You know you just might be right, on the other hand look at the earnings on works of art. I remember a story about De Koonings painting “Women”, he sold it for $75.00 US. During his life time the painting sold at auction for 1.5 million dollars. I think it was about a 30 year time span, that’s good earnings. What we artists have to do is get some of these investors interested in investing in living and working artists. We may be a long shot in the games to earn millions, but even modest earnings are much better than stocks. My concern is that these investors will stop funding; donating too non profit art organizations and that endowment funds will begin to produce negative earnings. It is really something of interest to watch. Oh if only my Visa wasn’t maxed out.
 

P.S. De Kooning did not recieve any money for the later sale. the million dallor plus earnings all went to the collector on the investment. Sad but true most of the time.
 

good idea, but we artists, will probably mostly get the short end of the stick, as has been the case through out history,
I don't know. A depression could be on the horizon. Not familiar with economic history in depth, myself.
 

Artists should profit on their art!
About 30 years ago I sold a 4'X 6'
abstract expressionist acrylic on canvas to a commercial business for $5,000.00 for their home office. Today, I can't afford to buy it back. There is a perhaps a solution. Have all art sold with a contract stating that if resold within the next, say 4 years, the buyer/investor must share the profits, or a percentage thereof, etc.. This will not work, these investors recognize a good investment and want the profit income for themselves, this is why they invest, thus creating a good art market. The real solution is easy, sell the art work for more money in the first place! Let's pray that this will work. Thee Art Gallery at weddellart.com by Monty Ousley Weddell Dallas, TX