Monday, June 19, 2006
Money... again
The New York Times said the city's Neue Galerie paid $135m (£73m) for the oil painting (portrait by Gustav Klimt) in a private sale.
What is with people? What drives people to acquire stuff like this for those kinds of prices? Obviously, many people wanted this picture and were willing to pay a lot of money to get it. First, let me state that I've never seen this painting in person - all I've see was a little 200 pixel wide image on the BBC Web site. Honestly, from what I saw, I'd be unwilling to $20 for the thing.
What is it about possession that drives people to waste so much money on so little? Think of what could be done with $135 million dollars! How many people in the Sudan could that feed; how many kids in Afghanistan could that send to school, what kind of clinic in a Detroit ghetto could you run; how many soup kitchens in San Paulo could that buy?
I guess I'm a bit strange here, but I could never see the whys of paying ultra dollars for what is usually no more than a name. I can see paying more for an actual return in quality. For example, I'm a tool guy - I like tools. I would rather purchase a $500 band saw instead of $300 band saw of similar size. However, I can't see paying $3000 for the same type of item. Perhaps, if I was a professional who used this tool day-in and day-out, I might be persuaded to pay the extra bucks, but as a home hobbiest, I can't see it. The same for a painting. Yes, I can possibly see paying $200 for a nicely hand-crafted landscape compared to a $15 print, but barely. However, I can't see paying $150,000 for the original of the print. And yes, I can see that there is a major quality difference between a $3000 Rolex and a $30 Timex and honestly, that's one of the few "luxury" items I crave. (That being said, I think I'd be afraid to wear it if I had it -- too many punks with $50 Saturday night specials crave them as well.), but functionally the Timex will probably keep better time. However, that being said, I still can't see paying $15,000 for Patek watch. You get all the quality and reliability you'd ever need with the Rolex - why pay for all the extra fluff, that doesn't do anything.
Of course, if I was one of those who could pay $100 million for a painting or $10,000 for a watch or $350,000 for a car, I'd probably see things differently. Screw the poor people and where's my Bentley keys?
