The art world has but a few watershed moments these days. However, the recent purchase of Giacometti’s “Homme qui Marche” for $104M USD is one of them. This is a BIG deal to a great many people for a great many reasons. Obviously, the sale means a great deal both to the buyer and the seller of this masterpiece. However, its significance to the art world as a whole and the to the broader world cannot be underestimated or easily quantified.

The fact that a bronze sculpture, one of 10 in the world, could command the type of pricing generally reserved for a one-of-a-kind painting is nothing short of ground-breaking.

The sale of “Homme qui Marche” represents a diametric shift in the perceptions of editioned and/or serialized sculptures. Never again can multiples be derided as being of less value than a signature work from a painter. Throughout the 20th century, the issue of rarity and speculation has become a hallmark of our art-buying culture. Whether or not we, as collectors, ever have chosen to “invest” in artwork, the idea of rarity is a prized concept for the art-buying public. The appeal of having the “original” of a particular work is singular. No one else has YOUR work in the world. However, the “original” in sculpture is often misunderstood as the general public is often unaware of the process involved in the production of a bronze. The “original” in sculpture is often destroyed in order to produce the end result, the bronze edition. In an age that permits artists to produce nearly identical serialized work in quantities and still maintain high quality controls allows self-marketability and broad distribution capabilities. A byproduct of this production in the 20th century however, has been that the public often seeks rarity within specific composition’s editions. Many clients will make specific requests of ”Artist Proofs” (which formerly carried a negative connotation, but is now thought of as a desirable, rare edition), or the lowest numbers in any given edition. At this point, there is no clear-cut correlation between high prices for Artist Proofs or low numbers in a given edition versus standard edition works. While this may change as we move forward, this is more often than not, a misnomer presently.

Contemporary sculptors such as M.L. Snowden (American, b. 1952) had issued editions of 100 numbered bronzes at the outset of her career and experienced a great deal of commercial success. However, with her recent editions of 25 selling out as quickly as she can produce them, she has opted to stick with rarer editions to promote fiscal growth in her oeuvre. Her popular composition “Solaris” sold out all 25 examples in a matter of months propelling her pricing from under $16,500 to over $85,000, based on rarity and consistent demand, all during a slow economic cycle.

Jackson Pollack’s “No. 5, 1948” which sold for $140M USD, Willem DeKooning’s “Woman III” which sold for $137.5M USD and “Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer” by Austrian Master Gustav Klimt which sold for $135M USD, have set the high-water mark for art sold in today’s world. Each were sold in private sales arranged by dealers, and each, as you can see, are paintings. The highest priced work ever bought or sold at auction is “Garçon à la Pipe“ after having sold for $104M USD in 2004. It too, obviously, is a painting. Never before have editioned sculptures been mentioned in the same breath as having broken the $100M USD plateau, much less becoming the highest priced work ever sold at auction.

In the 1980’s a Japanese investor offered $100M USD for a lifetime casting of French Master Auguste Rodin’s “The Thinker” (Large 181cm)… despite this translating to approximately $198M USD in today’s money…. no one who owned one would sell. Had this work sold, it would have changed the dynamic at work and perceptions toward editioned sculpture as there were approximately 10 examples which would have fit the buyer’s criteria. However, it did not, and nearly 25 years later we only now realize an edition as being on par with one-of-a-kind works.

The inauspicious unveiling of French Master Edgar Degas’ wax modele of “Petite Danseuse de Quatorze ans” in 1881, prompted Degas to never issue bronzes of any of his works. Posthumous editions of his work were begun shortly after his death in 1917 by the Hebrard Foundry in Paris in collaboration with Degas’ estate. The Hebrard foundry cast no fewer than 29 “Petite Danseuse” bronzes between 1922-1937.  Despite the fact that they were posthumous editions and that the edition was considered large for the age, the work has experienced no diminution in interest or real or perceived value. One example of “Petite Danseuse” sold for $16.9M USD on February 3, 2009 at Sotheby’s London [Sotheby's London, 3 Feb 2009, Lot #8]. In an effort to institutionalize exclusivity, the French government adapted a law in 1978 mandates that bronzes “cannot in any case exceed twelve examples”. While exclusive to France, many artists internationally have adapted this as doctrine in subsequent years in an effort to create demand based on rarity and exclusivity.

The Flip Side:

In contrast to positive impact a sale of this nature brings to the art world, larger questions must also be asked. A respected friend and fellow historian recently questioned me thusly, “In the context of all that is required to save lives around the world in a disaster zone, the only diametric shift in my perception the sale triggers is one of extreme distaste at the implicit obscenity of such a purchase. Had this current age any semblance of grace, the proceeds from the sale…aka revenue to Deutsche Bank would be redirected to some program to support children in dire need or at least be put to use to combat human trafficking which is erasing future human resource and preventing the advent of a future Giacometti…that in itself is a crime don’t you think?”

Notwithstanding the audacity of the purchase price itself, yes… the world may be better served as a whole if those with disposable income at this level donated it to help those less fortunate. We live in, and always have lived in, a world which is inherently unfair towards the haves and the have-nots. In a time which was rife with disease and starvation, The Medici’s were commissioning some of the world’s greatest masterpieces, and at great personal expense. The Holy See continued to amass incredible collections of art and treasure, even while wars were waged and children suffered. Mere months after 9/11, the Gaffe Collection sold at Christie’s New York for a total of $108M, only a few blocks from where workers were toiling at recovery efforts at the World Trade Center… Other records were also set in the 2002 auctions, including by Giacometti whose “Grande tete de Diego,” sold for $13,759,500 [Sotheby's NYC, May 8, 2002] and Juan Gris set a record for the artist at the same sale, when his “Le Pot de Geranium” sold for $8,479,500. Records for Constantin Brancusi and Magritte were also set within 8 months of Sept 11, generally to American buyers.

While not a justification, it becomes merely an indication that those with money always have and always will indulge themselves with it.

Further, this does not preclude those very same people from also being generous donors. Many of the world’s wealthiest people donate a significant portions of their time, resources and money to noble causes, all while still maintaining the lifestyle they and their families are accustomed to.

The Robb Report recently featured an article which noted that the average salary of a person purchasing the new Rolls Royce was $10M USD per year. The buyers generally paid cash and the vehicle was approximately $450k USD. Many felt this excessive at the time and scoffed at the audacity of someone to pay this amount for a car given the present economic climate. Their point though, was that the Rolls Royce buyer is spending an infinitesimal amount of his yearly salary for the vehicle, whereas someone making $80k per year and buying a $50k Lexus spends the vast majority on their yearly salary on a vehicle. Further, in a debt-ridden culture as we have here in the United States, the Lexus is not even owned by the driver, but rather by a bank.

I cannot sit here and justify the purchase price of this work. I am not in the position to identify with the mind-set of the buyer, nor do I know their contributions to the larger world. Is it a record? Yes. Is it astounding? Absolutely. Might it be an anomaly? Of course.

But either way… It is news.

Several years ago, a well-respected art dealer with whom I have known for some time brought me materials he had been given by another broker describing an oil painting from the famed Dutch master Peter Paul Rubens (born 1577- died 1640). [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Paul_Rubens] The work was fantastic and carried an extensive and prestigious lineage which included The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York and other luminaries of art collecting over the past two centuries. As the asking price was several million dollars, I felt it necessary to conduct significant leg-work prior to mentioning it to any of my clients as the research to independently verify works of this magnitude often takes quite some time. I did not doubt this dealers knowledge or professionalism but I am a natural skeptic and have spent far too many years entrenched in the art world to know the importance of properly researching a work such as this. The clients with the tastes for a great 16^th century masterwork are broad indeed, but the circle becomes infinitely smaller when you seek those with wherewithal and means to make such a purchase. Therefore, as the group is small, you must be incredibly careful with presenting only works which can be independently verified, vetted and authenticated. One wrong move at this level can end you on the wrong side of a mediation panel, or worse… a pair of hand-cuffs.

After a few well-placed phone calls, an archivist in the Metropolitan Museum was kind enough to dig through their basement files on my behalf. There it was found that this painting was not by Rubens, but by Gaspar de Crayer (1582-1682) [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspar_de_Crayer] a contemporary of Rubens whose work is well regarded but considerably less expensive. Though comparable in technique, age and beauty, this work was actually valued in the low hundred thousands, quite a difference from the millions of dollars it was currently being presented at. Introducing clients to works such as these without due diligence and research could have been a very serious problem down the line had someone purchased it, but luckily the work was shelved and my friend’s reputation was not compromised.

This story highlights potential problems with a growing proliferation of brokers whose profession has less to do with the art itself and more to do with being a middleman in a daisy-chain of art brokers. In many of these transactions, there is less of an emphasis placed on scrutinizing the information provided and/or maintaining the integrity of the work itself and more on letting as many people know about the deal they have access to.  In real estate sales, this kind of mass exposure may be advantageous, as a general rule of thumb states that the greater amount of people know about the property, the greater the chance of a sale. In the field of investment level art however, over- exposure of artwork can have an negative affect as works can be “shopped” if too many dealers present it openly on the market. Private sellers often want very few other dealers or brokers involved in this process as marquis works can become diluted. While this dilution could create a stigma around a work of art that may be unjustified, there have been many instances of artworks that fail to sell because their appearance of rarity has been compromised.

Additionally, problems can also begin to arise when many of these artworks and associated paperwork are scrutinized by professionals, authenticators, appraisers, foundations, museums and often the clients themselves who, after years of collecting, become seasoned to the artist’s works. Ideally a thorough knowledge art history along with extensive resources should be a prerequisite for art brokers, but oftentimes these “runners” have little knowledge of the intricacies of art and know even less about nuances in provenance, or lineage, of a piece of art.  When it comes to investment level art, being a good salesperson is not enough and simply presenting a work as a “Rubens”, “Picasso” or “Dali” does not make it so.

While contracting and exclusivity issues create problems with perfectly good pieces of artwork becoming spoiled on the market, bad works are just as much an issue for buyers, dealers and brokers as well. In a new book “Provenance: How a Con Man and a Forger Rewrote the History of Modern Art” [http://www.amazon.com/Provenance-Forger-Rewrote-History-Modern/dp/1594202206] co-authors Laney Salisbury and the late Aly Sujo highlight the case of notorious English con man John Drewe and artist/forger John Myatt who developed not only fantastically convincing fakes of major 19^th and 20^th century masterworks, but also convincing histories and provenances that traced back to the archives in London’s Tate Gallery archives. This tome provides a sobering glimpse into how works from Alberto Giacometti, Ben Nicholson, Georges Braque, Nicolas de Staël and others became falsely archived in the Tate and the havoc wrought by having nearly 200 fakes thrown onto the market by prominent auction houses (including Christie’s & Sotheby’s), private and public galleries and a network of “runners”.

What can you do to protect yourself?

- First, go with your gut. Whether you are working with a broker or a fine art professional, always understand that if a deal does not pass your “sniff-test” it might just be too good to be true.

- Be a skeptic. (NOTE: I am presently working on a column which highlights the importance of certificates of authenticity for serialized works) It is important to know the origin of the works you purchase particularly if the artist is deceased. This lineage of purchase is called “provenance”. Oftentimes, prominent artists will have foundations, archives or experts dedicated specifically to cataloging their authentic works. Oftentimes, these foundations or other respected arbiters will compile a comprehensive listing of all the works an artist produced. This is not without its own difficulties as opinions vary and a lot of money is at stake if a work is excluded from a catalogue. This fact was made patently obvious to Marc Restellini whose oft-delayed catalogue raisonne of the paintings of Amodeo Modigliani for the Wildenstein Institute has given rise to death threats, lawsuits and public derision by owners whose works will not be included within its pages. [http://www.forbes.com/2002/05/15/0515hot.html] In fact, the most respected guide to Amodeo Modigliani’s work was produced in 1958 by Ambrogio Ceroni, and it was so incomplete that it required updating in 1970 and 1972 to amend omissions and remove faulty works.

- Talk to a professional who has no vested interest in whether or not you obtain a work. If you call your local gallery to verify a work for you, he or she may be inclined to distance you from a work based on meeting their own sales goals. Independent authenticators and licensed appraisers can issue independent, third-party advice without the filter of self interest. Appraisers from the http://www.isa-appraisers.org/ or http://www.appraisersassoc.org/ may be able to provide an independent evaluation on whether or not a work is sanguine. Museum curators and independent authenticators can provide you arms-length advice on individual purchases you are considering, http://www.artexpertswebsite.com/ .

- Work with people you trust. As with every business transaction, form relationships with reliable partners. Talk to their partners and obtain references. Reputable brokers and dealers with strong ethics will often have a bank of referrals to call to edify you about their past work in Art or their chosen field. “Runners” may not scrutinize the works with this same ferocity, nor will they probably produce references to back up their reputations.

There is no fool-proof way to protect yourself in every transaction, as we all found out with the IRA bust which coincided with the stock crash last year. Seemingly “safe” investments became worthless and risky stocks went through the roof. Always make the best decision you can with the information you have. But also be aware of who you are speaking with and understand their motivations in the process. This way, you are at least on even ground and can make an informed decision.

BEWARE OF PREDATORY DEALERS

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/07/14/art.dealer.indicted/index.html

The case is seemingly inconceivable. You have entrusted your artwork, which might as well be a member of your family, to the care of a gallery you trust only to discover that the dealer you are working with is up to no good. The recent indictment of prominent New York dealer Lawrence Salander has thrust predatory dealers into the spotlight and highlighted an unseemly side of the art world that no one really wishes to speak of and fewer wish to believe they could be a victim of… that of civil theft, grand theft and grand larceny by a respected gallery.

New York’s Upper East Side Gallery Salander-OReilly, provided Lawrence Salander, his wife Julie and his family a lavish lifestyle full of the finest cars, luxury homes, food, clothing and an extravagant lifestyle by selling high-end fine art to a distinguished world-wide clientele. A member of the Art Dealers Association of America for over twenty years, Salander-OReilly exhibited at the annual Armory show in New York, Tefaf at Maastricht and Art Basel Miami. Lawrence Salander himself was a member of The Art and Antique Dealers League of America and the Appraisers Association of America. He was the first private art dealer to sit on the board of The National Indemnity Project of The National Endowment for the Humanities. In 2003, Salander-OReilly was named The Best Gallery in the World by the Robb Report.
However, beneath the surface, it is alleged that Salander ran a ponzi scheme (a scheme echoing that of the indicted financier Bernard Madoff) in which he sold consigned works, took the cash, and paid deffered payments out to other consignors offering a range of explanations for his actions along the way. His payments snowballed into owing dozens of consignors monthly “dividends” which he would attempt to keep in front of with month-to-month sales. This “dividend” system financed Salander’s extravagant lifestyle, including his Manhattan townhouse, his 66-acre estate home and the lavish parties he threw for his wife and family members, all while he was barely keeping himself afloat in these “dividends”. His investors, including Forbes members, Artists, estates, tennis great John McEnroe and actor Robert DiNiro claim he stole in excess of $88Million through his fraudulent business practices, which included outright theft of artwork, selling “shares” of artworks to multiple people, selling artwork below the promised consignment prices and paying “dividends” to consignors when artwork was already paid in full.
Mr. Salander’s troubles began when several consignors filed lawsuits due to defaulting on the “dividend” payments he promised by specific deadlines. Salander allegedly sold many works by Robert DiNiro Sr. (Father of the actor) without either informing Mr. DiNiro or remitting proceeds for their sale. This was the crux of several of the suits brought against Mr. Salander which amounted to 100 separate counts spanning fraud, grand larceny, securities fraud, forgery, breach of contract and other offenses. The affair become public when London dealer Clovis Whitfield withdrew paintings from a Salander-O’Reilly exhibit because of Salander’s mounting legal troubles. Creditors are said to be owed in excess of $300M and Mr. Salander faces up to 25 years in prison if convicted of grand larceny alone.

This leads to the inevitable question… What can you do to protect yourself?

Well, there are several consumer protections in place which protect buyers and sellers/consignors in the United States. Many states will have laws specific to their borders, but for purposes of this blog, we will utilize Florida statutes and criteria. A useful text is The Artist-Gallery Partnership, by Tad Crawford and Susan Mellon (http://www.amazon.com/Artist-Gallery-Partnership-Third-Practical-Consigning/dp/1581156456/ref=sr_1_1/181-0314806-2703807?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1247710903&sr=1-1)

As a seller, artist or consignor: When you consign your artwork to a gallery you have entrusted an asset to another person or company. Just as with other assets, this has certain risks and certain rewards. The reward is obviously that your work is placed with someone who has knowledge and expertise on how best to market and sell your work in the shortest possible time-frame for the most amount of money. Conversely, you run the risk of a predatory gallery selling your work for less than value, not remitting payment according to terms of contract or outright theft.
It is good practice to familiarize yourself with any gallery you are considering consigning works to. Speak with other merchants in and around the gallery you are considering. Contact references, consignors and artists the gallery deals with for impressions on the overall demeanor and temperament toward business practices. Contact the Better Business Bureau (www.bbb.org) or the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (www.doacs.state.fl.us/) to determine if any consumer actions have been filed and remain unresolved. Scrutinize your contract and have it reviewed by an attorney.
Once your work is contracted, consigned and in gallery residence, always be certain that your consignment contract is up-to-date with the entity which has physical possession of the artwork if it is not retained by the seller. (Oftentimes, galleries or partnerships are dissolved resulting in contracts being annulled. Among other issues, this may significantly affect insurance coverage in the gallery in the event of something catastrophic occurring to your item). Once a quarter, conduct a physical inspection of your item to make certain it has not been sold without your knowledge. If you are unable to inspect due to distance or infirmity, contact someone you trust locally or the local Sheriff’s office so that they might inspect your item for you. Make certain that offers lower than the contracted price are submitted to you in writing and agreed to in writing and do not agree to deferred payment plans without written assurance that the works will remain in the gallery until you are paid in full for your item. Sometimes even good galleries have difficult time paying the bills in this economic climate. However, you need to do everything possible to prevent your asset from paying only their bills.

Florida statutes state that your consignment contract must provide for:
*The proceeds of the sale must be delivered to the artist (Consignor) at a schedule agreed to by the artist (Consignor) and the art dealer
*The art dealer is responsible for the stated value of the artwork in the event of loss or damage while the artwork is in possession of the art dealer. (See parameters of consignors and galleries under UCC= Uniform Commercial Code Statutes)
*The artwork will only be sold by the art dealer for an amount at least equal to that agreed to by the artist (Consignor) in writing
*The artwork may be used or displayed by the art dealer only with prior written consent of the artist (Consignor) and only if the artist (Consignor) is acknowledged in such use or display
*An artwork delivered to an art dealer for the purpose of sale or exhibition, and the artist’s (Consignor’s) share of the proceeds of any sale by the art dealer, creates a priority in favor of the artist (Consignor) over any claims, liens or security interests in the artwork by creditors of the art dealer
(SOURCE: The Artist-Gallery Partnership, by Tad Crawford) Violations of these rules of conduct are punishable by up to 60 days in jail, six months of probation and a $500 fine for each instance.

As a Buyer: Your purchase order is a contract. Make certain that this contract provides you the basic parameters of what, where, how and when. Your purchase order should state the date, the value of the work, the price paid, numbering (if applicable) and the payment terms which have been satisfied at the time of sale. Further, as a buyer you are entitled to any peripheral documentation which quantifies authenticity (i.e. a Certificate of Authenticity, letters of authenticity, appraisals, etc.), condition, value, restoration, international clearance and the like which may exist pertinent to your acquisition.
Oftentimes, the bill of sale or purchase order serves as the certification of an authentic work if the artist is living, the gallery is contracted to work with the artist or the artist has chosen not to issue such certificates In such cases, you may wish to contact the artist or a local expert to determine whether or not the work is genuine. (It is not always in your interest to contact your local art dealer for this determination though as they may or may not have a vested or political interest in whether or not you purchase art from alternate sources).
The proliferation of serialized or limited edition works of art (lithographs, serigraphs, sculptures, documents and signatures) necessitates a need for some form of quantifying document which states the total edition size, the publisher and dates of issue. This certificate has become paramount in determining authorized items from unauthorized items, real from fake and delineations within an artist or celebrity’s oeuvre. While parameters of certificates of authenticity are a lengthy column unto itself, understand that certifications should be arms-length, third party evaluations of the item issued by a publisher, printer, foundry or independent expert on the artist. Galleries should not issue their own authenticity certificates for works published by others, as it is an obvious conflict of interest. Further, your legal ownership of a item is only consummated upon transfer of the original certificate of authenticity as this possession states that the work is paid in full to seller, gallery and other third-parties who may have interest in the work. So always make certain it is obtained, it is correct and it is safely stored.
If you have purchased a limited edition and not received the original certificate with your purchase, it may simply be a matter of contacting the gallery and asking for it. Oftentimes, galleries will keep certifications in separate places in order to protect themselves from theft, fire, flood, etc. However, this document should be readily accessible to the gallery and turned over within a reasonable amount of time. If it is lost, stolen or damaged, galleries can ask for replacements from the publisher provided the work has been purchased and paid for by the gallery. Alternatively, you can also seek outside advise from an expert on the artist or period.

I also recommend artists and consignors consulting a fine art attorney familiar with idiosyncrasies in Art Law pertaining to the state you live in or are releasing your items to. Legal Art is an organization which empowers artists and consignors by offering affordable legal council before, during and after a representation contract or consignment agreement. Their services are highly recommended by professionals in the field as having ethically and judiciously applied their knowledge to the betterment of the Art community as a whole. Kathleen C. Carignan, Esq. is a Miami-based attorney with Legal Art who may provide direction as to who to speak with about any questions particular to your case. (Kathleen@legalartmiami.org- www.legalartmiami.org) Other organizations throughout the United States provide similar services and can be located through a simple GOOGLE search of your area.

In sum total… There is no fool-proof way to avoid being “Salandered”, any more than there is to prevent the onset of “Madoffism”. However, simple steps you take to protect yourself, your assets and your capital can offer small comforts in knowing who, what, when and where of your art investments. This, in turn with pay true “dividends” as you move forward.

NOTICE: I am not an attorney, nor do I claim to be one. This blog is written in to provide common-sense advice for buyers and sellers of fine art, NOT Legal advice. For legal advice, contact an attorney.

Forbes Magazine (October 13, 2008)

The Color of Money by Claire Obusan

Rising art prices have provided a salve for several bruised fortunes.

Volatile markets have bruised several fortunes of The Forbes 400. But swelling contemporary art prices have provided an unexpected hedge.
Eli broad should be a lot poorer this year. worth $7 billion last fall, the insurance and housing maven saw his 46.6 million shares of aig–received a decade ago when he sold SunAmerica to the insurance giant for $18 billion–drop 70% between last summer and August 29, the day we priced The Forbes 400 (they’ve fallen much further since). That decline erased $2 billion from his personal balance sheet.

But Broad’s net worth fell only $300 million. One reason: the soaring value of his 2,000-piece art collection. Comprising mostly contemporary pieces by artists like Jeff Koons, his collection was recently appraised at $1.9 billion, up 72% in a year………….

 

Major collections and apprecation:
Thomas H. Lee
“5 Deaths Twice 1 (Red Car Crash)” (1963)
Andy Warhol
Gain: 285%in 4 years.
The investor acquired the piece for $6.5 million at a 2004 auction. Amy Cappellazzo, head of Christie’s contemporary art division, says it’s now worth as much as $25 million.

Steven Cohen
“The Physical Impossibility of Death In the Mind of Someone Living” (1991)
Damien Hirst
Gain: 144% in 4 years.
The hedge fund tycoon bought the iconic shark installation for $8.2 million in 2004. Cappellazzo says it’s worth perhaps $20 million today.

Norman Braman
“Diver” (1962)
Jasper Johns
Gain: 2,281% in 20 years.
The Forbes 400 newcomer paid $4.2 million in 1988 for this Johns piece. Cappellazzo says it would fetch perhaps $100 million today.

Lorenzo Fertitta
“Jersey Joe Walcott” (1982)
Jean-Michel Basquiat
Gain: 245% in 3 years.
The blood sport billionaire bought this piece in 2005 for $1.45 million. It’s worth $5 million today.

Frank Fertitta III
“Suite of 12 24-Inch Flowers” (1964)
Andy Warhol
Gain: 213% in 2 years.
The casino mogul purchased all 12 of Warhol’s flowers in 2006 for $9.6 million. Today they are worth $30 million.

Eli Broad
“Rabbit” (1986)
Jeff Koons
Gain: 567%in 3 years.
Broad’s 41-inch, stainless steel bunny was worth $12 million in 2005. A similar piece sold privately for $80 million earlier this year.

More at: http://www.forbes.com/global/2008/1013/114.html

Reed V. Horth Interview, March 19, 2009

 http://www.lifeisartfest.org/blog/2009/04/19/reed-v-horth-interview-march-19-2009/

Name: Reed V. Horth
Company Name: Robin Rile Fine Art
Opening Date: June 2008
Location: Miami
Website: www.robinrile.com

· How did your interest in the business of art start?
I have always generally leaned towards art throughout my life. I think the realization that I was better at the “Business side” than the “Art side” was a tough pill to swallow. But when you surround yourself with talented people, it is both humbling and inspiring. My first job was an animation gallery just out of college. Then I was hired and managed several galleries throughout Florida for many years, till I decided to branch out and open my own firm.