My limited experience is that a vast majority of "pro-ridden" bikes do not command much, if any, premium. Most riders labored in relative obscurity, and as others have mentioned, proving a connection can be difficult. But I gotta say, I had a Lambert back in the early 70's, and I don't see what the attraction is. I'd much rather have a water carrier's pro bike than a mediocre novelty bike that I actually could afford when I was a kid.
John
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 2:29 PM, <billydavid13@comcast.net> wrote:
> Like Moos i generally find bikes that stood out at the low end more
> interesting than the high end examples and his MG/Ferrari analogy is right
> on. And i'm a big fan of the Lambert/Viscounts w/ all their issues. But i
> have to say that a bike ridden by a Kelly or Lemond or even some forgotten
> domestique carries a certain cachet. We all value bikes for a myriad of
> reasons. Some border on idolatry or maya. But riding remains the highest for
> of hommage to both the builder and any former riders. Billy
> Ketchum; Chicago, IL; USA
>
> _______________________________________________
>
--
John Wood
Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA