[tdrdt]

Things are worth what the highest bidder is willing to pay. There are no other reasons involved. Taste doesn't matter, history doesn't matter, material doesn't matter, the creator doesn't matter.

The highest bidder does have his reasons, but they can be very different from person to person.

[tjoff]

Things are worth at least as much as the second-highest bidder is willing to pay. If everyone has a completely unique reasons then there would be noone to bid against.

And a very important aspect for most buyers is the perceived market value. And that ties in with whatever the market values, and if the market supposedly doesn't care for taste/history/material/creator - then what does it care for?

[tdrdt]

"then what does it care for"

Wel most of the time it's an investment. So for those bidders the perceived market value is very important.

But you can also imagine this scenario: someone has a ring from a great great grantparent. The market value of the ring is $10. But the owner would only sell it for $100000. Then their would noone to bid against.

[HPsquared]

The ring example is interesting: if nobody actually buys it for $100000 (the best anyone else would pay is $10), then what is the 'real' value of the ring?

The only logically consistent answer is that value is always relative and subjective; 'objective' economic value is only an abstraction.