| 8th February 2008 06:00 PM |
|
|
| moy |
WOOD'S PAINTINGS TOO EXPENSIVE FOR JAGGER
Mick Jagger - © ddp
2008-02-08 13:33:12 -
SIR MICK JAGGER was so impressed by bandmate RONNIE WOOD's paintings he offered to buy a piece of his artwork - but refused to pay the $140,000 (£70,000) price tag for it.
The Rolling Stones frontman is a fervent art collector who has spent thousands of dollars (pounds) for works by English surrealist Edward Burra but was shocked to learn how much his guitarist was charging for his work.
Wood explains, "Mick once put in an offer for one of my landscapes. But nothing came of it. "I think the price might have scared him away a bit. It was seventy grand or something." |
| 8th February 2008 06:02 PM |
|
|
| moy |
Mick Jagger's Ronnie art snub
Today 11:35
Sir Mick Jagger is too mean to buy a painting from Rolling Stones bandmate Ronnie Wood.
Wood has revealed the singer - who is believed to be worth in excess of £500 million - placed a bid for one of his artworks, but backed out after its £70,000 price tag "scared him off".
The 61-year-old guitarist said: "Mick once put in an offer for one of my landscapes. But nothing came of it. I think the price might have scared him away a bit. It was £70,000 or something."
Comment on this Article
Jagger has a reputation for being frugal with his cash.
Last year, his supermodel ex-wife Jerry Hall - with who he has four children, Elizabeth, 23, James, 21, Georgia May, 16, and Gabriel, 11 - said: "He wanted me to pay for everything to do with the house and children, which I didn't mind, I guess, because I had the money. But yeah, he's pretty tight with the day-to-day stuff."
Jagger hit back branding her claims "absurd", adding: "I have always paid all expenses for the children as well as the lion's share of the costs relating to her lifestyle."
Last night (07.02.08), Jagger, Wood and bandmates Charlie Watts and Keith Richards attended the Berlin Film Festival for the world premiere of 'Shine a Light', Martin Scorsese's documentary which was filmed over two days at New York's Beacon Theater when the band played there in autumn 2006.
|
| 8th February 2008 06:07 PM |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
>Sir Mick Jagger is too mean to buy a painting from Rolling Stones bandmate Ronnie Wood.<
Maybe he's dickering for a lower price.
|
| 8th February 2008 06:07 PM |
|
|
| mojoman |
fer what stones inc has paid for wood's services for 33 years mick should throw a few more coins his way......... |
| 8th February 2008 07:36 PM |
|
|
| gorda |
Maybe Mick was being polite, and didn't want to come right out and say that he hates Ronnie's paintings. Maybe he just didn't want to hurt his feelings.
$140,000! That is a lot of money!
If I had $140,000, I would not buy one of Ronnie's paintings. I would put a down payment on a house. I would buy a new car, exactly like the one I have now, except it would be brand-new. Plus, maybe some lipsuction on my stomach.
Damn! I wish I was rich. |
| 8th February 2008 07:39 PM |
|
|
| The Wick |
Perfect example of how the media twists words. Just because he didn't come up with 70 grand he supposedly snubbed Ronnie. They should just rename the article: Jagger Is a Stingy Bastard Because he Doesn't Buy Wood's Art No Matter What the Price |
| 8th February 2008 07:54 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
gorda wrote:
Maybe Mick was being polite, and didn't want to come right out and say that he hates Ronnie's paintings. Maybe he just didn't want to hurt his feelings.
$140,000! That is a lot of money!
If I had $140,000, I would not buy one of Ronnie's paintings. I would put a down payment on a house. I would buy a new car, exactly like the one I have now, except it would be brand-new. Plus, maybe some lipsuction on my stomach.
Damn! I wish I was rich.
Well true as that may be it does not take into account the fact that for Mick $140,000 is the equivalent of a six pack of beer for you and I, and cheap beer at that. It's all relative.
He should have thrown Ronnie a bone. If for no other reason than Ronnie has done so many paintings in homage to Mick himself.
Riffy
[Edited by Riffhard] |
| 8th February 2008 08:21 PM |
|
|
| gypsy |
He's always been notoriously tight with his money. As a fellow Leo, I am the opposite - and am very generous to my friends and family.
Anyways, it's his money and he can do with it what he wants.
Maybe he didn't want to buy Ronnie's painting b/c he doesn't like Ronnie's work. And then, if Ronnie came over, Mick would have to run and get the thing out of the attic and hang it on the wall really quickly just so Ronnie wouldn't think he was a dick.
Kind of like putting on that hideous sweater with the unicorns on it that your grandma got you for Christmas b/c you don't want to hurt her feelings. |
| 8th February 2008 08:33 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
gypsy wrote:
Kind of like putting on that hideous sweater with the unicorns on it that your grandma got you for Christmas b/c you don't want to hurt her feelings.
What? Just what are you trying to say?
Riffy |
| 8th February 2008 09:15 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
But how much money has Ronnie made off paintings of Mick's image? |
| 8th February 2008 09:36 PM |
|
|
| guitarman53 |
I think Mick thinks of Ronnie as the latter day Stones member, even though he's been a member longer then Brian & Mick Taylor, he's caught up with the jet set of fame, he's always been that way, that's why the way he is, he doesn't remember starving in Edith Grove, with Brian & Keith, stealing Beer Bottles & trying to find whatever means to survive, he forgets that!! he's Mick Jagger, everybody in this world knows his name, & he knows that, he probably wouldn't buy Ronnie's painting for nobody's money!! He's Mick Jagger after all. |
| 8th February 2008 11:37 PM |
|
|
| gypsy |
quote:
guitarman53 wrote:
I think Mick thinks of Ronnie as the latter day Stones member, even though he's been a member longer then Brian & Mick Taylor, he's caught up with the jet set of fame, he's always been that way, that's why the way he is, he doesn't remember starving in Edith Grove, with Brian & Keith, stealing Beer Bottles & trying to find whatever means to survive, he forgets that!! he's Mick Jagger, everybody in this world knows his name, & he knows that, he probably wouldn't buy Ronnie's painting for nobody's money!! He's Mick Jagger after all.
And he never banged Anita Pallenberg. |
| 9th February 2008 05:25 AM |
|
|
| glimmertwinfan |
$70 grand is too much to pay for a landscape. Now one of his portaits on the other hand.
Funny thing is I remember be invited to one of his art shows in twenty years ago and the pieces were between $500-$2500. Not a bad return if I would have bought some back then. |
| 9th February 2008 08:04 AM |
|
|
| StonesChick |
Has Keith bought any? |
| 9th February 2008 09:40 AM |
|
|
| gimmekeef |
Simple answer may be he felt it wasnt worth 70k...Obviously Ronnie sold it for what he could get..big deal. |
| 9th February 2008 10:30 AM |
|
|
| Mr.D |
Did all this start from that line "mick wanted to buy one but nothin came of it" - is that it? course he would buy a painting, and im sure ronnie's given each band member about 5 each! and i believe jagger over hall with that paying for stuff thing, im sure he'd pay anyhting, he's also no where near 500 mill, is he? i'd estimate around 350m...bastard, lol |
| 9th February 2008 12:07 PM |
|
|
| StonesChick |
quote:
Mr.D wrote:
Did all this start from that line "mick wanted to buy one but nothin came of it" - is that it? course he would buy a painting, and im sure ronnie's given each band member about 5 each! and i believe jagger over hall with that paying for stuff thing, im sure he'd pay anyhting, he's also no where near 500 mill, is he? i'd estimate around 350m...bastard, lol
I agree with you, except for the part about Mick being a bastard LOL
Funny how the media spins things....slow news day. |
