1960s Hummingbird values

[Zacko]

according to the vintage guitar price guide 1960 thru 64 cherry sunburst Hummingbirds are worth  from $7500.00-$9750.00  while 1965 models are worth $5250.00-6750.00. why the difference? did Gibson produce 1965s in much higher numbers? the natural non sunburst models are also worth 7-10K i assume because of limited production numbers.

[ksdaddy]

It is generally accepted that Gibson went to a 1-9/16” nut width in 1965. Many people find the narrow neck uncomfortable. All keyboard warrior disclaimers apply here, as I’m sure there are 1965 models with 1-11/16” width. Also in 1965 they went from a 17 degree peg head angle to a 14. Some people claim this made a difference in the tone. I can’t comment on that. 

[Zacko]

the one i'm working on has the 1 11/16" nut. might that enhance the value?

Edited July 28 by Zacko

[ksdaddy]

I wouldn’t say enhance. Better to say “will not detract”.

[zombywoof]

By the early-1960s, the only flattops being shipped in greater numbers than the Hummingbird were the J45 and J50. I have always viewed VGPG values with a bit of skepticism.  What throws the values off is they include sales by the big sexy vintage dealers who can sit on inventory for as long as it takes to get top dollar.  I have been told by other shop owners looking for a quick turnaround they often end up getting less.

Edited July 28 by zombywoof

[E-minor7]

6 hours ago, Zacko said:

the one i'm working on has the 1 11/16" nut. might that enhance the value?

As mentioned many people find the wider width more attractive - so it may play in. Not in a big way though.                                                                                                                                                                                 Check the marked and it'll give you a picture. Best way to do it.

Just remember there are other highly important factors : Truss rod working ? Loose braces ? Bridge plate decay ? Neck ? Frets ? 

                                                                    You have to be a bit of a scientist, , , , or at least a Gibson Forum member 

[Zacko]

everything mentioned above is fine. 2 dealers i checked with say the wide neck is worth 2-3K more than the narrow neck. 

[E-minor7]

18 minutes ago, Zacko said:

everything mentioned above is fine. 2 dealers i checked with say the wide neck is worth 2-3K more than the narrow neck. 

Okay - if that's how the marked has develop, it's should be easy to check. Did they mention anything about weight of braces ?

[Zacko]

both are knowledgeable nashville vintage dealers. no mention of braces. a 65 narrow neck on reverb is 6500.00. one in italy is 7900.00. the last 64 hummingbird that i bought i paid $225.00 for. that was in 1972 or 3 though.😁

[E-minor7]

19 hours ago, Zacko said:

, ,  the last 64 hummingbird that i bought i paid $225.00 for. that was in 1972 or 3 though.😁

Well, ,,  back then you flew home more than heavy braces. Got yourself an extra  X

[groovadelic]

I had a 67 Hummingbird with the 1-9/16th nut width for about a year before letting it go. They were going for under 2k about 10 years ago.  Not sure about pre-65 but other than the skinny neck + headstock angle, the back and sides were laminated mahogany, and it was a 25.5 scale length. I actually don't know if any 60s Hummingbirds were 24.75 other than maybe 1960???

Regardless, it was a great sounding guitar but ultimately didn't feel like I could bond with it long-term due to the feel. Around 68-69 they start adding screws to the pickguard and flipping the bridge belly down so that detract from the desirability somewhat.

[zombywoof]

I just ran into a somewhat interesting situation regarding values.  Out of nowhere I found an appraisal on a fiddle such as I own. Turns out, that at least in one opinion, the thing sports an insurance/replacement value of $5K.  Not too bad for a less than $200 investment.  But the interesting part was that apparently if I wanted to turn it over in a quick sale, say to a shop, the value dropped to $2K so only about 40% of the insurance value.  Granted though, while I am not complaining, an early-1960s HB would seemingly be a more highly sought after instrument than my fiddle which is just one of probably thousands of 100+ year old better than average quality German factory fiddles made for an American violin company. 

Edited August 4 by zombywoof

[Zacko]

i bought a fiddle for $200.00 in the late 70s. i forget the maker but the bow was worth 2K back then. lost em both when my ex did a property grab. 

[PrairieDog]

This cut is not unusual.  Insurance  value is based what it would cost to replace something walking into a shop and paying the full MSRP or common retail price.  Insurance can’t figure in periodic sales prices or haggling.  

The value to a store, or on consignment at a shop, has to leave room for the cost  of re-selling it, plus a profit. And yeah, while you can dicker to a point, it is usually around 50% of the retail price.  

Best case private party sales values will fall somewhere 10 to 20% below retail.  

[ksdaddy]

I’ve had a handful of guitars appraised by George Gruhn and it seems like if you took his appraisal and multiplied it by about 0.65, that would give you a good idea of what you could sell it for on a good day. 

[rct]

27 minutes ago, ksdaddy said:

I’ve had a handful of guitars appraised by George Gruhn and it seems like if you took his appraisal and multiplied it by about 0.65, that would give you a good idea of what you could sell it for on a good day. 

A pretty fair number.  Appraisal is for walking into a retail establishment and buying a replacement for the object that is not on sale, on consignment, or in a discontinued blow out state.  It doesn't account for negotiation of any kind.  If you insure a guitar for it's appraised value you will pay for insurance in that amount, not because it is of that value.  You can insure a squier for 5K if you want to pay for it.

The "price guides" are canvassed from dealers.  Look in the guide at what your guitar is "worth", go to one of the contributing dealers, let us know what they offer you compared to what they said in the "price guide".

rct

[PrairieDog]

1 hour ago, rct said:

A pretty fair number.  Appraisal is for walking into a retail establishment and buying a replacement for the object that is not on sale, on consignment, or in a discontinued blow out state.  It doesn't account for negotiation of any kind.  If you insure a guitar for it's appraised value you will pay for insurance in that amount, not because it is of that value.  You can insure a squier for 5K if you want to pay for it.

The "price guides" are canvassed from dealers.  Look in the guide at what your guitar is "worth", go to one of the contributing dealers, let us know what they offer you compared to what they said in the "price guide".

rct

The insurance bit is not exactly accurate.  Insurance will not pay out more than the market value at the time of the loss.  If someone wants to inflate the value and pay higher premiums than what the guitar is worth, it could be done, but that would only happen with “minimus” value items, below the value threshold that would trigger an appraisal before writing the policy.  However, still even then, when it comes to a claim they will pay no more than the current retail value or sometimes the original cost, if it’s in the policy and one can produce proof.  Otherwise the claimant would have to show proof that the going rate was 5k for the same run of the mill Squire, or provide proof why that one was exceptional.  

Edited August 4 by PrairieDog

[zombywoof]

5 hours ago, ksdaddy said:

I’ve had a handful of guitars appraised by George Gruhn and it seems like if you took his appraisal and multiplied it by about 0.65, that would give you a good idea of what you could sell it for on a good day. 

I had one guitar appraised by Gruhn about 20 years ago.  It was a 1958 Tele, early one with strings through body.  As the appraisal was ten times what I had in it,  no complaints.  But I have been told by those who have dealt with Gruhn at guitar shows that he is as good as you will find when it comes to finding every flaw there is on a vintage instrument he is interested in acquiring to give him the haggling room to get the price down to where he wants it.

[rct]

6 hours ago, PrairieDog said:

The insurance bit is not exactly accurate.  Insurance will not pay out more than the market value at the time of the loss.  If someone wants to inflate the value and pay higher premiums than what the guitar is worth, it could be done, but that would only happen with “minimus” value items, below the value threshold that would trigger an appraisal before writing the policy.  However, still even then, when it comes to a claim they will pay no more than the current retail value or sometimes the original cost, if it’s in the policy and one can produce proof.  Otherwise the claimant would have to show proof that the going rate was 5k for the same run of the mill Squire, or provide proof why that one was exceptional.  

If you pay for an appraisal that comes in at 5K the insurance company will insure the object, as long as you pay for the insurance, no?

rct

[PrairieDog]

25 minutes ago, rct said:

If you pay for an appraisal that comes in at 5K the insurance company will insure the object, as long as you pay for the insurance, no?

rct

Of course, I even said that.  It just needs to be a professional appraisal from an appraisal company the insurance company accepts (i.e., not just some dude down the street you handed a 20, chuckle).   Maybe I misread your original comment.   I understood you were implying someone could just decide to insure a Squire for 5k “if they wanted to”  even if it wasn’t really worth that.  Truly sorry for the misunderstanding if that wasn’t your intent.   

[rct]

7 minutes ago, PrairieDog said:

Of course, I even said that.  It just needs to be a professional appraisal from an appraisal company the insurance company accepts (i.e., not just some dude down the street you handed a 20, chuckle).   Maybe I misread your original comment.   I understood you were implying someone could just decide to insure a Squire for 5k “if they wanted to”  even if it wasn’t really worth that.  Truly sorry for the misunderstanding if that wasn’t your intent.   

No sorry needed.  I could insure my Hello Kitty strat for whatever I want, provided I pay for the insurance and if they want it, I pay for an appraisal that will put it at that value.  But since not a replacement value insurance the appraisal would be moot, I am paying for the insurance for a value, not for replacement.  Make sense?

"value" of a guitar is always in the eye of the seller beholder.

rct

[PrairieDog]

1 minute ago, rct said:

No sorry needed.  I could insure my Hello Kitty strat for whatever I want, provided I pay for the insurance and if they want it, I pay for an appraisal that will put it at that value.  But since not a replacement value insurance the appraisal would be moot, I am paying for the insurance for a value, not for replacement.  Make sense?

"value" of a guitar is always in the eye of the seller beholder.

rct

Well, not exactly.  Insurance is always tied to the cost to replace a covered item in the market, not an untethered value.   Underwriters don’t care what an owner says it is worth, outside of 3rd party proof.   The laws governing the insurance industry are clear they have to go by what the market says the value is, whether found through comp sales or a licensed appraisal, which is always required for high value, or hard to value items.  

Otherwise, insurance companies would obviously just low ball every claim.  And, it protects them from fraudulent claims based on fictional, inflated values.  

This is because when they pay a claim, the insurance company owns the item.  If it was stolen and recovered, the police hand it to the insurance company.  Some firms might ask if you want to buy it back and some will settle for the payout. Others will charge the market rate (even if that’s more than what they paid you, think gold coins.) Or they will just sell it through one of their services.  It’s theirs to do with to protect the finances of the company.  

This is why they have to have proof something like a standard guitar is really worth more than market value in order to write the policy.  

Still even if one were paying on a higher value policy, they aren’t going to pay out more than the item is worth at the time of the loss, no matter what the appraised value may have been years ago.  For some volatile items, the company can make you update the appraisal periodically to be sure the coverage still reasonable for the worth of the item.  In the case of markedly appreciating assets, it is in the owners interest to do this, and ask for higher coverage based on the new appraisal, rather than wait for the insurance company to ask, for obvious reasons.  

This is particularly true with volatile markets, like art or collectibles, like guitars.  Tastes change, or items break, things lose value all the time.  The company will reduce the policy themselves if they believe the value is underwater, unless again, one can provide acceptable proof.  

Think about it, people were insuring their Beanie Baby collections for thousands back in the 90s.   Even if somebody had been paying on the high policy all this time, a payout now wouldn’t even take a bite out of the deductible.