Galleries that refuse to go online: where will they be in five years

01The precedent of cultural industries

The recent history of cultural industries offers a warning that the art market would be wrong to ignore. The music industry refused to take digital distribution seriously for years, considering that the compact disc would continue to dominate. Record labels that waited too long suffered considerable losses, while those that embraced the transition found viable new business models. The press industry followed a similar path: newspapers that invested in their digital presence from the 2000s are faring better than those that waited until the 2010s to react.

Book publishing offers an even more instructive parallel. The physical book has not disappeared, contrary to catastrophist predictions. But the discovery and distribution ecosystem has radically changed. A publisher absent from online sales platforms would cut itself off from the majority of its potential buyers, even though the physical book remains most readers' preferred format. The parallel with the art market is striking: the physical work will never be replaced by a digital file, but the journey that leads the collector to that work increasingly passes through digital channels.

02Demographics do not lie

The most difficult argument to contest is demographics. The collectors who built their collections in the 1980s and 1990s, those accustomed to visiting galleries on Saturday afternoons and leafing through printed catalogues, still constitute a significant portion of many galleries' clientele. But this generation is ageing. The collectors who follow them have radically different habits. They research online before travelling. They expect to find an artist's works on the internet. They consider that a gallery without a serious digital presence lacks professionalism.

Galerie Perrotin, which invested heavily in its digital presence and social media, has observed a notable rejuvenation of its collector base. Buyers aged thirty to forty-five, representing the fastest-growing market segment, discover the gallery online before visiting it physically. Pace gallery made the same observation and adapted its strategy accordingly, developing digital content specifically designed for this generation of collectors.

The dealer who relies on existing clientele without seeking to attract the next generation is preparing, unwittingly, the decline of their business. In five years, the collectors entering the market today will represent a growing share of total art spending. The gallery that is not accessible to them will simply be invisible.

03The cumulative competitive effect

Every month a gallery spends without an online presence is a month during which its competitors develop theirs. The effect is cumulative and difficult to reverse. A gallery that has been present online for three years has accumulated search engine positioning, a database of digital contacts, search engine visibility and experience in managing this channel that a gallery just starting out does not possess. The gap is not merely temporal: it is structural.

Gagosian gallery, which has one of the most developed digital presences in the market, benefits from an advantage accumulated over years in online visibility. When a collector searches for an artist Gagosian represents, the gallery systematically appears among the first results. Smaller galleries representing artists in the same market segments are pushed towards the bottom of results pages if they have not invested in their own digital visibility.

This accumulation effect means that the best time to develop an online presence was five years ago, and the second best time is now. Waiting further means accepting a competitive handicap that will grow each year.

The accumulation effect does not concern visibility alone. It also concerns competence. The gallery that has managed an online presence for three years has developed a fine understanding of its digital visitors' behaviour. It knows which artists generate the most interest, which price ranges attract the most enquiries, at which times of year views are highest. This market intelligence, acquired freely through observation of traffic data, constitutes a strategic advantage that a gallery without an online presence does not possess and cannot acquire other than by starting.

04The five-year scenario for a gallery without an online presence

Let us project five years ahead. Galleries that will have refused any online presence will face a market in which virtually all active collectors, including the most traditional, use digital as their primary research and discovery tool. These galleries will not be found by new collectors entering the market. They will not be found by international collectors searching for artists in their segment. They will not be found by institutional figures searching for works for exhibitions or public collections who also begin their research online.

The clientele of these galleries will consist exclusively of loyal collectors whose numbers will naturally decline through attrition over the years. Each collector who stops buying, for whatever reason, will not be replaced by a new collector because the gallery will have no channel for acquiring new clients. Revenue will follow a downward curve that will progressively make it impossible to participate in fairs, fund catalogues, and support artists in their projects.

05Galleries that closed did not plan to close

Gallery closures do not happen overnight. They result from a gradual erosion of revenue over several years, until the moment when fixed costs exceed income and the dealer must resolve to close. Galleries that closed over the past decade did not plan to close. They considered their model solid, their clientele loyal, and believed the situation would eventually improve. What carried them away was not a brutal event but the accumulation of small losses: a collector who buys elsewhere, a fair that does not cover its costs, an artist who leaves for a more visible competitor.

An online presence is not a guarantee against closure. But its absence is an aggravating factor that accelerates erosion. A gallery not online cannot compensate for a disappointing opening with digital sales. It cannot reach a collector in Asia to offset a decline in the European market. It cannot use online traffic data to understand what interests visitors and adapt its offering.

06The cost of inaction exceeds the cost of action

The dealer who refuses digital often considers this decision prudent. Not investing in a channel whose codes one does not master seems safer than embarking on an uncertain venture. This perception is inverted relative to reality. The risk today is not performing poorly online: it is not being online at all. An imperfect online presence, with correct but not exceptional photographs, honest but not literary descriptions, regular but not daily updates, is infinitely preferable to total absence.

Galerie Nathalie Obadia, whose digital presence has evolved gradually over the years, illustrates this iterative approach well. The gallery did not wait to have a perfect website before going online. It started with available means, improved its presence over time, and today reaps the benefits of digital visibility built over the long term.

The dealer who postpones their decision waiting for the ideal moment, the perfect budget, or the definitive technology will wait indefinitely. Meanwhile, the market will continue to evolve, competitors will continue to develop online, and the window of opportunity will continue to narrow.

07The impact on artists

The dealer who refuses digital does not make this decision for themselves alone. They make it for the artists they represent as well. An artist whose gallery has no online presence is an artist invisible to the majority of collectors, curators and journalists who conduct their research on the internet. This invisibility harms the artist's career, their market standing, and their ability to secure institutional exhibitions. Artists, particularly younger ones, know this. And a growing number of them consider their gallery's digital presence a determining criterion in choosing their representation.

The gallery that cannot offer its artists a serious online presence will gradually lose its most promising artists to galleries that can. This movement is already observable: early-career artists favour galleries that offer maximum exposure, and digital presence is now an integral part of that exposure. The dealer who refuses to go online is not protecting their artists from digital superficiality. They are depriving them of a showcase they need to build their careers.

08Choosing one's future

The decision of whether or not to develop an online presence is not a technological decision. It is a strategic decision that commits the gallery's future. The dealer who chooses to remain offline chooses a future of gradual shrinking of their collector base, increasing dependence on a decreasing number of clients, and vulnerability to local market fluctuations. The dealer who chooses to develop online chooses a future of openness, client base diversification, and resilience against market fluctuations.

Artedusa was designed by art market professionals for art market professionals. Each partner gallery benefits from a personalised space, a qualified international audience and dedicated support. Joining Artedusa means opening a second door to the world without closing the door to your gallery.