I find it beautiful, romantic, obsessive, and an insta-flipper nightmare. Baseline: I approve, and will go for it 😊

(Also, I might be wrong, but somehow I have the feeling that many are not enthusiastic because of “capital gains” considerations, and that makes me like it even a tiny bit more)

347. Do I win the Paris boat if I'm right?

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, we’ll all be dead anyway 😉

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?

It’s 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 “bubble,” (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 it’s 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, I’m probably biased 😉

[/quote
I’m completely discombobulated, do you really consider pricing analysis like this, I wish I was an academic. No offence intended 🧐

It’s 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 “bubble,” (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 it’s 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, I’m probably biased 😉

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!