500-year-old Leonardo da Vinci painting sells for $450M at auction

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by Moggo

This is what I meant but obviously it was not conveyed accurately enough.

I’m sure name calling is a misdemeanour on this forum, I expect someone to have a warning


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Consider yourself warned.

You accused anyone who is very wealthy of being immoral. Painting an entire class of people with a broad brush like that is the definition of bigotry. Not an insult, rather a fact.

You still havent offered any evidence that your statement is true. If you’re going to promote that opinion you should cite the source of your information. Otherwise, it’s no different than saying a race of people is lazy simply because they are that race.

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by FeelingTheBlues

How many people have said the same thing about watches we all own and like?

Not even a comparison, we are talking thousands/ten-thousands vs 450million.
When it comes to it everyone has their vice, be it clothes, shoes, audio gear, cars or watches. But 450 Million is a whole different ballpark.

[Moggo]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

Consider yourself warned.



You accused anyone who is very wealthy of being immoral. Painting an entire class of people with a broad brush like that is the definition of bigotry. Not an insult, rather a fact.



You still havent offered any evidence that your statement is true. If you’re going to promote that opinion you should cite the source of your information. Otherwise, it’s no different than saying a race of people is lazy simply because they are that race.

If you read my post I said ‘Usually’ not always ........Anyway I didn’t mean to offend anybody and apologise if I did.

*sits on the naughty step*

Back on topic, I’m sure the buyer is a lovely person thoroughly deserving of a fine work of art




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Not even a comparison, we are talking thousands/ten-thousands vs 450million.
When it comes to it everyone has their vice, be it clothes, shoes, audio gear, cars or watches. But 450 Million is a whole different ballpark.

But the painting increased in value 300% in a few years. This isn’t an art sale, it’s an investment. If it sells for $500M in a couple years the buyer will have made $50M. Though the numbers are very large, this is no different than any other investment.

Would you all be lamenting the purchase had it been $450M of Amazon or Apple stock?

[SMD]

Originally Posted by Moggo

I would say maybe your outlook is too, someone has 450 million to spend on wall art and people live in poverty........you’ll never convince me that’s right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wealth is not zero sum. Making a rich man poorer does not make the poor man rich.

[Wesley Crusher]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Not even a comparison, we are talking thousands/ten-thousands vs 450million.
When it comes to it everyone has their vice, be it clothes, shoes, audio gear, cars or watches. But 450 Million is a whole different ballpark.

You have to look at this situation out of your own perspective, Bas.

450MM seems like a lot of money to you and me because we don’t have that kind of money to blow (I don’t, at least. You may be a billionaire and just not telling anybody. ). Somebody who spends that kind of money on a painting could be worth over 100 billion dollars.

A 10k watch may seem reasonable to us because it is a figure that is within our grasp, but ask a poor family in Africa (just an example) what they think about spending 10k on a watch and they will look at you like you’ve lost your mind.

I never understood how people could judge others for spending their wealth when those people are guilty of the exact same thing. The amount may be different, but if you are going to play the “Think of how many people you can help with that money” card, then there is no moral/ethical difference.

Some of the comments in this thread are truly shocking. It’s almost impossible to believe that there are some people with such a twisted view of things.

[antbkny]

Congratulations to the buyer, id love to have this painting some day.

[mtrunner]

Originally Posted by antbkny

Congratulations to the buyer, id love to have this painting some day.

Start saving.

[MonBK]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

You have to look at this situation out of your own perspective, Bas.

450MM seems like a lot of money to you and me because we don’t have that kind of money to blow (I don’t, at least. You may be a billionaire and just not telling anybody. ). Somebody who spends that kind of money on a painting could be worth over 100 billion dollars.

A 10k watch may seem reasonable to us because it is a figure that is within our grasp, but ask a poor family in Africa (just an example) what they think about spending 10k on a watch and they will look at you like you’ve lost your mind.

I never understood how people could judge others for spending their wealth when those people are guilty of the exact same thing. The amount may be different, but if you are going to play the “Think of how many people you can help with that money” card, then there is no moral/ethical difference.

Some of the comments in this thread are truly shocking. It’s almost impossible to believe that there are some people with such a twisted view of things.

Finally a voice of reason.

[FeelingTheBlues]

Originally Posted by SearChart

Not even a comparison, we are talking thousands/ten-thousands vs 450million.
When it comes to it everyone has their vice, be it clothes, shoes, audio gear, cars or watches. But 450 Million is a whole different ballpark.

It's not about the amount of money, my friend, my reply to Seth below this sentence explained my point better.

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

You have to look at this situation out of your own perspective, Bas.

450MM seems like a lot of money to you and me because we don’t have that kind of money to blow (I don’t, at least. You may be a billionaire and just not telling anybody. ). Somebody who spends that kind of money on a painting could be worth over 100 billion dollars.

A 10k watch may seem reasonable to us because it is a figure that is within our grasp, but ask a poor family in Africa (just an example) what they think about spending 10k on a watch and they will look at you like you’ve lost your mind.

I never understood how people could judge others for spending their wealth when those people are guilty of the exact same thing. The amount may be different, but if you are going to play the “Think of how many people you can help with that money” card, then there is no moral/ethical difference.

Some of the comments in this thread are truly shocking. It’s almost impossible to believe that there are some people with such a twisted view of things.

This post sums it up very nicely if you will.

And if we are indeed going to compare and go into details (which I will not expand upon past this post for it is not the point of this discussion anyway), the very arguments we use on a daily basis around here to explain our interest in very expensive watches - apart from the fact that we like them - can be used in a much better way to explain the price this painting was sold for. The historical value, passion for it, craftsmanship, attention to detail, the reputation of the maker, the fact that it is unique (and I mean it, truly unique for it is the only one)...what else do you need?

All in all, I simply hope the buyer will invest in a mighty fine nail to hang that on his wall...

[superdog]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

You have to look at this situation out of your own perspective, Bas.

450MM seems like a lot of money to you and me because we don’t have that kind of money to blow (I don’t, at least. You may be a billionaire and just not telling anybody. ). Somebody who spends that kind of money on a painting could be worth over 100 billion dollars.

A 10k watch may seem reasonable to us because it is a figure that is within our grasp, but ask a poor family in Africa (just an example) what they think about spending 10k on a watch and they will look at you like you’ve lost your mind.

I never understood how people could judge others for spending their wealth when those people are guilty of the exact same thing. The amount may be different, but if you are going to play the “Think of how many people you can help with that money” card, then there is no moral/ethical difference.

Some of the comments in this thread are truly shocking. It’s almost impossible to believe that there are some people with such a twisted view of things.

Great points. Well written.

[AzPaul]

Originally Posted by Blansky

500 year old painting sell for 450 million.

Wow. Imagine what it sold for brand new. Like I bet a billion or something.

Reminds me of something

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sELqobCIXU

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

You have to look at this situation out of your own perspective, Bas.

450MM seems like a lot of money to you and me because we don’t have that kind of money to blow (I don’t, at least. You may be a billionaire and just not telling anybody. ). Somebody who spends that kind of money on a painting could be worth over 100 billion dollars.

A 10k watch may seem reasonable to us because it is a figure that is within our grasp, but ask a poor family in Africa (just an example) what they think about spending 10k on a watch and they will look at you like you’ve lost your mind.

I never understood how people could judge others for spending their wealth when those people are guilty of the exact same thing. The amount may be different, but if you are going to play the “Think of how many people you can help with that money” card, then there is no moral/ethical difference.

Some of the comments in this thread are truly shocking. It’s almost impossible to believe that there are some people with such a twisted view of things.

Wes, you make some really good points but with one correction. No one currently has a net worth of 100B. Jeff Bezos holds the title as the world's richest person with a net worth of a mere $90B.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnb...0-billion.html

We sometimes hear a new forum member ask something along the lines of "how much should I be making before I buy a Rolex?" and I was wondering how much should someone have in the bank to consider buying a painting worth almost half a billion dollars? A mega mansion,, a mega yacht, a private island I can understand. But on what kind of wall does a painting like this hang?

Any thoughts?

[FeelingTheBlues]

Originally Posted by Tony64

Wes, you make some really good points but with one correction. No one currently has a net worth of 100B. Jeff Bezos holds the title as the world's richest person with a net worth of a mere $90B.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnb...0-billion.html

Oh please, what's 10 billion between friends...

Mind you, I knew his free shipping thing would end up costing him a lot.

[HERITAGE82]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

This post is entirely a political viewpoint that lacks any evidence to support a conclusion. In your bigoted view, anyone with wealth is immoral and a crook. Sad.

I find your tone overly aggressive and your word choice repulsive especially on a watch forum where we all share opinions and views.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by FeelingTheBlues

Oh please, what's 10 billion between friends...

Mind you, I knew his free shipping thing would end up costing him a lot.

[Knappo 1307]

Originally Posted by FeelingTheBlues

Oh please, what's 10 billion between friends...

Mind you, I knew his free shipping thing would end up costing him a lot.

That's funny...

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

You have to look at this situation out of your own perspective, Bas.

450MM seems like a lot of money to you and me because we don’t have that kind of money to blow (I don’t, at least. You may be a billionaire and just not telling anybody. ). Somebody who spends that kind of money on a painting could be worth over 100 billion dollars.

A 10k watch may seem reasonable to us because it is a figure that is within our grasp, but ask a poor family in Africa (just an example) what they think about spending 10k on a watch and they will look at you like you’ve lost your mind.

I never understood how people could judge others for spending their wealth when those people are guilty of the exact same thing. The amount may be different, but if you are going to play the “Think of how many people you can help with that money” card, then there is no moral/ethical difference.

Some of the comments in this thread are truly shocking. It’s almost impossible to believe that there are some people with such a twisted view of things.

His money his right, I get that. I'm not the guy screaming it's immoral, he should be helping others.. I probably wouldn't do that either.

Now I'd understand if this money was spent on something slightly more useful like a plane, boat, house, etc. But 450M for a painting is something I will never understand, not even if I had billions.

[larsr]

Originally Posted by incontrol

Wealth is not distributed, it is earned. Your comment is disturbing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For every great fortune "earned"; there is a great fortune eventually "inherited". And to my mind, great fortunes (measured in the billions) would not be able to be earned, or protected, without a functioning society.

So, yeah, when the net worths of the top three Americans is greater than the total of the bottom 50% net worth of all Americans it is reasonable to say, "Houston, we have a problem."

[larsr]

Originally Posted by SearChart

His money his right, I get that. I'm not the guy screaming it's immoral, he should be helping others.. I probably wouldn't do that either.

Now I'd understand if this money was spent on something slightly more useful like a plane, boat, house, etc. But 450M for a painting is something I will never understand, not even if I had billions.

If I had to guess whomever made this purchase saw it as a place to "park" money as part of a diversification process. It was a financial decision most likely.

[Moggo]

Originally Posted by larsr

If I had to guess whomever made this purchase saw it as a place to "park" money as part of a diversification process. It was a financial decision most likely.

Could be tax deductible ‘Office Decor’


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[larsr]

Originally Posted by Moggo

Could be tax deductible ‘Office Decor’


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wouldn't be surprised at all if the painting was hanging on a wall on the top floor office of some several billion dollar office building owned by purchaser as further diversification.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by larsr

For every great fortune "earned"; there is a great fortune eventually "inherited". And to my mind, great fortunes (measured in the billions) would not be able to be earned, or protected, without a functioning society.

So, yeah, when the net worths of the top three Americans is greater than the total of the bottom 50% net worth of all Americans it is reasonable to say, "Houston, we have a problem."

I respect what you're saying, but I personally would have to disagree with virtually all of it.

Another quote comes to mind with which I suspect you and I would also have differing opinions: "you didn't build that".

Can we still be friends?

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by incontrol

Wealth is not distributed, it is earned.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by Tony64

many people earn it. no question.

many don't.

[goin camping]

Originally Posted by larsr

For every great fortune "earned"; there is a great fortune eventually "inherited". And to my mind, great fortunes (measured in the billions) would not be able to be earned, or protected, without a functioning society.

So, yeah, when the net worths of the top three Americans is greater than the total of the bottom 50% net worth of all Americans it is reasonable to say, "Houston, we have a problem."

What is the problem?

The money supply is not finite. Anyone can earn more through employment or business.

Taking/taxing a rich persons wealth does not distribute wealth other than removing it from a citizen to the government. No win for those on the bottom there.

A tax/regulatory system can be designed to promote small business become large business. But even if you did that. Some folks either don't have an interest or ability to take an idea to fruition. What then?

The blunt reality is that in any competitive system some will do better than others.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by superdog

many people earn it. no question.

many don't.

Hard to disagree with that.

[larsr]

Originally Posted by Tony64

I respect what you're saying, but I personally would have to disagree with virtually all of it.

Another quote comes to mind with which I suspect you and I would also have differing opinions: "you didn't build that".

Can we still be friends?

You would be wrong about your quote.

I made my money on Wall Street. Investment Banker. So I am as capitalistic, or more so, then the next guy. I just recognize that "great fortunes" are made on the back of society. And, so when the maker finally meets their Maker I see it as good social policy that a significant portion of their estate find its way back into society either through charity or an estate tax.

[GB-man]

This thread sucks.

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by GB-man

This thread sucks.

Here’s a picture of the painting in question my buddy Chris sent me. Got yelled at for using the flash