Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Slide rule prices

Expand Messages
  • Aki Karhu
    Hi Ron, I was thinking should I reply or not. I decided I will. What all the others wrote is defenitely TRUE. You re doing a fabulous job. I myself watch your
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 1, 2000
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Ron,

      I was thinking should I reply or not. I decided I will. What all the
      others wrote is defenitely TRUE. You're doing a fabulous job. I
      myself watch your monthly 'table' with greatest interest. It's very
      valuable for informing and orientating oneself what's going on at
      ebay-price levels as well as what was sold. And personally I'm
      totally satisfied with this amount of information. Of course you
      could improve it and you would for sure satisfy still some more
      people, but right now as it is... it is enough info at least for me.
      Thanks for that!
      How long does it actually take until such a list is complete?


      Best Regards,
      Aki ;-)




      --- In sliderule@egroups.com, <gerwkr@u...> wrote:
      > Ron: I agree with Charlie. What you are doing is really helpful,
      but trying to
      > increase the informational dimensions may be more effort than it is
      worth. Of
      > course the most obvious would be to designate condition on an
      established scale
      > of quality. But, anyone who follows ebay will agree this will be
      nigh to
      > impossible. This is due to the wide differences in knowlege in
      those offering
      > slide rules for auction. Only a few of us know the Oughtred Society
      and Dutch
      > Circle classification systems. These we can use when we trade or
      buy. However,
      > these could never be applied across the board because of the
      difficulty of
      > analyzing the ebay pictures and descriptions of rules. I like the
      spirit of what
      > Charlie said. Thanks for doing what your doing and keep it up. It
      is a real
      > service to all of us. Regards, Bill Robinson
      >
      > cjoxford@i... wrote:
      >
      > > Ron,
      > > I think your listing is a good general price reference as is.
      Sellers
      > > oftentimes haven't a clue what they have or even its condition
      and some
      > > photos are nearly worthless. (one of my early purchases was
      described as "so
      > > pristine you can't tell it from new" and came rusted and dented
      in a ragged
      > > box.) I have seen high bids for poor or common rules and low bids
      for
      > > excellent or rare rules. I have sold identical items on ebay at a
      wide range
      > > of prices (same closing date} and I see rules at websites for
      sale at a wide
      > > range of prices.
      > >
      > > There are price guides in print for hundreds of different
      collectibles and
      > > you find a lot of disagreement in values. I wouldn't try to get
      better than
      > > slide rule accuracy or you may go nuts.
      > >
      > > When I started watching ebay I saved all the listings until there
      were too
      > > many and then prices were rapidly changing. I discarded all of
      the listings
      > > which to to vague to determine condition. Now, when I see your
      monthly
      > > tables, I will discard the highs and lows and base my range on
      what's left.
      > > I appreciate what you are providing, but don't think it's worth
      much more
      > > effort than you already put in.
      > >
      > > Hope my nickle helps,
      > >
      > > Charlie - an appreciative collector
      > >
      > > On 07/30/00 20:43:32 you wrote:
      > > >
      > > >Hermann has done his usual thorough job but I fear that what he
      > > >suggests for ebay sellers is a counsel of perfection. I get the
      > > >impression that the average seller is someone who finds his
      father's
      > > >Pickett 120 and offers it as "L@@K - rare vintage slide rule"; I
      > > >exaggerate of course, but only a little. Whilst a coding system
      would
      > > >work among the cognoscenti it would not work for the general
      public;
      > > >and if they did find out about it every rule would be classed as
      > > >RRRRRRR! I am also not sure that it would cover every
      eventuality. A
      > > >Faber Castle with bleeding ink or a K&E with crumbling cursor
      could
      > > >be complete and unused, and therefore C0, but still be a
      > > >disappointment to a buyer.
      > > >
      > > >I agree though that it would be useful to have a check list of
      > > >questions you could put to sellers or which you could provide to
      > > >buyers. This could cover:
      > > >Overall: How much the rule had been used
      > > >Rule: Whether marks, chips or other defects.
      > > >Slide: Does it move freely.
      > > >Cursor; Is it complete, is the glass/plastic scratched etc.
      > > >Box/case./wallet etc.
      > > >Instructions.
      > > >
      > > >We should also remember that most rules are sold with a picture
      and
      > > >if you know the model then Peter Hopp's book will give you the
      scales.
      > > >
      > > >Regards to all
      > > >
      > > >Ron
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >--- In sliderule@egroups.com, "H. van Herwijnen"
      <hermanrule@c...>
      > > >wrote:
      > > >> Ron,
      > > >>
      > > >> Whether you buy stamps, old camera's or slide rules the price
      is
      > > >very
      > > >> dependent on rarity and condition and sometimes the additional
      > > >items such
      > > >> as case, instruction booklet and separate data strips. You
      know my
      > > >vision
      > > >> on that I think.
      > > >>
      > > >> This could be an oportunity to get the ebay people and slide
      rule
      > > >egroups
      > > >> members to accept our (Dutch Circle of Slide Rule Collectors)
      way of
      > > >> condition description. It is accepted by the Oughtred society.
      It
      > > >adds to
      > > >> the price evaluation because a Condition 0 slide rule could be
      > > >worth twice
      > > >> as much as a Condition 5 one. Also the phenomenum of people
      going
      > > >more and
      > > >> more for the new in box or at least condition 2 type rules (C2
      is
      > > >that the
      > > >> rule is factory new but the case and/or attachements are not
      all
      > > >there) may
      > > >> be of importance when bidding on a rule.
      > > >>
      > > >> My second suggestion is that you might give the slide rule a
      number
      > > >and of
      > > >> course the ideal should be if you used the socalled Match
      number we
      > > >are
      > > >> using in our CD Catalogue. The CD will be in two years time in
      the
      > > >hands of
      > > >> say 50% of the collectors and it would mean that you can see in
      > > >detail how
      > > >> a rule being offered looks like. I guess that in 4 years time
      80%
      > > >of all
      > > >> available rules will be in the CD. The other 20% will be the
      very
      > > >rare ones
      > > >> and some variants.
      > > >>
      > > >> My third suggestion is to give the slide rule a rarity
      > > >qualification. It
      > > >> will be very difficult but looking at your huge ebay file with
      > > >rules sold
      > > >> will already give an indication. The qualifications
      > > >>
      > > >> Common
      > > >> R
      > > >> RR
      > > >> RRR
      > > >> RRRR
      > > >>
      > > >> I have defined and sent this rarity definition by email to all
      > > >emailgroup
      > > >> people.
      > > >>
      > > >> Nobody cared to give comments which I found a bit
      disappointing.
      > > >Neither
      > > >> suggestions for improvements or OK's. The same was true for our
      > > >condition
      > > >> description. No comments. It means that everybody is happy
      with it
      > > >or do
      > > >> not care. The latter possibility worries me a bit.
      > > >>
      > > >> My fourth suggestion is on coding the rules in a logical way:
      > > >>
      > > >> When coding the rules you may use the following system
      > > >>
      > > >> For the "Name":
      > > >> 1. Where the manufacturer or, as a second choice, the
      distributer
      > > >is known
      > > >> we use the first four letters for the name part of the code
      even if
      > > >the
      > > >> name is not on the SR but on the case or in the instruction
      guide.
      > > >> 2. If we do not have these names we use another important name
      on
      > > >the SR
      > > >> like the person who has the patent like Seehase, the person or
      > > >company for
      > > >> which the SR was made like Shell or the application.
      > > >> 3. Many military SR have no manufacturer name and have been
      given
      > > >the name
      > > >> Military ("Mili" as name code) in order to get them all in the
      same
      > > >place
      > > >> in the book.
      > > >> 4. Where absolutely no important data is mentioned the
      term "NoNa"
      > > >from
      > > >> NoName is used
      > > >>
      > > >> For the "Code":
      > > >> 1. If a number is mentioned then that number is used. Where
      many
      > > >numbers
      > > >> are used it is sometimes difficult to take the unique one. In
      the
      > > >catalogue
      > > >> the SR are first sorted on manufacturer and then on number.
      > > >> 2. If there is no number then a text can be used which can be
      > > >related to
      > > >> the application or name like Valve, Log Log or Elemath etc.
      > > >> 3. For a number of aviation computers, where often many
      numbers are
      > > >used,
      > > >> the part number with the letters FAA seems unique and has been
      used.
      > > >> 4. For the artillery type SR the size of the grenade, say
      155mm, is
      > > >used as
      > > >> the first part and the Charge no. is used as second part.
      > > >>
      > > >> For the "Variant":
      > > >> 1. Describing SR really becomes a problem when there are more
      than
      > > >20 items
      > > >> with the same name and number but all different even with
      different
      > > >scales
      > > >> like an Aristo 89. In these cases one of the rules is taken as
      the
      > > >> "original" and is given the Code "Aris 89" and the rest is
      > > >coded "Aris 89
      > > >> .01", "Aris 89 .02" etc. till say "Aris 89 .23". While in our
      > > >catalogue
      > > >> still all variants known have been mentioned there may be a
      future
      > > >CD with
      > > >> only one item described fully and only the mentioning of
      variants.
      > > >It
      > > >> depends on those people that are going to describe the slide
      rules
      > > >in
      > > >> detail in the future in the computer data base whether they are
      > > >describing
      > > >> variants or not.
      > > >>
      > > >> 2. A SR where only the name is known without any other data is
      > > >given the
      > > >> number code beginning with .0001. Thus an "Aris .0001 is the
      first
      > > >Aristo
      > > >> that came into my hands without any other identification.
      > > >The "Aris .0003"
      > > >> is the third Aristo without further data but could be
      completely
      > > >different
      > > >> from number .0001
      > > >>
      > > >> Like in a stamp catalogues it is not mentioned that a stamp is
      > > >rectangular
      > > >> or an unused one has glue on the back for the slide rules we
      have
      > > >following
      > > >> list.
      > > >>
      > > >> Assumed common and therefore not mentioned in the description
      are:
      > > >> - The front side of the SR is the side that has the A-scale
      (x2 = 1-
      > > >10-100)
      > > >> or if there is no A-scale the DF-scale.
      > > >> - Scale-codes (K L A B etc.) are printed on the left hand
      side
      > > >of the SR
      > > >> and formulas (x, x2, 1/x, sin, tg) on the right hand side.
      > > >> - Scales are not extending below 1 and above 10, 100 or 1000
      > > >(example:
      > > >> A-scale goes from 1-100 and not from 0.8 to 110)
      > > >> - A-scales have the numbers 1-10-100 and K-scales 1-10-100-
      1000.
      > > >> - A cm- or inch-scale is ending with an whole number.
      > > >> - Text on a SR is printed horizontal.
      > > >> - Letters, numbers and gauge marks are printed in black.
      > > >> - SR have one slide. The body is rectangular.
      > > >> - SR are without end plates.
      > > >> - SR is white including the end plates, if present.
      > > >> - The cursor is made of flat perspex with or without metal
      spring.
      > > >> - A slide has the same length as the body.
      > > >> - Scale strips, when present, are glued on.
      > > >> - "Wood", as indication of the material, means wood covered
      with
      > > >plastic or
      > > >> celluloid scale strips.
      > > >> - "All wood", as indication of the material, means only wood is
      > > >used, with
      > > >> or without metal pins or screws.
      > > >> -Descriptions will be replaced for 95% by thepictures.
      > > >>
      > > >> Ron this what I can think of in half an hour but I fully
      support
      > > >you if you
      > > >> would like to help with standardizing important slide rule
      matters.
      > > >I have
      > > >> never bought or sold anything at ebay but I can see a good
      future
      > > >> particularly if things are clear and you know where people are
      > > >talking
      > > >> about.
      > > >>
      > > >> If I think of something else I will let you know
      > > >>
      > > >> Herman van Herwijnen
      > > >
      > >
      > >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.