Hmm I think you'd need to spend more than 100k on a commission from any of those artists. 

I’d probably go with a Banksy canvas or a couple signed prints.

Mmmmmm figs

$50,000 actually isn't too bad for the 4. I don't approve of them but that's more because they are basically nicely crafted posters, they frankly have 0 to do with Basquiat other than the imagery, however, for those that do like these things the price is ok - when you compare it to what the last ones both cost when published and what they sell for now.

The fact you can buy a lifetime impression screen print by Basquiat signed by him for under $25,000 is to me incredible, but then those images are probably not what one thinks of when they think Basquiat, hence where their perceived value is.

I find it interesting that the estate chose these images. They are all drawings that were sold at gallery Bruno Bischofberger back in 1985. Does anyone know the size? The original drawings were 22.5"x 30" and were all done between 82/83. I wonder if they will be 1 to 1 copies, and how they got them since they presumably were sold at the show. Maybe they cut a deal with the owners to license them.

bought a set..... i think at 12,500 a sheet they are winners.... Have seen people buy "decorative" art for more...

yeah thats my point bruh.

people buying these are sad. So SAD.!

Isn’t that everything you stand for Bob? You’ve probably bought the lot..

All I care about is money. Trolling GP comes a close second.

Well then I'm sad and angry sleeping on a bed of 50s in my mansion.

Were these signed by him?  He has been dead for almost 30 years...

Remind me tomorrow and I'll take pics of the impressionist collection in my vacation house when my hangover goes away.

This sets a bad precedent, and I honestly think that the people with the cash for these don't quite understand the meaninglessness of it all. What connection does it have to the artist, other then a paycheck to the family (which arguably may be in the artists best wishes)?

People tend to shrug off multiples as just a reproduction of an original work, but the reality is much more complicated. Artists (who give a sh*t) carefully choose an image they want to produce as a print, then work in collaboration with a printer on every little detail like paper stock, colors, technique, ect. If done properly this is a long process involving lots of trial and error. BUT, the result is an edition that can accurately be included in an artists overture because they CREATED it.

In fact, the US congress literally passed a bill requiring the disclosure of this involvement for every print run sold to the public because its so incredibly important that buyers can assess how much involvement the artist truly had. Here, its like they aren't even trying. The money is there because Basquiat didn't produce many multiples, but wouldn't the logical conclusion of that be that he did not want to? Of course his untimely death makes all this uncertain, but IMHO if he wanted to produce massive serigraphs he would have (the dude did live with Warhol).

The intent really isn't bad. His family deserves to profit from their rightful estate (property rights!). But, the execution is morally troubling. Pace is marketing these as if they are no different then any other print run but that's obviously not the case. Inevitably, people will buy without full knowledge of the differences. Personally, I say if you want to do it, make editions of 1000-2000 and price them at 1-2k. That way its clear that its decorative in nature, yet everyone still gets paid, and there remains a small collectability to the edition for purchasers (ie a "fancy poster" with estate approval). I also wish someone would help me grab a banksy box set and a flying pet pig, so I doubt any of these desires will come true.