Art Market Blog - artmarketblog.com » contemporary art

Contemporary Art Market Karma at Phillips de Pury Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

admin — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 02:33:56 +0000

Contemporary Art Market Karma at Phillips de Pury Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

My last post was the beginning of my analysis of the auction house Phillips de Pury and their status in the current market. I finished that post by revealing one method that Phillips use to try and maintain as strong a presence as the can in the niche that they operate within – that method being the nurturing of emerging artists who they believe are worthy of the attention. Another way that Phillips try and justify their presence in a market where competition from the primary gallery sector is fierce is by offering works at auction by artists whose work would otherwise be unavailable to the general public. Top works by the hottest contemporary artists are usually in very short supply and are often supplied to only the very best clients of the top galleries before they even go on display, which means that owners of works by such artists who are wanting to sell will likely get a good price at auction. This brings me to the next strategy that Phillips utilise: providing minimum price guarantees to vendors via third party guarantors as encouragement to sell with them. Taking their recent 27 June 2011 Contemporary Art Evening Sale as an example, Phillips solicited third party guarantees for five of the most highly valued lots. The guaranteed lots were:

Jean-Michel Basquiat’s Self-Portrait, 1985 which sold for £2,057,250 against an estimate of £2,000,000-3,000,000

Mark Tansey’s Library (of Babylon), 1994 which sold for £1,161,250 against an estimate of £1,200,000–1,800,000

Urs Fischer’s Thank You Fuck You, 2007 which sold for £657,250 against an estimate of £600,000–800,000

Cecily Brown’s I Will Not Paint Any More Boring Leaves (2), 2004 which sold for £529,250 against an estimate of £350,000–450,000

Cindy Sherman’s Untitled Film Still #4, 1977 which had an estimate of £250,000–350,000

Interestingly, the work by Cindy Sherman was withdrawn prior to auction due to a similar work being seen for sale at Art Basel shortly before Phillips’ auction was due to take place. Such a move shows how highly orchestrated art auctions really are.

Competing in such a volatile market means that Phillips de Pury have had to make some serious sacrifices in order to maintain a strong presence in the contemporary art market and secure works of art for auction that will have a positive effect on their reputation. It has been reported in the past that Phillips have gone as far as to take a financial interest in works (ie. become part owners) that they knew they would not profit from just to have the opportunity to sell that work at auction and have that work associated with their business. As the market for contemporary art expands and evolves to their favour, Phillips will be hoping that they won’t have to take such extreme measures in the future.

Although the need to knowingly take on financial risk that will not pay off may become unnecessary, the need to sell works of contemporary art that have dropped in value since last appearing at auction is unlikely to diminish. Phillips’ Contemporary Art Part II
13 May 2011 auction included a particularly good example of a work that had experienced a reduction in value since last appearing at auction. Matthias Weischer’s Untitled, 2003 was auctioned by Phillips in 2007 at which time it sold for $421,000 against an estimate of $300,000-400,000. This work reappeared at Phillips Contemporary Art Part II 13 May 2011 auction where it was given a lower estimate of $250,000-350,000 and only fetched $302,500. Having to sell a work of art for a client for less than they sold it to them for give years prior must have been a little bit humiliating for Phillips yet is something that I am sure that they are used to dealing with. Because the contemporary art market is volatile by nature, a reduction in the number of works being consigned to auction that have dropped in value is highly unlikely.

to be continued…………………

**Nicholas Forrest is an art market analyst, art critic and journalist based in Sydney, Australia. He is the founder of http://www.artmarketblog.com, writes the art column for the magazine Antiques and Collectibles for Pleasure and Profit and contributes to many other publications.

No Related Posts

Contemporary Art Market Karma at Phillips de Pury Pt. 1 – artmarketblog.com

admin — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 01:44:22 +0000

Contemporary Art Market Karma at Phillips de Pury Pt. 1 – artmarketblog.com

Sotheby’s and Christie’s tend to pull the wool over the eyes of the market when they produce their “not so contemporary” art auctions which is why the contemporary art focused auction house Phillips de Pury is the one to watch when it comes to the contemporary art market. Since dedicating themselves to the contemporary art scene, and proving themselves dedicated to promoting the work of “true” contemporary artists, Phillips de Pury have had to deal with the volatility of the contemporary art market and have struggled to compete with the power of Sotheby’s and Christie’s. Having endured a succession of ups and downs over the last few years, the risk Phillips de Pury have taken on young emerging talent and many of today’s leading contemporary artists is currently paying off as the market for contemporary art heats up.

The success of their Contemporary Art Evening sale, which realized £11,243,350/$16,923,234 in total, selling 95% by value and 87% by lot, proves that Phillips de Pury do have the potential for greatness – but only under certain conditions. Although they were able to achieve a 189% growth on their 2010 London June Contemporary Art Evening Sale, close analysis of their catalogue reveals a clever strategy that takes full advantage of a range of current trends. Being a company that focuses on a rather narrow niche compared to most other auction houses, the opportunity to take advantage of such a wide range of strong trends within that niche is usually quite rare but is becoming more frequent as the number of strong submarkets of the global contemporary art market increase.

What makes the contemporary art market so difficult to profit from, especially for a contemporary focused auction house, is that the market for contemporary art is essentially driven by a series of trends within an ever changing and ever increasing number of submarkets. These often volatile submarkets can be defined by many different factors and characteristics including culture, geography, style, medium and many others. Because all these submarkets progress at different rates and operate at different levels of maturity, they all require a slightly different approach, which means unless your business is focused on a particular submarket of the contemporary art market, which most auction houses aren’t (except Macdougall’s Russian art auction house), finding a successful approach for a submarket is often a case of trial and error.

By focusing on a niche market that has as many highly active submarkets as the contemporary art market does, and is driven primarily by primary market sales, Phillips de Pury have put themselves in a position where they need to try and keep ahead of current trends as much as possible and, if viable, maintain as much of a primary market presence as possible. One way that Phillips try to maintain a primary market presence is by championing the work of contemporary artists who they feel are worthy of the attention – artists such as Ugo Rondine who Phillips achieved a record price for during their 27th June Contemporary Art Evening Auction. According to Simon de Pury “We are very pleased with the strong and solid results for this evening’s sale that saw spirited bidding. We are thrilled with the record price for Ugo Rondinone who we first introduced to the secondary market and is an artist we have always championed.”

to be continued………………….

No Related Posts

Chinese Art Market Matters from thedaily.com – artmarketblog.com

admin — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 11:51:29 +0000

Chinese Art Market Matters from thedaily.com – artmarketblog.com

I was recently interviewed by a journalist from the online ipad newspaper TheDaily.com regarding the Chinese art market boom. To see the full article visit:

http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/04/10/041011-biz-chinese-art-market-2-2/

My opinions were also mentioned in this article from Art Throb:

http://www.artthrob.co.za/News/China-tops-rankings-for-art-auction-revenue-by-Katharine-Jacobs-on-09-April.aspx#

Avoiding a 2011 Art Market Armageddon – artmarketblog.com

admin — Sun, 13 Feb 2011 13:14:43 +0000

Avoiding a 2011 Art Market Armageddon – artmarketblog.com

Don’t get me wrong, I am very glad that the art market has rebounded so quickly, but I am also extremely concerned about the way the art market is progressing. As I have mentioned many times before, the long term stability and viability of the art market is dependent upon the existence of a certain level of connection and interaction with the cultural sector, as well as certain level of participation from connoisseurs and collectors (as opposed to trophy hunters). Time and time again we see the art market take a dive when the value of art becomes so disconnected from the cultural and art historical value of the artists and their work that the only justification for the prices being paid is related to social status and egotism. At some point in the progression of an art market boom the purchase of fine art turns into nothing more than a game of one-upmanship – a game where a group of the super wealthy compete with each other to see who is ultimately going to be the biggest fool. As much as the super rich like spending money, there is always going to be a point in time when even they think that the prices are too high and have to pull out leaving one lucky punter with the “biggest fool” award.

Although the internet has had a positive effect on the art market, there is also the potential for the internet to further distance the connection between the cultural/art historical value of a work of art and the price being paid for a work. Think of it this way: the less exposure and interaction one has with the work they are purchasing, the less opportunity there is to analyse, assess and criticise those works. This leads to a very concerning situation where mediocre works by well known artists are being sold for prices that are way too high – a situation that I am all too familiar with. An indicator of the increasing level of disconnection between the buyer and the object is the reported increase in online bidding by Christie’s. According to a recent Christie’s press release:

“In 2010 online bidding via Christie’s LIVE^TM continued to deliver a large number of winning bids and new registrants. Over a quarter (28%) of Christie’s clients now bid online, a 5% increase on 2009 and the total value of lots sold online rose 69% to $114.4 million including premium.”

Add to this the recent launch of the first major online only art fair, the VIP art fair, and the new record for a work of art sold at any online art auction set by Saffronart in December 2010 with Arpita Singh’s ‘Wish Dream’ which fetched an extraordinary $2.24 million, and one can begin to see the impact that the internet is having on the art market. 2010 was a big year for the online art market that saw investors and collectors make progress into unchartered territory where they had previously feared to tread. That final leap of faith that had previously prevented the purchase of big ticket items online has finally been taken, and has really opened the flood gates. But at what cost?

Even more of a concern is the recent launch by a Chinese organisation of an online exchange for trading shares in works of art. Although many have talked about starting such a venture, no-one has been able to come up with a successful model – up until now. The market, operated by the government-backed Tianjin Cultural Artwork Exchange, is considered a financial innovation by the Tianjin municipal government. According to a Chinese government website:

“As we are told, the greatest highlight of TCAE is “trading of artwork shares”, namely public market trading based on the shares of the property right owned after the subject matter is evenly divided into certain shares. The cultural artwork can be traded through the e-platform of the exchange after being divided into shares. Investors can extend investment channels through investment in artwork shares.”

Also getting on the fine art share stock exchange bandwagon is a French company called A&F Markets who launched their exchange in January of this year. According to a press release:

“As of today, our clients will be able to see the first selection of artworks on the market, the price and volume of the shares available, discover how the marketplace works and what it offers and finally open an Art Exchange account in order to be the first to buy shares,” confirmed Pierre Naquin, founder of A&F Markets.”

Continuing on the subject of art investment, another sign that the art market is regaining its boom time momentum is the emergence of a new art investment fund. Emirates NBD, the UAE’s largest bank, announced at the beginning of February that they would be starting a new art investment fund as a means of tapping into the $10 billion Middle East art market. Clients will also be offered art investment advice from London based The Fine Art Find Group who have partnered with Emirates NBD.

Another worrying trend that has emerged during the first round of 2011 major art auctions is a noticeable resurgence in the interest of the work of artists who are boom time trophy hunter favourites such as Francis Bacon, Bridget Riley, Damien Hirst, Chris Ofili and Lucien Freud and others. Although it appears that buyers are remaining relatively conservative when it comes to purchasing works by these less “secure” artists, it is likely that it will not be too long before those irrational and indiscriminate demons rear their ugly heads. I also start to get worried when Surrealism takes centre stage because of the way the market approaches surrealist art. You see, Surrealism has become a sort of novelty movement that people like because it is unusual and intriguing. Unfortunately, few people understand Surrealist art and even fewer people want to understand it. Although the Surrealist art movement is a very intellectual movement, the complexity of the philosophies behind it tend to put most people off trying to understand the meaning behind Surrealist works of art.

When demand for Surrealist works increases dramatically I tend to think that the market is once again seeking trophy works of art that provide that instant visual gratification as opposed to an approach to the purchase of works of art that focuses more on scholarly and connoisseurial factors. Both Christie’s and Sotheby’s held sales during February that included a strong contingent of Surrealist works with Christie’s going as far as to hold a separate “Art of the Surreal” sale alongside their February 9 Impressionist and Modern Art sale. Christie’s held their big sale the night before Sotheby’s and got the ball rolling with a new auction record set for a work by Pierre Bonnard and a new auction record for a work by Dali. Although Christie’s set the Surrealist bar very high, Sotheby’s replied with a new auction record for Dali with ‘Portrait de Paul Eluard’ thus beating the Dali record set by Christie’s the night before. The price paid for the ‘Portrait de Paul Eluard’ was also a new auction record for any Surrealist work of art which gives Sotheby’s Surrealism bragging rights over Christie’s.

I wish I could say that I have confidence in the direction that the art market is heading, but recent events just can’t be ignored. As long as buyers continue to buy discriminately, there shouldn’t be a problem. I somehow, however, doubt this will be the case.

The Top 2010 Art Market Trends – artmarketblog.com

admin — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 20:46:06 +0000

Due to overwhelming demand I have posted the entire Top 2010 Art Market Trends series in one post. Hope you enjoy !!!

Top 2010 Art Market Trends Pt. 1 – artmarketblog.com

‘Venus of the Rags’ by Michelangelo Pistoletto

1. Arte Povera: The Arte Povera trend that took hold in 2010 has more to do with the concept of “Arte Povera” as opposed to the actual artists involved in the movement. The trend also extends to the work of other artists whose work embodied the concepts of Arte Povera such as Art Brut artists and naive artists. Without a doubt this has been the most dominant and most visible trend of 2010.

According to the Tate Modern website:

“The name (Arte Povera) means literally ‘poor art’ but the word poor here refers to the movement’s signature exploration of a wide range of materials beyond the quasi-precious traditional ones of oil paint on canvas, or bronze, or carved marble. Arte Povera therefore denotes not an impoverished art, but an art made without restraints, a laboratory situation in which any theoretical basis was rejected in favour of a complete openness towards materials and processes”

The glossy, blingy art that has dominated the market for years has given way to a desire for the more gritty and raw work of artists such as Lucio Fontana, Helio Oiticica, Michelangelo Pistoletto, Jean-Michel Basquiat, Alighiero Boetti, Piero Manzoni, Jean Dubuffet etc. The un-primed slashed canvases of Fontana, the graffiti style of Basquiat, the artist’s shit of Piero Manzoni and the unusually textured canvases of Dubuffet all represent artists who took a stand against the commercialism of the art market – a stand that collectors have taken up as they turn their back on the current commercialism of the art market.

Interestingly, the Tate Modern opened galleries dedicated to the Arte Povera movement in May 2009. According to a Tate press release “The central space of the new Energy and Process wing will be devoted to a selection of works made by artists in the 1960s and 1970s. The term Arte Povera was coined by the art critic Germano Celant to describe the activities of Italian artists who used the simplest means to create poetic statements based on everyday life. Seen as a reaction against the commercialism of the art market, the work demonstrated a keen appetite to use commonplace or ‘poor’ materials and new processes.”

2. Naive Art: The naive art trend is closely related to the Arte Povera trend with work produced by “naive” artists often resembling the work of Arte Povera artists. The work of artists who produce work in a naive style such as Basquiat, Dubuffet and Antonio Ligabue has proven to be extremely popular of late with many auction records being broken. A new auction record for Ligabue, one of the most famous 20th century naive artists, was set on the 24th of November 2010 when his ‘Autoritratto, olio su faesite’ sold for €152,000 against an estimate of €50,000-70,000.

3. Latin American Art: Although there was a general trend towards nationalistic and culturally representative art, there has been a particularly strong global increase in the popularity of Latin American art. Funnily enough, many of the artists that I associated with the concept of Arte Povera also have connections with Latin America such as Basquiat who has Haitian roots, Fontana who was born in Argentina, and Oiticica who was born in Brazil. What is also interesting is that many of the world’s most popular and influential naive artists also have a connection with Latin America.

A good example of the growing interest in the work of Latin American artists of both the past and present is the continuing success of the PINTA Latin American art fair. Although 2010 was only the fourth edition of the fair there was plenty of evidence to suggest that there is more than enough demand to support a dedicated Latin American art fair. Auction wise, 2010 saw new auction price records for many Latin American artists including: Jorge Jiminez, Helio Oiticica, Adriana Varejao, Julio Galan, Omar Rayo, Julio Le Parc, Wilfredo Lam, Alejandro Otero, Alfonso Michel and many others.

4. Sculpture: The resurgence in the interest of the work of classical style and modernist bronze sculptors, particularly those who work in metal, is somewhat of an odd and puzzling trend. There is, however, an increasing interest being shown in the work of sculptors such as Barbara Hepworth, Rembrandt Bugatti, Alberto Giacometti, August Renoir and Matisse. Christie’s set the benchmark at the beginning of 2010 when they set a new auction record for Giacometti, and a new record for a work of art sold at auction, when they sold the Alberto’s life-size bronze sculpture titled ‘L’Homme Qui Marche I’ for 65 million pounds. Proving that the Giacometti record wasn’t a fluke, Christie’s again made headlines in June when they sold Modigliani’s modernist sculpture titled ‘Tête’ for 43.2 million euros in Paris – an auction record for the artist. In November a new auction record was set for Matisse when Christie’s sold the artist’s ‘Nu de dos, 4 etat (Back IV)’ bronze sculpture for a $48.8 million. Although Christie’s appeared to dominate the metal sculpture trend, Sotheby’s also made some significant contributions with outstanding prices achieved for a range of bronze sculptures by Dame Barabara Hepworth and Rembrandt Bugatti.

5. Nationalistic Art: The beginning of the sentimental art market era, which I have written about extensively on my blog, has influenced a shift of focus towards the work of artists whom collectors can relate to on a cultural or generational level. Artists whose work is iconically representative of a particular era or culture are being pursued by collectors of that culture or era. The stark and sterile work of the contemporary art market boom combined with the faceless commercialism of the modern world is heavily responsible for what I believe to be a yearning that many art collectors and investors have to revive in themselves a sense of culture and place. As I wrote in my previous post “When art collectors or investors seek safety and familiarity they are most likely to gravitate towards works by artists from the era and culture that they have the greatest connection to. This would explain the large number of seemingly unrelated trends that emerged during 2010 many of which involved previously unfashionable styles and movements that are distinctly associated with a particular era or culture.”

Top 2010 Art Market Trends Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

There is really not just one dominant “art market” that one can refer to anymore. Once upon a time when one referred to the art market they were generally referring to the global leaders England and the USA, with perhaps the French market included depending on who you talked to and what their allegiances were. Now, however, there are so many more highly influential markets emerging on a regular basis that it has become extremely difficult to trace, track and predict art market movements – not totally impossible though. My last post focussed on the art market trends that I have seen emerge during 2010, which were identified primarily from observing auction sales throughout the year. With this post I want to look a bit further into those trends and the reasoning behind them.

The arte povera trend that I mentioned in my previous post on art market trends is not exclusive to the auction world. Some of the world’s top contemporary galleries are exhibiting works that have obvious ties with the concepts and characteristics that one associates with the Arte Povera movement – in particular the use of found objects. For instance, the Barbican Gallery recently held a special exhibition of work by Damian Ortega, a Mexican artist who has strong associations with the White Cube gallery, which consisted of a number of installations using found objects. New York’s Gagosian Gallery chose to use one of Rauschenberg’s ‘Combine’ paintings, a series of works that incorporate found objects and reproduced images, as the feature image of their Rauschenberg show that finished in November 2010. In fact, the first three works of the exhibit were from the artist’s ‘Combine’ series. Since September Hauser and Wirth have exhibited a sculpture by Martin Creed titled ‘Work No. 700’ (2007), three progressively slimmer steel I-beams balanced on top of each other. Creed’s steel girders are left in their used, practical state, which once again fits in with the “found object” trend.

If I can divert back to the auction market for a moment, the January 11-12 2011 Christie’s sale of items from the estate of Dennis Hopper included a particularly interesting array of works that perfectly reflect the current market trends that I have been talking about. A range of junk assemblages by George Herms, an artist who many consider to have been overlooked by the art world, attracted a particularly high level of attention and sold for several times the estimate. The Hopper sale also included a noticeably high number of collage works – another trend that I consider an extension of the “found object” trend. A “found object” collage by Bruce Conner titled ‘Picnic on the Grass’ took the third highest price of the auction reaching a fantastic $96,100 against an estimate of $10,000-$15,000. According to the Christie’s press release “Conner was a key artist in the development of assemblage art, a movement of found-object sculpture that critic Peter Plagens defined as “the first home-grown California modern art.” Hopper’s collection boasts several Conner works, including this multi-layered work that employs fabric, printed paper, plastic, string and even an acorn”. A verifax collage by Wallace Berman proved popular finding favour with a US buyer who paid $42,500, going well beyond the $12,000 to $18,000 estimate. Also included in the sale were collages by Viggo Mortensen and Llyn Foulkes; a collage by Lyn Foulkes titled ‘The Scene that is God’s Mouth’ was purchased by the Hammer Museum in Los Angeles.

Collages also proved popular on the gallery side of the market during 2010 with Gagosian Gallery holding an exhibition of discarded object sculptures and photographic collages by Nancy Rubin from June to July. Victoria Miro extended their exhibition of renowned collage artist Tom Lubbock who passed away less than a month after the exhibition closed. According to the gallery website, “Tom Lubbock died on Sunday 9 January 2011. In tribute to him Victoria Miro Gallery will reopen his exhibition on Saturday 15 & Saturday 22 January. This exhibition of beautifully crafted paper collages, provides the first opportunity to see a small selection of works made weekly by Tom Lubbock for the Saturday edition of The Independent between 1999 and 2004”.

The current fascination and focus on the 2D and 3D versions of “found object” assemblages tells us more about the market than you may realise. Erik Davis gave an excellent explanation of the allure of found objects in an article he wrote titled ‘The Alchemy of Trash, the West Coast of Spiritual Collage’. According to Davis:

“Duncan (Robert Duncan) praises the outsider artist, who goes against the grain, risks height, ignores dogma. This is all part of our “alternative” myth these days, but it remains to be seen whether the margins still exist — culturally, economically, spiritually — that could allow such creative feats to flourish. Juxtaposition has become an advertiser’s art. Trash is not the same thing today, in our belated self-conscious world of thrift-store savvy, mediated hipster rebellion, and omniverous collector mania. Before you know it, it’s on Ebay. Many of us still hear the spiritual call of redemptive refuse, of glimmers, junk, and “bits of beauty.” But it remains to be seen whether we can join the ranks of those who, in Ginsberg’s howling words, “dreamt and made incarnate gaps in Time & Space through images juxtaposed…”.

In a world that is so obsessed with material possessions, and that is so influenced by commercialism, it is inevitable that there will be times when the world becomes disillusioned with this particular path of progression and the objects associated with it. In my opinion the false, shallow and impersonal nature of the material world we live in is more than enough reason for collectors to want to seek works of art that represent a more idealistic and romantic approach to life. The familiar nature of works that are constructed of “found objects” is one reason that such works have greater appeal during times of disillusionment and disenchantment. As far as I am concerned it makes sense that a work constructed of familiar “found” objects would quite easily evoke a sense of nostalgia and sentimentality in many people and, as I have mentioned in previous posts, the familiar brings a sense of comfort and confidence to people during times of uncertainty.

The work of artists who are influenced by, or who produce work in line with, the concepts adopted by the Arte Povera movement, can also act as a sort of escapism that transports the viewer to another world that Erik Davis describes in his article ‘The Alchemy of Trash, the West Coast of Spiritual Collage’ as:

“a life authentically rooted in the noncommercial margins of bohemia, a magic circle of art and fellowship and esoteric romanticism that transmuted the objects and images it embraced”.

The inauthentic, sterile and commercialistic path that the art market tends to take during heady times of blissful ignorance will always come to a grinding halt when people are forced to face facts and return to reality. Works that embody the concept of arte povera, such as “found object” collages and sculptures, have an authenticity and spirituality that is extremely difficult to ignore unless one has been blinded by the glitz, glamour and sheen of the modern material world. Thankfully, the veil of commercialism and materialism has been lifted allowing these often shunned works to be experienced in all their glory – if only for a short period of time.

To be continued…………

image:

George Herms
Song for Hope
ca. 1986

Top 2010 Art Market Trends Pt. 3 – artmarketblog.com

Although 2010 saw a plethora of cities all over the world emerge as centres of cultural and artistic production, one of the most interesting locations of art market growth during 2010 was none other than the city of Los Angeles. The opening of a new building at the LACMA, the naming of Jeffrey Deitch as the new head of the LA MOCA, the sale of the LA based Dennis Hopper estate and other major events that took place during 2010 have taken the LA art scene to new heights – a climb that some say will soon elevate the LA art scene above the NY art scene.

If you have read my last couple of posts on the art market trends of 2010 you will know that one of the strongest trends that I identified from 2010 was a focus on work that was clearly influenced by the concepts and characteristics of arte povera. One of the most significant auction sales of arte povera style work in 2010 was the sale of the Dennis Hopper estate which, as I mentioned above, was an LA based estate. Ïnterestingly, we already we have a connection between the arte povera trend and the LA art scene. To explain the connection between the LA art scene and the arte povera trend further I need to take a slight detour and take a look at the different ways that dealers can approach the sale of fine art.

When a dealer decides to open a new gallery or take on a new market, there are several options that they have when it comes to deciding how they are going to approach that market. The options are:

A. Discovering and promoting emerging young talent

B. Selling the work of well established and highly recognisable artists

C. Reviving and promoting the work of artists from the past who were either overlooked or just not considered worthy at the time they were most active.

The market for emerging talent in LA is obviously flourishing, as is the market for the work of famous LA artists such as Hockney and Ruscha, which leaves option C as the option with the most potential for dealers. Art critic Mat Gleason recently wrote a piece for the Huffington Post titled ‘The Ten Most UNDERRATED Los Angeles Art World Stars’ ( see article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mat-gleason/the-ten-most-underrated-l_b_684359.html ). What made me particularly excited to find this article was the fact that three of the artists were artists that produced work that fits in perfectly with the arte povera trend; the second connection between the LA art scene and the arte povera trend. The current progression of this trend suggests that these three artists – George Herms, Lynn Foulkes and Michael C. McMillen – will begin to get the recognition they deserve as dealers continue to look for “new” artistic talent to promote in the form of overlooked artists from the past.

One of the reasons that LA is such an important location for the arte povera trend is the strong connection that LA has with artistic movements and cultural trends that relate strongly to the concepts and characteristics of arte povera. An influential beatnik trend that emerged in LA during the 50’s and 60’s was partially responsible for one of the most significant arte povera related (even though it appears to have predated arte povera) art trends to emerge in LA – the California Assemblage movement. According to the Laguna Art Museum website:

“Historically speaking, California Assemblage art was most prominent in the 1950s and 60s. The California Assemblage movement was born out of the Beat Generation of artists and poets, and George Herms was an active participant. Herms, whose work dates back to the early 1950s, is seen as one of the last living luminaries of the California Assemblage movement. Herms’ reclamation and reverence for the found object, along with his appreciation and use of entropy as an active and constant force operating on it, are the tools he uses to transform the detritus of our society into his artworks.”

The connections that I have made over the last few posts between arte povera, assemblage, collage, Latin American art and the LA art scene show that art market trends are more than just random coincidences. This particular trend has become so influential because of the strengthening and emergence of several markets around the world that have a strong connections with cultural and artistic traditions that can linked to the concepts and influences that resulted in the emergence of the arte povera movement and associated styles.

image:

Llyn Foulkes
Dali and Me, 2006
Mixed media
33 x 26 in. (83.8 x 66 cm)
Hammer Museum, Los Angeles

Top 2010 Art Market Trends Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

admin — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 13:07:11 +0000

Top 2010 Art Market Trends Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

“a life authentically rooted in the noncommercial margins of bohemia, a magic circle of art and fellowship and esoteric romanticism that transmuted the objects and images it embraced”.

To be continued…………

image:

George Herms
Song for Hope
ca. 1986

Top 2010 Art Market Trends Pt. 1 – artmarketblog.com

admin — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 21:23:29 +0000

Top 2010 Art Market Trends Pt. 1 – artmarketblog.com

'Venus of the Rags' by Michelangelo Pistoletto

According to the Tate Modern website:

How to Avoid Dirty Art Auction Tricks – artmarketblog.com

artforprofits — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 04:14:39 +0000

How to Avoid Dirty Art Auction Tricks – artmarketblog.com

Having focused my last few posts on the issues surrounding the questionable practices of some art auction houses, I thought it important to let people know how they can avoid becoming a victim of dirty art auction tricks and tactics. The only real way to avoid becoming a victim of the art auction houses is to ask questions and to know which questions to ask. Below is a list of questions, and the reasoning behind each question, that will ensure that you know exactly where you stand.

Seven questions every buyer should ask before bidding on a work of art:

1. Does the auction house or anyone associated with the auction house have an ownership interest in the work of art I am thinking of purchasing?

(The reason you should ask this question is that if an auction house has an ownership interest in a work of art you should question whether this would have an effect on the way the auction house markets and presents the work of art in question – as well as the final price. Auction houses are required to indicate in auction catalogues when they have an ownership interest in a work of art.)

2. Is the auction house employee who is advising me on my purchases also representing the seller of the works they are advising me on?

(The reason you should ask this question is that it is not unknown for a specialist assigned to a particular client as an advisor to be representing the seller of the works they are advising the buyer to purchase. If you are assigned an expert advisor by an auction house make sure they are not representing the seller of the particular works you are interested in.)

3. Is there any doubt regarding the authenticity or provenance of the works of art I am interested in purchasing?

(The reason you need to ask this question is that auction houses are not always forthcoming with information regarding authenticity. It is worth while making sure that you are getting what you are paying for.)

4. Who has authenticated the works of art I am interested in purchasing, what qualifications do they have and what evidence was the authentication based on?

(The reason you need to ask this question is that auction houses have been known to justify the attribution they make using less than reliable information.)

5. When were the works of art I am interested in purchasing last consigned to an auction and what was the result?

(The reason that you should ask this question is that auction houses are not always forthcoming with information regarding the consignment history of a work of art. Auction houses have been known to sell the same work of art a number of times within a short period of time and not disclose this information to buyers. It is important to know this information as it is likely there is reason that this has occurred. It is also important to know this information because a work of art being passed in at auction can gain a stigma that can reduce the value.)

6. Does the auction house allow the auctioneer to bid in his own sale?

(It should be obvious why one needs to ask this question, and yes, some auction houses to allow the auctioneer to bid on their own sale.)

7. What is the condition of the works of art I am interested in purchasing and has a condition report been completed on each work?

(Auction houses are not always forthcoming with information regarding the condition of a work of art. It is generally expected that buyers will inspect a work of art themselves and will be aware of the condition of the work of art. If you are not able to assess the condition of a work of art then hire an expert.)

Are Art Auction Houses Mocking Art Buyers? – artmarketblog.com

artforprofits — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 04:46:34 +0000

Are Art Auction Houses Mocking Art Buyers? – artmarketblog.com

A couple of posts ago I said that I have great respect for art auction houses – well, after the events of the last few weeks that respect is rapidly declining. If you have read my last few posts on contemporary art auctions then you will know that I have issues with the way some auction houses conduct their business. Unfortunately, over the last few days it has come to my attention that the problems that I identified are only the tip of the iceberg. Not only does there seem to be the potential for art auction buyers to be influenced by incorrectly categorised and catalogued works, but apparently some auction houses now appear to conducting auctions in a manner that suggests that art buyers are unable to make decisions for themselves when buying at auction, and need to be told what they should be buying. There are two recent events that have lead me to this opinion the first being the Phillips De Pury “Carte Blanche” auction, and the second being the recent Sotheby’s November contemporary art auction. Before I begin I want to state that the following is purely my opinion and not in any way a statement of fact.

A comment by Alex Rotter, head of the Contemporary Art Department at Sotheby’s in New York, was the first indication I received that the extent to which auction houses are influencing what buyers purchase may have increased recently. Yes, auction houses have been influencing what art buyers purchase for many years, and as businesses are more than entitled to do so, but it seems that they have begun to exert an even stronger influence of late with the seemingly blatant tactics that have caused me to write this post. According to Rotter, commenting on the Sotheby’s November contemporary art auction, “The success of tonight’s sale was the result of editing – getting the right young, Pop and Abstract Expressionist material into the sale”. So, is this an indication that auction houses are doing something that I am sure many suspect they have been doing for some time – deliberately orchestrating sales to encourage potential buyers to pay more for works than they should, or purchase works that they didn’t originally intend to buy? Is Rotter suggesting that by including a certain array of works, and arranging the catalogue in a particular way, that the auction houses are able to influence buying behaviour? Or, is he suggesting that the contemporary art sales are so carefully planned to ensure that the auction consists of works that they know they have buyers for, that they auction house can guarantee themselves a successful sale before the sale has taken place? Or is the meaning of this comment something else entirely? I will leave the answers to these questions up to you for the mean time. Food for thought though……

Now for the “Carte Blanche” sale. Having a themed auction that allows buyers who are looking for something very specific to be offered a range of related objects is something that I have no problem with; Phillips often hold themed sales such as their music themed sales. I do, however, have issues with a blatant marketing tactic being masked as a cultural and curatorial exercise, which appears to be what has taken place with the Phillips De Pury “Carte Blanche” sale. Philippe Segalot, the so called “curator” of the sale, is quoted as saying in a Phillips De Pury press release that:

“I have always been interested in the concept of curated sales, where the artworks are selected not for their market value but for their artistic quality, historical importance and coherence within the group. Here, I tried to push this idea further by bringing together a small “collection” comprised of my favourite works by my favorite artists. The result is a true self-portrait, a close representation of my life as an art lover, an art collector and an art advisor.”

To begin with, I have a problem with the notion that such a wide range of Segalot’s favourite works from his favourite artists just happened to be available for sale at the right time. AmI really to believe that the owners of Segalot’s favourite works of art were for some reason willing to sell those works just because he asked nicely? Phillips De Pury mentioned in the same press release that I got the above quote from that “He (referring to Segalot) has developed the Carte Blanche sale with the same focus and attention to quality that a private collector would develop their own collection”. So, Segalot spent 50 years putting this sale together did he? Secondly, I have a problem with Segalot suggesting that the mechanics of the sale were not financially motivated – I mean why else would an auction house hold such a sale? It is not as though the sale had any art historical or cultural significance, yet Segalot seems to be suggesting that it does. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, I have a huge issue with Phillips De Pury suggesting, in my opinion, that buyers need someone like Segalot to tell them what they should be buying. Because the auction houses seem to be making such an effort to dictate buying trends, there is a huge risk of the works associated with these trends dropping in value significantly when the auction houses move onto promoting the next profitable trend. I believe that the more the decision of what to purchase is taken out of the hands of the collectors and investors, the less stable and sustainable the art market becomes. The reasoning behind this philosophy is that collectors (and even investors) create and strengthen long term trends whereas the market is interested in making as much money from whatever trend seems most profitable at the current time.

The reason that I have such a problem with the developing and strengthening trend of auction houses dictating what art people should be buying, and encouraging buyers to pay more than they should be paying for works of art, is that some time in the future the buyers who fell for this ploy will likely find out that they paid too much. What Phillips De Pury seem to be inferring with their “Carte Blanche” sale is that the works included in the sale somehow become more valuable or desirable because they were chosen by a well known and respected art world figure. And, judging by the success of the sale, plenty of buyers fell for the ploy. I just hope these buyers don’t expect to be able to recoup what they spent anytime soon.

There are even more issues with the “Carte Blanche” sale than the ones I have outlined, but those will have to wait for another post.

Disclaimer: Auction houses are well within their rights to conduct their business in the ways that I have discussed above. I do not claim to have any proof that the auction houses are doing anything wrong, but am merely raising questions in the hope that they encourage discussion and dialogue. The above post is purely my opinion and is in no way a statement of fact.

Fixing the Contemporary Art Auction Crisis Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

artforprofits — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 11:34:30 +0000

Fixing the Contemporary Art Auction Crisis Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

In my last post I detailed two definitions of contemporary art from two different contemporary art museums that challenge the rather inadequate and misleading definition of contemporary art that many auction houses seem to abide by. Even though I had found two good museum definitions of contemporary art, I continued my search to see what else I could find. And I am glad I did continue searching because I came across a particularly interesting definition of contemporary art provided by the Tate Museum. According to the Tate, contemporary art is a:

“Term loosely used to denote art of the present day and of the relatively recent past, of an innovatory or avant-garde nature. In relation to contemporary art museums, the date of origin for the term contemporary art varies. The Institute of Contemporary Art in London, founded in 1947, champions art from that year onwards. Whereas The New Museum of Contemporary Art in New York chooses the later date of 1977. In the 1980s, Tate planned a Museum of Contemporary Art in which contemporary art was defined as art of the past ten years on a rolling basis”.

This definition is somewhat misleading because it lists the date range of two Contemporary art museums, the Institute of Contemporary Art in London and the The New Museum of Contemporary Art in New York, as though these museums define contemporary art by these date ranges. What I found was that the beginning of the date range of works in the collections of both these museums is in fact the year that each museum was founded. So, the Museum is not defining contemporary art as work produced from the year each museum was founded, but is in fact just maintaining a collection that is partly historical and archival even though their focus is on work that is new and experimental. What interested me most about the Tate definition of Contemporary art is the revelation that “In the 1980s, Tate planned a Museum of Contemporary Art in which contemporary art was defined as art of the past ten years on a rolling basis”. I personally think that this definition of contemporary art is the most accurate and sensible that I have come across and is the definition of contemporary art that the art auction houses should be abiding by. Continuing with the museum definition theme, I think that the Getty museum provides one of the most blunt and profound definitions of contemporary art on their website which states that “Strictly speaking, the term “contemporary art” refers to art made and produced by artists living today”. Here, Here !!!.

So, what does this mean for the art market, I hear you ask. Well, let’s take a look at the results of a recent contemporary art auction held by an auction house that I will not be naming. The reason I am not going to name the auction house is that there is not just one auction house on which one can lay total blame for this problem. I also have great respect for the major auction houses regardless of whether or not there are issues relating to the classification and categorisation of works of art. Looking at the top ten prices paid for this auction, which was promoted as a contemporary art auction, there were eight artists whose work was included in this top ten. The eight artists were Andy Warhol, Mark Rothko, Roy Lichtenstein, Francis Bacon, Gerhard Richter, Willem de Kooning, Robert Rauschenberg and Jean-Michel Basquiat. Out of those eight artists, seven are dead – the only surviving artist out of the eight being Gerhard Richter. Even more interesting are the dates that each of the top ten works were created: 1962, 1955, 1962, 1985, 1966, 1992, 1969, 1962, 1986 and 1987. Six of the works were created prior to 1970, three prior to 1990 and only one after 1990. The most recent work in the top ten was a work by Gerhard Richter, the only living artist in the top ten, which was created in 1992. Of all the works in the top ten, the Richter would be the only one that I would consider referring to as a work of contemporary art – only at a stretch, mind you.

Although the top ten prices paid were dominated by the work of deceased artists, I must acknowledge that the auction did include works by true living contemporary practising artists. Unfortunately the auction house uses the ridiculous misnomer ‘recent contemporary artists’ when referring to the work of the true contemporary artists. By definition, something that is ‘contemporary’ is recent so to make reference to ‘recent contemporary artists’ is just plain wrong. The fact that this term has to be used at all is, in my opinion, evidence enough that there is something amiss with the way some auction houses are cataloguing, categorising and presenting the works of art that they are selling. If you don’t think that this is a big problem in the scheme of things then I respect that and even admit that you may be right. But for me, this is the straw the broke the camel’s back; just another seemingly small problem that when added to the other seemingly small problems equal a rather big problem. I do have some plans to combat all these small problems but you will have to wait to find out what my plans are.

image: ‘The Art Crisis’ by Robert The

Art Market Blog - artmarketblog.com » contemporary art

Contemporary Art Market Karma at Phillips de Pury Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts:

Contemporary Art Market Karma at Phillips de Pury Pt. 1 – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts:

Chinese Art Market Matters from thedaily.com – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts:

Avoiding a 2011 Art Market Armageddon – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts:

The Top 2010 Art Market Trends – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts:

Top 2010 Art Market Trends Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts:

Top 2010 Art Market Trends Pt. 1 – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts:

How to Avoid Dirty Art Auction Tricks – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts:

Are Art Auction Houses Mocking Art Buyers? – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts:

Fixing the Contemporary Art Auction Crisis Pt. 2 – artmarketblog.com

Related Posts: