Your point is well taken, but my comments are based on the fact that
there are cars available in similar condition for much less money.
wallingford, ct <http://home.ix.netcom.com/%7Etype79/>
Wm. Severin Thompson wrote:
>You know, it seems as if people (the people that own them) are always
>willing to devalue these cars that we collect. They also like to ride both
>sides of the "value" fence. They'd never agrees to sell their own car for
>less than they think it's worth, but take issue with people that want more
>than they think it's worth.
>Historical value? I'm not even sure I know where to apply that term. I
>suppose you could apply historical value to a car once raced by the Works.
>Or, maybe a car once owned by a celebrity. But, since "value" is really
>always relative, some car once owned by your Uncle Joe, that you inherited
>could have as much historical value to you. I have a 100-6 I've owned since
>'73... my high school car. Does that make it of more historical value to
>you? Nope. To me? Yep. Again, value is always relative.
>In an era of $30,000 economy cars, in my opinion, a $10,000 '69 Sprite ain't
>such a bad thing. I'm not sure wha the $30k econo box will be worth in 10 or
>30 years from now, but I'm willing to bet its "value" won't be going up.
>Especially when buying a documented low mileage car, you never pay too much,
>you just buy too soon.
>And, if some buyer would rather ante up now, and enjoy it, rather than buy a
>roach and bugger it up with a bad home restoration that doesn't see the
>light of day for 5 or 10 years, more power to him.
>I've got 2 Bugeyes I wouldn't sell for $25k each. Hell, I wouldn't sell them
>for double that. Does that make me a dick? I may be one, but not for that
>I think I prefer the term "historical interest",or "historical significance"
>rather than historical value. Not only are low mileage originals rare, they
>have historical interest for those need a reference for restoration.
>From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>On Behalf Of David Lieb
>Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 6:14 AM
>Subject: Re: Cherry Mk-IV Sprite
>>As much as I love Sprites and as nice as it is, it's still a '69 and
>>objectively speaking a '69 is of little historical value.
>"Little historical value"??? This was the last year for Austin-Healey
>Sprites! Yes, I know that they made Austinn Sprites for a couple more years,
>but not Austin-Healey, since the contract with the Donald had expired. Also
>the last year they were broought to the US. Historically sad, perhaps...
>Historically insignificant Midget
Your messages not reaching the list?
Check out http://www.team.net/posting.html
=== Help keep Team.Net on the air
=== unsubscribe/change address requests to email@example.com or try
=== Other lists available at
=== Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
=== Edit your replies!