Why just lay this on the shoulders of one person? Set a task force, publish and sell the results. Donate the profits to Operation Smile and the cost of operating future Cirque.
Mikey Schmidt BattleGround Inn 4th Floor Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless
-----Original Message----- From: gholl@optonline.net
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:53:42 To:"brianbaylis@juno.com" <brianbaylis@juno.com> Cc:Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Subject: Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?
Brian: It's true that bike collecting is not analogous to collecting fine art . But, I think it's an important and interesting hobby-and I thin k you, and a lot of other people, do too.
As time goes by, and the older generation leaves the scene, it's g oing to get harder to preserve the information needed to identify and re store bikes. It's also important to know what value collectors put o n them-after all they've studied them and put up their hard earned mon ey to collect them. Now, I think someone like you should be heavily involved in such a pro ject (puttting together a guide to vintage steel bikes). Wouldn't it be a shame if your knowledge were lost? Cordially,
George Hollenberg MD
Westport, CT, USA
Date: Thursday, June 7, 2007 2:00 am
Subject: Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?
To: loudeeter@aol.com
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
>
> Lou, George, and all,
>
> I first have to admit that I haven't read any but these last few
> posts
>
> on this topic (but I have heard about it); but getting carried
> away
>
> with price guides and such for bikes is probably a waste of
> time. Why
>
> spend a tremendous amount of time making something that is
> casual and
>
> fun into something complicated. Bikes are worth what people are
>
> willing to pay for them. That varies. Get over it.
>
> If you don't know enough about the stuff to decide what it's
> worth,
>
> that's a pretty good sign you should not buy it. If you are a
> novice,
>
> stick around and make friends, talk to people, and learn who to
> ask if
>
> you have questions.
>
> Honestly, I don't think there are enough bikes and people in the
> hobby
>
> to make such a thing worth while; at least not for for
> everything.
>
> Maybe if someone wants to get the basics of what some of the
> most rare
>
> and desirable bikes are generally worth, go ahead. Everything
> else
>
> will be worth much less than those things. That's close enough.
> Bike
>
> collecting will never be as sophisticated as collecting art,
>
> automobiles, or watches. Simple fact.
>
> Just my opinion. If you disagree, feel free to give me a wedgie
> at the
>
> Cirque. Be ready for a hard punch to the kneecap from the dwarf
> if you
>
> do, though.
>
> Brian Baylis
> La Mesa, CA
>
>
>
> -- loudeeter@aol.com wrote:
> George, I'm baffled that you are baffled. First, there i
s no singl
> e
>
> un
> iversally accepted grading standard for used bicycles. I
> posted on
> e
>  standard that Jim Cunningham suggested to me, but again,
it's
> not
> universally accepted. Second, there is no annually published
>
> pricing
>
> list by condition for bicycles like you see for coins or guns.Â
> I
>
> have
>
> a "Blue Book of Bicycle Values that was published about five
> years
>
> ago, but
>
> it is woefully inadequate. The price list that Mike Kone
> (an
> d Sheldon?) prepared that you see on Sheldon's website is
a go
> od s
> tart, but again, it touched the surface for makes and didn't
> address
>
> the ful
> l range of condition. No criticism of the effort, just not
> what yo
> u
>
> ar
> e suggesting/asking. Third, provenance is a topic that Brett
Horto
> n
>
> co
> vered very well at a Cirque a few years ago (2003?) that may
> still be
>
> availa
> ble on DVD from listmember Ken Toda (huemax@aol.com) or you can
> just
>
> ask Bre
> tt at Cirque to tudor you on provenance. Would it be nice to
> have
> a
>
> un
> iversally accepted standard for grading and an up-to-date
> accessible
>
> pricing
> guide? Sure it would. Is that going to happen anytime so
on?
> Â
> I think not. Heck, we can't even get universally accepte
d defi
> niti
> ons for "original"! Lou Deeter, Orlando FL USA
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gholl@optonline.net
> To: loudeeter@aol.com
> Cc: Classic Rendezvous
> Sent: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 4:50 pm
> Subject: Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?
>
>
>
> Dear Lou and Don:
> am somewhat baffled by both your posts dated 4 June. Although I
> agree
>
> with
>
> the
>
> eneral conclusion that the more complete a description of a bike
> that
>
> can be
>
>
> ade the better, is there already a standardized system for such
> a
>
> descriptio
> n?
>
> f so, where is it to be found? If none exists, creating one
> would be a
>
> good
>
> dea. For example the Antiquorum (Watch) auction house has a
> pretty
>
> decent
>
> tandardized system for watch description.
> eedless to say, when a bike cannot be examined forst-hand, good
> photos
>
> (not
>
> lways easy to come by) are invaluable in determining condition.
> nother important issue raised is that of bike provenance. How
> can one
>
> easonably determine whether a bike was in fact ridden in the
> Giro by
>
> Bartoli
>
>
> or pick your own race and champ)?
> inally, as regards bike values, a very old and outdated list can
> be
>
> found on
>
>
> he web, and I have seen someone email CR about the preparation
> of a
>
> new vint
> age
>
> ike price list but, have never heard whether it was completed.
> Such
>
> lists ar
> e
>
> ritical in other areas of collecting, especially those giving
> photos
>
> and
>
> uction values. In fact, even Internet services exist giving fine
> art
>
> values
>
> rranged by artist, date of sale, etc. A service with these
> features
>
> would b
> e
>
> ery helpful to the vintage bike collector, especially the novice.
> eorge Hollenberg, MD
> estport, CT, USA
>
>
> ---- Original Message -----
> rom: loudeeter@aol.com
> ate: Monday, June 4, 2007 2:47 pm
> ubject: Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?
> o: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> > This is meant to be a way of describing condition, not
>
> necessarily value, al
> though I can see a logical correlation from the top to bottom
>
> ending in P (P
> oor). REB isn't meant to be in the order of value. I think
>
> this
>
> is just a way of properly describing the item. In fact, an
>
> excellent b
> ike ridden by Eddy Merckx would likely be worth more than a NOS
>
> team bike me
> ant for him, but never ridden. Likewise, a NOS Bianchi from
>
> 1951 might
> be worth a bunch, but a very well worn Coppi ridden Bianchi in
>
> F condition
> might be worth a lot more than NOS. Even a rebuilt or
>
> repainted
>
> Coppi bike might be worth more than NOS. How many of us would
>
> fault a
>
> collector who found a Coppi ridden bike with many parts
> replaced
>
> over the ye
> ars, with proper provenance, who then rebuilt it with correct
> parts.
>
> So, it depends.
>
>
>
> The point being that repainted or rebuilt isn't the same as origin
al.
> It is just that, a repaint or rebuild. Mike Schmidt throws a
> curve at this when he mentions a NOS 1972 Montelatici that had ne
> ver been painted. Then, when it is painted in 2000s, is it NEW
>
> or NOS
>
> or some other category. To me, it would be described precisely
>
> as Mike
> described it--NOS frame, originally unpainted, but painted anew
>
> in the U.S.
> in the 2000s. Agreement on terminology isn't always necessary
>
> as long
> as coompleteness of the description is made. Lou Deeter,
>
> Orlando FL U
> SA
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Donald Gillies
>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Cc: LouDeeter@aol.com
> Sent: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 2:30 pm
> Subject: Re: [CR]When is a restoration not a restoration?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lou Deeter's post brings up a very interesting point. A restorat
ion
> according to Lou's post) is classified as "REB: Rebuilt/repain
ted".
> f no modifications are made to the frame and the restoration is done
> n the spirit of "as close to the original finish, minus blems"
, then
> here does value now fall on Lou's list ??
> > NIP: New in original packaging.
> NOS: New, unused, old stock.
> NEW: New, unused, recent production.
> EX: Excellent, virtually unused or unblemished.
> VG: Very Good, minor wear or blemishes.
> G: Good, moderate wear or blemishes.
> F: Fair, significant wear or blemishes.
> P: Poor, incomplete, non-functional or very blemished.
> REB: Rebuilt/repainted.
> I think it depends on the bicycle brand and restorer. For a MASI
> ainted by a MASI painter, my impression is that the value might be
> omewhere between EX and NOS.
> For other bikes (like a Raleigh) painted by a master painter, with
> ood decals, value might be higher than NIP (perhaps this is wishfu
l
> hinking on my part...)
> For other items, such as a Schwinn Paramount painted by
> repaints-
> r-us,
> aybe the value falls to somewhere between G, F, and P...
> Interesting to contemplate.
> - Don Gillies
> an Diego, CA
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________
________________________
________________________
> _
> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about
>
> what's free from
> AOL at AOL.com.
>
>
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> text/html
> ---
> _______________________
________________________
> Classicrendezvous mailing list
> Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> http://www.bikelist.org/
>
>
> George Hollenberg MD
> T, USA
>
> -- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> ultipart/alternative
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> text/html
> --
> _______________________
_______________________
> lassicrendezvous mailing list
> lassicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> ttp://www.bikelist.org/mailman/listinfo/classicrendezvous
>
>
> _______________________
________________________
________________________
> _
> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about
> what's
>
> free from
> AOL at AOL.com.
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> text/html
> ---
> _______________________
________________________
> Classicrendezvous mailing list
> Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> http://www.bikelist.org/
>
>
> _______________________
________________________
> Classicrendezvous mailing list
> Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> http://www.bikelist.org/
>
George Hollenberg MD CT, USA
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
_______________________________________________
Classicrendezvous mailing list
Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
http://www.bikelist.org/
_______________________________________________
Classicrendezvous mailing list
Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
http://www.bikelist.org/