Comments on: Returns on art http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: absolut_bargain http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/comment-page-1/#comment-12823 Sun, 21 Mar 2010 19:18:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/#comment-12823 In general l agree – its clear that if you buy from galleries you are very unlikely to get your money back. But there are ways to ensure you shouldnt lose much…

First rule is of course to buy where there is already a secondary market (ie check that major auction houses have a market for the artist).

If you stick to auctions its safer – but since if you eventually sell at auction you’ll not only need to allow for buyers premium but the sellers premium too – ie: appx 33% of your investment will go to the auction house (in a flat market, no inflation – buy at 10k, pay appx 12k, then sell at 10k, get appx 8k)

To do better the only answer is to really know your stuff – when buying check your market, only buy art with an existing secondary market, buy very carefully and selectively at auction or haggle with dealer/artist to buy below gross auction prices. When selling do it when you want to – not when you need to, ie: watch the market and sell when you think the market is best for the work.

I could add loads more eg: dont ever buy editions, stick to only the best works by an artists – not secondary works, select their usual style/media.

If you break even youll have done well!

]]>
By: Maark Palmer http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/comment-page-1/#comment-8298 Fri, 30 Oct 2009 19:17:29 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/#comment-8298 I agree in part with Felix we run two gallerys in the uk www.gallerysales.co.uk and www.marmalade-art.co.uk our sales are mirrored by the housing market.It certainly is a buyers market and yes to survive we have reduced art cosiderably to compete with the auction houses.One in particular springs to mind,we have a painting by J. STEVEN DEWS who’s paintings of the “Americas Cup”demand prices of £100,000 ours of “Merchantman in a Swell”is now £12,000…….say no more.

]]>
By: Yan http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/comment-page-1/#comment-7631 Tue, 06 Oct 2009 21:24:24 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/#comment-7631 It depends on what you’re buying, I’d say. It’s all about diversification in art — what goes for all investing also goes for visual arts. With the dollar tanking, looking into quality art of all classes (antiquities to contemporary) in markets like China will probably have better returns in the long term, especially as the yuan internationalizes.

Holding on to Chinese works (paid for in USD now) over the next 10 or so years then selling back to Chinese buyers is probably a good investment choice. Plus, it’s portable and looks nice — always a good thing.

]]>
By: Dan http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/comment-page-1/#comment-7625 Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:04:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/#comment-7625 Felix, you make a good point. Most of us have no hope of identifying deeply valuable art before that value is conferred upon it by the art world. That is where the major returns would be found.

]]>
By: Dan http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/comment-page-1/#comment-7624 Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:59:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/#comment-7624 Valuable and rare old art might have a lot in common with gold. Both may be considered an inert store of value. Neither stocks nor bonds nor currencies can retain value if their nations collapse. Old art is arguably safer than gold because old art is less valuable in the hands of theives than in the hands of its rightful owners. The best art may provide a slight return above inflation and throws off a constant dividend in terms of its beauty and the prestige it confers on its owner.

]]>
By: q http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/comment-page-1/#comment-7620 Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:59:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/06/returns-on-art/#comment-7620 define art first, then we’ll discuss this

]]>