OT: An Englishman in New York

None Shall Pass

Dano moisturizes
Jul 7, 2007
15,379
11,597
Brooklyn
They receive tons of money in grants and don't pay taxes or rent.

And if they didn't they'd go belly-up. Pay the $25 or whatever it is. You're seeing millions, if not billions (if you actually want to put a price on the priceless) of dollars worth of art, culture, and history. And government investment in the arts is always the first thing to go when a certain segment of the political spectrum gets into power.

On average, close to 76% of a museum's funding in the US comes from non-government sources (Private donations and investments, ticket sales, interest on trusts, etc.)

America is rare worldwide in that our museums and other places of culture receive the least (or close to it) amount of government funding among wealthier nations. Big banks, for all of their faults, are among the biggest benefactors for the arts in the country. Prized pieces don't really decrease in value. They buy, lend to museums, and sell them in a few decades to someone else.

So, long story short, they need that $25 to survive.

Sources: I minored in this in college, and here's a cool article too: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/pamphlet/2012/05/201205155699.html#axzz4JxQD4Udr
 

hutter

Registered User
Mar 6, 2014
431
0
And if they didn't they'd go belly-up. Pay the $25 or whatever it is. You're seeing millions, if not billions (if you actually want to put a price on the priceless) of dollars worth of art, culture, and history. And government investment in the arts is always the first thing to go when a certain segment of the political spectrum gets into power.

On average, close to 76% of a museum's funding in the US comes from non-government sources (Private donations and investments, ticket sales, interest on trusts, etc.)

America is rare worldwide in that our museums and other places of culture receive the least (or close to it) amount of government funding among wealthier nations. Big banks, for all of their faults, are among the biggest benefactors for the arts in the country. Prized pieces don't really decrease in value. They buy, lend to museums, and sell them in a few decades to someone else.

So, long story short, they need that $25 to survive.

Sources: I minored in this in college, and here's a cool article too: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/pamphlet/2012/05/201205155699.html#axzz4JxQD4Udr


They don't "need" it to survive. The mets top employees and management make a SIGNIFICANT (and rather unnecessary) amount of money, while the vast majority of their revenue comes from private sources, so whatever "side of the political spectrum" is in power barely matters. These people work one of the coolest jobs in the world. They don't need to make a million or more each.

The idea behind the Met is that no one should have to pay to get in, and that's why they don't have to pay taxes or rent (they don't own that property). The original agreement with New York was that it should be free, and there have been recent law suits against the museum acting like a donation is mandatory.

Basically when you pay the $25 it goes straight to a managers pocket. The Met has never had trouble making ends meet otherwise. It has over a billion dollars in its investment portfolio, and pays taxes of no kind. Not even counting the ridiculous amount of money it makes from its portfolio, it basically breaks even almost every year anyway.

You may have a valid point with other museums (and you probably don't, honestly... if you don't have the money don't spend it and have your collection be smaller... its not like these museums are making bulk 300m dollar payments), but not the Met.

Sources: https://news.artnet.com/art-world/k...tropolitan-museum-of-art-rewards-its-own-7750

http://gawker.com/5992235/why-you-s...not-paying-the-mets-recommended-admission-fee
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->