Comments on: ArtFlock aims to disrupt gallery monopoly

By: Art Smith

Art Smith — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 11:01:13 +0000

Had not heard of artflock.com before this article. Sounds good, but as always online there is some many artists on each of these sites that it takes quite some work and money to get in a position that will get you noticed.

But I embrace the lowering of charges by galleries, I wonder if this movement will mark the end of traditional art galleries.

By: Jof Arnold

Jof Arnold — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 22:04:20 +0000

The problem artists will have with this it is that conventionally the reason (other than greed) gallery owners take such a high commission is because of huge amount of work involved in promoting artists to the right buyers.

A website like this will presumably be far less hands-on – consequently the cynic in me sees this site as a kind of “expensive etsy”, where anything that matches the color of someone’s curtains sells well and serious art doesn’t. That’s not to say that’s not a bad thing (provided it makes money), but if that’s the case then, as Travis points out, the competition is fierce and, worse still, is FREE to the artists.

By the way, my first startup was in this space… it didn’t work out. lol

By: Travis

Travis — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 18:18:34 +0000

Well, it is impressive what Ed has done on his own, but I think this site is missing the boat a little, at least in the sales area. Places like Imagekind are already way ahead of everyone in changing selling game for artists (giving them an even better percentage -100% – than Artflock). As well, original artwork is being sold in droves on places like Etsy, for the same kind of return.

However, Artflock does have some valuable tools that could be expanded for an overall artist promotion and management functionality for artists. Features like Artflock’s “Stockist” are intriguing.