a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by kleinbl00
kleinbl00  ·  2324 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Questionable da Vinci sells for $450M signaling end of times

You're an investor, mk - where are you making your edge? Cryptocurrency, obviously, but then, you know cryptocurrency.

Let's say you're an art collector. You've made your edge on art. All your other investments are in the shitter, though - even real estate is looking spooky because we have to be nearing the top. And new contemporary artists are way too speculative; who knows what they'll be worth in 5 years.

But a Da Vinci? the dude is not prolific. He's also got a pedigree - Da Vinci has been collected by kings for five hundred years. The Louvre insured The Mona Lisa for $100m in 1962 - that's an easy $800m today. So what you have is a rare asset that has shown long-term value that seldom changes hands.

Let's say it sells for $550m in ten years. That's a seriously disappointing result, right? but it beats inflation.

End of times? Rational market. Is a "questionable" da Vinci worth 100x as much as dead butterflies on a heart? Fuck to the yes, dude. Be real. Is it fucking ridiculous that dead bugs under lacquer are worth four and a half million fucking dollars?

Again, fuck to the yes. but IF=DAMIEN HIRST, THEN=HALF BILLION DOLLAR DA VINCI.





user-inactivated  ·  2324 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Every now and again, Antiques Roadshow (don't judge me, I'm cool and so are my hobbies) will have an updated episode kind of thing, where they go back to an old episode from a decade or so ago and show what the same pieces would be appraised at todays dollars. Sometimes they go up, sometimes they go down, sometimes they only go up enough to account for inflation. A lot of these pieces are famous pieces by famous creators, studios, etc. and even then their prices are volatile and based upon purchasing fads (which probably creates a price feedback cycle).

So with that in mind, something crazy like a Da Vinci would be a safe bet. But I'd only make that statement about a verified Da Vinci. The fact that this painting is attributed to Da Vinci and then followed up with a question mark and a caveat, does make it seem like maybe it was a little over payed for.

What do I know though? To me, a million dollars is an unfathomable amount. The gap between 1 million and 450 million is unfathomable and 450 million is pretty much out of the realm of my imagination. Plus, I got chastised recently for having "pedestrian" and "uncultured" taste in art so this whole thing is really out of my realm.

kleinbl00  ·  2324 days ago  ·  link  ·  

There's a lot of question marks and caveats about art from 500 years ago. There were a lot of studios run by artists whose art was painted by someone else, and often that someone else became someone famous and opened his own studio, so provenance is often shaky. I mean, Warhol has only been dead 30 years and this shit still happens.

mk  ·  2324 days ago  ·  link  ·  

So I am not saying that this is necessarily a bad investment. I'd buy art over most of the crap that people buy. However, I do think this is smells like peak art... even a rush to get out of fiat, maybe. What can you buy for that much money? Sure you could buy land, but land can be taken away and doesn't cross borders. This is $0.5B that can be carried.

If you want to take your wealth through WWIII, this is a reasonable buy.

kleinbl00  ·  2324 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The Louvre Abu Dhabi opened a week ago. They paid the Louvre $525m for the rights to the name, and are paying another $800m for access to the Louvre's back collection.

It may be a "questionable" da Vinci but right now it's also the second most famous Da Vinci in the world (probably; Head of a Woman might be up there, too, and it's also considered "generally accepted" as da Vinci). And they're already calling it the "male Mona Lisa."

    There was speculation that Liu Yiqian, a Chinese billionaire and co-founder with his wife of the Long Museum in Shanghai, may have been among the bidders. In recent years, the former taxi-driver-turned-power collector has become known for his splashy, record-breaking art purchases, including an Amedeo Modigliani nude painting for $170.4 million at a Christie’s auction in 2015. But in a message sent to a reporter via WeChat, a Chinese messaging app, Mr. Liu said he was not among the bidders for the Leonardo.

    On Thursday morning, soon after the final sale was announced, Mr. Liu posted a message on his WeChat social media feed. “Da Vinci’s Savior sold for 400 million USD, congratulations to the buyer,” he wrote. “Feeling kind of defeated right now.”

I'm betting it's not a hedge. It's a tourist attraction. Mark my words.

tacocat  ·  2324 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Whether or not this is a good investment is sorta irrelevant. This is a priceless, once in a lifetime buy. I don't see anything questionable about it. Every old master employed students to help. Hell. There's a painting that's important because Leonard might have painted part of it as a student. It's like 500 years old. Damn right it will have been restored. The Last Supper might have more restoration work than original at this point and that thing is just going to go away at some point because he painted it stupid.

Honestly I can't even believe there are Leonardos in private collection at this point.

coffeesp00ns  ·  2323 days ago  ·  link  ·  

honestly, i think that string instrument collecting is probably a good place to go for value. shit just keeps going up, even lesser known makers like Guadagnini, Guarneri, Candi, Vuillaume.