Posted By: Webmaster
Factoid #11 Discussion Group Therapy - 01/03/99 04:33 PM
Per Professor Aucremann's request, we'll use the Fog Signal Building to discuss his theories on the ins and outs of HL pricing over time. To jump to his latest edition, you can use this link:
http://www.lighthousekeepers.com/forums/Forum16/HTML/000009.html
Professor A's latest Factoid will take some time to digest and process. My first reaction is to recall a long-time theory of mine which is hard to enumerate:
The Tourist and Dispersion Factors Affecting Long Term Growth in Values of Lighthouse Collectibles by Harbour Lights (C) (R) 1996-98 etc.
The good professor suggests collectors stand back a bit from the various lighthouses in consideration for purchase and add a dash of 'beauty' to the equation. For example, Jupiter FL has a certain desireability because it is RED. Cape Blanco has less appeal because it is simple and, frankly, not as well sculpted.
Jupiter also has the advantage of being located in a more populated area than Cape Blanco and so more LOCALS will be available to purchase their copy of it for the mantlepiece or as a gift to others in their family than will Cape Blanco area residents.
And since more tourists flock to Florida than visit the Oregon coast by several multiples, more toursts are likely to snap up a Jupiter as a memento of their vacation.
(And just another diversion: A lighthouse model of Jupiter is a more appropriate memento of a trip to the coast of Florida than is a Boston Harbor lighthouse model a memento of your vacation to Boston. You need to go out of your way to see Boston Harbor light and Boston's appeal isn't so much tied to lighthouses. Oh, and Boston has a bunch of tall buildings that catch your eye before the areas lighthouses.)
Now then, some of the edition will end up in the hands of LOCALS, some in the hands of TOURISTS and some in the hands of two kinds of collectors: The basic collector and the speculating collector who buys one or more "extras". Those extras may be bought because they expect the piece to go dramatically up in value over some (unstated) period of time OR because they want to use it to leverage some other piece from another speculating collector.
And so we have "Chidester's Corollary" to "Aucremann's Theorem":
"The more dispersed an edition is among individual collectors, the faster it will rise in value."
Makes sense. If 5,350 collectors, for hypothetical example, hold the 5,500 Boston Harbors, then locating one to buy is more difficult and will be more expensive. ("You want me to WHAT? Break up my collection and sell you the ONLY Boston Harbor I have? You're gonna PAY BIG for that one!") Assuming none are broken or lost, then the "float" is 150 pieces.
Whereas, in the case of Thomas Points, the 9,500 may be held by 6,000 collectors, the "float" is 3,500. It's not hard to locate one to buy and for not much more than original retail.
Not enough time this morning to add more, other than saying, how will this affect future values?
Cape Blanco - took a LONG LONG LONG time to retire. Not a tourist area (comparatively), not as many LOCALS to buy one, probabaly not a lot of 'extras' in the hands of collectors, so sometime in the future, it will have a significant price rise?
We've seen a recent example in Ocracoke. One of the Southern Belles. Probably the one of the seven least visited by tourists, not many LOCALS, not much speculative buying of this one (as compared with St. Augustine, St. Simons, etc.) Pretty widely dispersed among collectors, so not many extras. Now selling in the $400 range and VERY hard to find at that price even. (And, although we can't predict this, it seems unlikley that there will be a GLOW Ocracoke.)
As its price rises, the number of collectors who can (or are willing to) buy it decreases. And as the price rises, the more likely a collector might be willing to forgo having one in their collection in exchange for $500. But that's a discussion for another time.
Chidester GA (Graduate Assistant)
[This message has been edited by JChidester (edited 01-03-99).]
http://www.lighthousekeepers.com/forums/Forum16/HTML/000009.html
Professor A's latest Factoid will take some time to digest and process. My first reaction is to recall a long-time theory of mine which is hard to enumerate:
The Tourist and Dispersion Factors Affecting Long Term Growth in Values of Lighthouse Collectibles by Harbour Lights (C) (R) 1996-98 etc.
The good professor suggests collectors stand back a bit from the various lighthouses in consideration for purchase and add a dash of 'beauty' to the equation. For example, Jupiter FL has a certain desireability because it is RED. Cape Blanco has less appeal because it is simple and, frankly, not as well sculpted.
Jupiter also has the advantage of being located in a more populated area than Cape Blanco and so more LOCALS will be available to purchase their copy of it for the mantlepiece or as a gift to others in their family than will Cape Blanco area residents.
And since more tourists flock to Florida than visit the Oregon coast by several multiples, more toursts are likely to snap up a Jupiter as a memento of their vacation.
(And just another diversion: A lighthouse model of Jupiter is a more appropriate memento of a trip to the coast of Florida than is a Boston Harbor lighthouse model a memento of your vacation to Boston. You need to go out of your way to see Boston Harbor light and Boston's appeal isn't so much tied to lighthouses. Oh, and Boston has a bunch of tall buildings that catch your eye before the areas lighthouses.)
Now then, some of the edition will end up in the hands of LOCALS, some in the hands of TOURISTS and some in the hands of two kinds of collectors: The basic collector and the speculating collector who buys one or more "extras". Those extras may be bought because they expect the piece to go dramatically up in value over some (unstated) period of time OR because they want to use it to leverage some other piece from another speculating collector.
And so we have "Chidester's Corollary" to "Aucremann's Theorem":
"The more dispersed an edition is among individual collectors, the faster it will rise in value."
Makes sense. If 5,350 collectors, for hypothetical example, hold the 5,500 Boston Harbors, then locating one to buy is more difficult and will be more expensive. ("You want me to WHAT? Break up my collection and sell you the ONLY Boston Harbor I have? You're gonna PAY BIG for that one!") Assuming none are broken or lost, then the "float" is 150 pieces.
Whereas, in the case of Thomas Points, the 9,500 may be held by 6,000 collectors, the "float" is 3,500. It's not hard to locate one to buy and for not much more than original retail.
Not enough time this morning to add more, other than saying, how will this affect future values?
Cape Blanco - took a LONG LONG LONG time to retire. Not a tourist area (comparatively), not as many LOCALS to buy one, probabaly not a lot of 'extras' in the hands of collectors, so sometime in the future, it will have a significant price rise?
We've seen a recent example in Ocracoke. One of the Southern Belles. Probably the one of the seven least visited by tourists, not many LOCALS, not much speculative buying of this one (as compared with St. Augustine, St. Simons, etc.) Pretty widely dispersed among collectors, so not many extras. Now selling in the $400 range and VERY hard to find at that price even. (And, although we can't predict this, it seems unlikley that there will be a GLOW Ocracoke.)
As its price rises, the number of collectors who can (or are willing to) buy it decreases. And as the price rises, the more likely a collector might be willing to forgo having one in their collection in exchange for $500. But that's a discussion for another time.
Chidester GA (Graduate Assistant)
[This message has been edited by JChidester (edited 01-03-99).]