MAKING A MARK: Is a minimum price for artwork in open art exhibitions necessary?

Friday, October 06, 2023

Is a minimum price for artwork in open art exhibitions necessary?

This post argues that the use of a MINIMUM price for artwork entries for an OPEN art exhibition/competition needs to be ELIMINATED.

In my view, any use of a MINIMUM price for artwork entries for an OPEN art exhibition/competition needs to have

a clear and cogent business purpose - based on facts and not assumptions
which generates positive results i.e. more income not less
produces better value than no minimum sale price!

READ ON: My investigations to date have produced no good reason for the use of a minimum price - and even less for raising it above the affordable art level if it is used!

PS. If you want to know why I write about the money side of art a lot, you might want to look at my background.

The Open Art Exhibition / Competition

The basic business premise of an open art exhibition / competition is that it aims to

attract lots of entries - and thereby generate funds via entry fees
get lots of good calibre art entered
select art which is good AND is priced to appeal to buyers
which sells well - and thereby generates funds from sales
which means more exhibitions next year!

However it cannot just be about wishful thinking.

Generating sales at an open exhibition/competition needs to be focused on:

good calibre art - which appeals to people AND art buyers
artists understanding how to price their art to sell (see How to Price Your Art)
including art which people can afford to buy (see my previous two posts:

attracting and getting visitors who want to buy - and not just look at art
creating funds so you can do it all again next year!

Generating funds is about:

covering the direct costs of the this year's exhibition
making sure next year's exhibition can take place i.e. creating a reserve for expenses related to running next year's open exhibition - many of which need an outlay in advance of the exhibition opening
contributing to the overheads of running the organisation / art gallery / competition etc
making money for the artists
paying taxes!

What the exact business model is varies according to every open exhibition, its organiser and their business aims and financial / budgeting expertise.

So it's worth looking at what currently happens....

Specifically in relation to the concept of "the minimum price" for art entered into an art exhibition / competition.

What is a minimum price?

Very simply, SOME open exhibitions or art competitions require that art entered must be priced at or above a minimum specified price.

However, this is NOT a rule. It is NOT required. It is an OPTION.

I've rewritten this blog post a number of times. It keeps foundering on trying to define any sort of rationale for a minimum price - of which more below.

Who uses a minimum price for art in an open art exhibition/competition?

A number of open art exhibitions stipulate a minimum price for artwork entered into open art exhibitions.

BUT NOT ALL DO. Below I've identified whether or not art competitions and open exhibitions use a minimum price

ABSOLUTELY NO MINIMUM PRICE

For example, there's absolutely NO MINIMUM PRICE identified for entries to, for example:

the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition 2023 - NOT an exhibition which struggles to sell - plus always sells a humungous amount of very affordable prints
the Royal Scottish Academy 2023 - the equivalent of the RA in Scotland
the Royal Hibernian Academy of Arts - I'm pretty sure follows the same approach - although terms and conditions for 2023 have disappeared (which is a pity)
the Royal Watercolour Society Open 2023
the International Original Print Exhibition 2023
the ING Discerning Eye Prize 2023 - focusing on small artworks, many of which are very affordable
the Annual Summer Exhibition of the Chelsea Arts Society - which I understand had record sales this year
the New Light Art Prize (Northern Artists ONLY)
the Trinity Buoy Wharf Drawing Prize 2023
the Derwent Art Prize 2024

Other major art competitions which I used to write about also did NOT have a minimum price for artwork (e.g. Sunday Times Watercolour Competition; Threadneedle Prize; Lynn Painter-Stainers Prize)

In practice what all the above - and others do - is state

there is an entry price
all work must be for sale
commission will be charged
prices must make provision for the VAT payable if it sells

and that's it. Artists are free to price as they see fit. Which is not to say artists always price on a rational basis but they are free to set their own price.

MINIMUM PRICE is mandatory

By way of contrast, ever since I can remember the Open Calls by the Federation of British Artists / Mall Galleries have ALWAYS had a minimum price for artwork submitted to the annual open exhibitions of the national art societies which have their home there.

The "minimum price" has no obvious or stated or rational reason that stands up to inspection that I can ascertain - given the very many art competitions and other open exhibitions do not need one!

It appears to be a tradition without a proper business rationale.

The basic minimum price for artwork has been £300 for some years. So this might suggest the figure is arbitrary

Over the last 12 months this has begun to vary by art society.

The Standard Minimum Price: £300 (framed prints: £180, unframed prints: £120) has been used by

NEAC (2023)
RBA (2023 and 2024) - which had very good sales in 2023 - see RBA Annual Exhibition 2023: Analysis of art sales metrics & Recommendations about pricing artwork
RP (2024)
PS (2023)

However others have INCREASED the minimum

RSMA 2023: £600 (Framed Prints £325 and unframed £200) (Exhibition metrics post coming soon)
ROI 2023: £500
PS 2024: £400
RI 2024: Minimum price: £350

I've warned in all past posts about Calls for Entries where the minimum price has been raised of the potential downside. (i.e. this blog post is not coming out of the blue!)

I'm very concerned that the minimum price has been raised to £500 for a number of reasons. I can only assume this is the product of some misplaced notion that eliminating very affordable art will increase sales and income. This is wrong. If anything the emphasis should be on making artwork more affordable. Call for Entries: Royal Institute of Oil Painters Annual Exhibition 2023

Are there ANY good reasons for a "Minimum Price"?

The reason for using a minimum price for the open art exhibitions of national art societies at the Mall Galleries is UNSTATED.

In my opinion (as an ex Finance Professional), the use of a "minimum price" needs to have a clear and cogent business purpose which generates positive results, given others are able to mount good exhibitions without one

Some possible explanations for the use of a MINIMUM PRICE are as follows - with my comments

Higher minimum price means higher priced art = more income from sales

I suspect this might be the main rationale for raising the minimum price
I only need to point to the percentage of sales above and below certain hurdle prices to indicate why this rationale has absolutely no basis in fact. (see all my past Exhibition Metrics posts)

The notion that it weeds out the 'rank amateurs'

Reflects an assumption that if you pitch the minimum price high enough, those who are amateur artists, who typically exhibit in local art societies, won't submit an entry. i.e. the minimum price will deter entries from artists who do not normally charge that much. HOWEVER raising minimum price to deter entries has the potential to depress the income from entry fees!!
I also think this assumption is WRONG. If you quote a minimum price that just sets a "benchmark" for pricing and typically amateurs who don't know a lot about pricing can (and do!) take that as their baseline - and then add a bit on.
For example, the most popular price for sales in the recent RSMA Exhibition was £675 - after they raised the minimum price to £600. Artwork was not much different to usual - but I think sales were down (blog post coming up). See
Review: 78th Annual Exhibition of the Royal Society of Marine Artists

The new minimum price has probably LOST sales and reduced sale income. and, as I said in this post Call for Entries: Royal Society of Marine Artists Annual Exhibition 2023) I think this was "a HUGE mistake"
Saves time on selection

The notion is that the minimum price has the potential to act as a kind of gatekeeper. It indicates that all the art in the exhibition is going to be worth at least this price.
The last thing any selector wants to be doing is sit through endless entries of bad/poor/not good enough art submitted by people who don't really know what they're doing. Others would argue that this is par for the course re any open exhibition / art competition!!
However, the use of digital selection means it's much easier to speed past poor artwork and focus on selecting artwork from the better entries (I speak as one who has done this more than once!)

Indicates the calibre of art on sale

Possibly - but not always. SELECTION is what determines the quality of art on display.
Others would argue that the entry fee charged to the artist and the requirements around framing and getting the artwork to and from the exhibition are enough to make only those serious about art to submit any artwork at all!

Wallspace costs money and artwork needs to earn its place on it

If you are going to have a minimum price then I think this implicitly indicates that every artwork should be capable of sale when hung on a wall in that space. Unfortunately, that's simply not the case for various reasons - which I could elaborate on at length...... and may well do in future. It's an interesting proposition!
The logical next step would be to review the quantity/percentage of work by members which remains unsold at the end of an exhibition.....

The Really Really Big Downside of a Minimum Price

There is ONE BIG PROBLEM with a minimum price. It can REDUCE SALES because when art costs more than available budgets of those visiting the exhibition - in person or online it WILL remain unsold.

Unless you happen to know how to attract frequent visits from high net worth individuals who buy art often!

From my How to Sell Your Art web page on Art Business Info for Artists
(with thanks to by Paula Mould and Leigh Shenton for the quote)

Raising the minimum price of artwork for sale in an open art exhibition might be seen by some as a good way to get

better quality art
AND better visitors with more money
WHO will buy more artwork
WHICH generates more income and meets business needs

In other words, the notion goes that it will raise the calibre of the exhibition and make more sales and more money.

However, in my opinion, this argument is entirely erroneous and this one factor - the minimum price - cannot ever on its own achieve these aims

More importantly, it might in fact have the reverse effect - and REDUCE income from sales

Particularly when the typical visitor on a comfortable but not excessive income is experiencing budgetary constraints.

When economic conditions get tough, art buyers just walk away.

What should happen to the Minimum Price?

In my view,

It has absolutely ZERO value as an instrument to generate sales.
it has serious potential to do damage to both sales and income generated by open exhibitions if flexed unwisely - without adequate rationale and facts
it should be REMOVED. There is in fact absolutely no need for a Minimum Price. Plenty of open art exhibitions and competitions exist without one as part of the terms and conditions.

If retained and used, ANY minimum price needs to be set very carefully

within the context of known facts about past sales
current data on the economic context and prospects for when the exhibition happens
how prices and sales have varied over time as the economic context has changed

For example, we learned between 2008-2010 that big / expensive art tended not to sell well, while smaller more affordable art sold much better - and the clever artists learned how to paint smaller more affordable artworks!

The same in my opinion is happening right now. I'm seeing lots of expensive art (£2k and up) left on the walls unsold. It's clearly associated with the current context.

I'm currently quantifying the impact on sales of those who raised the minimum price - and will continue to do so....

MY RECOMMENDATION: In the current context, I'd eliminate ALL minimum prices immediately - and see what happens - to

the number of entries and
the number of sales
income from sales.

As an option, it certainly can't do any worse than raising than raising the minimum price!

REFERENCE

There are two previous posts in this series of three posts about affordable art and the current economic context

MAKING A MARK

Pages