I think this discussion comes up every 6 months or so and it always triggers the same response in me. Collecting is a funny thing, I see words here like Mojo, Mystique, Admiration, Unique, Nostalgia and I am sure there are several other intangibles that can be attributed to these bikes.
This type of hype almost conjures up a deity that constructed a perfect frame the first time he and a torch met. It leads one to believe that every frame he ever made was the same quality, same ride, same aesthetics every time every frame. It leaves no room for the human factor of growing or getting better with experience and time.
It is almost insulting to the person being deified as it does not allow credit for them building their skill from ground up. The hard work it took to gain that skill. We all know that he had to fail to get better, that some of his frames are better than others. We as collectors just choose to grant sainthood to every bike that hits the market with his Marquee.
It is more psychological than tangible. It is much the same that a 1943 U.S. copper penny is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars and a 1944 is worth 1 cent. Scarcity leads to demand by a collector, that demand is fueled by the collector showing it to another collector who does not have one. Soon word of mouth (Internet) spreads and you have a feeding frenzy.
This is not to say that talent, skill and craftsmanship did not play a role. If it did not then I am sure there would be great demand for every one "of a kind" bike that was ever made.
A good bike with a good story and a good builder with the added elements of scarcity and an untimely death creates the formula for the evolution of collectibility. There is a bike being made somewhere today that in 30 to 40 years from now will be very collectible, in demand and desirable. It will look the best it will ever look today yet none of you can tell me which bike it is. The "Mojo et al" has not taken hold yet.
Ray Homiski
Elizabeth, NJ USA