Sweet *LINK*

Re: Sweetererererer *LINK*

Jonathan Peck - N.Y.

>This one was early in the evolution of the bench planes we know and love. Pre-bailey type #1, extremely rare and way up there on the gizmosity meter....AND...it's never been messed with.


LEONARD BAILEY THREE SCREW FROG #3

Re: Sweetererererer *LINK*

Jonathan Peck - N.Y.

>Looks like Mr. Leach is parting out some items from his collection. This is a good example of how the open market works. This is probably the finest example of a type 2 on the planet, and probably should have gone for more (IMHO)

If you don't think Patrick is passionate about tools, read the description and how he gushes over this fine example and this ain't no sales tactic either.


MOST EXCELLENT TYPE 2 #3

Basic demographics

Dean Burke - Yakima, WA

>All sounds fine; but I'd suggest that to realize profit in your life time, start selling out in about 10 years, when boomers haven't yet started dying off. Same with houses.

Now, higher levels of immigration may alleviate this depopulation event; but nothing I'd want to count on.

Dean

Re: Sweetererererer *LINK*

Jonathan Peck - N.Y.

>Check out this three part brass adjusting nut. What???? That's right..it adjusts so that you can take out any slop in the adjusting fork. What's that you say? This is a pre type 1 with an ingenious feature that eliminates slop in the adjuster???? Yup


A BETTER MOUSETRAP

Re: You might be right, BUT...

Greg Sloop

>

well I find that pretty amusing as i think just about all tradtional investments could fall under that heading...uhmm just what is the "basic Value" for

diamonds ,

gold,

stock shares or even

high priced real(e)state?

Gold and diamonds have traditionally been rare and valued. They don't appreciate much, and are not generally used as investment opportunities. They are generally safe harbors when the value of other "investments" are in question, such as stocks, bonds, real-estate.

As for the intrinsic value of Gold and diamonds, I tend to agree there's no real value to them. But their universal "value" has been accepted over thousands of years - what can I say.

As for stocks and real-estate...

Go look at all the stock market crashes. They exist mostly because people "invested" (true sarcasm there) in the faith that someone else would buy the worthless paper they held at a higher value than they paid. They didn't look at the earnings the company made and the assets vs. debt of the company etc. It was a ponzi scheme in short. (The dot-com crash is a text-book study here...)

Real-estate? Look at real-estate prices in CA in the 80's and 90's and the downturns and what happened... or how about real-estate in Japan during their economic crashes, or Texas during the S&L crisis.

Collector items only have value when someone else is willing to pay a *premium* over the cost of actual materials and manufacturing costs. This means it only has sentimental value. That is a pretty transient value, IMHO.

If the materials and manufacturing methods were scarce then perhaps one could justify the costs.

How Gold and Diamonds differ is precisely because they are scarce and, presumably, the price at which it sells is equal to it's "manufacturing" costs.

So, I tend to agree with your assessment that many people "invest" in many different ponzi schemes - not just tool collecting. There's lots of suckers in the world I guess.

Where I guess we differ is in the intelligence of said action. Mass hysteria doesn't make it any more logical and reasonable.

Anyway. I state again. If you like collecting, then do so for the love of collecting - not investment purposes.

A side note:

I think there are precious few who really make money "collecting" and those that do, are often just making money on the scarcity of *knowledge* rather than the increase in value (appreciation) of the items themselves. (i.e. Taking the knowledge of the worth of said $0.50 screwdriver and turning it for $116.00)

Even in the latter case, if the market demand dries up for that item, it won't be worth $116.00 but a price more approximating the real material and manufacturing costs. However, the turn around is quick and less likely to have a risk of financial ruin. But then again, you're not trying to make 150K a year doing so either are you?

I'll say it again...

IMHO - If you like collecting, then do so for the love of collecting - not investment purposes.

Collecting is a fine pursuit. We all do it to some degree I suppose. I suspect most of us attempt to justify it as an investment - which it generally isn't good at.

Cheers,

Greg

yup...

John Truxell-Svenson (jvs)

>Re-read the post. The fifty-cents-in-a-box-of-beanie-babies scenario has lots of investment potential, and the person who bought it for $116 got their money's worth if it made them happy, but based on the numbers provided, the #1 in 1969 was a lousy "investment" at $200. Buy low/sell high is always a good strategy; buy at auction and hold is a great way to collect.

I don't think that we have any disagreement, unless you are trying to say that today's auction prices will *make* money for their buyers.




/jvs

Auctions

Todd Hughes

>...."I don't think we have any disagreement, unless you are trying to say that todays auction prices will "make" money for thier buyers"...

True I didn't buy the Yankee 66 screw driver bit,[just a bit not a screw driver by the way] at an auction but few months ago I did buy a tool lot at a large,[probably 400+ people] well attended auction for $100 and sold one tool out of it for $1,800...so yea think i am saying that with todays auction prices money can still be made for buyers.Mater of fact most Antique dealers I know get lots of what they sell at auctions so don't really follow you when you say you don't think you can make money on what you buy at auctions... Oh sold the rest of the $100 lot for about $400 and the $1,800 item wasn't even what the other bidders wanted.I think I could have gotten it for the minimal bid of $5......Todd

Re: Auctions

joel

>You all realize of course that being able to find a deal at 5 bucks and selling it later for more has little to do with if tools are a good investment. Dealers have always made money (otherwise there wouldn't be dealers). you buy low and sell high and you would not have bought that load of tools for 2200 and held on to it until it appriciates. The question of investment is whether if you bought a load of tools at market (or from a dealer) ten years ago would you be able to sell them at a profit befitting a "good" investment.

I would say it largely depends on what was bought. Norris's bought 10 years ago have appricieated mightily. Stanleys have gone up some. Regular, run of the mill stanley stuff has stayed flat.

Wooden planes by "known" early makers have also done well.

I think there will be a run on rare saws in top condition (not reconditioned - top original condition) but If I were interested in collecting for investment - early portable power tools I think will do amazingly well in the next 20 years.

Re: Auctions

John Truxell-Svenson (jvs)

>Yea, I was kind of stuck on way a $200 plane in 1970 that could sell for a thousand now was brought out as an example of how value goes up over time and what a good investments tools are. If the buyer was a collector, sure--he had it for 35 years. If you do the math, it would net maybe a cup of coffee. A passbook savings account would have brought in enough to cover most of another #1 at today's prices over the same amount of time. Sure, there is money to be made buying at auctions, and maybe even ebay every now or then, but for most people who are buying FROM dealers, it is a sucker bet if making long-term money is the goal.




/jvs

I agree !

Todd Hughes

>I really think early power tools ARE the collectable tools of the future too. I think we are sort of on the bottom floor right now though I do think there is some collector interest already. While I might admit I collect coffens and body parts it is a little embarrasing to admit I have more then a few mint in the box power drills packed away.Really am thinking about starting to buy more esp. large early ones and those that look like ray guns...Kind of neat i think and sure to go up!.....Todd

Re: Auctions

joel

>I don't know - I just ran a few interest calculations (pretending they are bonds) on some of the tools I have. The best of them seem to have appreciated about 10-18 percent a year )over 17 years) which is a lot better than any other invenstment I have except my house.

All of this stuff was bought from dealers at "market"

Of course I can't sell them because I want them - and I think most of the price rise is over.

I know it's possible for a good securities investor to do much better but my talent at picking stocks is horrible and I don't get any pleasure at picking losers.

I didn't buy any tools for investment - I use my tools. well at least some of them. It's just nice to know they are appriciating in value.

Re: Auctions

John Truxell-Svenson (jvs)

>Aye--I was going on the example; worked out to ~1%, and even *I* can get that. Something like that Spiers infill shoulder is certainly in the category of priceless. On the other end of the spectrum, I'll be happy to pass my type 11s and 17s (nothing smaller than a #5 1/2, though) on to the little one, hoping mainly that she and her husband can enjoy using them in twenty or thirty years.




/jvs

Re: Auctions

Greg Sloop

>But, if I cherry pick out of a handfull of stocks, I can probably get 100% rate of return.

To be a fair comparison one would have to take every tool you've ever purchased and held with the intent of selling later and doing the math.

I suspect you'll find there are astonishing gains, and also losses. When they're averaged out, I suspect only a few lucky souls will have significant investment gains.

Anyway - not that it matters, but this discussion partially started about "Fad tools" as Moses so put it. I expanded on that, and redirected the idea some, and so perhaps some are complaining about this being a fad.

It may not be a fad, and thus Moses's terminology might be a bit off. However, I suspect he was thinking in terms of investment, and that's where I went with it.

Frankly, all "investment" schemes have risk issues. But I like investments that have some real fundamental value; Land at reasonable prices is one thing. Tools too - though not for collectors purposes - but for what their utilitarian value is. Companies that produce a real product that meets the needs of real people and who are satified with reasonable rates of growth and have sound financial basis, etc

Anyway. Thanks all. I enjoyed the discussion.

Cheers,

Greg

Investment

David Miller from Iowa

>I agree that this is a lot of money, that it has little user value, and that money can be better spent on user tools when one is building a set.

However, for those of us in the peak "earning years" collectible tools are a decent investment. I bought my first #45 MIB in 1975 and paid $5 for it. In the mid 1980s #1s were going for a couple hundred and #2s were about $40. I don't have the data, but this is probably the similar to a long term stock investment except you get to tune, gloat, enjoy and display. At least that is how I rationalize my collecting illness.

Just curious...

Jonathan Peck - N.Y.

>...but do you have to pay capital gains on tool sales?

Yup

David Miller from Iowa

>depends upon one's tax bracket, the maximum is 28% for items held more than one year. However, in the tools-as-investment theory, one's income should be in one of the lower brackets when they need to liquidate, which accordingly has an lower indexed rate. Save those receipts, especially the ones they don't give you at fleas markets.