I'd still choose Banksy.

His works resonates with me more than Warhols. Value or not, I'd choose Banksy.

I love both of those artists and have studied them deeply.  The only point I wish to add to correct some of the information above is that there are dozens and dozens of original Warhol images available on canvases for $100k or less. Many of the toys, most of the '85 ad images (be a somebody with a body, wholesome and delicious hamburger, keys, beatle boots, etc in 20x16 inch sizes). You could even get an iconic '65 flowers image in a tiny size for that price. Piss/oxidation paintings, camouflage, lobsters and crabs, shadows, champagne glasses/committee 2k, poinsettias, nudes/ladies and gentlemen, gems, the list goes on and on. You will even find some of the least desirable portrait paintings at auction for under $100k and those are usually 100 cm/sq. For my eyes, there truly are some very nice paintings in that price range for Warhol. I've long been a sucker for the wholesome and delicious hamburgers (never owned one) and there was one on yellow this week at christie's or sotheby's that sold for ~$80k which is where they've traded for 10-15 years now. It may be worth looking into for some, good luck.

Banksy all day long.... what you have to remember is the 'new real money Banksy collectors' don't even know they are going to be Banksy collectors yet.

They are still at school and again don't even know that the ap based start up company / crypto ccy hedge fund they will work for will give them some serious cash to spend on art.

Buy Banksy.....

Neither, for the amount of money they are selling for today. It's all about status and investment. Capitalism at it's best.

In my ignorance I hadn’t heard of Cohen.

This was from Wikipedia and made me laugh and wince in equal measure:

“In 2006, Cohen attempted to make the most expensive art purchase in history when he offered to purchase Picasso's Le Reve from casino mogul Steve Wynn for $139 million. Just days before the painting was to be transported to Cohen, Wynn, who suffers from poor vision due to retinitis pigmentosa, accidentally thrust his elbow through the painting while showing it to a group of acquaintances inside of his office at Wynn Las Vegas. The purchase was canceled, and Wynn still held the painting until early November 2012, when Cohen finally acquired the painting for $150 million.”

I agree, Id definately go for a Warhol. Timeless icon.

You may want to take another look at Warhol, he did a lot more than soup cans. Nothing sterile about his oxidation/urine paintings.
www.christies.com/lotfinder/Lot/andy-warhol-1928-1987-oxidation-painting-5074062-details.aspx

I have a vague memory of going to an exhibition called something like Banksy versus Warhol. Years ago now.

Warhol Vs Banksy was at The Hospital Club, Mr Banksy executed one of his best pieces, kate moss on a concrete slab

Asking if people would spend their cash on a Warhol or a Banksy on a Banksy forum is not really a fair fight.

I'd have to say banksy because he is the artist of my generation

You're showing your age. The artist of my generation is still an unknown.... (And I'm a child of the 70s....)

I would buy 1000 prints of Shepard Fairey jk

This thread has taken on a life of its own and some of the thoughts above are exactly what have been have been bouncing around in my head for over a decade now. i'll side step the money question portion of the thread and just give 2 cents about logic and artistic enjoyment on the wall as these two artists are the ones that have spoken the loudest to to my wife and I both (them and yves klein). The generous folks that mentored us in the art pursuit 20 years ago were warhol focused and it was wonderful learning from them which in turn made us want to collect warhol. But due to affordability issues, we could only acquire grade D & F works comparatively with their collections yet it us delighted for about 10 years. Somewhere in '05/'06 our level of satisfaction with those works on the wall declined as we felt like that work was before our time as others have stated above (although we're both children of the early 70s) but before our eyes were opened to art anyway.

I fondly recall conversations over wine in the evening and eventually concluding that we wanted the artist of our time on the wall. It was a natural and easy decision in hindsight to trade out the works from warhol that weren't as captivating as they once seemed for Banksy and to this day we are both much happier with the works on the wall from what we believe to be the artist of our day. One family's evolution so take it for what it's worth.

Unrelated side note, we watched a wonderful documentary last night called Tim's Vermeer that I'm sure many of you have seen but I'm often late to the party. Great story about an inventor who was influenced by the words of Hockney to dig deeper into Vermeer's oeuvre which resulted in a 5 year all consuming pursuit. I was reading reviews today and see that the critic Jonathan Jones (hater of all things Banksy) did not agree with the conclusions so you know that Tim Jenison is most likely correct. If you haven't seen it, definitely worth your time.