Price guide for vintage computers

From: Eric Chomko <vze2wsvr_at_verizon.net>
Date: Thu Nov 1 09:09:02 2001

Tony Duell wrote:

> > > If there is a price guide that says 'Commodore 64s are worth $200 each',
> > > and people actually manage to sell them at that price, then there won't
> > > be any available at prices that most of us can afford.
> >
> > But Commodore 64s AREN'T worth $200 and no one is going to get that price
>
> I seriously suspect (based on what I've seen in other areas) that if a
> price guide was pnblished saying 'C64s are worth $200' then you'd see an
> awful lot priced close to that figure. You'd find the odd one priced at a
> more reasonable amount (it belongs to somebody who's not read the price
> guide), I guess. But not too many.

And at $200, they'd sit and sit. I have at least 2 of them and would easily part with
one or two at $200 a piece.

>
>
> And if every C64 is priced at $200, then you can bet some people with
> more money than braincells will buy them.
>

Agreed. More-money-than-brains has been a complaint of mine about people, especially
Americans, for years! I have seen then in other markets as well. I just don't get the
oppurtunity to deal with them as much as I'd like. Or maybe I'm just to damn honest
or not ruthless enough to separate them with their cash. :)

>
> > > > Why would you want anything to go up in value? Answer me that and I'll
> > > > answer your question.
> > >
> > > Oh come on. If I bought something as an investment only (say I bought
> > > shares in some company), then I would obviously want the value to
> > > increase. The only 'use' for that item is to get me more money in the
> > > future. That's why I bought it.
> > >
> >
> > Fine, a computer can be both and interesting item to collect and an investment.
>
> No, I don't want _my_ computers to be an investment...
>

That's fine. But would you lambaste someone that did? And simply because you choose
not to is it wrong for me to look at it the same way, just because?

>
> Let me give an example, from an area where there is already a price
> guide -- HP calculators.
>
> Now, I like HP calculators (as do all insane people ;-)). I also try to
> obtain the most battered, scratched, etc examples I can find. I repair
> them, get them running again, and _use_ them.

Everything is fine with what you state as there is no right or wrong way to collect,
IMO. The only exception I would take about your statements above is, if in your quest
for beat up machines that YOU would beat them up in order to get them to your liking.
I assume that is not what you do, but felt the need to mention it. Even though one's
system is theirs and they can do anything they want to with them, I personally take
exception to intentional damage of items. Again I am not saying that is what you do.

>
>
> I don't want 'mint condition' machines. From what I've seen of other
> enthusiasts who have such machines, I'd never use them. I'd be worried
> about lowering the value by scratching the keyboard trim. Or ruining the
> value by a hardware modification. All I'd do with such a machine (and all
> said collectors do) is keep it in the softcase, and take it out
> occassionally to look at.
>

I understand. The preverse nature of such items is in other collectibles as well.

>
> No thanks. I want machines to _use_. To _use_ as computers, not as some
> way of storing money for a few years. Machines that it doesn't matter if
> I scratch the keyboard, or solder some wires to the PCB. So I start from
> machines that are worthless anyway, knowing that I can't lower the value
> any more. But I can have a darn good time using them.
>

Fine. But there is the whole gambit, and you are speaking about one end. I honestly
like old PCs and Macs for EXACTLY the reason you mention above. The best part of
course is that if you do break it then it's easy to replace, and chalk one up for
learning.

I get both the hacker-mentatlity and the collector-mentality and see where they are
at odds with one another. But on the same token, given the way of things that have
come from obscurity to everyday mainstay items; computers, and early ones at that,
are bound to be collectibles.

>
> >
> > >
> > > But I don't treat classic computers as an investment. Their use is not to
> > > make me money in the future. Their use is to be programmed, modified,
> > > repaired, hacked, and so on. So the financial value doesn't matter.
> > >
> >
> > That is your take, don't expect the same treatment from everyone else just
> > because that is what you want.
>
> Hang on a second... I am only saying that _I_ don't want to treat
> computers as an investment. If other people do, well, I guess they have a
> right to do that. It doesn't mean I have to approve of what they are
> doing. And if it spoils the hobby for me, you can bet I am going to moan.

As you are entitled to. As for me, I'll hack and collect all the same. And I can't
imagine a really good hack as adding any less value to a real nice existing
collectible. Others (purists) may disagree, in their quest for mint-in-the-box, etc.
Reminds me of the guy in the movie "Toy Story II".

Eric

>
>
> -tony
Received on Thu Nov 01 2001 - 09:09:02 GMT