What’s the price of nothing? For the ultra-wealthy, it can be $10 million—for an empty frame.
In the world of high-end art and luxury collecting, some buyers don’t just chase beauty or function—they chase absurdity, exclusivity, and the ultimate flex of wealth. From a golden banana duct-taped to a wall to a $85,000 “invisible sculpture,” the most expensive “useless” purchases prove that value is whatever someone is willing to pay.
But the crown jewel of bizarre luxury buys? A $10 million gilded frame… sold with no painting inside. Below, we break down this head-scratching auction record, plus other outrageously expensive purchases that serve zero practical purpose.
1. The $10 Million Empty Frame – “The Void” by Artist collective MSCHF
(Sold for $10.1M at Sotheby’s, 2023)
Why It’s So Expensive:
- Conceptual art stunt: The frame was originally part of a $30M Picasso painting—until MSCHF (the same group behind Jesus-themed sneakers) bought it, removed the artwork, and auctioned just the frame.
- Meta-commentary on art value: The sale mocked how collectors prioritize prestige over content.
- Ultra-exclusive bragging rights: Only one person in the world can say they own “nothing” for $10M.
Key Details:
✔️ 24-karat gold leaf and Baroque-style craftsmanship
✔️ Comes with a certificate authenticating its “emptiness”
✔️ Buyer remains anonymous—likely a billionaire art provocateur
2. Maurizio Cattelan’s $150,000 “Banana” Duct-Taped to a Wall
(Price: 120K–120K–150K per banana, 2019)
Why It’s So Expensive:
- Performance art satire: The banana (a real one, replaced weekly) symbolized absurdity in art valuation.
- Three editions sold: One was eaten by a performance artist mid-exhibit (raising its value further).
- Cultural phenomenon: Memes, debates, and even copycat banana art scams.
Key Details:
✔️ Includes a “Certificate of Authenticity” (for a fruit)
✔️ Exhibited at Art Basel Miami—epicenter of luxury art absurdity
✔️ Later resold for $250K+ after the viral “banana eating” stunt
3. The $85,000 “Invisible Sculpture” – By Artist Salvatore Garau
(Price: $85,000, auctioned in 2021)
Why It’s So Expensive:
- Pure conceptual art: The “sculpture” was literally nothing—just the idea of an artwork.
- Buyer received… instructions: They were told to display it in a private room with “nothing” inside.
- Art world trolling: Garau claimed the sculpture’s “energy” made it valuable.
Key Details:
✔️ Comes with a signed plaque describing the “artwork”
✔️ Debated by philosophers—can you own “nothing”?
✔️ Similar works have sold for $100K+ since
4. The $1.2 Million “NFT of Nothing” – “Nothing” by Pak
(Price: $1.2M in Ethereum, 2022)
Why It’s So Expensive:
- Digital “void” NFT: Just a blank white square—sold as a “digital artifact.”
- Status symbol in crypto circles: Proves you can waste money better than others.
- Part of a series: Some “Nothing” NFTs later resold for $3M+.
Key Details:
✔️ Fully tradable on OpenSea (current bids: ~$500K)
✔️ Ownership grants access to “Secret Nothing Club”
✔️ Critics call it “the ultimate crypto bubble indicator”
5. The $28,000 “Billionaire’s Ashtray” – By Tiffany & Co.
(Price: $28,000, available today)
Why It’s So Expensive:
- Solid sterling silver (requires weekly polishing by staff).
- Zero function: Most buyers don’t even smoke—it’s a desk ornament.
- Tiffany tax: The brand markup turns a $28K “luxury” piece**.
Key Details:
✔️ Weighs 8+ pounds (the size of a small dog)
✔️ Often gifted as a “joke” among Wall Street elites
✔️ Frequently stolen from high-end clubs (seen as a trophy)
Final Thoughts: Why Do the Rich Buy “Nothing”?
These purchases aren’t about utility—they’re about power, exclusivity, and the thrill of defiance. Whether it’s a invisible sculpture or Banana, the ultra-wealthy use these buys to:
- Mock traditional value systems
- Flex disposable income
- Own conversations (like this one!)
Would you ever spend millions on “nothing”? Tell us in the comments!
Disclaimer: Few images used here are generated by AI and are intended for illustrative purposes only. While we strive for visual accuracy and creativity, these images may not precisely represent real-life items or scenes.
