I feel like I'm hogging the forum page. Sorry. This will be my last topic for the month.

Anyone else wondering where the retirements have gone? If I'm counting correctly, there haven't been any "breakings of the mold" in 5 months. Why do you think that is?

Could the fact that open editions are overflowing on dealer shelves have something to do with it?

Could it be that there are more limited editions on the shelves? Could the 10,000 edition size be stretching out retirements (i.e. Cape Florida, which has been 'endangered' for several months...or Grand Haven...or Sturgeon Bay)?

Among the 9,500 series, I'm surprised that Jeffrey's Hook isn't gone by now. I'm really surprised that none of the Lady Lightkeeper's pieces from 1996 are retired.
And poor Wind Point and Round Island...going on 4 years, despite being released during the huge swell in the popularity of Harbour Lights.

I hope that Harbour Lights ends 1998 on a bang with several retirements (Roosevelt Island, at least, is a given). Anyone heard any rumblings as to what might retire next?

Disclaimer: I don't buy Harbour Lights just to watch them retire quickly. Not at all. It's just been awful quiet lately.

Bill

Bill - I think the 10,000 edition size clearly has something to do with it. And with so many new lighthouses coming out, folks who have been collecting a long time are beginning to find their collections unmanageable. My favorite dealer says all she is selling are Beanie Babies; HL sales have slowed way down. The open additions are certainly having their impact - attractive, highly detailed, and available (compared to their retired limited edition counter parts)! I,for one, think the open edition are as sophisticated a jump in artistic detail as the more recent limited HLs compared to the early releases. I think all this has impacted sales and therefore retirements.

I'm buying them as fast as I can!!!

!!!Yankees retired the Padres in 4 Straight games!!!

I've run into the same thing, Deb. Slow sales at almost all of the dealers I visit throughout New England on a semi-regular basis. Plus a general lack of "Wow!" (Even my "reviews" of new pieces on this forum page elicit very little in the way of comments or feedback).

Folks, take another look at my post about Bill Younger on QVC. Believe it or not, I was serious. When the energy or "buzz" around a line of collectibles starts to fade---and I'm sensing it with Harbour Lights---it's time to expand the market and get some new "eyeballs." I don't suggest QVC (or Home Shopping Network) in any cheesy way. I suggest it because of the fact that Beany Babies (and their ilk) are all over home shopping and they're kicking butt. I'd hate to see Harbour Lights start dwindling because they refuse to exploit other avenues of exposure. I can't believe dealers would take offense if Bill Younger offered the GLOWs to build his customer base. All it does is increase interest in the line...and quickly. As in INSTANTLY.

5 months without a retirement or an addition to the "Endangered" list? There's something in that fact that bears some scrutiny.

30,000 Society members...plus all the tourists and other shoppers who grab the occasional Harbour Light...and sales don't appear to be brisk? That warrants some discussion. So...what's everyone out there think of this situation? Or is it a situation at all?

With at least 8 new Glows coming out, the stores in my area are running out of available space. The limited edition pieces, esp. the older versions, are being relegated to the darker confines of the rear of the shelves. Please slow up the releases of the open ed. til we find out what's happening. Even the secondary market and internet postings seem to be slowing to a crawl.

Even though I did see that Cape Florida did just retire, I do believe that the GLOW editions do have a big impact on sales of the LE's. A friend of mine said he likes the GLOW's better than the LE's because they are smaller, cheaper and usually done very nicely. Since he collects only for enjoyment he doesn't care that they hold very little resale value. Also for people that are gift shopping--the $50 range is a lot more affordable than the $80 range.

I was saving my big blast of hot air for when I had the time to jump in on the Coquille River discussion, but thought I would add my 2 cents worth on this one.

Regarding the "QVC" idea.

Let me make sure I understand this correctly. HL has 30,000 members and is growing at around a 1000/month clip. And there is a need to create a BIGGER demand ????? Something doesn't make sense here. I mean, I know I'm new to this and all, but the lot sizes are only 10,000 pcs, right ? My gut feel on this QVC thing is that it would liken it to Beenie Babies (interestingly, after I had these thoughts, I see someone even mentions them on this thread, which I will get to later). In any event, I'm not sure I understand the need to grow the market, at least not from a collector's viewpoint.

Deb mentions: "The open editions are certainly having their impact - attractive, highly detailed.........."

I had to think about this one for a while. My initial thought was that I expect ALL HL realeases to be of the highest quality regardless of whether they are limited or open, but I don't think that was her point. I think the point was that BECAUSE they are highly detailed, etc they are taking sales away from the limited edition pieces ? I'm not sure I agree. As one of the 30,000 I have only purchased an open when the limited was no longer available ( at least not in stores....as a new collector, I'm somehwat reluctant to shop the after market until I become more "seasoned"). Therefore, they are not impacting my purchases at all. And I would tend to think that most of the serious collectors (at least serious enough to join as a member) would tend to focus on limited editions as well.

On to the Beenie Baby comment:

Here's where I get lost.....

Bill states "I suggest it because of the fact that Beany Babies (and their ilk) are all over the home shopping and they're kicking butt"

My response is: So what ? Who cares ?

I don't in any way, shape, or form feel in competition with the Beany Baby collectors. I'm not sure I understand who DOES feel in competition. The only one who might have an interest is BY and the only considerations I can think of would be over "bragging rights" or if he feels that he is losing sales to Beany Baby collectors.

I can't imagine that the beany baby collectors are collecting for their fine handcrafted, true to life, highly detailed, workmanship. All the collectors I know are into it because they think they can buy them at $5.00 and eventually sell them and make "big bucks". Therefore, I don't see any sales being lost to BB collectors.

Myself, on the other hand....I started collecting because of the culture of lighthouses, their historical significance in the growth of this country, their symbolism as guiding lights (and Motherhood and Apple Pie). And I am collecting because of their quality and detail (etc.)

If you want to compete with Beany Babies....sell the lights at $5.00. You'll see some growth then !!

Which brings up another point. At approx. $75.00, these are not cheap !! That is NOT to say they aren't worth the price. That's an individual's own call. But it IS, IMHO, a expensive hobby. I have been trying to limit us to 2 per month (at least until we have our priority list covered....or we win the lottery, whichever comes first). I don't think you can expect all the new collectors to have a sudden impact on the overall market. I would think it's more of a long term deal.

One more point.....

"I'd hate to see Harbour Lights start dwindling because the refuse to exploit....."

If the data of 30,000 members and 1,000 new per month is accurate, I'm hard pressed to see and "dwindling" going on.

And one other question: What's the big deal about retiring a piece (and I'm not being sarcastic, I really don't understand). Does this gain you anything other than the value possibly increasing ?

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not naieve. I, too, hope my collection will grow in value. But, it is not my prime motivator in becoming a collector. It's more of a justification for me. I'd be pretty happy if it didn't lose value (which is why I have a preference for limited over open).

Sorry for the ramblings !!!!

Regards,
Brian (who REALLLLLY needs to switch to de-caf)

Seriously Bill,if your a new collector, you're(I'm) buying the 5500 as quick as you can, and hoping the 9500 and 10000 will be there when you have more $.
Therefore I think the main focus is on newly retireds, and purchases are big on retired@retail or secondary market at reasonable prices.
You old time collectors will just have to wait for the new collectors to catch up for the 9500 and 10000 to disappear.
That's my view.

Whoa...slow down, folks. I'm not saying Harbour Lights should be competing with Beanie Babies. I'm just pointing out the fact that sales appear to be stagnant and that concerns me a little bit, especially BECAUSE OF the fact that there appear to be so many more society members---thousands and thousands more, in fact.

Between 1993 and mid-1997, Harbour Lights got a lot of attention. The Southern Belles and the '94 series were huge. The Assateague mold breakage caused quite a stir. Within 2 years 3 pieces (Coquille, Burrows Island, and Point Arena) retired early and caused a stampede. In 1996 Thomas Point was a blockbuster along with Alcatraz and Cape Canaveral. The early 1997 releases retired in record time.

Then in the second half of '97 something happened. Things slowed down and have been kinda quiet ever since. The UPS strike and their Asian manufacturer delays may have had a little to do with it, but they haven't seemed to recover the fervor they once commanded. Maybe it's temporary, who knows? But clearly there's been a slowdown in retirements (read: demand).

I'm just suggesting that Harbour Lights occasionally try to expand their presence in the mass market through something else other than gift shops and their semi-annual catalog. They're preaching to the choir. I bet there are many lighthouse lovers who have no clue about Harbour Lights and that's a shame. I didn't know a thing about them myself until 2 years ago, and back then I didn't even know what a collectible WAS.

To me it's just good business to try and reach more people, especially when business might be a little stagnant (again, this is only a theory---they could be stockpiling billions of $$$ for all I know). QVC? Maybe not. But I hope they're noodling on ways to attract more awareness. I think they need it now. That's my theory.

I'm not sounding the death knell by ANY stretch. At the same time, given all the limited edition pieces that are out there, I'm wondering why there's been such a dry spell (especially with summer tourists presumably gobbling them up).

Let me put on my business hat because I actually agree with you, Bill. Generally speaking, keeping supply as a constant and increasing demand increases the value of the product. That's basic common sense. And I certainly don't have a problem with increasing the value of my collection (I can be as materialistic as the next guy ). I think my initial fear (albeit unfounded) was that due to the large number of collectors, either the pieces were going to become more difficult to acquire, OR BY would elect to increase the lot sizes above 10K to match the demand. I was looking at it more from the standpoint of the demand being somewhat constant and therefore a smaller lot size would be the key to increasing value. My gut feel was that I would prefer keeping the lots smaller.

I think what I'm really struggling with here, is the perception that sales are "sluggish" (assuming that's true, of course). I think if you go back, and do a simple analysis of number of new introductions times lot size and plot it out over a period of time, it might show that now, there are more TOTAL pieces in the market then ever before. It MIGHT show that. I haven't done the analysis myself yet, but it would make sense. It would also show at what level the current market hits the saturation point.

Add that to the fact that "in the beginning" there were fewer pieces in the HL catalogue, new collectors were more apt to buy every single piece. To some us new collectors, that's somewhat of a daunting vision. And because the catalogue is so much larger, enthusiasts are more likely to just aim for the ones that have some special meaning to them as opposed to the whole catalogue.

I don't know the answer. Just sharing a few thoughts and possibilities.

And one more thing on QVC and I'll NEVER mention it again .

Here's my concern with QVC (other than my perception of it being, as someone said, "cheezy"):

I think QVC could create new demand. In fact it could create HUGE demand. My fear is that it would cause a huge demand that would impact the overall market, but that it would not be a SUSTAINABLE increase in demand. It could have the effect of causing the value of the pieces to go on a roller coaster ride. As a collector (and again, with my business hat on) I would prefer a gradual, long term, sustainable increase in value. Here's my analogy. Beanie Babies are like high tech stocks. You can make lots of money IF you know when to get in and when to get out. But you also have to be prepared to lose your shorts. Harbour Lights is like AT&T blue chip stocks. It's predictable, safe, well planned, and a good value for the future. Your point is that QVC might generate long term collectors and you could be right, of course.

OK, one side note since I keep slamming QVC. I was flipping through the channels the other night and came across QVC ( SWEAR I don't watch it ). They were showing what appeared to be a portion of a Thomas Kincaid print. So I kept it on to see what was going on and sure enough it WAS a Kincaid with ol' Thomas himself, hawking his works. The irony is that as they panned back on that particular print, it was his painting of a Lighthouse ! I was even thinking about buying it, but they sold out before I had to make that decision (to your point, I might add).

Regards,
Brian

A few comments on this thread...

Let's acknowledge for the moment that Bill is correct - there is a lack of recent retirements. What can account for this?

1. Sales may be down.

2. Or - the overall supply of HL models has increased relative to sales such that the rate of sale is not keeping pace with the rate of increase in number of models placed into the market. Iow, sales aren't down but demand is constant relative to increased supply.

3. Or - no single model has caught the eye of the collective sufficient to create a run on it.

What factors may be at work that might account for these possibilities - particularly 1 and 2? The following are conjectures:

The GLOW factor: I suspect GLOWs *are* starting to eat into sales of LEs. I've heard enough secondary dealers make this comment to believe it. Price, shelf space (marketing), and the increased aesthetics of GLOWs may be factors here. If there were no new GLOWs would LE sales increase?

The Thomas Point Affair Backlash: There is a big drop off in multiple purchases by 'investors'. We saw a surge in the purchase of multiples shortly after the early immense poplularity in models such as Alcatraz and Thomas Point. This caught both dealers and collectors off guard - many vowed not to be surprised again, and it accounts for Middle Bay and Drum Point going so quickly. (I previously dubbed this 'The Thomas Point Affair'.) Lotsa folks who bought multiples in hopes of a repeat of this phenomenon wound up holding these longer than they planned and didn't get a quick profit of the size they dreamed. This has led to a substantial reduction in the purchase of speculative multiples. (I wonder if Harbour Lights themselves may have got caught up in the wonderment of this sales spike and this gave support for the in-house advocates of the production increase to 10,000.)

The Bob Vila Effect: People have run out of display space and are now spending their money on remodeling or a new house (particularly with interest rates where they are today). This may seem like fruitcake but just maybe the $150-$225 a month that could be spent on lighthouses is now going into the Corian and SubZero piggybank. :-)

The Only So Many Wackos Factor: The number of collectors who are going after the entire LE collection has not grown at anywhere near the same rate as general collectordom. For new collectors, the overall size of the entire line-up makes it more a daunting task to seek them all. And obviously appreciation has made it more expensive to acquire just the 5500 series today as compared to two or three years ago. Not as many wackos means not as many additional purchases for a light they might not otherwise buy.

The Tourist Factor: Recent releases, while superior in refinement, are not of lights as widely popular as many earlier models. Not as popular because they are not typical tourist lights and thus not as appealing to the souvenir buyer who is not a 'lighthouse nut'. I believe this explains why Cape Florida *is* a retiree. (Afterall how many people go to Execution Rock for vacation, much less buy it as a souvenir?) The further down the list of available lights from which HL draws its models, the further the line will get from those lights likely to be seen and souvenired by tourists.

The Self Fulfilling Prophecy Effect: The fact that there have been fewer retirements, coupled with the slowing in the rate of appreciation of rarer pieces and the relatively small appreciation of newer pieces , may cause some people to defer purchases they might otherwise make if they perceived the HL market is hot hot hot. Thus the perception there are fewer retirements is leading to fewer retirements.

Who knows if any of these conjectures are playing a role in the decline of retirements. Nothing I observe in current activity or on the near horizon leads me to think we'll see a sudden rush to retirement for a number of pieces. I don't even think we've seen the flurry over NPL that both JC and I predicted would be tied w/ the 2nd Reunion.

Actually think Bill's QVC idea is not such a bad one after all. Definitely not as a regular kinda thing but as a one-time or once-a-year event it might give the market the spark that it needs. Even AT&T may need an occasional boost from Herr Greenspan when the situation warrants.

From the Fog Signal Building,
__
/im

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA.]

I believe that part of the problem is too much product and not enough display SPACE. Collectors like myself are running out of places to display our collections and therefore are being a bit more choosey as to what pieces we purchase.I used to collect New York and New England lighthouses .Now that there are so many New York pieces (of which I am happy),I buy very few New England ones and even sold a few of them to make room. We also collect Dept 56 New England Village and they did the same thing--too much product--and no way to display it,so we kept the early pieces, sold some newer pieces, and now only buy the nautical pieces . And besides all of this I also collect other lighthouse stuff and my wife collects Hummels and Charming Tails (the little rats). So one can see that display space can become a major problem when you combine multible collections and too much product. I'm not even going yo get in to the cost factor here.So maybe Harbor Lights should cut back on the number of introductions or take a poll of the membership as to what pieces the collectors would like to have. Just one collectors perspective.

Good points made by all on the "state" of Harbour Lights. I feel the market is definately changing. Maybe "evolving" would be a better word to use.

I got the number of over 30,000 members/1000 new per month from my area's HL sales rep., so I feel it is pretty accurate. I agree with the point that a lot of these new collectors find the task of "catching up" so to speak, a little daunting. These collectors, if they are like me when I started, are probably purchasing what 5500's & 9500's they can find and deferring purchase of the newer releases until they start catching up a little.

Tim, I think your thoughts are right on. I would have to agree with them all except for utilizing QVC or the like. I am still not sold on the idea as being a good one. As I have said before in previous posts, Younger & Associates is a business. One of the goals as such is to make a profit and therefore cannot be faulted for doing what is necessary to achieve that goal, even if that means going on QVC. As a collector with gaps to fill in my collection, the current "slow down" in retirements is a godsend. It is not my place to worry about profits or expanding the collector base. Some may call that selfish, but with the time, energy, and $$$ I have expended toward reaching the goal I set for myself, so be it.

With the high number of new releases it is almost impossible for some collectors to keep up, thus I will say disillusioning some. The cost issue that was brought up is also an issue. A Harbour Light does not come cheap. (They are worth every penny and more) I think that causes more pressure on the GLOW market and less on the limited's. One thing I haven't seen is any numbers on the sales of the open editions. Are they selling well? Better than predicted?

I don't feel that the lack of retirements is necessarily a bad thing. I think it is an evolving market with new collectors having a somewhat different philisophy than the more seasoned collectors. Who knows, "The answer is out there....."

-Todd

Alot of the comments are very valid, but I think a few of Tims puts it all in the nutshell. A couple comments to expand on his:

The "Only so many Wackos effect":
When I started collecting in 1996, there was only 40 or so "retired" pieces to contend with. As one of those Wackos, it was a bit easier to "catch up" and move on to the non-retired pieces. Being only 5500 pieces of each, it did not take long for many to retire since there was a flood of us new collectors buying as many as possible before prices skyrocketed. Therefore, quite a few retirements in 1996-1997.

For the new "Wacko" now, there are 80 plus retired pieces at a much higher price, eating up more of their money for fewer pieces. The new Whacko still wants the older pieces, but now they are coming from other collectors and secondary market dealers instead of HL retail stores. If you are trying to "get them all", why spend your limited money on a non-retired piece at $80 off the shelf when you can get an older retired piece you need for around the same price first. ie: Highland, Blanco, Bodie, etc. (I am not promoting to make purchasing decisions this way, but I know it happens frequently) The sales are still there, and probably at a much increased rate, they are just coming from individuals and secondary dealers instead of retail stores (or already retired pieces from retail stores. ie: retired@retail service). Those sales would not effect the newer retirement schedules, but I bet there are one heck of alot of them, much more than in previous years.

The "Thomas Point Effect":
I have always thought this was a major impact on the line (pertaining to the collector's thoughts and reactions). When many of the new 1995-96 collectors saw the secondary values increase sharply on many pieces, and Thomas Point briskly retired (a valid quick retirement) everyone thought how easy it would be to become an unofficial "dealer" to make some extra cash. Everyone scooped up all the Drum Points, Middle Bays, and many others which created another sudden burst of retirements. These were really "false" retirements because the retail stores ordered 10 or so additional pieces of these, and many collectors had bought their first "multiples". Remember "retirement" is when they are sold out to dealers, not sold out from dealers to collectors. I know a store who still has 10-15 Middle Bays sitting in the stock room. A big mis-calculation by all. There is of course nothing wrong with the "speculative buying", just that alot of it happened quickly by alot of people "forcing" many retirements earlier than expected.

Now, alot of those who bought all the extras are flooding the market with them at less than expected prices (ie: Oops). New collectors are gobbling them up first with their limited funds and eventually making those retirements more "valid" before the mass moves on to newer (easier to find, unretired) pieces.

I assumed a year or two of slow retirements was inevitible. All the previous quick retirements and "miscalculated extras" would need a chance of trading hands before the focus moved on to the non-retired pieces. I do not believe the lull is a problem in any way, just a correction in the market. I think the days of sudden retirements is past, but it should not be interpreted as a flaw in total sales or enthusiasm for the line. Too many other factors in play, as noted by everyones comments on the issue.

All in all though, I still cherish my Presque Isle as much or more as my Canadian Buffalo, even though there is twice as many made. The GLOWS are unlimited in quantity, but it doesn't seem to stop us from purchasing one. I don't think the idea of "retirement" is of that major of importance to the average collector. Not to worry, the "HL's Angels" will still take over the world eventually!

---

-RodW

[This message has been edited by Rod Watson.]

Whew! Heavy lessons in economics, marketing and systems dynamics. While I think that all points mentioned *may* be contributing factors, I agree with Rod about this being the "bust" part of a boom-bust cycle caused by the structure of the retailing system itself, with stocks and flows throughout the system not being completely understood by anyone. Each player (HL, manufacturing plant, Reps, retailers, collectors, secondary buyers and sellers) sees a different part of the puzzle from a unique perspective. "Logical" attempts to influence the behaviour of this cycle from perspectives of limited knowledge of the system (i.e., *any* of the players) will probably tend to make things worse over the long haul. In the end, the best reaction to the current lull is probably no special action taken at all. Just keep on collecting and enjoying, and don't get too caught up in what part of the cycle we're in. For anyone interested, there is an very interesting discussion about this type of phenomenon in Dr. Peter Senge's book: "The Fifth Discipline"; check out in particular "The Beer Game" in chapter 3 of that book.

Let me add just a few comments as a collector.

1. QVC - NEVER happen. Habour Lights sells lighthouses, GLOWs included, ONLY through retail dealers with but one exception (Reunion Events). Any other way and the Retail Dealers would rightfully rebel.

2. Harbour Lights does not encourage speculative purchases. Ethically they must stay away from any and all secondary market activities. In fact when Sanibel early orders were cancelled and restarted, they suggested to dealers that multiple sales be discouraged.

3. Rod points out that Retirement is when a piece is sold out to dealers [Note to Tim - we badly need acronyms for these nuances of retirement.] It may be that all the pieces aren't even manufactured yet, and it certainly doesn't mean they are sold to collectors. The "Retired@Retail" service on the Internet for about 17 months has had a mediating effect. Before R@R, if you couldn't find a piece at local or well-known stores, you assumed it was gone from all and the secondary market kicked in. With R@R, we all have a much better idea of what is truly "Shelf-Retired" (Better term welcomed) ie. not able to be found at retail. (NATBFAR?]

4. The Internet has created a nationwide 'exchange' for collectors with extras and buyers looking for them. It also has created a number of 'instant secondary dealers'.

5. The distribution of an edition to individual collectors is the key factor in market value. Yes, scarcity, but look at Point Arena. Probably 2,000 or fewer unbroken ones, but too many collectors have 'extras' awaiting a price rise. Lots of collectors buying extras expecting significant price increases is self-defeating. Until those 2,000 are in the hands of, say, 1,900 collectors, the price won't reach what its scarcity indicates it should be.

6. Expect fewer Limited Editions in 1999. No inside information here. Just that the number of new limited edition pieces put out each year by Harbour Lights is greatly affected by the number of limited edition pieces retiring in the previous year. The goal of Harbour Lights is to maintain a fairly constant number of available limited editions for dealers to stock.

7. IMHO, the increase in edition size from 9,500 to 10,000 had absolutely no effect on the apparent slowdown in retirements.



[This message has been edited by JChidester.]

[This message has been edited by JChidester.]

We just took a swing down I-5 through Washington and Oregon and them up the California and Oregon coasts. We found HL dealers going out of business in Eugene OR and Canby OR and dealers which had gone out of business in Tacoma WA and Vancouver WA. I don't know if this is typical or reflective of what you all have been saying. I must say that the 2 going out of business had 25% and 50% off - I didn't mind that part!

There are too many "gift shops" on the market today and many are falling by the wayside. I don't think this is a problem specifically with harbour Lights but with the collectible market in general. Some areas have just too many retailers. Here in the Albany, N.Y. area a number of gift shops have gone out of business over the past two to three years.Fortunately for me, I am within 30 minutes of eight Harbour Lights dealers, but I wonder how many will continue to carry Harbour Lights because there can not possibly be that many collectors in this area.

Right you are JC - ask and you shall receive.

Here's some suggestions listed chronologically - according to the HL Timeline. See if you can figure these out for yourself. Otherwise check out HAL in the FATF.

ABNR
SOBR
SOHL
SOSAD
SONADA
SMO

Yr Obdnt Srvnt,
__
/im [set your clocks back]

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA.]

Hey...thanks for all the posts on this thread. It's been very enlightening. I'm not an economics guru and certainly don't have as firm a handle on the collectibles industry as I'd like.

When I started collecting Harbour Lights in July of 1996, I was fascinated by discussions such as these, which were frequent. They've been sparse lately (even Jim Rutherford's latest newsletter didn't have my favorite section---"By the Numbers"). As much as I love Harbour Lights from a creative standpoint, I also enjoy the analysis of what & how they're doing, and the effect its having on collectors.

It makes my brain do gooder. Thanks again for the feedback (and keep it coming).

the truth of the matter is that we have just pasted a 20 year cycle of collectibles. Back some 20 plus years there were only 4-5 major collectibles. I know because the old South Bend Plate show had a few booths. Now they had to move it to Chicago at Rosemont because of all the new lines that have popped up in the last 20 years. Now HL has not been around for the entire 20 years, so the pinch is just starting to hit them. The major collectibles, Hummels, Precious Moments, Dept 56, Disney, David Winters, Lilyput Lane, or what ever, have and are currently dealing with this problem. they have all #1:overproduced, #2: early collectors purchsed everything made and now they are out of room, #3: Twenty years has gone by and now each collector has had many changes in their life. ex: young people now have college to pay for, older collectors now face retirement, moving to a warmer climate and have to down size. The open editons play a major role in this. They are smaller and more detailed and cheaper. What a great way to get a Hilton Head or St. Augustine etc etc. Before the OE's my dealers shelfs were empty, now they are packed with OE. A lot of new collectors don't know the difference but they can see the prices and often go for the OE's and not the limited.
PS a note to PamBrian: You can join the Kincaid Society and receive a lighthouse print just for joining, then there are two "members only prints" that are available this year and they are both of lighthouses. We are waiting for our two MO prints to arrive. There are also other light house prints from his collection. He does excellent work.
All for now
jake

So then it's settled: In 1999 Harbour Lights needs to produce a piece with...oh, let's say no doors. This piece will be retired after only 1,328 are made when it is discovered that the actual lighthouse really does have some doors.

Later that year, a little "arrangement" will be made for a master mold to be...whoops!...dropped, upon which time it will shatter into a million irrevocable pieces.

Still later that year, Harbour Lights will discover that their profit margin on the GLOWs just isn't cutting it and will cease all production on them. Wah.

That oughtta perk things up.

I stated on this forum a few months ago that HL was flooding the market.

I have not purchased a HL in the past two month, that going from an average of two to six HL a month to zero.

Really what stunned my purchasing desire, is when HL started coming out with duplicate light houses, but added a few trees or a building to make it more appealing. I don't want a second edition of he lighthouse (that be the case I'd purchase Spencers).

Some of you will take this as sour grapes but HL does not look at there buying public are membership as a group of ONE..if they did the reunion pieces given at the reunion would be the same as the reunion piece people can purchase who are not(for what ever reason) able to attend the reunion.

I have met BY twice and find him extremely conscienious of the buying public, and HL buyers. But I think that HL needs to slow down 30 knots and take a hard look at who and what got them where they are today, that same formula that got you here can leave you here, or severly limit your ability to go forward at the pace you are attempting.

Sorry for the babbling, just another member who had something to say.

Bob

OR.........maybe they produce a piece with.....ohhh, let's say they roof line is incorrect.

THEN they break the mold in the interest of authenticity.



Please.....I'm too new to be this cynical.

Hey Brian, don't go too far with this Chatham thing. If I'm proven to be wrong, I'll have lotta' splainin' to do...may have to address the nation on TV with my apology (or something outrageously unheard of like that)

---

-RodW

[This message has been edited by Rod Watson.]

LOL........

I'll blame my cynicism on:

A) Did not have my first cup of coffee

B) I'm still bitter about not being able to get Coquille River. Then I find out (via this forum) That they are going to release an open version in January (woo hoo) and THEN find out that because some individual , who will remain nameless , brought the open vs limited issue to the attention of HL and now they've pulled it (for the time being).

Besides, based on the research you've done, I'd say anyone in their right mind would be AFRAID to challenge you on this one !



Regards,
Brian

Bob - it sounds like you're into serious withdrawal symptoms here from going cold turkey. That crankiness side effect can be eased by visiting your local Habour Lights dealer and picking out a NEW lighthouse.

John

P.S. Just joking Bob. Your opinion, like all here, are valued!

[This message has been edited by JChidester.]

This is the way I look at GLOWS. Giftware. In my opinion if Harbour Lights doesnt make the GLOW then we end up with Limited Editions of about 20 or so of the most popular lighthouses in America being produced with an edition size of 25,000, 50,000 etc...... Harbour Lights needs the steady cash flow off the most popular lights. Hatteras is always going to sell, Portland Head is always going to sell, so I live with the GLOWs knowing that they are a necessary evil to keep the edition size of the LE to 10,000 and below. If you buy a GLOW Hatteras, Portland Head, Barnegat its still not the original Limited Edition no matter how you debate it. You can't fill the demand for the LE with a GLOW.

Quote it, Hate it, its only my opinion, and lord knows looking in my collectibles wallet its not worth much. :-)

Sean

Since the rules require me to respond to all your posts, Sean, :-) here goes...



I suspect they've already done the top 20 (and the edition size of these won't increase.) I also suspect these were made and gone before HL considered the need to continue having a model of them and before they had the idea for a GLOW.

(If someone wants to conjecture on which are these top 20, why not start a new thread just for that!)



True. LE's are impacted when (if) sales of GLOWs start to eat into sales of LEs. As suggested earlier I suspect GLOWs *are* hurting sales of LE's and this is one of the reasons why LE retirement has slowed. Particularly since the price and detailing of some GLOWs is the same or greater than the price of LE models. (Thomas Point 'signature' at $90!) I believe this concern is validated by HL's recent announcement to eliminate (at least for now) the "Regular Edition" from the A/B line.

I wouldn't mind GLOWs if hadn't become direct competitors on an economic level. While LE's have the advantage in terms of greater chance for appreciation, the rate of appreciation has slowed considerably.

I think we'd be better off if the GLOW line-up were half or 2/3 the scale of the LE. Keep the detailing top notch, but the smaller size would be a clear differentiator. That and a price commensurate with the smaller scale.

I also suspect most collector's don't start collecting with the investment aspect in mind. If that's true and if in the mind of the beginning collector there's little difference between LEs and GLOWs - perhaps they are just as likely to acquire a mix of both. This can result from a naievete about the difference between collectibles and giftware, not understanding that GLOWs are open editions, the otherwise seemingly similarity between GLOWs and LEs, the availability of a GLOW and lack of a matching LE, etc. etc. I'd suggest a someone who builds his initial collection with a combination of OEs and LEs is far less likely to become an *avid* collector and thus less likely to buy LE's for their own sake - especially retired LEs.

In other words, while you can't fill the demand for the LE with a GLOW, the demand for the LE qua LE is never created because the already purchased GLOWs are a sunk cost. It comes down to pocketbook economics - dollars spent on GLOWs - which aside from their 'appreciability' are otherwise equivalent to LEs - are not dollars spent on LEs.

In many cases its only after acquiring a certain number of LE's (and LE's only) that the 'fever' strikes and shortly thereafter sets in fiscal cognisance about the 'value' accumulated. From the point of view of *collectibles* - GLOWs have no value. (Yeah, there are a few exceptions, but none of these is exceptional.) This was not a problem for the likes of you and I and many others in the 'wacko' category because we were hooked in the pre-GLOW dawn of HL.

Of course, this is only a hypothesis. But if true, it reveals a more subtle side of the issue on why GLOWs negatively impact sales of LEs. I'll dub this corollary of the The GLOW Factor the Psychology of Cannibalism Factor as it adds further explanation why one part of the HL line is eating into sales of the other.

I don't think the reverse is true. Sales of LEs are not hurt when the avid collector buys a few GLOWs. Its much less likely this collector, in the long run, will forgo an LE because he has a GLOW of the same model. He's already committed. (Or his wife is preparing the papers :-> )

Finally - I suspect Cape Blanco will retire before this thread does. [g]

Rgds,
__
/he Usual Suspect

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA.]

So Tim, you kinda lost me after the word "True" are you fer'um or agin'um. I am fer'um sometimes and agin'um sometimes but other times I could be conviced to be fer'um and yet I probably would'nt change my mine and still be agin'um. On the other hand some that I usta to be agin I am totally fer. By the way I am all fer yer right say it, but I think I might be agin what you said if I could just understand what you said you were fer.

Paul L Brady MTPFIMC










































My Tongue Planted Firmly In My Cheek

Sorry about the mispellun but I have always bin agin spellun or is it I have bin fer it but but I've found if you hit add instead of replace it is all spell'd write.

It must be symptomatic of the HL collectors' disease that you can read two totally different points of view and agree with both. I enjoyed Tim's comments on retirements and LEs vs. GLOWS and understood it even though (like Paul) I wasn't sure where the logic trail was going or ended up.

As the collectors' disease took hold in early 1998, I got up to speed on the desirability of various retired pieces and felt an urgency to locate surviving pieces at retail before they were gone. The '91-94 pieces were gone, but '95-'97 had some great pieces. After getting these and filling in with society and Christmas pieces, the sense of urgency fell off as fiscal reality set in. I concentrated '98 funds on the reunion and other special pieces. Even though the '98 pieces are great, I haven't felt the need to chase after them yet. So, I think '98 may be a catch your breath year for many relatively new collectors and the slow down in retirements may (as has been stated above) reflect a clearing of dealers' shelves of earlier "retired" pieces, rather than a drop off in collector interest. The market and retirements will pick up.

I think GLOWs fill important needs. They allow newer collectors to get lights that are important to them. They attract tourists and giftware buyers, some of whom may come to value HLs and turn on to LEs. This would help the overall market for LEs. I'm not sure that the market needs or will support as many GLOWs as have been issued. Portland Head, Cape Hatteras, and other widely known lights, sure. I'm not sure about some of the the other GLOWs.

I agree with Tim that LEs should be just as detailed as modern techniques permit, but should be smaller in size to differentiate them from LEs. I would appreciate it if dealers would separate them from LEs on the shelves to reduce clutter and confusion.

CASE STUDY #1: Sandy Hook & Me.

I own a Sandy Hook GLOW. I love it. I can't afford the LE, and I actually prefer the appearance of the GLOW. I grew up near Sandy Hook, and frankly, the LE doesn't look right. Even if I had the budget for the LE, I don't think I'd buy it at secondary prices, even though the real-life light is very dear to me. In my case, the purchase of a GLOW did not hurt the secondary market one iota. And I still had enough cash (or credit!) left over to buy all of the new LE issues I desired, so it didn't impact the retirement date of any issue, either.

CASE STUDY #2: Alcatraz & Me

I own the Alcatraz GLOW. I've never seen a real-life Alcatraz LE, but the GLOW is a very nice piece. I don't think I'd ever be inclined to seek out the LE, with or without the GLOW. I bought the GLOW because I saw it and I liked it. And again, my purchase has not affected any retirement nor secondary market value.

CASE STUDY 3: SE Block Island & Me

I own a SEBI GLOW. I cannot afford the LE. Yes, I would like the LE in this case, but it is the secondary price that keeps me away. If I buy the LE, that's 3 or 4 new LE issues that I cannot buy. In this case, the retirement of some new issue would be delayed because of the secondary market **if the GLOW version did not exist**.

SUMMARY: These 3 carefully examined case studies show that:

(A) GLOWS do not adversely affect the LE market nor the secondary market in all cases.

(B) GLOWS may actually help the retirement of LEs by conserving capital that might otherwise go toward the purchase of some outrageously priced secondary piece.

Epilogue:

GLOWs add to my enjoyment of my collection without hurting anyone but the secondary market dealer (and that only minimally). The slowdown in retirements may be more related to the success of the line in the secondary market than to the GLOWs.

The purchase of GLOWs contributes to the preservation of the real thing. GLOWs allow collectors (yes, one can collect GLOWs; colections are not limited to LEs) to own an otherwise untouchable piece.

I believe that most people buy the HLs to keep, not as an investment. Although I believe the impact to be minimal, I don't care what impact a GLOW or anything else has on retirement or secondary value. It's *not* an economics thing, at least with me. For all the speculators who bought two of everything, sorry. HLs are for the collector
and for the the lights themselves, *not* for the profiteer. IMNSHO, of course.

Great points Art. I have learned while collecting many other collectibles that the new collector is the most important collector to make happy. If they can't afford to obtain some of their favorite pieces on the secondary market they may lose interest and never begin collecting or just give up. The collectors that are buying the entire line can not fill the gap for this one person that walked away discouraged.

Now to clarify where I stand on the GLOWS:
If there was a bus headed to El Cajon to protest against the GLOWS. I would be on it. My opinion is not to stop producing but to manage them better. Lets keep them a little less detailed and smaller than the LEs. Pieces like Bass Harbor and Hunting Island are the scale of the present made GLOWs. I feel a little ripped off by these two pieces. There needs to be a difference. A dealer, a new collector, non expert collector or Wacko Collector or even just a happy collector like me should be able to stand 10 feet away from the shelf and say that is a GLOW and that is an LE. And finally lets manage the ones that are being produced better. Not to imply something negative about Bolivar (the GLOW is HLs best model) but is the demand so high for this lighthouse it needed a GLOW? If you wanted to pickout the death of the secondary value of an LE because of a GLOW Bolivar would certainly be the one. Harbour Lights please wait at least 2 or 3 years after retiring a LE before releasing a GLOW. The paint was still drying on Alcatraz and Bolivar.

Sean

Sean, I agree 100% with waiting a while before introducing the GLOW. The LE should be for all practical purposes gone from the dealers' shelves (i.e., no longer available through Retired@Retail +1 year?)before introducing a GLOW. As for the size and detail, I heartily disagree. HL collectors know a GLOW from a LE, regardless of size or quality. The high quality GLOWs do not diminish the LE value, IMHO. Maybe HL can wait until the secondary price reaches a percentage, say 150% or 175% of retail, before issuing a GLOW. Let's not forget, if the size and/or quality of the GLOWs diminishes, then HL would be competing against Spoontiques and Leftons. I think if that were true, income from GLOWs would drop. That would be bad for real lighthouses, bad for HL. What's bad for those two entities is bad for all of us.

I agree with some who have pointed out the value of the GLOW to HL - it may keep some of us from branching out to other lines. My main focus is to collect lights I have visited. I made a trip to the Outer Banks and S. Atlantic this summer and just made a trip to Boston and Cape Cod. I bought the LEs that I could afford for the lights that I visited. I really want LEs of Boston Harbor, Tybee, St. Simons, Cape Hatteras. And I will get them, one by one. But for now, I bought the GLOWs to remind me of the trip. If there had been GLOWs of Nauset Beach and Minots Ledge I probably would have bought them. So I cruise the secondary market, looking for prices I can afford, but in the meantime, enjoy my GLOWs.

I never, never, never suggested changing the Quality of the GLOWs I simply suggested making them smaller and less detailed than the LE. As an Example of what I am suggesting: A detail means in my book that if the LE has three trees and three out buildings the GLOW might have one tree and no out buildings. I did not suggest it be molded or painted to a different standard. The release of the Tybee Signature Piece is another Killer of the secondary of the Tybee LE. The Tybee Signature Piece though smaller is a much more detailed piece than the LE.

Sean

Sean, I agree with you! For example, Hilton Head/ Sea Pines, was it really neccessary to add the little boat and the lampost to the Glow. I'm afraid, Tybee (LE) will be hurt on the secondary market also. There is a need in the market for the GLOWS, however, a strong secondary market is also vital for a collection to stay strong. A GLOW with fewer details will still provide a market for the hobby collector as well as, for the impulse buyer who just likes the look of a certain piece. BUT, whether a person wants to play the secondary market or not, it is essentially the lifeblood that keeps momentum in a COLLECTIBLE line. No one wants to see prices on retired pieces escalate to unreasonable levels. Ask a serious collector whether he/she honestly wants to watch secondary pricing hit the doldrums and then slowly drop
and
drop!
I think, if Harbour Lights, predicts the needs and wants of the total collective membership correctly, we can all be happy.

I agree with Sean's comments on making a size distinction between the Limited and GLOWs, but I would suggest going about it in a reverse manner and focus on making the LE's a little larger vs decreasing the size of the GLOWs too much. I have no problem paying $85-$95 for the slightly larger LE pieces, instead of $65-$75 for the slightly smaller ones. Keep the GLOW's in the $50-$60 range.

Sea Girt, Gay Head, Pemaquid, Rose Island, Nauset, Neddick, Montauk etc. seem to be nice size pieces with a little "heftiness" to them, but some of the others seem a little "twiggy" in comparison (Hunting Island, Faulkners, Chicago, many Gulf Coast pieces, Portland Breakwater, etc.) It's not so much the quantity of outbuildings as it is the scale that seems to make the nicer ones stand out. If Hunting Island had a few less outbuildings, but a bigger tower and some more mass, I think it would have been a little more obvious as a LE piece (maybe a little more like Grays, or larger) I think HL should really focus on keeping the LEs at the largest size possible for a below $100 price (plus or minus). Leave the GLOWs in the more economical "tourist" price range.

I doubt too many collectors really complained that much about spending $120 on Sanibel, but would you have liked it as much if it was alot smaller and retailed for $75 or so? Don't you think Mukilteo or New Canal would have sold a little better if they were at a larger scale with more mass like Fermin, Nauset, or Sea Girt? maybe not though, doesn't seem to have worked that well with Round Island (Oh well, I tried)

The problem with HL making the GLOW's with less buildings than the LE is the original LE's they are created from. At this point in time they are producing GLOW's from pieces that only had the towers to start with (Southern Belles, Boliver, etc) so they really can't have much less than the original already had.

I'm sure in their mind they are making up for the lower quality that the original LE's had when they make the GLOW's. It is their chance to make a much more accurate and aeshetically pleasing piece now with the new technology, and it would be hard to convince them to "step back" a bit on the GLOW's. It's pretty hard to convince creative people like HL to be a little less expressive. It's a pride thing.

I do think it is very neat to have the large scale Tybee tower LE piece next to the smaller scale piece with all the outbuildings though. The GLOW gives a totally different perspective to the light that many collectors may have never realized existed. They may not have even known it actually *had* any outbuildings if they only had the LE piece. The size of the GLOWs dont really bother me that much as long as they dont keep creeping larger and larger. They are definately at their max right now. I do disagree with the remaking of the SE Block, Portland, and Boston GLOWs though. I don't see the necessity of it right now, Just adds more confusion. I guess I am really not pro or con towards the glows. Just keep the distiction in size obvious.

I definately think they should re-think the GLOWs they actually make though. I would much rather see some of the earlier retired pieces before reproducing Bolivar or Big Red, etc. Like Sean said, give them time to "truely" retire before making the GLOW. Thats why I would like to see a Coquille (can't say I'm not persistant).

By the way, this is now a record long thread, good job Bill

---

-RodW

[This message has been edited by Rod Watson.]

Art, I respectfully disagree that your post successfully arrives at point (A) as a conclusion of your case studies.

[translational note to Paul: his argument don't work]

Hopefully we can agree the secondary market for Limited Editions is fundamentally driven by the law of supply and demand. Certainly there are other factors at work such as aesthetics, and The Tourist Factor, as my earlier post attempts to account for.

Hopefully we can also agree that rarely do the actions of a single collector yield a significant impact on the marketplace. And as I'm sure you recognize, we can't derive general principles from specific isolated acts.

Since we're talking about the secondary market let me offer what I believe are some fundamental principles: (1) If no retired piece ever increased in value then HL LE models would not be considered collectibles and there would be no secondary market. (2) When retired pieces do not increase in value the secondary market is adversely impacted.

In Case Study #1 you chose to buy the GLOW Sandy Hook instead of the more expensive LE and you conclude this had no adverse impact on the secondary market - "not one iota". If you *had* bought the Sandy Hook LE this would reduce the supply of Sandy Hook LEs on the secondary by one and it would validate the worth of the model to be the price you paid for it (presumably somewhere near the average secondary price for the piece - far more than a GLOW).

What does this mean? Well, for one thing it means Sandy Hook LE didn't get any rarer when you opted for the OE. A piece appreciates in value when demand for the piece exceeds the supply. [note to Paul: the ones that'r harder to find cost more money]

The more often folks choose the OE over the LE thats one less opportunity that demand for the LE will exceed its supply. If everyone took this approach, Sandy Hook would never go up in value. Applying this broadly across the HL lineup results in a severly diminished secondary market.

Or looking at the converse - if you'd bought the LE you'd have helped the secondary market and the more folks who choose this path the more likely the piece will rise in value. When one piece goes up in value, the collectibility of the entire LE lineup is strengthened.

Regardless of why someone buys a Limited Edition, these models are Collectibles because a) they have limited availability and b) they can and do appreciate in value. But its all for nought if no one buys them.

This same line of reasoning applies to Case study #2.

With regard to CS#3, I think you're correct that if you had purchased an LE SEBI thats less cash you have to spend on current LEs, thus slowing their retirement. Same principle is true for every dollar you spend on GLOWs. However, its important to understand a strong secondary market ultimately encourages the purchase of non-retired LEs by collectors and reinforces the collectibility of the entire LE lineup.

Market forces of supply and demand work independently of whatever reason someone may have for purchasing a piece. If a strong secondary market had not developed for Harbour Lights its highly doubtful their line of Limited Edition lighthouse models would be successful for the length of time they have.
While it may not be "an economics thing" for you personally, your purchasing choices (GLOW vs LE) combined with the choices made by others most definitely impact the secondary market, the retirement rate and ultimately the success or failure of Harbour Lights models as collectibles.

The fact there is a viable secondary market is a good thing for HL generally. There is no long term successful collectible that doesn't have a strong secondary market. This is simply a fact. Some folks whine about dealers making a profit - if there was no profit to be made there is no secondary market for the models. Without a secondary market what we have is giftware. If HL was just a giftware company we would not see the variety and continuing refinement that we have seen.

I am not a secondary dealer (I've sold one piece in 3½ yrs of collecting) and I love lighthouses as much as the next nut. Its because I enjoy collecting HL models (and don't collect giftware) that I want HL to succeed and specifically I want them to succeed with the Limited Editions. At the point the giftware portion of the line (OEs) hurts the collectible portion this success is diminished.

[final note to Paul: fer 'em or agin em? If HL never made giftware I wouldn't be missing anything. I think Sean's note pretty much sums up my own view. GLOWs are ok as long as they don't hurt the continuing success of the Limited Editions. HL needs to rethink the way they're managing the GLOW line - hopefully they do this before they're forced to by the economics of the situation. As I said somewhere else on this forum - size does matter. ;-> ]

Holy Fresnel Batman, I gotta go - little gremlins are ringing the bell here at The Fog Signal Building. ...wish we had a bag of thumbnails to give out. :-)


Rgds,
__
/im [Mark - put your Ida Lewis costume back on and answer the door!]

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA.]

"Hopefully we can also agree that rarely do the actions of a single collector yield a significant impact on the marketplace. And as I'm sure you recognize, we can't derive general principles from specific isolated acts"

I guess this is in reference to the example I made. I simply don't like to write 4 pages of comments. My mind is 5 minutes ahead of my fingers and I lose interest. The point I was making is that if you want new collectors to start collecting you need to be able to lure them in. If all there favorite pieces are retired and at secondary prices they may just look at another line or just say a photograph would be cheaper.

Sean

>>I guess this is in reference to the example I made.<<

Actually, I had Art's post in mind. Of course his purchase of a GLOW instead of a retired piece will hardly impact the market. But if most folks took this approach it will.

I think you make a good point about the need for models that will appeal to a new collector. It may be one of the stronger points for having GLOWs. The favorites of a new collector may be lights near him or that he has seen and remembered. For this reason I think its important for HL to have a good geographic spread across a year's line. For some specific areas they may be running out of lights and eventually all lights for that area will retire.

The availability of a GLOW to a potential collector who can't find, or isn't aware of the LEs which are his favorites, may indeed help get him started. I was wondering if a newbie who has several GLOWs in his initial collection would switch to buying LEs when he had a choice between a GLOW and an LE. If he keeps buying mostly giftware then I think we'd agree he hasn't been 'lured in'. If he switches then the availability of the GLOW was good thing.

Since the GLOWs seem to be built with the same materials and attention to detail as LEs I doubt most GLOWs are able to help subsidize LEs. But maybe - if the volume for a popular GLOW is high enough that all costs have been recouped. Makes you wonder if there is any GLOW thats sold or will sell more than 10,000 .

Rgds,
__
/im

"I was wondering if a newbie who has several GLOWs in his initial collection would switch to buying LEs when he had a choice between a GLOW and an LE. If he keeps buying mostly giftware then I think we'd agree he hasn't been 'lured in'"

This is a angle I hadn't thought of. The collector who only buys GLOWs. Are there collectors that get into this with the intentions of only buying GLOWS? Some have already retired. We might even be shocked to find out that some could be of a production size smaller than the LEs. Anything is possible. The giftware deal is simply my opinion of the GLOWs. Are they collectibles? Is an A version more valuable than a D? How many collectors that collect Harbour Lights that say they must have one of everything have A through D of each GLOW? Are there GLOWs listed for sale at Secondary Markets?

Sean

Tim, Let me clarify:

>(A) GLOWS do not adversely affect the LE market nor the secondary market in all cases.

My first conclusion is that my case study is an *exception* to the notion that OEs directly affect LEs. As such, I only mean to infer that if I am an exception, there are likely to be others. I was completely supporting your assertion that broad generalizations could *not* be made at all. I did *not* intend to say that my case study could be extrapolated to the general population. Let me rephrase my original statement here:

(A) GLOWS do not *necessarily* adversely affect the LE market nor the secondary market (although they may in some cases). So broad assertions of such an effect cannot be made.

I agree that the secondary market is important to a collectible line, but I also think that everyone is on kind of a witch hunt, looking for a culprit as to why retirements are now slower than in the past. I think that the GLOWs have become the witches. Please see my earlier post in this forum (10/24/98).

In your saying:

>In Case Study #1 you chose to buy the GLOW Sandy Hook instead of the more expensive LE

and

>If you *had* bought the Sandy Hook LE this would reduce the supply of Sandy Hook LEs on the secondary by one

I think you missed my point about the Sandy Hook LE:

>Even if I had the budget for the LE, I don't think I'd buy it at secondary prices, even though the real-life light is very dear to me.

That point stands regardless of the existence of an OE. It is an aesthetic judgement, not an economic choice. *I just don't **want** one*. The demand doesn't exist (for me), with or without the GLOW.

You also say:

>Well, for one thing it means Sandy Hook LE didn't get any rarer when you opted for the OE.

and:

>The more often folks choose the OE over the LE thats one less opportunity that demand for the LE will exceed its supply. If everyone took this approach, Sandy Hook would never go up in value.

Again, I agree with the importance of the secondary market to the line, but I'm not going to buy a LE I don't want as a kind of welfare program. Each piece must stand on it's own. *That's* free-market economics.

Now, let's suppose that HL *doesn't* make a Sandy Hook GLOW. If other collectors, tourists, locals (NYC is a pretty large local market for Sandy Hook), giftware enthusiasts, et al, share my sentiments that the LE Sandy Hook is *not* that great a representation, then doesn't that open the door for another line to step in and make a better Sandy Hook? If they do, then what impact does *that* have on our beloved obsession? If HL doesn't do it, then someone else will fill the vacuum. It is conceivable that taken to a logical conclusion, this scenario will result in the collapse of HL LE values, should the phenomenon repeat itself throughout the HL retired LE lineup.

Soooo...

Let HL make the GLOWs. Let speculators, rich guys and HL nuts (count me in) bid up secondary prices to their hearts' content. Let the dealers, retail and secondary, make a nice profit. We can all peacefully coexist with a just a little care in timing GLOW releases.

(Is this fun, or what?!!)

-Art

[This message has been edited by Art.]

>> I also think that everyone is on kind of a witch hunt, looking for a culprit as to why retirements are now slower than in the past. ...GLOWs have become the witches. <<

Nah - I think we're just trying to explain it. There are lots of possible explanations - GLOWs are one of these. I concur w/ JC that The Thomas Point Affair Backlash has also had a substantive impact on retirement rate.

>> It is an aesthetic judgement, not an economic choice. *I just don't **want** one*.<<

Tell us how you really feel! [g,d&r] I do understand. But the brute functioning of the supply/demand curve doesn't really care *why* one does or don't make a purchase.

>> If HL doesn't do it, then someone else will fill the vacuum. It is conceivable that taken to a logical conclusion, this scenario will result in the collapse of HL LE values,<<

*And* - the same conclusion is just as possible (perhaps more so) if it is GLOWs filling this vacumn. My point all along. :-)

Hypothetically - if your scenario were eventually to come to pass - what would be some of its early signals? Two I can think of: a slowdown in the rate of retirement and a slowdown in the rate of appreciation for retirees. Now - why would these happen?

Cogito ergo glow,
__
/im

>>Are there collectors that get into this with the intentions of only buying GLOWS?<<

I doubt it. I'll bet most collectors don't have any long range intentions when they buy their first few pieces. It certainly took me a while to understand these little models. Only after a year or so did I realize I was well over half-way towards my Wacko merit badge - and only then did I decide to go for it.

Suppose some guy looks in his display case one day and finds 11 models - 7 GLOWs and 4 LEs. Is he more or less likely to become an avid collector or buy more Limited Editions and no more GLOWs? If not, did the fact he had as many GLOWs have any bearing on his decision?

When I awoke, MaryJo and the Glow were gone,
__
/im

TIME OUT. Wait a minute.

This thread is so long (22 pages of printing) that I need a day to read it and figure out what I think (or am supposed to think). THEN I can add my 5 cents worth (2 cents Canadian) So no more posts until then, otherwise, just about when I've figured out what to think, you guys will have added 10 more pages!

John [Stop the world, I want to get off!]
(Just kidding)

I would like to thank all of you whose HL purchases have slowed down or ground to a halt. This has afforded me an opportunity to catch up. In the last seven days, I have purchased every Spyglass set; every Christmas ornament except for Stonington and Point Sanilac; Heceta Head, Yaquina Head, Point Arena, Point Betsie, Sturgeon Point, Grand Haven, Concord Point, Toledo Harbor, and a Chesapeake LS. So you see not all collectors have slowed or stopped purchasing HLs. Perhaps when I have almost all of them, my purchases will slow to a few a month if I can find those I don't have. Do I buy GLOWs? Yes, I have one, Cape Hatteras. Would I buy GLOWs in the future? Once I run out of LEs to buy, I will buy GLOWs. Do I think GLOWs are a threat to the value of the LEs? Personally I don't think so. Otherwise there wouldn't be any secondary market. Will new collectors buy the GLOWs instead of the LEs? Good possibility if they can't find LEs at a price they can afford. Take me for an example: fairly new collector that started in Sept. 97 with the exception of buying SE Block when it first came out; I bought the LEs from the area and the ones that I liked from other parts of the country; I made many new friends on the Internet which encouraged me to buy more LEs; I could never afford an original CH so I purchase the GLOW; I attended a reunion that turned up the flame to the point that I'll probably try to get every piece, including those I really don't like the looks of; When I have them all I will probably buy all the GLOWs just to say I have all the HL pieces made.
I would also be willing to bet that many of the major collectors out there that have the full collection also have the GLOWs. I would also wager many of them have them displayed side by side.
In closing I would like to say retirements will come as people like me fill in the empty spots in their collections by buying pieces they didn't think of buying before. The LEs will always be worth more than the OEs. Please make a Coquille GLOW.
Remember I'm only one of the new guys who now has over 100 LEs and is putting a 20 x 24' addition on his home so I'll have a place to display all these things!