Artster, in my first post in this thread I was actually hoping to turn the discussion away from issues of monetary value. Though based on the replies, I see I haven't been too successful - or not read carefully enough. ;-> Dollars have never been a strong concern although it is useful as one of the objective yardsticks available to us for assessing this notion of 'Collectible' which, over the months (years) I've been attempting to both observe and come to grips with.

For the sake of argument, we can throw out the monetary value factor. However, even if we do this, I continue to believe the creation of what I've now taken to calling 'knock-offs' has had an deleterious effect on the value of what I believe HL had has their original goal. (Besides making money, that is.) Their early brochures reference 'Hand Numbered Limited Edition Collectibles'. I think they attempted to create original, exlusive, high-quality lighthouse models to be valued for their detail and their uniqueness. And in fact they did this, and continue to do it quite well. (Bravo) Unfortunately, imo, the creation of unlimited edition knock-offs (regardless of quality) reduces the exclusivity and uniqueness of their original efforts. I see this as breaking a trust with those who bought into the line based on its original intent. (Or at least what I perceive to be that intent.)

I'll grant you that buying into the exclusivity of a manufactured-rarity is a tenuous proposition. For example, one has to have some faith that the manufacturer won't turn around and sell 10 times the number of copies they originally promised they would make. I've got to wonder what BY's answer would be to a fledgling collector about to shell out $63 for Boston Harbor in 1991 who asked if he would eventually be making near copies that actually were a bit nicer and less expensive. If BY had said "yes we plan to launch a line of Open Editions that will include one very similar to the model you're buying", I wonder what that new collector would think about the whole idea of 'Hand Numbered Limited Edition Collectibles'. (And I'm not wondering whether the new collector would have bought it anyway.) Let's not overlook the cachet of exclusivity, and unique quality are part of what helped sell the piece at $63 rather than at $33.

Could HL have been successful if they'd 'kept the flame' with the Collector? Are there enough die-hard lighthouse model collectors who would buy 5500 copies of East-Backwater Shoals as quickly as they snapped up Portland Head? Do the knock-offs have to be hand-numbered and so close in size as to compromise the exclusivity and uniqueness in the Limited Editions in order to meet what some see as their purpose - to attract new collectors while providing giftshops something to sell? If Y&A had managed to come up with a different line of models that were successful, would they feel the need to make HL knock-offs?

On a different note, Art, your 'counter-plausibility' example is a good one. (I fully understand the Humean notion of casuality issue, yet remain unrepentent in my Newtonian approach to medium size objects. [vbg]) Nonetheless your example seems to - at the same time- work at a higher level than the issue I'm addressing, and also include it. Your example draws on the lack of demand, but fails to account for it. I think the cheap attractive knock-offs may, to some extent, squelch the flame of desire in the person who is both fervent over having "All the Belles" and yet hesitant about spending several hundred dollars for just one.

"Look dear - here's a nicer one for just $60". Who knows how many marriages have been 'saved by the Glow' LoL!.

Yap On,
__
/im