IBJNews

Museum of Art expects boost from fall Warhol show

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indianapolis Museum of Art expects an Andy Warhol exhibit this fall will draw 40,000 people, helping it offset a predicted $2 million drop in revenue from its endowment in the next fiscal year.

The Warhol show opens Oct. 10 and runs through Jan. 2. It will feature more than 100 works in a wide range of media and cover his career from the 1950s to the 1980s. Much of the work will be on loan from the Andy Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh. The PNC Foundation, the corporate foundation of Pittsburgh-based PNC Financial Services, is a major sponsor.

IMA CEO Max Anderson has said a successful fall exhibit would be one way to help the museum balance its budget in fiscal year 2011, which begins July 1.

Museum spokeswoman Katie Zarich said the museum staff hasn't completed its revenue projections for "Andy Warhol Enterprises." The general admission price will be $14, but IMA members will be admitted free. The museum has about 9,300 members.

The IMA's last fall exhibit, Sacred Spain, featured free admission and drew 69,218 people. The last exhibit that charged admission, Power and Glory in 2008, drew 29,696. Attendance for the Warhol exhibit is predicted to exceed that exhibit by 25 percent.

The endowment is decreasing its payout to IMA due to investment losses in 2008 that forced the museum to reduce its annual "draw rate."

IMA expects to get about $16.4 million from the endowment in the 2011 fiscal year, accounting for 69 percent of the museum's total revenue.

The endowment was valued at $324.3 million on March 31.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT