Will the orphan car survive..

[nick8086]

Will the  orphan car survive??  as a collectible car..

 

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-22/the-collectible-car-market-is-getting-the-air-kicked-out-of-its-tires

Edited November 17, 2017 by nick8086 (see edit history)

[Joe in Canada]

Collector plates, Royal Dalton's, Beanie Baby's, antique pine furniture and hydro pole insulators have all had there day.  As for collector cars in general I believe in the near future our hobby is in for a price adjustment. I am a regular checking on eBay's listings of pre 1916 cars for sale. I see a 1913 Cadillac and Hudson listed with a dealer have been there for over a year if you look at the times they revised the listing. As for orphan cars I believe some models they will slide the hardest being less popular. No different than a four door 6 Cyl. standard 1971 Biscayne. The bottom line is supply and demand dictates the price.

[Frantz]

I mean they start out talking about those highly collectible 1980s cars... As big of a supporter of late model antiques as I am.. I hardly think that's what to watch. The index's they show also are sorta truncated so it's hard to get any real analysis. Was the classic car prices "over-inflated" and thats way "air is getting kicked out" so it's back to correct? Seems more like a clickbait article for bloomberg without much real meat.

As to your question, orphans always struggle a little bit more. The audience that remembers them grows older and fewer. They are generally made in smaller numbers so surviving examples, parts stashes, and demand for reproduction parts is smaller too. I do believe we'll soon be in a part on demand easy access though so that may not be an issue. Getting non existing plastic bits may well be easier than replacing wooden parts that actually require craftsmanship. Orphan car owners often are fiercely loyal though. I don't know that they are quite as concerned with pricing as they are with survival. I know sometimes I see guys saying "I wish my AMX was worth more" and I can't help but think... "yeah, but then you wouldn't have two of them".

[Walt G]

that whole post talks about investments and cars as the things to buy to make $. I worked my whole life to buy an old car(s) because they give me pleasure to look at,

drive, smell (leather, old mohair etc) and yes work on as well. The satisfaction of pride of ownership, and that an 80+ year old car (I collect pre war) can still go down the road as it was made to

I think is the reason most of us collect and own the cars we have. They have survived scrap drives, abuse, harsh weather conditions , neglect, but yet here they still are and here we are as caretakers.

That article addresses none of that. Everyone has things that they do or own that make them feel at the end of the day. Old cars are what do it for us.

I live right next to (for over 60 years) one of the major horse race tracks in the USA, the site of the third and final race of the annual Triple Crown of racing, people say to me "you must be there all the time" I tell them, I have been there exactly 4 times, and each time was to celebrate some historic anniversary. I have never placed a bet, wouldn't know how to. They are taken aback when I say that and start to shake their head in wonder when I then add "I'd rather spend my $ on a rusty old car part, old toy or some period car literature"  My personal investment in old or collectible cars is because it makes me feel good as well as a lot of other people who I may take for a ride, or wave at when they stare as I drive by. You can't put a price on a smile on someones face including mine.

[John_S_in_Penna]

Sorry to be critical of the article, but I think it's a

shallow, valueless piece written by a newswoman

who knows nothing about cars, and who just had an

assignment to fulfill.  And the whole tone of the piece

sees cars as commodities, missing the whole point of

ownership.

 

If Miss or Mrs. Verhage, the author, could spend a day

with a long-term hobbyist, take a scenic ride in an old car,

meet the family that has owned the car for 20 years,

go to a club event where she would see the camaraderie

the hobby offers, she would get a far more realistic picture.

 

She would then stop thinking of cars as statistics.

Maybe then she'd even want to get an old car for her family.

 

There's far more to antique cars than tracking money. 

Edited November 17, 2017 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[joe_padavano]

Why does anyone in the automotive hobby pay any attention to articles about cars written by Bloomberg, MSNBC, CNN, etc, etc? These people are not experts in this field.

[Matt Harwood]

He bought his two classic cars — a 1986 BMW M6 and a 1986 Porsche 911 Cabriolet...

 

 

Fortunately, the values of "classic" 1986 cars are not the sole indicator of the entire collector car market.

 

I have often told my clients that expecting your collector car to get more valuable each year is as foolish as expecting the souvenirs you bought at Disney to get more valuable when you get home. HOWEVER, most genuine collector-grade cars (not simply old cars or cars that have merely been lucky enough to survive for three or four decades) will typically hold their value and you can usually sell them for about what you paid. Few will pay you back for your repairs, storage, insurance, tires, and other factors that go with owning an old car, but if you paid $35,000 for it five years ago, you can probably turn it into $35,000 today. A lot of guys figure that whatever they "have into" a car is what it's worth and that merely getting older means the cars are also getting more valuable, which is what drives articles like this one. That is not true in 95% of the cases. Still, I ask you: what other hobby allows you to buy the hobby item, enjoy it for an indefinite period of time, sell it, and get most of your money back? Golf clubs? Boats? Guitars? RVs? Skiing? Video Games? No. Collector cars remain one of the very few places you can safely park some money for an indefinite period of time and still turn it back into a similar pile of money when you're done playing. And barring some catastrophic financial event like 2008, it tends to stay that way regardless of what other market forces do.

 

Like most "investments" there are some that perform and some that are losers and some that stay the same. Your parents probably thought highly of GM stock or the phone company, not because they were getting rich but because they could count on them to not lose value. You see these factors in the stock market daily, so it's not unique to the collector car world. I don't think the Ferrari market can continue on its current trajectory. Early 911 Porsches bringing six- and seven-figure price tags probably can't continue, there are just too many of them. I think the mini car thing is almost over. Pagoda Mercedes SLs are peaking. Toyota Land Cruisers have faded like the Cleveland Indians in the playoffs. Hemi Fever is DEFINITELY over. But those are all operating on the fringes of the hobby. If we consider ourselves the bulk of the hobby, meaning modest cars purchased with modest means, then it remains pretty stable. Sadly, that also means your Model A will never get more valuable than it is today so it's best to go out and enjoy.

 

It's impossible to say what "the market" is doing in regards to old cars, a question I get almost daily. Some segments are strong, some are soft, some are dead. I suspect it has always been thus.

[John_S_in_Penna]

If this authoress has written so unenlightenedly

about the car hobby, in which she isn't involved,

doesn't that imply that other authors' articles--

on a wide variety of subjects--may be similarly

shallow, distorted, and wrong?

 

Thank goodness that true automotive magazines

are written by people who know their subjects!

[60FlatTop]

I would like to see the graph in the article plotted against the death rate of males over 65. Old car guys are dying. Potential new collectors aren't out there.

 

As soon as the current political football get kicked up to the coming elections the topic will revert to the nationwide issue of minimum wage. That is not the era of budding car collectors like the prospering country we started collecting cars in.

 

I have always told my kids that the prime reason for an author writing an article is to put a couple of bags of groceries on the table, nothing more.

 

"People" sit on the edge of their seats waiting for "someone's" conclusion on "everything". Collect the facts and draw your own conclusions. At least they won't be shallow or biased, I don't think I have ever drawn a shallow or biased conclusion.

Bernie

[nick8086]

Maybe some History :

 

 

 

[nick8086]

One more :

 

 

[John348]

Hey Nick,

That Great Cars Documentary was fantastic, and I learned a lot. I remember reading some time ago (I believe it was in our AACA Magazine) that Kaiser got jammed up when he sent left over 1953 cars back to the factory and "re-vin'd them to 1954's and that came back to haunt the company's credibility. There was no mention of that in the documentary, is there any truth to that?

 

Good Job. 

[John_S_in_Penna]

1 hour ago, John348 said:

Hey Nick, That Great Cars Documentary was fantastic, and I learned a lot...

 

Agreed.  That documentary was outstanding.  I would have given

it two "likes" if I could.  Henry Kaiser was evidently a man who

thought big and succeeded hugely at most of his endeavors.

[60FlatTop]

Whether you founded the company or not, using the name Kaiser in post WWII America seems like a really lame marketing plan.

 

 

[JV Puleo]

I'm not so sure about that. Henry Kaiser was very well known for his success building the Liberty Ships during the war. I suspect most people associated the name with him rather the the "Old Man of Doorn".

[John348]

58 minutes ago, JV Puleo said:

I'm not so sure about that. Henry Kaiser was very well known for his success building the Liberty Ships during the war. I suspect most people associated the name with him rather the the "Old Man of Doorn".

 

I agree

[jan arnett (2)]

I think it is simple.  It is a hobby just like bowling, softball, fishing, hunting, surfing, ect.  You are not into the hobby to make money.  You are into it to have fun.  Period.  If you want an investment get in the stock market and you can still lose money.

[nick8086]

Yes that was a very well  done  Documentary on orphan cars..

I should know you may spend more on the car than it is worth..

 

Now will the will the  orphan car survive??  as a collectible car..

 

I know the tucker was a great car to have.. will the orphan cars find a place also..

 

 

 

[1937hd45]

I don't know anyone with a 1986 "classic", and don't care to meet any.

 

Bob 

[Walt G]

"I have always told my kids that the prime reason for an author writing an article is to put a couple of bags of groceries on the table, nothing more. "

 

Bernie, can understand your statement when it applies to the article mentioned here and others that are written by the general press authors who are not enthusiasts nor understand the cars we collect (or write about any other subject they do not have a genuine interest in)

BUT to paint all authors (myself included) with that statement is a bit over the top . Sure I get paid for my contributions of stories to commercial  magazines , but for 35+ years have contributed articles to CCCA and other club publications ( and still do) and did not receive one dime, nor expected to or wanted any compensation $ or otherwise. If all authors stopped writing (gratis) articles then there would be no club publications.

Just sayin.

Walt

 

 

[Ed Luddy]

29 minutes ago, 1937hd45 said:

I don't know anyone with a 1986 "classic", and don't care to meet any.

 

Bob 

They are over 30 years old, so by most folks standards they are old cars. Maybe not around AACA people, but we have to keep an open mind. After all 30 yr old cars when I started driving were 1941 models.

[Paul Dobbin]

Seems like Julie Verhage didn't find a sympathetic readers here where real "Classic Car" people talk.

The point of her story is old history, since 1979 when Antique and Collector Cars became "Investment Vehicles".  Like the market for anything, it's like the ocean tide, it ebbs & flows.   In the mean time we're having a ball in the old car community and unlike other hobbies, there may be some return of of investment in the end.  (Notice I said of, not on.)

[Grimy]

The premise of the Bloomberg article was that "collectible" cars, not necessarily "orphans," MAY be a volatile market.  Neither of the cars mentioned in the article (1986 BMW and 1986 Porsche) is an orphan.  Nick posed the question about orphans in the context of the article.

 

I remember the market balloons of Duesenbergs ca. 1989 and of Ferrari a very few years later.  In retrospect, those markets overheated, probably driven by speculators, and then corrected almost violently but both those markets are quite strong today 25-30 years later.

 

I don't have a problem with the examples of 1986 (31-year-old) cars, which helps general readers identify more than if the examples were brass cars or CCCA Full Classics.  When I bought my 1939 Cadillac 75 in 1968, it was 29 years old AND it was a CCCA "Full Classic," and I kept it for 42 years. 

 

A distinction missing from the article is between "easily available" cars vs. "what hard-core collectors acquire."  Nor did I expect that level of sophistication in a filler piece.

 

As to Nick's question expanding the premise of the article to orphan cars, it depends on the car: The Kaiser Darrin is hot and will likely remain so, Kaiser sedans not so much.  Similarly, Model As and Model Ts are frequently available, Dietrich-bodied Packards and Lincolns not so much.

 

[1937hd45]

The overall feeling I get from articles like this is I'm support to welcome with open arms an never ending wave of USED CARS as "classics". Seams just as dumb as the guy with a 2017 Mustang he bought four hours ago show up across town at the local drive in  cruse night.

 

Bob  

[Grimy]

19 minutes ago, 1937hd45 said:

The overall feeling I get from articles like this is I'm support to welcome with open arms an never ending wave of USED CARS as "classics". Seams just as dumb as the guy with a 2017 Mustang he bought four hours ago show up across town at the local drive in  cruse night.

Bob, I'm with you on the use of the term "classics" but that's a battle lost despite SaddleRider's repetitive rants.  I view the newer (30 yr) cars as ENTRY TO THE HOBBY vehicles.  These days learning to admire and work on older cars is not the Rite of Passage to adulthood that it was for you and me.  

 

As for the current year (2017) models, out here there are indeed clubs as well as informal groups for NEW Mustangs, Camaros, etc.. and these groups show up at the Blackhawk Museum's Cars-n-Coffee on the first Sundays.  However, because of the misbehavior (burnouts, etc.) of THOSE folks, that event has gone dark until March.  Those events are park-where-you-can (1200 cars!) so sometimes I'm next to new Mustangs or tricked out rice-burners in a Pierce.  I've had a lot of interest in my cars when I raise the hood and let them idle, and try to exhibit interest in theirs and ASK QUESTIONS which seems to be the most sincere way to show interest.  As these owners age and become more sophisticated in their tastes, they may be the buyers of our cars from our estates....

Edited November 19, 2017 by Grimy
correct spelling (see edit history)

[John_S_in_Penna]

The article begins, 

"Sean Gambino, a portfolio manager at Heron Bay Capital LLC, timed the market right.

He bought his two classic cars — a 1986 BMW M6 and a 1986 Porsche 911 Cabriolet —

in 2003 and 2008, respectively. That was just before prices for vintage vehicles such as

Ferrari Spyders and MGs began to take off, with measures of interest in collectibles

surging to record highs by mid-2015."

 

I've heard that some Ferrari prices may boom and burst;

but is that the case for MG's?  Really?

Are MG's "taking off"?  It sounds more like sensationalism. 

[mikewest]

On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 9:20 AM, John_S_in_Penna said:

Sorry to be critical of the article, but I think it's a

shallow, valueless piece written by a newswoman

who knows nothing about cars, and who just had an

assignment to fulfill.  And the whole tone of the piece

sees cars as commodities, missing the whole point of

ownership.

 

If Miss or Mrs. Verhage, the author, could spend a day

with a long-term hobbyist, take a scenic ride in an old car,

meet the family that has owned the car for 20 years,

go to a club event where she would see the camaraderie

the hobby offers, she would get a far more realistic picture.

 

She would then stop thinking of cars as statistics.

Maybe then she'd even want to get an old car for her family.

 

There's far more to antique cars than tracking money. 

I agree! Most likely Ms. Verhage's significant other has a garage full and she isn't getting enough attention. Will the orphan car survive???? It already has ! I agree that the common prewar stuff is in for a price correction. Just my opinion.

[8E45E]

On ‎11‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 8:56 AM, 1937hd45 said:

I don't know anyone with a 1986 "classic", and don't care to meet any.

 

Bob 

Sorry to hear about your narrow mindedness.

 

I have a friend who owns a 1986 Buick Grand National.  He keeps it in pristine condition, and regularly shows it during the summer.  If one has read the comparison between the Grand National and the Nissan GT-R in the September Hemmings Motor News, its more than capable holding its own in the six-cylinder league.  Once again, a misdirected decision on GM's part to discontinue a high-performance turbocharged six cylinder that would have made an excellent North American tuner car offering.

 

Craig

[DAVES89]

I agree with Craig. Grand Nationals are great cars and another overlooked car from that era that has "timeless" styling [but not the performance of the Grand National] and is underappreciated is the Buick Reatta. Of course I am biased owning 3 of them and 2 table top models...

[Matt Harwood]

29 minutes ago, 8E45E said:

I have a friend who owns a 1986 Buick Grand National.  He keeps it in pristine condition, and regularly shows it during the summer.  If one has read the comparison between the Grand National and the Nissan GT-R in the September Hemmings Motor News, its more than capable holding its own in the six-cylinder league.  Once again, a misdirected decision on GM's part to discontinue a high-performance turbocharged six cylinder that would have made an excellent North American tuner car offering.

 

Craig

 

I have to agree. When they finally put that motor in the 1989 Trans Am Turbo Pace Car, it became one heck of a machine--the fastest-accelerating Trans Am of all time. Power of the Grand National with brakes and handling (finally!) to match. Add in limited edition status and a sublimely subtle look, and you have a car that's a definite collectable despite being fairly recent. I LOVE this car!

 

 

If you're not familiar with these one-year-only oddities, here are some details: http://www.harwoodmotors.com/vehicles/inventory_details.php?id=781

 

Late-model collectables are not common, but sometimes things come together just right to create something special and we should be aware of them in real time so that we can preserve them for the future. Everybody knew the Duesenberg "Twenty Grand" was special, they knew the '53 Buick Skylark was special, even when they were new. Age is but one determinant of collectability--more often than not, it's a happy confluence of factors to create something that couldn't (or shouldn't) exist or existed for only a very brief moment in time, yet defining an era. I think cars like the Grand National, Mustang 5.0, and Trans Am Turbo all define the second renaissance of factory performance, and that alone makes them worthy of note. Would we have 700+ horsepower Dodge sedans today if not for those big, black, blown Buicks stomping Corvettes into the pavement back in the '80s? I think not.

[1912Staver]

On ‎2017‎-‎11‎-‎20 at 5:03 AM, John_S_in_Penna said:

The article begins, 

"Sean Gambino, a portfolio manager at Heron Bay Capital LLC, timed the market right.

He bought his two classic cars — a 1986 BMW M6 and a 1986 Porsche 911 Cabriolet —

in 2003 and 2008, respectively. That was just before prices for vintage vehicles such as

Ferrari Spyders and MGs began to take off, with measures of interest in collectibles

surging to record highs by mid-2015."

 

I've heard that some Ferrari prices may boom and burst;

but is that the case for MG's?  Really?

Are MG's "taking off"?  It sounds more like sensationalism. 

 

I am a MG guy going way back to my first MGA bought as a 15 year old in 1974. They have definitely become more expensive over the years but have never had what I would consider a "Boom". Just a slow gradual upward increase.  The supply is good for all of the standard postwar models. I doubt there is any real "profit " for an investor unless someone found an outstandingly original car at a bargain price.  Post war "T" series cars are what I consider remarkably cheap. They haven't gone up much in value at all for at least the last 20 years.  The MGA twin cam is an exception , along with any genuine "works" prepared racing cars or very well known privateer competition cars . But this segment of the market is a specialised niche and very small.  And if anything MG's lag behind many other British makes in regard to prices realised for historic examples. They are great fun at a modest price.

 

Greg in Canada