I have a custom uke for sale in the Market Place and when I saw this thread I thought I was going to be very disappointed with the price I listed, but no, I'm actually encouraged that I asked a less than I paid for it.
I wonder if I'm the only one who feels uncomfortable buying an instrument without first playing it. I do like an instrument to look nice, but it's much more important that it is a good player that also sounds good. I can't tell this about an instrument that I see on the internet.....
But it is my firm belief that brand names depreciate at the same rate any other similar item. That does not mean that a 10 year old $1000 ukulele will be worth the same as a 10 year old $100 ukulele it means that the brand name gets its premium up front. It starts off at a higher price and ends at a higher price although ends at a price lower than it originally sold for taking inflation into account.
Thanks for the excellent question - there are a lot of ways of trying to answer it.
I get your point that you're trying to exclude emotional value - hence the idea of insurance value: how much is it worth to a non-playing, highly objective Insurance broker. And you are very correct at pointing out the relatively small market.
You said
I don't really agree, even considering the same expensive model is still available new - I think they do depreciate, but less than cheaper ones. A five year old NRP or pricy Martin will probably be 20-30% below the value of an identical new one (all other factors considered equal: condition, case or not, even warranty...), while a Makala Dolphin of the same age will probably have ducked below the 50% of a new one (even considering it's still mint and unplayed). In percentages, the expensive ones loose less value (30% instead of 50%), in absolute cash value of course more so (say 450$ instead of 25$).
Another point to consider is similar to house prices: the higher you go value-wise, the smaller the potential market. Like it is harder to find a buyer for a big mansion in perfect shape than for a smaller house that needs mending (considering the prices for both are fair), it takes more time and patience to find someone for a 1000$-plus ukulele, while you can sell your old starter ukulele within two days. Ad sites and online auctions prove that: the expensive ones are relisted more often before selling, even while maintaining their asking price.
You do make a very good point with this thread: one simply can't buy and sell modern ukuleles for a profit. Unless you're a regular dealership and thus sell 'new'. I highly doubt that - in the hypothetical case someone would want to do that - one could even get a profit out of trading 'waiting list' ukuleles. But I even talked to people last night who made very nice profits by buying and selling vintage, high-end and thus rare instruments. Not enough to make a living, but enough to buy several other instruments. Oh, and they play them as well, while they're at it.
The vintage guitar market is something really odd. Nostalgia has a lot to do with that: electric guitars from the late 1950s fetched top prices, but since babyboomers are ageing, that bubble is slowly, gently deflating.
And there probably is a ground level, instruments in a playable shape of whatever brand, age or quality don't go under say 10$ (and exceptions are exceptions: someone who doesn't know what they're selling, or selling in a fit of rage, or doing the young buyer a favor; we're still talking actual Marketplace here).
Thanks for your reply, but I think you may have overlooked a very important part when you quoted me. I said that provided that BOTH the expensive model and a $100 model are priced at their true worth when new. ( a dolphin would not fall into either category I mentioned btw)
When you compare ukuleles to houses I have already stated earlier that houses are dictated at a different rate than the model I am using.
There are several ways to profit from collectibles one is by buying high and selling them for a loss and taking a deduction on taxes. Or by buying two and selling one in a manner that will inflate its value and holding onto the other.
Hi Brian,
Fair argument! And I did overlook that. Still I think that the resale value of higher-end ones ukuleles is better percentage-wise, but worse in absolute numbers.
Hi Brian,
Fair argument! And I did overlook that. Still I think that the resale value of higher-end ones ukuleles is better percentage-wise, but worse in absolute numbers.
Originally Posted by Brian1
There are several ways to profit from collectibles one is by buying high and selling them for a loss and taking a deduction on taxes. Or by buying two and selling one in a manner that will inflate its value and holding onto the other.
I'm not good at economics, but you just gave me some new insights! And did we just get actually sound financial excuses for UAS?
If you sell at a loss, then by definition you're not profiting. You can sell at a loss and increase cash flow because you're converting inventory dollars to cash. But you're not profiting. You only profit when your sales price exceeds your costs.
Oh, wait, I mean, that's a fantastic idea. Sell me all your ukes for $1. You'll make a lot of money with the tax write-off (you won't). ;-)
Bring stringed musical instruments - guitars, mandolins, ukuleles to be sold at Bernunzio's www.bernunzio.com on consignment. They check them out completely and then research to determine price. I reluctantly brought a Kamaka concert and Kamaka Ohta-san there because I still have another concert and another Ohta-san. Believe the price they are listed at is very fair.
According the chart I found for general items made out of wood they suggested wood items had a rate of depreciation of 13-15% per year.
And it seems here that the $2800 uke and the $270 uke depreciate at about the same rate.
Well bernunzio has what appears to be a 1 year old (listed as 2013 that could be the year they got it) $2800 Collings uke for just over $800 off retail, marked down from $500 off. So that is about 30% in one year ? (or a little more)
They have a Johnny Marvin Uke there for $699 which I found an add for saying when new sold for $13.50 in 1930 that is equal to about $200 to build it today. I guess people have to decide themselves what the history is worth for a $200 uke with case that seems to have been taken care of for 85 years.
And I looked at a random Cordoba that originally sold for $270 that appears to come from 2013 and was marked down to $199 so it seems a like a little bit more than 30% in the first year for that one too.
(I shouldn't be attempting math this early in the morning the numbers may or may not be right)
If the ages of the ukes I have seen listed is really from 2013 I would think they are fair prices, without knowing the true "value" of anything maybe I should say they seem consistent with more expensive and low to mid priced ukuleles. ( I guess, from what I can tell.) The ukuleles have yet to be sold that could be playing factor too. -OR- Maybe I am just trying to put a science to something where there is none.
*I have no connection with this seller I only list prices to try to determine values of used ukuleles.
According the chart I found for general items made out of wood they suggested wood items had a rate of depreciation of 13-15% per year.
And it seems here that the $2800 uke and the $270 uke depreciate at about the same rate.
Just curious, what are you looking to buy or sell?
I remember back in 2010 and 2011 KoAloha's were extremely popular and always in demand. Pop's specialty models, the scepter and the Pineapple Sunday were all the rage and held their value very well. Now you would be lucky to get 50% of their retail price in a sale. Times and demands change.