Wheres 'Ebay Madness' I've something to add

[pw_pw_la]

I don't think that's true.

I think the value of something is built into what it is; who made it; the quality and condition it's in, and its rarity, or lack thereof.

You can charge anything for anything, but I don't think that's the same thing as assigning its value.

Take Levis 501s, for example.

I understand how and why certain, early, made in the US versions are worth what they are based on where and how they were made, with what materials and on which machines.

But if you were trying to charge $350 for a mass-produced pair you got from the outlet mall in 2001, I'd say you don't understand the difference between what you have and what else might be available in the market.

Even though they're both old 501s.

I know this is not the perfect analogy, but you see it in all areas of vintage, not just bikes. Something being old or looking like another old thing doesn't dictate its value, and nor does what Kanye might be willing to pay for it.

Or maybe it does, but that still depresses me!

I'm not an economist after all. I just pack and ship boxes for a living!

 

[pw_pw_la]

If I told you I was selling a beat-up 1998 Hardrock for $2,500, and that someone had paid me $2,500 for it, would you say that 1998 Hardrocks are now worth $2,500?

 

[grey-beard]

Anything is only worth what someone is willing to pay.

 

[pw_pw_la]

No, it's really not.

Or it shouldn't be, at least.

If I charge you $200 for a Crunchie because it's the only one around, and you pay for it because you're starving, the Crunchie isn't suddenly worth $200.

You just foolishly paid $200 for it.

And I ripped you off.

 

[mk one]

I don't think that's true.

I think the value of something is built into what it is; who made it; the quality and condition it's in, and its rarity, or lack thereof.

You can charge anything for anything, but I don't think that's the same thing as assigning its value.

Take Levis 501s, for example.

I understand how and why certain, early, made in the US versions are worth what they are based on where and how they were made, with what materials and on which machines.

But if you were trying to charge $350 for a mass-produced pair you got from the outlet mall in 2001, I'd say you don't understand the difference between what you have and what else might be available in the market.

Even though they're both old 501s.

I know this is not the perfect analogy, but you see it in all areas of vintage, not just bikes. Something being old or looking like another old thing doesn't dictate its value, and nor does what Kanye might be willing to pay for it.

Or maybe it does, but that still depresses me!

I'm not an economist after all. I just pack and ship boxes for a living!

So who decides the value, or worth as you put it, the seller or the market?

 

[pw_pw_la]

Neither.

The thing itself does. Because, ideally, the people buying and selling it both know what it is, in the scheme of all the other things that also are, and therefore what it should cost.

And what it should cost (originally) should be a fair valuation of the time, skill, labor and materials that went into making it. Thereafter, any increase or decrease in its value should be weighed against those same things incrementally, based on current availability, alternatives, and, I suppose, trends. I know this is simplistic, and idealistic, but I do think it's the way things should be, in a more fair version of the world (aka, an honest market).

What money you make on something or spend on something is not the same as what that thing is worth.

It's supply and demand, yeah. But that doesn't mean there's nothing wrong with charging whatever you want for something just because people will pay that for it.

Would you honestly buy a house that was four-times the going rate of houses of that size, condition and age in the area?

What's different with bikes?

Or Crunchies!

I'll die on this hill! Lol

 

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

So who decides the value, or worth as you put it, the seller or the market?

I feel both dictate the value, depending on what it is. If its rare its valuble, if a person wants/needs it its valuble.

 

[grey-beard]

What is worth? What a crunchie is worth to me is different to what it is worth to someone else. A new product or item has a cost attached to it, how much did it cost to produce? How much profit do you want/expect to make? That's the value of it, or the selling price. No? Once it has been sold, it's second hand and that price or value is dictated by several things but the market is a major factor surely? How many people want it? What are they willing to pay?
Like has already been said, many of us have paid over the odds for something just because we really really wanted/needed it.

 

[slackboy]

the problem with scarce/rare items is that as soon as someone "overpays" for an item because they must have it - then it become the market rate that the next seller will benchmark.

In the retro world the value of something is intrinsically linked to how important it is to complete someones build or how obsessed they are with period matching components - take bonty forks for examples are they worth £300 ? objectively not - you can get some perfectly good exotic carbon forks for £100 that will perform just as well.

But do individuals value them at £300? Yes - they're essential to finishing off classic bonty's, salsas and roberts in some peoples minds. Its a small market though.

so therefore the value of something is tied to what someone is willing to pay.

 

[slackboy]

and for particularly rare items the seller can effectively ransom the potential buyers and wait until someone blinks. particularly if they were originally purchased before the retrobike inflaton started kicking in around 2015.