Portland Head ME by Harbour Lights as a limited edition has come and gone. All 5,500 were sold.

But is Harbour Lights prevented from ever making a NEW sculpture of Portland Head and issue it as a limited edition -- of 10,000 say?

It would be a different sculpture - perhaps (as suggested elsewhere) shown covered with snow.

Before you offer up the Open-to-Limited editions of 1995-96, the promise that Harbour Lights made was that they would not issue a lighthouse as a GLOW edition unless it had first been a limited and retired. But it doesn't take President Clinton's lawyers to see the loophole.

Nothing in that statement prevents Harbour Lights from issuing a new limited edition after an earlier limited edition had been issued and retired.

Is there a precedent? Would doing this lower the desire or demand for an earlier 'Portland Head' in an edition size of only 5,500?

For Harbour Lights to continue to pull in new Collectors Harbour Lights will have to always offer the High Demand Lighthouses. Would you rather a GLOW to fill the demand for the new collector? Not me, I think that it continues to scare off some potential new collectors. If new versions/molds of Limited Edition Lighthouses are offered each version stands on its own as long as they are significantly different from the one before. The First edition is always the first. If they offer a new version at 6,500, 9,000, 9,500 or 10,000 its still not the original Limited Edition. The Minority of the collectors are going to spend the big bucks on the Secondary Market for the original. I think that there is a market for both without fearing it will hurt the value of the entire collection. Certainly it has to be better than issuing a GLOW which regenerates each year. The key here is to manage the releases and not flood the market in a year with new Hatteras, Portland Head, West Quoddy, Cape Neddick, etc.... Once the new collector has started collecting and gotten the bug they will probably have the desire to buy the original anyway. Maybe not right away, but certainly it will be thought about. I would rather see a couple of re-releases than a continued edition size of 10,000 filling up the retailers shelves. Pleasing Dealers is as important as pleasing collectors. Dealers wont carry them if they dont have the space for inventory.

ImHo
SeAnDiEgO

>>Would doing this lower the desire or demand for an earlier 'Portland Head' in an edition size of only 5,500? <<

In other words, would it lower the value, or the likelihood the original Portland Head will appreciate further?

Yes it would. Another Limited Edition Portland Head will have an adverse impact on the original's appreciation. Reduced demand = lower price. Current value is more likely to remain constant cuz they're all been purchased and few will want to accept devaluation. But the appreciation curve will tank.

The prospect of Yet Another Porthland Head will no doubt elicit coo's and squeals from the 'but I can't afford an original' crowd, but - not to put too fine a point on it - I think its a crack-pot idea. Perhaps I'm one of the last remaining few who - as much as I enjoy lighthouses - see the HL LE models as a line of collectibles and believe they should be treated as such.

The best examples we have of these sort of shenanigans are REXA and REXM. If you need a loophole, there's your precedent. The main (but not sole) reason REXA has a higher value is because there's only 670(?) of 'em. What if there were 4000 REXAs. (that would have made a fun reunion) to go with the 6000 REXMs. I'll grant any piece with an edition size of 5500 will appreciate better than one with a size of 10000, but the vast majority of collectors - including those who would buy the original PH - are probably satisfied with just one.

Reissuing LE's - even if they're different (snow, better tech, whatever) compromises the integrity of the LE line-up as a collectible. And where does it stop? How 'bout another Assateague with a different mold? Or a new version of Barnegat? ("Gee - those snowy PHs went fast - lets do another reissue - St. Augustine is popular, lets do that one".)

Precedent, smecedent don't do it HL.

And fwiw - I'd love a cheaper original LE PH - its the one piece I need to complete my 5500 series not including Coquille (that'll never happen). But I wouldn't trade a lower market value on the PH I don't have, for the chance at a new one with snow or sleds, or birds, or fences, or whatever.

[rant mode: off]

Nice n Comfy in the FSB,
__
/im

I think I would be against this idea. If the main thrust of the new LE version would be to offer *very* popular lights on a more continual basis for newer collectors, that is already the stated purpose of the GLOWS. Portland Head will always be available in that format (especially since it is being re-molded, you will already have 3 versions to choose from)

If the new collectors would not be the main thrust of the idea, then I would assume the purpose would be just to offer yet another version to sell out quickly because of a low edition size (if 5500 was chosen), creating another *must have* for the whacko collector. I don't believe this is a solid foundation for a new approach from such a creative company. There has to be a more unique or purposeful reason for doing so.

I do believe the idea would be championed by the collectors if the approach was taken to redo a select few lights that have changed so dramatically over the years that it would be modeled after a completely different version of the real light (in the same vein as a "before and after" style piece). Take Chatham for instance (not a suggestion, just an example since everyone has seen the posts of how much the building has changed through the years). An earlier representation including both towers, rear full porch as main entrance, rear dormers, front bay windows, and all original rear yard outbuildings would create a dramatically different sculpture to be placed next to the existing one. At least in this example there would be a more fundamental purpose for doing a new sculpture of it. Other lights were dramatically different in earlier years and would probably make a better example of this approach.

There have been some very creative ideas put forth on the these forums before concerning new approaches to the line. The "Lighthouses of the Past" idea for lights no longer in existance was great, "Before and After" ideas would be creative, "Lights During Preservation" complete with scaffolding and miniature workers painting and working on the light would be awsome, "Lights During Relocation" with the lighthouse on its raised foundation and track system during its move was also neat, etc, etc.

The practically unlimited potential for new creative ideas seems to overshadow the approach of just remolding an existing light for the sole purpose of adding snow to it or re-kindling interest through a new limited version. It seems a little boring to me as a new idea, somewhat of a cop-out. HL can do much better.

Harbour Lights is in a "class of their own", to the point where the real competition is with themselves. Each new release is competing against all existing pieces for our money and attention. New ideas or approaches have to be thought out more carefully as practically being *brilliant* to be successful since our expectations have risen dramatically over the years. I am not for sure the "Signature Series" really met that criteria as the latest new idea, as an example.

---

-RodW
[This message has been edited by Rod Watson (edited 12-11-98).]

I also think the idea of reissue isn't such a grand one. Whether a Winter Portland Head or a ice-crusted Minot's..HL is a special collectible line and careful management is needed especially during this growth period. One of the best things about collecting is trying to find "that deal of a lifetime" on say a Portland Head (which I'm still looking for.)
Check the pricing on Alcaraz lately, then say the GLOW version wasn't a little too exacting in it's execution and price. Some collectors are always going to complain about older pieces costing too much. So be it, thats the reward for the early collector who noticed the potential of a new line. Other lines of collectibles are now in that phase of reissuing new versions of older pieces and in just about every case, the value of the older version has started to drop. I hope HL takes notices.
There is nothing wrong with new collectors wishing prices and availability of older pieces were better. Also, there's nothing wrong with older collectors hoping prices stay up on their older pieces. This makes for a fun and interesting collectible line. Much of the discussions are centered on the more costly and rare pieces - this is a good thing- why do people want to tinker with it.
This bulletin board is full of new and unique ideas. Let Harbour Lights explore them . No, not everyone will be happy and that really is not a bad thing. That is what makes things interesting, makes collectors set goals. If someone gave you enough money to immediately purchase every # and variation of the HL line, what makes it interesting tomorrow.
Let us persue new ideas and leave the classics where they belong- on everyones WANT list.
Finally, add me to the list of wanting a piece depicting the moving of Cape Hatty, now thats special.

Whoops, Kaiz...

Doesn't that last statement about depicting a Cape Hatteras under moving conditions contradict the rest of your post?

Clarification, please.

The idea of another Portland Head LE is an interesting concept. I would only hope that Harbour Lights depict any future remakes of LE's in different time periods. For instance, it would be interesting to see Portland Head under construction with teams of oxen dragging fieldstone (maybe Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, could be seen overseeing the project). Or how about Minots original tower (the skeletal tower built on pilings that eventually fell into the Atlantic)? Maybe an early lighthouse with horse and buggy outside or a harnessed horse walking around the mechanism to blow the fog whistle (as was how the early whistle was operated at Beavertail).
I only hope that future LE releases are in smaller edition size (such as 6500). The number of pieces available has everything to do with maintaining these miniatures as "collectables".

Ron

"The Minority of the collectors are going to spend the big bucks on the Secondary Market for the original. I think that there is a market for both without fearing it will hurt the value of the entire collection."

I stand by this statement and believe that there is plenty of demand for either edition.



SeAnDiEgO
A member of the stubborn lumberjacks society

I agree with BuyGlass.
How often have you heard a collector
moan and groan when he finds he doesn't
have the original of that piece?
Think about it.

tnkeeper

[This message has been edited by tnkeeper (edited 12-11-98).]

[This message has been edited by tnkeeper (edited 12-11-98).]

John to clarify: refer to the "Save a Sentinel Series" posted on 10-27-98 by me that states:
"Maybe this one will bring about some discussion. I would like to see HL start a series on the relocation of and/or serious endangered lighthouses. Whether depicting the moving of SE Block or hopefully the saving of Cape Hatteras. Maybe picturing the immediacy of the encroaching cliff or sea to the featured lighthouse.
The series could be issued every other year with a special flag. I'd be willing to pay a small premium (I know the GLOWS do this now) that would go to the saving of these structures that we admire.
I just think a designed series, especially for this purpose, would indeed be SPECIAL."
As you see John, I would want to create a special catagory per se. Hope this answers your question.

Hang in there Sean, plaid's making a comeback!

Rgds,
P.Bunyan

I would support the idea of new/reissued LEs (sounds like an oxymoron) under strictly limited guidelines. First, I think that HL should consider only a handful of lights such as Portland Head, Cape Hatteras, etc., that have a compelling history. Second, the new molds should depict a significant different time in that history from that of the original LE. This could be, as stated in previous posts, the original construction underway or complete, an earlier historic reincarnation following modifications, a recent restoration or move in progress, etc. A depiction such as these would fascinate true collectors or buffs as opposed to the casual tourist for whom the GLOWs fill an on-going need (as well as cash stream for HL). Last, these special reissued LEs should have a very limited edition size. This would spark collector interest. IMHO, there are a few lights that many of us would like to see in different renditions.

John, a little followup to the "Save a Sentinel Series", I was too pooped last night to linger and ramble on.
What I would envision with a series like this would be similar to what was done with the Society Rose Island. A one month window for Society members to reserve the piece. This might keep the # down and would keep the HL collective juices flowing. As with the Rose Island piece, there was alot of discussion on when and who took delivery. An interesting twist would also be to not preview the piece to open up furthur talk.

I know pieces like this would not be as profitable, but I believe these releases would tweak interest enough to increase overall sales. Also the price could be set higher to allow a greater percentage to go to these wonderful groups that put forth tremendous efforts to save these lighthouses. I believe issues that show the special efforts involved in rescuing these Sentinels would not depreciate the existing LE's perhaps it would actually enhance them.
See ya, Mike

Maybe those who can show proof of ownership of the ORIGINAL Limited Edition Portland Head would be allowed to purchase one of the NEW Limited Editions? (Just Kidding)


I like the direction this is going - acceptance of the idea of re-sculpting only very important lighthouses shown in either a different era or being moved, etc. Maybe one of these new versions would have people (like Anchor Bay) or a carriage, or scaffolding, etc. Also I like the smaller edition size - like Hillsboro FL with 6,500.


Another idea that might go along with this is that some of the income from this piece would go fund lighthouse restoration and care. (Not necessarily the lighthouse being depicted.)

How about this hypothetical example: A sculpture of Cape Hatteras being moved, total edition size of 6,500. Price about $125.

Also available for an additional $250 tax-deductible donation: a unique base and glass dome. The base would be 'fitted' so that the lighthouse sits in it - and the base has additional features that compliment the lighthouse - more trees, additional keepers' house, etc. Plus an engraved plaque with matching serial number. Perhaps the special base would be limited to 1,500.

$200 of the $250 ($300,000 total) raised from this special display base would go to 'Harbour Lights' Trust Fund' with money going to help fund the saving of endangered lights or restoration, etc.

The result - Harbour Lights collectors collectively donate $300,000 (and the company puts in an additional $50,000) for restoration and maintenance of America's lighthouses. Perhaps one annual 'funding' piece might be done.

Could a "Harbour Lights' Lighthouse Trust Fund" be established in this way? Help me out here CPAs and Lawyers.

St. John I think that's a wonderful idea. In reviewing the Forum messages I think it's the best new concept yet. I'd buy 'em in a heartbeat.

P.S. - I can show proof of ownership, too.

If redoing a small number of historically significant lights shown at an important point in their history were to be considered by HL, I think these pieces should be issued only one each year as Society pieces during a brief order window like Rose Island. They would be for targeted to committed HL collectors and resulting edition sizes would likely be around 6,000 (like REXM). Every collector who wants one would have equal access and few would make their way to retail shelves.

Hopefully, HL would price them to recover production costs and normal profit.
I like John's idea of an optional special base or glass cover available for an additional tax-deductible cost to be applied to restoration or other good purposes.

These lights would become true collectibles in every sense of the word.

IANAL, but follow the money...

I have to say that I am against the idea of making new limiteds out of old limiteds. The reason being? I agree with the lines of reasoning that Tim and Rod have stated above. (I'll save myself some typing and ride your coat tails on this one guys. If I get too heavy, just throw me off).

Point is, there are a lot of lighthouses out there, a lot that haven't been sculpted, and a lot that I, and I am assuming many other collectors, would like to see done.

-Todd

Marketing Experts help me out. What has the introduction of the Tybee GlOW, Cape Hatteras GLOW, Hilton Head GLOW, St. Augustine GLOW, St. Simons GLOW, Boston Harbor GLOW done to the market? Would these markets be stronger if there was no GLOW? I say yes. Could have Harbour Lights released a newer version with a small limited edition 5, 6, 7 years down the road instead of issuing a GLOW. I say yes to this as well. I have never suggested reissuing in the same size, same mold, same season or same era nor have I suggested flooding the market with them. I advocated new small (less than 10,00) LE of a different mold to delete the GLOWs. Tnkeeper makes the point for me. If you don't have the original those that could afford it on the secondary market are still going to want it and eventually buy it. Those that already have it and those that can't afford it are going to race to the dealer to buy the new and improved version with the nice new trees, detailed rocks & cliffs, metal handrails, better paint, metal piers, boat davits, lamp posts, cows, sailboats, etc......

Think of the possibilities.

SeAnDiEgO

>>Think of the possibilities. <<

Yep. I think thats exactly what Rod is getting at. While my case looks at the valuation side, Rod's is even stronger, imo. There are so many interesting and deserving lighthouses that HL could model for the first time, that doing redundant versions at this point is, well, redundant. As Rod suggests by using their imagination, "HL can do much better" than reissuing different takes on the same thing they've done before. "Think of the possibilities." :-)

On the side of valuation, sure I agree that those that can afford a original Portland may not be deterred from buying one. And I'll agree that both those that can and cannot afford an original PH may indeed buy a snowy PH or whatever. But those points, while valid, don't address my concern. Multiple LE versions of the same light (regardless of how different one is from the other) will have an even greater compromising effect on both the original LE and the LE line as a whole.

What's to prevent HL from doing a different version of PH? Nothing? What's to prevent HL from doing the 4 Seasons of Montauk? Nothing? Does HL have any principles that inform the choices they make - aside from profitability? I'm not suggeting they don't - I'm asking what are they, or what should they be.

And please please please don't tell me they should "make lighthouse lovers happy" unless you can state what makes up the same happiness for everybody. At best someone could make the case that happiness means willingness to make another purchase.

Are there any unwritten rules that govern how a line of collectibles should be managed. I think inherently there are. It will be an interesting exercise to draw these out. My sense of one of these 'rules' is: "Don't do multiple different versions of the same piece". Sure anyone can rationalize why HL would be successful doing this, but if there are any such guidelines they transcend HL or any single company.

HL models are the only thing I collect. I'm not familiar with other lines that are truly collectible - not giftware. Is it common practice here for a manufacturer to do re-issues that vary an orignal? Surely there are some examples. Anybody got any?

Brunching at the FSB,
__
/im

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 12-13-98).]

with some 700 past and present lighthouses in the United States has Harbour Lights run out of ideas ? Is it necessary to make the same lighthouses over and over and over again ? Since the Portland Head GLOW is all ready being overhauled do we need a new "Relimited Edition" Portland Head isn't 3 of them enough ? Would it be a Portland Head "then" from 50 years ago, What would be next after that ? a Portland Head from "Way back Then" from 100 years ago ? you get the point. The same goes for S.E.B, Hatteras and all the rest of em. 10 years from now will there be a push on the redo all the current pieces with tommorows technology-lantern rooms that you can see thru and have a light in them, doors that open and maybe windows you can see into so we can see the kitchen (so we can be sure that the seahorse isn't in there)

I personaly would like to have 500 diffrent lighthouses 15 years from now - not 125 diffrent lights with 4 diffrent sizes each

Mark

"Harbour Lights run out of ideas ? Is it necessary to make the same lighthouses over and over and over again ?"

Nobody Suggested Harbour Lights has run out of ideas or is even considering this.

"I personaly would like to have 500 diffrent lighthouses 15 years from now - not 125 diffrent lights with 4 diffrent sizes each"

This is pretty extreme don't you think when you read what I suggest?

I have run out of ideas to get rid of the GLOWS its someone elses turn to find a way.
At the rate Harbour Lights is releasing GLOWS your going to have a similar problem anyway.

SeAnDiEgO

>>I have run out of ideas to get rid of the GLOWS its someone elses turn to find a way.
At the rate Harbour Lights is releasing GLOWS your going to have a similar problem anyway.<<

Sean,

I agree with your motivation. I just disagree that LE re-issues (with variations) are the way to cope with it. How long will it take to sell out of 6500 or even 10000 of a re-issue? Probably about the same amount of time as it takes now. [Granted this seems like forever with a few pieces :-) ] But won't the same thing just happen again once these are gone?

The GLOW line represents the gift-ware branch of the HL enterprise. I don't know what led to their decision to make them. A conjecture is HL doesn't think they can be successful selling just collectible LH models .

They tried branching out with Anchor Bay. They did this wrong, imo, by offering OEs and to make matters worse, OEs that were not very distinguishable from the LEs. As it turns out neither is very successful. I suspect thats partly due to having OEs and partly due to a general failure to appeal to a broader market than lighthouse fanatics.

By definition a collectible has a greater appeal (demand) than supply - by definition not everyone who wants one can own one. This is a dilemna for the collectible manufacturer and we as collectors are somewhat at the mercy of the manufacturer as they struggle to come to grips with it.

It is a simple fact there are a limited number of people with interests in lighthouses that are willing to invest in a line of collectible lighthouse models. This leads to the conclusion that the lighthouse collectible market has an upper limit. Its probably tough for a company to face the fact their market has a limit and they cannot continue to grow and expand it. Ergo, they look for a new market - in this case its giftware.

The idea of attempting to reap the gains of the giftware side (ie, $) by introducing more popular Limited Edition collectibles is a legitimate approach. Well, its legitimate assuming - as you suggest - the giftware goes bye bye. But the kind of these 'more popular collectibles' is also important.

It seems obvious (at least to me) the issuing of Hillsborozilla is HL's attempt at a different approach to the same problem. A bigger, more expensive, limited edition is worth a shot. I hope it works. This represents a more imaginative approach than reissuing a different version of the same thing. It also means they should not create a bigger, more expensive version of one they've already done eg., the Attack of The Giant Portland Head.

Another tactic they are trying, but not quite so overtly, is with the International Series. Can they grow a market in Britain or Australia? Expanding the market without compromise is the most obvious solution, but also the most difficult.

Of course we haven't come to what I'll dub "the Luddite Approach". Chanting crowds with placards at signing events handing out bumper stickers. The signs and bumper stickers say: Smash the GLOW Molds Now ...Not yet anyway. ;->

Broadcasting from the Collector's Revolutionary Front outside the Fog Signal Building,
__
/im

One, Two, Three
What're We Fightin' For?
Don't Ask Me I Never Known
Next stop is El Cajon.

And its Five, Six, Seven
Open up the GiftWare Case
Tried Persuading, but Bill sez 'No'
Whoopee We're All Gonna GLOW!


With apologies to Country Joe and the Fish


[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 12-13-98).]

With some 800 different lighthouses still standing in the U.S. I don't much think HL will be at a loss to find different ones to sculpt. Add to that some of the beauties I've seen pictures of which are no longer with us and it'll be many years before the supply is exhausted.

It's my opinion that some lighthouses are just so beautiful and so appealing that having a few multiple versions is OK. Cape Hatteras and PH immediately come to mind as has been discussed here.

St. John's idea especially appeals to me because it would provide some much needed funding to those groups, composed mostly if not totally of volunteers, who diligently strive to save and restore our nation's sentinels and keep them maintained. And yes, I put my money where my mouth is in that I regularly contribute cash and whatever expertise and services I'm capable of providing to some of these groups. In addition, us HL addicts would get something special, too.

IANAL and IANACPA. I have no special knowledge of the limited edition collectible business. Therefore, I won’t try to advise Y&A how to run their business. I have no idea how much Y&A makes on any pieces but I sincerely hope it's substantial so they will continue to create my beloved HL LE's and technologically 'stretch the envelope'.

I personally have little interest in GLOW editions. I’m not convinced they detract one iota from the LE’s. Even given the opportunity I wouldn’t buy a Coquille GLOW because I would know the difference between it and HL-111. I was given a Cape Hatteras GLOW when they were first introduced and it’s a nice piece but it would not stop me for a moment from buying HL-102 if I had the opportunity and the willingness to dedicate the financial resources.

From my soap box within the fog signal building...


------------------
Lamar

I’d like to add a comment or two, or three, or …

There seems to be a constituency that is absent from these discussions and that’s the new collector. The lines of reasoning expressed so far tend to talk about preserving the value of our collections. This takes many forms, such as the impact of GLOW editions on the LE versions. Or the relative effect of a 2nd LE on the original’s worth. Maybe I’m in left field here, but I think the one thing that will assure the long term value of any of our collections is the continued entry of new, excited, committed lighthouse lovin’ nuts like us.

If HARBOUR LIGHTS cannot capture new collectors, the jig is up for all of us. What are we going to do, pass the one remaining intact Point Arena among ourselves for an ever increasing price? That’s not realistic. We need new collectors. Without them, eventually there’s no market at all.

If you accept that we need new collectors, then I think it’s unreasonable to expect them to become as enthusiastic about lighthouses and Harbour Lights as this audience is, without the chance to own LIMITED EDITIONS of the same popular, romantic and historic lights that we had a chance to buy. Which lighthouse is more likely to capture a persons imagination, Portland Head or Crooked River? (It’s in Florida). Cape Hatteras or Price’s Creek? (It’s in North Carolina).

Harbour Lights product is accurate reproductions of REAL lighthouses. Whether there are 500 standing, or 1500 that have ever stood, it’s a finite resource. Eventually HARBOUR LIGHTS will sculpt the last one. What happens to the collections then? Do we all just dust the ones we have and move on to Anchor Bay? I don’t think I’d like that. I’d rather have a new look Cape May or Buffalo. This is a real consideration. Maybe not in the next ten years, but these things we all love to collect are not hatched in some ones imagination. Harbour Lights can’t just dream up a new one and put it in clay.

If you’re still reading after all of that, thanks. I have one more point. I think the idea to re-issue some of the popular lights (Portland Head, Cape Hatteras, Key West(?), etc.) as Limited Editions somehow tied to a ‘Harbour Lights Lighthouse Preservation Trust’ is worth exploring. Once done, maybe these editions could be re-issued themselves periodically. This serves the dual purpose of limiting the number of available versions of any one lighthouse and affording new collectors the opportunity have an LE of all the lights we old-timers had a shot at.

Well said Rick. I think it is very important to increase the size of the Harbour Lights Family of Collectors and to do this you must offer them some of the same lights that others have emptied the store shelves of. I would be all in favor of PH or Hatty depicted in a different time or season.

Ron

Well, here goes.... I am one of the "new" collectors (less than one year) who is still trying to build a complete collection of HL.
I realized when I started collecting HL that some of the pieces would be expensive if I wanted to add them to my collection due to the fact that they are rare. Remaking this same piece would not change the fact I would want the orginal to complete my collection.
If I wanted to have a Cape Hatteras or Portland Head in my collection just for looks I would buy the GLOW (I do have a GLOW Cape Hatteras by the way).
Buying a second LE piece would not satisfy the hard core collector in me who would still want to acquire that ever ellusive original.
I think the idea of representing the same lighthouse at different periods of time such as the Morris Island then and now ( they look totally different) is a great idea though!
.....just the humble opinion of a new HL collector!! Thanks for reading!

Right on, Rick.

And if one ponders the question of why so few pieces have retired recently (haven't we done this before?), one might notice that the lights sculpted recently are on the whole simply not as awe-inspiring as say Assateague, St. Augustine, Cape Hatteras, Nauset, Portland Head, et al are. So the Crooked River Syndrome? It's already happening, IMNSHO. The recent sculptures are very well done, but the subjects themselves are rather mundane by comparison. No offense, but which is more likely to get the attention (to the point of purchase) of a potential new collector -- an (8" tall!) St. Augustine, or Goat Island? Yes, you and I will buy Goat Island. And so would have that new prospect that just walked away, had a sufficient interest been cultivated by that essential first purchase of a real eye catcher or two. Addiction takes time. My point is, that of the several hundred potential subjects out there, very few have the impact of the best. Those best subjects should not be locked away for all eternity in a sometimes relatively feeble early 1st edition, but should be recycled periodically in such a way that each subsequent edition is clearly different than those that have gone before. That would keep enough pieces with that "push them over the edge" impact flowing through dealers' shelves to continually entice new collectors without confusing the seasoned ones. (Coquille River may be a whole 'nother story!) So, to answer the original question: Can There Be Another Limited Coquille? Hatteras?:

http://www.the-earchives.com/wavs/s/stooge13.wav

-Art

Rick, I think you make a very interesting point that leads me to consider this issue from some angles I hadn't thought about previously.

Since we're talking about collectibles any alternative must ultimately relate back to supply and demand.

As I understand it, your suggestion to increase the number of collectors is effectively suggesting an increase in demand. If this happens then concerns about valuation are mitigated because demand continues ahead of supply.

I've been advocating what is essentially a defensive position, namely, maintain relative value (demand) by not doing something that might dilute it.

Increasing demand is definitely an effective approach if it can be made to happen. Your theory, and what I understand RonF to be saying, is "a good way to increase demand is by offering different versions of lights previously done." (Let me know if I'm off base in understanding you.)

This is an interesting notion, and one that can be proven true or not only by attempting it. Before committing to go down this road we might want to ask ourselves the following questions:

1. How big of an edition size (of for example a snowy Portland Head) will be needed to allow for the possibility of bringing in new collectors? I would be skeptical if it was less than, say, 7,000. You've got to have enough to satisfy much of the current collecting base and maintain availability over a span of time sufficient to draw in new collectors.

Would the issuing of a new Hatteras or Portland Head by itself cause a quick jump in the number of collectors? I don't know, but I kinda doubt it. Having such LE's available for folks to purchase when they visit the light would be important. Once an initial purchase is made, hopefully more will follow. But I think this will take time. In other words, supply has got to exceed initial demand by enough for the piece to be assured a shelf life during which it can do its job.

One key is your notion that "maybe these editions could be re-issued themselves
periodically". That would almost be a necessity.

So I'd ask - how many should be made? I think this is the critical question. And - we've got to fix the edition size before release so we need to determine that up front. Which leads us to...

2. Is it realistic to believe there is limit to the collectible lighthouse model market? And a corollary question - is it realistic to believe there is a limit on the number of versions of a piece most collectors will buy?

Or to put them both differently, at what point will collector's stop buying reissues, and at what point will there no longer be enough new collectors coming on board to absorb them. How many different versions of Hatteras or Portland are most folks willing to own?

This is another place where the edition size question comes into play. Once you can no longer sell well into the current collecting base, will these re-issues turn into barkers? Well.... not a problem as long demand continues to grow in the form of new collectors.

SO - while we're here, we might ask ourselves has the market limit already been reached? At present I believe it has maxed out - at least roughly. (JC is absolutely correct with his notion that what we'd really like to know is average days to retirement, not in terms of purchase by dealers, but in terms of broad distribution to collectors.)

With a few exceptions, much of the 9500/10000 edition size pieces are taking almost 2 years to retire. And again with some exceptions, very few of these are appreciating faster than 10%-15% a year. What this suggests to me is the market is somewhere close to saturation.

Of course your theory proposes this can all change by re-introducing popular pieces that are no longer available. Can it work? I dunno. I do think its a gamble. If it doesn't work, then we'll have a much larger number of the re-issues on hand and the number of new collectors will not have grown enough to maintain an increasing valuation curve in the face of an increasing supply. I think this will cause either a devaluation of the original models or a real slowing of appreciation, a la the GLOW effect.

The alternative, which I believe Rod and I are considering from two different perspectives, is based on hanging on to the current collector base (demand) by a) maintaining value and appreciation (me), and b) maintaining variety and appeal sufficient to keep current collectors making purchases (Rod).

Is it possible to increase the number of new collectors? Is it a gamble worth taking? Maybe. Maybe not. But I think you do make a very interesting point - one worth further consideration. Thanks for an interesting post.

One final note, if HL does adopt an approach of continual re-issues of the same popular LE models (with variation), then there is definitely no longer a need for GLOWs. (Sean's point - one with which I definitely agree.) If HL does this, would they be willing to have faith in their own bet and kill off the GLOW line?

Life is grand at the FSB,
__
/im

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 12-15-98).]

"One final note, if HL does adopt an approach of CONTINUAL re-issues of the SAME popular LE models (with variation), then there is definitely no longer a need for GLOWs. (Sean's point - one with which I definitely agree.)"

Delete the word continual and change same to some I'll agree. I only suggested a few of these might be redone to generate some new interest and fill the demand for some of the well known lights. It is not my idea to meet the demand for years to come or to fill the demand for the original. I 100% agree that a firm secondary market is critical to the collection. I just think that with Harbour Lights current quality they could really stimulate collecting by releasing some planned variations on the original. Lighthouses NOT designed to compete but to give us another version (LE Version) for the oldtimers to place next to the Original and the newbies to have a limited one, not a gift shop GLOW. I still think that there will always be a demand for the original release of any collection. If you pay $85 for a new release of Portland Head your not spending much out of your budget for the original. I said I would never pay secondary for Coquille Harbor. Well guess what, I lied to myself. I couldnt stand not having a complete collection so I shelled out the big bucks. I feel that others have the same feelings even if it was just completing a region. If you were collecting North Carolina Lighthouses what would your collection be like without at least the Mold 2 Hatteras? If you collected New England Lighthouses what would your collection be like without the original Portland Head? I guarantee you that there is still that fever to have the original even if the gap is temporarily filled with a GLOW or the LEs I'm suggesting. I think when the collector gets a Tax Refund, Christmas Gift, or Birthday they are considering making that big purchase. Its just a matter of timing and cash.

SeAnDiEgO
Vice President of the Stubborn Lumberjacks Society

I agree with Sean. Even though I may buy a GLOW as a substitute/place holder for an expensive retired LE that I don't yet own, I still look forward to acquiring the original LE. I would also get more satisfaction from owning a reissued LE of the same light from a different period (with the latest technical improvements). The lighthouse buff side of me likes the GLOW, but the collector appreciates the LE whether orignal or reissued.

I think Tim is correct in that, for Harbour Lights, this is all about supply and demand. It's their challenge to manage the intricate relationships between the two. As others have said, in this thread and in others, maybe an edition size of 10,000 for Limited Editions is too many. In fact Harbour Lights might be admitting, or at least suspecting, that already. Could it be that the Special Limited Edition Hillsboro Inlet, at an edition size of 6,500, is a "fishing edition". An edition that is attmepting to find the "sweet spot" for how many are really required to meet the balance between supply and demand. It's probably more than 5,500 and almost certainly less than 10,000. Except for may a new Portland Head or Cape Hatteras.

I think that HLs went to 10,000 much too quickly. They did it right after some of the most popular lights they could have done (at any edition size) and in the midst of the burst of retirement activity that depleted the dealer inventories. It may be that the very same dealers who clamored for inventory to fill the shelves are now voicing concerns that Ida Lewis and Horton Point are taking up space for way too long.

Another bit of conjecture on the same point. I think the market (that's us) is maturing. One of the manifestations of that maturing is that collectors have become more selective in their purchases. More restrictive as to which HL will find shelf space on their own crowded shelves. I know I made a mistake, maybe a clasic mistake, of first time collector. I thought I wanted them ALL. I could see the opportunity and I jumped on it with enthusiasm and a big limit on the VISA card. But now all of the Washington, Oregon, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Minnesota, and Wisconson lights are in their boxes in the attic. It was too many, too fast and there's no place to put them. They had to go to make room for the East and Gulf coast lights that Linda and I visited and photographed. Those lights, the East and Gulf coast that we have pictures of, are the ones that I make room for now.

From the Widow's Watch in Salem,
Rick

A quick thought on the 2nd version of an LE topic. Is there a difference in the popularity of some lights. I think we all know (or suspect) that there is. A supporting piece of evidence. I recently posted for sale here on www.harbourlights a Diamond Head and a Castle Hill in the same post. I did not post anywhere else. I've had seven (7) inquiries about Diamond Head. I've had zero (0) inquires about Castle Hill.

I think it's clear that certain lights have a high potential to entice people to purchase them. It's those lights that Harbour Lights needs to have available in order to grow the collection beyond the current market.

From the Widow's Watch in Salem
Rick

Rick not to argue your point. Castle Hill is still available at retail on the shelves. Collectors can find them with a little digging around. I think Diamond Head is long gone.

There are definately lighthouses that are more popular than others. I think ease of accessibility to tourists is one impact on what makes one more popular than others. How many Lighthouse Photography Books have you seen that always have the same lighthouses in them? Quite a few has been my experience. I think this exhibits the point without naming the lighthouses.

SeAnDiEgO
5,500 2nd Edition LE Mold Twos are better than 20,000 A,B,C,D,E......GLOWs
President of the Stubborn Lumberjacks Society

It's interesting to observe the different ways people approach the subject of collecting HLs. I started a little slow in September of '97, but in a little more than a year later, I'm only missing about 15 LEs to complete my collection. I had no intention of purchasing the older ones which I felt weren't as nice as the new ones. I think my turning point was the Reunion. It gave me the inspiration to go for them all. Many of the people I met at the Reunion have been very helpful in finding those missing pieces.

I often wondered why some pieces were still available on store shelves after many years. I suppose it's a collector's dream to walk into a store and find that missing piece for retail. I know I've done it many times. I'm fortunate in the fact I have more than 50 dealers within an hour or so ride from my home.

I've also wondered if dealers ever swap HLs that would be easier to sell in their part of the country because they are replicas of local lights. Doesn't that make sense as far as moving the slow movers off the shelves? Take Ida Lewis for an example. Is it a hot seller on the west coast? Probably not, but I'm sure it would eventually sell out in the Rhode Island area. Are Bodie Island HLs readily available in the North Carolina area? There's still a lot of them up here in New England. Maybe dealer swaps for more localized lights could bring about quicker retirements. The only problem would be who absorbs the cost of the shipping. What do you think about this?

Bravo Sean - well said!

Does that make me a member of the Stubborn Lumberjacks Society, too?

Okay Sean, I'm a little uncomfortable with these personal responses in a public forum, but I'll say it a different way. Same two HLs. Paraphrasing you, Diamond Head is long gone from the shelves, Castle Hill can still be found at retail with some effort.

I beleive it still makes the point that I was trying to make. A Diamond Head or Portland Head or Cape Hatteras is more likely to be a "First Purchase" than is a Castle Hill or a Cape Blanco or a Biloxi. And it's that "First Purchase" that has to be made before one can become an avid collector.

That's all,
Rick

>> ... maybe an edition size of 10,000 for Limited Editions is too many. <<

Yep - I think your questions and points applies to the 9500 edition size as well. The 500 model differential is not enough to make a difference on the issues you raise.

HL is a victim of their own success. Just when they think they know the 'sweet spot' they're in a situation where they shoulda bunted the runner over instead of swinging away. From 5500, going to 7000, and finding out where things stand might have been a more reasonable approach. Of course we have the benefit of hindsight.

Imo, its the issue size that causes the real problem for the notion that 2nd Mold LEs can bring in new collectors and keep demand high. If these are limited to 5500-6500 they'll go too quickly to let new collectors discover them. If HL makes 10000 of 'em, they may sit on shelves too long and get labeled as not likely to appreciate.

The first one or two in a re-issue series will capture the attention of the existing collector base, sell-out relatively quickly, with the consequence of reinforcing HL's thinking they did the right thing. If they start with a smaller re-issue edition size these would go the quickest, then HL may think they need to re-up the edition size back to 10k.

Its not an easy balancing act to get right consistently and it may be recognition of that fact that led them to try the OE GLOW approach where they have hard data that tells them its time to make another batch or not. Its the easy way out - for them.

So folks - I'll ask my question once again. If you think 2nd Mold LE Re-issues will draw new collectors thus increasing market demand for the line as a whole - what should the edition size be to make this possible?

Duckin' curves in the FSB,
__
/im

I am not sure what a good size would be. It would need to be enough not to demise the collectivety of the first mold and it would need to be a size that would not necessarily sit on the shelves for many years to come. I think a Healthy Retirement would be no more than 24 months. Thats just my opinion, it is not based on fact. Anything longer than 24 months and I think dealers are in the "where do I put my inventory game".

I really am pretty flexible on this issue. I like to sturr the pot a little just to see all the viewpoints of how everyone feels about the collection.

From what I can see it looks like we are pretty much in agreement that the drop from 10,000 on some lighthouses can be considered a good thing by the collectors. It also seems that some of the older collectors that have a fairly large collection also do not favor the idea of remolds while the newer collectors seem to favor it. I am not sure what that means but it has to be info that means something. The demand has to be larger than it was in 1995 and earlier which seems to enforce the idea that there could be a healthy market for both.

I am not trying to sell everyone on the idea of 2nd mold, 3rd mold LEs. I just would like to see some of these older beauties done with the newer improvements on them. I am not looking for duplicates. Portland Head could be done with Snow with a Horse Drawn Carriage out front next year and in the Year 2003 Hatteras could be done in the midst of a move.

If the majority says "HEY NO REMOLDS OF LEs" I can live with it. I'll still be in line at the dealer picking up my pieces.

Welcome to the Club Lamar, I was looking for a VP.

SeAnDiEgO
Pres. of the Stubborn Lumberjacks Society

>>I like to sturr the pot a little just to see all the viewpoints of how everyone feels about the collection. <<

Goodness gracious, I would never do that. :^)

From the FSB with a VBG,
__
/im

Perhaps LEs should come out in stages. Hillsboro is a 6,500 piece series (so far). If it sells out in less than a year, an additional 1,000 will be made. If that additional 1,000 sells out in less than 3 months another 1,000 will be made. This could go on until a maximum amount has been reached, perhaps the current cap of 10,000. By doing this popular pieces will be available for most every collector who wants one. Less popular pieces might then become more popular after a year because their edition size will be smaller. Pieces can be coded as "A" for initial edition and "B" for second run or "C" for third run. These letters could be put at the end of the serial number so they wouldn't be confused with open editions. I should add that the numerical serial# will run sequentially: Initial edition 0001A - 6500A; second run 6501B-7499B; third run 7500C-8499C, and so on.
This probably sounds a little crazy but I see it as preventing pieces from gathering dust on store shelves yet supplying ample stock for the best sellers. It will probably be like the theory behind open editions yet limited to no more than 10,000 pieces.

Those are my thoughts from the East Coast!

Our opinions don't really count here. Market research would give a far better estimate, though still highly fallible. IANA marketing guy, but just for kicks, let's kick off the market research with a poll (statistically invalid -- serious sampling issues here).

I'll start a new thread, "Market Pseudo-Research on Resculpted LEs" in the "By the Numbers" Forum so Tim will have something to count (Merry Christmas, Tim!) ;-}. Please weigh in with (a) how many LEs you own now, and (b) how likely you are to buy a resculpted LE of one of the most popular lights. Click on the link below to jump there now. Thank you for your reply.

http://www.lighthousekeepers.com/forums/Forum16/HTML/000006.html

-Art


[This message has been edited by Art (edited 12-17-98).]

Doesn't sound crazy - sounds like GLOWs.

So we'd buy a Hillsboro Inlet FL in 1999 knowing the edition size would be "6,500-10,000"? How would that flag read?

#26/oh, somewhere between 6,500 and 10,000

John [I wish Milton Berle would edit my messages, Mark]

Thanks Sean. Does this mean that I too am now allowed to wear the much-coveted, monogrammed Bob Younger Memorial Beaver emblem?

---

Doesn't sound crazy - sounds like GLOWs

---

Exactly what I wouldn't want. I want a piece that is so different it couldn't be mistaken. The reason GLOWS are Labled A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I (have they made this many yet? Hee, Hee, they will) is because they are all made from the same mold over and over again. No special designators like the GLOWS use are needed, the edition size and copyright date would identify it. They could always introduce one as the 1999 Christmas Piece. Maybe??

SeAnDiEgO




[This message has been edited by BuyGlass (edited 12-17-98).]

[This message has been edited by BuyGlass (edited 12-17-98).]

Of what? The number of people whose "opinions don't really count"? Forgive me but unless you're polling folks who will become new collectors at some time in the future, the poll missed the point.

If HL makes a model for everyone who will buy one, did they make a collectible?

For those who feel like counting - count the number of collectible lines doing re-issues that are still going strong. Then count the number that aren't.

"Based on a tally taken at Malls Across America, Harbour Lights announces a new Limited Edition Portland Head (HL #247). Edition size is limited to 34,172. The model is displayed in a glass dome case. Just shake it and it snows. To promote this significant re-issue Burger King will offer a set of 7 different HL collectible cups. Each cup depicts Portland Head on a different day of the week. Better hurry - supplies are limited and this exclusive offering will not be repeated for a while."

Yep - that should draw 'em in. :-)

Steam Powered at the FSB,
__
/im

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 12-19-98).]

Opposite side of the coin. Harbour Lights makes an ugly version of Grosse Point (imho - appologies to friends at HL, you have to start somewhere). "Collectors" are not satisfied with it, it sits on shelves, clogs up dealer storage rooms, and the collector that wants a better version will never see it released again from Harbour Lights. I used this lighthouse as an example. I realize it is not a Cape Hatteras or Portland Head.

Tim I agree with your survey idea. It cant be done by surveying the people that have the originals or people not yet collecting.

Cups, 37,0000, McDonalds. Hee, Hee, Hee, you know this is not what I suggest. Why are we affraid they would flood the Market? Harbour Lights knows that would never work.



SeAnDiEgO

The survey is admittedly not up to that task. It was never intended to answer the question of if resculpting would draw new collectors or not. Quoting myself if I may:



Hence the name "Pseudo Research". And please take note of the "just for kicks" statement. There is just so much one can expect of this medium. Serious market research is beyond its limitations. This poll is more of a way to quantify the opinions that don't count (ours), to attach some data to the answers to Tim's question: That might yield some idea about the market for such a resculpting effort among current collectors, who will be a part of the equation. The question is how big of a part?

Data on potential new collectors would need to come from focus groups and/ or other (more valid than an internet BB survey) methods. Indeed, data on current collectors had best be obtained by methods other than my straw poll before HL proceeds with such an effort. They're certainly smart enough to do that. A forum such as this can only instigate an investigation, at best. I wouldn't want it to have any greater effect than that!

Laissez-faire,

-Art


[This message has been edited by Art (edited 12-19-98).]

>>you know this is not what I suggest<<

Yeah I know. I was just taking to a silly conclusion the notion of doing a collectible with an edition size that is based on how many people say they'd buy one.

Here's a completely different twist. How 'bout if HL makes a really nice model of a light they've never done before. Each autoship dealer is automatically sent their two - no more are ever released. No announcement is made. No publicity photos. No automatic distribution to folks who get a regular number. Sold to dealers on agreement it get resold at HL's fixed price. If you see it on your dealer's shelf and buy it, then you've got a nice collectible piece. If you're a brand new collector and happened to have acquired one of these, it might really spark your interest.

That might draw attention to the hobby.

Uh oh. I see they're lining up the ballistas, getting ready to lob equal opportunity pies. Time to go inside. :-)
__
/im [...hmmm - was that cocoanut creme?]

Not enough profit in only making a couple thousand unless that fixed price is a BIG ONE!!! I dont think it would happen and I think it would take the fun and family atmosphere that Harbour Lights works so hard to maintain right out of collecting. If a majority of collectors are intentionally designed out of having it I wouldn't want it!!! It certainly would make quite a rush to the dealers though. Ever seen "Jingle All the Way"? Maybe Harbour Lights could give everyone a colored ball. If yours is blue you get to buy one. NOT!!!

SeAnDiEgO

I'm capping this thread at 50 messages strictly for ergonomic reasons. Post replies and new messages on the topic "Can There Be Another Limited Coquille? Hatteras?" in the continuation message. Here's a shortcut to go there now: Part II

Rgds,
Yr. Obdnt. Moderator

[Note: This message has been edited by JTimothyA]

bringing this Wacko Classic^TM up for air...

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 02-25-2001).]