Tom, 'ave a good day, mate. Cheers! Enough said.
Best Regards,
Jerry Moos Big Spring, TX
Tom Dalton <tom_s_dalton@yahoo.com> wrote: While I think we are all aware that much if what Jerry posts to this list is inspired by his contrarian nature, and therefore is probably best ignored, I find myself once again unable to exhibit appropriate restraint.
Jerry wrote: I think this whole discussion, if viewed with some perspective, points out the obsessive behavior exhibited by many of us bike collectors. The fact that someone could potentially alter a pair of brake calipers and thereby increase its price fivefold suggests that many buyers have an obsessive preoccupation with detail that makes them potential victims of such scams.
To which I say: Thanks for the perspective, Jerry. Yes, many of us are, at least in your view, obsessive, though certainly not yourself, right? I mean youre not the least little bit obsessed with being the anti-Campy, anti-Masi, Francophile-who-rides-his-bikes, are you? No, I didnt think so.
Anyhoo, Jer, I really dont think that there is any significant chance of gaining a fivefold jump in price (its more like three-fold, FYI) by simply buffing off some logos and re-anodizing some parts. Virtually anyone inclined to dump a grand on a set of first-gen Record brakes will be aware of the centerbolt, spring, and barrel adjuster differences and would not be fooled by any sort of counterfeit unless it involved the machining, stamping, polishing, plating, etc, of several parts. At that point your costs would include about $300 for the original brakes, and all the additional costs of this elaborate counterfeiting process. I suppose if you did a hundred or a thousand sets, you may be able to benefit from economies of scale, but after the first five sets hit the extremely tiny market, the ruse would be self-evident. The obsessive buyer is well protected from the petty scams of your conjecture.
Jerry wrote: While equipping a bike with components of period -correct or even original design, manufacturer and model is perfectly reasonable, obsessing over trivial cosmetic details within a single model of component seems to me to be "over the top".
To which I say: Yes, seems so to YOU.
Jerry wrote: It seems Campy components are the object of some of the most extreme such obsessive behavior. Perhaps that is because Campy parts have been the most exhaustively documented. I also suspect that French components discourage the same level of obsession because markings were more erratic and because the French manfacturers tended to keep old models in production for decades virtually unchanged, simply pushing them down to a lower price point as new model came out.
To which I say: Mike Kone addressed this quite well.
Jerry wrote: I recognize that obsessiveness about detail is probably not as great among bike collectors as, say, stamp and coin collectors. But I regard bike collecting as fundamentally different from those hobbies in that bikes, for me, are to be ridden, allowing one to recreate the same experience as when the bike was new. Coins and stamps, on the other hand, can only be hoarded and gloated over, since no one would ever use valuable ones for their originally intended purpose, even in cases where they are theoretically still legal tender.
To which I say: Same experience as when the bike was new? Perhaps for you. But would not the experience of riding a brand new 1974 Cali Masi, to use an example close to all of our hearts, have been fundamentally different in 1974 than it would be today? At the time, you would have been riding one of the finest bikes available, and a bike just like those used by some top pros. Today, you are riding a cool old bike, to be sure, but gone is that best-of-the-best, latest-and-greatest-feeling. To my mind, this is not a bad thing. I think cool old bikes are cool and old and they remind me of the days of yore, and all that stuff. Moreover, some of the bikes in my collection are the very machines that I used in anger, in my not-so-glorious racing days, so they have special memories. But I will never again experience my 1987 racing bike as a 20 year old turning respectable TT times and hashing it out in Cat 3 crits. Taking this a step farther, who of us has ever, or will ever, experience this stuff in the fullest sense? This stuff we collect was designed and built for elite racers, and it is incidental that the collateral enthusiast market is where the vast majority of it got used. So, would any of us really appreciate the benefits of a set of Clement Paris-Roubaixs on the actual cobbles for which they were intended? Will we ever experience the true benefits of a set of 28-hole Medaille dOrs at full tilt in the Grand Prix des Nations? No, were all pretty much pretenders, whether then or now, and whether we ride it, or just obsess over it.
As to your point about stamp and coin collecting all I can say is, are you serious? Wow, what a sad and profoundly unsophisticated understanding of two rich and important fields of collecting and study. Do you really think that serious philatelists and numismatists do nothing but hoard and gloat? What about the historical context of the minting/printing and use, the artistic merit of the pieces, the highly specialized and carefully assembled collections of serious hobbyists? Thats akin to saying that those of us collections of very specific and rare Campy parts are nothing but hoarders and gloaters, which is, in fact, exactly what you assert... once again.
Finally I cant let this go without comment:
Jerome & Elizabeth Moos wrote:
> (snip) While equipping a bike with components of period -correct
> or even original design, manufacturer and model is perfectly
> reasonable, obsessing over trivial cosmetic details within a single
> model of component seems to me to be "over the top". (snip)
To which Chuck replied:
+------------------------+ | "One man's ceiling is | | another man's floor." | | -- Richard Sachs | +------------------------+
Chuck Schmidt South Pasadena, Southern California
To which I say:
First, quoting RS is downright silly, and I love Chuck for doing it. And what was Chuck saying other than, different strokes for different folks, or something along those lines? At the absolute worst, Chuck pointed out (perhaps a tad presumptuously) that a lot of money to you is nothing to others.
Then there was Jerrys response:
. +-------------------------------+ | | A fool and his money are soon separated.
- Benjamin Franklin +-------------------------------+
Now theres a carefully selected, obscure old gem. Whats the point? Yes, many fools are separated from their money. Not all who are separated from their money are fools, however. This tired old quote is presumptuously misapplied once again.
Tom One man's "obsessive" and another man's "sophisticated" Dalton Bethlehem, PA, USA
---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call rates.