The most expensive sale of a piece of art at auction just occurred for $450,300,000 and there are no threads about it, so lets get a discussion going. Some questions to begin with:
Did provenance drive the price of this sale, or was it a bidding war, or money laundering? Are we in an art pricing bubble for old masters? All artists? Are old masters immune and only more recent artists subject to the bubble? How long do we suppose it will be until something else surpasses it? This was thoroughly marketed as 'the last Da Vinci' to be available for private collection, is it a shame that such a piece will disappear from the public eye for the foreseeable future? Or is it's only draw the fact it is a Da Vinci, and that it is of little merit beyond that?
it's just above average painting, but as with every "muh da Vinci" work, it becomes overrated. I am sure that some gulf prince/king bought it, even billionaires won't buy it at that price
Christopher Ward
money laundering is not Veeky Forums
Camden Walker
>it made a lot of money, so it's good
Let me guess: you like The Beatles, Radiohead, and Marvel movies.
Easton Foster
money laundering 99%
David Bell
My money is on an oil emir with bond villain's taste for unique objects.
I doubt it's money laundering. I would like to think that somebody or an organisation successful enough to need to launder 450 million isn't going to be so incompetent that they think one morning "oh shit, should probably do something about all this cash", then checks what Christie's has coming up, bids a vast attention grabbing sum on a painting by probably the most renowned Renaissance artist, well above the expected going price. They would be lucky to see a return and it would also be highly suspicious to flip again it quickly, also It's an ungainly amount for a single painting for it to be useful to use as collateral for a loan.
If this were a cold business decision to clean up dirty money would be far more sensible to run art acquisitions like any other investment portfolio.
Austin Ward
It's a sexy Jesus drawn by Da Vinci himself. I wouldn't be surprised if Araki bought it using all the money he's made in the last 30 years.
Nathaniel Ward
Yesterday's news. Discussed (archived). Da Vinci fake painting bought by moron.
Andrew Hughes
it's not even a good painting if Da Vinci's name wasn't on it, no one would give a fuck since it's so generic
a black and white repaint maybe bush colored it :-)
Anthony Green
Historical significance.
Also, it would be a big draw for exhibits, not only because its Da Vinci, but the sale prize is so insane people will want to see what the fuss is about.
Dylan Green
Apparently somebody bought it for $10k like 15 years ago and restored it.
Henry Evans
Where do I ever imply that it is good? I personally think $450 million is an abhorrent price to pay for an object like that, it certainly isn't worth that much on its merits.
Josiah Johnson
It's fake. Da Vinci was intelligent enough to know that a sphere like that would mirror the image upside down.
Carter Baker
...
James Sullivan
It's not modern art, so it's not money laundering.
Jason Brown
Can you explain how modern art is more vulnerable to money laundering than other eras? Preferably with real examples, not how it might work.
Benjamin Roberts
Painting has no real historical significance.
Sale happened within the last 25 days (nevermind 25 years).
So, obviously, there'd be no thread about it on Veeky Forums.
Grayson Fisher
Woops...
Michael Perry
Jesus can make it mirror whatever he wants though
Lincoln Clark
Read an article today about some poor fuck in Indonesia who was horribly burnt making $6 a day when the firework factory he worked in exploded. Then see an article about some fucker who spent $450 million on a painting. Yet some people still wonder why communism is still a thing.
Matthew Wilson
>$450,300,000 michelangelo utterly and irrevocably BTFO
Kevin Williams
So you going to tell everyone how much money they should have? Kill yourself, faggot commie
Christian Walker
>rich people stay rich, but in another country >poor people starve to death You solved it
Eli Lee
Looks like a tranny
Joshua Myers
I thought that the lefty/pol/ infiltration was overblown but look at all the fucks itt that seem to subscribe to the labour theory of value
Luis Martinez
>implying people are equal in any sense How spooked can you be?
Easton Martin
it'll end up in the Louvre they opened up in Abu Dhabi. THat's my bet. 450,000,000 is ridiculous for a private collection.
John Watson
$450 million seems a bit excessive for a painting of DaVinci's that wasn't even highly known, like I could see pic related going for something that high given how famous it is in history. I'd say it's either money laundering or arabs with too much taxpayer money.
Joseph Martin
Not that user but Damien Hirst's entire career is based off of money laundering. He glued a bunch of diamonds and shit onto this skull (costing around $10 million or so), generated a lot of buzz in the media about it and tried to sell it for $100 million right off the bat just because it was made by him.
Then a committee that he headed ended up buying his own skull for around $20 million, there's no way there isn't laundering involved in this.
