"Investors zoom in on photography"

[tim atherton]

Tying in slightly to Opportunities" thread:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/11/13/8393128/?postversion=2006111010

[paulr]

That's all pretty good news for photographers, but also a little sad. Might as well be about mutual funds. Nowhere is any mention of actually likeing the work that you buy.

[photographs42]

Not to start an argument Paul, but I didn’t read it that way at all. More than once it mentions buying for “love or money”. There have always been art investors who are just that. Often a gallery makes the purchase for them, stores the piece and resells it later without the investor ever actually seeing it. I’ve always advocated buying for love and if your taste runs to work that also appreciates in value, that’s even better.

If you are a collector, the dilemma is that if you love the work, it is hard to part with it when it is time to “cash in”. I don’t really consider myself an art investor but I own several pieces of art that have appreciated considerably. I have no intension of selling them so their appreciated value is rather meaningless. On the other hand, I did sell a few things (at a nice profit) quite a few years ago that I wish I had kept.

Jerome

[paulr]

you're right, Jerome. I just get put off by the cold tone of art articles written with such a strong investment slant. They suck a lot of the life out of the subject for me.

[Remigius]

let them buy those photos, that keeps the wine prices from rising to even more incredible figures...

[robc]

And how many of the quoted photographers are dead?

Newton died between the two sales so what does that prove? Well it proves you are better off dead!

But on the other hand, if you are going to invest in a photographers work, then wait until they are old and crotchety before you buy. Time it right and you'll be laughing all the way to the bank.

[paulr]

But on the other hand, if you are going to invest in a photographers work, then wait until they are old and crotchety before you buy. Time it right and you'll be laughing all the way to the bank.

i get the impression that some dealers think like this. there's a whole generation of photographers who are mighty famous, very old, and whose best work is decades behind them. their work is considered "vintage" but sells for significantly less than the work of their truly dead compatriots. The dealers seem to be biding their time. At least they can sometimes get appearances and book signings out of the walking dead.

[robc]

The time to get worried about your print sales is when you are getting on in years and notice a sudden upturn in sales. It's a sure sign the vultures are circling! ;)

[paulr]

Politely decline to drink the odd-smelling wine at the opening of your big retrospective.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

That's all pretty good news for photographers, but also a little sad. Might as well be about mutual funds. Nowhere is any mention of actually likeing the work that you buy.

There are two crowds of photography collectors. The most large crowd is the crowd that buys what they love...they have some extra money, they probably drive Infiniti's or Lincolns, own their own home, have a high level career, etc. They buy what they love, whatever looks good and pay just a tad bit attention to edition size, printing process, year photograph was taken vs. the year photograph was created, etc. They tend to buy photographs under $10,000 and won't attend auctions or buy high-end vintage photography. These people regularly attend gallery and museum exhibitions. In my research, this is about 75% of the market.

Now the rest of the market, really heavy-hitter collectors don't care as much about the aesthetic value than they do the money and financial value of the photograph. Is it a vintage print, who was the photographer, how famous was the photographer, etc. These are the ultra-wealthy, make more money than God crowd. They don't attend exhibitions and only come to the gallery when it is closed, but most of the time dealers and galleries come to them. These are the people who regularly attend auctions or have a dealer attend auctions for them to bid on a piece. They probably have a high end BMW or Lexus something even better. They could walk into a show like Photo NY and buy everything there and it wouldn't amount to how much money they paid in taxes last year. These are the upper echelon collectors. They will, from time to time, purchase something from an unknown or living photographer, but it is rare.

This article in Fortune magazine is the best thing for photography since the MoMA started exhibiting it. Fortune's circulation is mostly made up of the 75% demographic, but could garner some interest from other collectors. The thing is people don't know about photography as a collectible item...they see paintings and sculptures, but only very very recently in the history of art has photography been something that collectors could purchase or that had any kind of value to it. This truly, TRULY is a MAJOR article and is just more proof that magazines such as B&W and Focus haven't even begun to scratch the surface of reaching a large segment of photography collectors. For it to be something so popular that it would be published in Fortune is quite an accomplishment. Where was photography 30 years ago vs. today and where will it be in 30 years from today? Can anyone imagine how many people will be collecting photography in 30 years from now? The popularity is exploding with growth... which is good for anyone who sells their work because that means there are more buyers out there.

This article has made my day.

[robc]

Next time I have some images on display, I'll be sure to only talk to those viewers with the right type of car. That's obviously the secret to selling images.

[Don Hutton]

Next time I have some images on display, I'll be sure to only talk to those viewers with the right type of car. That's obviously the secret to selling images.

Yes - it certainly puts Mr Spiv's idea's on the collector market into some perspective when you realize that he does his market segmentation based on the vehicles' they drive....

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

Yes - it certainly puts Mr Spiv's idea's on the collector market into some perspective when you realize that he does his market segmentation based on the vehicles' they drive....

Not just me, my friend. Any company who researches a market segment has to find out what kind of car they drive. Why don't you spend some time in marketing and try to understand that the difference in psychodemographics of someone who owns a BMW and someone who owns a Chevy? What kind of food do they buy, where do they do their shopping, what kind of clothes do they wear, etc. People who can't afford their monthly payments on their used Malibu won't be buying art anytime soon. However, 89% of the people who purchased a luxury car with cash own at least two pieces of art worth over $10,000 each.

[Don Hutton]

Not just me, my friend. Any company who researches a market segment has to find out what kind of car they drive. Why don't you spend some time in marketing and try to understand that the difference in psychodemographics of someone who owns a BMW and someone who owns a Chevy? What kind of food do they buy, where do they do their shopping, what kind of clothes do they wear, etc. People who can't afford their monthly payments on their used Malibu won't be buying art anytime soon. However, 89% of the people who purchased a luxury car with cash own at least two pieces of art worth over $10,000 each.


Let me guess - you just ask them if they lease their BMW or paid cash for it; and then you can put them in a box as to whether or not they'd be interested in collecting photography??? I'd guess that plenty people get into the same sort of trouble making the payments on their BMW's too....

I'd think your time would be better spent not p*****g off photographers.

[Jack Flesher]

Very interesting.... My day job puts me in contact with a wide range of folks. I think FocusMag would be surprised to learn that many who drive BMW's and Porches cannot really afford them -- and just as often the millionaire next door is usually the guy driving a 6 year old Buick. In fact, one of the highest net-worth individuals I ever met drove a 10 year old POS Chevy sedan! He owned half a city (real estate-wise) in the heart of Silicon Valley.

Now what may be true is that folks who drive expensive cars are more likely to spend on art. But that does not necessarily have anything to do with their net worth -- and more likely relates more to their own self-image.

[Tim Hyde]

Putting aside the vehicle variable, the dichotomy between Infintiy-driving photo enthusiasts--essentially naive amateurs who pay scant attention to print dates or edition sizes--and high-end, ultra-wealty heavy hitters who are less interested in aesthetics than in the "financial" value you is a useless oversimplification at best. Any good photograpy gallery will tell you that there are show-openings full of Infinity-class collectors who save and budget to routinely buy at auctions, collect vintage, pay more than 10,000 for choice pieces, and otherwise devote a portion of their retirement or savings to risky photography investment and have amassed incredible collections in the process.
And as for the implication that only dead photographers' work sells for more than $10,000, you might want to check out Sugimoto or Bell or Polidori or Gusky or Huan or Epstein or Mann or Misrach or Struth or Moriyama or .... well, you get the idea and you can read all about them in the auction sections or elsewhere in FOCUS Magazine.

[David Spivak-Focus Magazine]

Putting aside the vehicle variable, the dichotomy between Infintiy-driving photo enthusiasts--essentially naive amateurs who pay scant attention to print dates or edition sizes--and high-end, ultra-wealty heavy hitters who are less interested in aesthetics than in the "financial" value you is a useless oversimplification at best. Any good photograpy gallery will tell you that there are show-openings full of Infinity-class collectors who save and budget to routinely buy at auctions, collect vintage, pay more than 10,000 for choice pieces, and otherwise devote a portion of their retirement or savings to risky photography investment and have amassed incredible collections in the process.
And as for the implication that only dead photographers' work sells for more than $10,000, you might want to check out Sugimoto or Bell or Polidori or Gusky or Huan or Epstein or Mann or Misrach or Struth or Moriyama or .... well, you get the idea and you can read all about them in the auction sections or elsewhere in FOCUS Magazine.


Thanks, Tim. Check's in the mail. ;)

Once I am done finishing negotiations with this gallery in Manhattan, I will have the biggest announcement from Focus magazine since our launch and hiring of Steve Anchell as our Editor. This is bigger than anything we have ever done before and will add on yet another advantage for photographers who advertise with us.

[paulr]

Putting aside the vehicle variable, the dichotomy between Infintiy-driving photo enthusiasts--essentially naive amateurs who pay scant attention to print dates or edition sizes--and high-end, ultra-wealty heavy hitters who are less interested in aesthetics than in the "financial" value you is a useless oversimplification at best.

I'd agree with that. The one filthy rich collector that I know is in it for the love of it, not the investment. He knows a thing or two about the medium, too. he recently donated the bulk of his collection to the san francisco moma, nearly doubling the size of their photography holdings in the process.

[kjsphotography]

Ever been to blackhawk in CA? Every where you look million dollar houses but go inside and they are empty because the people that own them, cant afford them and only own those homes for clout. I have heard of stories where for Christmas they would go out and buy all these expensive gifts for each other to show off in front of their friends. The next day they would take everything back and get it off their credit cards. Just because you drive a nice car doesn't mean anything. Most people I know that have huge houses and nice cars are maxed out to the gills.

[paulr]

... any millionaire will tell you ...

millionaire used to be synonymous with filthy rich. not anymore. in NYC, as you suggested, people witha million bucks in the bank probably count as upper middle class, and are a dime a dozen. and many of them probably did get there with help from being frugal.

but plenty of the filthy rich got rich without. there's inherited money, there's silicon valley boom money, there's runaway investment money, there's wildly successful entrepeneurial money. and even the ones who were frugal while they built there fortunes tend to get to a point of kicking back and indulging in some conspicuous consumption.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

This message has been deleted by Ralph Barker. Reason: inflammatory

So I guess anything that comes under the "this guy does not know what he is talking about is inflammatory" huh?

Lets all hold hands and sing kumbayah....... :rolleyes:

[Ralph Barker]

Polite disagreement is fine. Certain adjectives and adverbs, however, can push a post over the line.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Polite disagreement is fine. Certain adjectives and adverbs, however, can push a post over the line.

Then why dont you hands us down a list so we all can know what is allowed.

[Capocheny]

Ever been to blackhawk in CA? Every where you look million dollar houses but go inside and they are empty because the people that own them, cant afford them and only own those homes for clout. I have heard of stories where for Christmas they would go out and buy all these expensive gifts for each other to show off in front of their friends. The next day they would take everything back and get it off their credit cards. Just because you drive a nice car doesn't mean anything. Most people I know that have huge houses and nice cars are maxed out to the gills.

Kevin,

Couldn't agree with you more! In fact, most people (generalization, of course) are only two or three pay cheques away from being homeless!

Not only in Blackhawk, CA but it could be your next door neighbor!

Conversely, some of the wealthiest people I know don't get up in the morning and hop into a Versace or Zegna suit! One of my friends was snubbed when he went in to look at a Benz in his grubby jeans. The next day... he went back in and bought a 500E station wagon with his cc. Needless to say, the salesman who snubbed him didn't get the commission. I can only imagine the look on his face! :)

So, one would be an absolute fool to judge a book by its cover! :)

Cheers