Robert Genn on pricing

The forum for discussion on business aspects of working with glass.

Moderator: Brad Walker

AVLucky
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 6:15 pm
Location: PA

Post by AVLucky »

This thread is taking a pretty interesting turn. Once again, I feel compelled to poke my nose into the discussion. Cynthia wrote:
Doing good business is an art, no arguments there, but making art is not about making money (which doesn't precluce making money from making art) and to confuse those two as being somehow hand in glove is one of the mistaken premises you have put forth that I have taken issue with....that, and the comments you have made that denegrate those who persue this work from an arts emphasis perspective in their work and process.
In and of itself, art is not about making money. But if you are going to define yourself as a professional, it becomes much different. Let's be realistic. If you're trying to make a living at it, then it is about making money. I'm not talking about scheming your way into instant riches and fame, just making an honest, comfortable life for yourself. Unless you're lucky enough to be living on a trust fund or lottery winnings, you probably have to think about profitability from time to time. But that doesn't mean you have to compromise your art as well. For example, if you are producing intricate, time consuming, "artistic" pieces, and you supplement that with simpler, more production-oriented work, does it make you less of an artist? Just because you're making steadier income?

I suppose there's a certain preciousness to one-of-a-kind work. It's the only one in existence, it has the maker's hand clearly visible in it, etc. I won't deny the power of that. It's a very important emotional component of a piece of art, and one that makes the difference to many people. Others might refer to it as snob appeal, and in a sense it is. Consider this: You really like a famous painting, but lack the millions of dollars required to purchase it. So you buy a poster, hang it on your wall, and get to look at it every day. It doesn't have the status or the auction value of the original, but it makes you just as happy. That's value too. I am not suggesting that one of a kind work is unnecessary. In fact, I think it's more important than ever as the world gets more and more homogenized. But I don't think that something should automatically be cheapened by not being the only one of its kind.

Let's not forget that what started this whole discussion was a suggestion about pricing. That's what pulled us all in and got us debating. You might call yourself an artist if you make $20 production pieces or $10,000 sculptures. But once you take them out of the studio and offer them to the public for money, you are also a businessperson. If nobody here cared how much they were making for their work, nobody would be reading this. It's just a matter of deciding how you personally want to earn money.
Dennis Brady
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 9:06 pm
Location: Victoria BC
Contact:

Post by Dennis Brady »

The debate originated about "perceived" values. Perhaps we should consider that just as customers perceive different values when buying, so do producers perceive different values when selling.

Some perceive their effort is more valuable if it's offered as art, others don't believe it makes any difference how it's offered - that it's all a product whose price will be determined by the buyers willingness to pay.
DeBrady Glass Ltd http://www.debrady.com
Victorian Art Glass http://www.vicartglass.com
Glass Campus online classes http://www.glasscampus.com
The Hobbyist
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 7:09 pm
Location: Sun City West (NW Phoenix), AZ
Contact:

Post by The Hobbyist »

Thanks everyone. This has been a wonderful thread. I don't wander over into the business/money forum but I'm glad I did this time.

I am a Hobbyist and all this talk about money, markets, pricing, perceived value, showmanship, etc. reinforces me. I am sooooo glad I am a hobbyist.

I am privileged to make what I want, when I want and do with it as I please. I wish I were an artist which, IMO, is someone that brings creativity to craftsmanship. It is not someone that focuses on selling themselves to make money (that's a prostitute).

I will sell anything I own, including glass. I will not make glass for the purpose of selling it. If I had to make a living from glass I would determine what the market wants and then have it made in the third world to my design specs. Fast, cheap and profitable. That is an art but not glass art. It sounds to me like Dennis simply hasn't made any business connections in the third world.

In selling I always thought price was reflected in supply vs. demand, or more correctly preceived supply vs. perceived demand. I believe Picasso was financially successful, as an artist, because he lived long enough.

This thread makes me wonder if the art business is any different than the oil business or banking. We all know they are such pillars of ethics and honor.

Still glad I am ................The Hobbyist................Jim
"With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion. " Steven Weinberg
Dani
Posts: 493
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 3:17 pm
Contact:

Post by Dani »

Bert Weiss wrote:The key to this discussion is the notion of "perceived value" The public does perceive that diamonds are worth more than Cz's and gold more than silver. They also are impressed by sparkle and size. Dichro sells well because it has sparkle, not because it is expensive for glass artists to purchase.

The bottom line is that some works of art contain a factor that is compelling to buyers. When you got it, you got it, whether it is from size or sparkle or content or color... The catch is that Picasso had it and so does Chihuly and Thomas Kincaide...

I'm laughing at Jackie's post because my years in stained glass basically turned me off to opalescent glass.
My clientele must be very smart (of course they are, they're buying from me!) because they have no problem at all comprehending the difference between a $100 s.f. panel that involved eight pieces of glass and a bevel in the middle..... and a figurative painted window that might sell for upwards of $500 s.f. I think sometimes we underestimate the intelligence of the public. Or we're trying to "educate" and sell to members of the public sector who shouldn't be our focus to begin with. Back to the above scenario. Same size windows, huge difference in price. Nobody questions the rationale.
AVLucky
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 6:15 pm
Location: PA

Post by AVLucky »

Jim wrote
If I had to make a living from glass I would determine what the market wants and then have it made in the third world to my design specs. Fast, cheap and profitable.
That sounds like bringing creativity to craftsmanship to me!

Nobody has to make their living from glass. We could all go out and become investment bankers (or oil tycoons) if we wanted the money that badly. I think that people choose to be self-supporting artists because it's what they love to do. In effect, I think many of us sell work to support our habits of making work.
There's this whole "money is icky" attitude among those who are doing it simply "for the sake of art". I know all about that. It's what kept me from selling my work for so long. It's very easy to get bogged down by the drama of Art: You made it; You were inspired, it's a unique creation, a piece of your soul, a contribution to the world. There's no way that you could put a price on that, of course, because it would destroy the integrity of your artistic vision.

Baloney.

Accepting money for work you love to do is not prostitution. Your artwork may be deeply personal and come from a part of yourself that you don't consciously understand, but it is not you. You're not selling your babies. You have put time, effort, creativity and materials into something, and that has value.

Jim, I'm confused, because you say you would
sell anything I own, including glass. I will not make glass for the purpose of selling it.
What's the difference? :?
Post Reply