DesignAddict Forums


	> Edit your post


	title of this thread your message Now consider the Picasso. Its utility is limited to sprucing up a wall. But it is a masterpiece, just like the Wright house. And it costs nothing to maintain other than insurance. And you don't have to keep the Picasso at its current location. If you want, you can roll it up, put it in a tube, sling it over your shoulder and go anywhere with it. Rich persons from all over the world with a taste for masterpieces of painting want it, not just those who are willing to live at its present location. There are many rich persons in every country in the world capable of bidding on the Picasso. Rich persons have a few places they are fond of. The Picasso can go in everyone of them. The Wright house cannot. Many rich persons capable of bidding on things like the Picasso and the Wright house, worry about inflation hedges. Both things go up in inflation. But such persons also often worry a great deal about their governments seeking to put the pinch on their wealth with taxes, or imprisonment, or what have you. What if your country is overthrown by those hostile to you? Paintings are something you can take with you as you flee, or ship, or widely disperse in various countries you might move to, and you can sell them quickly for cash. Or best of all, if life is stable in a country like USA, or UK, one can amass a huge collection of masterpieces, let them appreciate hugely, then donate them to museum and shelter a huge amount of wealth; then direct the museum to subsequently start buying up other artists, that you just happen to have collected over the years, also, and then bid those up over time so they too can be donated to preserve more of your wealth from taxes. Influencing great museums buying activities is one of the best ways drive up the value of things you have already bought at low prices. Now, let's compare the Picasso painting with the Wright house. The Picasso painting has many more rich buyers than does the Wright house. The Picasso and the Wright are good inflation hedges and both require a good bit of insurance, and both can be financed (houses 80% loan to value ratio and Picassos about 50% LTV ratio), but the Picasso doesn't cost much to maintain and you don't have to pay property taxes twice a year and so on. And great museums have not really found a way to capitalize on the ownership of real estate designed by great architects the way they have with paintings (a museum can have hundreds of master pieces in a small space, but a Wright house can't be shrunk and stuck in a new wing, because the site and the scale of the house are necessary to the masterpiece of Wright architecture. And great museums have not yet, to my knowledge, contributed to the massive bidding up of Wright houses the way they have with Picassos. associated web images (optional) associated web link (optional) your email your password create a forums account \| you forgot your password?