Today I want to talk about art investment. If you recently concern reported, will be found, generally have a perspective on the market, that art is not a revaluation of the value. A picture worth is completely determined by personal preference, so art is not available to assess the value of. So that is the same as stock does not, and bond is not the same, it has no so-called fundamentals or connotation of value. Art content value is zero.
I cannot agree to this view. I think the value of a piece of art, that is, market value, which generally speaking is actually made up of two parts, part art, part there is the so-called consumption value.
Art value depends on the two parts, one is the value of aesthetic value or referred to as the United States, is an academic value, is its influence in the artistic fields. Consumption value can be divided into two pieces, consumption of a piece is pursuing pure beauty, hangs in the home is a pleasant, can feast for; the other, I think that is the value of the brand. Brand value as girls like the back of the package, such as LV, Channel, and so on. This four part can affect the value of art market value of the. For example, · Finch, very high aesthetic value his work, his academic status is in doubt. The world's best collections of museums to be proud of one of his works. He's a picture of the Mona Lisa's smile can bring to the people a very beautiful to enjoy. To the Louvre to the front of the painting of the Mona Lisa's smile watching crowd know how appreciate about this painting. Another is the brand value, if there is a · Finch taken on the words of the original, I think a lot of people want to have it.
Have it, not only because of the above three values, but also a symbol of status. So why art to become an investment product? I would like to cite a very simple example, in addition to the aesthetic value, outside the academic value and brand value, the pursuing pure beauty of consumption, the consumption value is to a large extent and the growth of national income. And potatoes is not the same, potatoes, with the improvement of people's lives is more to eat less. Consumption of beauty in art, as income increases, consumption increases more rapidly. That with the increase in wealth that people will take on more and more of their income to works of art. And the increase in consumption will promote the appreciation of the art.
Here you can take a very simple example, in 1890, the richest person in the world at that time called Vanderbilt when he bought the most expensive painting in the world, we all think he's a bit crazy, mind has. When the painting was in the United Kingdom, pounds, converted into dollars at that time was $ 27,000, after he bought this painting died by the end, after the death of the Wall Street Journal made an assessment to his wealth, when assessment results is this person worth almost US $ 90 million. In other words at that time purchased a site in the world's most important works, at that time one of the best works, spends most wealthy people at that time how much wealth does? We can do a simple Division, almost 1 per thousand. We all know, 2010 is the Picasso of a site with the highest auction history, $ 106 million. The richest person in the world last year, should be the Mexico Telecom big King, should he was worth about USD 50 billion. Then do a simple Division, to buy the most expensive in the world today one of the best picture, with the wealth of the rich what? About 1% to account for his wealth. Therefore, wealth was devalued for art. From this point, we can see roughly, the art is fundamental, and the long term may be a good investment.
