Mornin'
QUOTE
How do you define investment? That seems to be where we really disagree. Every investment has its risks. I gather that you define investment as something that does not fluctuate in value, and only rises predictably
I do not define investment as something that rises in value, and only rises predictably. I believe i did not write that anywhere.
"Every investment has its risks" is true but unhelpful. More helpful is to assess if the risks are disproportionately or utterly overwhelmingly severe relative to reasonable expectation of benefit and to assess if said risks are downplayed in casual presentation of the imagined upside. These are classic features of the "collectables as investment" industry.
My primary objection is to the conflation of speculation with investment in hobbydom, and to the abject and repeated failure by those who occasionally cite value growth of a collectable as indication of its status of investment, to reveal the overwhelming, dominating and devastating down side risk to such "investments"-- with those downsides including barrier-to-entry, lack of industry standards and regulation, speculative nature of the purchase, risk of degredation of the product itself even whilst owned by the investor, and historically dismal performance.
QUOTE
Investment acording to Websters: "the outlay of money usually for income or profit". It mentions nothing about a guaranteed income or profit.
Industry-specific use of jargon can differ from general use/common dictionary meanings. Any casual reader of the dictionary would be very very disappointed with a "very good" coin or pen, based on his dictionary driven expectation of what very good means.
Futhermore, in the limited definition presented, one can "invest" in the predictions of fortune tellers, or in chain-letter ponzi schemes.
If truly you assert that it is fine to spend, say, $10,000 "investing" in a fortune teller to let you know next week's lotto numbers, then i will grant you that- sure- pens might be an "investment" too. I'm really not sure we wish to go there.
I consider the purchases of pens in hopes of value growth to be speculation at best, to be self- justification for our simple
desire to own many things we just waaant to have at medium, and to be horrible self-deception at worst.
Perhaps- if one wishes to stick to the notion that any purchase with hope of value growth can be an investment (even the fortune teller session), then let's just call pens an abysmal and horrible investment.
How do I define investment- or perhaps capital-I Investment?
Don't know fershure. But i would expect a few things to be offered in the arena of financial planning investments promulgated to casual readers...
-----1) Reasonable Barrier to Entry
-----2)Industry standards and safeguards
-----3_ Lack of risk of Degradation to the investment item itself
------4)Some historical record of return, and freedom from purchaser fickleness
1) Reasonable barriers to entry regarding bid/ask price.
The spread for a bank account is about nil. Stock bid/ask is well less than one percent. Pens- assuming all else is done ethically- will run at least 50% from bid to ask. A collector who buys $1000 in nice wahls from a dealer saw them marked up likely (there is play here) from $666. If he tries to sell them to the same dealer the next day he can get $666 for his pens. The 50% mark up (or 33% markdown on repurchase) is itself probably an overwhelming barrier to treatment of pens as investment
In other words, in an FDIC insured bank account one can earn 5% per year turning 666 into $1000 in probably 8 years. If one buys $1000 in pens abruptly devalued to $666 by the hobbydom buy/sell spread, his "investment" will have to gain the equivalent of 8 years bank interest to grow its "buy" value back to the point he can sell it for break even. The collector has lost 33% (or more) and has lost 8 years bank interest (or more) the day he buys the pens.
2) Industry Standards and safeguards.
We have none in pendom. If reason one were not enough to dissuade anyone from "investing" in pens, then we get into overgrading/undergrading. The first time a collector buys a pen with an unadvertised sealed hairline capcrack, he has bought an item worth 30-50% less than its stated value, even before the 30-50% bid-ask spread that so devastates his value. Now he is 15 years from seeing his item reach break-even, assuming the pen market grows at all. Grand.
3) Degradation of the Investment product.
Pens are melting over time. We all know stories of the perfect Doric that one day when pulled from the darkened pen cabinet is found to have flourescent endpieces. Investing in decaying goods adds to risk
4) Some historical record of return.
Independent of losing 30% of value the day he buys the pen, independent of the terrific added loss in cases where a pen is sold in overgraded fashion or at price above market norms (such as they are), independent of the risk of the pens degrading over time, pens just have not ever proven to have any record of consistent growth
The cream of vintage pendom- fancy eyedropper overlays- are worth less today than they were 15 years ago. So if you bought a $1000 retail pen in 1992 that is worth $750 today, and if the average dealer will give you $500 for such pen before selling it for today's $750, then your $1000 investment in 1992 is worth $500 today, whilst money put in the bank at 5% in 1992 would be worth about $2300 today. One will have lost $1800 by investing in pens instead of in the federally guaranteed bank. That of course does not account for further losses to overgrading and meltdown of the pen itself.
And, no, the point is not that something is not an "investment" just because it does not always go up. The point is that if a niche-market collectable wishes to elevate itself to investment, it would be nice to know there is some, any historical pattern of consistent growth. Otherwise, the word "investment" is just blowing smoke.
Pens are subject to collector caprice. Twenty years ago, overlays were the rage. Today plastic is the rage. The Patrician was the king 15 years ago. Now "51" is hot. Beany Babies are worth pennies. Rare coins- the largest collectables hobby on earth- are mostly worth less than they were 20 years ago.
Pens became an organized collectables field just 30 years ago. Inevitably there was an expansion phase as awareness grew and price pumped. Much of the 1980's-1990's price growth was driven by Watch collectors dabbling here, playing at speculation.
Some Wahls today are worth a bit more than they were when i entered hobby 9 years ago. A bit more. Some of my Wahls have developed crazing along the way. Some turned out to be flawed (overgraded).
This is a field of speculation, not of investment.
It is fine to make a business buying/selling pens. It is fine to buy a collectable that has some value beyond the modern "LE" factories telling us about "instant" collectables.
But, given the instant devaluation of pens the moment a collector buys from dealer, given the lack of regulatory standards regarding grading and sell spreads, given the risk of pen degredation, given the lack of any consistent record of value growth once the hobby stabilized out of its infancy, i find notions that these things are investments to be... inappropriate.
Still, all that is different from the question of "Are Wahl's relatively undervalued" to which the answer might well be, "Yes".
QUOTE
Buying right and sometimes intuitively is an integral part of investing. If Wahls as a whole are a little undervalued, then high quality items may be a good buy today.
Again, true but unhelpful. Or maybe it helps my stand /:)
Buying right and buying intuitively certainly is important to not being destroyed.
I would assert that the more difficult it is to buy right and sometimes intuitively, the greater is the barrier to entry to a would-be investment. A 30-50% buy-sell spread (vs. <1% for stocks), and that the outrageous amount of overgrading that goes on in our hobby (Syd, have you looked at some of the $300 standard Dorics on the tables at the LA Show?- They are NOT all like yours!), makes the notion of investing in these things a bit of a joke.
If Wahl's are a little undervalued (say 10% that we posit will be "discovered" during next year), then the buyer is still hosed on his investment, because if his $500 wahl goes up to $550 retail, he still can sell his pen to dealer for only $300 and is out $200 bucks.
It is possible that this is what you experienced when you had your stamp collection examined by a dealer. Hobbies are not set up for collectors to reap investment returns on their cherished collectables.
QUOTE
So my perspective is probabIy different from yours about inventory appreciation over time.
Your opening to this whole thread, regarding your stamp collection, would suggest your perspective might be more in keeping with mine than you believe
QUOTE
With ebay you don't have to sell your pen back to a dealer and you don't have to deal with the dealers need to buy with an instant positive spread over purchase.
Ebay without doubt affects one of the four issues i cited- barrier to entry. But it is not an absolute resolution to what is just one of my four core objections to conflating hobby purchases with investments.
Re-selling on ebay is not open to everyone. Many don't wish to become writers and photographers in order to part with their "investments"
Have we factored in the opportunity cost of the time and effort spent on this? What is the time/opportunity cost to just buy/sell a bank account, stock or (yuck) commodity? How many hours must be spent to liquidate a $5000 pen collection on ebay vs selling a stock or closing a bank account.
QUOTE
When I buy I buy with a 5 year resell horizon. That is a mid-term investment to me.
Most vintage pens are price about where they were about 5 years ago.
If a Wahl is expected (not sure how, but i'll concede point for now) to "rise" 25% in next 5 years, the buyer still has lost money relative to banking the money, even before the buy-sell spread takes away all his profit, or he has to spend hours of personal effort to sell his 300 dollar pen.
So, again, how do i define investment?
At very least, i define it as a purchase based with rational non tulip-mania expectation of growth, which is not subject to quirks and caprice of a buying public in niche market, in which the item to be bought has industry regulation and standards, and which will not be melting even whilst i own it.
regards
david