Page 2 of 3
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:02 pm
by lawton
If I had the money I'd be bidding on it either way. How many Capris -- of any particular vintage -- are you going to see offered for sale?
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:08 pm
by Scastles
CME has one for sale as well right now and that wasn't what I asked.
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:15 pm
by lawton
Sorry, Stan. I started the thread, so I'm thinking I was responding to the whole discussion, not necessarily just to your last post. I don't really know which is more valuable - the extremely rare and not as well made ('58), or the very rare and better built ('60). Which would be more valuable to you?
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:27 pm
by Scastles
No apology is needed. I was thinking (and you posted this as well) if someone purchases this Capri and he/she isn't necessarily a Ric lover but more of a guitar investor and he pays XXX for it and it's real value is only X, he might be hacked when he finds out...then again maybe not. The guitar could keep getting passed on as a '58. Who knows? And you're right, I too would like to own one, no matter the year.
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:36 pm
by lawton
Well it seems reasonable to assume that whoever is buying this isn't buying it to play (unless they just have too much money sitting around). I got the same response from the seller that John got, a statement that Gruhn's had appraised it as a 1958 guitar. I wonder, then, if it turns out to be a 1960, and 1960s appraise for a lower value, will Gruhn's be liable for some damages resulting from mis-information? The seller is really hanging his hat (so to speak) on that piece of paper (I hope he has it in writing).
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 12:44 pm
by Scastles
I think you hit the nail on the head. The seller won't take the hit, Gruhn likely would if they vouch for the date, etc. If a major dispute arose I think the seller would just lay the blame on Gruhn and plead ignorance.
But again, it may wind up being of no relevance for someone.
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 1:54 pm
by jingle_jangle
I have to chuckle at the thought of George Gruhn being stitched up for a mistaken appraisal. He has his butt covered six ways from Sunday. Bottom line: Even if the difference between a '58 and '60 Capri was $5K (and this is very unlikely!), to see that $$$ go into an attorney's pocket "just to prove a point" defies common sense.
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:02 pm
by Scastles
Well, maybe you're right, Paul but I've seen dumber things done. People defy common sense on a daily basis,...anyway back to my original question, what, if anything, would be the difference in value?
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:29 pm
by jingle_jangle
I'm just speculating on likelihoods, Stan.
Do you notice how nobody is venturing an answer re: difference in value?
I think it's because there are just too many variables: condition, relative rarity, market, "gotta have it", and the toughest of all to pin down--perceived value.
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 2:41 pm
by Scastles
Again, think you're right but I am saying I am looking at 'ballpark' difference. All of the tangibles you mentioned can't be resolved in the price. Simply, let's say, what is the the best estimated value of a NM Capri? Any year, any model. I like to think of it as my anal have-to-know thought process. In reality I don't think anyone really does know, other than saying somewhere between here and there. And here and there usually is a wide margin. So in a sense I probably answered my own question but was hoping for a more definitive answer.
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 4:27 pm
by circles
Doesn't anybody own the new vintage guitar price guide? It even has rick's on the cover! That should put this debate to rest quickly enough, that is, if the differene in capri's is documented in it.
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 4:32 pm
by jingle_jangle
McNabb doesn't own it, obviously...
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 6:16 pm
by jsm610
I own the guide. I share. I care.
Model 335 Capri
1958-1959 Fireglo $3500-$4500
1960 Fireglo $3200-$4200
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 6:23 pm
by jsm610
"Well it seems reasonable to assume that whoever is buying this isn't buying it to play (unless they just have too much money sitting around)."
It seems unreasonable to me to not play it - it isn't a mint muesem piece...
Different strokes:Different folks
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 6:36 pm
by lawton
John, I don't mean not to play it around the house. I mean not to play it out with any sort of frequency. Were it mine I might play it on stage for a particular song or two that called for it (Beatles, Byrds, for instance), but it wouldn't be a primary gigging guitar.
