Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 152 posts

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#91

Post by mynewtb »

sporkologist wrote: post #89
comboy wrote: post #17

Marketing 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…

> Marketing In this case: Painting for sale; of Jesus; by Leonardo da Vinci. I don't think you can cram more important Western culture into one object.

What is culture but successful marketing though.

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#92

Post by mm4 »

ctdonath wrote: post #80
null0pointer wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

if that was the case you might just keep the initial money and not launder them...

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#93

Post by ireadfaces »

Is it too late to ask that how such art is valued? Of course I read about the theory that it depends on art dealers and a lot of things, less to do with quality of art. As quality of art is subjective after a certain point.

Just thought someone could guide me.

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#94

Post by cepth »

ireadfaces wrote: post #93

Is it too late to ask that how such art is valued? Of course I read about the theory that it depends on art dealers and a lot of things, less to do with quality of art. As quality of art is subjective after a certain point. Just thought someone could guide me.

https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/01/e...

> About half of the market is accounted for by sales through dealers, either directly from the artist’s studio (the “primary market”) or by reselling a work that has already been bought once (the “secondary market”) and which is now being sold on, often with several commissions being paid to intermediaries along the way. The other half of the art market is made up of sales by auction, a system that claims to be open and competitive, with both artwork and potential bidders being visible to all. In reality, it can be as secretive as the dealing world, with complex financial arrangements and discounted commissions being not uncommon.

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#95

Post by _Codemonkeyism »

ireadfaces wrote: post #93

Is it too late to ask that how such art is valued? Of course I read about the theory that it depends on art dealers and a lot of things, less to do with quality of art. As quality of art is subjective after a certain point. Just thought someone could guide me.

http://aswathdamodaran.blogspot.de/2017/10/the-bitcoin-boom-... about value vs pricing vs asset.

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#96

Post by sporkologist »

mynewtb wrote: post #91
sporkologist wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Marketing In this case: Painting for sale; of Jesus; by Leonardo da Vinci. I don't think you can cram more important Western culture into one object.

What is culture but successful marketing though.

I'd more characterize "culture" as "stuff you have to do to stay within polite society". Whether that's marketing, I'm not sure.

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#97

Post by acjohnson55 »

alehul wrote: post #86
joe_the_user wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

From the article: > Christie’s marketing campaign was perhaps unprecedented in the art world; it was the first time the auction house went so far as to enlist an outside agency to advertise the work. Christie’s also released a video that included top executives pitching the painting to Hong Kong clients as “the holy grail of our business” and likening it to “the discovery of a new planet.” Christie’s called the work…

Be that as it may, there are very few Da Vinci paintings in the world, even fewer for sale, and the man's cultural clout is still riding high a decade after Dan Brown's book. Once you're in the rarefied space of having "tres commas", you gotta set yourself apart somehow.

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#98

Post by malloryerik »

ktta wrote: post #26
comboy wrote: post #17

Marketing 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…

“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…

I'm happy that NY Times bought Wirecutter -- two outfits with integrity.

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#99

Post by evgen »

mynegation wrote: post #22

"the old masters market is contracting, because of limited supply" Can someone familiar with the art market comment on how that works? That seems contrary to what I know about markets. I mean, I understand that the volume is contracting, but the context is that such "[high] price is remarkable".

There are never going to be any new old masters and because shit happens the supply is slowly shrinking over time as various works leave the market due to museum acquisition, accident, war, and theft. The demand side of the equation however is growing as various new money entrants to the art market compete for this diminishing supply. The demand side is also boosted by the fact that art like this has now become something of a financial tool for capital flight, corporations, investment funds and criminal interests.

Re: Leonardo Da Vinci Painting Sells for $450.3M, Shattering Auction Records

#100

Post by zhte415 »

onewaystreet wrote: post #48
dchuk wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's...kinda weird, right? The before and after are clearly two different paintings. Hair is different, mouth is different...I would assume, as a layman, that restoring a piece of art the goal should keep it looking nearly the same just cleaning it up and removing damage. This looks like they just straight up painted over it.

Christie's has more details here: http://www.christies.com/features/Salvator-Mundi-timeline-86... That BBC quote is a bit misleading. The photo on the left is what the painting looked like before restoration, not what it looked like when it was originally painted. Parts of it had been damaged and repainted over multiple times in the past which is why the restored version looks so different.

That was an excellent article and dialogue. Thank you.
Post reply on HN