Mathilde Drye created the following report in 2017 as part of the 'Art Business, Finance and Management' module of her MA Art Business at Sotheby's Institute of Art in London. This report consists in an in-depth due diligence of Mark Bradford's 'Let's Make Christmas Means Something This Year' to highlights a private bank decision-making regarding accepting or not this artwork as a collateral against a five-year bullet loan. It thus presents the artist's and the artwork's specific information, a analysis of the primary and secondary market of the artist, a qualitative and quantitative value appraisal of the artwork, an appraisal of both the subjective and immeasurable risks and the objectives and measurable risks, and the final recommendation given to the private bank.

1. Mathilde Drye © MA Art Business, Sotheby’s Institute of Art, 2017
ART SECURED LENDING
DUE DILIGENCE
REPORT

2. 2
INTRODUCTION
This due diligence report highlights a private bank decision-making regarding accepting or not Let’s
Make Christmas Mean Something This Year by Mark Bradford as a collateral against a five-year fixed
bullet loan.
It will present striking information regarding the artist and the object chosen as collateral as well as
analyse the artist’s primary and secondary markets and his exhibit success. A price estimate will,
thus, be appraised considering the different risks that come with this artwork and will advise the
private bank in the amount of money that should be lent to the borrower.
A wide range of different sources such as financial and art critic articles, auction and exhibition
databases and publications about the artist will be used to support the diligent investigations.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................2
ARTIST SPECIFIC INFORMATION ............................................................................................3
OBJECT SPECIFIC INFORMATION ...........................................................................................4
ARTIST MARKET ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................5
Primary Market Analysis .................................................................................................................5
Secondary Market Analysis..............................................................................................................8
VALUE APPRAISALS ...................................................................................................................12
Qualitative Value Appraisal ..........................................................................................................12
Quantitative Value Appraisal ........................................................................................................14
RISK APPRAISAL..........................................................................................................................17
Objective and Measurable Risks....................................................................................................17
Subjective and Immeasurable Risks...............................................................................................21
FINAL RECOMMENDATION .....................................................................................................21
BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................................23
APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................................25
APPENDIX 1..................................................................................................................................25
APPENDIX 2..................................................................................................................................26
APPENDIX 3..................................................................................................................................27

3. 3
ARTIST SPECIFIC INFORMATION
Mark Bradford is an African-American artist born in 1961, Los Angeles. Graduated with a Bachelor
(1995) and a Master (1997) in Fine Arts at California Institute of the Arts, he still lives and works in
his hometown which particularly matters to him and hugely influences all his artworks.
Even he creates sculptures, installations, videos and prints, he is well-known for his large-scale
mixed-media paintings, which are abstracts but letting appearing aerial maps of Los Angeles streets,
at the same time (Miller, 2015).
Bradford is considered as a mid-career artist by Mendelsohn and Thackara (2016). He ranks, in 2016,
450 regarding his exhibit success (Artfacts, 2016), 194 (Skate’s, 2017), and 82 (Artprice, 2016)
considering his art market results. As shown in Figure 1, his exhibition demand skyrocketed in the
early 2000s and from then on, his art market position also rapidly rose from 2008 to 2016.
Figure 1. Artfacts and Artprice Bradford’s ranks (1999-2016)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
ARTPRICERANK
ARTFACTSRANK
Exhibition Success and Art Market Ranks Over Years
Artfacts Rank Artprice Rank

4. 4
OBJECT SPECIFIC INFORMATION
Let’s Make Christmas Mean Something this Year is a mixed-media and collage painting (259 x 365
cm), created in 2007 which refers to the middle of his expansion phase (Fig.13), his first solo show
at the Whitney Museum and his first group show at Saatchi Gallery. This work is signed, titled and
dated ‘2007’ on the reverse and was sold the 17th November 2016 during the Sotheby’s Contemporary
Art Evening Auction in New York for $4,373,500 including buyer’s Premium ($4,000,000 Hammer
Price).
As indicate in the catalogue notice (Sotheby’s, 2016), this painting is illustrated in the Aspen Art
Museum exhibition catalogue entitled Mark Bradford: Merchant Posters and in Skin Fruit: A View
of a Collection, written by Jeff Koons. It has also been acquired by its previous owner in a show
Figure 2. Mark Bradford, Let’s Make Christmas Mean Something This Year ©2017 Sotheby’s (Source: Sotheby’s, 2016)

5. 5
called ‘Mark Bradford: Nobody Jones’ at Sikkema Jenkins & Co., in 2008, and then, exhibited at the
New Museum in a 2010 show called ‘Skin Fruit: Selections from the Dakis Joannou Collection’.
Thereby, we can deduce that it has been acquired there by Dakis Joannou, who is a prestigious
collector.
ARTIST MARKET ANALYSIS
PRIMARY MARKET ANALYSIS
GALLERIES
Mark Bradford is represented by several galleries in the United States and Europe including Hauser
& Wirth (New York, London, and Zurich), White Cube (London), Cirrus Gallery (Los Angeles) and
Finesilver Gallery (San Antonio, and Houston).
EXHIBITIONS
Bradford was exhibited 165 times from 1999 to 2017 which represents an average of 9.17 shows per
year throughout the period. Figures 3-6 show that Bradford’s exhibitions were mainly group shows
(77%), in public institutions (66%), and in the United States (79%). Solo shows even represent a
quarter of the total number of his exhibitions.

6. 6
Figure 3. Breakdown of solo and group shows (1999-2017)
Figure 4. Frequency distribution of solo and group exhibitions per year (1999-2017)
23%
77%
Breakdown of Solo and Group Shows
Solo shows
Group shows
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
NUMBEROFSHOW
Histogramme of Solo and Group Exhibitions
Solo shows Group shows

7. 7
Figure 5. Breakdown of exhibits by institution (1999-2017)
Figure 6. Frequency distribution of exhibitions by institution (1999-2017)
66%
15%
11%
5% 3%
Breakdown of Exhibitions by Institution
Public Institutions
Commercial Venues
Private Galleries
Biennials
Others
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
TINUMBEROFSHOW
Histogramme of Mark Bradford Shows by Type of Institution
Public Institutions Commercial Venues Private Galleries Biennials Others

8. 8
He will also be largely in the spotlight in 2017. Indeed, he has been selected to represent the United
States Pavilion at the 57th Venice Biennale and will curate a Clifford Still paintings exhibition at the
Still Museum while simultaneously, an exhibition of both artists will be inaugurated (Rinaldi, 2016).
In addition, the Hirschhorn Museum has commissioned a ‘monumental cyclorama’ to Mark Bradford
which will be the biggest work he has ever created (Americana, 2016).
CURATORS AND WRITERS
Mark Bradford is described as ‘among the most in-demand painters in the contemporary art field’ by
the art critic Ray M. Rinaldi (2016) and a ‘highly regarded abstract painter’ by the art world writer
Randy Kennedy (2016). According to Jessica Backus (2016), he is ‘one of only a handful of black
artists in over seventy years’, and also has a close relationship with Gary Garrels, currently senior
director of painting and sculpture at SFMoMA. Thus, Bradford has benefitted from an undeniable
support from major curators since the beginning of his career as well as an exceptionally positive
critic in the media.
SECONDARY MARKET ANALYSIS
Mark Bradford’s paintings have been mainly sold in the three biggest auction houses in the world
which are Sotheby’s, Christie’s, and Phillips (Fig.7) and likewise solely in New York and London,
the two biggest worldwide art trading hubs (Fig.8).

9. 9
Figure 7. Breakdown of lots sold by auction house (2008-2016)
Figure 8. Breakdown of lots sold by sales location (2008-2016)
His first paintings were sold at auction in 2008 and generated a turnover of $410,000. However, none
of Bradford’s paintings weas sold in 2009 (Fig.10) and bought-in represented 38% of lots offered at
auction in 2010 (Fig.9), partly because no artist’s solo show was organised in 2009 (Fig.4) and partly
due to the art market crash in 2008.
35%
31%
32%
2%
Breakdown of Lots Sold by Auction House
Sotheby's
Christie's
Phillips
Bonhams
70%
30%
Breakdown of Lots Sold by Sales Location
New York
London

10. 10
The artist’s attractiveness started over again as several solo shows including his major touring show
across the United States occurred in 2010 (Fig.4 and 13). Thus, the average low and high estimates
inched up until they reach their highest level in 2016 (Fig.10).
Figure 9. Number of lots offered at auction and bought-in (2008-2016)
Figure 10. Auction sales volume and average pre-sale estimates (2008-2016)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
PROPORTION(%)
NUMBEROFLOTS
Histogramme of Lots Offered at Auction and Bought-in
Lots offered at auction Bought-in Bought-in (%)
$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
$1,600,000
$1,800,000
$2,000,000
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
MID-ESTIMATE(USD)
NUMBEROFLOTS
Annual Sales Volume and Pre-Sale Estimates
Sales volume Average Low Estimate Average High Estimate

11. 11
In the meantime, sales volume was decreasing from 2014 to 2016 which signifies that Bradford’s
paintings price per square centimetre (price/sqcm) was increasing. According to Figure 11, while the
artist’s average price/sqcm, and his 90,000-100,000cm2 paintings average price/sqcm (Appendix 2,
Table 7), were respectively at $5.23 in 2008, and $5,07 in 2010, they attained $64.21 and $38.40 per
square centimetre, in 2016. Prices/sqcm, thus, soared by 1227% and 757% over the whole period.
Figure 11. Bradford’s average price/sqcm and 90,000-100,000cm2
paintings price/sqcm (2008-2016)
The annual paintings mid-price was also surging from $205,000 to $1,824,679.22 which represents a
jump of 890%. Comparing those results to the pre-sale estimates, we can, admittedly, say that auction
results were each year outweighing art world professional estimations.
$5.23
$9.20 $8.63
$11.24
$34.72
$26.43
$41.83
$64.21
$5.07
$21.49
$34.04
$38.40
$0.00
$10.00
$20.00
$30.00
$40.00
$50.00
$60.00
$70.00
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
PRICE/SQCM(USD)
Artist's Average Price/sqcm and Comparables Price/sqcm
Artist's average price/sqcm Comparables' price/sqcm

12. 12
Figure 12. Bradford’s average hammer prices and pre-sale estimates (2008-2016)
VALUE APPRAISALS
QUALITATIVE VALUE APPRAISAL
As noted in the Sotheby’s catalogue (2016), Let’s Make Christmas Mean Something This Year
‘achieves the perfect apotheosis of Mark Bradford’s ground-breaking Merchant Poster paintings’ and
‘is amongst his most iconic’ paintings. It was part of the Palazzo Grassi inauguration exhibit called
‘Mapping the Studio’. Besides, many paintings of the ‘Merchant Poster’ series are in internationally
recognised museum’s collections such as the Whitney Museum, the Hammer Museum, and the
MoMA. Adding that it has been firstly acquired by Dakis Joannou, this collateral seems to be an
emblematic and museum-quality painting.
$0
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
$16,000,000
$18,000,000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
PRICE(USD) Average Hammer Prices and Pre-Sale Estimates
Average Hammer Price Average Pre-Sale Estimate

13. 13
Art value is also determined by the endorsement process and the ecosystem surrounding the artist
(Petterson, 2014, pp.67-85). Tastemakers can play a key role and hugely influence the demand and
supply of works as well as prices achieved at auction. Thereby, a trajectory path has been designed
(Fig.12) to summarise major events that have rhythmed Bradford’s endorsement process.
Figure 13. Bradford’s art market trajectory
As it can be seen, he received numerous awards. He also found several valuable supports from
gallerists, public institutions as well as collectors, before his auction market began. Afterwards, he
found himself propelled in the highest spheres of the art ecosystem. Frequently exhibited in
international museums, he is represented by some of the main galleries around the world, earned the

14. 14
Driskell Prize and his auction activity remains prosperous. Recently, he has also been selected to
represent the United States at the Venice Biennial which is a consecration.
QUANTITATIVE VALUE APPRAISAL
ART MARKET DATABASES AND PRICE INDICES
Pownall (2014, p.169) said that ‘The future value of artworks depends on their sales prices at an
undetermined yet forthcoming point in time’. Thus, it is recommended to establish an index of price
changes over time and assess how widely dispersed and volatile they are in order to minimise market
price risk and anticipate a potential high volatility. Thereby, annualised indices have been constructed
from data collected on S&P 500, Artprice (Yahoo! Finance, 2017a-2017b) and global and
contemporary art markets (Artprice, 2016) as well as Mark Bradford annual auction results (Appendix
1, Table 6) with base 100 in 2008 (Table 1 and Appendix 3, Fig.17).
Table 1. S&P 500, Bradford, Artprice, Contemporary and Global Artprice Indices (2008-2016)
YEAR
S&P 500
INDEX
BRADFORD
INDEX
ARTPRICE
INDEX
CONTEMPORARY
INDEX
GLOBAL
ARTPRICE
INDEX
2008 100 100 100 100 100
2009 78.1 0 71.9 74.3 74.2
2010 93.1 400.4 96.2 76.8 86.9
2011 105.4 575.4 301.1 86.1 106.2
2012 113.9 353.2 347.6 94.8 93.6
2013 136 1670.6 224 89.3 102.5
2014 160 1742.3 167.3 89.2 103.8
2015 170.4 4127.8 152.5 86.2 91
2016 173.3 3921.7 117.2 72.4 74.1
TOTAL
RETURN
73.29% 3,821.72% 17.22% -27.56% -25.95%
RETURN
PER YEAR
6.30% 50.33% 1.78% -3.52% -3.28%
ANNUAL
ST DEV.
13.70% 188.40% 82.45% 12.76% 17.51%
SHARPE-
RATIO
0.46 0.27 0.02 -0.28 -0.19

15. 15
REPEAT SALES
As data about Bradford repeat sales (Table 2) are not extremely consistent, only one small acrylic
painting can serve as a study case. The Father’s ‘No’ mean average return is 14.41% between 2013
and 2016. Although acrylic paintings are not known as the most attractive paintings of the artist, we
can envisage that the collateral might be resold at a higher rate of return as it is bigger and
representative of Bradford’s breakthrough technique.
PRICE PROJECTIONS
Looking at hammer price (Fig.15) and price/sqcm (Fig.14) projections, every linear equation plotted
until 2021 are steadily stepping up. Thus, Bradford’s paintings would be priced around $84.65/sqcm
on average while those measuring 90,000-100,000cm2 would be appraised at $65,09/sqcm, in 2021.
As Let’s Make Christmas Mean Something This Year measures 94,535cm2, its estimate could range
from $6,153,349.32 to $8,002,387.75 (Average $7,077,868.54). Even so, average hammer ballpark
estimates are respectively around $2,619,865.09 and $6,330,607.52 (Average $4,475,236.3), in 2021.
The collateral forthcoming fair market value ought to, hence, range from $4,500,000 to $7,000,000,
considering both price projection averages.
Table 2. Summary Statistics on Bradford’s repeat sales (2008-2016)
MARK BRADFORD REPEAT SALES STATISTICS (2008-2016)
NUMBER OF REPEAT SALES 4
NUMBER OF LOTS TWICE AT AUCTION BUT ONCE BOUGHT-IN 3
STUDY CASE: Mark Bradford, The Father’s ‘No’
FIRST
SALE
MID-ESTIMATE
USD
SALE
PRICE
SECOND
SALE
MID-ESTIMATE
USD
SALE
PRICE
MEAN
AVERAGE
RETURN
2013 $500,000 $509,000 2016
£400,000
($548,080)
$582,335 14.41%

16. 16
Figure 14. Scatter plot of the artist’s average price/sqcm and 90,000-100,000cm2
paintings price/sqcm as well as
their linear price projections (2008-2021)
Figure 15. Scatter plot of Bradford’s paintings hammer prices and their linear price projections (2008-2021)
y = 6.9454x - 13952
R² = 0.798
y = 5.5567x - 11165
R² = 0.9556
$0.00
$10.00
$20.00
$30.00
$40.00
$50.00
$60.00
$70.00
$80.00
$90.00
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020
PRICE/SQCM(USD)
Scatter Plot of Price/sqcm and Linear Price/sqcm Projections
Artist's average price/sqcm Average comparable paintings price/sqcm
Artist's average price/scm projection Average comparable paintings price/sqcm projection
y = 236189x - 5E+08
R² = 0.1821
y = 551162x - 1E+09
R² = 0.882
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020
HAMMERPRICE(USD)
Scatter Plot of Hammer Prices and Linear Price Projections
Hammer Prices (USD) Comparable Paintings Hammer Prices (USD)
Mark Bradford Hammer Prices Projection (USD) Comparable Paintings HammerPrices Projections (USD)

17. 17
RISK APPRAISAL
OBJECTIVE AND MEASURABLE RISKS
FINANCIAL AND MARKET RISKS
As Pownall (2014, p.179) argued that bankers are unable to reduce objective financial risks incurred
owing to only one work served as collateral for this five-years bullet-loan, they should consider a
diversified art collection (Deloitte, 2016, p. 104) with different artists and different periods. Market
struggling and value collapsing risks could, thus, be easily reduced.
Incorrect valuation is another inherent risk that should be managed by banks holding art as collaterals.
Even if ‘market value at [an] unspecified future date cannot … be accurately predicted (Pownall,
2014, p.169), art-price risk can be estimated in studying Mark Bradford’s hammer prices volatility
over time. While Tables 3-4 indicate that the mean price ratio is 1.72, the standard deviation ratio is
1.60 and the hammer price ratio of standard deviation to mean price is 1.33, Table 1 shows that the
annual auction results standard deviation is about 188.40%. Thus, Bradford’s market appears highly
volatile and the financial downside risk is peskier in Bradford’s market rather than in other art indexes
over the past 8 years (Table 1). However, as hammer price statistics are overweighting average
estimates (Tables 3-4), the volatility seems to be regularly in favour of the seller as illustrated in
Figure 16, where Bradford’s annual returns are largely surpassing the others.

18. 18
Table 3. Summary statistics on Bradford’s hammer prices (2008-2016)
Table 4. Summary statistics on average estimate and hammer ratios (2008-2016)
HAMMER PRICE STATISTICS (2008-2016)
TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS 71
NUMBER OF LOTS SOLD 59
NUMBER OF LOTS BOUGHT-IN 12
BOUGHT-IN PROPORTION 13%
MEAN PRICE $910,927.73
MEDIAN PRICE $444,052.00
MAXIMUM PRICE $5,044,050.00
MINIMUM PRICE $1,900.00
STANDARD DEVIATION $1,211,900.91
STANDARD DEVIATION/MEAN RATIO 1.33
AVERAGE ESTIMATE AND HAMMER RATIO STATISTICS
(2008-2016)
AVERAGE ESTIMATE
MEAN PRICE $530,654.92
MEDIAN PRICE $250,000
MAXIMUM PRICE $4,000,000
MINIMUM PRICE $2,000
STANDARD DEVIATION $759,113.62
HAMMER RATIO
MEAN PRICE RATIO 1.72
MEDIAN PRICE RATIO 1.78
MAXIMUM PRICE RATIO 1.26
MINIMUM PRICE RATIO 0.95
STANDARD DEVIATION RATIO 1.60

19. 19
Figure 16. Annual returns variations per index (2008-2016)
Another interesting feature could be how Bradford’s market is correlated with other markets. Table
5 puts forward the Bradford Index negative correlation with all other indices, except the S&P 500
Index. Thus, while Artprice indexes were decreasing, Bradford returns were increasing. As any data
has been collected from traditional asset classes, it is not possible to decide whether or not a
relationship could exist with other asset markets and would require further research.
Table 5. Indices Correlation Matrix
-150%
-50%
50%
150%
250%
350%
450%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
RETURN(%)
Indexes Annual Returns
S&P 500 Index Returns Bradford 100 Returns
Artprice Index Returns Annual Artprice Global Index Returns
Annual Artprice Contemporary Index Returns
S&P 500
INDEX
BRADFORD
100
ARTPRICE
INDEX
ARTPRICE
CONTEMPORARY
INDEX
GLOBAL
ARTPRICE
INDEX
S&P 500 INDEX _ _ _ _ _
BRADFORD 100 0.922 _ _ _ _
ARTPRICE INDEX 0.048 -0.130 _ _ _
ARTPRICE
CONTEMPORARY
INDEX
0.034 -0.225 0.552 _ _
GLOBAL ARTPRICE
INDEX
-0.038 -0.280 0.463 0.771 _

20. 20
Mark Bradford secondary market may also face a liquidity risk caused by a restrictive marketplace.
Indeed, his paintings are mostly sold in New York (Fig.8), and only two sale seasons happen per year.
Let’s Make Christmas Mean Something This Year resale value could not be as high as it would be in
a forced liquidation market in case of credit default.
Due to 22.5% of Bradford’s paintings were sold under their estimate, the risk of collateral shortfall
seems also quite important. However, all the artworks concerns were measuring under 40,000cm2 or
over 100,000cm2. The shortfall could, incidentally, be explained by their small or gigantic sizes which
make them more complicated to sell over their estimation. Let’s Make Christmas Mean Something
This Year is less affected by this risk than other paintings of the artist due to its area is in the range of
those which are the most appreciated.
LEGAL AND REGULATORY RISKS
As Let’s Make Christmas Mean Something This Year is a signed, titled and dated painting from a
living artist, risks of forgery are almost inexistent. Indeed, the artist can authenticate the work and
provide the necessary evidence to match the bank requirements regarding attribution while,
concurrently, Sotheby’s and Sikkema Jenkins & Co. Gallery, the two art market intermediaries who
sold the work, can certify its provenance.
CONDITION RISK
Another concern is the condition of the work. Mark Bradford is used to combine materials and
imagery found in the Los Angeles streets and then, obliterate those collages using an industrial sander
to unearth undercover part of the painting (Morgan, 2012). As explained by Sotheby’s (2016), ‘This
painting is in excellent condition’ and impairments are part of the work. However, it still exists a risk

21. 21
that the artwork has been damaged between its acquisition and those diligent investigations. A
condition report actualised by an expert could, thereby, be needed.
SUBJECTIVE AND IMMEASURABLE RISKS
TASTE AND FASHION CHANGES RISKS
Christopherson (2014, p.51) said ‘Even at the top of the value range, …, it nevertheless can operate
under a range of domestic influences’. This means that an artwork valuation is also determined by
immeasurable factors such as taste and fashion about a specific artist, medium or genre. Those factors
are quite unpredictable and cannot be completely mitigated. As Mark Bradford endorsement process
seems to be at its apotheosis, it can be assumed that interest in the artist and his prices could perhaps
decrease in the following years. However, Bradford is praised by the critic, thus, his auction prices
are not going to fall shortly.
FINAL RECOMMENDATION
As Grant (2003) recommended, Let’s Make Christmas Mean Something This Year is a contemporary
westward painting which is internationally marketable. Despite the facts that Mark Bradford is a
living artist, that the painting is wide and that a whole collection should be a less risky collateral,
Bradford is internationally recognised and well-established, large-scale paintings are one of the main
characteristics of his art and the artwork, chosen as collateral, appears as a masterpiece of the artist.
Consequently, Bradford’s painting sounds to reach most of the criteria to be a suitable collateral asset
against a five-year bullet loan even though the private bank should conduct further research about the
current condition of the artwork, Bradford’s market correlation to traditional assets and the artist’s
value at risk in order to decide what is the safest choice for them.

22. 22
Regarding a standard loan-to-value ratio (50%) and the painting original cost ($4,373,500), the bank
should borrow $2,186,750 to its client. However, Bradford will participate to the Venice Biennial, in
2017 and the borrower could expect a higher amount of money due to this event will increase the
artist’s prices. Finally, bankers also ought to consider that the work holding as collateral is estimated
at $4,500,000-$7,000,000 in 2021 and that its current value seems to be around $4,500,000-
$5,000,000, in 2017. It would be recommended to the private bank to borrow $2,375,000.

23. 23
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS, THESIS, REPORTS AND ARTICLES
Backus, J. (2016). ‘As SFMOMA Prepares for its Signature Fundraiser, an Interview with Senior
Curator Garry Garrels’, Artsy, 5 May. [Online]. Available at: https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-
auctions-sfmoma-s-senior-curator-gary-garrels-on-the-loaded-art-of-mark-bradford (Accessed: 26
December 2016).
Bai Americana, (2016). ‘Mark Bradford’s Hirschhorn Commission – Unveiling in November, 2017’,
Black Art in America, 21 July. [Online]. Available at:
http://blackartinamerica.com/profiles/blogs/mark-bradford-s-hirschorn-commission-unveiling-in-
november-2017 (Accessed: 26 December 2016).
Chan, A. K. H. (2014). Art as collateral: Seeking returns from lending vs. Owning. Master Thesis.
Sotheby’s Institute of Art.
Christopherson, T. (2014) ‘Art market risk and complexity: An insider’s view’ in Dempster, A. M.
(2014). Risk and Uncertainty in the Art World. London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, pp. 47-66.
Deloitte, (2016). Art & Finance Report 2016. [Online] Available at:
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/lu/Documents/financial-services/artandfinance/lu-
en-artandfinancereport-21042016.pdf (Accessed: 9 October 2016).
Garrett, W. (ed.) (2013). Appraising Art: The Definitive Guide to Appraising the Fine and Decorative
Arts. New York: Appraisers Association of America.
Grant, D. (2003). ‘Fine Art as Financial Collateral’, Consumer’s Research Magazine, May 2003,
86(5), pp.18-21.
Gyorgy, S., and McAndrew, C. (2010). ‘Art Banking’ in McAndrew, C. (2010), Fine Art and High
Finance: Expert Advice on the Economics of Ownership. New York: Bloomberg Press, pp.117-134.
McNulty, T. (2013). Art Market Research: A Guide to Methods and Sources. 2nd edn. Jefferson:
McFarland & Company, Inc. Publishers.
McPherson, B., and Sinclair, P. (2011). ‘Red Flags of Fraud Part II: A Due-Diligence Checklist’,
American Bankruptcy Institute Journal, June 11, 30(5), pp.20, 72-73.
Mendelsohn, M., and Thackara, T. (2016). ‘How Advocates of African-American Art are Advancing
Racial Equality in the Art World’, Artsy Editorial, January 2012. [Online]. Available at:
https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-in-black-artists-pursuit-of-equality-these-17-art-world-
leaders-are-changing-the-game (Accessed 28 December 2016).
Miller, D. (ed.) (2015). Whitney Museum of American Art: Handbook of the collection. London: Yale
University Press, p.76
Morgan, J. (2012) ‘Mark Bradford – Ruinaphilia’ in Deitch, J. (2012), The Painting Factory:
Abstraction after Warhol. New York: Skira Rizzoli Publications, Inc., pp. 94-109.

24. 24
Pownall, A.J. (2014). ‘Art price risk, emotional and aesthetic value: Investing in boutique art funds’
in Dempster, A. M. (2014). Risk and Uncertainty in the Art World. London: Bloomsbury Publishing
Plc, pp. 165-186.
Petterson, A. (2014). ‘Value, risk and the contemporary art ecosystem’ in Dempster, A. M. (2014).
Risk and Uncertainty in the Art World. London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, pp. 67-86.
Rinaldi, R.M. (2016). ‘Mark Bradford gets shows at Denver Art Museum, Clyfford Still Museum:
Artist will show here just before representing U.S. at Venice Biennale’, The Denver Post, 9 June.
[Online]. Available at: http://www.denverpost.com/2016/06/09/mark-bradford-bienelle-denver-
museum-clyfford-still/ (Accessed: 26 December 2016).
WEBSITES AND DATABASES
Artfacts, (2016). Mark Bradford b.1961. [Online]. Available at:
http://www.artfacts.net/en/artist/mark-bradford-15172/profile.html (Accessed: 17 December 2016).
Artnet, (2016). Mark Bradford (American, born 1961). [Online]. Available at:
http://www.artnet.com/artists/mark-bradford/ (Accessed: 17 December 2016).
Artprice, (2016). Mark Bradford (1961). [Online]. Available at:
http://www.artprice.com/artist/244349/mark-bradford (Accessed: 17 December 2016).
BlouinArtinfo, (2016). Mark Bradford. [Online]. Available at: http://artsalesindex.artinfo.com/Mark-
Bradford-212994-results.action (Accessed: 17 December 2016).
High Museum of Art, (2016). 2016 Prize Winner: Mark Bradford. [Online]. Available at:
https://www.high.org/en/Support/Driskell-Prize/Mark-Bradford-2016 (Accessed: 26 December
2016).
High Museum of Art, (2016). High Museum of Art Names Mark Bradford 2016 Recipient of David
C. Driskell Prize. [Online]. Available at:
http://www.high.org/~/media/Sites/HMA/Res/PDF/Press/2016/February/Driskell-Prize-2016-Press-
Release.ashx (Accessed: 26 December 2016).
Skate’s, (2017). Skate’s Top Artists. [Online]. Available at: http://www.skatepress.com/skates-top-
10000/artists/2/ (Accessed: 3 January 2017).
Sotheby’s, (2016). Contemporary Art Evening Auction – Lot 28: Mark Bradford, Let’s Make
Christmas Mean Something This Year. [Online]. Available at:
http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2016/contemporary-art-evening-auction-
n09572/lot.28.html (Accessed: 12 December 2016).
Yahoo! Finance (2017a). S&P500. [Online]. Available at:
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5eGSPC/history?period1=-
630979200&period2=1484438400&interval=1mo&filter=history&frequency=1mo (Accessed: 3
January 2016).
Yahoo! Finance (2017b). Artprice.com. [Online]. Available at:
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/PRC.PA/history?period1=-
630979200&period2=1484438400&interval=1mo&filter=history&frequency=1mo (Accessed: 3
January2016).

25. 25
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1
Table 6. Mark Bradford Index build on total sales using auction data collected (2008-2016)
YEAR
BRADFORD
INDEX
TOTAL PAINTING
SALES (USD)
2008 100 $495,500
2009 0 $0
2010 400.43 $1,984,133
2011 575.45 $2,851,331
2012 353.16 $1,749,892
2013 1,670.57 $8,277,659
2014 1,742.31 $8,633,130
2015 4,127.75 $20,453,026
2016 3,921.72 $19,432,105
TOTAL RETURN 3,821.72%
RETURN PER YEAR 50.33%
YEARLY STANDARD DEV. 188.40%
SHARPE-RATIO 0.27

26. 26
APPENDIX 2
Table 7. Data collected about Let’s Make Christmas Mean Something This Year and Mark Bradford’s
paintings with similar area (Please rotate on the right)
LOT
28
6
7
74
11
29
9
SALE
DATE
11/17/2016
10/05/2016
05/08/2016
05/13/2015
02/12/2015
05/12/2014
10/15/2010
LOCATION
NewYork
London
NewYork
NewYork
London
NewYork
London
AUCTION
HOUSE
Sotheby’s
Phillips
Phillips
Christie’s
Phillips
Christie’s
Sotheby’s
PRICE/
AVERAGE
ESTIM.
1,35
2,13
0,88
2,08
2,04
1,2
0,9
HIGH
ESTIM.
4,000,000
2,000,000
5,000,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
2,500,000
500,000
LOW
ESTIM.
3,000,000
1,500,000
3,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
300,000
SALE
PRICE
(USD)
4,737,500
4,773,760
3,525,000
3,637,000
3,948,062
2,405,000
578,289
HAMMER
PRICE
(USD)
4,000,000
4,092,160
3,000,000
3,100,000
3,357,200
2,000,000
480,240
PRICE/SQCM
42.31
41.96
30.92
32.86
35,18
21.49
5.07
AREA
(CM2)
94535
97536
97022.7
94352.5
95420
93080.7
94794
MEDIUM
Mixed
Mediaon
Canvas
Mixed
Mediaon
Canvas
Mixed
Mediaon
Canvas
Collageon
Canvas
Mixed
Mediaon
Canvas
Acrylicon
Canvas
Mixed
Mediaon
Canvas
CREATION
DATE
2007
2011
2012
2007
2013
2007
2002
TITLE
Let'sMake
ChristmasMean
SomethingThis
Year
RatCatcherof
HamelinIII
Building'TheBig
WhiteWhale'
GhostMoney
BitingtheBook
TheWorldIsFlat
WhitePainting
YEAR
2016
2016
2016
2015
2015
2014
2010

27. 27
APPENDIX 3
Figure 17. S&P 500, Bradford 100, Artprice, Artprice Contemporary and Artprice Global indexes evolutions over time
(2008-2016)
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
BASE100IN2008
Indexes Evolution
S&P 500 Index Bradford Annual Auction Result Base 100
Artprice Index Annual Artprice Global Index
Annual Artprice Contemporary Index