Login

Or
Register Now


Already have an account?
Username:

Password:

Remember me

Lost Your Password?
Main Menu
Collector's Guide Table of Contents
Recent Visitors

onthetrail
15 minutes ago

Eorl
1 hour 7 minutes ago

Trotter
1 hour 15 minutes ago

Khamûl
1 hour 30 minutes ago

mboswi
2 hours 9 minutes ago

remy
2 hours 19 minutes ago

Findegil
2 hours 19 minutes ago

garm
3 hours 49 minutes ago


« 1 ... 1951 1952 1953 (1954) 1955 1956 1957 ... 2722 »


Re: Super Deluxe values
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/6/2 14:15
Group:
Shirefolk
Fellowship
Posts: 347
Offline
As far as I am concerned it is a little more valuable...

I wonder why I have to log-in again and again every time I come to this board...

Posted on: 2010/8/20 4:47


Re: A nice blog on collecting Tolkien books
Just can't stay away
Joined:
2010/7/23 2:59
Group:
Shirefolk
Posts: 88
Offline

Posted on: 2010/8/20 4:24


Re: Super Deluxe values
Just can't stay away
Joined:
2010/7/23 2:59
Group:
Shirefolk
Posts: 88
Offline
So Beren - is 17 of 500 considered low enough to make it a bit more valuable than, say, number 435?

Posted on: 2010/8/20 4:23


Re: Super Deluxe values
Home away from home
Joined:
2006/6/2 14:15
Group:
Shirefolk
Fellowship
Posts: 347
Offline
"would like to make the market think"?? I guess it is the opposite way around. It is the market that makes me think that.

An example, I got the limited editions of the Folio Society available... all different limitations numbers will sell far less easy then matching limitation numbers. Is there any difference? No, but still I have seen it happen about 10 times before.

If I have a lower number limited edition it sells much, much better and demand is very high for the lower numbers, while the higher numbers always takes 'much' longer to sell.

No really, it is the market that dictates the value, not the other way around...

Posted on: 2010/8/20 3:23


Re: Super Deluxe values
Shirrif
Joined:
2008/8/10 2:07
Group:
Shirefolk
Fellowship
Shirrif
Posts: 1329
Offline
> Out of interest, for those who agree with low numbers being more valuable (and I know some don't) how low does a number need to be? Number 17 of 500 seems to be quite good I would think?


Personally, I don't think it makes much - if any - difference. Some of the prominent Tolkien book dealers would like to make the market think it does (and price lower numbered copies accordingly), but unless the lower numbered book is different (e.g. signed, vs unsigned), there is no logic to it costing more. The number is completely arbitrary.

I was fortunate to get two for the price of one (at the original price), so I only paid GBP 125 per copy. I think that is about what they are worth to me, and if I could get GBP250 for my lower numbered copy (19), I would be pretty happy as that would leave me with a single copy with no outlay. Realistically, though, I don't see them being "worth" much more than GBP 175 or so each, so I'll more than likely just hold onto them unless I have a pressing need for cash. I'm not as anti this book as some of the posters are (it grew on me), but the asking price and number of copies printed was always daft.


Stu

Posted on: 2010/8/20 3:16



 Top
« 1 ... 1951 1952 1953 (1954) 1955 1956 1957 ... 2722 »




© 2016 TolkienGuide.com and respective authors. Contact Us