Art they say, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder-sometimes people invest in a piece of artwork merely because they like it, other times because they think it bestows some cache to say they own a piece by so and so, and other times for what they perceive to be an investment value-something that will appreciate over time.
I think some who purchase a Peltier print, or even an “original”, when asked would respond that it is a” humanitarian” gesture, a way to contribute to the “cause”.
But they also probably think they may be getting in on the ground floor of a future bonanza-maybe so, but I doubt it, as the truth becomes known and the “artists” popularity fades.
Truth is I’ve been informed by more than one owner of a Peltier masterpiece that in attempting to unload them they are taking a noticeable hit-they aren’t able to even recover the initial investment.
My advice would be if second rate art resembling a paint by numbers scene is desired the initial cost would be significantly less and they wouldn’t be burdened by expectations if they were to purchase one of those black velvet paintings of Elvis, or one of those awe inspiring portraits of a tiger or lion.
Some I am told will even glow under blacklight -now that’s awesome, an heirloom to pass on.