Comments on: Annie Leibovitz, subprime borrower

By: Julia

Julia — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 18:43:44 +0000

Felix, would love the answer to Gingeryellow’s questions, which none of the news reports have addressed: What does a private individual, busy at work and busy at home with three children, need $24 m. for? And why did she not hire a competent studio manager to organize her finances?

By: John

John — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:08:01 +0000

@Aaron

Thanks Aaron…hadn’t thought about it that way, but it certainly starts to make more sense.

By: Aaron Pressman

Aaron Pressman — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 16:14:17 +0000

Is this just another one of those deals that securitize intellectual property rights? There’s a huge tax benefit (immediate income is transformed into deferred income with taxes pushed into the future) and the stream of future cash flow is turned into a fat lump-sum today. I assume that the real estate is in there as some kind of emergency backstop, perhaps because there’s probably not a lot of precedent for securitizing photo rights. This is very commonly done in the music biz.

By: walter

walter — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 16:12:12 +0000

Felix, why don’t you take a look at what Art Capital Group really is? I don’t want to bring the lawyers down on you, but everyone in the art world knows that the guys who run this thing are a bunch of shysters, who have been involved in crooked deals before. They’d be in jail if the investigators hadn’t been so busy foiling Madoff’s ponzi scheme, heh heh.

By: Ginger Yellow

Ginger Yellow — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 16:04:25 +0000

What exactly does Annie Leibovitz need $24m of debt for?

By: John

John — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 15:01:43 +0000

Felix – To me this is fascinating, and truly confusing. A.L. is almost exclusively and ad photographer (with the exception of the VF shoots she does), and is in the company of about 4/5 other photographers (Steven Klein, Steve Meisel, etc.)that can pull down day rates of ~$100K. Assuming she makes about $5MM/year just on her ad shoots, how is it that she can’t service this debt? How did this even get this far?

By: Unsympathetic

Unsympathetic — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 14:53:15 +0000

Both parties are spoiled brats: ACG for thinking they had free money, and AL for being.. well, herself.

Loaning someone money requires knowledge of their character as well as the collateral? Shocking!

I’m seeing good times with a bankruptcy judge. Good times!

By: will

will — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:56:37 +0000

Eagle- I think she entered into the arrangement because ACG managed to sweet talk her into it, plus it was for 24 million, 2 million more than the line it replaced. But ACG – who must have been aware than A.L. is Batsh*t Crazy, underestimated exactly how Batsh*t Crazy she was. They are now finding out! Good Luck ACG!

By: Eagle

Eagle — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:36:38 +0000

I’m really confused as to why she entered into this arrangement in the first place. Why on earth did she not just default on whatever debt forced her into this arrangement?

By: Sterling

Sterling — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:30:45 +0000

Has anyone ever actually used the word “cooperative” when describing her?