand what kind of "sick" question you say, in my sixties with no issues at all there. And deal with them much easier than with most other areas, and from the investment point of view, they are still one of the most interesting segments of the market. And, interestingly, is a global trend: the Western "sixties" - today one of the fastest growing markets.

Meister · 28-05-2008, 22:35

I would invest in undervalued western artists, in some fauvists example. and agreed with previous speakers about the sixties, there are still a lot of names on which you can earn decent. Much more than a Picasso, in my opinion. more promising artists in the Russian art I do not see. I'm not talking about superpuperpervoklassnyh things avant-garde.

Евгений · 07-06-2008, 05:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Artdealer

so I was curious. Forum has existed for some time, written a lot of thinking about investing in art, about profitability. But, if in practice? Even let them virtually? Suppose you have a million dollars, where would you have to invest and for how long?

Without hesitation, would invest in Gerasimov AM, Konchalovsky, GerasimovaS.V., Plastova, Yakovlev VN, Baksheeva, Kupriyanov, Daineka, Romadina, Juon .. well, a dozen more names, in large paintings to 1950g.Poka You can buy the work of these authors to be 10-30 times cheaper than they are actually ...

Konstantin · 07-06-2008, 08:45

=942840 & m []=939420 & m []=939440 & m []=939460 & m []=939480 & m []=939500 & m []=960740 & m [ ]=958360"] http://artinvestment.ru/auctions/866/records.html?&m []=942840 & m []=939420 & m []=939440 & m []=939460 & m []=939480 & m []=939500 & m []=960740 & m []=958360

This is a link to Plastova, 10 th and 11 th of this month, his paintings will be sold at auction. Let's look at the results.
Eugene
If you can will predict the sales price.
It will be interesting to compare.

27-05-2008, 13:39	Original language: Russian #1
Artdealer Местный Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 191 Thanks: 102 Thanked 92 Times in 46 Posts Reputation: 87	how to invest $ million I was so interested. Forum has existed for some time, written a lot of thinking about investing in art, about profitability. But, if in practice? Even let them virtually? Suppose you have a million dollars, where would you have to invest and for how long?

27-05-2008, 22:13	Original language: Russian #3
Vladimir Гуру Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 8,085 Thanks: 3,353 Thanked 25,444 Times in 5,540 Posts Reputation: 23525	Thinking nothing Nothing in the two years is not changed, think nothing. With this budget line for investment only to the sixties. Per million with a certain luck will buy 5.8 first-class canvases representatives "other art" of the first magnitude with high investment potential. Sergeyitch, and what you have been offered? Why doubted?

27-05-2008, 15:59	Original language: Russian #2
Сергеич Авторитет Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 940 Thanks: 66 Thanked 1,047 Times in 392 Posts Blog Entries: 1 Reputation: 624	Two years ago the answer would be unequivocal - in the sixties. We need to think about.

27-05-2008, 23:42	Original language: Russian #4
Сергеич Авторитет Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 940 Thanks: 66 Thanked 1,047 Times in 392 Posts Blog Entries: 1 Reputation: 624	The sixties, which cost two /five years ago, 20 000-100 000 $ now in the hundreds, and under a million. Hence the question: - Will also grow rapidly? Most likely on individual artists, rather than on the phenomenon in general. Maybe easier to buy a Picasso, graphics, or that there is enough. At least get to "falshak" complicated provenance, etc. - will be understandable. And since the sixties is the most painful issue.

28-05-2008, 10:59	Original language: Russian #5
Vladimir Гуру Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 8,085 Thanks: 3,353 Thanked 25,444 Times in 5,540 Posts Reputation: 23525	Sergeyitch, Picasso - a bad example, he basically can not grow as fast as the "venture" artists, favorites emerging market. Picasso is unlikely to buy for speculative purposes, at best maintain or slightly increase. And for the sake of prestige. Considerably faster than the market he is unlikely to grow. "Fire", ie a sharp rise in price considerably faster than the market can only things that contain risks and therefore undervalued. I'm not talking about the risks of origin (authenticity), but about the risks of recognition, market career. If you guess an artist, you can expect "a shot." Among the sixties still have such. Among modern art have names, but there are too high risks. Among the antique vystrelevshih artists can recall the German and Austrian ekspressonistov - some pictures can be seen at the Salon now in the arena.

28-05-2008, 11:05	Original language: Russian #7
qwerty Гуру Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,213 Thanks: 1,422 Thanked 7,269 Times in 947 Posts Reputation: 5499	Sergeyitch, I do not understand what kind of "sick" question you say, in my sixties with no issues at all there. And deal with them much easier than with most other areas, and from the investment point of view, they are still one of the most interesting segments of the market. And, interestingly, is a global trend: the Western "sixties" - today one of the fastest growing markets.

28-05-2008, 22:35	Original language: Russian #8
Meister Гуру Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Москва Posts: 2,576 Thanks: 1,512 Thanked 2,996 Times in 1,037 Posts Reputation: 1814	I would invest in undervalued western artists, in some fauvists example. and agreed with previous speakers about the sixties, there are still a lot of names on which you can earn decent. Much more than a Picasso, in my opinion. more promising artists in the Russian art I do not see. I'm not talking about superpuperpervoklassnyh things avant-garde.

07-06-2008, 08:45	Original language: Russian #10
Konstantin Гуру Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 9,415 Thanks: 1,532 Thanked 29,854 Times in 6,714 Posts Blog Entries: 10 Reputation: 27272	=942840 & m []=939420 & m []=939440 & m []=939460 & m []=939480 & m []=939500 & m []=960740 & m [ ]=958360"] http://artinvestment.ru/auctions/866/records.html?&m []=942840 & m []=939420 & m []=939440 & m []=939460 & m []=939480 & m []=939500 & m []=960740 & m []=958360 This is a link to Plastova, 10 th and 11 th of this month, his paintings will be sold at auction. Let's look at the results. Eugene If you can will predict the sales price. It will be interesting to compare.