This thread carries a response to some of the messages in the "Retired GLOWS ... would you like to know" thread up in the General Forum.
I suppose one might say the 1st mold of Cape Hatteras or Assateague was "retired". Or the tan tower Beavertail was "retired". But I don't believe this is terminology HL uses.
Its misleading to speak of "retired GLOWS", although I'm aware some dealers have perptuated this terminology.
Do the revised GLOWS of Barnegat or Portland Head have different model numbers in the HL catalog?
Therefore to answer the question:
"but what is a retired Glow?" from the point of view of Strawson, the British philosopher of language: This is a category mistake. You can attach the adjective 'retired' to the word 'GLOW', but you've created
a nonsense phrase.
It appears that the amount of these retired Glows is far less than the current edition run for limited editions. Interesting...
I suggest caution in making statements like this because they can be quite misleading to new collectors.
And its only interesting if you ignore the math. 6300 1st mold Boston Harbor GLOWs is definitely
not "far less" an edition size than the 5,500 Boston Harbor LEs. And 6,950 revised 1st mold SEBI GLOWs is 1,450
more than the 5,500 Limited Edition SouthEast Block Island models. But yes there are 1,500 fewer 1st mold runty tower Barnegats than the Barnegat LE.
But in the same spirit of semantic obfuscation I'll join in and say "
you can't collect GLOWS, but you sure can acquire alot of 'em". :-)
Fwiw - I think HL did a disservice to collectors by remolding GLOWS. Were the 1st molds selling so poorly? Barnegat may be the exception - that was a QA problem from the get go. I guess this is the price we pay in the age of manufactured rarity.
Rgds,
__
/im (a sea breeze at the FSB tonight)
[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 05-08-99).]
