How BUTTER Founders Rethink Art Fair Economics

In a pay-to-play art-fair ecosystem designed largely to keep galleries coming back and collectors happy, new shows looking to gain ground can’t stray too far from the old model. But the founders of the BUTTER Fine Art Fair didn’t want to play the game as it’s often played, and, in fact, it strayed too far from the norm—on paper—reading less like justice than a measure of social justice. But BUTTER, launched in 2021 in Indianapolis and extended to Los Angeles during LA Art Week, is very good, although it is an experiment that examines in real time what happens when the economic structure of the art exhibition is reconstructed around the artists.

Launched in 2021 in Indianapolis by the cultural development organization GANGGANG, co-founded by Malina Simone Jeffers and Alan Bacon, BUTTER was named after the statistics of racial equality that flooded the cultural sector after 2020 and asks the vague question that most shows avoid, why do artists make so little money? The response is structural rather than rhetorical. Instead of the usual art pipeline—galleries applying for booths, paying a hefty fee and presenting a list of artists—the fair has artists and collectives putting on exhibitions directly. Selected through an accredited selection process, the invited artists not only cover the cost of renting a booth; The show also includes travel and accommodation. More importantly, the financial model eliminates many intermediaries who tend to extract profits from the top. There are no commissions, so sales revenue flows directly to artists in one of the few serious efforts in the US art ecosystem to redistribute economic power.

In its first five years, BUTTER has featured nearly 200 artists and welcomed more than 46,000 visitors, generating more than $1 million in art sales, all of which go directly to the artists. Each program typically presents 30 to 50 exhibitors that include emerging names, established artists and occasional established figures from across the United States and the wider African continent. Price points show the same diversity: jobs can start in the low hundreds and go up into the six-figure range, making the fair just as comfortable for first-time collectors as it is for seasoned buyers.

But the show’s appeal isn’t just economic. BUTTER sits squarely at the intersection of several shifts that are reshaping the contemporary art landscape: a growing emphasis on equality for Black artists that was historically sidelined by the commercial gallery system, the diversification of the art market away from its traditional ivory towers and a wave of artist-centered platforms experimenting with new ways to connect creators and collectors.

Ultimately, BUTTER is equal parts marketplace and testing ground. The fair has been able to expand beyond its Midwestern origins in just a few years, suggesting the model has legs beyond its original community context, but whether it can reshape the broader fair culture remains an open question. The Spectator caught up with Jeffers and Bacon to learn more about the show’s origins, how it works and where it’s headed.

First, tell me about GANGGANG. What drew you to focus on the intersection of social justice and the arts?

In 2020, in a time of social justice and unrest happening across the country, we saw the need to make culture a platform for justice. With our deep experience in social engagement and art communication, we wanted to develop a model that focuses on equity—not just on the message but on the economic impact—by ensuring that artists retain control over their work, their narrative and their financial future. GANGGANG is about giving power back to the artists and creators who make our culture meaningful. It is about proposing cities that a focus on art and culture can improve the bottom line, internal balance and local narrative.

As for the fair, let’s start with the obvious! Why “BUTTER”?

BUTTER softens the rigid structures of the art market. It shows that culture can be nutritious, accessible and built on happiness, not just commerce. It’s a nod to culture that shows smoothness, elegance and confidence. We wanted an experience name that felt instantly familiar and comforting to all.

Art exhibitions are not the first thing that comes to mind when I think of equality. How did the launch of the art fair support GANGGANG’s mission?

Traditional art exhibitions are built around galleries, dealers and institutions, while artists often receive a small share of sales. With BUTTER, we’re changing the narrative by putting artists at the center. From the beginning, we designed fairness to increase artists’ agency and income, providing a place where artists sell directly to collectors and keep 100 percent of their profits with no entry or exhibition fees or commissions. As of 2021, BUTTER has generated over $1.5 million in direct sales to artists, and the first BUTTER LA generated over $175,000, proving that equity and sustainability are inseparable.

Is it fair that 100 percent of the proceeds go directly to the artists who work financially? What are the biggest structural obstacles to making a commission show?

The no-commission model requires deliberate income planning. Sponsorships, grant funding, ticket sales and partnerships underwrite production costs, including everything from venue rental to staff and event infrastructure, so artists don’t have to cover those costs or pay commissions. A non-traditional model like ours requires financiers who understand long-term value over short-term branding, and that’s not something that all of our partners navigate around.

The biggest structural constraints are sight and scale. Many sponsors and institutions are based on traditional pricing models and exchange visibility. We constantly educate our partners on why investing in artists first is not only ethical, it’s smart. When they see artists keeping 100 percent of their sales and building viable career paths, we win over the doubters.

Who is your target collector? Who buys at BUTTER?

Our collectors include seasoned collectors who are expanding their collections and institutional buyers who are acquiring pieces to hold forever. We are also a place for first-time buyers to invest in original work, as we create a market for collectors and artists.

Do you feel that there is tension between activists and business with a program like this? Or its power when BUTTER gets too big?

There is always disagreement when you build within the plans and criticize. But for us, commercialism is not against our value—the background is. We intentionally design both the experience and the economy to move forward with the artists, and as BATTERY scales, that value only deepens. Growth will not mean cleaning up but increasing opportunities for artists, collectors and cultural stakeholders to participate in an equitable market. Our commitment to economic justice and structural access remains non-negotiable.

How is it different doing a show in Indianapolis compared to doing a show in LA?

Indianapolis is where the experiment began—infused with community, context and a deep sense of identity. Its impact is palpable: artists, families and local institutions are re-imagining their city, and that place-based pride makes the experience powerful. In contrast, Los Angeles is expanding that model into a global market at a different pace and scale. The LA collector base is broad and institutionally connected, but the spirit is the same—the need for a balanced, culturally grounded and artist-centered art experience. Now, with BUTTER LA produced by standeo—our production agency designed to scale this experience—we’re able to bring our model to new markets with thoughtful, social and cultural impact.

Do you have thoughts about future markets you would like to enter?

We intend to expand. The goal is not to cut cookies from coast to coast but to develop areas where the ecosystem of artists can flourish. Cities with rich artistic histories and emerging Black arts communities feel like natural candidates, but any new market must align with our values ​​of outreach, long-term investment and deep community engagement. BATH requires a significant emotional, financial and physical investment. Where it spreads it should be based on invitation and influence.

What kind of response did you get from the artists who participated in the LA show?

The response in Los Angeles was overwhelmingly positive. There was a clear sense that LA has always needed something like BUTTER: a platform that intentionally highlights Black artists while introducing new audiences to the collection in a way that feels accessible rather than intimidating. Artists shared that it felt reassuring to be the focus of LA Art Week, instead of being put on the sidelines of major events. For many, it was not just about sales but visibility, relationship building and immersion within the rich cultural ecosystem of Black LA. BUTTER offers a different kind of artwork during the week that you can feel special by ensuring accessibility for students, families and first time collectors.

Whose work is in your collection? Which artists should our readers follow?

Indianapolis artists such as Ashley Nora, FITZ! and Gary Gee represent the depth of talent from the Midwest. Ashley’s work carries an emotional and textural resonance that feels intimate and expansive, while Gary’s recording practice reflects a unique perspective rooted in community and lived experience. The artist collectors to follow are those who create sustainable works, create a visual language in real time and expand what the art market allows. And many of them come for FREE.

Many Art Conversations