Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 10:42:59 GMT 1, Missing the point again. Black people being told how to think and feel by people who are not black. Interesting. I'm not denying how someone feels... I'm questioning why they would feel it only applies to them because they're black, when it's an issue for all artists. He's voicing an opinion, not an unquestionable fact.
Missing the point again. Black people being told how to think and feel by people who are not black. Interesting. I'm not denying how someone feels... I'm questioning why they would feel it only applies to them because they're black, when it's an issue for all artists. He's voicing an opinion, not an unquestionable fact. That's a bit of an "all lives matter" argument no?. He's not saying it only applies to him. He's saying he'd rather collectors supported Black Artists and the community by selling to collectors that believed and supported the content of the work and that is likely to be black art collectors as oppossed to Miami Frat Boy flippers who get in first and have no interest in the content of the work or the culture, only in profiting from the labour of black artists. Hence the analogy to slavery. |
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 10:52:16 GMT 1, I am pretty sure that most of the flippers don't even know that the artist is black ... or care, that's the beautiful think about rational capitalism it really only cares about green.
I am pretty sure that most of the flippers don't even know that the artist is black ... or care, that's the beautiful think about rational capitalism it really only cares about green. cough cough, not to mention -slavery, the industrial for-profit prison complex, scientific racism, systemic racism, colonialism, imperialism, genocide and white supremacy. |
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Happy Shopper on Apr 23, 2021 12:17:22 GMT 1, I'm not denying how someone feels... I'm questioning why they would feel it only applies to them because they're black, when it's an issue for all artists. He's voicing an opinion, not an unquestionable fact. That's a bit of an "all lives matter" argument no?. He's not saying it only applies to him. He's saying he'd rather collectors supported Black Artists and the community by selling to collectors that believed and supported the content of the work and that is likely to be black art collectors as oppossed to Miami Frat Boy flippers who get in first and have no interest in the content of the work or the culture, only in profiting from the labour of black artists. Hence the analogy to slavery.
Not at all an "all lives matter" argument, because in this case black artists aren't in any way being treated differently to other artists... Unless someone can show an example of how there's a difference in how it's being treated ??
Black artists' art is just being bought and sold the same as all art... as far as I can see. He can be unhappy about flippers, but he made it a racist thing, which seems like a huge stretch.
And he doesn't say Miami Frat Boys, he says Europeans (I assume meaning White) and Asians. Which is a pretty odd thing to say, and assumes none of those Europeans or Asians could also be Black.
AND to suggest that art should only be bought if you can afford to keep it, even when it's price rises to 5 figures, like pieces in his collection (humble brag) is spoken from a position of privilege which he clearly doesn't even realise in himself.
I'm not denying how someone feels... I'm questioning why they would feel it only applies to them because they're black, when it's an issue for all artists. He's voicing an opinion, not an unquestionable fact. That's a bit of an "all lives matter" argument no?. He's not saying it only applies to him. He's saying he'd rather collectors supported Black Artists and the community by selling to collectors that believed and supported the content of the work and that is likely to be black art collectors as oppossed to Miami Frat Boy flippers who get in first and have no interest in the content of the work or the culture, only in profiting from the labour of black artists. Hence the analogy to slavery. Not at all an "all lives matter" argument, because in this case black artists aren't in any way being treated differently to other artists... Unless someone can show an example of how there's a difference in how it's being treated ?? Black artists' art is just being bought and sold the same as all art... as far as I can see. He can be unhappy about flippers, but he made it a racist thing, which seems like a huge stretch. And he doesn't say Miami Frat Boys, he says Europeans (I assume meaning White) and Asians. Which is a pretty odd thing to say, and assumes none of those Europeans or Asians could also be Black. AND to suggest that art should only be bought if you can afford to keep it, even when it's price rises to 5 figures, like pieces in his collection (humble brag) is spoken from a position of privilege which he clearly doesn't even realise in himself. |
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 13:11:38 GMT 1, That's a bit of an "all lives matter" argument no?. He's not saying it only applies to him. He's saying he'd rather collectors supported Black Artists and the community by selling to collectors that believed and supported the content of the work and that is likely to be black art collectors as oppossed to Miami Frat Boy flippers who get in first and have no interest in the content of the work or the culture, only in profiting from the labour of black artists. Hence the analogy to slavery. Not at all an "all lives matter" argument, because in this case black artists aren't in any way being treated differently to other artists... Unless someone can show an example of how there's a difference in how it's being treated ?? Black artists' art is just being bought and sold the same as all art... as far as I can see. He can be unhappy about flippers, but he made it a racist thing, which seems like a huge stretch. And he doesn't say Miami Frat Boys, he says Europeans (I assume meaning White) and Asians. Which is a pretty odd thing to say, and assumes none of those Europeans or Asians could also be Black. AND to suggest that art should only be bought if you can afford to keep it, even when it's price rises to 5 figures, like pieces in his collection (humble brag) is spoken from a position of privilege which he clearly doesn't even realise in himself.
Unless you've been living under a rock these past couple of years, we know very well that people of colour are treated very differently in the US and that BLM's push for an end to systemic racism alongside decolonising art and education institutions has been key in raising the profile of black artists across the board. From Juxtapoz to MoMA to Sotheby's. Every strata of the art world has been informed by this push for equity and are responding in various ways to accomodate these demands in a manner we haven't seen before. I imagine watching over priviliged white Frat Boy's recognising this, jumping on the bandwagon and flipping black artists work is annoying to some. As it should be. I don't think it's contentious at all, but I can see why others may. I also imagine there are artists of colour who are quite happy for the cash and the hype. I wouldn't take it so personally, you'll give us YT's a bad name ;-)
That's a bit of an "all lives matter" argument no?. He's not saying it only applies to him. He's saying he'd rather collectors supported Black Artists and the community by selling to collectors that believed and supported the content of the work and that is likely to be black art collectors as oppossed to Miami Frat Boy flippers who get in first and have no interest in the content of the work or the culture, only in profiting from the labour of black artists. Hence the analogy to slavery. Not at all an "all lives matter" argument, because in this case black artists aren't in any way being treated differently to other artists... Unless someone can show an example of how there's a difference in how it's being treated ?? Black artists' art is just being bought and sold the same as all art... as far as I can see. He can be unhappy about flippers, but he made it a racist thing, which seems like a huge stretch. And he doesn't say Miami Frat Boys, he says Europeans (I assume meaning White) and Asians. Which is a pretty odd thing to say, and assumes none of those Europeans or Asians could also be Black. AND to suggest that art should only be bought if you can afford to keep it, even when it's price rises to 5 figures, like pieces in his collection (humble brag) is spoken from a position of privilege which he clearly doesn't even realise in himself.
Unless you've been living under a rock these past couple of years, we know very well that people of colour are treated very differently in the US and that BLM's push for an end to systemic racism alongside decolonising art and education institutions has been key in raising the profile of black artists across the board. From Juxtapoz to MoMA to Sotheby's. Every strata of the art world has been informed by this push for equity and are responding in various ways to accomodate these demands in a manner we haven't seen before. I imagine watching over priviliged white Frat Boy's recognising this, jumping on the bandwagon and flipping black artists work is annoying to some. As it should be. I don't think it's contentious at all, but I can see why others may. I also imagine there are artists of colour who are quite happy for the cash and the hype. I wouldn't take it so personally, you'll give us YT's a bad name ;-) |
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Happy Shopper on Apr 23, 2021 13:32:00 GMT 1, Not at all an "all lives matter" argument, because in this case black artists aren't in any way being treated differently to other artists... Unless someone can show an example of how there's a difference in how it's being treated ?? Black artists' art is just being bought and sold the same as all art... as far as I can see. He can be unhappy about flippers, but he made it a racist thing, which seems like a huge stretch. And he doesn't say Miami Frat Boys, he says Europeans (I assume meaning White) and Asians. Which is a pretty odd thing to say, and assumes none of those Europeans or Asians could also be Black. AND to suggest that art should only be bought if you can afford to keep it, even when it's price rises to 5 figures, like pieces in his collection (humble brag) is spoken from a position of privilege which he clearly doesn't even realise in himself.
Unless you've been living under a rock these past couple of years, we know very well that people of colour are treated very differently in the US and that BLM's push for an end to systemic racism alongside decolonising art and education institutions has been key in raising the profile of black artists across the board. From Juxtapoz to MoMA to Sotheby's. Every strata of the art world has been informed by this push for equity and are responding in various ways to accomodate these demands in a manner we haven't seen before. I imagine watching over priviliged white Frat Boy's flipping black artists work is annoying to some. As it should be. I also imagine others are quite happy for the cash and the hype. I wouldn't take it so personally, you'll give us YT's a bad name ;-)
No one is denying the importance of BLM, and equal treatment in all things.
But is this related to the flipping of art? Is it being done in a way that overly effects Black artists more than other artists?
There's been an incredible uplift in the popularity and prices of Black artists, so to so quickly start complaining about the downsides to that popularity, and make it about race, seems like a crazy stance to take, IMO.
Not at all an "all lives matter" argument, because in this case black artists aren't in any way being treated differently to other artists... Unless someone can show an example of how there's a difference in how it's being treated ?? Black artists' art is just being bought and sold the same as all art... as far as I can see. He can be unhappy about flippers, but he made it a racist thing, which seems like a huge stretch. And he doesn't say Miami Frat Boys, he says Europeans (I assume meaning White) and Asians. Which is a pretty odd thing to say, and assumes none of those Europeans or Asians could also be Black. AND to suggest that art should only be bought if you can afford to keep it, even when it's price rises to 5 figures, like pieces in his collection (humble brag) is spoken from a position of privilege which he clearly doesn't even realise in himself.
Unless you've been living under a rock these past couple of years, we know very well that people of colour are treated very differently in the US and that BLM's push for an end to systemic racism alongside decolonising art and education institutions has been key in raising the profile of black artists across the board. From Juxtapoz to MoMA to Sotheby's. Every strata of the art world has been informed by this push for equity and are responding in various ways to accomodate these demands in a manner we haven't seen before. I imagine watching over priviliged white Frat Boy's flipping black artists work is annoying to some. As it should be. I also imagine others are quite happy for the cash and the hype. I wouldn't take it so personally, you'll give us YT's a bad name ;-) No one is denying the importance of BLM, and equal treatment in all things. But is this related to the flipping of art? Is it being done in a way that overly effects Black artists more than other artists? There's been an incredible uplift in the popularity and prices of Black artists, so to so quickly start complaining about the downsides to that popularity, and make it about race, seems like a crazy stance to take, IMO. |
|
Wearology
Junior Member
Staff at FatFreeArt
🗨️ 3,598
👍🏻 4,514
April 2008
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Wearology on Apr 23, 2021 14:46:20 GMT 1, NEWS
Study Finds That Just Over 1 Percent Of The Art In All Major U.S. Museums Are By Black Artists
This is the lowest share of any race.
Jon Greig
by Jon Greig
June 06, 2019 at 4:18 pm
NEWS
Study Finds That Just Over 1 Percent Of The Art In All Major U.S. Museums Are By Black Artists
This is the lowest share of any race.
Jon Greig
by Jon Greig
June 06, 2019 at 4:18 pm
|
|
|
|
Pipes
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,438
👍🏻 2,883
January 2012
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Pipes on Apr 23, 2021 16:14:54 GMT 1, Surely flippers and robbers don’t care of the artist’s origin...
A few banksy's at 1:34
bomb hugger
applause
golf sale
trollies
Surely flippers and robbers don’t care of the artist’s origin... A few banksy's at 1:34 bomb hugger applause golf sale trollies |
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 16:15:22 GMT 1, "Not at all an "all lives matter" argument, because in this case black artists aren't in any way being treated differently to other artists... Unless someone can show an example of how there's a difference in how it's being treated ?? "
Unless you've been living under a rock these past couple of years, we know very well that people of colour are treated very differently in the US and that BLM's push for an end to systemic racism alongside decolonising art and education institutions has been key in raising the profile of black artists across the board. From Juxtapoz to MoMA to Sotheby's. Every strata of the art world has been informed by this push for equity and are responding in various ways to accomodate these demands in a manner we haven't seen before. I imagine watching over priviliged white Frat Boy's flipping black artists work is annoying to some. As it should be. I also imagine others are quite happy for the cash and the hype. I wouldn't take it so personally, you'll give us YT's a bad name ;-) There's been an incredible uplift in the popularity and prices of Black artists, so to so quickly start complaining about the downsides to that popularity, and make it about race, seems like a crazy stance to take, IMO.
"Not at all an "all lives matter" argument, because in this case black artists aren't in any way being treated differently to other artists... Unless someone can show an example of how there's a difference in how it's being treated ?? "
Unless you've been living under a rock these past couple of years, we know very well that people of colour are treated very differently in the US and that BLM's push for an end to systemic racism alongside decolonising art and education institutions has been key in raising the profile of black artists across the board. From Juxtapoz to MoMA to Sotheby's. Every strata of the art world has been informed by this push for equity and are responding in various ways to accomodate these demands in a manner we haven't seen before. I imagine watching over priviliged white Frat Boy's flipping black artists work is annoying to some. As it should be. I also imagine others are quite happy for the cash and the hype. I wouldn't take it so personally, you'll give us YT's a bad name ;-) There's been an incredible uplift in the popularity and prices of Black artists, so to so quickly start complaining about the downsides to that popularity, and make it about race, seems like a crazy stance to take, IMO. Black people, always complaining and taking crazy stances, can't they just be grateful YT frat boys are flipping their culture for profit. Tsssk.. |
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Happy Shopper on Apr 23, 2021 17:02:00 GMT 1, There's been an incredible uplift in the popularity and prices of Black artists, so to so quickly start complaining about the downsides to that popularity, and make it about race, seems like a crazy stance to take, IMO. Black people, always complaining and taking crazy stances, can't they just be grateful YT frat boys are flipping their culture for profit. Tsssk..
One artist, and some other artists reposting, isn't "Black people". No one is generalising here. Tssk. 
There's been an incredible uplift in the popularity and prices of Black artists, so to so quickly start complaining about the downsides to that popularity, and make it about race, seems like a crazy stance to take, IMO. Black people, always complaining and taking crazy stances, can't they just be grateful YT frat boys are flipping their culture for profit. Tsssk.. One artist, and some other artists reposting, isn't "Black people". No one is generalising here. Tssk. |
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 17:15:18 GMT 1, Black people, always complaining and taking crazy stances, can't they just be grateful YT frat boys are flipping their culture for profit. Tsssk.. One artist, and some other artists reposting, isn't "Black people". No one is generalising here. Tssk.
Black people, always complaining and taking crazy stances, can't they just be grateful YT frat boys are flipping their culture for profit. Tsssk.. One artist, and some other artists reposting, isn't "Black people". No one is generalising here. Tssk. But you understand why Basil Kincaid could find it distasteful or ? |
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Happy Shopper on Apr 23, 2021 17:44:26 GMT 1, One artist, and some other artists reposting, isn't "Black people". No one is generalising here. Tssk. But you understand why Basil Kincaid could find it distasteful or ?
Are you just sealioning now? I think I've been very clear.
One artist, and some other artists reposting, isn't "Black people". No one is generalising here. Tssk. But you understand why Basil Kincaid could find it distasteful or ? Are you just sealioning now? I think I've been very clear. |
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by scarylarry on Apr 23, 2021 18:13:01 GMT 1, This thread is really bringing out the racists..
This thread is really bringing out the racists..
|
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 18:26:40 GMT 1, But you understand why Basil Kincaid could find it distasteful or ? Are you just sealioning now? I think I've been very clear.
But you understand why Basil Kincaid could find it distasteful or ? Are you just sealioning now? I think I've been very clear. Not at all, I'm genuinely interested and curious about how flippers general sense of entitlement has developed this kind of guilty "white fragility" around collecting black art, to the extent that they'll call out black artists who are championing a kind of sef-determinism for the movement. But I forget, I've been away a while and didnt realise just how much that "supreme" mentality had infected and commodified all aspects of this scene which seems to have disconnected from the "art", maybe that's also why people are looking at more traditional artists like Richter, Emin, Hirst, Riley etc. I was maybe hoping there was a little more art left in "urban art" than there is, I guess that's Basil's point also. I guess ultimately it's about empathy and an awareness of our own privilege. |
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 18:28:06 GMT 1, This thread is really bringing out the racists..
This thread is really bringing out the racists.. haha, let's bring out the looting videos |
|
|
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Happy Shopper on Apr 23, 2021 19:22:46 GMT 1, Are you just sealioning now? I think I've been very clear. Not at all, I'm genuinely interested and curious about how flippers general sense of entitlement has developed this kind of guilty "white fragility" around collecting black art, to the extent that they'll call out black artists who are championing a kind of sef-determinism for the movement. But I forget, I've been away a while and didnt realise just how much that "supreme" mentality had infected and commodified all aspects of this scene which seems to have disconnected from the "art", maybe that's also why people are looking at more traditional artists like Richter, Emin, Hirst, Riley etc. I was maybe hoping there was a little more art left in "urban art" than there is, I guess that's Basil's point also. I guess ultimately it's about empathy and an awareness of our own privilege.
Flipping is bad. That’s something discussed many times on here.
It’s annoying sometimes, but can also build an artist’s popularity and primary prices... actually helping the artist in a perverse way.
Popularity isn’t a bad thing.
The question being asked is, are European and Chinese flippers of Black art somehow worse?
Personally I think all flipping is the same. Good and bad.
Are you just sealioning now? I think I've been very clear. Not at all, I'm genuinely interested and curious about how flippers general sense of entitlement has developed this kind of guilty "white fragility" around collecting black art, to the extent that they'll call out black artists who are championing a kind of sef-determinism for the movement. But I forget, I've been away a while and didnt realise just how much that "supreme" mentality had infected and commodified all aspects of this scene which seems to have disconnected from the "art", maybe that's also why people are looking at more traditional artists like Richter, Emin, Hirst, Riley etc. I was maybe hoping there was a little more art left in "urban art" than there is, I guess that's Basil's point also. I guess ultimately it's about empathy and an awareness of our own privilege. Flipping is bad. That’s something discussed many times on here. It’s annoying sometimes, but can also build an artist’s popularity and primary prices... actually helping the artist in a perverse way. Popularity isn’t a bad thing. The question being asked is, are European and Chinese flippers of Black art somehow worse? Personally I think all flipping is the same. Good and bad. |
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 19:42:29 GMT 1, Not at all, I'm genuinely interested and curious about how flippers general sense of entitlement has developed this kind of guilty "white fragility" around collecting black art, to the extent that they'll call out black artists who are championing a kind of sef-determinism for the movement. But I forget, I've been away a while and didnt realise just how much that "supreme" mentality had infected and commodified all aspects of this scene which seems to have disconnected from the "art", maybe that's also why people are looking at more traditional artists like Richter, Emin, Hirst, Riley etc. I was maybe hoping there was a little more art left in "urban art" than there is, I guess that's Basil's point also. I guess ultimately it's about empathy and an awareness of our own privilege. Flipping is bad. That’s something discussed many times on here. It’s annoying sometimes, but can also build an artist’s popularity and primary prices... actually helping the artist in a perverse way. Popularity isn’t a bad thing. The question being asked is, are European and Chinese flippers of Black art somehow worse? Personally I think all flipping is the same. Good and bad.
Not at all, I'm genuinely interested and curious about how flippers general sense of entitlement has developed this kind of guilty "white fragility" around collecting black art, to the extent that they'll call out black artists who are championing a kind of sef-determinism for the movement. But I forget, I've been away a while and didnt realise just how much that "supreme" mentality had infected and commodified all aspects of this scene which seems to have disconnected from the "art", maybe that's also why people are looking at more traditional artists like Richter, Emin, Hirst, Riley etc. I was maybe hoping there was a little more art left in "urban art" than there is, I guess that's Basil's point also. I guess ultimately it's about empathy and an awareness of our own privilege. Flipping is bad. That’s something discussed many times on here. It’s annoying sometimes, but can also build an artist’s popularity and primary prices... actually helping the artist in a perverse way. Popularity isn’t a bad thing. The question being asked is, are European and Chinese flippers of Black art somehow worse? Personally I think all flipping is the same. Good and bad. Yeah I get that, but I also get that after a long and arduous road to recognition through grass roots pressure, that it can feel to some that their scene and particular form of expression is being "targetted". |
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Happy Shopper on Apr 23, 2021 19:51:07 GMT 1, Flipping is bad. That’s something discussed many times on here. It’s annoying sometimes, but can also build an artist’s popularity and primary prices... actually helping the artist in a perverse way. Popularity isn’t a bad thing. The question being asked is, are European and Chinese flippers of Black art somehow worse? Personally I think all flipping is the same. Good and bad. Yeah I get that, but I also get that after a long and arduous road to recognition through grass roots pressure, that it can feel to some that their scene and particular form of expression is being "targetted".
It’s getting more popular. It definitely feels like a huge surge in interest in Black artists.
But what can black artists do if they don’t want white or asian people making a profit off their work!? I’m not sure how they can square that circle within the art world!?
If it’s popular it gets bought and sold, by whoever can afford it.
Flipping is bad. That’s something discussed many times on here. It’s annoying sometimes, but can also build an artist’s popularity and primary prices... actually helping the artist in a perverse way. Popularity isn’t a bad thing. The question being asked is, are European and Chinese flippers of Black art somehow worse? Personally I think all flipping is the same. Good and bad. Yeah I get that, but I also get that after a long and arduous road to recognition through grass roots pressure, that it can feel to some that their scene and particular form of expression is being "targetted". It’s getting more popular. It definitely feels like a huge surge in interest in Black artists. But what can black artists do if they don’t want white or asian people making a profit off their work!? I’m not sure how they can square that circle within the art world!? If it’s popular it gets bought and sold, by whoever can afford it. |
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 20:42:21 GMT 1, Yeah I get that, but I also get that after a long and arduous road to recognition through grass roots pressure, that it can feel to some that their scene and particular form of expression is being "targetted". It’s getting more popular. It definitely feels like a huge surge in interest in Black artists. But what can black artists do if they don’t want white or asian people making a profit off their work!? I’m not sure how they can square that circle within the art world!? If it’s popular it gets bought and sold, by whoever can afford it.
Yeah I get that, but I also get that after a long and arduous road to recognition through grass roots pressure, that it can feel to some that their scene and particular form of expression is being "targetted". It’s getting more popular. It definitely feels like a huge surge in interest in Black artists. But what can black artists do if they don’t want white or asian people making a profit off their work!? I’m not sure how they can square that circle within the art world!? If it’s popular it gets bought and sold, by whoever can afford it. Yep, not an easy path to tread if you're new to this world I guess, I guess we're used to it after 10 years of watching hedge fund managers slowly buy into anti-capitalist themed art. :-) Anyway, cheers for the chat, appreciated. |
|
Dice
Junior Member
🗨️ 2,235
👍🏻 1,529
October 2011
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Dice on Apr 23, 2021 20:56:09 GMT 1, I think we need to stop talking about black artists, Chinese collectors, European buyers etc. What does this labelling achieve? His problem should be with flippers if that’s his point. There is no reason to bring race or ethnicity into it. His first post seems to suggest that he has no problem with people of colour flipping his stuff which is a ridiculous argument.
I think we need to stop talking about black artists, Chinese collectors, European buyers etc. What does this labelling achieve? His problem should be with flippers if that’s his point. There is no reason to bring race or ethnicity into it. His first post seems to suggest that he has no problem with people of colour flipping his stuff which is a ridiculous argument.
|
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 21:20:53 GMT 1, I think we need to stop talking about black artists, Chinese collectors, European buyers etc. What does this labelling achieve? His problem should be with flippers if that’s his point. There is no reason to bring race or ethnicity into it. His first post seems to suggest that he has no problem with people of colour flipping his stuff which is a ridiculous argument.
All of those questions are posed and answered in Raoul Peck's new 4 part documentary, "Exterminate All the Brutes" for HBO, highly recommended. It might lessen the “whitesplaining” on how artists of colour should feel and behave when they navigate white spaces. I think they're pretty much done with being told what they can say and how they should behave by people who think the world revolves around them.
I think we need to stop talking about black artists, Chinese collectors, European buyers etc. What does this labelling achieve? His problem should be with flippers if that’s his point. There is no reason to bring race or ethnicity into it. His first post seems to suggest that he has no problem with people of colour flipping his stuff which is a ridiculous argument. All of those questions are posed and answered in Raoul Peck's new 4 part documentary, "Exterminate All the Brutes" for HBO, highly recommended. It might lessen the “whitesplaining” on how artists of colour should feel and behave when they navigate white spaces. I think they're pretty much done with being told what they can say and how they should behave by people who think the world revolves around them. |
|
artzzzy
New Member
🗨️ 246
👍🏻 214
January 2021
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by artzzzy on Apr 23, 2021 22:13:35 GMT 1, I think HB should focus on resolving other issues first... like why charging GBP 1320+tax for this. Also, his works are not even flipping that much, so....
I guess that’s why he’s mainly angry with flippers 😄
I think HB should focus on resolving other issues first... like why charging GBP 1320+tax for this. Also, his works are not even flipping that much, so.... I guess that’s why he’s mainly angry with flippers 😄 |
|
Reader
Junior Member
🗨️ 1,273
👍🏻 2,836
June 2016
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Reader on Apr 23, 2021 22:39:02 GMT 1, I think HB should focus on resolving other issues first... like why charging GBP 1320+tax for this. Also, his works are not even flipping that much, so.... I guess that’s why he’s mainly angry with flippers 😄
I think HB should focus on resolving other issues first... like why charging GBP 1320+tax for this. Also, his works are not even flipping that much, so.... I guess that’s why he’s mainly angry with flippers 😄 Careful with those tropes, wokesters are watching, he re-posted an insta post, I don't think than constitutes being angry hey, maybe slightly annoyed for a minute ;-) |
|
|
|
sandworm
New Member
🗨️ 144
👍🏻 151
February 2021
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by sandworm on May 4, 2021 22:35:38 GMT 1, I'm hoping to open up a discussion on flipping art, having only been on the forum for a couple of months I've noticed a big resistance and at times hostility towards people flipping recent releases for a quick profit.
Firstly, I agree with the philosophy art should be enjoyed, hung on the wall and bring enjoyment for years to the owner and I don't wish for it to become purely an investment vehicle for people with no interest in the art itself.
However....
Much of the artists who's work I admire from names such as Hirst, Banksy, Harland Miller, Warhol, Miro, Indiana, Haring etc. are at a price point which is unobtainable for me at present.
Imagine for the sake of illustration my budget permits £500 per month of art purchases and I desire to purchase a Banksy print currently selling for £50k. This would require saving that £500 a month for approximately 8 years to reach the £50k required for the purchase, at which point the print has appreciated and is now worth £100k, back to the drawing board and the saving cycle continues with no art to enjoy in the mean time.
To me as a young collector just getting started with my collection the art market feels comparable to the housing market, where the generation before me enjoyed huge returns on their properties which now enable them to buy and sell at that price level with relative ease. The same goes for those who began collecting art 10-20 years ago and perhaps had a number of Banksy prints or similar in their collection.
The solution for me to allow me to break into the exclusive 'Banksy club' is to invest in some lower value releases from the likes of Shrigley, Connor Brothers etc. which can be enjoyed in the interim and if required sold very quickly due to their mass market appeal. These pieces act as stepping stone to the artists / pieces which I really desire.
I appreciate that this results in rapid price inflation at the 'low' end of the market with some ultra quick flippers immediately listing a print available only an hour earlier from source with 100% profit on-top. I've never actually sold one piece from my collection, but watching recent releases etc. It really is starting to feel like the only way I am ever going to break into my desired area of the market is to start to engage in the philosophy of "If you can't beat them, join them!"
Really keen to hear people's thoughts and have a discussion around this!
I'm hoping to open up a discussion on flipping art, having only been on the forum for a couple of months I've noticed a big resistance and at times hostility towards people flipping recent releases for a quick profit.
Firstly, I agree with the philosophy art should be enjoyed, hung on the wall and bring enjoyment for years to the owner and I don't wish for it to become purely an investment vehicle for people with no interest in the art itself.
However....
Much of the artists who's work I admire from names such as Hirst, Banksy, Harland Miller, Warhol, Miro, Indiana, Haring etc. are at a price point which is unobtainable for me at present.
Imagine for the sake of illustration my budget permits £500 per month of art purchases and I desire to purchase a Banksy print currently selling for £50k. This would require saving that £500 a month for approximately 8 years to reach the £50k required for the purchase, at which point the print has appreciated and is now worth £100k, back to the drawing board and the saving cycle continues with no art to enjoy in the mean time.
To me as a young collector just getting started with my collection the art market feels comparable to the housing market, where the generation before me enjoyed huge returns on their properties which now enable them to buy and sell at that price level with relative ease. The same goes for those who began collecting art 10-20 years ago and perhaps had a number of Banksy prints or similar in their collection.
The solution for me to allow me to break into the exclusive 'Banksy club' is to invest in some lower value releases from the likes of Shrigley, Connor Brothers etc. which can be enjoyed in the interim and if required sold very quickly due to their mass market appeal. These pieces act as stepping stone to the artists / pieces which I really desire.
I appreciate that this results in rapid price inflation at the 'low' end of the market with some ultra quick flippers immediately listing a print available only an hour earlier from source with 100% profit on-top. I've never actually sold one piece from my collection, but watching recent releases etc. It really is starting to feel like the only way I am ever going to break into my desired area of the market is to start to engage in the philosophy of "If you can't beat them, join them!"
Really keen to hear people's thoughts and have a discussion around this!
|
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Black Wolf on May 4, 2021 22:46:13 GMT 1, Flipping is just a part of the game
You buy and hold a £10 Banksy poster for 5 years and sell it for £2000, there’s no grief.
You buy a £1200 Shrigley and sell it for £2500 a week later, you get grief.
There is no difference.
If buying and selling a few things helps pay for a more expensive piece or helps pay the bills go for it
Flipping is just a part of the game
You buy and hold a £10 Banksy poster for 5 years and sell it for £2000, there’s no grief.
You buy a £1200 Shrigley and sell it for £2500 a week later, you get grief.
There is no difference.
If buying and selling a few things helps pay for a more expensive piece or helps pay the bills go for it
|
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Sebastian Dusseldorf on May 4, 2021 22:55:20 GMT 1, How about you get a hobby, where you can be part of the club you really wanna be in, without raining on the parade of people who maybe only have 50£ a month, save for the year, to get a print from an artist they really love, but can't get it, because some people see this as a brokering game?
How about you get a hobby, where you can be part of the club you really wanna be in, without raining on the parade of people who maybe only have 50£ a month, save for the year, to get a print from an artist they really love, but can't get it, because some people see this as a brokering game?
|
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by therivler1 on May 4, 2021 22:57:09 GMT 1, no one is entitled to limited release expensive pictures from famous artists.
I did exactly what you describe 10 years ago. Flipped a bunch of stuff (thx Shep, Mondo and Mr Brainwash!) and bought an unsigned love rat in 2011 for £1100.
flip away. The people that get salty just want something for below market prices.
no one is entitled to limited release expensive pictures from famous artists.
I did exactly what you describe 10 years ago. Flipped a bunch of stuff (thx Shep, Mondo and Mr Brainwash!) and bought an unsigned love rat in 2011 for £1100.
flip away. The people that get salty just want something for below market prices.
|
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Terry Fuckwitt on May 4, 2021 22:58:46 GMT 1, Flipping is just a part of the game You buy and hold a £10 Banksy poster for 5 years and sell it for £2000, there’s no grief. You buy a £1200 Shrigley and sell it for £2500 a week later, you get grief. There is no difference. If buying and selling a few things helps pay for a more expensive piece or helps pay the bills go for it
I would say it's very different buying art and selling five years later compared to buying art and selling a week later. I also think the tax man would agree with me😉
Flipping is just a part of the game You buy and hold a £10 Banksy poster for 5 years and sell it for £2000, there’s no grief. You buy a £1200 Shrigley and sell it for £2500 a week later, you get grief. There is no difference. If buying and selling a few things helps pay for a more expensive piece or helps pay the bills go for it I would say it's very different buying art and selling five years later compared to buying art and selling a week later. I also think the tax man would agree with me😉 |
|
sandworm
New Member
🗨️ 144
👍🏻 151
February 2021
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by sandworm on May 4, 2021 23:02:16 GMT 1, Flipping is just a part of the game You buy and hold a £10 Banksy poster for 5 years and sell it for £2000, there’s no grief. You buy a £1200 Shrigley and sell it for £2500 a week later, you get grief. There is no difference. If buying and selling a few things helps pay for a more expensive piece or helps pay the bills go for it
It appears that people get hung up on the timescales, continuing your example above the reality is the Banksy poster has probably been hidden away in a flip file and equally not enjoyed or hung as art so there is simply no difference in my opinion.
It appears to me that people are concerned about 'motive':
If you make an 'accidental profit' by holding something in a flip file for a number of years before selling that profit is acceptable and even congratulated.
If you purposely make profit from a piece with a short term flip, you're given untold grief.
In both scenarios you're profiting from working the market but they are viewed entirely differently regardless of the outcome being exactly the same.
Flipping is just a part of the game You buy and hold a £10 Banksy poster for 5 years and sell it for £2000, there’s no grief. You buy a £1200 Shrigley and sell it for £2500 a week later, you get grief. There is no difference. If buying and selling a few things helps pay for a more expensive piece or helps pay the bills go for it It appears that people get hung up on the timescales, continuing your example above the reality is the Banksy poster has probably been hidden away in a flip file and equally not enjoyed or hung as art so there is simply no difference in my opinion. It appears to me that people are concerned about 'motive': If you make an 'accidental profit' by holding something in a flip file for a number of years before selling that profit is acceptable and even congratulated. If you purposely make profit from a piece with a short term flip, you're given untold grief. In both scenarios you're profiting from working the market but they are viewed entirely differently regardless of the outcome being exactly the same. |
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by Sebastian Dusseldorf on May 4, 2021 23:07:15 GMT 1, ...but they are viewed entirely differently regardless of the outcome being exactly the same.
So is punching you in the face and you running into my fist like really, really fast. 😉
...but they are viewed entirely differently regardless of the outcome being exactly the same. So is punching you in the face and you running into my fist like really, really fast. 😉 |
|
|
|
Flipping Art • The Debate, by therivler1 on May 4, 2021 23:11:38 GMT 1, No one in their right mind would have a flip file with a 5 year plan to resell it.
Fine wine takes time to age also. As long as prices appreciate greater than the opportunity cost, having a longer time frame can sometimes increase profits. There is going to be oversupply after the initial release, so after that all gets mopped up and it's a few years on, less available on the market will raise prices (if the artist and image still have demand - not always a given)
No one in their right mind would have a flip file with a 5 year plan to resell it. Fine wine takes time to age also. As long as prices appreciate greater than the opportunity cost, having a longer time frame can sometimes increase profits. There is going to be oversupply after the initial release, so after that all gets mopped up and it's a few years on, less available on the market will raise prices (if the artist and image still have demand - not always a given) |
|
