Brandon-
I think Ken's point is: Rare does not necessarily equal desireable. And that rarity is only one of the things that determines value.
So, sure, that bike is rare... but, what else is driving the price up?
In the case of Herse, Singer, and others, there is craftsmanship, innovation, beauty, reliability, quality of materials, utility, etc.
I don't doubt that there are reasons why that bike went for so much, but Ken, (and I) can't tell what they are!
John Barron
Minneapolis
http://www.velostuf.com
>
> At 11:16 PM -0400 8/7/02, Huemax@aol.com wrote:
> >I saw the bike, it is old and very well made by top quality craftmanship of
> >30's in the USA. But I still do not understand why some one paid
> >8.100.00 for
> >this, (missing parts, rusted, to me a prro condition overall).
> >Then, you said it could brought 15,000.00 for better days. Just being
> >"RARE"??
>
> So Ken I guess the question is why does this seem odd? Rare is just
> that, it's not unique like the Rubens painting that just picked up 70
> million. People constantly call things "rare" that are not if you
> look closer at ebay. The bike auctioned truly is rare and if you
> want to think about that there are at least 100 times as many Herse's
> as there are of that bike you really are getting a good price. I
> have a period of cruiser collecting and if you think the French stuff
> carries a high price take a look at 30's Schwinn stuff. I know
> someday I will spend over $20,000, quite possibly much more, on a
> piece of wood, canvas, or paper with paint on it. I will never spend
> that much on a bicycle and that price discrepancy comes down to
> something being "rare" or something being truly rare.
> enjoy,
> Brandon"monkeyman"Ives
> SB, CA
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> End of Classicrendezvous Digest