Art Moscow 13

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Konstantin

And to those that exceed 10 000 $, the main question for so many, and whether to grow further.

Yes, not just to answer such questions, I understand. : D

[Vladimir]

Target should be honest. For example: you get is not an investment asset with reasonable risk and predictability, and a prestigious consumer goods, which is intended to emphasize your status and deliver aesthetic pleasure. For this, and pay. In addition, in the commodity and laid lottery potential. In the best of circumstances the price of any product may grow in value many times over.

[Физик]

Сообщение от Konstantin

interested in modern artists in the age, I determine for itself, up to 50 years. And the prices at which up to 10 000 $. And for those that exceed 10 000 $, the main question for so many, and whether to grow further.

Here age may be a little more, because "sixties", then those who attended, many are working full swing and exhibited. Many artists are not included in any group, their ideas were, but now, when the market and already there was talk that we should sell various art ... And yes prices, rising. The fact that in 2003 was worth $ 800 now more than twice ... Even the simple themes, still lifes, etc.

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Physics

Here age may be a little more, because "sixties", then those who attended, many are working full swing and exhibited.

Job sixties already living on antique rules. There are statistics and the auction and place in art has already been defined. Risks of investing in the first row of artists unofficial art is not so much. This is another topic. Unfortunately, the work of the sixties is expensive and not directed at consumers. The price of issue is usually 50-100 thousand dollars

[Konstantin]

And yes prices, rising. The fact that in 2003 was worth $ 800 now more than twice ... Even the simple themes, still lifes, etc.

No, because in the "general" does not respond properly, let us names.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Konstantin

Let us with the names.

Here, with the names:
http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showthread.php?t=42445
: D

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Vladimir

Unfortunately, the work of the sixties is expensive and not directed at consumers. The price of issue is usually 50-100 thousand dollars

Well, why? You can buy a cheaper 50 000 $. And even a very good picture. Especially now ...

[Konstantin]

You can buy cheaper and 50 000 $

As I understand it wishes - it is to buy the work in the area of $ 1.3 tons, followed by growth. This is not graphic, and full-sized oil. At the same time that the eye and pleasing, and the price rise.

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Konstantin

As I understand it wishes - it is to buy the work in the area of $ 1.3 tons, followed by growth. This is not graphic, and full-sized oil. At the same time that the eye and pleasing, and the price increased.

5 - 10 t $ and above, I think, really. The sixties is not just first names. While I think that first and now you can buy cheaper than $ 50 tons. I myself have sold more cheaply, even before the crisis.

[K-Maler]

Сообщение от Vladimir

Target to be honest. For example: you get is not an investment asset with reasonable risk and predictability, and a prestigious consumer goods, which is intended to emphasize your status and deliver aesthetic pleasure.

Wrong is separated. In art, everything is possible, if it is art. You are trying to introduce the term "prestige, status, defining it as a negative, like crafts ... Bouquets Van Huysum, for example, were very prestigious, especially against the "ideological" religious paintings of those times. But they were and are "within art." Now the same thing, no "commercial art" is art or not art. But art has always been a status and commercial, it was always someone else paid. Investing should be in the industry, and to understand the details (the art of it or not) at the seminar can not teach.