Mombo's topic of new improvements was an excellent one, but it also brought about the GLOW issue. Since it shouldn't be discussed there, I thought I would put my 2 cents here.

When I said that I didn't think that GLOWS and extras necessarily hurt the market, I may have over simplied the statement. So let me correct that. I think GLOWS have hurt the secondary market, but I don't think they are affecting the market on new pieces. I think they attract new collectors, (as other have stated) which is what everyone wants, and creates interest in the preservation of lighthouses. New collectors keep the secondary market alive. Would I buy a Key West LE after seeing a Key West GLOW? No, but then even if a Key West GLOW hadn't been created, I wouldn't spend over $65 for the LE anyway. Regarding the newer releases, well, I can't see how they can possibly make a GLOW that can be better and less expensive than Hudson Athens or Haig Point. Maybe the trend will be to create a more simply-styled GLOW similar to the first LE releases.

As far as the extras go, well, I have the Bob Tree and four Mark Sherman water color prints. I might get the Keeper's Chores statue. I decided not to get to involved in the The Pharos line although it appears to be excellent quality and very nice, but I don't want to get hooked on them.

Joanne

>>So let me correct that. I think GLOWS have hurt the secondary market, but I don't think they are affecting the market on new pieces. <<

I agree that GLOWs have hurt the secondary market. And it is in virtue of that secondary market that Harbour Lights are considered to be Collectibles. Note the capital 'C' - so as to differentiate them from string or leaves or GLOWs or AOL diskettes which are indeed collectible, but which have an inexhaustible supply.

Since GLOWs are a part of the market for new pieces, stating that they have not hurt that market is somewhat tautological. To say otherwise is equivalent to suggesting GLOWs have hurt the sale of themselves - I'm not sure what that would mean. :-)

One might conjecture that if there were not GLOWs, HL may have been more successful with an edition size of 9500 or 10000. I'm not sure on this one.

There are only so many disposable dollars that people have to spend on lighthouse models. The purchase of GLOWs represents dollars not spent on LEs. Over the last 3-4 years, the number of new collectors does not appear to have surpassed the number of people that leave the hobby. (Churn, but little overall growth.) Therefore GLOWs have hurt the HL Collectibles market.

Anytime a Collectibles line sees the introduction of slightly less expensive yet nearly identical knock-offs, its bound to hurt it. If the GLOW models were smaller and half the price of LEs they probably would not have the same deleterious effect. Thats speculation on my part. The person who buys the $200 knock-off Rolex would probably never be in the market to afford the real thing. But the person who buys a $65 GLOW is in the same market as the one who buys the $80 LE. GLOWs hurt the sale of LEs.

HL themselves probably doesn't care - to them a dollar is a dollar regardless of what model it is used to buy as long as its an HL model.

Rgds,
__
/im

No offense Joanne but, IMHO, I DON'T want anymore new collectors (all these people are ruining the reunions!) and a true HL Wacko WOULD spend over $65 for a LE! Heck, I spent over 25 times that amount for a Coquille River!

[This message has been edited by Rock (edited 05-17-2000).]

Correlation is different than cause-and-effect. By the logic used here, one could just as easily assert that, "Therefore the Clinton Presidency has hurt the HL Collectibles market" or "Therefore the appearance of the Hale-Bopp Comet has hurt the HL Collectibles market" or...

There is no evidence of cause-and-effect offered in the above posting. It is mere conjecture.



Don't overlook the fact that it is the new collectors that make an LE worth owning over a GLOW. Granted, without new collectors you would have saved a lot of money when you acquired your Coquille, but I think you'd get pretty lonely at the reunions.



To each his own. Call me a fool, but I just purchased a Key West LE a month ago at what I thought was a decent price -- $270 dollars, shipping included. I think it's a great piece. I have seen but do not own the GLOW. I probably will eventually, when I run out of LEs to buy.

------------------
-Art

Tim, one thing about your posts, I always have to keep a dictionary close by - tautological: needless, repetition of the same sense in different words.

What I meant by market was the limited edition market. Once again, I lacked clarity.

Rock, I have to disagree. Without new collectors, the line would die out. Eventually, the HL reunion would be like the Titanic Survivors Reunion, every time, a little smaller, till there are none. And Art is very correct, the new collector keeps the secondary market alive. Would the same group of 4000 people keep buying the same pieces from themselves? It's the relatively new collector, like myself, who spends the extra money for a Sand Island or North Head. Although, I admit to being stingy with my money and very particular on what I purchase. Maybe my choice of Key West was a poor once since I haven't bought a Key West GLOW. I haven't bought a Holland GLOW because I want the LE. I'm just waiting to find one at a good price.

Tim, I'm keeping my dictionary out for my next word of the day. I can't wait to use tautology in a sentence.

Joanne

It looks like we are back to the "GLOW's War" again. Do GLOW's hurt the market or not? Well, first you have to define which market you are talking about. The "Collectors Forum" market or the "Real" market. The Collectors Forum at its best only represents about 4 to 5 percent of all Harbour Lights purchased. The other 95-96 percent of sales comes from the real market which is composed of mostly people who don't give a hoot about LE's or GLOW's or even the secondary market. They simply like the product they see and buy it.


"The Lightkeeper"

[This message has been edited by TheLightkeeper (edited 05-17-2000).]

I just love the smell of napalm in the morning. Artillery Prepare to give them another Round of GLOWs!!!

I for one have yet to see where GLOWs have harmed the LE market. Since their arrival we have seen a drop in the over inflated prices of some of the older LEs, but imho this is a good thing. In fact, I don't believe it was the GLOWs that caused this drop in secondary market value. Here's the way I see it. During the heyday of the secondary market when prices were climbing like homesick angels, most dealers didn't have an advertised price they just said, "hay I have HL model XYZ for sale." It was very hard for collectors to get a real feel for a piece’s worth, and many of them overspent. This caused a feedback loop to form, where the dealers saw they could get more and more for each piece and the buyers had no idea what the piece was really worth, so they would agree to the higher prices. The only time one ever found a pricing guide it was always weeks or months out of date and the information always seemed to say the market price was the highest price that had ended in a sale.
Then along comes things like Ebay, and some dealers start posting their prices. Buyers are able to start comparing prices and do what we all do, they buy the cheapest one they find. The markets perceived price for most HLs start to correct . This starts to hurt the speculators who have bought many LEs at a inflated price, and have had dreams of financing their retirement on even more overpriceing of the LEs, and they panic, dumping their LEs on the market driving the price still lower. This also starts to feedback on itself. More and more speculators with 10 HL XYZs in the closet, start feeling like the market is collapsing and they too dump their supply. It becomes a negative factor to speculate on LE futures and HL, (which has raised edition sizes to meet a perceived increase in demand, caused by speculators,) suddenly finds itself with product that will not move. In a move to increase retirements they lower edition sizes to a point about midway between the original size and the edition size which cannot sale out. To some this is also seen as a sign that HL's time is ending. Not so (IMHO.)
None of this was caused by GLOWs. This was not caused by all the other “bells and whistles” HL sales. This market shift was caused by the speculators and the nondisclosure of secondary market prices. The only people who have been hurt by this correction in market prices are those who caused it. To the average LE collector this has been the greatest thing since sliced bread!! With a shaking out of the speculators, and a slightly smaller edition size HL seems poised to continue to grow, and given enough time the price for the LEs will start to rise again, but this time at a much slower and more natural rate as most LEs will be in the hands of collectors not Speculators looking to make a fast buck.



[This message has been edited by Weasel58 (edited 05-17-2000).]

NOTE: I was constructing this posting even as Weasel58 was posting his. Right on, Weasel! Sorry for being somewhat redundant.

If we want to talk about possible causes of the secondary market softness, how about talking about eBay? I think that eBay will be very good for the market in the long run, but short-term, it seems to be killing *all* collectibles. Just ask anyone who collects other lines that have significant eBay exposure. We can't easily blame the fall of collectible plates or David Winter Cottages on HL GLOWs. Long term, I see the market efficiency fostered by eBay driving out the excesses that were built into the HL secondary prices. In the current HL correction, I think long time collectors are shedding "extras" in an attempt to get something out of their "investment" before a possible panic and a total collapse of prices can occur. Of course, this extra supply coming on the market has the potential to feed just such a panic and collapse. Survival falls onto the mercy of mass psychology.

Barring a total collapse and widespread loss of interest in the line before the end of the present correction, the pieces will eventually be in much stronger hands. Far fewer "extras" will be floating around. And the fact that there are only 5,500 Key West LEs out there will not have changed. People (not all, but many – I believe far more than 5,500) will still think that the Key West LE is a great piece. Prices can then resume an upward climb at a reasonable pace. That will again begin to attract other people's attention.

Several things can undermine this scenario, not the least of which is the availability of LE lighthouse models that are generally more desirable than, say, Key West, at the time of the rebound. (I say generally since we all have personal preferences, but these don't matter much individually in the marketplace. It is the collective opinion that matters.)

This need for desirable LE lighthouse models could be filled by HL or (less likely) by another line. If it is filled by HL, it can be filled by existing pieces or by new releases. Each new HL release competes for Limited Edition lighthouse model dollars with the older pieces. This is why I feel that the best thing for the secondary value of HL LEs would be for HL to produce fewer new models each year in lower edition sizes. Not only is the total number of LE lighthouse models (number of models x edition size) to be absorbed by the marketplace important, but also the number of options available to each collector (number of new models alone) is important. Of course, the edition size influences how many total model styles each collector will purchase, so the two measures are not completely independent even at this level. HL has been doing much better in the edition size as of late, but they are still releasing too many new models each year, imo. I understand that Y&A needs to make money, and I don’t begrudge them for that. I say this only from the selfish perspective of secondary market appreciation. This perspective is not all that selfish though if you agree that a vibrant secondary market is essential to sustain an interest in a line of collectibles and is in Y&A’s best interest.

I remain unconvinced that dollars spent on GLOWS are necessarily dollars that would otherwise be spent on secondary-priced LEs. They are different. A person looking merely to buy a nice Key West model might choose a GLOW over a LE; he is motivated differently than a person looking to acquire a limited edition. To think that a person paying $60 for a GLOW would otherwise automatically buy the same lighthouse in a LE at $250 or $300 is unfounded. Indeed, to think that such a person would buy a different HL LE lighthouse model at $80 is also unfounded. If not a GLOW, then a Spoontiques or Scaasis or whatever Key West model is available will fill the bill. But if the buyer wants a Key West, the best Rockland Breakwater LE in the world won’t do. If Y&A doesn’t produce the Key West GLOW version, someone else will move into the market niche. At least the GLOW purchase helps preserve real lighthouses and sustain Y&A. The only problem I have with GLOWs is when they are released too soon (Alcatraz, Bolivar). Otherwise, HL can make them big and beautiful and make lots of ‘em. I’ll even buy a few along the way.

------------------
-Art

You know what? All this talk that I started about Key West makes me wish that I could see one. Probably one of the reasons why I wouldn't consider spending a few hundred dollars for one, is that I've never seen the LE. Does anyone have photos to post other than the one on the website catalog?

Joanne

>>Correlation is different than cause-and-effect. By the logic used here, one could just as easily assert that<<...blah blah

Art - I haven't read your tome yet. However in the msg from which I quote, your reply doesn't seem to follow from what was written. Turn off the auto-pilot. You may notice Joanne's point is not about the secondary market. (Joanne: "I don't think they [GLOWs] are affecting the market on new pieces.")

I'll try a simple example: If there is $1000 to be spent on non-retired Harbour Lights models, and $500 of that is spent on GLOWs that means there is $500 not spent on LEs. Ergo...

>>Don't overlook the fact that it is the new collectors that make an LE worth owning over a GLOW. <<

Huh?

And for Joanne, I was using tautology in the sense of a=a. And I agree, dictionaries are handy to have around. :-)

Its nice to be on vacation,
__
/im
[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 05-17-2000).]

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 05-17-2000).]

Mr. Weasel, there is a period in the history here you may be overlooking. Between the 'paper' secondary market and E-bay, there was a strong market on the Internet. Approximately 1996-1998. I believe this was the period of greatest secondary price growth.

At first models were advertised primarily in the collectible newsgroups and it was common there to quote prices. Then several Web sites sprang up. Our own JC had a thriving business with his partner Warren, based on his HLCIC site - which eventually morphed into the official HL site. Mike Richards, Nico Derks (for sale items posted by collectos), Tom Wahlberg and Joe's Lighthouse Page (prices only, no sales), and the AOL board were others. Several dealers who had stores also had Web pages with secondary pieces for sale with prices advertised. It was easy to compare and hunt for bargains.

Sadly, several of the most active Web dealers realized they were getting underbid (though not by much) by individual sales and stopped posting prices. By then however, enough prices had been posted that one had a pretty good idea what a given piece was going for. Being irked by the stoppage in open pricing, I myself came very very close to creating a Web site that provided a price tracking service.

The speculative market collapsed before E-bay came into prominence as a source for Harbour Lights - and actually it did not last that long. During the time under discussion GLOWs were 30%-40% cheaper, slightly smaller, and not as refined as the LE. There was a period of time when you could easily identify a piece as a GLOW and only the rawest newbie would mistake an early GLOW for an LE. (This comment does not include the pieces that became open editions before there were GLOWs such as Split Rock and Marblehead).

Nowadays its very difficult to tell GLOWs from LEs in terms of size, quality, and price.

Prices have dropped for the same reason they always drop, viz. a lessening of demand. Why would demand for LEs fall off? One explanation is they are no longer perceived as having the same value and cache. Remember most of the valuable pieces whose prices increased were in the 5500 series. Realizing that there are onlly 5500 or fewer of a model and that model was no longer available gave the LE an exclusivity that commanded a higher price. Knock-off models of similar size and quality (GLOWs) have a detrimental impact on the psychology of exclusivity. I suspect some collectors turned elsewhere because of that.

There are other reasons why demand has fallen off. It would be interesting to hear other theories about this - I have some but this post is long enough already. Supply and demand aren't explained away by closed pricing and speculation.

Fwiw, I do agree w/ Art's mention of a stampede effect having some collectors selling off before prices fall lower. Thats another account of the increase in supply. Several pieces of the model coming on the marketplace at once causes price competition as is typical with any over supply.

Rgds,
__
/im
[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 05-18-2000).]

Ok I will go out on a limb and make a prediction. My feeling is that GLOW production will dwindle and eventually cease making this ongoing discussion a moot point.

If Glows are giftware and giftware is mainly purchased by tourists, casual purchasers, those looking to buy a quality lighthouse model at a lesser price, etc. and in the store you see say, Key West Glow for $65 and then spot a Key West Little Light for $15 and a Brand X small poorly made light for $20 and you're looking to buy a souvenier for Uncle Charlie, which one are you going to buy? For the money the LL is the best deal.

With this thought in mind I am betting that if sales of Little Lights are good, production of GLOWs will decrease.

Secondly, once the more popular lights have all been made as GLOWS, why make the lesser ones as giftware and expect folks to fork out $60 on Aunt Jane so that she can have a nearly full sized replica of the Light on Lake Whatchacallit? Friends will ask her, "Where is it?" and she will reply, "Darned if I know. It was nice of them to buy it for me but if they were going to buy me a lighthouse I wish they had bought Cape Hatteras."

(This is the cease part.)

For "c"ollectors looking to augment their collections with a substitute for the higher priced LE's some will purchase glows, some will purchase LL's, some will purchase other brands, some will just say, "I guess I didn't really want that light anyway."

(Sporatic sales of existing glows).

Just a thought.

"I think there is one part of this GLOW argument that we can all agree on. GLOWs compete with factory production, GLOWS compete with artists scheduling, GLOWs compete with distribution, GLOWs compete for shelf space and unsold inventory."

I would add two more things to this list:
1-GLOWs are being purchased by many C-ollectors and LE's are being purchased by many tourists.
2-GLOWs also make Harbour Lights a lot of money and will continue to do so throughout the years because there is no production limit whereas when a LE reaches its number be it 5500, 9500, or whatever, it is forever done and will not make any more money for HL.
Sooner or later HL will run out of desirable LE's, which is probably already happening,just by the fact that they have had to retire so many pieces early. The bottom line is that the future of HL lies in the production of GLOW's or some kind of remake of a LE. GLOWs are here to stay.


"TheLightkeeper"

Sometimes you have to quit philosophizing and go visit the front lines. Dealers' shelves are overflowing, thanks in great measure to GLOWs. The displays look ragged and cramped. Dealers tell me they wish Harbour Lights would ease up on the GLOWs. Many sell them at reduced prices just to clear out space in the back room and on their shelves. They also want lower LE edition sizes...they're begging for them, as a matter of fact.

There's no doubt that Harbour Lights is listening, but it will take a few years before the effect of their downsizing is felt.

If the Little Lights are taking off, IMO they should retire the GLOWS immediately and make TLLOM their exclusive giftware line. Dealers can blow out their remaining GLOWs and get their LE displays back in order.

The GLOW argument is fun, but it overlooks the real problem: There's just too much stuff out there that's moving too slowly.

I agree that many retail shelves are a mess, and that GLOWs are occupying valuable space. I do not know if retailers are obligated to buy GLOWs along with their auto-ship plan or not, but even if they are, once that initial quantity is gone it is the retailer's choice to reorder or not. Imo, the problem of overstocked shelves is not to be blamed on the existance of GLOWs, but on the decisions of the retailers themselves.

------------------
-Art

I didn't get into detail, but if you reread the last few lines of my original posting, you can see that I agree on this point.



The assumption here seems to be that a person's purchasing criterion is "non-retired Harbour Lights models". How many of you go into a store looking for "non-retired Harbour Lights models?" People go to the store looking for (a) an attractive keepsake or gift lighthouse, or (b) a limited edition collectible. There may be other criteria and combinations of criteria, but I doubt that anyone goes looking to spend their money on a "non-retired Harbour Lights model". In examples (a) and (b), the people are different, and the dollars are different. I'm certain that there is a great deal of crossover, but how much one spends and what one buys depends at least in part on the degree to which he is motivated by each of these two criteria.



OK. Maybe I've got this exclusivity/ limited edition motivator thing all wrong, but what I was cryptically saying is this:

(a) An LE is worth owning only if people in number over the edition size are interested in owning it. Otherwise, what's the attraction? I can make one of something and be proud of it and happy with it, but unless someone else would also like it, is there any attraction specifically in the fact that only one exists? Would I care if there were a million of them?

(b)New collectors = increased demand. A corollary to (a). If HL sold every one of the 5,500 Key Wests made, but it was known that there were no new collectors above the 5,500 that purchased them at retail, would the LE status matter?

I only ask. Let me know your thoughts on this.

Probing the depths of the Collector psyche,

-Art [Isn't this fun?]

>>. Imo, the problem of overstocked shelves is not to be blamed on the existance of GLOWs...<<

If the GLOW line did not exist there could be less crowding for a more attractive display of LEs.

When Bill sez 'there's too much stuff moving too slowy' he's reiterating the supply-demand factor. Even if we speculate that demand for lighthouse models has remained constant an increase in supply (GLOWs) should yield either lower prices or an increase in unsold models. If new GLOW models were not released that could leave more shelf space to continue displaying previous year's LE models that may now be pushed to the back room in order to display the new pieces in the GLOW line.

One of the more interesting arguments for the presence of GLOWs suggests they are needed to subsidize the existence of the LE line.

Do GLOWs help even out the HL cash flow? Are sales of LEs too unpredictable? Would cessation of GLOW production result in HL staff cutback? If HL had been successful introducing further or different lines of Collectibles would there be a need for GLOWs. Or is it simply as Mike suggests that GLOWs exist because they are profitable?

Another wacko theory for GLOWs suggests their presence helps bring together the HL community to discuss their pros and cons. After all, if GLOWs didn't exist this thread probably wouldn't either. ;-)

>>I doubt that anyone goes looking to spend their money on a "non-retired Harbour Lights model". <<

Art- the point was simply to differentiate the secondary market from the non-secondary market to clarify Joanne's post . Don't get hung up on this specification as intending to represent what people think when they're making a purchase in a store.

>>If HL sold every one of the 5,500 Key Wests made, but it was known that there were no new collectors above the 5,500 that purchased them at retail, would the LE status matter?<<

Yes. Of course it would. Remember not all buyers are C/collectors.

Rgds,
Yr. Fogmeister
[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 05-18-2000).]

If the GLOWS truely cause a depreciation to the value of LE's, then why is an LE Coquille costing over $1000, and an LE St. Augustine usually in the $400 range? Both of these have an alter ego GLOW, and in the case of Coquille, it's actually a more accurate lighthouse. The reason is simple. An LE is a collectable, and a GLOW is not!

Just some quick numbers regarding when GLOWS were introduced in respect to the retirement of their LE relative.

One year or less:

Cape Hatteras
Boston
Marblehead
Split Rock
Southeast Block Island
Portland Head

Bolivar: about a year and a half

About Two years:

Sandy Hook
New London Ledge
Old Point Loma
Cape Neddick
Barnegat
St. Simons
Thomas Point
Cape Canaveral
Alcatraz

Grosse Point
Ponce de Leon
St. Augustine
Hilton Head: all about two and a half years

Three years or more:

Montauk
Holland
Old Mackinac
Tybee
Key West
Assateague
Coquille

So what does all of this mean? I don't know. I was hoping someone could tell me if it means anything at all.

It is easy to understand why some were created so soon after the retirement of their LE brother or sister: The popularity of Cape Hatteras for example or the creation of the Stamp Series for Split Rock and Marblehead. Others, it is unclear why they were made into GLOWS at all. Does anyone really need a Grosse Point or Bolivar GLOW???

I happen to agree with the idea that the Open edition pieces should have been kept distinctively different from the limited edition pieces. They should have remained markedly smaller and less expensive.

-Todd

And the debate goes on....
I am ill equipped to add anything of real substance here. I DO enjoy reading the dabate!
The only point I will make is this:
Y&A is truly fortunate to have an intelligent bunch of marketing experts and customer satisfaction researchers that they have access to here in the forum that doesn't cost them a cent. I hope that they have the good sense to listen.
--Joe

I'm not saying that I think existing glows should be "retired" as most of them are quite popular lights and there are still plenty of folks who may want to buy them. I just don't think lots of folks will want to pay that price for some that are not so popular.

I also think that there are still plenty of lights to be made as LE's that would sell quite well. Just because a light is not well known to the general public true lighthouse affectionados see the beauty in and appreciate the importance of all the lights and would buy them. Ever increasing numbers of Sociey Membership indicate an abundance of this type of collector. Maintaining the current trend of lower edition sizes is a must.

If a dealer's display is not kept attractive, they certainly cannot expect to sell a lot of lights, whether they be glows or le's.

"I'll try a simple example: If there is $1000 to be spent on non-retired Harbour Lights models, and $500 of that is spent on GLOWs that means there is $500 not spent on LEs."

I can't agree with that because if I have $1,000 I will buy what I desire. If I spend $500 on LE's and $500 on GLOWS, it's only because I did not see $1,000 worth of LE's that I wish to purchase. So, if there were no GLOWS, I would probably walk out of the store with $500 worth of desired LE's and $500 left in my pocket. In other words, I have never not purchased a desired LE in order to purchase a GLOW.

Joanne

>>If the GLOWS truely cause a depreciation to the value of LE's, then why is an LE Coquille costing over $1000, and an LE St. Augustine usually in the $400 range? <<

In 1997 the Coquille LE was selling for $2200-$2800. During 1997-99, St. Augustine was selling for $450-$520. Yes, there are exceptions in both directions. If you're asking why these prices are down and/or why haven't these pieces continued to appreciate in price, I'd say probably for all the reasons we're discussing.

>>I can't agree with that because if I have $1,000 I will buy what I desire. <<

I'm sure you will. The example was not intended to reflect the purchasing choices of an individual. I doubt it makes any sense to figure out what any one person would do. I was using the example to refer to the sum total of dollars available to be spent by all buyers on lighthouse models over some period of time. But I don't know what percentage would not be spent on GLOWs if they didn't exist.

Part of the point I'm trying to make is if GLOWs didn't exist more people would be inclined to Collect LEs. I believe there would be more true Wackos (in the original sense of the word, not the forum meaning) who would stay with the hobby, and more new ones who would join it. Thats the inverse of what I see happening today. Why? Because LEs would be perceived as being more valuable than they are today. And if one believes LEs are as exclusive (desired, wanted, valuable, what-have-you.) today as they were three years ago, why are secondary prices depressed, shelves overstocked, and HL cutting back on edition sizes? Have no doubt that if they could sell 10,000 of each model they'd make that many.

GLOWs don't appear to be bringing in enough new Collectors to make up for the ones the hobby is losing. And I'm suggesting they are one of the factors explaining why that loss occurs. Don't underestimate the appeal of a real Collectible to capture a loyal audience. After all, thats exactly why HL was successful in their first 4-5 years. As it is now the LE line is tainted as a Collectible because of the pretty knock-offs.

I'll make the same suggestion I've made several times... why doesn't HL simply stop numbering all pieces?

Rgds,
Saint Deja-vu
[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 05-18-2000).]

GLOWS




[This message has been edited by Gravedigger (edited 05-18-2000).]

Hey Digger,
Thats .
Rich

------------------

'Cute, Digger.......

Good one, Digger!

Hey Tim, if you have an extra $1000, why not send it my way and I'll be glad to do the shopping and report back?

If there's anything left I'll buy myself a new dictionary!

As new HL collecter but Lighthouse Nut for over 4 years now Kathy and I just get Lighthouses that we have seen, and we have seen many. Problem with LE's that have been retired that we have seen I need to buy GLOWs, for I don't want to spend the big bucks to get a retired piece.
You may say I'm not a true collecter by saying this but I thoughly enjoy the HLs weather LEs or GLOWs
Just my thought!!!!
Larry