Kobel's Art Weekly

Kobel's Art Weekly 33 2025

The art market got off to a turbulent start this year, but not necessarily with the momentum that the reduction in German VAT had promised. The first of three reviews of the past season looks back at major and minor market developments.

Margaret Carrigan at Artnet (probably paywall) – artificial intelligence, a generational change and the growing importance of the Gulf region: ‘However, there's widespread hope that the worst is behind us. I, for one, am willing to believe in the power of positive thinking, but I don't think we're heading for an all-out rebound. Instead, 2025 offers the promise of change—and change can be good.’

Favourable press articles about the art collection of the club chain Soho House, shortly before its sale to investors, questions George Nelson at Artnews: ‘The December announcement of the buyout offer sent the stock price skyrocketing by over 50 percent. However, the company's market cap is still far down from its IPO valuation of $2.8 billion. Is the focus on the art collection a distraction from the financials—a signal to the market about a valuable asset the club could eventually sell? Or is it an effort to burnish the club's reputation as a place for top creatives rather than mid-level bankers, aspiring startup founders, and the laptop class?’

According to Clare McAndrew, the art market is not as bad as Mei & Moses claim, writes George Nelson in Artnews. Michael Moses and Jianping Mei have been tracking artworks on the auction market for decades and measuring their performance when they are resold. Last year, this index was negative for the first time this century. McAndrew accuses them of sample bias because they ignore other marketing channels. As is often the case when two experts in a field disagree, both sides are somewhat correct. Since Mei & Moses have been using the only reasonably controllable sources (the Big Three of the auction world) for decades, they do not actually represent the entire market. However, as they are consistent in their methodology, their results can certainly be considered valid.

Margaret Carrigan discusses the possible effects of Trump's tariff orgy on the art market at Artnet (possibly paywall): ‘Edouard Gouin, who runs the art shipping and logistics firm Convelio, said that any long-term impacts of the tariffs could ’unduly affect’ the art industry, given the U.S.'s outsized share of the market. “Tariffs would generally raise the cost of doing business, and I think galleries would be the most impacted,” he said. When it comes to art shipping, tariffs could have “Brexit-like implications” for U.S. trade, Gouin said, arguing that shipping costs, which have soared since the pandemic, would climb further.’

One regulation (PDF), three different interpretations: ‘A.I. Art Generated With Text Prompts Cannot Be Copyrighted, U.S. Rules’, headlines Adam Schrader at Artnet. ‘AI Art Lacking “Human Expression” Cannot Be Copyrighted, US Officials Say’, writes Tessa Salomon at Artnews. And Benjamin Sutton's article for The Art Newspaper reads: ‘Artists can copyright works made using AI as an “assistive tool”, US Copyright Office concludes’. This is why press diversity is so important.

Stephanie Dieckvoss reports from Jeddah for the Handelsblatt on how Saudi Arabia's strategy differs from that of other Gulf states: ‘In this way, Saudi Arabia is consciously setting itself apart from the strategies of other Gulf states, which are mainly making a name for themselves in the cultural sector with large-scale projects such as the Louvre and Guggenheim Abu Dhabi or art fairs such as “Art Dubai”. Two events are currently demonstrating how fruitful the Saudi approach is: the second Islamic Art Biennale in the port city of Jeddah, which runs until 25 May, and the art festival in the desert region of Al-ʿUla, which ends on 22 February. Both events excitingly demonstrate the connections between art, commerce and tourism. They also reveal the balancing act the country is performing to open up to the world – and thus, in particular, to investments.’ Rebecca Anne Proctor introduces the country's key figures in a refreshingly neutral way on Artnet.

In a press release, Artnet AG celebrates the outcome of its Annual General Meeting. The content of the report prompted Dirk Hagemann, the representative of DSW - Deutsche Schutzvereinigung für Wertpapierbesitz (a German private investors' association), who was present at the AGM, to make a statement. Immediately before the AGM, Artnet's editor-in-chief Naomi Rea conducted a PR interview with her boss. I will be publishing a detailed report in this week's Handelsblatt.

‘Why the art world has to talk about poverty,’ explains Larissa Kikol, at Monopol: ’It's fear. It weighs heavily on everyone. Admitting that you can't make a living as an artist is a big taboo. And this is also a paradox: because it affects the majority of artists. And yet everything is done to hide it from the outside world. The bright, chic art world consists of illusions that are only reality for a small elite. But almost everyone wants to maintain the shiny façade.’

US customs policy could well damage its own art market, reports Kate Brown in early March for Artnet (possible paywall) from her native Canada: ‘Dealers are weighing their options. One based in Toronto said that they may focus on fairs beyond the U.S. or exhibit artists based in the U.S. or Europe when they do attend U.S. fairs. Wil Aballe, of Wil Aballe Art Projects is based in Vancouver, said he hit pause on U.S. art fairs. The gallery has been focusing on shows and art fairs in Europe, largely in Belgium and Germany.’

I describe the course and background of the Artnet AG Annual General Meeting in detail in the Handelsblatt (paywall). However, a lot has happened since then. As can be seen from the mandatory disclosures, Galerie Neuendorf AG has 600,000 shares to former Goldman Sachs banker and existing Artnet shareholder Andrew E. Wolff – on the day of the Annual General Meeting.

The British government is making it easier to import works of art, reports Kabir Jhala in The Art Newspaper (possible paywall): "In a move expected to boost the ailing British art market, the UK Treasury has extended the period during which fine art and antiques from overseas can come into the country free of import duties. [...] Dealers will now pay zero import tax on works brought into the UK, provided they are exported within four years. The change particularly impacts London, which is one of the global art market's three largest hubs for cross-border trade, along with New York and Hong Kong, neither of which levies import taxes for art and antiques.’ However, the article does not make it clear whether it is taxes or customs duties that are being referred to, as it uses both terms.

The new Artnet Intelligence Report is available to download (PDF): ‘In her cover story, Artnet News senior reporter Katya Kazakina explores a generational turning point, with younger buyers now driving demand. Luxury, pop culture, and digital engagement are shaping their collecting habits, forcing the industry to rethink exclusivity and adapt to new values. Meanwhile, online art sales are surging in volume, reflecting an enduring change in how collectors interact with the market.’

Tariffs or no tariff on art? If so, how much? The question of why doesn't really arise when considering the mafia-like methods of the Trump regime, which rules without parliament. (No, I don't plan on travelling to the US in the next few years.) Given the chaotic situation, most of the trade media are capitulating in the face of the possible repercussions. Only Katya Kazakina is trying to provide some clarity at Artnet (possibly paywalled) in early April: ‘On the ground in Chelsea, New York's gallery epicenter, anxiety was spreading fast. Dealers were glued to their computers, deciphering emails from shippers and trade organizations like the Art Dealers Association of America and the New Art Dealers Alliance (NADA). By mid-afternoon on Thursday, many seemed to find some solace in an arcane, fine-print-type of a document, known as ‘50 USC 1702(b),’ which lists objects exempt from tariffs. Dated 2001, it includes prehistoric items like CD-ROMs (remember those?), microfiche, news wire feeds, and—drum roll, please!—artworks. By the end of the rollercoaster of a day, there was a growing consensus that important tariffs will not apply to art, with a big caveat. ‘Even though it looks like it doesn't affect art right now, it can change tomorrow,’ Green said. ‘It's fluid. Watches and wines are taxed. So, it makes little sense why art isn't.’’ I gave an interview to Vivian Perkovic on Deutschlandfunk Kultur about the looming tariffs and an exemption for art that is hidden deep in the legal thicket.

Art Basel's parent company, MCH Group AG, has reported a net profit for the first time since 2016, I report in Weltkunst Insider (60 days free trial) and in the Handelsblatt of 4 April.

Importing works of art into the EU is becoming more complicated, explains lawyer Zacharias Marwick in Weltkunst Insider: ‘What has long played a major role in Germany due to the Cultural Property Protection Act will now also gain importance at the European level: the examination of foreign legal norms to clarify whether the import or export is legal. The rules for the import of cultural objects from third countries, which were adopted in 2019, will come into force on 28 June 2025. These stipulate that anyone importing objects from an archaeological context that are more than 250 years old must obtain an import licence, regardless of their value. Applicants must prove that the objects were legally exported from the country of origin by submitting the relevant documents.’

On 1 April, Dirk Knipphals in the taz Klaus Wowereit zum neuen Kultustaatsminister, I let Art Basel stir up the Viennese art fair scene at Artmagazine, and Monopol makes the Last Generation and Just Stop Oil the curators of the German Pavilion in Venice. The magazine seems to have found the joke so good that the next day it felt obliged to explain it.

The speculation is over, now everything will be fine! At least that's what the Hiscox Artist Top 100 (PDF) suggests, which Karen K. Ho read for Artnews: ‘Flipping appears to have fallen out of favour, with total sales of “wet paint” artworks (those sold at auction within two years of being created) by artists under 45 falling 64 percent, to $14.1 million, down from $38.8 million in 2023. The HAT 100 report also noted that the number of works in this category fell to 698 lots from 924 in 2013, and that nearly one in five of these did not sell. That's ‘the highest proportion in seven years,’ the report said. ‘With sales at a seven-year low, the speculative fever that took hold in 2022 and 2023 is now over,’ said the report, published by global specialist insurer Hiscox, with research done by art market research and analysis firm ArtTactic.

Zachary Small and Julia Halperin have counted in early May which galleries represent artists in New York institutions for the New York Times. The result will surprise many: ‘What these in-demand artists have in common is their deep-pocketed Swiss dealer, Hauser & Wirth. The gallery's artists are so dominant in New York's leading museums this season that some in the art world are calling it “Hauser spring.” Hauser & Wirth's prominence comes at a time when the most powerful dealers in the commercial art world play an increasingly large role in helping support the city's ambitious museum shows. A New York Times analysis of solo exhibitions since 2019 shows that out of 350 exhibitions by contemporary artists, nearly 25% went to artists represented by just 11 of the biggest galleries in the world.' Years ago, there was a study for the entire United States with similarly extreme results, which I can no longer find. I would be very grateful for any information!

Brita Sachs explains the move of Munich's gallery weekend Various Others to May in the FAZ: ‘Munich's art initiative Various Others (V.O.) aims to put on such exciting opening days that culture lovers will find it impossible to resist a trip to the city. Until now, September was considered the best time for this, but the short span between the end of the summer holidays and the start of Oktoberfest, plus the IAA every two years, created conflicts of interest and made hotel rooms scarce and expensive. That is why V.O. has now postponed the event to May. Whether the date – one week after Berlin's Gallery Weekend – was a clever choice remains to be seen.’

When the luxury goods industry falters, the art market also has a problem. Michael Schweppe reports in Handelsblatt (Paywall) on the persistent slump in sales in the industry: ‘Luxury has been a reliable growth industry for decades – until now. Europe's luxury brands are facing their biggest challenge in decades: punitive tariffs, trade wars and unstable markets in the US and China are hitting luxury goods companies hard. Louis Vuitton, Gucci and Hermès are suddenly having to juggle significant cost increases, while US customers are gripped by fears of recession. […] According to the consulting firm Bain, business with personal luxury goods such as shoes, leather goods, perfume and jewellery shrank by two percent in 2024. This was mainly due to the fact that luxury buyers in China, the most important market for the future, were suffering from the consequences of the economic downturn. And in Europe, too, the middle class has cut back on its luxury spending.’

Annika von Taube explains the difference between blue chip and red chip art in Monopol: ‘Those who don't condemn what red chippers like (for example, merchandise and brand collaboration products by Takashi Murakami or Kaws, algorithms for purchase advice, aesthetically accessible digital art that can be grasped at a glance on a mobile phone display), has no problem with them pigeonholing Beeple, Damien Hirst and Jeff Koons, because at some point they might buy their first Warhol. […] Galleries such as Gagosian and Emmanuel Perrotin have already begun to open the door to a world where you don't necessarily have to choose between the red and blue pill, reality or illusion – why should you, when in art, after all, both are the same thing.’ Even Max Hetzler is jumping on the bandwagon and announcing his first KAWS exhibition in Berlin.

Artnet, the most well-known art market portal, is being acquired by a British investor, according tomy news for Artmagazine. Going a step further than the buyer himself, former major shareholder Rüdiger K. Weng provides information about the possible future of Artnet and Artsy in an article by Georgina Adam for The Art Newspaper: ‘Weng said that Wolff would be combining Artnet and Artsy and might acquire more; “In order to monetise these companies, you need a bigger structure,” he says.’ Daniel Cassady reflects the positive reaction of Artnet's management in Artnews.

George Nelson explains the increasingly complex issues involved in the valuation and authentication of artworks in Artnews: ‘But art appraisers and authenticators are increasingly inserting “caveats” into their appraisals or hedging authentication reports as “conditional,” seemingly to skirt the legal liability that certainty might incur. In speaking with relevant experts about two recent cases, it became clear that while appraisal and authentication have always been sticky issues, this line of work may be growing more complex.’

Have millennials killed the art market, asks Melanie Gerlis provocatively in the Sunday Times: "The cracks in the art market are impossible to ignore. After a post-pandemic bump, the total value of art sales fell by 4 per cent in 2023 and then slumped by a further 12 per cent last year. Further havoc has been caused by the prospect of President Trump's tariffs. Art may be exempt from these tariffs under American laws, but its wealthy buyers are grappling with unknown implications, which means they are at best distracted and at worst losing money. That art might not be such a good investment has begun to hit home.

Tim Blum (formerly Blum & Poe) is closing his galleries in Los Angeles and Tokyo. Daniel Cassady spoke to him about his reasons for Artnews: "Blum said that the decision was driven neither by financial strain nor a midlife reinvention, but by burnout. ‘This is not about the market,’ he said. ‘This is about the system.’ He was referring to the whole architecture of contemporary gallery life: the ever-expanding web of fairs, openings, obligations, and expectations that he said have grown more demanding year after year. ‘It's not working. And it hasn't been working,’ he said. ‘Even when it looked like it was.’

Anyone interested in how art and money are connected and what role interest rates play in the art market should definitely read this essay by Janelle Zara, which the freelance journalist published on her blog What are we looking at in response to the closures of Tim Blum and Adam Lindemann's galleries: "This is the aesthetic of financial optimisation, a consequence of downgrading the value of art to currency. (I also tried to coin the term “quiet luxury”). In order to take the commercial path of least resistance, both quiet luxury and frictionless painting take no artistic risks and pose no challenge to the viewer's existing worldview. This defeats the purpose of art—art without tension is just decoration—but it's ideal for collectors whose smooth lifestyle has made them a little soft. Probably a little stupid, too. While the goal of art investment used to be to support the artist's practice, today it's about maximising profit while squeezing the life out of art. All this is the result of a self-reinforcing cycle: art that no one has put any effort into, for viewers who don't bother to look at it." Venmo account holders can express their appreciation to the author in monetary form here.

The crisis in the French art market is described in a study (PDF) by the gallery association CPGA, which Roxana Azimi read for Le Monde (paywall): "In addition to cost inflation, there is another phenomenon: the lack of younger collectors. “We are struggling to attract young people, while in other countries, such as China, the average buyer is around 30 years old,” notes Magda Danysz, vice-president of the CPGA, adding: “In France, too, priorities have shifted; it's more about the experience than the object.” […] The most worrying thing for Philippe Charpentier is the difficulty of securing the next generation in the long term. “No new player founded after 2015 has been able to change its size, expand internationally or enter the trade fair system,” notes the CPGA president. In the long term, this could lead to a shrinking market, a loss of diversity and an impairment of our ability to bring our artists to the international stage." However, one of the industry's problems may also lie in its fixation on this very fair system.

This year, the art market segment at the interface with the luxury industry will once again have to brace itself for rough waters, according to figures from Bernard Arnault's LVMH group reported by Manager Magazin: "Sales fell by 4 per cent to 39.8 billion euros, the company announced on Thursday after the close of trading in Paris. [...] Despite the decline in profits, analyst Zuzanna Pusz of Swiss bank UBS emphasised what she sees as impressive cost control. However, she added that business development in the second half of the year remains difficult to predict and that the risks associated with the estimates for 2026 remain. The watch market, on the other hand, offers a ray of hope: Prices are rising again, according to research by Markus Hinterberger for the Handelsblatt (paywall).

Being a mega-gallery owner does not seem to be the endgame for young professionals entering the art industry, as Tim Schneider discovered for the Financial Times (paywall may apply).

Contrary to the prediction made by WFA AG CEO Rüdiger Weng in the previous issue of WELTKUNST Insider (60 days free) about the fate of the gallery business, Düsseldorf art dealer Hans Paffrath counters in the latest newsletter: "Galleries that boldly break new ground have a strong future. Digital platforms will grow, but they will not replace the traditional gallery business – they will complement it. It is crucial that we as gallery owners adapt our self-image: we are not just dealers, but hosts, mediators and creators of experiences. Those who recognise this and act accordingly need not fear the “end of the gallery business”.”