posted 01-03-1999 02:55 AM            

If you're just coming into this and haven't read part 1, I encourage your to do so and study the data provided before proceeding. In a nutshell, it offers an analysis describing in numeric terms why certain HL models are more desirable (valuable) than others. It also has pretensions of predictive power, suggesting the same formula can be used to determine which pieces will become more desirable in the future. A caution previously noted is this sort of analysis is only quantitative and has considerable limitations. There are also lots of "subjective" reasons why demand is higher for some models than others.

With that caveat in mind, the analysis does do a pretty good job of identifying the most and least desirable pieces based on data about when each model is released and retired. What validity there is in this approach can be seen by correlating the ranking of models (based soley on the formula ) with their current market price. Without even looking at price, judge for yourself the relative desirability of a piece, both to you personally and based on your own impression of the current market.

Here in part 2, we look at data for all the retired models that are not covered in the first message. ( see next msg. below) For the most part, these models have not been retired for as long as those in part 1. What this means is their price points relative to one another are not as well fixed. Relative pricing for those pieces that have been retired the longest is more entrenched. For pieces recently retired (say in the last 6-24 months) the market is still figuring out where these pieces belong. Here in lies opportunity.

I don't want to make this sound pompous and scientific. Its really pretty simple. I looked for a numeric way to express the theory that: those pieces that retire quickly and have been retired longer tend to be more valuable. Not exactly rocket science when you think about it. Since there does seem to be a pretty good basis in reality (ie., price) for thinking this theory is fundamentally correct, you can also use it to gauge which pieces will become increasingly more expensive the farther they move from their retirement date. Use that information as one more data point among many to help guide your purchases.

Think of it this way. You're presented with an opportunity to buy a Yaquina Head for $80 (it was the 10th model ever released by HL) or you can buy Fire Island for $70 - it was released just a few months before Yaquina Head retired. What's the smartest move at this point in time. Or put differently, which is more likely to be relatively more expensive in the future than the other? What are the chances that one will cost $20 more in 8 months and the other still be available at today's price? Here's where the info in this Factoid can give some ideas.

No promises, no guarantees - just more information to consider. You are the best judge of how best to implement your own acquisitions plans. (You do have a plan, don't you?)

In the following message is a table that covers retired pieces; all of these have a positive number coming out of the equation: Age in Days at Retirement minus Days Since Retirement. While in part 1 I spoke of 'a good negative' (any model showing up in the chart in part 1 is pretty much a no brainer) here, we'll look for 'low positives'. The lower the number, the more likely the piece is to be more valuable, either today or in the future, than others on the same chart.

Yes - there are exceptions. Like good old Ptolemy, I need to add a few epicycles to clean things up. At some point we can come up with an 'aesthetic factor' which, when retrofitted into the equation, will give us Newtonian Certainty. (yeah right - but like Ptolemy, we'll just keep fiddling till our formula matches our data or until we stumble upon the Harbour Lights equivalent of the Copernican Revolution.) But I digress .

In part 3 of this Factoid (whenever I get around to it) we'll look at some data on all those non-retired pieces that may give a clue about their future in the market. And in part 4 maybe I can draw JC in to give a re-cap on his ideas about the role played by non-quantitative factors, along with some of his thoughts on 'what to buy' - goodness knows we've had this discussion enough times.

And for anyone who's read this far - what do you think? Well, if you think you should buy what you like (mombo's lament) then cool - do that - akuna matata - but while perfectly wonderful, its just not very interesting. So spare this thread. But if you're wacky enough to collect them all or many of them, or a bunch of 'em, then I'm very interested in hearing if anyone thinks this makes sense. If you gotta do it over time (years) like most of us, I think its helpful to have as much information about the market as you can get.

And any vets - certified card carriers - you know who you are - please toss in your two cents worth. What is/was your approach to making purchases?

Rgds,
__
/im

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 01-03-99).]

posted 01-03-1999 03:04 AM            

The models at the top of the chart tend to be the barkers. Imo, a key factor is how long it takes for a piece to retire. Poor Cape Blanco, 5 years after it was released in an edition size of 5500 - it still wasn't retired to dealers!

To get a perspective, break the chart in two parts. For today, I tend to draw the line at Old Point Loma. As time passes - as we get farther from a model's retirement date - this line could change.

HL#	Lighthouse Name	Avail Dt	Retire Dt	Age at Ret (Days)	Days Since Ret	Age at Ret - Days Since Ret	Mrkt Price C 12-27-98 LHKeepers	Retail Price
109	Cape Blanco	07/01/91	4/1/97	2101	642	1459	$65.00	$60.00
106	North Head	01/01/91	11/22/96	2152	772	1380	$60.00	$60.00
115	St. George's Reef	07/01/91	12/23/96	2002	741	1261	$70.00	$60.00
110	Yaquina Head	07/01/91	11/22/96	1971	772	1199		$62.00
120	Grosse Point	01/01/92	12/17/96	1812	747	1065	$75.00	$62.00
112	Sand Island	07/01/91	9/9/96	1897	846	1051	$75.00	$64.00
107	Umpqua River	07/01/91	7/26/96	1852	891	961		$60.00
172	Chatham	04/01/96	11/12/98	955	52	903		$70.00
116	Castle Hill	07/01/91	5/13/96	1778	965	813		$60.00
114	Great Captain Island	07/01/91	3/30/96	1734	1009	725	$95.00	$66.00
127	Whaleback	07/01/92	8/23/96	1514	863	651	$95.00	$60.00
123	Michigan City	01/01/92	5/23/96	1604	955	649	$95.00	$62.00
122	Buffalo	01/01/92	4/8/96	1559	1000	559		$62.00
166	Scituate	04/01/96	5/6/98	765	242	523	$85.00	$77.00
105	Old Point Loma	01/01/91	9/6/95	1709	1215	494	$145.00	$60.00
161	Highlands	02/01/96	3/16/98	774	293	481	$105.00	$75.00
159	Bodie	01/01/96	1/28/98	758	340	418		$77.00
155	Bald Head	02/01/96	1/28/98	727	340	387		$75.00
131	Minot's Ledge	07/01/92	4/2/96	1371	1006	365	$145.00	$60.00
176	Fire Island	03/01/96	1/28/98	698	340	358	$85.00	$70.00
164	Pemaquid	03/01/96	1/24/98	694	344	350	$105.00	$90.00
130	Portland Breakwater	07/01/92	3/15/96	1353	1024	329	$95.00	$60.00
113	Fort Niagra	07/01/91	9/6/95	1528	1215	313	$130.00	$64.00
147	Port Isabel	01/01/95	4/10/97	830	633	197	$80.00	$65.00
209	Cape Florida	02/06/98	10/12/98	248	83	165		$78.00
192	Le Jument	04/01/97	5/1/98	395	247	148	$75.00	$68.00
119	Cana Island	01/01/92	9/6/95	1344	1215	129	$105.00	$66.00
150	Pensacola	01/01/95	2/24/97	785	678	107	$105.00	$80.00
149	Biloxi	01/01/95	2/14/97	775	688	87	$95.00	$60.00
146	Bolivar	01/01/95	1/29/97	759	704	55	$85.00	$70.00
103	West Quoddy	01/01/91	1/16/95	1476	1448	28		$60.00

Calculations on 1/3/99

While you're at it, think about a couple other issues we've talked about at some length here in the forums. What is the correlation between a slow rate of retirement and an equally slow increase in value over retail? Why are folks bemoaning the fact that the retirement rate has fallen off dramatically? (Should be obvious). What are the factors slowing up the retirement rate? (Edition Size? Demand not keeping up with supply? Satan? GLOWS?) Hopefully one will begin to understand why Wackos with a substantial investment in HL's tend toward a particular perspective on these issues, and things like Snowy PHs. (I said 'understand' - you don't have to agree.) To debate this stuff - visit The Fog Signal Building; here, we're simply By The Numbers.

Rgds,
__
/im

[This message has been edited by JTimothyA (edited 01-03-99).]

posted 01-03-1999 07:54 AM            

I'm getting to the point in my HL collection where I believe I should have my "mask, snorkel, and fins" on. The only ones I'm missing (not counting variations) are CH, Burrows Island, Coquille, Old Mack, Portland Head, Ponce, Key West, Ocracoke, Hilton Head, St. Augustine, and Holland. Some of these "Missing 11" are very obtainable. Others would carry a substantial investment that I don't feel comfortable making at this point.

I must add I only own one GLOW, Cape Hatteras. I'm planning to purchase the Montauk GLOW because it's a light I visit every summer. If the 1999 HLs are distributed slowly I might purchase more GLOWS just so their isn't a back-up of extra cash in my wallet.

My collection amounted to one piece, HL 128 Southeast Block Island, during the summer of '94. I never purchased another HL until September '97. I developed a strong philosophy about HL purchases over the past 16 months:

" You (HL Dealers) call,
We (HL Collectors) haul,
That's all ! "

posted 01-03-1999 09:34 AM            

http://www.lighthousekeepers.com/forums/Forum17/HTML/000008.html

posted 01-03-1999 03:57 PM            

Oh dear, you certainly wouldn't want *that* problem. You could buy LE's just retired. Then, at the end of the year, donate them to some nice tax deductible organization at their appreciated value. (Maybe a lighthouse preservation group).

Just think of the benefits: a) you'll feel good (still important in the 90's); b) you'll help a worthy cause; c) and, you'll do your bit to speed up LE retirements which we'll all applaud! Glow purchases pale in comparison - plus there's all that guilt. LOL

posted 01-03-1999 10:47 PM            

The Glow topic is certainly worthy of discussion; how 'bout we cover that and ancillarly issues in The Fog Signal Building. Here's a shortcut to a Glow discussion thread.

I still hope to get your good input on the merits of the numeric analysis in Factoid #11. That is very much invited. Here's a shortcut to JC's Factoid #11 therapy group.