New Banksy Print
- brewdog123
- Art Expert
- Posts: 1054
- Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 1:43 pm
- Location: ATL
ok, so i guess i misunderstood. i just think it is just bizarre. Raise $15 million (for something he paid $13 million?) and sell off 10k interests of the painting itself. Does this original person that listed the pieces get to hang and enjoy the work and is there is any possibility for future resale?
I mean ppl do raffles for $5 lotto entry/50 spots for a $150 print. That’s the business behind it.
When multi billion dollar properties go up, you think it’s only one guy? It’s hundreds of different groups made up of all different investors that are organized by one place and they take money off the top.
If the price increases and they sell the piece eventually, your share value increases. I’m not too much into fractionalizing things but it’s popular. Probably a better market too then Masterworks
When multi billion dollar properties go up, you think it’s only one guy? It’s hundreds of different groups made up of all different investors that are organized by one place and they take money off the top.
If the price increases and they sell the piece eventually, your share value increases. I’m not too much into fractionalizing things but it’s popular. Probably a better market too then Masterworks
Last edited by acidburn on Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:26 am, edited 3 times in total.
- brewdog123
- Art Expert
- Posts: 1054
- Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 1:43 pm
- Location: ATL
with those raffles there is a clear winner that takes home the prize, all of the physical prize....not sure it is the same. but whatever, this does not appeal to me
I member hearing a commercial for masterworks and hard eye rolling. They’re obviously making some serious coin tho.
RupertPupkin wrote:I live by this rule and this rule alone: people are drymounting idiots.
Lol.
Trust me, I couldn’t care less how one spends their money.
That’s not what is happening here, obviously.
Except:
Every work acquired by Particle will be immediately integrated into the Particle Foundation’s permanent collection on behalf of the community, thus ensuring the physical works will never be sold.
Furthermore:
Before the invention of museums, private ownership was one of the few ways to enjoy fine art. But even museums are limited by the demands of the physical world: you need to be in the artworks’ physical presence to access it.
Yet,
Particle is pioneering a new application of NFTs that will free major artworks from the historical limits on their accessibility.
They aren’t “pioneering” anything. Nothing has changed in terms of one’s ability to “enjoy fine art”. You still need to be physically present. All that is happening here is you are taking a double risk “investing” in a piece of art by buying some crypto tokens, value of which is limited by the perceived value of the particular physical piece of art you invest in.
They aren’t even “pioneering” the ownership deal, as you yourself mentioned.
A lot of what they are saying is not true and the rest is yet to be seen how it pans out. But “invest” and “own” away. No triggers here, Joe.
There are winners here and it’s these guys:brewdog123 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:32 amwith those raffles there is a clear winner that takes home the prize, all of the physical prize....not sure it is the same. but whatever, this does not appeal to me
Particle was founded by a team of leading figures and innovators in the worlds of art, blockchain, and technology.
then this will make you crybrewdog123 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 9:56 amdestroying physical art work is absolutely ridiculous on every level
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/damie ... cy-1988535
mmmm Beer
Went to another article because its nowhere on their site. This is how ppl make money from it.bubbie wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 12:36 pmLol.
Trust me, I couldn’t care less how one spends their money.
That’s not what is happening here, obviously.
Except:
Every work acquired by Particle will be immediately integrated into the Particle Foundation’s permanent collection on behalf of the community, thus ensuring the physical works will never be sold.
Furthermore:
Before the invention of museums, private ownership was one of the few ways to enjoy fine art. But even museums are limited by the demands of the physical world: you need to be in the artworks’ physical presence to access it.
Yet,
Particle is pioneering a new application of NFTs that will free major artworks from the historical limits on their accessibility.
They aren’t “pioneering” anything. Nothing has changed in terms of one’s ability to “enjoy fine art”. You still need to be physically present. All that is happening here is you are taking a double risk “investing” in a piece of art by buying some crypto tokens, value of which is limited by the perceived value of the particular physical piece of art you invest in.
They aren’t even “pioneering” the ownership deal, as you yourself mentioned.
A lot of what they are saying is not true and the rest is yet to be seen how it pans out. But “invest” and “own” away. No triggers here, Joe.
There are winners here and it’s these guys:brewdog123 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:32 amwith those raffles there is a clear winner that takes home the prize, all of the physical prize....not sure it is the same. but whatever, this does not appeal to me
Particle was founded by a team of leading figures and innovators in the worlds of art, blockchain, and technology.
How does it work?
Particle divides each piece of art into 10,000 unique NFTs or "Particles," each with its own title deed stored on the Blockchain. Particles are randomly assigned during the primary drop. Once a buyer purchases a Particle, they receive a digital certificate, or collector’s card, which represents its owner’s specific ownership in the painting. Purchasers then have the right to buy and sell their particle on secondary markets, trade or transfer them to anyone they wish. They’ll have the opportunity to see the painting whenever and wherever it’s displayed, and the right to call the painting partly theirs.
This btw does not appeal to me either.
Top. Men.
There is no mention of shares. Sounds like if they upsold the physical work for say 20 mil you wouldn’t be entitled to any of those profits. Though a lawsuit or 10,000 might sort it out.
just a foil for me today, thanks
well thats the thing with the NFT markets, its all perception.bubbie wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 12:36 pm
They aren’t “pioneering” anything. Nothing has changed in terms of one’s ability to “enjoy fine art”. You still need to be physically present. All that is happening here is you are taking a double risk “investing” in a piece of art by buying some crypto tokens, value of which is limited by the perceived value of the particular physical piece of art you invest in.
They aren’t even “pioneering” the ownership deal, as you yourself mentioned.
Yes all art markets work on perception as a yardstick for value. perception of the artist, the image, or the release, whatever it may be.
But while collecting art is more based in the acquiring of physical goods.
The importance with NFTs is placed on the perception of ownership rather than the actual owning of a thing.
Its a market demanding viability, because their value is in perception and buying into the notion that you 'own' a digital asset because some other digital system proves that you do.
And that is enough for some people i guess.
jkw3000 - Nobody ever really wins in this hobby.
Olly - I'm a hack asshole unable to provide you with what you want.
Gonzo's Mom- And some of you are the demons!
Olly - I'm a hack asshole unable to provide you with what you want.
Gonzo's Mom- And some of you are the demons!
- MaxCollinsII
- Art Connoisseur
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2013 9:42 pm
- BENYOUNG20
- Art Expert
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 10:49 pm
- Location: STL
- Contact:
Man if all the people triggered by NFTs could just stay in one grumpy channel instead of spreading it in every single topic it would be great.