I agree with Emanuel. I had a really great guitar that I wasn't playing , so I sold it. It seemed wrong to me to have someone use so many resou rces and put so much energy into making something and then for me to jus t leave it under the bed. The allure of the unused "virgin" vintage bike, for me at least, is the recreation of the buying experience that I originally missed. So for ex ample, I got a thrill out of finding a NOS 1975 Raleigh Sports last year on Ebay. It was the bike I admired as a kid, but was too small to use or have then. I do ride the bike. Its newness did not have to be prese rved, just experienced once. I'm not running a museum here... Len Grossman S. Orange NJ Emanuel Lowi wrote: I prefer to think of bicycles as wheeled vehicles meant to be pedaled
down roads. Its function is intrinsic to its value. Therefore, to my way
of thinking, an unridden vintage bike is therefore worth less than one
that has been employed for its purpose.
Could there be something wrong with it, or it is otherwise unrideable,
and therefore not fit for its purpose? The only way to know is to outfit
it and get on the thing, take it out for a spin.
Fundamentally, I find the whole obsession with virginity weird.