Original subtitles

Most people see this and think culture.

They see a calming, eco -friendly tradition.

But look closer.

This isn't just people liking to pedal. What you are watching is a high

-frequency, low -friction economic machine.

Ultimately, private car ownership is going to become obsolete.

Cities are building for pedestrians, they're building for cycling, they're

building for livability, not for cars.

The bike economy.

the multi -billion dollar system of Amsterdam.

In Amsterdam, the bicycle isn't a toy.

It is a critical urban infrastructure.

If this system failed today, the city's economy would collapse tomorrow.

For decades, the world has viewed Amsterdam through a romantic lens.

But cities don't run on vibes.

They run on systems.

And when a system moves hundreds of thousands of people every single day, it

stops being a choice and starts demanding three things.

Faith, rules, and capital.

Research shows that the cycling system contributes benefits equivalent to

roughly 3 % of the Netherlands' GDP.

This isn't just green energy.

It's hard cash saved in public health, reduced absenteeism at work, and most

importantly, unlocked productivity.

Every person on a bike is a person who isn't taking up 12 square meters of

public space with a car.

That freed up space allows for high value real estate, commerce, and

In economics, we call this optimization of land use.

But success created a crisis.

By the 2010s, Amsterdam had a clutter problem.

Thousands of bikes were choking the streets.

The solution?

One of the most expensive and daring engineering projects in the city.

They built a cathedral for 7 ,000 bicycles.

Under the water.

It cost millions. From a traditional linear perspective, spending that much

free parking, seems insane.

But from a circular economy perspective, a model where Amsterdam is a global

leader with 30 .6 % circularity rate, it was a mandatory investment.

As we see in the latest urban governance reports, planning isn't an option here.

It's the only way to exist.

In this documentary, we are going beyond the postcard.

We will travel back to 1965 to see why the first sharing economy experiment

failed. We will use scientific GPS data to track the shadow economy of the 80

,000 bikes stolen every year.

And we will explore how Amsterdam is using the bicycle to become the world's

first 100 % circular city by 2050.

This is the story of how a humble machine with two wheels became the

a multi -billion dollar urban miracle.

To understand why Amsterdam spends 85 million euros on underwater parking

we have to go back to a time when the city almost lost its soul to the car.

The 1960s.

As post -war prosperity grew, Amsterdam was being choked by motor vehicles.

In response, a counter -culture group called the Provos launched what would

become the first bike -sharing program in history, the Vita Fiestenplan, or the

White Bike Plan.

Their proposal was radical and purely idealistic.

Paint 20 ,000 bicycles white, leave them unlocked across the city, and let

anyone use them for free.

No keys, no coins, no owners.

They viewed mobility as a public good, as essential and free as the air we

breathe.

On paper, it was a circular economy, avant la lettre.

In practice, it was a disaster.

Within days, the system collapsed.

Why? Because the provost ignored a fundamental principle of economics.

The tragedy of the common.

When we talk about the matrix of goods, we are talking about the matrix of

product consumption.

which is an economic tool that we use in a simplified way, as always, like

economic models, to understand what is the relationship between the different

products and their use.

Therefore, in this case, we are especially interested in seeing it from

of the supply and then the use of the goods and services that exist in a

at a given moment.

So we have to understand what its components are, the utility as well, and

have to see how it is updated.

without ownership or registration public property quickly became nobody's

property in an unregulated system with zero entry costs the incentive to

maintain the effort disappears without locks or registration public property

quickly became nobody's property the police confiscated the bikes because

invited theft and the citizens driven by individual rationalism either took them

home or threw them into the canals.

The lesson was harsh.

You cannot have a massive urban transit system based solely on romanticism. You

need governance.

However, the white bike planted a seed.

It shifted the economic debate.

The city realized that if they didn't want to spend billions on highways like

Los Angeles or London, They had to invest in a different kind of capital.

Transition requires not just technology, but a change in urban metabolism.

The failure of the white bikes taught Amsterdam that the bicycle had to be

integrated into the formal economy of the city, not as a rebel symbol, but as

regulated tax and planned asset.

Today, the free spirit of the white bikes only survives in one place, the

Veluve National Park.

But in the city, the white bike has been replaced by a sophisticated capital

incentive model.

We no longer trust in the goodness of the user. We trust in incentives.

We move the tragedy of the commons to a system of managed common pool resources.

In economics, success can be as disruptive as failure.

By the late 2010s, Amsterdam was a victim of its own efficiency.

With nearly one million bicycles in the city, the urban surface had reached a

breaking point.

Every bridge, railing, and sidewalk was occupied by idle metal.

This wasn't just an aesthetic grievance, it was an economic bottleneck.

Thousands of parked bikes were clogging the city's arteries, slowing down 200

,000 daily commuters at Central Station.

In one of the world's most expensive real estate markets, free surface

is a luxury that a functional city cannot afford.

The opportunity cost of that space was becoming too high.

So solve this, Amsterdam launched De Entree, a massive urban reconfiguration

project. The crown jewel?

The open haven front underwater parking.

Consider that figure.

Spending 60 million euros just to store 7 ,000 bicycles underwater.

Who, a traditional accountant, This looks like a massive sunk cost.

But to an urban economist, it's a masterstroke of asset management.

By moving 7 ,000 bikes beneath the water, the city performed open -heart

on its central hub.

They reclaimed the surface, restoring the landscape to its 1900s aesthetic.

This isn't just about beauty, it's about maximizing pedestrian flow.

A station that breathes and flows is a station that generates higher economic

value for the surrounding businesses.

However, an 85 million euro asset must be managed like a high -performance

logistics center.

You cannot allow zombie bikes to occupy these slots indefinitely.

This is where the incentive structure comes into play.

The primary goal isn't profit, it's turnover.

By offering the first 24 hours for free, the city subsidizes the daily

workforce. But by charging a daily fee thereafter, they penalize long -term

storage and abandonment.

Using advanced optical sensors, the city monitors idle infantry in real time,

ensuring that these 7 ,000 slots remain a liquid asset for those who keep the

economy moving.

Finally, we must consider the cost of friction.

that we have to assume in relation to a distance and a transport with a traffic

that we are going to have to travel in an urban space, generally, is where it

studied the most. We are talking about 0 .26 euros per kilometer and this, in

the end, is affecting the costs of people, of companies,

of families when it comes to moving within spaces.

In transport economics, every second lost in a transfer is a loss in human

capital and productivity.

This underwater facility connects directly to the metro and train

The commuter can transition from their bicycle to their train seat in less than

two minutes, shielded from the elements.

This level of intermodal synergy It's exactly what makes Amsterdam's circular

economy, currently at a record 30 .6 % circularity rate, a functional reality

rather than just a policy goal.

But this transition to a highly regulated system created its own set of

problems. Because when you turn a bicycle into a valuable economic asset,

create something else. A black market.

In Amsterdam, data doesn't tell the whole story.

While police record 11 ,000 thefts a year, the reality is closer to 80 ,000.

Most citizens don't report it.

Cost of time is higher than the bike's value.

This creates a massive shadow market operating entirely outside the official

GDP.

Forget the myth of international bike smuggling rings.

A 2023 study tracking 100 bikes proves that stolen assets rarely leave the

Instead, they feed a shadow circular economy.

Your stolen bike is sold to a street dealer and then bought by your neighbor.

It's a localized, untaxed, and illegal closed loop.

High theft risk creates a market distortion.

If you expect your bike to be stolen within months, you don't buy quality.

You buy junk.

This beta bike equilibrium keeps the city's transport fleet low quality and

forces owners to spend more on locks than the bikes themselves.

These aren't victimless crimes.

They are negative externalities that drain city resources.

Amsterdam's answer?

The FIED depot.

Since the city couldn't stop the theft, it decided to manage the orphaned

assets. Because in a circular city, even a stolen bike is a resource that must

be managed to maintain the urban metabolism.

In a city with more bicycles than people, orphaned assets are an

Every year, thousands of bikes are simply left behind.

In economic terms, this is dead capital.

They occupy valuable public space, provide zero utility, and degrade the

landscape.

According to official Amsterdam regulations, the city must intervene

private property interferes with public efficiency.

Whether it's an improperly parked bike blocking an emergency exit, or a wreck

that is no longer functional, the municipality acts as the ultimate

spatial order.

All seized bicycles are transported to a central facility, the FIED depot.

This is a logistical powerhouse that manages the city's lost capital.

This isn't just a pound, it's a sorting facility for the city's metal

metabolism, the retrieval.

Owners have around six weeks to claim their bike for a fee, approximately 25

euros. This fee doesn't cover the full operational cost, but it serves as a

-paid tax to discourage abandonment.

If your bicycle was removed from the city parking facility, you will also pay

€33 .75 parking cost.

The sorting.

Only about 25 % of bikes are ever reclaimed. The rest? They are classified

waste or asset.

Here is where the circular economy strategy 2020 -2025 becomes tangible.

Amsterdam aimed to reduce the use of new raw materials by 50 % by 2030.

The FIAT depot doesn't just scrap everything.

Refurbishment. Bikes in decent condition are sold to social enterprises or

second -hand shops.

They are recirculated into the economy at a low price point, providing

affordable mobility for low -income residents.

Education.

Many are used in vocational training programs, turning junk into a teaching

for future mechanics.

Raw materials, the unsalvageable ones, are sold as high quality scrap metal,

feeding back into the industrial cycle.

What we see here is a complete life cycle management of a transport mode.

The biggest challenge for circular cities is the lack of effective

mechanisms. Amsterdam succeeds because it treats the bicycle as a public

utility.

From the multi -million euro investment under the water to the scrap metal in

the harbour, the city manages the entire cradle -to -grave cycle of the bicycle.

Amsterdam is no longer just building bike lanes, it is building a new

DNA. The city has set a target that many economists call impossible, to be 100

% circular by 2050.

This means that by mid -century, every gram of steel in a bicycle and every

stone in a bridge must stay within the economic loop.

The take -make -waste model will be extinct.

For Amsterdam, the bicycle is the alpha product, the test case for how a city

can move, consume and recycle without depleting the planet's capital.

To reach 100 % circularity, the concept of private ownership is being challenged

by a more efficient model, product as a service.

You don't buy the bike, you rent the mobility.

So we talk a lot about ownership as a service, but it's this idea of, you

something as a service.

So in our case, bike as a service, it's all of the benefits of ownership.

but none of the drawbacks, so none of having to deal with the maintenance or

of the things that come with actually owning something.

Economically, this aligns the incentives of the producer and the consumer.

If the bike breaks, it's the company's problem, not yours.

By centralizing all of that maintenance, obviously we cut costs significantly,

we cut waste significantly, but for the individual user...

They have nothing to worry about. As a subscriber, you get all of your

maintenance. So we come and do preventative maintenance.

So first of all, that obviously reduces the cost overall, not so much for the

end user, but the cost of the business.

That prevents breakdowns and things like that.

But in the end, if you think about the cost of time, the cost of effort, maybe

you don't even know how to maintain your own bike, having a service that does

all of that for you is just a matter of convenience.

This forces manufacturers to design for durability and modularity, the core

pillars of this circular economy.

When the city manages the flow and private companies manage the

shadow economy of theft we saw in Act 3 begins to shrink.

So if you subscribe to a bike from Clover and your bike gets stolen, first

all, we actually probably will notice that it got stolen maybe even before you

did because we have GPS on all the bikes.

But if it does get stolen, you use our WhatsApp chat. You basically send us a

message and we come and bring you a new bike immediately.

Why steal a bike that is tracked, branded, and has no resale value in a

subscription -based market?

So what is the final return on investment?

Let's look at the triple bottom line.

Public health.

By avoiding 11 ,000 deaths annually through active transport, the Dutch

saves 19 billion euros in healthcare costs.

Urban density.

By utilising underwater parking and vertical depots, Amsterdam maintains a

population density that would be impossible with cars, keeping real

productivity at peak levels.

Resource independence.

By reclaiming metal from the Pietsdepot, the city insulates itself from global

commodity price shocks.

This is a sustainable urban metabolism.

The city isn't just a place where people live. It's a living organism that

processes resources with maximum efficiency.

Amsterdam's success has sent a clear message to the rest of the continent.

Spatial efficiency is the only way forward for the modern metropolis.

Across Europe, the bicycle has moved from being a leisure tool to a

of urban recovery and economic resilience.

In Paris, a city once defined by its congestion, the Plan Velo is investing

hundreds of millions to become 100 % cyclable. In Barcelona, the superblocks

reclaiming entire intersections from cars to create human -centric lungs.

These aren't just environmental projects.

They are market corrections.

The cities are betting that a quieter, cleaner and more agile urban centre will

attract more talent, more tourism and higher property values.

From the cycle superhighways of London to the industrial hubs of Germany, the

economic logic is consistent.

Replacing a one and a half ton vehicle with a 15 kilogram machine reduces the

cost of maintenance to the city and increases the productivity of the

But while northern capitals have the advantage of decades of infrastructure,

real test is happening in the south.

In the Mediterranean, where the street is a social space and the sun is a

constant resource, a new leader is emerging.

a city that has used the Amsterdam blueprint to transform itself at record

speed.

train stations, bus stations, the beach itself, Valencia has a beach, the beach

has to have a lot of infrastructure.

But then, also with this that we talk about the permeability of the bicycle,

there must also be small places where you can leave your bicycle safely so

you are going to visit a friend so that you can leave the bicycle on their

portal.

If Amsterdam is the blueprint, Valencia is the laboratory.

The big challenge is,

first, not to start using the bicycle for routes where you don't need to use

bicycle. In Spain we walk a lot, in Valencia we walk a lot.

You don't need to use the bicycle for all the routes, right?

And then also the management of abandoned bicycles, those...

In less than a decade, this Mediterranean city has transitioned from

-centric capital to a global reference in urban metabolism.

If you improve public transport, if you expand sidewalks and make the space more

pleasant to walk, create cyclist infrastructure, more people will choose

modes of transport, then there will be a transfer from people who were going by

car to people who now use more active mobility, more beneficial mobility.

Valencia's transformation wasn't a matter of vibes or romanticism.

It was a calculated investment in spatial efficiency.

I think attracting top global talent means that you need to have a vibrant,

livable city. And I think most young people, particularly who are coming into

the workforce now, are looking for ways to get around a city that doesn't rely

on public transit. They don't want to own a car because car ownership is a

burden, having to find parking, insurance, cost of the car, all of that.

So having this accessible infrastructure, cycling infrastructure

and in a city like Valencia that already has a lot of reasons to attract top

talent, just makes it that much better.

Cycling is the preferred way to get around in Valencia. We're number seven

the world for cycling to work, for example.

So adding a layer of an easy subscription e -bike service to that

attracts even more top talent to the city.

By implementing the Anilo Ciclista, the city has reclaimed high -value public

space to boost local commerce and reduce the toxic liability of the car.

It's important to remember that oftentimes with cars, although they can

multiple people, Most of the time, it's one person per one car.

So when we're asking about, you know, 10 bikes versus one car, we're essentially

saying 10 people versus one person.

So we have a 10x multiplier on essentially everything that's happening

street. Whether that be visits to businesses, whether that be transactions

purchases, everything gets that 10x multiplier and increases revenue for the

whole street.

In economics, this is the optimization of land use, the same principle that

drove Amsterdam to build under its canals.

If I'm cycling and I pass by, for example, a bakery,

So I smell that bakery and I go, oh, you know what, maybe I'm going to stop in,

try something one of those products, you know, essentially become a patron of

that business. Whereas if I'm parking by in a car, there's no chance of that

happening. And the other benefit is car parking also has this sort of

psychological effect on the streets and the people that live there.

Car parking makes the space feel a lot more closed in and a lot more cramped

than bike parking, which keeps space very nice and open.

Emerging businesses are shifting the market from ownership to usership.

Our customers, they depend on their bikes as a reliable way to get around.

And so we use an ownership as a service model. So instead of owning the asset

yourself, you subscribe to it from us. And we think that's what customers need

in terms of reliable day -to -day transportation.

If you look at something like Lime or Ballen BC, they will have that idle

problem.

And certainly ownership, obviously, the same thing. But with us handling

maintenance, battery swapping, theft protection, insurance, all of that, and

still having access to the bike anytime you want. It's your bike.

Subscription models like Swapfiet, which already dominate the Dutch market, are

landing in Valencia.

These companies treat the bike as a service, covering all maintenance and

repairs for a monthly fee.

Ownership isn't necessarily a bad investment, but I think most consumers

moving away from owning things. People are leasing their cars, people are more

and more renting their homes.

So for us, the subscription model made sense, that and affordability.

This eliminates the fear of theft and long -term depreciation, turning the

bicycle into a predictable low -friction utility for the modern worker.

The impact it sends to logistics.

In Valencia's historic centre, where large trucks are increasingly

last -mile delivery by cargo bike is becoming the gold standard for

We are witnessing the birth of micro hubs, small urban distribution centres

allow for zero -emission, high -speed delivery in high -density zones.

From the massive underwater investments in Amsterdam to the emerging

subscription models in Valencia, the message is clear.

The bicycle is no longer just a hobby.

It is a financial instrument and a spatial optimizer.

You know, when we were speaking to consumers about how we could get them to

switch from a car to an e -bike, it was all about convenience.

So it was about this idea that, you know, with a car, you can go point A to

point B whenever you want. You're not relying on public transit or any of

things. But if you need gas, you go to a gas station, it takes five minutes, and

you're back on your way.

People perceived e -bikes as inconvenient because, oh, what if I

charge the battery? Then it's just kind of a very heavy paperweight.

But if we eliminate that need for charging and people can just come and

a charged battery anytime, it helps break that barrier to entry for getting

of a car.

By integrating these new business models with public planning, Valencia is

securing its place in the 21st century economy, proving that a dense,

city isn't just a choice.

It's a competitive necessity.

Ultimately, private car ownership is going to become obsolete.

Cities are building for pedestrians, they're building for cycling, they're

building for livability, not for cars.

Throughout this documentary, we have seen the gears of a massive economic

machine. But there is a final myth we must dismantle. The idea that cities

Amsterdam or Valencia look like this because their citizens are simply

different. History tells a different story.

In the 1970s, Amsterdam was on the verge of becoming another car -centric

congested metropolis.

The transition we see today wasn't a natural evolution of culture.

It was a hostile takeover of urban space by policy and planning.

When a city reaches a certain density, freedom of choice in transport becomes a

mathematical impossibility.

If everyone chooses a car, No one moves.

In this high -stakes environment, planning is not an option. It is the

to survive.

What is the ultimate harvest of this planning?

It is the 3 % GDP boost we mentioned at the start, but it's also found in the

margins.

The fiscal savings.

By avoiding the need for multi -billion euro highway expansions and massive

healthcare costs related to sedentary lifestyles,

The resilience factor.

By creating a circular metropolis that can process its own waste at the

Kroekhuis depot and turn it back into capital.

The talent magnet.

In the global war for talent, highly skilled workers choose cities based on

livability.

Amsterdam's bicycle infrastructure is its most effective recruitment tool.

We started this journey looking at a simple machine.

Two wheels and a frame.

But as we've seen, the bicycle in Amsterdam is much more than a transport

It is a financial instrument.

It is a spatial optimizer. It is the invisible engine that allows a medieval

city to function as a 21st century economic powerhouse.

The 85 million euros spent on underwater tunnels, the complex logistics of the

Kruquius depot, or the new Mediterranean bike lanes are not costs.

They are investments in resilience.

In a world of rising energy prices and shrinking urban space, the Amsterdam

model offers a glimpse into the future.

It proves that the most sophisticated technology isn't always a new gadget

sometimes. It's the perfect integration of an old idea into a new circular

world.

Imagine for a moment, what if your Bitcoin holdings could purchase more

just everyday items like coffee or the latest gadgets?

What if that digital currency sitting in your wallet could actually buy you a

house or perhaps even an entire commercial building?

and Bitcoin, which is one of the most modern assets, we can say.

what were once purely digital coins into tangible physical real estate

investments. Whether you're an experienced crypto investor looking to

your portfolio or simply someone who's curious about emerging trends in

markets, this is an in -depth look at how the landscape and future of real

estate transactions is fundamentally evolving and changing before our eyes.

The financial world is in constant transformation.

But in this decade, digitalization has accelerated that change faster than

anyone imagined.

Today, money, investments, and assets flow through codes silent, transparent,

and borderless.

Cryptocurrencies, led by Bitcoin, mark the beginning of a new era. They shook

the foundations of the global financial system, sparking both excitement and

skepticism. Yet behind that phenomenon emerged something even deeper.

Tokenization.

The tokenization has to do with the fractionalization and therefore generate

contracts at a digital level that will depend on the type of contract, the

rights that we obtain on these goods that are tokenized. In

the case of the tokenization of real world assets, we are talking about the

three years.

there has been an increase of 380%, which tells us about the

level of development, the speed of development of this type of content

and products and that, therefore, it is something that at the moment, while

we are talking, the regulation continues.

The idea is simple. The impact, enormous.

Each token represents a fraction of an asset, a share, a bond, a property, or

even a work of art, all recorded on a blockchain, a global tamper -proof

that are fast, almost immediate, at level 24 -7 and that, in this way, the

process can also be automated through smart contracts.

These smart contracts allow us to speed up and dynamize

these processes that are traditionally much more expensive and linked to

bureaucracy and intermediation.

We believe the next step going forward will be the tokenization of financial

assets. And that means every stock, every bond will have its own basically Q

-SYST. It'll be on one general ledger. In other words, a token isn't just an

asset. It's a digital entry in a new kind of ledger that is rewriting how

capital markets keep their books.

Investment in tokenized real estate represents one of the most recent

advancements in the property industry.

Tokenization enables houses and apartments to be divided and sold, and

smaller units.

and we are going to fractionate them in different parts.

We could associate this, without being exactly the same, with what has been

done historically with other types of rights, both political and economic, and

I'm talking, for example, about the actions of companies.

So, tokenization, we have to understand it as that fractionalization within the

digital world.

Small programs act like a bridge between a property and an online trading

platform. Hence, tokens create a digital representation of a property,

facilitating its digital transfer.

The process of purchasing a property is still associated with significant

bureaucracy, lengthy procedures, and subsequent high costs.

So, what exactly is crypto real estate?

At its core, the term refers to any real estate transaction where cryptocurrency

plays a major role, either as a direct form of payment, a converted asset, or

collateral for purchasing property.

to pay the total or part of the operation, we can also use the

as a support for the operation itself. For example, with the Crypto Reference

Loans, in which what we do is we take a debt and we are using these

cryptocurrencies as a value that is in custody, as a support.

But the concept goes even deeper than that. Crypto

real estate includes buying a home directly with Bitcoin or other

cryptocurrencies. Using stablecoins like USDT or USDC for a more stable

purchase. Converting crypto into fiat at closing. Taking out loans backed by

cryptocurrency to purchase real property. Tokenized real estate where

is fractionalized into digital tokens. Blockchain -based property records and

smart contract -driven transactions.

make the buying and selling operations or that we can use in the buying and

selling operations. We can also make use of stablecoins, which are related, they

are a family close to cryptocurrencies, but they are not exactly the same. And

then we can also talk about the conversion of cryptocurrencies to fiat.

talk about stablecoins, we have, for example,

to pay attention to the regulation that is being done in Europe with the MICA

regulation, which divides them between EMT and ART.

In the case of EMT, we can talk about, for example, those issued

by CENTER, the USDT,

and then, on the other hand, we could talk about those of CHIRECODE.

which are USDT and EURT.

In the case of Recycled, they are accepted by the current regulation,

the MICA regulation, and in the case of USDT,

not yet.

So, I think it is one of the main stablecoins worldwide.

And when we talk about the cryptocurrencies that we convert to

what we are talking about is that we take a cryptocurrency and convert it to

value, in this case, like the euro or the dollar, to be able to carry out the

operation and agree on the value that we are assigning to

those assets.

It's an

evolution

in how value moves around the world.

And for the first time, digital wealth is becoming a direct pathway to physical

ownership.

To understand how we arrived at this moment, we need to step back and look at

the timeline.

Bitcoin launched in 2009 as a peer -to -peer digital alternative to money. In

its early years, the idea of using Bitcoin to buy real estate was

Bitcoin grew, first crossing $1, then $100, then $1 ,000, then tens of

thousands. a new wave of wealth was created suddenly early adopters who once

bought pizza with bitcoin now had enough digital value to buy entire homes and

sellers began paying attention the first public record of a property purchased

fully in bitcoin dates back to 2017.

from there the trend spread to luxury markets miami los angeles new york dubai

and london developers began marketing properties specifically to crypto buyers

Brokers started specializing in crypto transactions.

Escrow companies adapted.

Even governments began studying blockchain -based property registries.

Buying real estate with Bitcoin isn't science fiction.

Some sellers now accept crypto directly, while others work through brokers who

convert Bitcoin into local currency.

The process is faster, borderless, and sometimes even tax -efficient, if you

know the rules.

Things that sounded impossible in 2010 became normal by 2020.

And now, in the 2020s, cryptocurrency is becoming a serious player in global

real estate.

The crypto boom has created a new class of investors.

High net worth individuals want to diversify. And real estate is a safe,

tangible asset. From luxury homes in Miami to condos in Dubai, Bitcoin buyers

are making their mark.

Let's look at a few real -world examples to understand how crypto real estate

works in practice.

Case Study 1, in 2021, a luxury penthouse at Arte by Antonio Soterio in

Surfside, Florida, made history.

The property sold for $22 .5 million, paid entirely in cryptocurrency.

The largest publicly known real estate transaction completed using digital

assets at the time. A developer's decision to accept cryptocurrency had

off. The sale came just weeks after the developer announced it would begin

accepting cryptocurrency payments through a partnership with blockchain

SolidBlock. According to Forbes, the deal demonstrated that crypto was no

just a speculative asset. It had become a viable method for purchasing high -end

real estate.

Case study 2. In Dubai, one of the earliest large -scale experiments with

real estate unfolded at Aston Plaza and Residences, located in Dubai Science

Park. Marketed as one of the first major developments in the region to accept

Bitcoin, the project offered apartments priced directly in cryptocurrency.

Buyers were able to commit funds using Bitcoin, capturing global attention.

But the story also revealed the risks of innovation.

Originally advertised as a $325 million development, the project later stalled

and its completion became uncertain.

While crypto payments were accepted, it remains unclear whether all buyers

ultimately received finished property.

The case highlighted both the promise and the pitfalls of early crypto

in real estate.

Case Study 3 In 2025, Spain recorded one of its first officially reported

property sales completed with Bitcoin.

A property in Madrid, valued at approximately 1 .5 million euros, was

by an international buyer using Bitcoin.

The transaction follows standard real estate procedures, including escrow,

compliance, and the conversion of crypto into euros for the seller. It marked a

significant milestone, showing that cryptocurrency could integrate into

traditional real estate systems, even in highly regulated European markets.

Case Study 4. In the United States, crypto adoption hasn't been limited to

coastal tech hubs.

An agent with Sotheby's International Realty in Delaware reported selling a

luxury property for $175 million paid in Bitcoin, believed to be one of the

state's first major real estate transactions involving cryptocurrency.

The sale was widely publicized as a local milestone, signaling that crypto

estate was beginning to reach beyond niche markets and into everyday property

transactions.

They are trying to maintain a permanent position in the markets at an

international level and therefore they are strongly betting on the

different stablecoins and on the

financial system.

that we know has a worldwide impact, of the tools so that it can evolve in an

agile and dynamic way. On the one hand, we have agility and dynamism. On the

other hand, we can find that the fact that everything is happening in real

often limits the protection of the consumer or what could be

the most conservative rules to try to mitigate or reduce the risks

to the maximum.

Therefore, in the United States we see a greater openness.

In the European Union we see more conservative positions.

And then we have in other parts of EMEA, we can see

how they are quite open to carry out operations of this

type. Some are carried out, others are not carried out, but without a doubt

within a framework of a will to advance,

to study and to put into practice.

Taking together, these cases tell a larger story, one of experimentation,

success, setbacks, and growing legitimacy.

Crypto real estate is no longer hypothetical.

It's happening, transaction by transaction, across the globe.

But it's not all smooth sailing.

Crypto's value can be volatile.

Regulations vary by country. And tax implications can be tricky.

First, volatility.

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies can move dramatically, sometimes losing or

gaining a third of their value in weeks. For buyers who convert at closing,

rapid swings can erase gains or spike costs in hours.

Second, transaction mechanics and title.

Even when a seller accepts crypto, most governments and land registries require

deeds to be issued in the local currency.

That usually means an intermediary converts crypto to fiat before the legal

title is registered, adding counterparty risk and an extra step that can delay

and complicate settlements.

Third, taxes.

In many jurisdictions, authorities treat crypto as property, not currency, which

makes nearly every transfer a taxable event. That includes sales, exchanges,

sometimes even payments for goods or services.

Buyers and sellers must track cost basis, gains, and report the

accurately or face audits and penalties.

Fourth, lending and counterparty risk. Crypto -backed lending exploded in the

previous market cycle, but it ended with high -profile collapses and

bankruptcies. When platforms fail, borrowers and depositors can lose access

funds, collateral can be liquidated at a loss, and promised liquidity

disappears, a danger for anyone relying on third -party services to bridge

crypto and property purchases.

Fifth, compliance, and anti -money laundering rules.

Regulators and global bodies have tightened rules around virtual assets to

prevent illicit flows.

Real estate transactions are high on that list, meaning additional KYC,

of fund checks, and reporting requirements.

Failure to meet these standards can stall a sale, trigger investigations, or

expose participants to legal liability.

Six, operational and technical risk.

Crypto transactions are irreversible.

A single wrong character in a wallet address or a phishing attack on an email

with wiring instructions can send millions to the wrong place, and there's

bank to reverse the transfer.

Seven, technology risk. Smart contracts, tokenization, and new platforms bring

innovation, but also software bugs and design flaws. A poorly written smart

contract or an unaudited tokenization platform can freeze assets, misallocate

ownership shares, or enable exploits.

Finally, market and reputational risk. Developers and brokers who accept crypto

can attract new buyers, but they also take on greater scrutiny, regulatory

compliance burdens, and the risk that projects promoted with crypto funding

underdeliver, stall, or become entangled in legal disputes.

In short, crypto can speed and globalize property deals, but it also layers on

volatility, regulatory complexity, and new failure modes.

For buyers, sellers, and advisors, the lesson is clear.

De nuevo tenemos que tener en cuenta que el hecho de eliminar intermediación

hace que sean más ágiles los procedimientos, pero igualmente la

muchas veces aporta garantías que ahora tendremos que asegurarnos se

protejan con la tokenización.

The opportunities are huge.

A new generation of buyers is turning digital value into physical assets.

For many, Bitcoin isn't just a currency.

It's a gateway to ownership.

One of the biggest shifts is tokenization.

Instead of buying an entire building, investors can now purchase fractional

ownership through blockchain -based tokens.

This lowers the barrier to entry, allowing smaller investors to access

estate markets that were once reserved for institutions and the ultra -wealthy.

of high value would be difficult with a lower purchasing power while when

we fractionalize this or we do it in different pieces or parts this asset

will allow the price of the same to be lower

because in the end we are selling parts and therefore it would be more

affordable and it could be proposed

Tokenization also brings liquidity to an industry that has traditionally been

slow and illiquid. Real estate transactions can take months.

Tokenized shares can potentially be transferred in minutes.

Crypto is also reshaping cross -border real estate.

International buyers often face currency controls, wire delays and banking

restrictions.

Cryptocurrency allows capital to move globally with fewer friction points,

opening markets to buyers who were previously locked out. As a result,

that embrace crypto -friendly regulations are attracting global

Developers are responding by marketing properties directly to crypto holders,

not as a novelty, but as a strategy.

Governments are also exploring blockchain for land registries and

records. Immutable ledgers can reduce disputes, prevent title fraud, and

permanent, verifiable ownership history.

especially in regions where property rights are difficult to enforce.

This isn't a complete replacement of traditional real estate. It's a

transformation. Crypto doesn't eliminate the fundamentals.

Location, demand, and due diligence still matter. But it changes how value

moves, how quickly deals happen, and who gets access.

So what does all of this mean for you as an investor or future home buyer?

It means new opportunities are emerging.

Opportunities to leverage your crypto holdings. Opportunities to participate

international markets more easily.

Opportunities to acquire property faster and more efficiently.

we are aware that it is not something immediate, it requires long

bureaucratic processes and that in many cases can become complex.

In the case of tokenization, we are talking about a kind of sophisticated

technology, therefore,

We will have to see exactly the consequences and the level of knowledge

required to be able to proceed in the best way, but it is true that

we do get a greater liquidity than with real estate only.

It reminds me, or we could associate it with other types of assets that already

exist, such as optimis or RAID.

and that therefore allow us to have rights

in properties or in

property contracts because the intention of

tokenization is an intention that has been dragging on since

ancient times, which is to obtain rents from real estate

and therefore

But like any emerging space, education is key. Working with crypto -friendly

agents, attorneys, and escrow companies is essential.

Understanding your local regulations is crucial, and ensuring the security of

your crypto wallet is absolutely non -negotiable.

of training.

We are talking about some active systems, sophisticated

procedures. Therefore, we have to be constantly educating ourselves.

This will generate a financial culture that has to do with the capacities and

skills of people to make decisions.

And in the European case, We can talk about ESMA and we

can talk about the fulfillment of training hours and also about the

experience that professionals who advise or accompany us at any

time when we are making decisions, when we are carrying out

operations.

The importance of financial education or, in this case, the importance of

an advanced knowledge of any type of financial asset and

of any procedure associated with it is fundamental because, even with it,

there are always risks that we will not be able to eliminate from the equation.

Therefore, at the very least, we try to reduce the risks that depend on us to

the maximum and we must also try to reduce the risks to the

maximum of people and entities,

that is, of physical or legal people with whom we are going to relate when we

are carrying out this procedure so that it is successful.

In the end, what we are looking for is

The cryptocurrency market has entered the opening days of 2026 with renewed

momentum. After a volatile end to 2025, prices across major digital assets have

moved sharply higher drawing attention from both retail traders and

institutional investors.

In early January, the total cryptocurrency market capitalization

around $3 .2 trillion, according to aggregated data from major market

This represents a meaningful rebound from late 2025 levels, with the market

adding hundreds of billions of dollars in value over a relatively short period.

While exact figures vary, the direction is clear. Capital has returned to the

crypto market at the start of the year. At the center of this move is Bitcoin,

which rallied toward the $93 ,000 level in the first week of January.

As the largest and most influential digital asset, Bitcoin continues to act

the market's primary anchor and its strength has helped lift sentiment

the broader ecosystem.

Historically, strong Bitcoin performance has often preceded periods of increased

activity in alternative cryptocurrencies, and early 2026 appears

a similar pattern.

Another key factor has been renewed institutional participation,

through spot Bitcoin and Ethereum exchange traded funds.

Reports from early January indicate notable ETF inflows, suggesting that

traditional investors are once again increasing exposure to digital assets.

The current momentum appears to be driven by a combination of factors,

Bitcoin's price recovery, increased ETF inflows, improved global risk sentiment,

expectations of more supportive regulatory and macroeconomic conditions.

As 2026 begins, the cryptocurrency market finds itself at a familiar

Renewed optimism balanced against persistent uncertainty.

Whether this early year strength marks the beginning of a sustained trend or

simply another chapter in crypto's cyclical nature is a question that only

will answer.

For now, the message from the market is clear.

Crypto is once again commanding attention.

If you approach crypto real estate with knowledge and preparation, the rewards

can be extraordinary.

Bitcoin the bricks isn't just a catchy phrase.

It's the future of real estate investment.

If you want to stay ahead of the curve, now's the time to learn how crypto can

open doors.

Literally.

to acquire expertise, even as far as possible, I think it is always

In the end, what we have to talk about is transparency, we have to talk about

understanding what we are doing and we have to talk about precaution and

control. But exploring, I think, is very interesting at a technological level.

It is also very interesting at a social level, what it can mean.

And we can also consider the possibilities it could

offer in terms of, as we speak, this democratization of access to

new types of investments.

From digital coins to physical assets, from online wallets to real -world

property lines.

Cryptocurrency is reshaping how we buy, sell, and think about real estate.

We are witnessing the merging of two worlds, the oldest asset on Earth and

of the newest technological inventions of our time. And as the future unfolds,

only one question remains.

Will Bitcoin buy your next home?

The art market and visual arts as a whole is like Hollywood or it's like

Bundesliga, if you will.

You know, there are a lot of people who play football in Germany, but there are

very few who play in the Bundesliga.

The global art market is worth US $65 billion, a market of extremes.

From Economy Investigates, why is the art market so opaque?

How are prices set?

How do auction houses and galleries operate?

What about the gender and equal pay gap?

Why is art so attractive as an investment?

What is the future of digitalization in the art market?

The economy dives into the mechanisms of the global art industry from the

perspective of the German art market.

The glamorous world of an artist

fascinates and inspires us.

with their biographies, innovations, rebellions, alternative lifestyles,

creativity and unique works of art.

But what remains once the glamorous deconstructed?

It's always been the people with money that affected the art world,

unfortunately, because without that there's no market and there's no artist.

Art is above all a business in the hands of a few players.

But how does the art market really work?

The business is booming.

In 2023, the global art market was valued at $65 billion.

The year before, it was worth $67 .8 billion, the second highest figure ever

recorded for the global market.

This is because the wealth of the world's billionaires has grown to 13 .7

trillion US dollars in 2023.

This wealth has a significant impact on the top end of the art market.

The commercial art markets are great indicators of economic trends, economic

development. Which companies have money, which companies are educated, which

companies are interested in art and buy art.

Despite increased purchasing power on the art market, many artists, especially

women, people of color and queer artists, live and work under precarious

circumstances.

The situation is similarly bad, at least in the Western and American art

markets. I think Germany is third from the bottom in a European comparison.

But this gender pay gap of 18 % in Germany and around 30 % in the

arts is not just a European problem, it's a global problem.

To understand this contradiction, let's look at the mechanics

of the art market.

Today, the art trade is perceived as opaque and inaccessible.

Nevertheless, people remain fascinated.

Digitalization is rapidly developing.

accelerating social and cultural insecurities in our society.

The top three art markets in the world today are the US, the UK and China.

The US is the absolute leader, accounting for 42 % of sales.

The Chinese market is the second largest in the world with a share of 19%,

followed by the UK with a share of 17%.

The remaining 20 % of the global art market is shared by the other 192

of the world.

My name is Amelie von Wehle. I'm an art advisor. I have an art advisory company

in London. In the commercial art world, you have auction houses, galleries, you

have dealers, and you have art advisors. I think that's probably the sort of

four main categories.

This strict hierarchical system creates a huge gender pay gap.

The market grows through multi -million dollar auctions,

where artwork is traded as an investment by only a handful of the super -rich.

Meanwhile, the artists struggle at the other end of the food chain.

on sort of gentleman rules.

And I think now everything is sort of shifting and nothing is as clear -cut as

it used to be anymore.

The art world is growing year by year. I think you've got now in total more than

2 million artists.

It's a very opaque, it's not a transparent art world.

Since the 1990s, the international art trade has been in a process of

industrialisation.

With the acceleration of digitalization during the COVID -19 pandemic, online

-based business models have also become more visible in the mainstream.

This includes online auction houses in the low -priced segment, NFC

marketplaces, and artists selling directly to buyers via Instagram.

The growth of online commerce is one of the most significant developments in the

art market in recent years.

My name is Constanze Wolter. I'm an art dealer for over 14 years now, and I'm

the founder of eartist .com, an online auction house. We're getting artworks

from private collections or from estates, and we sell it in auction

only specifically online.

Traditional auction houses are focusing on high -end artworks in a very high

price range.

so this is what makes sense economically so not to forget out there

is a large amount of artworks lower that level below 1000

euro and this is exactly what we target as well as artworks

because that fits our philosophy that art should be more accessible to a

wide range of people

Around $11 billion were generated through online sales.

My name is Dirk Boll. I'm on the board of the 20th and 21st century art at

Christie's in London.

What we have seen during the pandemic is that the commercial distribution of art

has become very much digitalized by necessity.

This means that there is now a higher proportion of digital distribution for

traditional suppliers.

the gallery system, the art trade, the auctions.

At the same time, artists have increasingly offered their objects and

directly during the pandemic through their own websites, but especially

social media.

There is now a rule that as an artist you can contribute from the secondary

market or you can benefit from the secondary market, but it's kept at a

value.

The secondary market, or resale market, deals in works of art that are part of a

collection from a private individual, gallery or museum.

When their work is resold, artists do not receive a cut of the sale.

The boundary between the primary and secondary markets has shifted

over the last 20 years.

On the one hand, the time gap between the two markets has narrowed.

In the late 20th century, it took 10 to 20 years to get from the primary to the

secondary market.

This period has been steadily shrinking.

Today, you can find very fresh works on the secondary market, the famous wet

canvas. At the same time, it has been said that the way sellers work has

changed, especially in the gallery system, which now also does a lot of

secondary marketing of its own artists' work.

In most cases, works by deceased artists are the main objects traded on the

secondary market.

My name is Zoe Claire Miller, and I am an artist and organizer.

I'm based in Berlin, Germany, and I also am one of the spokespeople of the

BBK Berlin, which is the professional association of visual artists.

Active artists sell their art mostly through the primary market.

Several factors, such as the artist's fame and relevance, but also gender,

and ethnicity, influence prices in this market.

In Germany, female visual artists earn on average 28 % less than their male

colleagues.

The average annual income is 10 ,500 euros.

The gender pay gap is 7%. And 90 % of female artists face poverty in old age.

with an expected pension of €357 per month.

One can definitely notice that the situation is shifting, that a lot of

and collections are hurriedly thinking like, oh, wait, we need to show actually

also some women or some people of color.

It's still straight white men, straight old white men, usually, that have the

highest prices, that set the record prices, that sell the most, that have

highest representation at fairs, have the most solo shows in museums. So this

still... definitely quite dominant.

In Germany, the so -called gender show gap varies from one institution to

another.

This refers to the number of works by women that can be seen in exhibitions,

museums, collections, or fairs.

At the Hamburger Bahnhof in Berlin, only 28 % of solo exhibitions between 2015

and 2019 were by women.

This has now evened out.

In addition to gender, skin color also plays a role.

A lot of it has happened, I think, already in the last year.

I think you still have American museum collections that are probably 80 % male,

but there's such a push in terms of museums buying

female artists, buying artists from sort of marginalized groups.

It's also very political -driven.

And I think that is reflected in the art market. And I think this trend will

only continue.

And I think there's no way back. And, you know, for example, it's really

reflected also now in this sort of traditional, for example, I don't know,

Christie's evening sale in New York last May had more female artists than male

artists. And that's completely new.

And so I think all of this will...

and I think become more democratic.

In the art world in particular, there are many more women than men.

But there is also the pyramid, where it is mainly men who make a career in the

middle sector.

There are many reasons for this, because this has been perceived as the right

model for centuries, because for a very long time there was a lack of role

models for successful women.

But of course there are also social reasons, such as the fact that women can

have children and men, unfortunately, cannot.

these are all elements that have had an impact at mid -career i

think it's because we simply have a very male

patriarchal art elite that still dominates the art market or has

art market over the last few decades and probably still done so

when we think of a museum director

when we think of a gallery owner, but also who does what, who teaches.

And on the other hand, of course, who is also active in the important press

organs, who is the editor -in -chief.

We now have some amazing female artists who are also very, very successful.

For example, Katharina Grotha.

whose artworks sell for around $600 ,000.

I believe the currently most expensive living contemporary female artist is

Jenny Saville, with one of her artworks selling for $10 million.

However, this is on the secondary market.

While that sounds like a lot of money, if you compare it to the price of a Jeff

Koons piece, which can cost $80 million, it's clear that there's still quite a

disparity.

Sotheby's, the industry leader, published a report in 2023 that

own global sales figures as well as those of the auction houses Christie's

Phillips.

According to the report, sales by female artists in the million -dollar -plus

segment have more than doubled in five years, from just under $222 million to

nearly $462 million.

Well, I think that both extremes are kind of an unrealistic romantic

vision. An artist is self -employed, is a freelancer, so like all other self

-employed people, an artist has to think about financial aspects and business

aspects if they want to be able to survive off of their art, if they

rich heirs to a huge family fortune that means they don't ever have to earn

money in their life. So, yeah, in terms of needing to consider money and profit

and income, every artist has to be a business person to some degree.

In order to succeed as an artist and small business owner, artists need to

overcome individual market barriers.

These can be grants, prizes, exhibitions in relevant museums, but also

sufficient reach on Instagram.

The market is now so large, it can absorb a lot more artists.

And I think also, of course, there's now lots of different ways how you can sell

your art.

You can also digitally now as an artist, you can reach your audience in lots of

different ways.

But I think the predominant factor, I think, is the sort of increase.

of wealth in the world.

And I think more and more people aspire to having an original artwork on their

wall. The prices of world -famous artworks are set on the top end of the

secondary market by the leading auction houses and realized with the money of

the world's richest people.

My name is Daniel Ranschake.

I'm the managing partner of Grisebach, which is one of the leading auction

houses in Germany.

for modern and contemporary art. The auction system is particularly important

for the resale part of the market because it's the most efficient way of

reselling artwork.

Auctions as a whole have an extremely important role in the art market in

of creating price transparency and price information because it's otherwise very

difficult to find the price information about what artworks are selling for and

the auction is really the only fully transparent and publicly available

information about that. So that's why it fulfills a very important role within

the whole ecosystem.

Auction houses and galleries are two key intermediaries in the traditional art

market. They are there to ensure quality and attract potential buyers.

As a gallery, you present the artist.

that you work with, and that's basically what you have to sell. It's a beautiful

thing, and it's a very rewarding thing to work with artists, but that's sort of

what you have to sell. And sometimes they might make work you like, sometimes

they might make work that's not that great, but of course you have to sell

it's your job.

And as an auction house, you're sort of limited to what you manage to get on

consignment, while as an art advisor, you have complete freedom. We can sort

roam the world.

and just sort of try and look for what we really believe in for, you know, of

course, different kind of reasons, and then try and find a good home for that

artwork.

Most commercial art galleries are small businesses, both in terms of employment

and revenue.

In addition to the small galleries, a new type of gallery has emerged, the so

-called mega gallery.

These are industry -leading galleries with multiple global locations that are

sized to the standards of a large museum.

This blurs the boundary between what is considered a gallery and what a museum.

Because of this, museums are losing their influence as the main institutions

art, as well as the main tastemakers for quality control in art.

The largest mega -gallery is owned by Larry Gagosian, the world -renowned

Gagosian Gallery.

It is actually a global empire comprising 17 gallery locations around

Bogosian deals exclusively with contemporary art in the top segment.

The total annual revenue of this empire is approximately $1 billion.

The big gallery is just becoming bigger and bigger, and the smaller gallery is

struggling, and there's medium -sized galleries. And I think that to have that

diversity of different commercial...

Places to sell art is important, and hopefully we can somehow keep those

different places.

Galleries are closed systems.

This system is made accessible to collectors in the traditional art market

art advisors.

If you look at the statistics, I think there are supposed to be more

millionaires in 2026, or 40 % I think more millionaires in 2026 than this

And more and more people, I think, look at buying art.

35 million.

The room at 36 million. $37 million.

It's in a new place.

I have $37 million now on the telephone at 37 million. I have $37 million here

on the telephone.

There are different reasons why you collect.

I think that, you know, you do it maybe for return, to get social capital

somehow. You know, it's fun to be part of the art world.

I like to think that the art market is transparent because, you know, in the

auction market, you can look everything up. There's data banks.

where you can look up all the auction sales going back to 1985 or so. You can

see all of the sales information, what's sold for what price, and so on and so

forth. If you look at a gallery business or a private dealing business, this

information is not public.

It's true. But traditionally, the art market was a very small market. It's a

very competitive market, too, so people wanted to keep information.

private to themselves and not shared with other market participants because

felt that there was a profit in it.

The gallery buys directly from artists and then sells their work for a profit.

Or the gallery takes the work on commission and receives a commission

work is sold.

The artist and the gallery usually agree on the price of the artwork.

The relationship between artist and gallery is a business partnership, and

can be quite...

difference depending on which artist and which gallery.

I guess that ideally the situation would be that artists and gallerists enter

into a long -term partnership where the gallerist takes care of selling the

artist's work but also supports the artist with production, also tries to

the artist be in important shows and biennials and so functions kind of as

a promoter of the artist's work, also might help with acquiring funds for them

to be able to realize big productions that might be difficult if they didn't

have the gallery's support.

while the artist is, of course, the producer of the product that

the gallery sells.

So in those terms, the artist is quite important for the gallerist.

In a worst -case scenario, an artist is very dependent on a gallerist. There's a

very unequal power balance, a strong hierarchy, and the art market, the art

world, is often one in which business deals are made. informally, like more

a handshake, often people start working together, an artist in a gallery,

without a formalized contract.

And then this can end up meaning that the party involved in this business

partnership that doesn't have the best legal advice can be taken advantage of.

sometimes buy back their own early work from galleries, collections or

collectors in order to influence, maintain or increase the market value or

of their art.

Art students and career changers rarely make the leap from university directly

into a commercial gallery.

As an alternative, they set up their own non -commercial exhibition spaces and

studio galleries.

In major European cities, such as Berlin, These self -managed spaces are

encouraged.

Such independent structures or NGO business models give artists a space for

visibility as well as publicity.

And they are incubators that produce innovations which are later absorbed by

mainstream market and even the secondary market.

In addition to sophisticated patronage, technological developments such as

blockchain technology offer an opportunity to reduce market barriers

new business areas.

I think the certification of digital art through NFTs is an interesting concept,

an interesting technology.

It's low threshold, which means you don't need a lot of equipment to produce

these certificates, so it's very accessible to artists.

And it's a good way to make digital art tradable.

If you think of NFT technology as a certification technology, the question

when it will extend to the sale of physical artwork.

At the same time, we have to recognize that this is not an era of art,

but a technology that certifies art.

And that means that one day it will be equipped by a newer, more up -to -date

technology. This is the fate of all technological developments.

What is interesting in this area is the liberation of artists from the big

support companies that provide such systems, that can provide such services,

because nowadays almost anyone can do such certification themselves.

Digital platforms enable artists to

reached other audiences to communicate with their audiences in a different way.

And I think that's a trend.

I think it's an exciting trend and it will take us to a completely different

world. I think now more and more things get sold online that people have never

seen and also people are much more comfortable now to pay by expensive

online.

art market will grow i think hybrid models will develop of sort of physical

exhibitions and digital and the digital exhibition sort of sitting alongside

it's going to enable more people to see artwork that they might not be able

to to go and see physically i think it's also going to democratize the market

I think there will also hopefully be more sort of data and I think AI -driven

sort of data sets available that's also maybe hopefully going to make the market

more transparent and will allow to make better informed decisions.

But the question, what is interesting art? Of course, technology cannot answer

this question.

The criteria by which galleries select artists is individual and depends on

personal preferences.

Since COVID we really did a program inviting artist studios to consign

to us directly.

This is quite new because we saw that there's a demand at the artist system

finding ways to promote and sell their artworks. And we actually

work with artists.

Excellent relationships with market makers are essential for emerging talent

make their mark on the art market.

After all, artists have to convince the industry's major gatekeepers, such as

the major auction houses, to make it into the top segment.

Those who manage to do so are eventually included in the top 100 highest earning

artists in their country.

However, the artists do not receive a share of the sales from the traditional

auction houses.

The global art market for art at auction is about $35 billion.

Last year we did 75 million euros of turnover.

So Germany as a whole is 2 % of the global market.

The global art auction market generates around $35 billion a year.

In 2023, Villa Gritherbach generated 50 million euros.

The auction system is particularly important for the resale part of the

because it's the most efficient way of reselling artwork.

Private owners.

come to us and ask us to sell artwork on their behalf, and then we sell them

through the auction process, mostly in live auctions, but sometimes also in

online auctions.

Auction houses generally claim to offer the very best.

The art market worldwide is dominated by a very few leading auction houses.

We only really work in art, so painting, drawing, sculpture.

prints. We don't work with furniture. We don't work with jewelry.

All these things that are other sub -markets, we do not do. We only do

art. We only do 19th century, 20th century, and 21st century.

Most people know how a traditional auction works.

Lot number seven is next. Property from an important private collection, Los

Angeles. So it's in the room at 12 million dollars.

A bid is placed and the highest bidder wins the item.

$26 million.

At $26 ,500 ,000, fair warning now, sold. Thank you very much indeed.

The consigner, the seller, when they come

in, they will sign the consignment agreement with us for the upcoming

and then we receive a fee.

of the value, based on the value of the work. So it could slide from the lower

the value, the higher the percentage rate. It will be 18%, let's say, for an

item at 1 ,000 euros.

And if it's a higher value item, then the rate goes down. So for a very high

value item, we might receive 5 % or so. And then we also receive a

so -called buyer's premium, which is the fee that the buyer...

pays to the auction house and that's also a fixed percentage rate that they

on the hammer price which is the highest bid in the room at the time of the

auction when a work of art is sold at auction it is sold with a published

estimate in other words it is an estimate of what the auction house

receive for the work there is also a reserve price which is the price at

the owner will allow the work to be sold.

This is the reserve or limit, the lowest price at which the work can be bought.

There is more online bidding in the auction sector today than ever before.

Sotheby's reports that 91 % of bids at its 2022 auctions were placed online.

The reason is simple.

Top quality art does not fetch such high prices because it is worth so much

more. Or because they are so much better than the art in the lower segments of

the art market. But because there is so much more money circulating in this

segment.

The museums legitimize these prices by exhibiting this art.

In this segment of the market, art becomes an investment for a small number

rich investors.

Some people certainly buy it for pure investment.

Most of our clients buy it for pleasure, but like with most

things, when you spend a lot of money on something, you do hope that it doesn't

lose a lot of value. I think in the last 20 years, there's also been a large

influence through globalization that you have new buyers, many new buyers coming

into the market from areas that previously were not connected to the

Today there are more collectors than famous works of art at auction.

But why is investing in art so attractive?

Investment is indeed a motive for buying.

The motive for buying art is, of course, in most cases, and it must be said,

hopefully the love of art, the desire to surround oneself with art.

You always want to be surrounded by art because you want to be able to enjoy

works of art without having to go to a museum, different moods and different

moments of life, light, etc.

There are also other reasons for buying art, such as the before -mentioned

investments in social prestige.

You want to belong to a social group, and art is a way of doing that. You want

to impress those around you. You want to park money.

So, in addition to investment, which is more geared towards profit and therefore

speculation, people see works of art as tangible assets, as money garages.

People want to decorate their homes beautifully, which are all further

for buying art.

Even two years ago, you couldn't call art an asset class.

And now it's become totally accepted that art is looked at by many people as

asset class.

Also, you've now got platforms like Masterworks, which I find totally

fascinating. It's basically a platform where they sell fractional ownership for

artwork. So they really treat a painting like a listed public.

And you can buy or share.

And also on their website, they compare the S &P and how other asset class have

performed in comparison with art.

And they make the case that a certain percentage of your portfolio should be

invested in art. And they make a very powerful case with this sort of real

comparison, how well artworks are doing compared to traditional stock market

gold. real estate.

In the last banking crisis in 2008, I think art did very well.

And it always goes down a little bit with delay if there's a crisis in the

world. But it sort of, you know, it didn't go down that much, especially

A -plus, top quality work. They were holding their value.

And so I think that also made it more and more interesting that it's sort of

proven now over a certain amount of years.

to be a good place to put your money.

I think not all art always has, over the long term, a stable value.

I mean, there are changes in pricing, also, if you look over time.

So if you look at who the most expensive artist in 1850 in Paris was,

it was an artist called Bouguereau.

A hundred years later, you couldn't give his paintings away. Nobody was

interested in that art anymore.

It does change over time.

But generally, like in a shorter time frame, you do have a certain stability,

especially if it's artists that are quite well established in the market,

because there's just a large market and there's a general interest in these

artists.

Investments, money garages, locked art depots, out -of -touch art elites, money

laundering, non -transparent galleries.

The art market has a dubious, mafia -like, shady image.

But what is the real truth in these narratives?

Of course there are illegal practices in the art trade.

Every successful distribution system involves something like this.

It can be a forgery or counterfeiting of the artwork being traded.

It could be the use of an authentic work of art for money laundering or fraud.

Anything is possible.

The art market is so intransparent because there's a culture of silence.

Almost all serious galleries don't publicly list the prices of artworks.

So it's quite hard to determine value.

And, I mean, of course, value and equality is also totally subjective.

Art is very, very frequently used as a way to hide and move dirty money. I

you can imagine a Picasso that's worth 10 million and fits into a suitcase is

less of a hassle than, you know, carrying a suitcase full of diamonds or

gold or having a bank account that... someone might find out that the money

there wasn't taxed or was gained through criminal activities.

So this also is a factor towards transparency.

Very few regulations in that sense now for private collectors. I mean, the main

regulations, of course, now and for the past.

decade or so where we follow all the rules for money laundering and anti

laundering, which have been tightened up more and more over the last few years,

which we spend a lot of time and effort following these rules and recording all

these details that are required. The largest other regulation that...

pertains to private collectors are the import and export rules for cultural

goods, which have been reformed in the last few years in Germany from a private

owner's perspective the most.

a pertinent regulation?

I think generally it's an unregulated market.

I think also famously so. It's probably one of the most intransparent,

unregulated markets.

I think now if you buy a very young, very sought -after artist with a long

waiting list, the gallery will probably make you sign an invoice that has a five

-year non -resale clause.

But again, there's always the debate if those clauses are actually legally

enforceable.

I think there's more or less zero regulation.

The Cultural Property Protection Act has been in force in Germany since 2015.

This law regulates which works of art are allowed to be exported.

The German art trade does not like this at all, as much higher prices can be

achieved on the world market.

By contrast, with little or no legislation, The USA, China, Switzerland

Singapore seem like paradises.

The US, China and Russia especially rely on tax -friendly art markets.

So, of course, the art trade is subject to taxes, which are quite normal

business taxes.

Works of art are subject to VAT and inheritance tax.

There is an import sales tax if art is imported from abroad.

In principle, the law applies to works of art as it does to any other

goods.

But there are ways around the laws.

For example, duty -free warehouses, such as the one in the Free Port of Geneva.

Here, neither value -added tax nor customs duties have to be paid.

The works of art can be stored there for an indefinite period of time. For the

collector, Custom duties and taxes are only due when the work of art arrives at

its final destination.

There are some shortages offering special conditions for

people who have interests in international sales without any

regulations.

Who stores which works and where remains a trade secret.

Galleries are reluctant to reveal what artworks they store.

Artists often have to pay for storage themselves.

A small individual box of eight square meters in this Berlin warehouse costs

euros net per month.

People don't like to talk about money because everyone is... generally trying

seem like they're very successful because if artists aren't doing well and

speak openly about it, then that has a negative influence on their

market success.

So if someone knows that a big famous artist at a big gallery didn't sell a

single work, that makes all the other potential collectors think like, oh...

This isn't the hot shit anymore. We shouldn't buy it either.

And the market is also really fragile. For instance, if

your prices go down on the secondary market, then that totally messes with

the primary market.

Say you're a mid -career artist and you've been producing work and selling

for 10 years. One collector bought a lot of your work and then the collector

decides to dump all of that work at auction and they fetch low prices.

Then that can totally ruin your career because then basically you can't sell at

the price level that you'd been selling at before.

The New York auction houses are considered global market makers.

They drive up prices worldwide.

The New York galleries are the first to create a market for their artists and

emerging talents.

The touchstone for whether the newly created market is sustainable are the

auction houses.

This means that emerging artists who manage to sell at an auction house but

not achieve good prices are quickly forgotten.

Museums still are the absolute...

long -term deciders of the fate of an artist's work, and it's not individual

collectors. There's various examples where you find that an artist was

successful and popular and pushed, let's say, even by certain private

collectors, but if they don't have major museum exhibitions, if they don't have

that support from the museum over time, their career and their recognition

fades. The other major players in the art market are the international art

fairs. The most important of these is Art Basel. At this superlative event,

around 300 galleries from 40 different countries exhibit around 4 ,000 artists.

Art Basel and Art Basel Hong Kong are considered the most expensive art

in the world.

700 of the world's potentially super -rich international buyers come to buy

at Art Basel. The big question, which of the 4 ,000 artists exhibited will be

bought? What's more, of the 400 of the artists who sell their work successfully

at Art Basel, only 40 of them will go on to maintain a successful long -term

career. In this artificial system of pricing created by investors and fund

managers, it is difficult to determine the real value of a work of art.

The difference between price and real value is blurred by the media.

This leads to the general assumption that expensive equals valuable.

We sold 2 ,500 works last year.

And the average price was around

30 ,000 euros.

That's kind of the market in Germany, too. It tends to be

more in the five figures.

But I think you will find that it's probably not that different around the

world, actually.

You have a lot more work that are sub -100 ,000 than you have work that are

above 100 ,000. And you have a lot more buyers that are below 100 ,000 than

they're above 100 ,000. So it's just larger numbers.

In art, the value or quality of a work depends on the creative power of the

artist.

Idea, theme.

Aesthetics and technique are the meaningful parameters by which value can

judged.

The media -effective staging of auctions and artists, the mystification of the

art market by the media, galleries, collectors, and artists themselves

contribute to a lack of transparency about the true value of art.

Instead, marketing and the image value of individual artists are polished up in

order to increase the market value and price of individual works.

You sort of worry if a Joseph Beuys would still become possible today

it's an artist you need to explain.

It's an expensive exhibition to put up. It's not going to attract visitors.

Figures probably are not going to be great. And that's just one example of an

artist that makes complicated intellectual installations where the

meaning is not accessible on the first. It's not love at first sight, probably

for most people. And I guess my...

and there's probably not going to be a way around that, is that art will sell

and do well that looks good on a JPEG. I think that will be also just...

things that are aesthetically pleasing at first sight.

I think also the next generation, I think, is leaning towards painting

it's sort of easier to digest. You can imagine easily what it's going to look

like on your wall if you just sit on a JPEG. That will definitely, I think,

influence the market.

The art market is becoming increasingly fast -paced due to globalization and

digitalization.

Digitalization means that more people see the same things.

It can be consumer goods, it can be works of art.

And that leads to a certain homogenization of taste.

In the art market, It also has to do with the fact that digitalization means

that we're increasingly guided in our choices by algorithms, reflect a

historical taste, i .e. the computer shows us what we liked in the past,

the algorithm can assume that we will like it again, like it and possibly buy

it.

This means that the presentation

of artwork in digital media often means that we are presented with similar

things, that we develop a taste that looks rather conservative, because the

computer does not, of course, make the discoveries that you make yourself when

you visit a graduating class at an art academy or an art fair.

Newcomers need to move fast and established companies need sophisticated

creative marketing strategies and effective media campaigns to stay

The acceleration of market cycles and the growth of structures naturally

a constant supply of material.

This means that as the markets grow, both in terms of structure and demand,

need more and more art.

This puts a certain pressure on the system. First of all, of course, on the

artists who create the goods that these markets trade in.

And here you can see a very clear over -functioning of the market, which can

bring objects onto the market that would not have left the studios 10, 20, 30

years ago, because the quality control has become different.

The art market is changing, with a new generation of makers and collectors

entering the world stage.

The future of the traditional art market will be even more influenced by the

digital art market.

What will not change are the power structures.

Whether online or analog, the market makers of yesterday, today and tomorrow

invest a lot of money and influence the prices on the market.

But what are the prospects for newcomers in this hyper -capitalistic art world?

Artists from all around the globe.

entering the mainstream art market.

And I think it's easier now for them to enter the mainstream art market,

especially thanks to the digitalization.

And I think also history books will have to be rewritten because, you know, you

have also all these discovery stories now of, you know, of course, lots of

African -American artists, for example, that are now entering American art

history that maybe didn't really have the place in the books that they

And will the cultural discourse of the future be left to super -rich investors

and tech giants?

But, you know, having said that, you know, American, Chinese, UK, that's the

most important art market, and I think that's not going to change anytime soon.

This means, on the one hand, that we have a strong concentration of demand on

the globalized brands, also in the art world, on the branded artists.

because it is not without reason that they are called, and, on the other hand,

that new work, the emerging artists, find it more difficult to assert

themselves, because their platforms, for them, are getting smaller.

And what are the prospects for the next generation of women in the art world?

It means that men may have to take a back seat.

And that, of course, means a loss of power.

Of course, it means the challenge to a system that is male -dominated, that is

male -dominated to basically curtail itself.

But of course, the question is, where do we want to go?

Where do we as a society want to go?

At some point, it's not about ego and power.

It's really about fairness.

September 2008.

The global financial system is on the verge of a total blackout.

Lehman Brothers has vanished.

Merrill Lynch is gone.

AIG is hemorrhaging billions every hour.

In Washington, the halls of the Treasury are filled with the smartest minds in

the country.

But they have a problem.

They are staring at a black box of toxic debt worth trillions.

and no tools to open it.

There is only one person who has the map.

One person who spent the last 20 years building a digital, unblinking eye that

can see through the wreckage.

The government didn't call the big banks to save the world. They needed someone

to handle the toxic waste.

And there was only one man that could lead through that darkness.

They called Larry Fink.

Larry Fink, the man behind Black Rock.

Today, he manages more money than the GDP of almost every nation on Earth.

$14 trillion.

But before he was the shadow sovereign of Wall Street, he was a man who lost

everything.

Who is Larry Fink?

Lawrence D. Fink, also known as Larry Fink, is one of the co -founders of

Rock. He is also the chairman and CEO of the company, the largest money

management firm in the world.

It's the first time in history a company manages to reach such a milestone and

gives a clear picture of how BlackRock operates.

Not just a traditional investment bank, but as a central pillar of the global

financial infrastructure, where its sheer scale allows it to influence

and industries at a level previously reserved only for nation states.

Founded in 1988 as an investment firm that prioritized risk management, with

.5 to $14 trillion under management, BlackRock's influence is staggering.

BlackRock is a top three shareholder in nearly every company in the S &P 500,

from Apple to Exxon.

from Microsoft to Nestle.

They don't just invest in the market, they are the market.

But its reach is personal. It holds the retirement dreams of over 35 million

Americans. This is the story of how a kid from a California shoe store became

the custodian of the world's wealth.

But who is Larry Fink?

Lawrence Douglas Fink entered the world on November 2nd, 1952.

Born in Los Angeles, California, he was raised in a Jewish family in the heart

of San Fernando Valley, the quintessential American suburb of Van

His home was a balance of academic discipline and retail grit.

His mother, Lila, was an English professor who valued the power of

education.

And long before he pulled the strings of the global economy, Larry Fink was

learning the value of money on a much smaller scale.

His father's shoe store in Van Nuys, where he spent evenings helping and

learning the business.

As one of three children, Larry grew up in a household where hard work wasn't

just encouraged, it was the baseline.

While he often joked he wasn't the smartest in the room, it was this

combination of his mother's intellectual curiosity and his father's Main Street

business sense that would eventually form the DNA of a global financial

While the future titans of Wall Street were rubbing elbows in the marble halls

of Harvard or Yale, Fink was a Bruin.

In 1970, Larry arrived at UCLA.

For a young man from Van Nuys, this wasn't just a local university, it was a

world of ideas.

But it was in his final years that the trajectory of his life shifted.

He immersed himself in political science, learning how power moves

nations.

But he soon realized that in the modern world, power follows the money.

This led him to the Anderson School of Management specializing in real estate.

It was here that he began to see the world through the lens of assets and

yields.

His public education gave him a different edge, while his peers at

Coast schools were being groomed for traditional corporate roles, Larry was

developing the outsider's eye, a perspective that allowed him to see

opportunities in the messy, unpolished corners of the bond market.

He graduated in 1976, not with a silver spoon, but with a California -bred

ambition to take on the giants of Manhattan.

He was a Bruin headed for Wall Street, and the financial world had no idea what

was coming.

The year is 1976.

New York City is a brick -covered battlefield, and Larry Fink has just

handed the keys to the kingdom.

Goldman Sachs, the most prestigious name in finance back then, has practically

hired him.

He had passed the technical test.

He had charmed the partners.

All that remained was a rubber -stamp interview with Human Resources.

But Larry... Larry...