One way rich people are pulling back

Hi, it's James. The rich are (finally) seeing a hit to their disposable income. I'll tell you how I know. [View in browser]( [Bloomberg]( Hi, I’m [James Tarmy](, Bloomberg’s arts columnist. Last week, as high borrowing costs dampened the mood at [the Frieze art fair in London](, the rich didn’t seem so different from the rest of us. At the opening day of the fair, Marc Glimcher, the CEO of Pace gallery, told me that there is a faction of art collectors whose lifestyle was built on debt. “They were buying things with borrowed money,” he told me, “and their art buying budget was part of their credit line.” Those people? “They’re out of the market now,” he says. A view of Lisson Gallery’s booth at Frieze London. Photographer: George Darrell, ©, Van Hanos, courtesy Lisson Gallery That was painfully evident at the London auctions, which [were down 20% by value]( from last year. And it kind-of-sort-of seemed to be the case once sales numbers were released at Frieze, where things sold reasonably well, but no dealers I spoke to were thrilled. And yet! This week in Paris, all talk of interest rates went out the window. Chalk it up to the wine or the parties or the many stellar exhibition openings, but the opening day of the Paris+ par Art Basel art fair (horrible name, fun event) was mobbed. There were tons of Europeans, and Americans and people from across Asia had made the trek too, undeterred by rumors of bomb threats and bed bugs. Multiple lines stretched down the block for the (theoretically) hyper exclusive 10 a.m. opening time, and by midday the aisles were so full it was hard to get around. Look at all these VIPs at Paris+ par Art Basel’s opening day! Photographer: James Tarmy/Bloomberg Several galleries had sold enough work that they were already sending out sales reports by mid afternoon, and over subsequent days collectors–giants in their own fields of finance or real estate or private equity–told me plaintively (and sadly, off the record) about not being “given access” to $500,000 artworks. Others spoke triumphantly about “scoring” small paintings for $300,000 apiece. So perhaps I should take it back: All the rich need is a little red wine, some top-notch puff pastries, and a lot of great art to remember that they are, in fact, very different from you and me. Connect with James on [TwitterÂ](or via [e-mailÂ](mailto:askpursuits@bloomberg.net). Elsewhere in arts and culture... [Online Marketplace Basic.Space Acquires the Design Miami/ Furniture Fair]( High design is going digital. [Crowds of Jittery Rich Fill Frieze London Art Fair’s Opening Day]( The frenzy for buying million-dollar paintings seems to have tailed off. [Bloomberg Screentime: The Ones To Watch in Arts, Culture and Entertainment]( These are the comedians, executives, designers, podcasters, Twitch streamers, rappers and others who we think will shape the culture—if they’re not already doing so. [Step Inside the Met’s Rebuilding of Beloved La Bohème]( It was in continuous use for more than 40 years. Time for an update. [Chinese Billionaire Liu’s Auction Flops at Sotheby’s Fall Sale]( The $70 million total for art may still represent a single-owner record in Asia, but a full quarter of the lots failed to sell. The top gallery shows in London and Paris: Delcy Morelos at Marian Goodman in Paris: Morelos put herself on the map in the last edition of Venice’s Art Biennale, where her [massive, aromatic earthworks]( were a must-see. She’s kept things going in this most recent show, where the concepts are the same but the art is sized to be slightly more manageable. [Through Dec. 21]( Alex Ayed at Balice Hertling in Paris: In this unbelievably charming exhibition of new work, Ayed has used weather-beaten sails as canvases. The show is a companion to Ayed’s excellent installation, up now at the Fondation Louis Vuitton. [Through Nov. 18]( Liu Ye at David Zwirner in London: These lovely, highly skilled and lightly stylized paintings of dogs, flowers and other less important things (people), prove that sometimes art doesn’t have to have a deep conceptual underpinning to be worth your time. [Through Nov. 18]( Richard Prince at Gagosian in London: Prince has been around so long, and gotten so expensive, that it’s nice to be reminded of how it all started: His early photos use appropriation and no small amount of humor to cut deep into the American psyche. [Through Dec. 22]( Wade Guyton at Chantal Crousel in Paris: Guyton, who’s best known for using inkjet printers as a very interesting form of painting, has printed over pages from a Manet exhibition catalog and installed them, beautifully, in Crousel’s exquisite gallery. [Through Nov. 18]( A few modest homes—shacks, really—have hit the market recently: [A Massive Mansion in the Dominican Republic Lists for $45 Million]( [Filmmaker Mike Mills Lists His Mountain Retreat for $3.3 Million]( [A Gay Bathhouse Turned Luxury Mansion Lists in SF for $4.8 Million]( [Cotswolds Manor House Listed for $17 Million by Superdry Co-Founder]( [Americans Are Buying Up Scotland’s Most Expensive Housing]( So, you had some questions? Here are some answers! Keep them coming for next week via our Bloomberg [Pursuits Instagram]( and [e-mail](mailto:askpursuits@bloomberg.net?I%20have%20a%20question). Is the market for young artists’ work really getting decimated? I believe this question is in reference to [a piece](I wrote recently. Basically, the short version is that there was a crop of young-ish artists whose secondary market prices shot up and have fallen nearly as fast. That’s a pretty small group of people. To see who I’m talking about, just look at recent [auctions at Phillips]( and [Sotheby’s](—and it’s true they appear to be getting slammed. Young artists are being deserted in favor of older, safer bets. Illustration: Josephine Ritschel But the broader issue is that prices for young artists have gotten too high, pretty much across the board, and collectors have begun to push back. Here’s why: If a work is a mere $15,000, there’s less pressure for it to be a meaningful part of the art historical canon. You can buy it because you like it, or like the artist, and that’s that. But when the work costs $150,000, you can’t really buy it on a whim. It had better be seriously good, and that’s a serious problem for artists who are often still figuring things out. Inside the exquisite Rothko retrospective at the Fondation Louis Vuitton in Paris. Photographer: James Tarmy/Bloomberg It’s very, very important to give artists room to figure things out! For proof, look no further than the must-see show of the season, the [Mark Rothko retrospective]( at Paris’s Fondation Louis Vuitton (through April 2.) It turns out Rothko was an above-average figurative painter who required years to slowly refine his ideas and aesthetic to finally arrive at the total abstraction we know and love. It’s hard to imagine that he’d ever have gotten there if he had immense pressure to produce “marketable” art. What do we know about New York’s mega November auctions? A lot, actually. In the last few weeks, Christie’s, Sotheby’s and Phillips have [listed some major consignments](. Most notable is art from the estate of mega-collector Emily Fisher Landau, which [includes a Picasso]( that’s estimated to sell for more than $120 million. (That is correct, and not a typo: I’ll say it again, $120 million.) There are probably 50 people on the planet who’d be up for spending that much, so here’s hoping they make it to the auction. I, for one, would not want to be responsible for hanging, or for that matter, touching, a $120 million painting. Photographer: Tristan Fewings/Getty Images Europe But there’s a flurry of works aimed at the mere super rich, including an $8 million Frida Kahlo [from music exec Jerry Moss]( and, separately, [a $20 million Gorky]( consigned by music exec David Geffen—bargain basement stuff, in comparison. How all of this will actually sell is a very open question. As I’ve said, the London auctions were not great, and there’s some concern that the mood won’t improve much in time for New York. The dominant narrative over the last few years seems to be a reasonable rule of thumb, though: Rich people will still spend what they need to if they’re convinced that whatever it is they’re buying is the best, or best-available work. There’s enough of that material coming to market that I have a hunch the auctions will do fine, even if they don’t break too many records. Is now a good time to buy decorative arts? Just for context, this person is referring to a very broad category that’s a catchall for “nice things you put in your home that aren’t explicitly artworks.” Think: designer lamps, antique desks, Murano vases, crystal chandeliers, mid-century coffee tables… they all fit under this very big umbrella. Lebreton Gallery at Design Miami/ Paris. Photographer: Courtesy of James Harris for Design Miami/ Par The short and totally unsatisfactory answer is: it depends. Just this past week, the Rothschild family held a very successful [version of a garage sale]( at Christie’s that netted more than $62 million. People from 40 countries bid on everything from a pair of Louis XV gilt chairs (price realized: $4.4 million) to a small terra cotta dachshund (estimate: $300 to $500) which sold for $3,780. Clearly, that kind of decorative art is doing great, and you certainly won’t be buying at the bottom, although it’s also unclear if we’ve reached the top. An e-commerce company called Basic.Space is betting that the market has a lot more growth left: Just yesterday [we reported]( that it had acquired the design fair called Design Miami/, which confusingly has editions in Paris and Basel, Switzerland, too. I invite you to read the piece, but the basic gist is Basic.Space has reasoned that many people want to collect design online, they just don’t know where to go. We’ll see if it works out! New for subscribers: Free article gifting. Bloomberg.com subscribers can now gift up to five free articles a month to anyone you want. Just look for the "Gift this article" button on stories. (Not a subscriber? Unlock limited access and [sign up here](.) Follow Us Like getting this newsletter? [Subscribe to Bloomberg.com]( for unlimited access to trusted, data-driven journalism and subscriber-only insights. Want to sponsor this newsletter? [Get in touch here](. You received this message because you are subscribed to Bloomberg's Bloomberg Pursuits newsletter. If a friend forwarded you this message, [sign up here]( to get it in your inbox. [Unsubscribe]( [Bloomberg.com]( [Contact Us]( Bloomberg L.P. 731 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10022 [Ads Powered By Liveintent]( [Ad Choices](