Annie Leibovitz, photographer of stars, faces ruin

Breitbart ^ | August 23, 2009 | unk

[OldCorps]

Annie Leibovitz is as famous as the people she photographs but now the genius behind the lens is close to financial ruin -- a victim, some say, of her own relentless artistic ambition. Among the qualities making Leibovitz, 59, the most sought after portrait photographer in the world are legendary perfectionism and the pouring of resources into lavish sets. Over the course of her long career, nothing has been too extreme in Leibovitz's pursuit of the perfect picture. She put former action icon and current California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on top of a mountain, submerged black actress Whoopi Goldberg in a bath of milk and closed France's Versailles palace to shoot Kirsten Dunst posing as Marie-Antoinette. Circus animals, fire, airplanes -- she was rarely denied a requested prop, however seemingly outrageous.

A debt is due September 8 and if she can't pay up, she could lose her life's work. ACG, which specializes in making loans to owners of high value art works, is unlikely to adopt a soft line. Leibovitz must "comply with the sales agreement she signed authorizing Art Capital to sell the fine art and real estate assets and to pay the invoices that are due," ACG spokesman Montieth Illingworth said in a statement. The over-leveraged photographer not only risks losing her photo archives, which The New York Times estimates could be worth 50 million dollars, but also her house in the trendy Greenwich Village district of Manhattan and a second home outside the city. If she is forced to declare bankruptcy, it will then be up to the courts to decide how to distribute the assets. Banking giant Goldman Sachs entered the fray this week with a claim to own part of Leibovitz's debt. ACG disputes that, but says Goldman Sachs could ...

[Albion Wilde]

I see you have never seen the inside of the high-end studio portraiture craft. It is a technologically exacting and difficult medium. Comparing it to painting doesn’t advance the discussion of the business problem. Being a painter is substantially less complex and demanding as a business.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

Well, this is in parallel to the situation with Michael Jackson and Sony a couple of years before his death. He borrowed money from Sony, the collateral for which was his music publishing portfolio, and when an installment became due, suddenly Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were insinuating it was a civil rights dispute.

Here - a very successful (and I would concede, very good) photographer, with $$ to hire the best legal talent available, enters into a security agreement collateralizing her works in support of a large loan. Now, she cannot repay and the bank is taking actions to enforce the contractual agreement. This is somehow portrayed as a crime? WTF? I guess it just shows how much of the press doesn’t understand business and law.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

Is she the one who screamed at toddlers to get them to cry for their portrait shot? If she did that then she is the same photographer who shot portraits of some of the lessor apes. Her animal portraits were stunning, the kid pictures were very disturbing.

Regards,
GtG

[coop71]

I agree.

[wardaddy]

In my world 50M covers 24M

now she may not want to have to liquidate or sell intellectual properties but she will eventually

sounds like she doesn’t pay her debts as they come in and has let them pile up

not too smart, she will have problems with the Cracker Barrell table peg game...

can u say IG-NO-RA-MOOSE

[wardaddy]

lol...you guys are such a soft touch..lol

[wardaddy]

I agree and thank for a cogent post devoid of the usual populist (but I’m a conservative really) undertone that often pervades here

[wardaddy]

I'm no authority on what portrait photography of celebrities go for but don't forget she gets residuals every time the photos are reused and it can be tracked...like BMI or ADSCAP

there is quite a bit out there on this

seems our nemesis here on FR... Getty Images (asshats) ruined her deal she had to pull a rabbit out of the hat with Art Capital Group

libs are all about money aren't they when it's their’s

Avedon and Scavullo’s works go for as high as 100K per original but the market is down with the times no doubt

i would expect her to auction

or....leverage her assets

if she can get 50M appraisal and borrow 24M to pay off creditors (less if they agree and they will likely) then she is at 48% Loan To Value which is not too shabby in the real world and I bet she can cash flow 150,000 a month to service that through covered sales and auctions and new work and pledging her hard assets in case of her death...that is based on a 20 year am which could be called in 5 and then refinanced and in the meantime she could sell some stuff orderly

were I her counselor that would be the deal I would look for...anyhow

this is sorta what I do but not with art but with car washes and self storage and small office buildings

i pinged several folks familiar with deals

didn't David Bowie sorta do this with a bond issue?

[wardaddy]

LOL...you and I make about 4 here who give adamn.

FR is not sympathetic to the suffering of the rich....lib or not.

I always found that odd for a conservative site...I thought everybody here believed in the right to try to get rich so why deny rich folks some empathy?

The Dummies and KOSsacks are I’m sure worse with the torches and pitchforks.

[dixiechick2000]

Thank you for including the ONE person on your ping who knows squat about selling art. lol

“Leibovitz must “comply with the sales agreement she signed authorizing Art Capital to sell the fine art and real estate assets and to pay the invoices that are due,” ACG spokesman Montieth Illingworth said in a statement.”

The article said her assets are worth 50M, but would they appraise at that amount now?

I like your idea of an auction. However, how many who would be sympathetic think they can afford her now? Too, the debt is due on Sept. 8. Not much time.

“libs are all about money aren’t they when it’s their’s”

Dang straight!

Goldman-Sachs is in the fray.

Frankly, I’d take my chances with the bankruptcy judges. Perhaps hers would be a fan.

[wardaddy]

I’m surprised she can’t finance her way out...looks like she tried.

I’m sure she has counsel.

Wonder is she expected Sontag to leave her something...gossip folks claim she didn’t get squat

tight fisted sapphos behaving badly

[stephenjohnbanker]

“if she can get 50M appraisal and borrow 24M to pay off creditors (less if they agree and they will likely) then she is at 48% Loan To Value which is not too shabby in the real world and I bet she can cash flow 150,000 a month to service that through covered sales and auctions and new work and pledging her hard assets in case of her death...that is based on a 20 year am which could be called in 5 and then refinanced and in the meantime she could sell some stuff orderly”

That would fly. Call her up, set it up, and grab a heathy fee!

[stephenjohnbanker]

“I’m surprised she can’t finance her way out...looks like she tried.

I’m sure she has counsel.”

Well, so did Kareem Abdul Jabbar. And his adviser turned 25 million into 2.5 million under his skilled analysis ;-)

[dmz]

Photography is not art.
________

You deserve to be flamed for such a ridiculous comment.

[Osage Orange]

It is........

[Maverick68]

Nope, it is the capturing of an image with a mechanical device.
In the same respect, movie-making is not “art”.

Again, the Photoshopping of a photograph definately has some artistic aspects to it, but can’t be compared to taking a blank canvas and painting a coherent image.
Apparently I’ve offended some photographers on this site :)

[Maverick68]

I mean no offense, but I have real problems with the “art-community” and the “standards” applied.
I’ve seen people comment that Warhol is a genius, whilst Norman Rockwell is simplistic, campy, and not worthy of praise.

[Boiling Pots]

She really is obnoxious, like her background would suggest.

I saw video of her asking the Queen of England to “take off her crown” in a photo shoot. The Queens non-reaction reaction was priceless.

[EyeGuy]

“I’ve seen people comment that Warhol is a genius, whilst Norman Rockwell is simplistic, campy, and not worthy of praise.:

####

As an artist Warhol is not even in the same galaxy as Norman Rockwell. Rockwell loved his subject matter, whereas Warhol was addicted to the infantile shock value which dominates the Leftist hijacking of once great American culture.

However, in the “hip and progressive” art world, Warhol would be even more lionized if he’d done something really “daring” and “edgy” like a “Sculpture Series” built around his turds.

[Maverick68]

David Bowie was great as Warhol in “Basquiat”...