The calf in formaldehyde for 19 million USD It goes without saying ...

[Евгений]

"The Golden Calf" by Damien Hirst sold for 10.3 million pounds
On Monday, during the first trading day work of British artist Damien Hirst at Sotheby's in London sold 56 lots totaling more than 70.5 million pounds (127.2 million dollars), reported at the auction house.
The greatest interest was the work of "Beauty is always in my thoughts, or the Golden Calf, which was established in 2008. It is an aquarium filled with formaldehyde, which is bull with hooves of gold and a gold disc between the horns. In a preliminary assessment of 8 to 12 million "Golden Calf" went for 10 million 345 тысяч 250 pounds (18.6 million dollars). A new record prices for works by Hirst, said the agency France Presse.

Tiger shark in formaldehyde called The Kingdom ", previously estimated 4 to 6 million pounds, was sold for 9 миллионов 561 тысячу 250 pounds (17.3 million dollars). In total, during the first half hour auction buyers purchased works of Hirst worth more than 43.5 million pounds (78.3 million dollars).

Hurst put up for sale 223 the lot, reminds agency Bloomberg. Bidding works very wealthy British artist at Sotheby's will continue on Tuesday. Judging by the results of the first day, the proceeds of sale significantly exceeds 65 million pounds, which was originally expected to auction house.

[iosif]

Eugene,
If anyone thinks this is art - is fully entitled. Just as I have every right not to consider it art.

[Vladimir]

Excellent result. Auction waited with bated breath. He was supposed to show how the crisis affected the market of art. It turned out that everything is normal. And dealers were in a rage: from a business perspective is a complete rudeness do the work directly from the studio to auction, bypassing the gallery. Undermines the foundations of the market. But Hurst - krutan, he these rules the drum, and all auction dude not valerian drinking and playing pool Respect.

[fross]

Somehow, I remain confident that, with this auction is not clear. It will take some time as a pop-up conspiracy of the auction house with the author of these masterpieces. Surely the real figures much more modest: to pay for their services came to 5.8 million who were actual sales, well, and the author of several million perepalo plus fans excitement and fury of the persecutors.
The most expensive lots could be as it were purchased by the same zagatochnymi investors, and the record skull. As the lots on which there were no applicants. Gallery selling its inventory will be easier to mollify recalcitrant buyers, they say exactly the same at the auction but bought as much. Not only the fact that it is not that same.

[iosif]

fross,
would like to hear your opinion on related questions. The above option you probably can be considered as cheating the public.
And if you put up for auction the work agreed in advance with this buyer of its guaranteed purchases (not for the record, of course, amount)? I think it will be and ethically, and the auction history can do. How is your opinion on this score?
I mean the artist A gallery with good sales, but with missing auction history.

[fross]

Сообщение от iosif

fross,
would like to hear your opinion on related questions. The above option you probably can be considered as cheating the public.
And if you put up for auction the work agreed in advance with this buyer of its guaranteed purchases (not for the record, of course, amount)? I think it will be and ethically, and the auction history can do. How is your opinion on this score?
I mean the artist A gallery with good sales, but with missing auction history.

Ethical issues in business is flirting, he's essentially legalized fraud. In case you described the risk there is only one - the other owners of the works can start to sell them en masse after a successful auction sale. So you should be prepared to buy them. So if you want to raise prices and increase the potential demand, then it should be done gradually over several years. And certainly better than one.

[Wladzislaw]

Сообщение от fross

In the case you described the risk there is only one - the other owners of the works can start to sell them en masse after a successful auction sale. So you should be prepared to buy them. So if you want to raise prices and increase the potential demand, then it should be done gradually over several years. And certainly better than one.

In fact, there are several problems. Discontinuous growth is not particularly profitable. Since stocks are not always possible to sell at great prices, people are suddenly willing to pay several times more. And in a small can, it will undermine the market an artist. Therefore, the aforesaid, with potentially high prices for work, can sit without selling and without money. Permanent sustained profitable growth for this reason.

[uriart]

Interesting!
And how many would be sold to Hearst himself in a jar of formaldehyde?
I think that the purchasers would be found ...
It is time to make him a drug! Such a great artist!

[artcol]

Сообщение от uriart

interesting!
And how many would be sold to Hearst himself in a jar of formaldehyde?
I think that the purchasers would be found ...
It is time to make him a drug! Such a great artist!

Good idea! Presumably Hurst (via E) be interested. Something like futures

Shl A, Ants Millikan has already outstripped the ...

[LCR]

Сообщение от iosif

And if you put up for auction the work agreed in advance with this buyer of its guaranteed purchases (not for the record, of course, amount)?

Wow Joseph invented America

People and do - expose the work to tender, raise prices (to record). If someone begins to bargain, to concede him a job, but if not - redeem it yourself. And so - to the finish.

One of the rules of an art dealer (professionals will correct me if I'm wrong, but I have specific examples), unwinding of the artist - never exhibited work at the auction, if you are not ready to buy it myself.