I guess I do not get really this. I enjoy old bicycles, but guess I'm lacking a sentiment gene of some kind. (that was my excuse to my wife for forgetting our anniversary last year ;-)
Take two identical bicycles, both with original, period correct parts. One was built that way by somebody buying a frame and parts 40-odd years ago. The other was built up by the same person through acquiring an equivalent frame and parts this year. Due to a serious financial reversal, he/she is forced to sell the bike, and really does need every penny available. It is a "crime" to sell one of these bicycles piece by piece, but perfectly ok to sell the other one that way? Even if in every other way they are identical physical objects? Does the sentiment change if even in parting the complete bike out, the seller gets less than the price that was initially paid, so there's no "profit" in the equation?
And everybody who feels this way is willing to overbid for the Colnago now that he is selling it complete?
Baird Webel ---- Washington, DC
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:00 PM,
<classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: John Betmanis <johnb@oxford.net>
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 11:32:51 -0400
> Subject: Re: [CR] 1972 COLNAGO SUPER PANTOGRAFATA is being sold complete
> Normally, if it had been the seller who had built this bike from parts acquired over a period of time, he would be taking a huge hit by selling it complete. The only way to recover the investment would be to part it out again, provided he hadn't overpaid for any of the components out of desperation to complete the project. Conversely, parting out a significant original bike for profit would be a crime. Hopefully this seller at least recovers what he paid for it when he bought it, plus what he spent upgrading it.
>
> --
> John Betmanis
> Woodstock, Ontario
> Canada