long range value of an archtop

[~mf~]

just wondering if anyone would know how say, a regular eastman jazz archtop would keep its value? how about resale value? is that basically the same thing? thanks.

[mptachenko]

I am sure they will not go up in value like a vintage Gibson or Epiphone but they are great guitars for the money. Unless you have some cool or rare model that get discontinued that is. I would say though that they will be less than a new one but as the companies increase prices so will the value of your used Eastman. Look up online or at stores for used ones and see what the percentage drop will be. I always try to buy used guitars so I don't take the New to Used price hit. All that said... Eastmans are great values in the archtop world so have fun playing!

[fws6]

Rare models ? If I look at the Fender, Gibson etc websites it seems almost any guitar nowadays is a limited edition. Limited to how much they can sell that is. Thereafter comes the next limited edition ;-)

But besides that I agree with mptachenko - Buying a new imported guitar can be a great value for money; but do not expect it to increase in value an investment. Generally with a newer guitar that you dont like and want to re-sell you will loose about 30-40% of your money.

The old gibsons & epiphones were exceptional guitars even in the 30s - early 60s; in quality, price, and rarity. While nowadays guitars are much more plentyful; affordable; and even cheap guitars usually are pretty well made. The guitar market is way down because of the economy, but still older guitars have risen in value steadily from the 80s until now. The new guitars will never reach a similar status of collectability.

[mongrel]

There's a street proverb that savvy investors in everything from real estate to classic cars to fine art live by: the only time you make money is when you buy. In other words, only when you buy something for less than it is worth when you buy it have you made a positive investment. Say an Eastman (or whatever) archtop has a manufacturer's retail of $2,500 but all the dealers are pricing them at $1,995. You can buy one for $1,995 and the next day when you put it on Craigslist, Ebay or take it to your local music shop that buys used gear, you will probably be able to get $1,200 to $1,500 for it. That's a pretty bad investment. Suppose you respond to an ad or find a person who has one but is in desparate need of cash and you drive a hard bargain for $750. That's a good investment. Buying anything now at market ensures absolutely nothing profit-wise in the future. Witness all the real estate gurus and homeowners who drank the "It will always go up" Koolaid. If you buy one to play and enjoy, that's great. No matter what you pay, at least you will get some return of you investment. Return on your investment is never a sure thing but will be more likely with the possibility inversely proportional to how much under current market you buy it for.

[Baltar Hornbeek]

Is the current dip a bottom, or are we headed lower? Guitars are good investments for trying to pick bottoms. If the market heads still lower, at least you have an great guitar to play them blue$ away.

The great thing about the Gibson market, is it's liquidity compared to other brands. Although, today's Gibson management IMHO, is putting demand to a test with it's current marketing strategy. In a way, they're becoming a newfangled guitar spam.

[Meggy]

In the early 1980s I bought an Ibanez Joe Pass model archtop new for around £625, if I remember correctly. This is by no means a top of the line guitar, but still a nice guitar I think. Second hand ones seem to make around £1000 or a little less on a good day from what I can tell. So a poor investment from that perspective. Fortunately, I still enjoy playing the guitar and have no intention of selling it. Maybe in another 20 years it will start to acquire some rarity value, who knows? But my suspicion is that any new archtop is not going to be a great investment in either the short, or medium term. Not to say that there aren't other considerations which may make buying new a good idea though.

[lpdeluxe]

An inexpensive guitar, today, is very unlikely to be anything but an inexpensive guitar in the future. L-5s and Super 400s? They have always been limited production, high dollar guitars, meaning that there are a lot fewer around to begin with. If you want a "vintage" L-5, be prepared to pay for it because a lot more people want one than exist. What about the '57 Chevrolet Bel Air, you say? GM sold zillions, and they are still worth some money. But cars wear out, and get in wrecks, and rust out, and suffer other indignities of constant, heavy use unheard of for guitars, limiting the number of good examples left. AND, an important consideration with the current mania for "all-original vintage" guitars, you won't find a Chevy that hasn't had many, perhaps many major, parts replacements (would you want one with the original tires and brake linings?).

A lot of people look in the ads in Vintage Guitar Magazine and start fantasizing about putting kids through college on the increase in value, but those prices are mostly fantasies themselves. I personally think the "vintage" guitar market will soon be reduced to the genuinely valuable old instruments, and not just the ones that were made before you finished high school. The pattern was Les Paul Standards, then gold-tops, then Stratocasters, and pretty soon it was "this is old and it's what we were able to dig up, and we want a bunch of bucks for it even though nobody liked the damn things when they were new." It's dealers trying to maintain their high income without the quality guitars to offer in exchange. The vintage market these days is a football game where everyone pretends the football didn't go home with its owner a couple of hours ago.

Personally, I buy guitars to play and that's the end of it. I find ones to buy that are reasonably priced and I sell them for reasonable prices when I go on to another one (of course, I make a buck when I can, and sometimes lose a buck when I can't avoid it).

[JohnW400]

Certain models of import guitar did well like the early George Bensons and Lawsuit model Ibanezes.

Who knew? I bought a used GB10 for about $500 and sold it at a profit. I think I made a whopping $150. Not bad when you consider I played it for about 6 years before I sold it.

As far as Eastmans I don't ever see them being an investment guitar unless they have one model that winds up getting discontinued before it's time.

Look at the Epiphone version of the Byrdland. I recently saw it up for sale for $2300. I think they were about $1100 new . (Correct me if I'm wrong) Here's an example of a guitar discontinued before it's time.

The next question to ask is,what do you replace it with if you sell it?

[lpdeluxe]

Originally Posted by JohnW400

The next question to ask is,what do you replace it with if you sell it?

There ya go. I have sold guitars only when it became obvious that its replacement was already in my arsenal -- with a couple of exceptions for guitars that just didn't suit me (Ric 366/12 and Strat). I've always had a "#1" and that's the alpha guitar that is the first to go once I have a better one. Thus Gretsch Country Gent>Les Paul>SG>335 (guitars) and Carvin>G&L>Fender (basses). In fact, I have developed a distaste for accumulation, and these days I prefer to trade for new acquisitions, which neatly sidesteps the whole "what's its dollar value" question.

[spiral]

You really need to read this thread:
http://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/guita...d-guitars.html

Doctor Jeff makes a very good point.

It was a big aha moment for me realizing i should buy a guitar because i liked it, and not to expect any sort of monetary return. If i ever did sell a guitar and make a little money, the return would be negated by inflation anyhow. It was something i had never considered.

With so many private luthiers now, it is hard to predict which guitars will be popular in 20 years. Who even knew Harmony guitars would even be collectible?

[Steve Hoffman]

Who knew that the World's Worst High-Price-Tag guitars like 1970's Norlin Gibsons and 1970's crap Fender Strats and Teles would now be sold as "Vintage Collectables!" with giant prices. I mean, these young players today have no idea what was the GOOD era and what was the BAD era. It's all "vintage" to them.

Gives me a pain.

[NSJ]

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

Who knew that the World's Worst High-Price-Tag guitars like 1970's Norlin Gibsons and 1970's crap Fender Strats and Teles would now be sold as "Vintage Collectables!" with giant prices. I mean, these young players today have no idea what was the GOOD era and what was the BAD era. It's all "vintage" to them.

Gives me a pain.

Hey, I got a kick ass Norlin era guitar USED off CL a couple of years ago--74 Howard Roberts Custom, and didn't cost an arm and a leg--much less than a new ES 175 now. It is a total keeper, too.

[lpdeluxe]

I had a great '70 gold top Les Paul Deluxe that I got for $750 and eventually sold for $1250 (last December, in fact). Had I worried about "collectibility" I would never have had the guitar that became my gigging tool for 12 years, and I most likely would not have made a 66% profit, either.

Right now I've got what I believe is my lifetime electric, an '00 blonde 335, which I bought for roughly half what I sold the Chet Atkins Country Gent for (that was a 700% profit, by the way, but just because I bought it when it wasn't fashionable [1982: no self-respecting hair band had a Gretsch!] and sold it just before the bottom dropped out of the market). I didn't buy it for the price, or for the expected return in the future, but because it sang to me. There's no other reason, unless you're a dealer, for buying a guitar.

The numbers are fun to speculate with, but in the end, I don't believe it is any longer possible to buy a "sleeper" that will appreciate significantly: you'll have to pay a good price now, and there's NO guarantee you won't end up giving it away. So buy one you love to play, and consider profit a windfall and nothing more. The value of a great guitar you bond with is not in dollars.

[Steve Hoffman]

Originally Posted by NSJ

Hey, I got a kick ass Norlin era guitar USED off CL a couple of years ago--74 Howard Roberts Custom, and didn't cost an arm and a leg--much less than a new ES 175 now. It is a total keeper, too.

Don't get me wrong, I have a '78 Gold Top 'Paul (volute & everything) and a 74 blonde & 73 Cremona sunburst Johnny Smith that kill most other archtops regardless of age.

What bugs me is that guitar dealers try and sell their 1970's stuff with that "this 40 year old vintage dream guitar is ALL ORIGINAL" and is just as good as the 50's and 60's stuff (with the same high price). Yeah, all original (apart from the neck break, refret, missing pickguard....)

Bothers me, that's all..

[lpdeluxe]

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

What bugs me is that guitar dealers try and sell their 1970's stuff with that "this 40 year old vintage dream guitar is ALL ORIGINAL" and is just as good as the 50's and 60's stuff (with the same high price).

Yeah, now that the primo stuff is gone, or priced out of sight, the dealers want to peddle the crap that's left for the same premium prices.

[NSJ]

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

Don't get me wrong, I have a '78 Gold Top 'Paul (volute & everything) and a 74 blonde & 73 Cremona sunburst Johnny Smith that kill most other archtops regardless of age.

What bugs me is that guitar dealers try and sell their 1970's stuff with that "this 40 year old vintage dream guitar is ALL ORIGINAL" and is just as good as the 50's and 60's stuff (with the same high price). Yeah, all original (apart from the neck break, refret, missing pickguard....)

Bothers me, that's all..

Well, that I understand. I never understood the cliches (plays like "butter"??) "Vintage" is a marketing term, mostly. Has nothing to do with quality--in fact, it's hard to conceive of anything from the 70s--when I was a kid--as being "vintage".

Seriously, who has money in this economy to throw around for G.A.S. when gas is expensive enough?? I'm just thankful that I have no need for any more guitars (except maybe for a 7 string arch top down the road, but I have to be good enough to know how to play it correctly. That's gonna take a lot of time.)

You reach a point where you really like the instruments you have, know matter how few they may number, and have no need for any more---because what you really want to do is concentrate on the MUSIC.

That said, it still blows my mind that a late 50s/early 60s solid body is worth much more than an L5. Now THAT is marketing 101, right there, particularly if it's a bolt on plank guitar.

[Steve Hoffman]

You think $500,000.00 for a 1959 Les Paul (totally beat up) is unreasonable?

One is for sale right now for that price.

[spiral]

I can understand a small premium on a vintage instrument that has acoustic qualities, or better quality craftsmanship on a solidbody, but is there really a huge difference in a vintage telecaster or les Paul and a vintage recreation? If the construction is nearly the same quality, and you are using reproduction pickups, is there a difference? Has anyone done or seen a blind A/B test? I'm not a solidbody user and strats and les pauls sound similar to me (at the very least not $10k different).

[NSJ]

Originally Posted by spiral

I can understand a small premium on a vintage instrument that has acoustic qualities, or better quality craftsmanship on a solidbody, but is there really a huge difference in a vintage telecaster or les Paul and a vintage recreation? If the construction is nearly the same quality, and you are using reproduction pickups, is there a difference? Has anyone done or seen a blind A/B test? I'm not a solidbody user and strats and les pauls sound similar to me (at the very least not $10k different).

And the you have the reissed RELICS, where you get to pay double or triple foe them to to beat the shit out of it, so it "looks" vintage, even if the wood is greener than the Hulk. That just blows my mind! Check out the Gear Page, and you'll see....

[Steve Hoffman]

Don't get me started on that RELIC bullshit. Man, what a dipsheet thing to do. Grrrrrrr....

[JohnW400]

Originally Posted by Steve Hoffman

Don't get me started on that RELIC bullshit. Man, what a dipsheet thing to do. Grrrrrrr....

+100

what an effin' scam.

[mptachenko]

The L5 type guitar vs. solid body blows my mind too. A hand carved instument made with the same skill as a Stradavarius will be a fraction less that a beat or refinished bolt on Strat. There was litterally a handful of L-5s, Super 400s, Deluxes or Emperors made and they sell for so much less than solid bodies. Even the new carved stuff does not sound as good as the vintage stuff and they are as much or more. I have a 1938 Deluxe that blew the doors off a newer all acoustic Super 400 I played recently. That Super 400 was twice or three times my Deluxe. You think people would pay for tone but they dont. It is all about suply and demand. People want solid bodies because of Rock and Roll and Jazz is what your grandfather listen to.

[Meggy]

Originally Posted by JohnW400

Certain models of import guitar did well like the early George Bensons and Lawsuit model Ibanezes.

Who knew? I bought a used GB10 for about $500 and sold it at a profit. I think I made a whopping $150. Not bad when you consider I played it for about 6 years before I sold it.

An interesting point for me, as I could have bought a GB10 in the early 80's instead of my Joe Pass model. In fact, I tried both guitars, as well as several others. I didn't like the GB10 as much as the Joe Pass, and it cost about £100 more, so I went for the JP. But the GB10 would have been a much better investment money-wise, as it turns out. Hard to predict this sort of thing though, and as others have pointed out, investment potential is not the main reason us guitarists usually have for choosing a guitar.

[backliner]

At least an archtop guitar will probably still be playable in the future (as will most solidbodies) when compared to a lot of used flat-top acoustics I see needing neck resets.

[lpdeluxe]

Originally Posted by backliner

At least an archtop guitar will probably still be playable in the future (as will most solidbodies) when compared to a lot of used flat-top acoustics I see needing neck resets.

The market for flat-tops is robust, for the simple reason that they are more in demand. Flat-top owners (and buyers) seem to be prepared to spend the money for resets. And, I'll add, I have a late '30s Regal that's still going strong on its original neck joint.

[brad4d8]

I have never bought a guitar with the idea that it would increase in value, but most of my guitars are worth more now than when I bought them. The few exceptions are ones that I bought at the recent peak in prices for used instruments that have fallen a little in average selling price since then. I fully expect them to go back up as the economy changes.
That said, would I ever consider buying an investment quality instrument? Only if it were also one I would enjoy playing, not one that would sit in a display case or its equivalent instead of being played. Oh, yes, I'd also have to have the disposable income needed, can you say lottery winner?
Brad

[tonyknight]

I have a number of good guitars - nothing worth six figures! I could probably sell any of them for more than I paid. BUT, by if I took the time to work out the original amounts I paid adjusted for inflation, I reckon I'd break even on them. Which is really not bad given that I didn't buy any of them with any interest in ever selling them!

That said, my crystal ball says that the next 5-10 years are going to see the world's economies crash worse than the Fukushima earthquake. So the only things that will have value will be stuff we can eat :-) I hope it's wrong, but I don't think so... That's why my next guitar will have great acoustic qualities in case my amps no longer work :-)

But Eastmans seem to be excellent value for their quality, that's for sure.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Originally Posted by tonyknight

That said, my crystal ball says that the next 5-10 years are going to see the world's economies crash worse than the Fukushima earthquake. So the only things that will have value will be stuff we can eat :-) I hope it's wrong, but I don't think so...

I've got my shopping cart picked out!

[kamlapati]

As many mentioned above, it's crazy that an old L-5 is cheaper than either an old Strat or a new L-5... totally blows my mind.

I think that means that you should all go out and buy an old L-5. Really.

(Mine are not for sale. They get played.)

[stevedenver]

as a newbie
jazz guitars are a tiny niche-so
i would think one would want to be toward the top items of interest in that tiny market

to widen the appeal to the gratest number of interested buyers-(not simply jazz players)

to a non-jazzer, GIbson, D'A's (both) Stromberg, Epis etc,very likely too now Bennys and others getting bigger press

those not in the know, will continue to seek these iconic names-if nothing else because they are recognizable, adn the overall reputation for quality as well as historic pedigree

buy low, sell high,
i too never buy with an idea of making money-but i have chosen names and prices points as a hedge against devaluation as well as future saleability

there are not a lot of buyers for 5K+ no less 10K+ insturments-
many more at 1-3K-

there are so many people that simply feel good or pair security with fender, gibson, martin etc-and increasing retail prices will tend to push up used prices

so all of this may effect your choice

with no insult to anyone, i can think of very few asian made instruments that are used and premium-of course there some, but in my experience, its not that common

otoh-quality is quality no matter who makes it-the issue however will be what the average buyer will choose, given price and options-id far sooner buy a norlin (and i have many) than a yamaha or ibanez counterpart-because overall gibson (LPs at least) are pretty easily sold (until fashion changes)

as for eastman-
IF they become noted for super quality
and
retail and street prices rise
and they stay a leader in the price range
and the field stays narrow
they may well hold value

and.....
we may well be on a cusp-
i think it is a golden era of guitars -
but choice and traditional woods may be another thing soon

fwiw i passed on an eastman f mando in favor of a gibson f,
the eastman was bout 1500 as i recall-and i thought this was a sizable amount

so, i instead paid a bit more than more than twice the price for a used gibson f,

because it seemed a better value and prices on gibsons are not dropping
(-and i also greatly preferred the instrument)

-not a dis-

an example- and i imagine others think similarly when spending over a thousand dollars