Donovan Banks wrote: there are so few details here, what's going on in this thread?
.....exactly ,

Donovan Banks wrote: there are so few details here, what's going on in this thread?
This guitar is currently on consignment with a UK dealer and is in Dallas for the Arlington Guitar Show.joel wrote:Donovan Banks wrote: there are so few details here, what's going on in this thread?
.....exactly ,......... , can anyone shed further light on this please ?
Economic reasons ? .....Bigsby ?.Vintage Guitar wrote:
This guitar is currently on consignment with a UK dealer and is in Dallas for the Arlington Guitar Show.
I highly doubt it will sell for the asking price of $137,500.
There is far better 1958-1960 Les Paul Stock available for the same sort of money.joel wrote:Economic reasons ? .....Bigsby ?.Vintage Guitar wrote:
This guitar is currently on consignment with a UK dealer and is in Dallas for the Arlington Guitar Show.
I highly doubt it will sell for the asking price of $137,500.
As a vintage guitar collector why do you think this ?
Here is a less original example for a lot more...a '60 for $185000 www.gruhn.comVintage Guitar wrote:There is far better 1958-1960 Les Paul Stock available for the same sort of money.joel wrote:Economic reasons ? .....Bigsby ?.Vintage Guitar wrote:
This guitar is currently on consignment with a UK dealer and is in Dallas for the Arlington Guitar Show.
I highly doubt it will sell for the asking price of $137,500.
As a vintage guitar collector why do you think this ?
This particular late 1960 example also has the least desirable features and a Bigsby removal.
Thin neck, reflector knobs and the tomato soup colour.
I can only guess...hope she 's an informed personX-rated Bob wrote: Question: What did said lady get for the guitar?
These pieces are on consignment and have been in stock for ages.vic wrote:Here is a less original example for a lot more '60 for $185000 http://www.gruhn.com/?utm_source=Goop+Newsletter&utm_campaign=40aa69849d-Goop75_03_25_2010&utm_medium=emailVintage Guitar wrote:There is far better 1958-1960 Les Paul Stock available for the same sort of money.joel wrote:Economic reasons ? .....Bigsby ?.Vintage Guitar wrote:
This guitar is currently on consignment with a UK dealer and is in Dallas for the Arlington Guitar Show.
I highly doubt it will sell for the asking price of $137,500.
As a vintage guitar collector why do you think this ?
This particular late 1960 example also has the least desirable features and a Bigsby removal.
Thin neck, reflector knobs and the tomato soup colour.
and a '59 with no "Les Paul model" logo for $199000. Click inventory and then Gibson solidbody electrics...
vic wrote:I can only guess...hope she 's an informed personX-rated Bob wrote: Question: What did said lady get for the guitar?
Any ideas what buyers of ZAR 1 or 2 bar guitars do with them ? Are they merely collectors, or do they get bought for tone and played ? Combo of both ?vic wrote: The export of some of our vintage gems is nothing new. At R970,000 this an excellent buy and was it not for the plugged bigbsy holes it would have been a lot more imho. These guitars could easily fetch $250k ?
The 50's LP Customs are all mahogany (I think) and could therefore weigh a bit more. It's said that the lighter weight LP's are more resonant.X-rated Bob wrote: Gruhn's have a 1960 Les Paul Standard for a piddling $135000. They note that there is a small repair to a crack (not a break) on the headstock.
They also list the weight for most of their old Les Pauls. This particular one is 8 pounds, but they have a late 50's LP custom at 10lbs 7oz.
Does the weight influence the desirability and thus the price of the instrument?
A bit of both imo. Remember people who fork out this kind of money have many other investments as well and most of these buy it as such. The world economy is sluggish at the moment, but will most probably pick up again (soon I hope ? ). And these guitars are not getting more in number hey...6x9base13 wrote:Any ideas what buyers of ZAR 1 or 2 bar guitars do with them ? Are they merely collectors, or do they get bought for tone and played ? Combo of both ?vic wrote: The export of some of our vintage gems is nothing new. At R970,000 this an excellent buy and was it not for the plugged bigbsy holes it would have been a lot more imho. These guitars could easily fetch $250k ?
Disgusting....however if you're not informed and don't bother to do a bit of research, then you WILL get taken by the sharks...sad but true.joel wrote:vic wrote:I can only guess...hope she 's an informed personX-rated Bob wrote: Question: What did said lady get for the guitar?.....didn't want to say until it has been confirmed , but apparently she was paid R40K ......this the figure doing the rounds via bush telegraph ???
The thing is , she could have easily gone to a Cash Converters and got offered a helluva lot less.....maybe thats actually what happened ?
Well whoever bought it is going to give that store in the US a cut, 20 to 25%, of the eventual price. But assuming that they knew what more or less what it was worth they could have paid 40K dollars and still expected a good profit.singemonkey wrote: It is sad. It should have given her financial security for the rest of her life. Still, as Vic says, you go with the first opinion, you're going to get taken. If only she'd hit up the interwebs or got someone to do it for her.
Well some collectors/investors just cut straight to the chase and will vacuum pack the guitars and put them into very secure storage. However it may be that some owners of, for example, 1950s strats are like the people who own Stradivarii and make them available to be played and heard.In general, the impression I get is that few of these instruments get played in the real sense. I mean that people won't take them out and gig. People won't play them every day. Among players, it's more likely to me that they take them out every now and again and have a little go and then gently put them back in the case and lock 'em up.
It's the tool vs emotional value thing. Richard Thompson has a '59 strat that has basically been played into the ground. He still has it even though he never seems to play it, but I would think that the resale value has been substantially reduced. Not the least because it has a replacement bridge and is on at least it's 3rd neck (or was before he retired it in the mid 90s). As far as anybody knows he hasn't got the guitar restored or even made roadworthy again (it was in the Fender museum for a while) and he hasn't used it with any serious intent for at least 10 years. He regards them as tools. His attitude seems to be that that was a particularly good tool, but still a tool. He bought that guitar in the early 70s and it was his main guitar, often his sole guitar, in studio and on the road for 20 odd years. It might be worth quite a bit more now if he'd used it less, kept it at home a lot more.Seems to me that the only people who play them regularly are people who've had them for a long time and/or have enough money that losing them isn't a serious financial blow. I remember reading Martin Barre of Jethro Tull saying he gave up playing his '59 'burst live in the mid-'80s when he started having to buy it its own plane seat. And they were worth a lot less then. I wonder, for example, whether even Jimmy Page plays his actual guitars or one of the copies that Gibson made him.
It's very likely to me that Billy Gibbon played a Tokai at one point because his guitar was too valuable to play - that was before Gibson made it's re-issues and signature models. I think it was a similar story with Robert Frip. And I wonder how many of them had custom made replicas before Gibson was doing them.