# Graham Knuttel art - good investment?



## badgambler

*Graham Knuttel - Art Investment*

Ok, gone off Gold from the 25K in three years thread.

Now my next plan, buying a Graham Knuttel.

Canvas or textile, or even sculpture,  one or many

Any informed comment?


----------



## ClubMan

*Re: Knuttel*

Yes - don't buy art as an investment. Buy it if you like it though. Check out previous threads on "investing" in art, antiques, wine, coins, stamps, football programmes etc.

Is this thread a bit of a wind up?


----------



## diarmuidc

*Re: Knuttel*



ClubMan said:


> Is this thread a bit of a wind up?


check out his name ...


----------



## rabbit

*Re: Knuttel*

I think he is a brilliant artist.   I do not think that just because he is collected by many celebrities and stars, I just love his work.    The Picasso of the modern age.


----------



## paddywhacker

_Mod Note: Thread merged with earlier one on the same topic_

Anyone here know much about art and if so would they consider a Graham Knuttel a good investment? Saw one selling at 10k and wondered what kind of appreciation could be expected on it, seeing as he is supposed to be THE Irish artist at the mo. Could he be the next Louis Le Broquy (sp) in which case, happy days?


----------



## gonk

paddywhacker said:


> Anyone here know much about art and if so would they consider a Graham Knuttel a good investment? Saw one selling at 10k and wondered what kind of appreciation could be expected on it, seeing as he is supposed to be THE Irish artist at the mo. Could he be the next Louis Le Broquy (sp) in which case, happy days?


 
Do you like his work? It's the most important question, since you could be looking at it on your wall for a long time waiting for it to rise in value. (The same goes for any art work.) Personally, his style does nothing for me, but each to his own taste.

I'm no art expert, but I think it's safe to say (and Knuttel would probably be the first to admit) that he is not and never will be in the same league as Le Brocquy.

Knuttel is also extremely prolific and he very likely has many more productive years in him - his works would not have a lot of scarcity value. Finally, €10k would be on the high side for one of his works - though it could be worth it depending on size, subject, etc. Have a look at results from some of the auction houses to try to judge whether the price is reasonable.

[broken link removed]
http://www.whytes.ie/
http://www.deveresart.com/


----------



## paddi22

I'd agree with the view above. I have always thought of him as a glorified illustrator who had a savvy agent and struck lucky. He was lucky to arrive at the same time as the celtic tiger and I think his style happened to strike a chord. 

He churns out paintings, as well as having a nephew who produces identical ones. He def isn't in the same league as La Brocquy or Markey even.There are better artists that you could take a punt on.

But as the poster says above, buy something cause you enjoy it. For the price of one Knuttel you could buy a few paintings you like from younger, well thought of artists. And who knows you could stike lucky with one of those, and at least you'd like looking at them!


----------



## MandaC

We have a Knuttel in our Board room. 
Have it about 2 years or so now.  Dont think it has gone up much in value.  It suits its location and is easily recognisable.  Think it cost about €8.5 at the time.


----------



## oysterman

MandaC said:


> Think it cost about €8.5


Now that's cheap. And, in my opinion, a fair price.


----------



## ClubMan

oysterman said:


> Now that's cheap. And, in my opinion, a fair price.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Paddy

The art market is almost imossible to predict. I share the negative view of Knuttel's work. But if you check the Askaboutmoney archives from the 1980's we were equally dismissive of the Markey's which we could have got for the price of a feed of pints. 

He certainly is prolific, but so was Markey, so was Jack B Yeats and there seems to be lots of Le Brocquys around as well at the moment. 

One art dealer told me about a promising artist who never made it because he hadn't produced enough work. That surprised me, but it seems that the art buying public wants to see an artist appearing fairly frequently in galleries or auctions. I suppose that there is a balance between the two. 

By the way, while I don't like Knuttel's work, there was an exhibition in the Leinster Gallery recently and it looks great for reasons I don't understand. You can see some of the works at http://www.leinstergallery.com/currentexhibition.html



Brendan


----------



## ClubMan

Brendan said:


> By the way, while I don't like Knuttel's work, there is an exhibition in the Leinster Gallery at the moment and it looks great for reasons I don't understand.


This one?

http://www.leinstergallery.com/currentexhibition.html


----------



## gonk

Brendan said:


> He certainly is prolific, but so was Markey, so was Jack B Yeats and there seems to be lots of Le Brocquys around as well at the moment.


 
In fairness, Le Brocquy has a 38 year head start on Knuttel!


----------



## paddywhacker

Thanks lads, sounds like it is a bit of shot in the dark so....


----------



## europhile

I've heard ads on the radio in recent days for a "clearance sale" in Kevin Sharkey's gallery.  Inspires confidence, doesn't it?

I think Knuttel's stuff lacks any artistic merit whatsoever.  Ditto for the nephew.  I'm particularly astonished by the nephew's neck.


----------



## MandaC

I saw the nephews designs on place mats in House of Fraser


----------



## ClubMan

europhile said:


> I've heard ads on the radio in recent days for a "clearance sale" in Kevin Sharkey's gallery.  Inspires confidence, doesn't it?


It's not a clearance sale - it's his annual half price sale. So what? 


> I think Knuttel's stuff lacks any artistic merit whatsoever.  Ditto for the nephew.  I'm particularly astonished by the nephew's neck.


 Beauty/merit is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## Brendan Burgess

Clubman asked:



> It's not a clearance sale - it's his annual half price sale. So what?


 
There is something tacky about it. The pricing of art is very subjective. If I had bought a piece of art by Sharkey last week for €1,000 and I saw it reduced in price to €500, I would be very annoyed. 

I think it's different from seeing something reduced in the sales as the amounts are larger and you expect to live with it a lot longer. 


Brendan


----------



## europhile

The expression "clearance sale" was used on the radio ads.  Same thing as a half-price sale, in any case.


----------



## paddi22

I agree with Brendan, there is something odd and tacky about it. 

The whole idea of art is that it is timeless and should transcend trends, fads or 'seasons'. It's not like clothing where seasonal trends are a norm. 

When i'm in a shop again a few weeks later and I see a top I bought on sale at 50%, I might curse bad luck  but I understand that they have to clear out stock that will be 'unfashionable' next season. I don't believe that painting functions the same way. If he thought it was a lesser work then he should have priced it correctly at the start. If he truly believes he prices his work correctly, then surely its a case of waiting for the right buyer to come along. 

It's taking the p*ss out of people who might have bought similar ones under good faith at full price.


----------



## ClubMan

paddi22 said:


> The whole idea of art is that it is timeless and should transcend trends, fads or 'seasons'. It's not like clothing where seasonal trends are a norm.


I disagree - at least in the general case. There are lots of examples of "disposable" or ephemeral art. Ultimately there are no right answers here as all criteria on which things will be judged are so subjective. Each to their own.


----------



## paddi22

Ephemeral art is usually cheap when it is made. For example, the psychedelic posters made for the Filimore in the 60's were ephemeral and cost nothing at the time and were freely available. Due to the skill and beauty of them they grew in value over the years and have kept growing. The markets set their own value like you said, and great work, regardless of original price will be valued as such and grow in price. 

But to for the artist to reduce their own stuff down by 50% off the bat sets a dangerous precident. If he values his own work so little then it sends out a bad message. What about all the other young artists starting out who might have pressure put on them to give discounts or 'sales' on stuff if it becomes the norm? It also looks like artists are overinflating their own prices if its so easy to cut 50% off.


----------



## ClubMan

paddi22 said:


> But to for the artist to reduce their own stuff down by 50% off the bat sets a dangerous precident. If he values his own work so little then it sends out a bad message. What about all the other young artists starting out who might have pressure put on them to give discounts or 'sales' on stuff if it becomes the norm? It also looks like artists are overinflating their own prices if its so easy to cut 50% off.


Surely the market/buyer dictates what a piece of art is actually worth? Did the fact that _Warhol _or _Picasso _(or lots of others) had teams of minions churn out art in their name destabilise the art market? Not that I know of.


----------



## paddi22

The majority of the old masters were started by the main artist and finished by other (usually equally as talented but less well known) I have no problem with that. But those artists priced their art correctly at the time when the art work was sold. They didn't reduce prices to clear 'stock' or view some works as lesser quality.

I completely understand and agree with your point about the market down the line deciding the value. I just think it shows him up in a bad light if he prices his painting and then suddenly decides they are worth less than people paid.


----------



## ClubMan

paddi22 said:


> I completely understand and agree with your point about the market down the line deciding the value. I just think it shows him up ...  if he prices his painting and then suddenly decides they are worth less than people paid.


If they are all unique pieces then nobody will be affected by the price drops since nobody will have bought them in the first place.


----------



## muesli

Interesting article here about Mr Sharkey:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20070421/ai_n19037882


----------



## rabbit

paddywhacker said:


> Anyone here know much about art and if so would they consider a Graham Knuttel a good investment? Saw one selling at 10k and wondered what kind of appreciation could be expected on it, seeing as he is supposed to be THE Irish artist at the mo. Could he be the next Louis Le Broquy (sp) in which case, happy days?


 
I think you could do a lot worse - in todays uncertain stock + property markets etc - than have a small percentage of your investment portfolio invested in art, providing you really like the artist.
Knuttels prices have increased steadily over the years and his art is appreciated by the many successful business people / celebrities etc, some of whom collect it.


----------



## ClubMan

Art prices need to appreciate significantly to cover the significant costs of having an auctioneer or art dealer to sell them on for you!


----------



## gonk

ClubMan said:


> Art prices need to appreciate significantly to cover the significant costs of having an auctioneer or art dealer to sell them on for you!


 
The _droit de suite_ law introduced last year, which gives living artists the right to a royalty on the resale of their works, adds to this hurdle.

[broken link removed]


----------



## F. Kruger

I think that you have to diversify as much as you can with the budget that you have and try to get guidance somewhere along the line. I think that you can generally tell if someone is talking bull or is actually passionate about what they do. 

Trying to predict an artist that is going to be commercial in the years ahead is very difficult. I think that it is no harm to study the 'headline' artists names that keep coming up at auction and then choose two or three whose work you actually like. Like any 'investment', diversify. Perhaps, a sculpture could be thrown into the mix. 

No point in having to look at something for years ahead that you don't like because you can't sell it at a profit. You may as well frame a share certificate.


----------



## ClubMan

gonk said:


> The _droit de suite_ law introduced last year, which gives living artists the right to a royalty on the resale of their works, adds to this hurdle.
> 
> [broken link removed]


Interesting stuff _gonk_.


----------



## doberden

If you are going ahead with a Knuttel send me a PM as I know the agent that represents Knuttel so you may get a better price.


----------



## bamboozle

I cant see knuttel’s art appreciating too much in value as he produces so much of the stuff, his nephew does the exact same stuff also.  I was at a dinner party recently which featured knuttel table mats!!!

Markey’s work is good.

If you’ve got a good eye for art (or know somebody that does) a great place to pick up good cheapish work is the end of year art exhibitions in NCAD (every May), picked up a piece by Eoin mchugh a few years ago the following year he was exhibiting in Irish Museum of Modern Art, he’s done a lot of international exhibitions recently, one for the future I hope!


----------

