Re: [CR]Re: Collecting rationale

(Example: Production Builders:Frejus)

Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 22:04:28 -0500
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
From: "John Betmanis" <johnb@oxford.net>
Subject: Re: [CR]Re: Collecting rationale
In-Reply-To: <003201c83ec0$a0a94570$6402a8c0@peter5ca78cb10>
References: <c9e.1dc4a871.3494455e@aol.com> <8CA0CBCF79855E2-748-1E5D@webmail-me10.sysops.aol.com> <008001c83eb3$7d9257f0$0300a8c0@ourlaptop> <47632D5A.80801@burlingtontelecom.net>


Everyone has their rationale for collecting vintage bikes. Obviuosly, there are some among us who have the means to collect some significant historic machines. If I had the means, my garage would be full of them. But I don't. However, another addiction of mine is music. A CD costs 1% the price of a vintage bike, or less. It still adds up, so I probably have several vintage bikes on my shelf. Add to that the trips to music festivals and concerts all over Ontario plus Vermont and Texas and there's a few more bikes. (Okay, for the curious, I'm a Fredhead and even Google won't tell you what that means unless you dig deep.) My vintage collection consists of bikes I've had since new or bought before they were considered rare or valuable. However, my most recent acquisition is a 1950s Claud Butler frame similar to my first lightweight, which I intend to restore and build up for sentimental reasons. Everyone has a rationale for spending more time and money on an old bike than "normal people" would ever understand. Some would begrudge a wealthy Japanese collector sniping a particular bike or part they had their eye on, but hey, at least it's going to a good home and will be well cared for. At least we can consider ourselves fortunate that our hobby has not gone the way of other established antique stuff. Even old cars are continuously evolving. Some 20-year old cars you buy today for $5000 might be classics worth 10 times more in 10 years.

John Betmanis
Woodstock, Ontario
Canada