How is this surprising? The copy was a scruffy ex-lib. copy. Could you even tell what impression it was? Bibliographically of dubious interest. And surely of very little collecting interest? Why would this be worth £31?
I continue to be baffled at the prices being paid for supposedly rare editions which are no more than 10 years old.
I continue to be baffled at the prices being paid for supposedly rare editions which are no more than 10 years old.
Khamûl wrote:
How is this surprising? The copy was a scruffy ex-lib. copy. Could you even tell what impression it was? Bibliographically of dubious interest. And surely of very little collecting interest? Why would this be worth £31?
I continue to be baffled at the prices being paid for supposedly rare editions which are no more than 10 years old.
Completionism is a hell of a drug.
Khamûl wrote:
How is this surprising? The copy was a scruffy ex-lib. copy. Could you even tell what impression it was? Bibliographically of dubious interest. And surely of very little collecting interest? Why would this be worth £31?
I continue to be baffled at the prices being paid for supposedly rare editions which are no more than 10 years old.
You are such a grump.
I continue to be baffled at the prices being paid for supposedly rare editions which are no more than 10 years old.
Stu wrote:
I continue to be baffled at the prices being paid for supposedly rare editions which are no more than 10 years old.
I don't understand it either... but I assumed it was a product of online/forum gossip and people just believing what they read and see. So if someone says they've been looking for a particular edition for years, saying it's their 'white whale', saying how maybe they want to leave it to their children, then other people read the post and start keeping an eye on eBay for it. It only takes two people to drive up the final price of an auction... but then that final price becomes known and suddenly one person's idea of an edition's value is spreading exponentially. The final auction prices are too highly regarded. Just because one auction sells a book for £230 doesn't make the book's value £230. Just a theory. I agree it's a strange thing.
Berelach wrote:
Stu wrote:
I continue to be baffled at the prices being paid for supposedly rare editions which are no more than 10 years old.
I don't understand it either... but I assumed it was a product of online/forum gossip and people just believing what they read and see. So if someone says they've been looking for a particular edition for years, saying it's their 'white whale', saying how maybe they want to leave it to their children, then other people read the post and start keeping an eye on eBay for it. It only takes two people to drive up the final price of an auction... but then that final price becomes known and suddenly one person's idea of an edition's value is spreading exponentially. The final auction prices are too highly regarded. Just because one auction sells a book for £230 doesn't make the book's value £230. Just a theory. I agree it's a strange thing.
I feel bad for stealing Khamûl's post now, given you replied to me, not him. That said, I agree with your assessment. I really think there are a lot of inexperienced and incredibly undiscerning people collecting Tolkien at the moment. I think the prices being paid for rubbish like the 2012 LoTR/Hobbit collectors editions are proof of that, coupled with the reddit (etc) posts about how fantastic/amazing they are. We see the same with the extremely mediocre deluxe editions ("Wow! - where did you get those from????"). I feel like it is the same kind of numpties who threw money at Beany Babies.
Not sure if I'd go that far. But let's be clear, that copy was ex-library, impression unknown. How is this "collectable"? I get someone paying £30 odd for a decent first impression copy, sort of. Still too much. But, if you're willing to pay £30 for this, then collecting is going to be very, very expensive. And there is very little sell-on value in paperbacks in my experience.
Khamûl wrote:
Not sure if I'd go that far. But let's be clear, that copy was ex-library, impression unknown. How is this "collectable"? I get someone paying £30 odd for a decent first impression copy, sort of. Still too much. But, if you're willing to pay £30 for this, then collecting is going to be very, very expensive. And there is very little sell-on value in paperbacks in my experience.
Surely the buyer could have requested a picture of the copyright page before bidding, right? It better be a first... at least that would be something! This all makes me wonder if there are sellers taking advantage by spreading exaggeration on reddit or wherever this hyper-subjective info is spreading... but maybe that's just the cynic in me.
Khamûl wrote:
Not sure if I'd go that far. But let's be clear, that copy was ex-library, impression unknown. How is this "collectable"? I get someone paying £30 odd for a decent first impression copy, sort of. Still too much. But, if you're willing to pay £30 for this, then collecting is going to be very, very expensive. And there is very little sell-on value in paperbacks in my experience.
I think the Blue Wizards PB clearly IS collectable at this point in time. The question is, will it be collectable in 10 or 20 years time? I'd suggest the chances of that being the case are incredibly low. Paperbacks typically have low collectability and - really - is anyone going to care about a specific set of HarperCollins covers a few iterations down the line? I see nothing wrong with collecting them, but I think it is crazy to pay a lot of money for something that has only been created as a cheaply manufactured disposable reading copy. I also doubt they are actually rare. Just because something isn't yet frequently found on the market doesn't mean a lot of them weren't sold.
4001
1740308