[deleted]
Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
71–80 of 152 posts
Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
“When information is cheap, attention becomes expensive.” ― James Gleick We've come to a point where we're inundated with everyone trying to push their own agenda that it is difficult to both sort the BS out, while also becoming impossible to really appeal/reach out to the people who would appreciate and benefit from what one has to offer. >I think in the next years we will see rise of companies that help customers m…
> Case in point - is the 'undisclosed buyer' really benefiting $450.3 mil worth? Of course not! They are benefiting from whatever the difference is between $450.3M and what they expect to sell it for in the future, discounted to present value. Which means they might either expect to make money on it, or at least not lose too much on it. For some people, buying art aren't isn't too different from buying stocks... exce…
That's right. There are certain luxury purchases that are not about spending money, but rather are a reasonably safe way to park cash.
Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
#73Art is supposed to inspire our inner eye for beauty. Seeing the 450 million dollar price tag, i feel an unusual amount of anger, disgust, revulsion at the ostentatiousness, excesses and brazen corruption of the rich and of the fine art world. I feel more disgust at this than i would at the usual gaudy, blingy excesses (like gold-plated cars and mansions) of the tasteless wealthy. I suppose good art can also seek to inspire these feelings, even if the price tag has only cheapened the actual artwork in my eye. I wonder how the millions of the poor, nameless, talented artists around the world feel about this.
A portrait of Jesus Christ of questionable origin and authenticity being sold by a Russian fertilizer magnate for 450 million usd. Says quite a bit about the times we live in, Doesn't it?
edit: Sorry for my salty tirade; Just sharing a viewpoint.
Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
#74Marketing wins everywhere. Paintings, IT, open source projects, startups, everything. It seems to be responsible for 90%+ value in worryingly many cases. It may be getting worse. I think in the next few years we will see rise of companies that help customers make decent choices that are not solely based on advertising. We have many user review based solutions but it just doesn't work with most things (not even touchi…
I don't see how the value of a Da Vinci painting is a triumph of marketing. If marketing was ruling, I'd expect a contemporary piece of junk to be higher valued.
As it is, I think you have something of undeniable, a classical part of European and world civilization, given a monetary value that seems a bit absurd.
And seems more easily explainable in the way that commodity bubble can be explained - combine investors wanting something guaranteed to be worth something and investors following trends into bubble territory. All exacerbated by the general trend to print money when the financial system is under threat (so money goes into stuff that seem "of certain value").
Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ponzi scheme is a scam where buyer is fooled into buying something that has no value. Here if the painting is used as an apparatus to move money, it becomes sort of a currency to move $450 million dollars. As long as the big money movers honor its price it could be used for such purpose. Almost like Bitcoins!
Some ideas are ancient. The painting doesn't have to move. The money doesn't have to move. We just all agree to assign it to someone else. "Because these stones are too large to move, buying an item with one simply involves agreeing that the ownership has changed. As long as the transaction is recorded in the oral history, it will now be owned by the person it is passed on to and no physical movement of the stone is…
The painting doesn't have to move.
Sadly, this appears to be true. Tons of art just sits in secure warehouses like gold bars, never seen by anyone. https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-freeports-oper... (I've never heard of Rybolovlev before, but his name comes up in this article as well.)
Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
#76Marketing wins everywhere. Paintings, IT, open source projects, startups, everything. It seems to be responsible for 90%+ value in worryingly many cases. It may be getting worse. I think in the next few years we will see rise of companies that help customers make decent choices that are not solely based on advertising. We have many user review based solutions but it just doesn't work with most things (not even touchi…
I don't see how the value of a Da Vinci painting is a triumph of marketing. If marketing was ruling, I'd expect a contemporary piece of junk to be higher valued. As it is, I think you have something of undeniable, a classical part of European and world civilization, given a monetary value that seems a bit absurd. And seems more easily explainable in the way that commodity bubble can be explained - combine investors w…
The DaVinci brand has been promoted for centuries.
Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
#77What is interesting is that if this painting was attributed to someone unknown, its price would have fallen off the cliff even though there would have been zero material change in goods that buyer would be receiving. This says a lot about our hero worship tendencies. People are going to look very hard to see what is so special about this painting.
> This says a lot about our hero worship tendencies.
Does it? Or does it say more about its value as being incredibly rare, and one of only a few Leonardi paintings.
You understanding the value of scarcity right?
Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
“When information is cheap, attention becomes expensive.” ― James Gleick We've come to a point where we're inundated with everyone trying to push their own agenda that it is difficult to both sort the BS out, while also becoming impossible to really appeal/reach out to the people who would appreciate and benefit from what one has to offer. >I think in the next years we will see rise of companies that help customers m…
> Case in point - is the 'undisclosed buyer' really benefiting $450.3 mil worth? Of course not! They are benefiting from whatever the difference is between $450.3M and what they expect to sell it for in the future, discounted to present value. Which means they might either expect to make money on it, or at least not lose too much on it. For some people, buying art aren't isn't too different from buying stocks... exce…
>>Of course not! They are benefiting from whatever the difference is between $450.3M and what they expect to sell it for in the future, discounted to present value.
You're writing about him, so he's benefiting. He knows and everyone in his social circle know that he has a painting of DaVinci. His children's friends etc etc. After securing our daily bread and then some, we do things for bragging, pleasure..
Not knowing the buyer, it may also be a way to move cash outa his corrupt country (Russia, China, Saudi Arabia...). 'Whatever happens, I have 2 apartments in NYC, one in Miami and a DaVinci painting i can sell'
Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
#79I think the buyer probably had a net worth at least ≥ $4.5 billion (I wouldn't spend more than 10% of my wealth on a single painting.) According to https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/ there are only ~380 persons that would qualify. Any one knows who is the buyer?
You wouldn't spend more than 10% of your wealth on a Da Vinci?
Of course not. Most people would not. I wouldn't spend that much no matter how much I had.
Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have $400 million in funds whose origin you can't account for, you move it into some opaque account to buy the painting for that $400 million. The buyer (you) remains "unknown" but now you have $400 million that you can account for, since it came from selling a painting. In the art auction world, either or both sides can remain as anonymous as they wish, which makes this whole scheme possible.
But how do you explain your acquisition of the $400MM painting when the taxman comes knocking?
You don't. Tax man cares not how you bought it, only that tax is fully paid when sold.