Legitimacy of the Ten Year Rule.

From: Bill Yakowenko <yakowenk_at_cs.unc.edu>
Date: Sun Jan 24 14:07:17 1999

] On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Doug <doug_at_blinkenlights.com> wrote:
] Subject: Re: Legitimacy of the Ten Year Rule.
]
] On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Buck Savage wrote:
... snippage ...
]
] A "universal" rating/certification system, similar to the way coins are
] graded, would be ideal. But I don't think you'll ever get this group to
] agree on anything -- just do it! (And then sell a book.)
]
] Forget the word "classic". A guide that gives production numbers,
] variations, years, criteria to judge condition, price, etc. would be cool
] -- I'd buy one, and I'd buy a new copy every year as you updated prices
] and other info.
]
] Start with Hans P's list of machines (and pay him royalties).
]
] -- Doug


I don't believe it. *THIS*, coming from the same guy that blew
his stack over his secret bargain bid getting exposed? Which do
you want, well-known (and high) dollar-tags attached to everything,
or obscurity and bargains? You can't have both.

We have a choice between an entrenched mainstream collector's
marketplace, with standard price guides, and with all the neat stuff
ending up in investors' display cases, off-limits to mere hobbyists;
or an unrecognized garage-sale niche marketplace, with dispute as
to the value of anything, but with many of these machines clanking
away in our basements.

It seems we have no real choice about it, we will eventually end up
with the former. But there is no need to hurry it. Especially if
you are one to bitch when one of your bargain-basement bids get
exposed and immediately out-bid.

        Bill.
Received on Sun Jan 24 1999 - 14:07:17 GMT