Art Market Monitor

Global Coverage ~ Unique Analysis

  • AMMpro
  • AMM Fantasy Collecting Game
  • Podcast
  • Contact Us

Dumb Art Economics: $100 Million x 6 ≠ $600m

November 5, 2014 by Marion Maneker

Matisse Backs

Felix Salmon has made a name for himself as an astute writer about markets. And he’s very knowledgeable about art. So it’s a mystery that he writes this:

The most interesting aspect of the hundred-million-dollar Giacometti is that it isn’t unique. “Chariot” comes from an edition of six—each of which, we can now assume, is worth roughly the same amount. When Giacometti made this sculpture, he didn’t create a hundred million dollars in present-day value; he created six hundred million dollars.

As Salmon well knows, price is set on the margin. So the $100 million for this Chariot is only achieved because four of the other five works are in museums. So, this Chariot is only worth $100m because the other Chariots are not accessible. The “value” of the six editions, then, is the purchase price of each work added together, not multiplied.

How do we know this? Because it has been demonstrated repeatedly in the auction market. An apt example would be the Matisse series of bronze backs. One set is in the garden of MoMA. In 2010, another one of the backs (No. 4) alone sold for $48.8m.

Wow. Doesn’t that mean a complete set of four would be worth, like, $200m?

That’s what the Burnett Foundation thought. So they decided to sell their complete set of four backs, one of the four or five complete sets in a museum (but theirs was on loan.) When it came time to sell, however, the final deal price was $120m instead of $200m. That’s $30m per back or 60% of what was paid just a year before.

Why the price drop? Because the $48m buyer of one back operated under the impression that the four backs on loan were never going to be sold. Had the buyer been able to see the future, she might have waited to get the whole set. Either way, with more backs coming on the market, the idea that a buyer would never get that chance again was punctured and the price pressure dropped somewhat. Also, one bidder from the previous year had already dropped out because they bought the first back. Fewer bidders make lower prices.

Sotheby’s and Giacometti’s hundred-million-dollar “Chariot” (The New Yorker)

More from Art Market Monitor

  • Artelligence Podcast: Mathias Rastorfer, Galerie Gmurzynska’s Joan Miró ShowArtelligence Podcast: Mathias Rastorfer, Galerie Gmurzynska’s Joan Miró Show
  • What’s Dolman Trying to Say About Murphy?What’s Dolman Trying to Say About Murphy?
  • What Art Advisers Do at AuctionWhat Art Advisers Do at Auction
  • Nye-a-comNye-a-com
  • Sotheby's 19th C European and Orientalist SaleSotheby's 19th C European and Orientalist Sale
  • Artist Gains Notoriety from Celebrity TantrumArtist Gains Notoriety from Celebrity Tantrum

Filed Under: General

About Marion Maneker

Want to get Art Market Monitor‘s posts sent to you in our email? Sign up below by clicking on the Subscribe button.

Top Posts

  • Keith Haring’s 1989 Retrospect Comes to Sotheby’s London Prints Sale
  • Lost Lempicka Discovered at Sotheby's
  • $10 M. Picasso Portrait Unseen for Decades to Sell at Bonhams
  • Vienna Secession Painting, Long Thought to Be Lost, Sets a Record at Auction
  • Four of Picasso's Women Valued at $28m Come to Christie's from Rose-Walters Collection
  • Tony Podesta's Secret Art Buying
  • Roy Lichtenstein’s Top Ten Auction Prices
  • Collection of Texas Heiress Anne Marion Expected to Fetch $150 M. at Sotheby’s
  • Norman Rockwell's Not Gay. But Is He a Great Artist?
  • Sotheby's Pulls in a $9m David Hockney for November
  • About Us/ Contact
  • Podcast
  • AMMpro
  • Newsletter
  • FAQ

twitterfacebooksoundcloud
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
California Privacy Rights
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Advertise on Art Market Monitor