Records Christie's

[zarajara]

Сообщение от Sergei burly

A couple of trivial facts , and we have to figure out for what they pay 100 million dollars!
Well, what is it? His grandmother was Russian in Odessa ? Or does it live in the studio deaf beaver ? Danes with the Dutch love it .

 Maybe deaf beaver and two-headed crocodile . In any case, no one IMHO does not understand the pricing mechanism and no one understands why. Definitely not for the art , even if it is really like for like so much no one gives .
The most lousy when you try to explain to the students that they need to draw a lot of learning to do it well. Do you feel ... Well, in general feel stupid . That's just today was such a conversation . They say that in general there is no point to draw : it is thanks, Basquiat , Koons and others like them . And really - why? To what? Now it is a completely separate activity are not related to sales.
There is no relation price - quality, price - the talent , the price - skill. And you never know for the next time someone tells fortune finger .
142.5 million for Bacon ! he twice steeper Rubens ?
And it already seems simple Funny , when under this price someone starts to talk about how the artist is talented . It is understandable that it no longer has any value. And the fact that the art is not in any way related .
This is a purely psychological effect, where everyone called plain woman beautiful after a while you start to find her attractive , and only then on their own initiative seek in it something beautiful and funny thing - when you find <! - ~ 7 ~ ->

[Seriy]

As it is not very clear. Selling at auction is a legal income . And on inheritance tax Picasso created the Picasso Museum in Paris , and all the pictures.
Also completely unrealistic to pay 140 million in cash at the auction .
Only convenient for the legalization of the moment- if someone buys from a private individual for allegedly painting 5 thousand dollars and a few years later to sell for 500 thousand then receive legal income . But uncomfortable that neither Picasso nor Bacon can not show that he bought for 5 thousand
So, you have to buy little-known authors , and they, just no one buys.

Added after 9 minutes
zarajara, the relationship between price and quality, the talent is. Picasso's genius , Lucian Freud , technically amazing artist on the Internet to see, but alive staggering. We also have a Bacon and equipment , and the composition and meaning , and novelty .
Basquiat also not chosen at random , it is just a worthy successor to the post-war American expressionists.
Another thing , you're right , when it comes to which of the outstanding artists will sell 100 million What's the difference who? So you can head and share different bars , who will sell for 900 thousand different in talent from someone who for 850 thousand ? It is important that they differ both from those who sell for $ 800

[Hollandup]

Nah , do not enter " the inner circle " of course .. but in contact several times. Much was also not clear to me in this art world.

" white " income , gone shopping for a noble cause of modern art ( or exhibit where art is purchased in the form of remuneration) is almost sponsorship (! ) can easily turn into a "black" cash ( after a time on the contrary become "white " )

'm not going there , " warp " the art community ..

A million sales for the end product of a chain. Money is not a cash , but out of funds, and of offsherov . Yes, and just income ( hypothetically earned honestly ) is no longer in the store than art .. good option

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от zarajara

142.5 million for Bacon!
he twice steeper Rubens?

Good Rubens in museums, the market things his studio as a rule.

Added after 8 minutes
zarajara, in general, of course, wrong to compare today's market price for the artist of the XVII century and our contemporary (Bacon died 20 years ago, in '92).

It's like a broken: that Mozart died in poverty and put it in a reproach Madonna.

[zarajara]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzran

Good Rubens in museums, market things tend to his studio .

I like a bit of it. Prices this level , it is not the price of /for art . This is a pure abstraction . It's as if a picture was worth $ 1 - it's not its price , just a figure . Because in fact there is no reason not to , or for the other.
Well, let's not Rubens , and the same Goncharova, for 6 million as I can remember . 20 times better?
Seriy, genius , talent, yes please , you just announcing now very very abstract and theoretical concepts that are not directly transferred to the cost , especially in this price .
Warhol urinated on canvas - it's worth 10 million because he is a genius ?
It seems to me that this kind of game, which is already in itself almost without depending on the object. Rather there is a number of objects that are suitable to all believe that the game is going on around them.
But it is rather closer to the fetishism than money laundering , IMHO, then look in vain for the rational .

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от zarajara

The prices of this level, it is not the price of /for the Arts.
This is the pure abstraction.

And the amount of such a level for me is too " pure abstraction ".

[Аркадий]

Сообщение от zarajara

Maybe deaf beaver and two-headed crocodile . In any case, no one IMHO does not understand the pricing mechanism and no one understands why. Definitely not for the art , even if it is really like for like so much no one gives .
The most lousy when you try to explain to the students that they need to draw a lot of learning to do it well. Do you feel ... Well, in general feel stupid . That's just today was such a conversation . They say that in general there is no point to draw : it is thanks, Basquiat , Koons and others like them . And really - why? To what? Now it is a completely separate activity are not related to sales.
There is no relation price - quality, price - the talent , the price - skill. And you never know for the next time someone tells fortune finger .
142.5 million for Bacon ! he twice steeper Rubens ?
And it already seems simple Funny , when under this price someone starts to talk about how the artist is talented . It is understandable that it no longer has any value. And what has to art in general does not apply .

 All this art madness on the strength of 100 years. In the history of mankind for thousands of years has been a lot of strange to think of the example of the Dutch tulip pyramid and how it ended ? <! - ~ 6 ~ -> Time will tell ..

[Konstantin]

Сообщение от Arkady ; 2846451 "

In the history of mankind for thousands of years has been a lot of strange

And that 's strange , the majority of assets are now widely used as financial instruments , and oil (resources in the broad sense) and real estate ( apartment in the center of Moscow, or in Manhattan is more expensive than Muhosranske ) and KC .
A simple example , if the same triptych of Bacon put up with the start of the $ 1 million as it were wanting ?

[Аркадий]

Financial instruments are different, yes ..
With varying degrees of reliability in the long term, with varying liquidity, etc.
Financiers know better, but I am a supporter of conservative assets, gold, antiques ...

[Seriy]

IMHO, KC may be the most common type of financial instrument shares. There is a market , auction , it listed 5,000 artists, every day something is traded , the work passes from hand to hand physically or virtually. In the same way as on the exchange of shares will be garbage artists, blue chips , undervalued and overvalued artists . And KC has huge advantages over stocks , the paintings do not hang loans , as in any enterprise , the pictures can be cheaper, but they can not become zero, in the dust. Now that the shares of the company are the 19th century, which no longer exists , kakih-nibud Russian railways popular asset in Russia in the late 19th century ? Zero. A picture of any Russian artists of the late 19th century ? and if the top-end ?
And it seems to me , to all of that and goes, auctions now skim the cream in the form of huge commissions. If KC were traded with a pay-per- transaction, like stocks , 6-7 dollars ? - Then we would have had a stormy market. The problem of counterfeiting will be decided one way or another on-line Portfolio of each artist and a data bank owners. No similar problems of counterfeit shares of Gazprom ?