> >Well, remember the real life rule;
> > "Something is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it!"
And John Dunn replied:
> Sorry, but with all due respect, I couldn't be more in
> disagreement with this. Unless you are speaking strictly
> in monetary terms. I watch in awe as some of these parts
> go to unimaginable heights and am reminded of the line
> by Oscar Wilde about someone who ".... knows the price
> of everything and the value of nothing."
> I simply don't believe that because someone out there, with a
> lot of disposable income, decides that he/she will have something,
> regardless of cost, adds anything to the intrinsic worth of a
> bicycle part (or a Picasso, or the Hope Diamond, for that matter).
I'm not sure, but I think you may be saying that rarity doesn't add to the intrinsic value of anything. True if we're referring to how well the derailleur shifts, but if that can't be all you're after if you're a member of this list! (Nobody loves the old derailleurs because they shift better than new ones do they?)
If we agree that rarity adds to the value, then how can you put a value on something that most of us have never seen before - "the rarest of the rare"? I know this derailleur isn't a one-of-a-kind, but it is very rare indeed. If ten of something sell on ebay and one goes for a lot more than the others, then maybe that guy overpaid. But if (hypothetically speaking) one has never been auctioned before, how can you put a value on that?