|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Happy Go Lucky Chap on Dec 5, 2018 0:59:04 GMT 1, Predictions on final number? 50000
Predictions on final number? 50000
|
|
Express Post
Junior Member
Posts โข 3,330
Likes โข 2,479
January 2008
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Express Post on Dec 5, 2018 1:31:09 GMT 1, Treefiddy
Treefiddy
|
|
tab1
Full Member
Posts โข 8,519
Likes โข 3,678
September 2011
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by tab1 on Dec 5, 2018 1:34:05 GMT 1, The real question is.... who will be the first person to open their letter and see what is inside.................?
A raffle ticket to win a original canvas It's xmas ๐
The real question is.... who will be the first person to open their letter and see what is inside.................? A raffle ticket to win a original canvas It's xmas ๐
|
|
tab1
Full Member
Posts โข 8,519
Likes โข 3,678
September 2011
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by tab1 on Dec 5, 2018 1:40:31 GMT 1, People moan about this at ยฃ600 but rave about stik prints that are ยฃ5000-ยฃ12000? Hirst dot prints that can be upward of 20k There is a market for everyone Still think the piece is over priced though!๐ฎ Special edition colab with tags over the stamps to make it a bit more urban / edgy next
People moan about this at ยฃ600 but rave about stik prints that are ยฃ5000-ยฃ12000? Hirst dot prints that can be upward of 20k There is a market for everyone Still think the piece is over priced though!๐ฎ Special edition colab with tags over the stamps to make it a bit more urban / edgy next
|
|
d.r. perseus
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,569
Likes โข 1,747
December 2014
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by d.r. perseus on Dec 5, 2018 1:42:55 GMT 1, Predictions on final number? 50000
I Think you overestimated by potato
Predictions on final number? 50000 I Think you overestimated by potato
|
|
Chris JL
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,766
Likes โข 1,852
March 2017
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Chris JL on Dec 5, 2018 2:43:49 GMT 1, I find it beautiful, romantic, obsessive, and an insta-flipper nightmare. Baseline: I approve, and will go for it ๐
(Also, I might be wrong, but somehow I have the feeling that many are not enthusiastic because of โcapital gainsโ considerations, and that makes me like it even a tiny bit more)
I find it beautiful, romantic, obsessive, and an insta-flipper nightmare. Baseline: I approve, and will go for it ๐
(Also, I might be wrong, but somehow I have the feeling that many are not enthusiastic because of โcapital gainsโ considerations, and that makes me like it even a tiny bit more)
|
|
|
sfnyc
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,111
Likes โข 1,126
August 2017
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by sfnyc on Dec 5, 2018 3:51:41 GMT 1, If you like the piece, good for you but there s no point to comfort your choice by speculating on conspiracy theories of why many dont like it. Enjoy it but dont bash others who have different tastes / expectations from Pejac. I don't think many would buy it at this price (or any price) if it was an unknown artist vs Pejac. And please dont try to make yourself a saint for spending your money on things you like that others dont, I dont think anybody cares. Even though this went all a bit offtrack, this thread really demonstrates how buying art is for many a way to make themselves feel more important than they are...
If you like the piece, good for you but there s no point to comfort your choice by speculating on conspiracy theories of why many dont like it. Enjoy it but dont bash others who have different tastes / expectations from Pejac. I don't think many would buy it at this price (or any price) if it was an unknown artist vs Pejac. And please dont try to make yourself a saint for spending your money on things you like that others dont, I dont think anybody cares. Even though this went all a bit offtrack, this thread really demonstrates how buying art is for many a way to make themselves feel more important than they are...
|
|
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Lroy on Dec 5, 2018 4:32:12 GMT 1, I find it beautiful, romantic, obsessive, and an insta-flipper nightmare. Baseline: I approve, and will go for it ๐ (Also, I might be wrong, but somehow I have the feeling that many are not enthusiastic because of โcapital gainsโ considerations, and that makes me like it even a tiny bit more)
I would say 500 or 600 maybe 1000 sales/edition tomorrow (24h.) !
I did not know that there will have something inside... So, fir those who have the 600 quids itโs intersrybg !
I find it beautiful, romantic, obsessive, and an insta-flipper nightmare. Baseline: I approve, and will go for it ๐ (Also, I might be wrong, but somehow I have the feeling that many are not enthusiastic because of โcapital gainsโ considerations, and that makes me like it even a tiny bit more) I would say 500 or 600 maybe 1000 sales/edition tomorrow (24h.) ! I did not know that there will have something inside... So, fir those who have the 600 quids itโs intersrybg !
|
|
rosac
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,894
Likes โข 1,538
July 2015
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by rosac on Dec 5, 2018 7:45:26 GMT 1, I live in Madrid
I live in Madrid
|
|
Express Post
Junior Member
Posts โข 3,330
Likes โข 2,479
January 2008
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Express Post on Dec 5, 2018 8:18:38 GMT 1, They anticipate selling a lot.
Look at the amount of envelopes on that pallet in the video.
Not a fan of Pejac pricing and have called it out since they were charging โฌ4500 for an A3 piece of drawing, but am seduced by this project.
Not buying, but the project has me in dem feels on many levels.
They anticipate selling a lot.
Look at the amount of envelopes on that pallet in the video.
Not a fan of Pejac pricing and have called it out since they were charging โฌ4500 for an A3 piece of drawing, but am seduced by this project.
Not buying, but the project has me in dem feels on many levels.
|
|
case
New Member
Posts โข 416
Likes โข 494
September 2015
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by case on Dec 5, 2018 8:28:22 GMT 1, Predictions on final number?
347. Do I win the Paris boat if I'm right?
Predictions on final number? 347. Do I win the Paris boat if I'm right?
|
|
d.r. perseus
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,569
Likes โข 1,747
December 2014
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by d.r. perseus on Dec 5, 2018 8:51:26 GMT 1, Predictions on final number? 347. Do I win the Paris boat if I'm right?
You picking one up? How do feel about the new peice
Predictions on final number? 347. Do I win the Paris boat if I'm right? You picking one up? How do feel about the new peice
|
|
Chris JL
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,766
Likes โข 1,852
March 2017
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Chris JL on Dec 5, 2018 9:18:22 GMT 1, This may be a stupid question but can the box it's shipped in be used to frame it if you replaced the wooden lid with some glass, or are you meant to take the mount out and frame separately?
The wood of the box is likely soaked with chemicals. And if this is the case using it as a frame will actually impact the paper in the long run. But again, in the long run, weโll all be dead anyway ๐
This may be a stupid question but can the box it's shipped in be used to frame it if you replaced the wooden lid with some glass, or are you meant to take the mount out and frame separately? The wood of the box is likely soaked with chemicals. And if this is the case using it as a frame will actually impact the paper in the long run. But again, in the long run, weโll all be dead anyway ๐
|
|
19818914
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,337
Likes โข 1,029
October 2018
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by 19818914 on Dec 5, 2018 9:23:54 GMT 1, 100% will be treated with chemicals.
100% will be treated with chemicals.
|
|
|
case
New Member
Posts โข 416
Likes โข 494
September 2015
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by case on Dec 5, 2018 9:41:50 GMT 1, 347. Do I win the Paris boat if I'm right? You picking one up? How do feel about the new peice
My thoughts are on page 5 already. The more I look at it the more I like it but still a pass for me at this price point.
347. Do I win the Paris boat if I'm right? You picking one up? How do feel about the new peice My thoughts are on page 5 already. The more I look at it the more I like it but still a pass for me at this price point.
|
|
pada1
New Member
Posts โข 627
Likes โข 424
August 2012
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by pada1 on Dec 5, 2018 9:47:34 GMT 1, This may be a stupid question but can the box it's shipped in be used to frame it if you replaced the wooden lid with some glass, or are you meant to take the mount out and frame separately? The wood of the box is likely soaked with chemicals. And if this is the case using it as a frame will actually impact the paper in the long run. But again, in the long run, weโll all be dead anyway ๐
The box can be used as frame but not recommended. There is however a white backing included with the magnet. So itโs โready to be framedโ like a print.
This may be a stupid question but can the box it's shipped in be used to frame it if you replaced the wooden lid with some glass, or are you meant to take the mount out and frame separately? The wood of the box is likely soaked with chemicals. And if this is the case using it as a frame will actually impact the paper in the long run. But again, in the long run, weโll all be dead anyway ๐ The box can be used as frame but not recommended. There is however a white backing included with the magnet. So itโs โready to be framedโ like a print.
|
|
iamzero
Full Member
Posts โข 9,190
Likes โข 8,542
May 2011
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by iamzero on Dec 5, 2018 10:02:10 GMT 1, This may be a stupid question but can the box it's shipped in be used to frame it if you replaced the wooden lid with some glass, or are you meant to take the mount out and frame separately? The wood of the box is likely soaked with chemicals. And if this is the case using it as a frame will actually impact the paper in the long run. But again, in the long run, weโll all be dead anyway ๐
With the packing foam be chemical free? ๐คฃ๐คฃ๐คฃ
This may be a stupid question but can the box it's shipped in be used to frame it if you replaced the wooden lid with some glass, or are you meant to take the mount out and frame separately? The wood of the box is likely soaked with chemicals. And if this is the case using it as a frame will actually impact the paper in the long run. But again, in the long run, weโll all be dead anyway ๐ With the packing foam be chemical free? ๐คฃ๐คฃ๐คฃ
|
|
gd79
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,129
Likes โข 1,220
September 2015
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by gd79 on Dec 5, 2018 10:27:57 GMT 1, Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing.
I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything.
Here's why...
If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it.
If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight.
If that's the number that get bought, then fine.
However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people.
If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid.
If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods.
Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good.
It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am.
Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing.
I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything.
Here's why...
If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it.
If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight.
If that's the number that get bought, then fine.
However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people.
If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid.
If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods.
Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good.
It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am.
|
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Deleted on Dec 5, 2018 10:30:37 GMT 1, Like it or not - this thread going all Mike Tyson over 8 pages in about 30 hours says a lot about the interest for Pejac. Only Hirst and Banksy have demanded more discussion on here lately. Yes, I noticed that too. Is Pejac really in the same league as Damien Hirst and Banksy? Would most commercial galleries even have heard of Pejac?
Like it or not - this thread going all Mike Tyson over 8 pages in about 30 hours says a lot about the interest for Pejac. Only Hirst and Banksy have demanded more discussion on here lately. Yes, I noticed that too. Is Pejac really in the same league as Damien Hirst and Banksy? Would most commercial galleries even have heard of Pejac?
|
|
Dive Jedi
Junior Member
Posts โข 6,160
Likes โข 9,392
October 2015
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Dive Jedi on Dec 5, 2018 10:30:53 GMT 1, In the end FOMO will conquer all. Go buy it!
In the end FOMO will conquer all. Go buy it!
|
|
Arty Farty 15
New Member
Posts โข 678
Likes โข 1,103
January 2018
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Arty Farty 15 on Dec 5, 2018 10:47:03 GMT 1, Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am.
Itโs signed and NUMBERED by the artist (as per the specs on his website) so I assume the edition size will be there for all to see...
Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am. Itโs signed and NUMBERED by the artist (as per the specs on his website) so I assume the edition size will be there for all to see...
|
|
warwolf
New Member
Posts โข 255
Likes โข 186
April 2018
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by warwolf on Dec 5, 2018 11:16:38 GMT 1, Like it or not - this thread going all Mike Tyson over 8 pages in about 30 hours says a lot about the interest for Pejac. Only Hirst and Banksy have demanded more discussion on here lately. Yes, I noticed that too. ย Is Pejac really in the same league as Damien Hirst and Banksy? ย Would most commercial galleries even have heard of Pejac?
Err..... No and no
Like it or not - this thread going all Mike Tyson over 8 pages in about 30 hours says a lot about the interest for Pejac. Only Hirst and Banksy have demanded more discussion on here lately. Yes, I noticed that too. ย Is Pejac really in the same league as Damien Hirst and Banksy? ย Would most commercial galleries even have heard of Pejac? Err..... No and no
|
|
|
Chris JL
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,766
Likes โข 1,852
March 2017
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Chris JL on Dec 5, 2018 11:34:11 GMT 1, Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am.
Itโs actually not that hard to model formally. Assuming (as many seem to) that the value of the print/piece is decreasing in the edition number, the edition number will be in equilibrium exactly such that (in expectation) the value is identical to the price that they are charging for it. So (in expectation) it has exactly zero flip value.
If one departs from the rational expectations framework, everything goes but in two clear possible ways.
1) If Pejac is a โbubble,โ (in the sense that demand is driven by unrealistic price increase expectations), actually the edition number should be such that buyers are overpaying for it - i.e. long run flip value should be negative.
2) if buyers are over pessimistic about this, actually the release size would be such that the value is higher than the price charged.
Note that in a world in which beliefs are known (and common) neither 1) or 2) can actually be Nash equilibria (the equilibrium is again in this case price = value) as long as a sufficient mass of people acts strategically. But with uncertainty about beliefs plus risk aversion, 2) can actually be an equilibrium. While instead both 1) and 2) can arise with overconfident people. If we add a private value component to it (ie a few will buy it because they actually like it), then 1) becomes actually more likely to arise.
Interestingly, the flipping price will tell us about ex ante beliefs. My bet: price = value (in equilibrium), hence worth buying (only) if you plan on hanging it on the wall (and have the spare cash).
.......
But talking about more important stuff, one interpretation (among many) for me is that itโs a statement about the transformative power of (the written) words. The figure in equilibrium is a metaphor of the receiver of the letter/words her/himself, since the self cannot be the same anymore after reading the letter - one is transformed by the words (or even by their absence) as long as one is willing to pay attention to them (as a lover would receiving a love letter). But being somebody that sells words for a living, Iโm probably biased ๐
Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am. Itโs actually not that hard to model formally. Assuming (as many seem to) that the value of the print/piece is decreasing in the edition number, the edition number will be in equilibrium exactly such that (in expectation) the value is identical to the price that they are charging for it. So (in expectation) it has exactly zero flip value. If one departs from the rational expectations framework, everything goes but in two clear possible ways. 1) If Pejac is a โbubble,โ (in the sense that demand is driven by unrealistic price increase expectations), actually the edition number should be such that buyers are overpaying for it - i.e. long run flip value should be negative. 2) if buyers are over pessimistic about this, actually the release size would be such that the value is higher than the price charged. Note that in a world in which beliefs are known (and common) neither 1) or 2) can actually be Nash equilibria (the equilibrium is again in this case price = value) as long as a sufficient mass of people acts strategically. But with uncertainty about beliefs plus risk aversion, 2) can actually be an equilibrium. While instead both 1) and 2) can arise with overconfident people. If we add a private value component to it (ie a few will buy it because they actually like it), then 1) becomes actually more likely to arise. Interestingly, the flipping price will tell us about ex ante beliefs. My bet: price = value (in equilibrium), hence worth buying (only) if you plan on hanging it on the wall (and have the spare cash). ....... But talking about more important stuff, one interpretation (among many) for me is that itโs a statement about the transformative power of (the written) words. The figure in equilibrium is a metaphor of the receiver of the letter/words her/himself, since the self cannot be the same anymore after reading the letter - one is transformed by the words (or even by their absence) as long as one is willing to pay attention to them (as a lover would receiving a love letter). But being somebody that sells words for a living, Iโm probably biased ๐
|
|
25127096
New Member
Posts โข 570
Likes โข 402
December 2013
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by 25127096 on Dec 5, 2018 12:50:10 GMT 1, Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am. Itโs actually not that hard to model formally. Assuming (as many seem to) that the value of the print/piece is decreasing in the edition number, the edition number will be in equilibrium exactly such that (in expectation) the value is identical to the price that they are charging for it. So (in expectation) it has exactly zero flip value. If one departs from the rational expectations framework, everything goes but in two clear possible ways. 1) If Pejac is a โbubble,โ (in the sense that demand is driven by unrealistic price increase expectations), actually the edition number should be such that buyers are overpaying for it - i.e. long run flip value should be negative. 2) if buyers are over pessimistic about this, actually the release size would be such that the value is higher than the price charged. Note that in a world in which beliefs are known (and common) neither 1) or 2) can actually be Nash equilibria (the equilibrium is again in this case price = value) as long as a sufficient mass of people acts strategically. But with uncertainty about beliefs plus risk aversion, 2) can actually be an equilibrium. While instead both 1) and 2) can arise with overconfident people. If we add a private value component to it (ie a few will buy it because they actually like it), then 1) becomes actually more likely to arise. Interestingly, the flipping price will tell us about ex ante beliefs. My bet: price = value (in equilibrium), hence worth buying (only) if you plan on hanging it on the wall (and have the spare cash). ....... But talking about more important stuff, one interpretation (among many) for me is that itโs a statement about the transformative power of (the written) words. The figure in equilibrium is a metaphor of the receiver of the letter/words her/himself, since the self cannot be the same anymore after reading the letter - one is transformed by the words (or even by their absence) as long as one is willing to pay attention to them (as a lover would receiving a love letter). But being somebody that sells words for a living, Iโm probably biased ๐ [/quote Iโm completely discombobulated, do you really consider pricing analysis like this, I wish I was an academic. No offence intended ๐ง
Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am. Itโs actually not that hard to model formally. Assuming (as many seem to) that the value of the print/piece is decreasing in the edition number, the edition number will be in equilibrium exactly such that (in expectation) the value is identical to the price that they are charging for it. So (in expectation) it has exactly zero flip value. If one departs from the rational expectations framework, everything goes but in two clear possible ways. 1) If Pejac is a โbubble,โ (in the sense that demand is driven by unrealistic price increase expectations), actually the edition number should be such that buyers are overpaying for it - i.e. long run flip value should be negative. 2) if buyers are over pessimistic about this, actually the release size would be such that the value is higher than the price charged. Note that in a world in which beliefs are known (and common) neither 1) or 2) can actually be Nash equilibria (the equilibrium is again in this case price = value) as long as a sufficient mass of people acts strategically. But with uncertainty about beliefs plus risk aversion, 2) can actually be an equilibrium. While instead both 1) and 2) can arise with overconfident people. If we add a private value component to it (ie a few will buy it because they actually like it), then 1) becomes actually more likely to arise. Interestingly, the flipping price will tell us about ex ante beliefs. My bet: price = value (in equilibrium), hence worth buying (only) if you plan on hanging it on the wall (and have the spare cash). ....... But talking about more important stuff, one interpretation (among many) for me is that itโs a statement about the transformative power of (the written) words. The figure in equilibrium is a metaphor of the receiver of the letter/words her/himself, since the self cannot be the same anymore after reading the letter - one is transformed by the words (or even by their absence) as long as one is willing to pay attention to them (as a lover would receiving a love letter). But being somebody that sells words for a living, Iโm probably biased ๐ [/quote Iโm completely discombobulated, do you really consider pricing analysis like this, I wish I was an academic. No offence intended ๐ง
|
|
gd79
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,129
Likes โข 1,220
September 2015
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by gd79 on Dec 5, 2018 14:15:38 GMT 1, Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am. Itโs signed and NUMBERED by the artist (as per the specs on his website) so I assume the edition size will be there for all to see...
But it doesn't have to be numbered out of something.
It could be numbered xxx
Rather than XXX/yyy
One gives you a certain edition size, the other doesn't.
Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am. Itโs signed and NUMBERED by the artist (as per the specs on his website) so I assume the edition size will be there for all to see... But it doesn't have to be numbered out of something. It could be numbered xxx Rather than XXX/yyy One gives you a certain edition size, the other doesn't.
|
|
gd79
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,129
Likes โข 1,220
September 2015
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by gd79 on Dec 5, 2018 14:19:33 GMT 1, Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am. Itโs actually not that hard to model formally. Assuming (as many seem to) that the value of the print/piece is decreasing in the edition number, the edition number will be in equilibrium exactly such that (in expectation) the value is identical to the price that they are charging for it. So (in expectation) it has exactly zero flip value. If one departs from the rational expectations framework, everything goes but in two clear possible ways. 1) If Pejac is a โbubble,โ (in the sense that demand is driven by unrealistic price increase expectations), actually the edition number should be such that buyers are overpaying for it - i.e. long run flip value should be negative. 2) if buyers are over pessimistic about this, actually the release size would be such that the value is higher than the price charged. Note that in a world in which beliefs are known (and common) neither 1) or 2) can actually be Nash equilibria (the equilibrium is again in this case price = value) as long as a sufficient mass of people acts strategically. But with uncertainty about beliefs plus risk aversion, 2) can actually be an equilibrium. While instead both 1) and 2) can arise with overconfident people. If we add a private value component to it (ie a few will buy it because they actually like it), then 1) becomes actually more likely to arise. Interestingly, the flipping price will tell us about ex ante beliefs. My bet: price = value (in equilibrium), hence worth buying (only) if you plan on hanging it on the wall (and have the spare cash). ....... But talking about more important stuff, one interpretation (among many) for me is that itโs a statement about the transformative power of (the written) words. The figure in equilibrium is a metaphor of the receiver of the letter/words her/himself, since the self cannot be the same anymore after reading the letter - one is transformed by the words (or even by their absence) as long as one is willing to pay attention to them (as a lover would receiving a love letter). But being somebody that sells words for a living, Iโm probably biased ๐
Love that.
I agree too. You end up with no premium, so won't flip for upside on day one. Whether the price appreciates depends on the market for pejac. And also whether the edition size is known.
Magnum Square Prints are a good example. Rarely see them up for sale. Magnum refuse to disclose the edition size. People tend to buy for their own use, stick them on the wall and keep them there.
Would be a nice outcome for this print. An edition with none that end up under the bed
Bored of talking about the art now, but the numbers are intriguing. I bet the size of the edition is never disclosed. Would add to the intrigue. I'm not sure it specifies whether they will be numbered or not, but even if they are then there is no need for the numbers to run consecutively. So finding the highest number won't necessarily prove anything. Here's why... If the edition size is, as an extreme, 10, this is a bargain. Everyone on here would buy it. If the edition size is 10,000, noone will buy it. If we knew the edition size in advance, what would be a 'fair' size? I would say a run of 400-500 priced at e700 feels about right. Any more than that, and it would be too expensive for the edition size. Any less than that and it would be a bunfight. If that's the number that get bought, then fine. However, any more or less than this and you get a lot of unhappy people. If only 100 get sold, then that is a failure. Artist looks silly. Existing prints are devalued. Looks stupid. If a lot more get sold, the buyers will be annoyed. They have overpaid. You'd probably even get a lot of returns. Remember, under EU law you have the right of return for mail order goods. Hence, the path of least resistance is to never state the edition size. This kills the secondary market stone dead. Buyers are happy. Artist looks good. It's a fascinating dynamic. You could write a dissertation on the market clearing mechanism of this. That's the kind of fun guy I am. Itโs actually not that hard to model formally. Assuming (as many seem to) that the value of the print/piece is decreasing in the edition number, the edition number will be in equilibrium exactly such that (in expectation) the value is identical to the price that they are charging for it. So (in expectation) it has exactly zero flip value. If one departs from the rational expectations framework, everything goes but in two clear possible ways. 1) If Pejac is a โbubble,โ (in the sense that demand is driven by unrealistic price increase expectations), actually the edition number should be such that buyers are overpaying for it - i.e. long run flip value should be negative. 2) if buyers are over pessimistic about this, actually the release size would be such that the value is higher than the price charged. Note that in a world in which beliefs are known (and common) neither 1) or 2) can actually be Nash equilibria (the equilibrium is again in this case price = value) as long as a sufficient mass of people acts strategically. But with uncertainty about beliefs plus risk aversion, 2) can actually be an equilibrium. While instead both 1) and 2) can arise with overconfident people. If we add a private value component to it (ie a few will buy it because they actually like it), then 1) becomes actually more likely to arise. Interestingly, the flipping price will tell us about ex ante beliefs. My bet: price = value (in equilibrium), hence worth buying (only) if you plan on hanging it on the wall (and have the spare cash). ....... But talking about more important stuff, one interpretation (among many) for me is that itโs a statement about the transformative power of (the written) words. The figure in equilibrium is a metaphor of the receiver of the letter/words her/himself, since the self cannot be the same anymore after reading the letter - one is transformed by the words (or even by their absence) as long as one is willing to pay attention to them (as a lover would receiving a love letter). But being somebody that sells words for a living, Iโm probably biased ๐ Love that. I agree too. You end up with no premium, so won't flip for upside on day one. Whether the price appreciates depends on the market for pejac. And also whether the edition size is known. Magnum Square Prints are a good example. Rarely see them up for sale. Magnum refuse to disclose the edition size. People tend to buy for their own use, stick them on the wall and keep them there. Would be a nice outcome for this print. An edition with none that end up under the bed
|
|
nandaman
New Member
Posts โข 457
Likes โข 131
December 2010
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by nandaman on Dec 5, 2018 14:30:03 GMT 1, Instead of this release - Iโll buy & frame by Paco Pomet- Internacional & get a crate of beers with the change If you can show me where I can get an Internactional, framed, with beer for 600 quid, let me know, I'll buy one, too!
Instead of this release - Iโll buy & frame by Paco Pomet- Internacional & get a crate of beers with the change If you can show me where I can get an Internactional, framed, with beer for 600 quid, let me know, I'll buy one, too!
|
|
Deleted
Posts โข 0
Likes โข
January 1970
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Deleted on Dec 5, 2018 15:01:04 GMT 1, Instead of this release - Iโll buy & frame by Paco Pomet- Internacional & get a crate of beers with the change If you can show me where I can get an Internactional, framed, with beer for 600 quid, let me know, I'll buy one, too! I just bought one for 550eur 250 eur framing 20 eur beers ยฃ730
Pejac ยฃ600 + vat + shipping = ยฃ750
Instead of this release - Iโll buy & frame by Paco Pomet- Internacional & get a crate of beers with the change If you can show me where I can get an Internactional, framed, with beer for 600 quid, let me know, I'll buy one, too! I just bought one for 550eur 250 eur framing 20 eur beers ยฃ730 Pejac ยฃ600 + vat + shipping = ยฃ750
|
|
kendo
Junior Member
Posts โข 1,210
Likes โข 1,208
August 2010
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by kendo on Dec 5, 2018 15:05:47 GMT 1, To be clear and to avoid confusion, am I right in saying that buyers will receive:
i.ibb.co/PMqGv61/Pejac1.jpg
And not this:
i.ibb.co/f4hZy0w/Pejac2.jpg
If so, I guess you can frame as you like but I wanted to make it clear so buyers don't expect to get a fully framed, ready to hang piece!
To be clear and to avoid confusion, am I right in saying that buyers will receive: i.ibb.co/PMqGv61/Pejac1.jpgAnd not this: i.ibb.co/f4hZy0w/Pejac2.jpgIf so, I guess you can frame as you like but I wanted to make it clear so buyers don't expect to get a fully framed, ready to hang piece!
|
|
Dive Jedi
Junior Member
Posts โข 6,160
Likes โข 9,392
October 2015
|
Pejac - Love Letter, by Dive Jedi on Dec 5, 2018 15:05:48 GMT 1, Well, there has not been any preo-orders yet, but you never know with these time released pieces, right? Better work ahead!
Almost 5 PM - I know you are getting excited !!
Sandbar Shark - Lemon Shark at the back
Well, there has not been any preo-orders yet, but you never know with these time released pieces, right? Better work ahead! Almost 5 PM - I know you are getting excited !! Sandbar Shark - Lemon Shark at the back
|
|