3 ms·
>For some people, buying art aren't isn't too different from buying stocks You are making it look like there's no emotion involved. Buying art in my opinion is
by ktta 9y ago
>For some people, buying art aren't isn't too different from buying stocks
You are making it look like there's no emotion involved. Buying art in my opinion is mostly an emotional one, unless you're lucky and getting a Monet in a yard sale (which you admit by saying 'you can't do anything to enjoy equities hanging on your wall.'). Also, it is definitely not a logical rationale like buying stocks. Atleast not a stable one.
For half a billion dollars there are better ways to invest, and diversity. Without risking a single point of failure like here.
Also, what guarantee is there that this will appreciate? What's stopping from this painting's value from dropping to zero in a decade or two? Other investments do too, but that's where the diversification part comes in. Art definitely has it's place in the future, but a specific piece isn't worth risking half a billion dollars over.
- zippy5 9y agoThere is centuries of data about how this asset has appreciated. It has a brand that has endured 500 years. Most of the stocks you will invest in, probably won't exist in 50. What could you possibly want to diversify against? It has outlasted Governments, new technologies, and new ideologies. Diversification is a durability strategy and this painting has proven durability across a multitude of change.
- ForHackernews 9y agoWell, unless somebody proves this is a fake. Its authenticity has been questioned.
- ktta 9y ago>Most of the stocks you will invest in, probably won't exist in 50. I wasn't just talking about stocks. There are so many other places to invest with that amount of money.