Orange, Red, Yellow

I was perusing Pinterest tonight and I came across the image I selected from a random image search to illustrate a recent post featuring Rothko's manifesto. It was Rothko's Orange, Red, Yellow, which he painted in 1961. What caught my eye was the comment under the pin: last night...sold for just under $87 million. It must have been a old post because it sold a few years ago on May 9, 2012 at Christies. It was reported that it was one of the longest bidding matches yet witnessed in a contemporary art sale (six and half minutes, wow). That Tuesday evening was a very good night for selling contemporary art. Christie's sale took in $388.5 million, a record breaking auction! By the way, the buyer's premium on the Rothko was roughly $9.2 million on top of the hammer price of $77.5 million.

The painting is obviously worth $86,882,500 million (actual price with buyer's premium). Why? Because someone was happy as a pig in paint to pay that much for it. Amazing! Do you think it was a steal or did he pay too much?

Mark Rothko, Orange, Red, Yellow

1961, Acrylic on canvas 93"x 81.25" 

Now my friend Jerry would be interested to know that the highest price paid for a contemporary painting was $160,000,000 (in May 2012 dollars). Guess who Jer? Jackson Pollack. Painted on something he must have picked up at the lumber yard. It was at a solo Pollack show at the Betty Parsons gallery in January 1949 that Alfonso Ossorio decided to purchase the painting. He paid $1,500. There are some who believe that the artist should participate in the appreciated value of their work each time it is resold. The auction house tacks on 15% but the artist gets nothing. But wonder if the painting is sold at a loss, does it work both ways? What do you think?

Jackson Pollack No. 5

1948, Oil on fiberboard 8'x4'