I think part of their idea is that the sometimes-alienating "fine art" distinction, and the expectations around pricing that go with it, is keeping available art from people who would get a lot of pleasure from living with it. I think there's a type who thinks fine art isn't for them but will be shocked and pleased to be able to get a real, individually made art work for such a low monthly cost.

I mean, anecdotal data ra ra ra, but this is super appealing to me, and I'll probably be making my first art purchase >$500 as a result.

Used to work in an art gallery. Lots of people finance art.

I dont fully agree with this statement, but perhaps the sentiment. I think there are those who are on the fence and doing it monthly can always help. However, I think the bigger struggle is that those interested but not major collectors still get sticker shock whether or not its monthly or not. This is the challenge with all rental models. They advertise "only $25/mo" however when that person says yes I like this, its still $2000 and they are like no thanks.

You could be right! But if AiR is right they might be able to prove that there is actually demand for financing in this context.

Perhaps, but the first (and only) original painting I ever purchased was on layaway.