Don’t worry Mr.Stubbs is just Acting
You might think so if you read the plethora of articles written on the end of Big Art and Non-Profit Art Organizations.
Auction Houses are reporting poor sales and the values of previously valuable artworks are in decline or on the skids altogether. More over the fate of many Art Museums and Non-profit galleries are simply stated unknown with their endowments devastated by the financial turmoil that is everywhere. Other Arts Organizations from symphonies to seasonal festivals are canceling their entire seasons and Universities are closing their art galleries and museums and talking about de accessioning their art collections to raise capital. Collectors are in a panic as their wealth is failing and want to rush out and sell the treasures in their collections at drastically depreciated values.
You the average artist might get the idea that the end is indeed here for the Art Market. That might be the case for at least parts of the big art market, but I believe that Two Art Markets exist in two very different Art worlds. Just as I believe that two financial systems or economies exist in America.
Let me start with the value of Art. One market professes that the value in art is an investment and it operates much like the stock market. The perceived values of artworks are abstractions that are difficult for even the top experts to understand. What makes a Damien Hirst or a Jeff Koones worth millions? Is it the aesthetic importance or is it a rare commodity. Is value a false premise to begin with? The world’s great art treasures certainly, have real value but are they really worth the hundreds of millions of dollars paid for them or are their values just as abstract as the values of stock derivatives.
The values of these treasures are as unreliable an investment as mortgage securities or stock derivatives. In fact, I would compare the Money that everyone is so upset about losing including me is a close cousin to Conceptual Art. It the money exists inside our minds as an idea without real substance. This money is simply numbers on paper or in a computer programs and has no real value except in the idea that is actually exists. In fact, recently when AIG was called (as in poker) to pay out insurance claims against losses they insured against they did not really have any real money. Their wealth was a concept on paper.
The same deal is going down in the Big Art Market. Values of artworks, endowment funds and the real value of all of these abstractions are now becoming Representational or Realistic, and the picture is a scary one to say the least. I guess because like the experts I just don’t get the whole concept and don’t know why it works or doesn’t for sure, maybe.
So where does that leave you the Artist, Writer, Musician, Actor, The Arts Worker. It leaves you with the second Arts Market and the Second Economy. Maybe I should just call it as I see it the real Market Place.
The Real Market is where real things get done, where actual work is preformed, real things are produced, and where real money, goods and services are exchanged. This is the market where the real value in what you produce exists. You write a book and you sell that book to someone that wants to read it. You sell a painting to someone that wants to hang it on the wall in their study because the real value is, they enjoy looking at the painting, it brings real pleasure to them outside it’s monetary worth.
It is where you take the money you earned from the sale of your painting and you buy lunch at the corner café. You tip the waitress and she takes the money she made waiting on you and buys fresh produced grown by a local farmer to feed her kids dinner.
The kids spent the day at the local Art Museum on school fieldtrip learning about art and making art projects and they share their new knowledge with Mom at dinner.
After dinner, Mom is amazed that the kids are forgoing TV and doing their homework. Johnny suddenly gets the math problem that was a conceptual enigma, but after seeing an abstract Artwork that the Docent explained to his class, he sees the math.
Jill is working on her English homework writing the poem she had been putting off but because the museum had, a poet read to the class she is inspired to write her own poetry.
Jimmy is in his room practicing his music lesson because at lunch, the museum had a drum ensemble perform and he too is now inspired to make music.
Mom decides that it would be a good idea to sign the kids up for more art experience classes and becomes a member of the museum that she pays for with the tips she earns from many different customers at her local restaurant.
Years later, her kids grow up and never forget the childhood experiences that the arts provided for them. They go to galleries and buy art, join museums and buy season tickets for the theater and local symphony.
And we all eat, drink and prosper. That is the value of the real economy. By now, you get the idea and if you think about it, you can insert any real product or service into the equation. It is this very simple premise, the exchange of goods, services and ideas that makes the real economy real and is where we Artists can find success.
How do we make this second economy work?
Once you begin to think about creating a real value economy you will figure it out, let your creativity your artist out to play.
I do not believe we can go it alone as independent artists.
We need to work collectively to create an Arts Presence. Places where multiple artists of every kind work in visible ways. We need to create a presence in our community, like an arts district. Even if we all cannot have a studio or shop, we need to create the availability a connection to each other. Some artists have formed co-ops where they work as a group and share the costs and work load.
The co-op does not have to be just visual artists. It could be a combination of disciplines. You could have a visual art gallery and a music center or performance component like dance or theater where the combined talents could offer dynamic combined events.
Examples of Artists Co-op’s
Tennessee
http://www.clarksvilleartists.org/
On-Line Co-op
Colorado
West Virginia
http://www.icehouseartistsco-op.com/
Idaho
Other artists have created Phantom Gallery Networks.
Before the current Boom and as business’s moved out of older Downtown areas for new digg’s in newly developed retail areas empty retail space became a problem across America. Many cities and towns had wide-open, depressed retail corridors that presented a dismal picture of the community. Artists working together with property owners, city officials and businesses filled those empty spaces with art. The programs also created events like Art Walks to bring people into these depressed corridors stimulated the local economy.
Today as the economy worsens and businesses close up shop, a lot of space is going to be available.
It will take someone with energy like you to organize and build a successful presence. You can sit around and wait for someone else to do something or you can take the lead and make it happen. Art is your life your lifestyle and your business.
Examples of Phantom Gallery Programs
L.A.
http://www.phantomgalleriesla.com/DowntownLA.html
Butte Montana: This link is to the Montana State Travel Site.
http://visitmt.com/categories/moreinfo.asp?IDRRecordID=16816&siteid=1
I added this link because it is a great example of how a presence can create value. Butte is in between two large National Parks Yellowstone and Glacier. Tourist travel I-90 and the Butte Phantom Gallery program gives them something to stop in town for. Most tourist use the internet to pre-screen their trips and stops. Tourists buy Art and Lunch.
More Butte
http://www.montanastandard.com/articles/2006/07/07/newsbutte/hjjdjcjciijigc.txt
Tucson
http://wc.arizona.edu/papers/96/13/04_1.html
My wife and I lived in a loft in an old Hardware store in Downtown Tucson in the 1980’s Downtown was vacant and artists created a presence. One Saturday a month the local Arts Co-op sponsored an ad hoc art walk that brought thousands of people Downtown. It was fun and changed the perception of the Downtown area.
Now with the economy again bad, folks in your community are going to be looking for something to do that is fun and free. Local business will like the idea too because they want people to come out and spend money. In Tucson, the little shops and restaurants sold a lot of merchandise along with art.
Another way to go is to use existing businesses as exhibit space. Café’s, Banks, you name it, will hang art on their walls and you can create events like art walks that will bring people out and into those businesses. Everybody wins.
Art Spots
One thing that another Montana Artist and I did in Kalispell Montana years ago was start an Art Spot program. Marshal Noice a local painter/photographer and I the Director of a local museum made Art Spot flags. We got all of the hardware together to hang a flag at an art location. We charged each location the cost of the flag, hardware, and publication and hung Art Spot Flags creating an Art presence throughout town.
We created and printed a simple two-sided card with the Art Spot business names and address on one side and a corresponding numbered map on the other side of the card. If you visit Kalispell Montana the program is still working. Tourists can easily locate local art businesses and museums following the flags.
Note: Kalispell has a sign ordinance that restricts signage that is why we chose a flag. Most cities do not restrict Flags but do restrict signs and banners.
We had had a vision of doing something statewide with signage on the interstate to locate art hubs in towns across the state. It could still happen.
Art Spot Link
http://www.hockadaymuseum.org/Links.htm
The Internet
Today the internet is a very good place to start a collective or Social Network for Artists in your town, county, state or across the nation. I started a Montana Artists Network a couple weeks ago. The purpose was to create a site where anyone interested in the Arts Artists in Montana could communicate with each other to network and promote the arts.
I used Ning, which is a social networking platform to create the site. Ning is free for anyone to use and you can create your own network with ease using Ning. http://www.ning.com/
I want to stress that this type of social network is very different from a website. The format is far more interactive and flexible. Members control their pages and can do a variety of things to communicate and promote their art. Members can up-load Photos, Videos, create discussions, chat, list events, blog and many more. This type of format is dynamic and easy to use and it is free.
Examples of Ning Type Networks (I am a member at all three)
Montana Artists Network
http://montanaartistsnetwork.ning.com/
Brooklyn Art Project
http://brooklynartproject.ning.com/
Arts for Arts Sake
http://artsforartssake.ning.com/
We need to work together and create real value for our communities and our customers.
In Philadelphia, a Group of Artists are Bartering, Art for Goods and Services.
http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20090308_A_barter_economy_for_art_in_Phila_.html
Many of these ideas are not new they just faded away with the boom times of the last decade. These Gorilla Marketing tactics grew out of need during the last down times, some hung on while others did not.
Today as we again face economic challenges in the arts, we need to explore ideas outside of what became the Box.
Looking for a new gallery may be the real challenge in today’s market. It might even become impossible as galleries scale back or close their doors along with museums and other non-profit art organizations.
You might just get a show if that gallery owner sees your work hanging in a vacant window a Phantom Gallery he or she walks past on the way to work.
As for the Big Art Market, most of us never got there to begin with. That market has been a far away illusion that made sensational headlines and captivated our dreams of fame and success. For the majority of us our market is still right here in front of us. All we have to do is create value to find success.
Success is measured in many ways, your success is personal, what do you really want from art, what is success to you.
The value of the arts is like a spider web, woven in many directions touching many places.
There are no limits of what we can do together only our imagination will limit us or free us. Put your creative thinking cap on and let your imagination fly.
Do the Arts Need a National Bailout
http://davideubank.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/do-the-arts-need-a-national-bailout/
Filed under: Art, Art Marketing, Art News, Culture Economey, How to survive as a Working Artists, Investing, News, On Art, Painting, Photography, Politics, Uncategorized , Art and the Economy, Art Co-op, Art Marketing, art sales, Investing in Art, Phantom Gallery
Interesting post. I have long said that there is more than one Art World and have been trying to come up with some sort of philosophy surrounding the idea–sadly, not devoting enough time to it. Very little is written about the Real Art World and the economics of it.
Your post provides a unique and encouraging outlook on the art market’s current state of affairs. The need to promote strong community support is vital in maintaining the industry’s viability and profitability. However, while I agree that the future of the “Big Art Market” is under threat, designating value as “representational” or even “conceptual” seems a bit pre-emptive. Though certainly a valid point, the present devaluing of art is likely a temporary symptom of the financial crisis rather than a permanent development. Just last week, the Armory Show proved the perseverance of the market, attracting better than expected crowds and surprising sales. Declaring the so-called “Big Art Market” obsolete is thus premature. As your entry indicates, community interest is based on so-called “Real Market” values, superceding the momentary highs and lows of the stock exchange. However, your post ignores the “Real Market’s” dependence on the “Big Art Market.” While visual culture provides educational value and holds community significance, artists rely on their patrons to survive – a group controlled by the “Big Art Market.” Thus, with both markets struggling, it is necessary to promote both community organizations and larger institutions. Focusing your entry entirely on co-ops and internet outlets undermines the importance publicly funded organizations play in the art world. With over 5.7 million workers and a financial impact of $166.2 billion, it is vital communities work to preserve struggling establishments on every level.
While I certainly agree increased support of community-based initiatives is necessary, expansion in the midst of a recession is, unfortunately, improbable. With the decline of private donations, the successful formation of new public agencies is simply implausible without government assistance. Your entry suggests the need to cater to patrons of the arts, yet you fail to consider that this financial base is diminishing. Without monetary support, how do you propose communities acquire the necessary start-up capital to form these organizations ? In solely discussing the economics of the industry, your post also does not take into account the impact the recession has had on artistic ouptut. As I am sure you believe, the power of art moves beyond pure economics. Thus, I am curious to hear your thoughts concerning the changing content of art. Recent articles suggest the need to develop new modes of representation and the demand to incorporate new subject matter to reflect current realities. An artist yourself, do you think the content of art will be impacted by the financial collapse? In looking at your assessment as well as similar posts from other authors, it seems that emerging trends have mistakenly been declared as finite changes in the art market. While these assessments may be limiting, I do, however, appreciate a more positive stance on an improving situation.
Hanna,
Thank you for your very well thought-out comment.
You make several very important and interesting points. First, I will start with the obsolescence of the big Art Market. I hadn’t really thought about Big Art becoming obsolete. Although your comment gives me, pause to think about that question. I think Big Art is in for a major change and that the market will need another decade of distance from today to snare naive collectors who believe their investments won’t suffer a decline like those who survived the nineties.
Quote from Five Theories why the Art Market Can’t Crash and Will Anyway
By Marc Spiegler
In the Art world there’s a clear delineation between those who experienced the last crash, in the nineties, and those who didn’t. “This market is fueled by collectors who have never been through a correction,” says art adviser Darlene Lutz active since the eighties. “The generations who did are watching in disbelief. It’s like a teenagers who have unprotected sex thinking they’ll never get pregnant. And then, whoops… look at what happened!”
http://nymag.com/arts/art/features/16542/ This is a very good article.
I couldn’t agree more, only I would say the market is more akin to a bunch of drunken Sailors on shore leave. I think that the false run up of the stock market and the false valuation of the market as a whole, which lead to a great concept of wealth-fueled collectors with money to burn. And the Big galleries and Auction houses threw gasoline on the fire and pushed values sky high. Now the sky is falling and everybody is looking for an Umbrella. I have to confess that my experience with auctions and insider practices and manipulation has left a bad taste in my mouth.
Today is much like the great Western (Cowboy) Art run up of the eighties that crashed in the nineties. It was like alchemy, bronze to gold. Then the bust came and that golden investment wasn’t worth anymore than scrap metal and the market value for those artworks have not returned in two decades. That event here in the west made it very hard to sell anyone who had bought into that market a bronze ever again regardless of who’s name was on it. The current market is new collectors or collectors who didn’t get burnt.
It is that very situation today; those who got burned are going to be gun shy and maybe smarter. That is not going to help average artist or the rising star that isn’t a solid commodity.
As for the Armory Show as Marc Spiegler’s article points out, those who sold best were the commodities of the Art world. Some artworks have transcended aesthetic value and are worth more than gold and I suspect those works will always have commodity value.
Quote from Marc Spiegler’s article about the Armory Show
“Likewise, during last year’s auctions, the Postwar and Contemporary sales started to truly rival the historically dominant Impressionism and Modern categories. Granted, much of that dollar volume is driven by dependable heavy hitters such as Roy Lichtenstein, Andy Warhol, and Willem de Kooning. But the younger end of the spectrum has even more momentum. Last October, for example, Christie’s capitalized on the Frieze Art Fair’s bringing international collectors to London to create a bona fide contemporary-art event. Two paintings, by Tim Eitel and Matthias Weischer of Germany’s “Leipzig School,” created a presale sensation. You could have bought such works for as little as $4,000 a few years back, before the Leipzig School hype started building, and neither artist had ever come to auction before the Frieze fair. There was some surprise when the Eitel sold at $212,000, three times the high estimate. But the stunner was Weischer. Estimated at $31,000 to $38,000, his painting soared to $370,000, instantly making it shorthand for everything overblown in the current market.”
In fact, I would go so far as to say that if any artwork made with even the most modest skill in a century or so if it survives will have value if you apply the Antiques Road Show theory. And the current Big art market I believe supports that theory.
Now that I have rambled on, I am not sure as an artist that the current market practices help living artists, except a few very lucky superstars. I guess that the bottom line is if our patrons have felt the burn, they are not going to invest in risky art, looking at art as an investment. Which I also believe the market convinced the collector or potential collector to believe investing is the reason to collect. And by dealing behind the scenes the Dealers have obscured the real value of the artwork they push, very successfully until the other shoe dropped, now.
As for the Armory Show, I don’t know what fueled buying. I will take a wild guess and say it was the sure thing of buying solid commodities. When your wealth is at risk, you look for other places to hold your money and as you say values will return or improve someday. So is Big Art Obsolete, maybe; restructured forsure.
Another article suggests that investors will shy away from young and emerging artists and small galleries will be the victim. I do think small galleries are going to continue to have hard times and many will close. But I don’t think there is any relation to investing in big art here. Most of these galleries don’t handle Big Art. They are part of the Real Art Market and they are feeling the down turn in the economy and I believe they like many business will survive on their bottom line and their debt to income ratio. Buyers in the real market are still out there buying. I think too that most of these patrons buy art for reasons other than investment. I believe they just like art and like the idea of living with art. As in the perfect world it should be.
Speculation in young artists is over, and the smaller dealers will be hurt the most
By Josh Baer
http://www.theartnewspaper.com/article.asp?id=16267
As for Arts Organizations, I think they art a vital part of the National Infrastructure and should be treated in the budget as such. The fact that we as a nation rely on sustaining our culture on the gifts of the wealthy is foolhardy. That is not to say that private donations are not welcome or important. But real sustainability for non-profits comes from stable dependable support. Like today, how will communities re-open programs closed because of market failure? What is the overall economic impact on a community, caused by the loss museums, symphonies, theaters and more? Will those communities lose their ability to retain a competitive edge if they are trying to attract new industry or business to replace business and industry they have lost? Will their education programs and citizens suffer because they no longer have access to important culture?
Further, as organizations try to survive the turmoil of today’s economy they are further isolating their audiences by increasing admission fees and ticket prices. I am not being critical I am just stating a fact. But as the audience is eroded so is public and perhaps political support.
Here where I live in Northwestern Montana the city of Kalispell has applied for 5.6 million dollars in stimulus money to expand our regional Art Museum. The Hockaday Museum of Art is the only art museum in the region and serves four counties each the size of Connecticut. I don’t know why we always compare our geographic size to Connecticut but we do. I have to tell you also that I was the Director of the museum 10 years ago, so I like it. But what we did then was build program. The museum provides art education services to Glacier, Lake, Kootenai and Flathead county schools. The museum is a vital resource in the region with the closest comparable program one hundred and fifty miles south. When I was there we needed more space but the historic building that houses the museum needed urgent restoration and we accomplished that and built the program and the collection. Over the last ten years, the museum, which was land-locked, bought the adjoining property and developed a plan for expansion. Now the city council, which by the way is faced with 12 percent un-employment and the near total destruction of the timber-wood products industry and a massive decline in construction and development wants to expand the museum, why? Why are they committed to an Art Museum as well as the other cultural programs in the community? They understand the value. They understand that if they are going to move forward and attract new business to the region they have to have sustainable culture, livability. Arts and Culture is part of the Infrastructure.
But there is a downside to this story. Public opinion does not share the sentiments of the city council; largely the public does not believe government should fund an expansion or a museum of any kind. So what happened? I can testify in court that a decade ago, every student in the country at sometime or another visited the museum or the museum visited their classroom and I believe that is still the case today. So where did the connection fail?
In 1999, I attended the American Federation of the Arts, Directors conference in New York. I have to tell you that I was the guest of a very generous wealthy patron who had never met me or set foot into my museum. She was on the board of the AMA and she made it possible for directors like me who’s museum could not afford the cost, to attend what she believed was an import education program. There are true angels out there and I have met many. People who give because they believe it is the right thing to do and they do not expect anything in return. More to that point but let, me bore you little more.
Where did the connection fail was the hot topic among most Art Museum Directors that attended from across the country as well as those in New York. I quickly learned the question is not something you speak about openly in public. After all everybody is after that Arts education money and it is big money for programs.
The idea was that if the Arts played an important role in education the benefactors of the experience, the kids would grow up and become art patrons. But 20 years later that hadn’t worked out in measurable results was the sentiment of the attendees. Our audience had not developed as hoped, but no one really knew why or if they did, they weren’t saying. They also weren’t giving up on the idea. I have thought about this a lot.
I think we missed the boat. Here are two things that I think went very wrong in the arts. The Blockbuster Art Exhibition is the first. Everybody wanted to produce big blockbuster shows I am sure you remember those big shows. They did bring in audience but they were expensive and often lost money and more importantly, they isolated many mainstream people who could not afford to attend a pricey art exhibit. Elitism was alive and well in the minds of the masses.
Big donors, wealthy art patrons also invaded Arts programs. The programs needed donors and the donors I guess needed certain things from the programs. Yes, some patrons give with no strings attached but most big donors expect something in return. Some were satisfied with branding and the big museums delivered. That’s a fair trade the donor gets name recognition but the organization still holds on to control over content and program. Some donors want to control content and program and they pressure cash strapped boards into deals that no public art organization should engage in, but they need the money and they cave in to the demands of the check. Again, elitism enters the mind of the public. At the Hockaday, the program changed to soot the need of a major donor and his posse. The dynamic program that provided the community a wide variety of art and art events shrank into narrow large private collection of the donor and his posse and what many believe now is a museum just for the local socialites. But the board doesn’t have to raise money.
The way we did it was small memberships and fund raising events and grants. That is work. We had to engage the whole community to achieve success. I think because we lack sustainable funding for the Arts we lost much of the general public in exchange for more well to do patrons. But on the other hand who is more likely to deliver the political punch we need to achieve sustainable funding. In Missoula Montana, the Missoula Art Museum went to the voters and won public funding through a mill levy. They now have a sustainable funding base to work from and patrons along with the voters the community built a new art museum. They continue to offer a diverse and dynamic programs and exhibitions. Collective effort can work at many levels.
God I am missing a lot of commercials on TV and so are you if you’re still reading this, how will we know what to buy.
I think the real art market is under valued. You mention 5.6 million workers and 166 billion dollar economic impact. I saw a study a while back, I looked for it tonight but couldn’t find it and I am sorry I don’t remember the name of the study. In short it said that the Big Art Market was far easier to account for because Big Auctions and Big Galleries maintain public sales records and so on. But the rest of the market is more obscure and difficult to account for because it is woven throughout every part of the economy. The real market of made up of millions of individuals many of which may be reflected in your figures may in fact be larger than what we are referring to as the Big Market.
I believe that today more artists are looking at taking control of their position in the market. Even Damian Hirst after his big auction success last year has started a new direction in selling his work. He opened a store and he is selling his work online along with the work of others.
http://davideubank.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/did-the-art-bubble-burst/ I wrote about it here along with other drivel.
Other Criteria Hirst’s shop
https://www.othercriteria.com/index.php
As the internet moves forward into the next phase, I think Artists of all kinds are going to find ways to harness the economic force of cyber space. I think galleries and museums are going to change the way they deliver the product too.
The Luce foundation Center, Open Storage Program.
http://davideubank.wordpress.com/2009/03/14/the-luce-foundation-center-for-american-art-has-a-great-website/
Walls and space are expensive and the way audience is beginning to receive information is on their Blackberry or I-phone and if we want to reach our audience we had better be there.
That does not mean the audience will not come to the museum or wherever but it does mean they are going to preview before hand. Javier Peres the L.A. Berlin Art Dealer says he only knows a few buyers who do not preview J-PEG images of artworks they are interested in, so artists need that presence.
Social Networking is creating communities of artists that can span the world, just your state or your group of associates and creates the ability to communicate ideas across a wide spectrum of opportunities. I can participate in a dialogue or share my work with artists around the world if I want too. And I can do it with ease at my leisure and that is power, individual power that is not control by a gatekeeper. I can share my ideas with you and you me and look at the wonderful conversation we have shared.
Started by the Brooklyn Art Project
http://brooklynartproject.ning.com/
Started in by Roger Povey England
http://artsforartssake.ning.com/
This is a network I started two weeks ago.
http://montanaartistsnetwork.ning.com/
I am a member on all three and also at Art Review http://www.artreview.com/
The artists of the world are communicating like never before. Artists are building content and sharing ideas across the most diverse platform ever imagined and I think it is just going to bust loose.
I don’t really think the current economic times have stalled creativity I think the current crisis may in fact be the catalyst that takes us to the next level. I think the art world has been stalled in afterglow of modern art of the last century and even a little before. The sixties and seventies saw some brilliant advances but a big break out like Abstract expressionism hasn’t come I don’t think, but I am looking and so are a lot of others.
Japanese collectors love Impressionism
I think we make a lot of art that looks like art and I think there has been a return to realism or representational image making. But abstract art is still in demand. The break out may not even be in any known media for that matter it could be very new altogether.
I am blending computer generated drawing with painting. Recently I have been experimenting with digital film and digital collage. I do think young artists are looking harder at some of the basic principles in making images. I don’t think young students get enough art history. They don’t learn Art History in a way that they can build on top of a foundation of ideas that came before them and transition that knowledge into new ideas. I think some of the most interesting images made today are on the internet, in digital format that never make it to paper. And I think Photography is going to be a big winner in the art world. But when all else fails and your I-phone doesn’t work it will be that painting hanging on the wall art needs the object to survive.
I think visual artists will be more in control of their sales like musicians. One last website to look at is https://www.artocracy.org
Here at Artocracy you can download art, like music for a fee of course.
Thanks again for a wonderful well though out comment. Hope we talk again.
David