crazy valuation

[Namvet]

Ain't worth crap. It's been ruined.

[bonzoboy]

The worst mistake I ever made was in 1975 when I took my 10 year old '65 Strat to a self proclaimed luthier to"restore".The guitar that would be worth about $16,000 these days,is now worth less than 1/2 that.Never,Never,Never alter any vintage guitar-not even a little bit-to do so would cause the value to plummet faster than a skydiving Sumo wrestler.

[jnastynebr]

Tough crowd. Although we can all agree that the instrument is drastically overpriced, it doesnt merit the bashing it has earned in the thread. Nothing in the description indicates that the maple cap has been replaced, even if book matched-flame maple caps were not the norm in this time period.

If the cap has been replaced, its worth 2-3 max. If its the original cap, back, and neck (even with the repair), it could be a fun 56 restoration project, or burst conversion project. A wealthy player with a taste for old LPs might be willing to drop 5-6 grand on a "vintage" inspired LP that he's not afraid to gig with and beat up a little.

The guy is just marketing the thing wrong, and way off on price. Ill bet anything the $20,000 tag is just to scare off all the tools that would be offering $300-400 for it. I doubt this guy lives on his own planet, and would take 5 grand if he got a serious offer.

[This_Dying_Soul]

The way I see it, even if the guitar is not a vintage instrument; if it's something as iconic as a Gibson Les Paul Standard or a USA made Fender; someday it could be.

 

I don't believe in doing any kind of modification that I can't reverse. Even upgrading tuners is a no no to me unless the replacements can use the same holes as the orginals so that if the guitar ever does become a valuable collector's item, it can be restored to original condition.

 

For a famous guitarist like Jimmy Page or Eric Clapton this doesn't really matter that much because somewhere there is a fan who will pay crazy money to own his guitar later on when he's finished with it. For us regular people though, unless you are 100% sure you'll keep this guitar forever, why shoot yourself in the foot by doing things that are irreversable and hurt the guitar's resale value. I guess the flip side is that a professional musician views his guitar as a tool and if they like the guitar enough, modifying it to enhance it's performance or add additional features that aren't stock increases it's usefullness to that individual... but since the cost of a quality instrument is not pocket change for most people, including myself, and since I'm not famous enough that collectors want my guitars the way I played them; I tend to lean towards wanting to preserve the resale value by keeping everything either stock or at least in a state that can be returned to stock with very little evidence that I'd changed anything.

 

Personally, if I buy a used guitar that's been modified, regardless of whether I like the mods or of the guitar's current collectors value; it's a reason to try and talk the seller down to a lower price if they don't include the original parts or if the mod is something I can't have reversed if I decide later to sell the guitar.

 

I know some people here might not care about this sort of thing so much and probably do modify their instruments in ways I would never consider... that's their choice, I just don't agree with it from the point of view that if I ever sell my Gibsons I want to get as much out of them as possible rather than be forced to sell them for peanuts because I made a drastic change to them that can't be undone.