Rare vs hard to find vs valuable

[dragnusa]

A friend and I was talking about the 20 inch Firestone Special cruiser I found a while back. He asked me if I had found out any info on it. I told him I have found very little about it and he said so its valuable then. I told him that isn't always true, that just because something is hard to find or rare doesn't mean its valuable. I told him sure all of us hope to find that one bike that is worth alot but just because info on one isnt readily available doesnt mean that it is valuable

 

[deven_science]

True.

Example: This Magic Freewheel I might be selling to Von Yinzer is supposed to turn a freewheel into a coaster brake. It was made for a limited time, decades ago. But because it's so rare that there's no info on the net about it, it's not really worth much. If it was on Sheldon Brown's website, with him saying how well it worked or whatever, than it might be worth something. The lack of info makes it seem like a risk to any who want to try it.

So does it work? I don't know, I never tried it!

 

[the_undecider]

Value is a function of demand. If something is rare, lots of people want it, then the value tends to go up if such demand remains high for a long enough time period. Sometimes, you might have an item on ebay, and it sells for a lot just because perhaps a couple or few people got into a bidding war. It doesn't mean next time around the same thing will happen.

People throw around the word "rare" rather recklessly. Most often, said item really is not that scarce. Then, so many people believe rare always equals expensive.

 

[Bicycle808]

In my experience, some of the bikes that do best are ones that were never really rare... Schwinns were best-sellers BITD, and they've held their value very well. And, some of the most expensive Schwinns today tend to be models that sold very well.

Expense is, in part, a function of demand. (As mentioned above.) Many ppl want an old Schwinn b/c they once had one, so now they're nostalgic. Or, at the very least, they've heard of Schwinns and know they're collectible. so, demand is up, which brings the cost up.

The flip side is "supply", where rarity can add to the value. If something is both rare and in demand, it will bring a high price. (eg, Elgin Bluebird).

But, being rare doesn't make something valuable without that demand piece. There are many one-of-a-kind bikes out there that won't bring much money, b/c they're too obscure to be popularly sought-after. If you've never heard of it, how would you know to look for it? And, if you happen to find it, how will you determine a fair value if there are no others to compare it to?

FWIW, truly valuable collector's pieces tend to have a lot of info available about them online, with few examples being offered for-sale.

 

[gcrank1]

In our real world (not the 'money is no object' collector crowd) the only thing we can be sure of being rare is a steak thats still bleedin'.
Caveat lector,
Caveat emptor

 

[kingfish254]

Caveat lector,
Caveat emptor

Is that Hannibal's brother?

 

[StephenH]

In some areas of collecting, "rare" automatically equates to "valuable". For example, if you're collecting Jefferson nickels, the common way to do so is to try to collect one of each year and mint mark. In that case, the 1950D is the rarest, and that makes it more valuable. Well, people assume this applies to things like bicycles. The only catch is, I have never heard of anyone, much less large numbers of people, who were trying to collect "one of every bicycle ever made". Consequently, if a bike is rare, but not especially notable either, then there may be minimal demand for it as well.

Another factor that enters in is regional rarity. For example, bicycles made specifically for European or Asian markets are fairly uncommon here. So you'll see ads for some random German bike that is "rare". Well, maybe it is in Texas, but it's likely to be as common as old Schwinns back in Germany. So if there was any great value to them here, they'd just load up a few containers full of 'em and ship 'em over.

 

[gcrank1]

Thats a-cute one K-fish

 

[expjawa]

I guess ultimately, something is only worth what a buyer is willing to pay. When there is more than one interested party, that drives the price. But if no one is interested, well...

We had this conversation years ago with a friend that's a car collector. He's got a '61 Lotus Se7en, a Jag XK150 and '57 Turner. The Turner is one of 3 or 4 that were steel bodied, the rest were fibreglass. But compared to the Lotus or Jaguar, who the heck has heard of a Turner? Even amoung British sports car nuts, its a bit obscure. He comment back then that being rare doesn't necessarily make it valuable...

 

[kentercanyon]

Things are worth what you can reliably sell them for. Yes there may be " just the one" buyer out there who will pay a premium price for something that is common but that is just a sucker. "A fool and his money are easily parted."

On the other hand getting a bargain at a garage sale doesn't lessen the market value of a collectible item.

 

[c.p.odom]

Yup, the usual confusion between rare and desirable. People might collect what is rare but they pay for what they desire. I was told by a mentor many years ago to only collect and buy what was high end and rare when it was new. Collect what the rich people bought new then later discarded.

 

[mikeeebikey]

In the 80's you couldn't get wet snow for a muscle bike!
nowadays an original crate is nearly priceless, like the one I had when I was a kid...

 

[dougfisk]

Think about why a consumer item is rare... It is usually because people didn't buy it when it was initially offered. Many times, years later, people still don't want it!