Re: [CR]was: Campy Gum hoods; now: another perspective

(Example: Framebuilding:Norris Lockley)

From: <>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 07:32:10 EDT
Subject: Re: [CR]was: Campy Gum hoods; now: another perspective

In a message dated 5/9/2002 4:43:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, writes:

> Isn't that what Enzo *intended*? Can you debate that? Isn't that what the
> makers of your "collectible" bikes intended? That they be ridden?? It
> sounds like you are the self-righteous one is this discussion. Garaging
> your Ferrari defeats the very purpose of their production. They just sit
> there with no soul. It only glorifies possession. This is what motivates
> many collectors. Possession. This may be OK for paintings by the masters,
> which hang on the wall (museum or not), doing nothing, because it's what
> they were *designed* to do. Ferraris and Masis were never, ever,
> designed
> to sit in a garage or hang on the wall , doing nothing.

Well put John. Let me add that just as the rich doctor, lawyer, CEO may be able to afford the Ferrari, driving it well may be another thing all together. Big checkbook does not equal skill. A lot of collectible bikes started life as racing machines. Riding it well may be another matter too. In some cases maybe the owner is not up to riding the bike as intended?

Pete Geurds
Douglassville, PA