My Back Pages

[admin]

What could be more exciting than following the royal road to creation in the Rickenbacker Factory? In 1998 one of my goals was to learn as much as possible about Rickenbackers. This included the number produced, the relative proportion of models and their finishes of the total made and where they ended up. Nearly a decade later, some general trends are emerging that are fascinating to me which have been discussed on this forum under a number of topics.

At this stage, following a 10 year analysis, at least two major observations are clear and for me both were surprising. First, gathering and organizing the data has been more difficult that I imagined. Fortunately, the support of others on this forum has made this task lighter and a most enjoyable experience. Second, and of even greater surprise is the relationships that have formed as a result of this venture. Our project has transcended a contest of train spotting and moved into the realm of interpersonal relationships. I could write a book on this aspect.

Trying to understand history based on the creations of human kind is a difficult one to which many a physical anthropologist, archaeologist or even Columbo will attest. I am reminded that Piltdown man, the prefrontal lobotomy and DDT all seemed like good ideas at the time. So too, I am reminded, that If you twist the arm of your data far enough they will cry uncle however disingenuous the resulting response may be.

Having collected 5,000 instruments we have come to a place where our discussions about the nature and number of Rickenbackers is becoming more meaningful. Understanding the error inherent in this type of data collection and analysis some estimates can be made regarding the number of instruments produced. Based on the serial numbers collected to date, an estimate from the Register (1988 to 1997) would have RIC producing approximately 54, 000 (54,400) instruments. The Register database has identified 1407 Rickenbackers by serial over this same period or about 2.5% of the total instruments thought to have been manufactured. Examining each individual year over the period cited has the Register representing 2-3% of the total production estimate.

In global terms, assuming the Register represents 2.5 percent of the total Rickenbackers made, our sample of roughly 5,000 instruments predicts a grand total of 200,000 produced so far. Of course, our estimate is based on a sample of 10 years and there is room for sizable error here. The downside to our research is that our database will be completed in 400 years if we move ahead at our current rate of collection.

The good news is that I was so much older then and I'm younger than that now.

[Scastles]

200,000!! Incredible. Only 195,000 left to register. Okay, who's holding out?

[jsm610]

Understanding the error inherent in this type of data collection and analysis some estimates can be made regarding the number of instruments produced. Based on the serial numbers collected to date, an estimate from the Register (1988 to 1997) would have RIC producing approximately 54, 000 (54,400) instruments. The Register database has identified 1407 Rickenbackers by serial over this same period or about 2.5% of the total instruments thought to have been manufactured. Examining each individual year over the period cited has the Register representing 2-3% of the total production estimate.

Peter: can you elaborate here? Not sure I'm following how you analyzed the SNs to get the 2.5% #?

[admin]

John: I calculated the total number of estimated instruments mades by RIC from the serial number data over a decade. I compared this number to the number of instruments that we actually have in the Register over the same period. The number of actual instruments divided by the estimated total based on the serial equaled very close to 2.5% (2.59%)

If 5000 instruments represent 2.5% of the total estimated production then 100% of the total estimated production would be 5000 X 40 or 200,000 instruments. Again there is error in this estimate and it may turn out that the original estimate of the total instruments produced is based on more than the serial number data alone. Further, conducting the same analysis on another period of production may yield a slightly different outcome. That is, 1978 to 1987 for example may yield different results than the period I chose, 1988 to 1997.

Year:Estimate(Actual)
1988: ~4000 (111)
1989: ~4700 (148)
1990: ~6100 (165)
1991: ~6200 (180)
1992: ~6500 (158)
1993: ~4900 (120)
1994: ~3400 (60)
1995: ~5400 (106)
1996: ~6900 (158)
1997: ~6300 (201)
Total:54,400(1407)

[jsm610]

John: I calculated the total number of estimated instruments mades by RIC from the serial number data over a decade

What are you assuming with regard to the SN sequence? Is it a sequence? For example, in '89:
- are you assuming A2 0000 is the first one?
- if so, does month 1 go from A2 0000 - A2 9999, and then in month 2 go to B2 0000?
- and if so, what are you assuming is the last one? L2 9999?

I ask because it would seem to me that the SN system allows for up to 10,000 instruments to be produced per month? And if so, it would be difficult to determine how many were made in any month/year? Maybe I'm thinking of this incorrectly?

[admin]

John: The assumption is that the countdown for each year begins at 9999 (the instrument's unique serial) which appears after the first two characters in the serial and it is carried over from one month to the next and reset at the end of the year. You can see this sequencing if you do a detailed search of a single year and then sort the dates so that they are in order. In each of the years in question, the allotment of 9999 is not exceeded.

Again, this may not be how RIC assigned serials to their instruments, but it is at least a reasonable hypothesis.