Investing in Art
the-easel.com
Investing in Art
1–10 of 18 posts
Re: Investing in Art
#2Insider trading and conflicts of interest are uncontrolled in this market. The major shows of works of an artist are scheduled long before they are publicly announced. These shows usually increase the value of works by the artists selected. The big donors to the museums that hold the shows are the kind of people who enjoy and buy art and wind up sitting on their boards. It would be bad enough if they steered the museums to schedule shows of the artists whose works they hold, but even if they do not hold any, they may have months of insider knowledge of future shows during which they can acquire some such works before the show is publicly announced and the market prices of the works rise.
Re: Investing in Art
#3There are now companies like Masterworks that let you crowd-fund the purchase of million-dollar artworks. Problem is that the fees are 1.5% a year and 20% of profits and your gain will be realized when they decide to sell at some point in the future.
It would be good to a Vanguard-like trust owned by investors where the trust invests in well-known types of art - a trust for Impressionists, and a trust for Baroque, for example. I'd perhaps invest in an art ETF that's traded on the public market and owned hundreds of works. It's just not clear what should be bought and when they should be sold.
Re: Investing in Art
#4Shameless plug:
If you're interested in the art market and factors which affect price/value, I work for Arthena (YC W17) and we're hiring for a variety of roles. If you're interested check out https://angel.co/arthena or reach out to me directly: adrian@arthena.com
Re: Investing in Art
#5There are now companies like Masterworks that let you crowd-fund the purchase of million-dollar artworks. Problem is that the fees are 1.5% a year and 20% of profits and your gain will be realized when they decide to sell at some point in the future. It would be good to a Vanguard-like trust owned by investors where the trust invests in well-known types of art - a trust for Impressionists, and a trust for Baroque, fo…
>>It's just not clear what should be bought and when they should be sold.
Maybe this will be an incentive for shareholder voting to come back into vogue.
Re: Investing in Art
#6I'd love to make moderate investments in art. The problem is I'm a prime candidate for over-pricing, forgery, etc. Basically I have no idea how to validate or value a piece of work.
So I guess I'll stick to the safe cheap stuff.
Re: Investing in Art
#7I'd love to make moderate investments in art. The problem is I'm a prime candidate for over-pricing, forgery, etc. Basically I have no idea how to validate or value a piece of work. So I guess I'll stick to the safe cheap stuff.
Not to sound too cynical, but I am wondering how over-pricing can be a problem when the price for a piece of art is however much someone is willing to pay for it?
Re: Investing in Art
#8I'd love to make moderate investments in art. The problem is I'm a prime candidate for over-pricing, forgery, etc. Basically I have no idea how to validate or value a piece of work. So I guess I'll stick to the safe cheap stuff.
Not to sound too cynical, but I am wondering how over-pricing can be a problem when the price for a piece of art is however much someone is willing to pay for it?
Further, if there is any measurable value to much art other than how much someone pays for it? Which is seemingly driven by hype, not any intrinsic worth such as beauty/utility.
For example, anyone going through Gloucester Road tube station in London might wonder if the platform 'art' there does anything noteworthy but hide the brickwork behind.
Re: Investing in Art
#9I'd love to make moderate investments in art. The problem is I'm a prime candidate for over-pricing, forgery, etc. Basically I have no idea how to validate or value a piece of work. So I guess I'll stick to the safe cheap stuff.
Not to sound too cynical, but I am wondering how over-pricing can be a problem when the price for a piece of art is however much someone is willing to pay for it?
Art has no direct utility value. But there is a definite - if approximate - consensus value based on the reputation and history of an artist and the location of a work in their output.
This is often multiplied by speculative hope/greed, which can be manipulated in ways that have nothing to do with any consensus about artistic value or historical interest.
Galleries and collectors are not unfamiliar with the art world's equivalent of pump 'n dump. More direct methods may also be used:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/16/think-you-can-spot-a-fraud-t...
Re: Investing in Art
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to sound too cynical, but I am wondering how over-pricing can be a problem when the price for a piece of art is however much someone is willing to pay for it?
Further, if there is any measurable value to much art other than how much someone pays for it? Which is seemingly driven by hype, not any intrinsic worth such as beauty/utility. For example, anyone going through Gloucester Road tube station in London might wonder if the platform 'art' there does anything noteworthy but hide the brickwork behind.
>> the platform 'art' there does anything noteworthy but hide the brickwork behind.
Too true. I guess the value of the platform "art" might be equivalent to the financial cost of actually fixing the hole, which in this case, could be millions if you factor hiring the hole fixers and the lost of revenue due to closing of the tube station.