Steinway

[Farrell]

Please explain some of this because I don't quite understand it.

"According to Forbes, over the past ten years, the retail value of a
Steinway concert grand has appreciated nearly 200%. An impressive record, to
be sure - but one that tells only part of the story. "

So what does that mean? What does a D cost now, $90,000? Are they stating
that a D cost $45,000 in 1991? I don't know what they cost in 1991 - I
wasn't in this business. If that is the case, this tells nothing about
investment potential. They are simply talking about inflation. Let's say you
bought a D new in 1991 for whatever they cost - I think likely more than
$45,000 (my guess would be $60,000 or $70,000) - inflation has been real low
in the 90s. How much would it be worth now? $50,000? $60,000? Where the he$$
does the 200% appreciation fit in? You bet it only tells one part of the
story!

"The fact is, the appreciation of Steinway pianos is even more impressive
when you look past the previous ten years - and take an historical look at
appreciation over the past few decades. The numbers are nothing less than
remarkable: Today, if the owner of a vintage Steinway grand decided to gauge
the value of his or her piano on the open market, it is likely that the
piano would command a price 4.3 times higher than the original retail cost."

Please, I honestly don't know. What did a Steinway M, B, and/or D cost in (a
few decades back) 1960 or 1970? Automobiles have gone up approximately 5
times since the mid 60s. Did a D cost $18,000 in 1966? Did a B cost about
$13,000 at that time? How much is the average D or B worth today that was
built in 1966 - and let's consider original condition only? I think we are
looking at something pretty close to salvage value - maybe a little more for
someone who thinks pianos get better with age - like violins (ARRRGGG - I
know, I know - but that is how the saying goes!!!). I don't think that the
1966 original condition D is now worth $77,400 (4.3 times the original
purchase price of $18,000) and the 1966 original condition B is not worth
$55,900 (4.3 times the original price of $13,000).

Now, I'm just guessing at these prices, although I don't imagine they are
way, way off. You get the point. I believe this is EXTREMELY deceptive
advertising. What do you think?

Terry Farrell

----- Original Message -----
From: <JIMRPT@AOL.COM>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 12:46 AM
Subject: Re: Steinway


> Wim we would accept this type of reasoning from a dealer but not from a
CAUT!
> :-)
>
> In a message dated 26/07/01 11:11:48 PM, Wimblees@AOL.COM writes:
>
> <<" This has been brought out before, by me. Three years ago a customer
asked
> me
> to appraise a S&S S he had bought 10 years earlier for $20,000. He was
told
> the "investment" story by the *local dealer* and now wanted to cash in his
> investment, and make a bundle.">>
>
>  The operative words here are *local dealer*. Further you only have the
> customers word for the 'supposed' dealer's wording of the "investment"
> qualities of his S&S. What the customer wanted to hear and what the dealer
> actually said 'might' be vastly different things. This is not nearly
enough
> evidence to paint S&S as "unethical" in any sense of the word.'
>
>
>  <<"He called the Steinway dealer and was told new
> S's were selling for $35,000. He assumed that is what he could get for his
> piano. ">>
> This is just plain stupidity on the customers part. Ethics certainly does
not
> enter into this customer greed quotient.
>
> <<"He was astounded that I would not only not give him $35,000, but that
> his piano was worth at most $20,000 if he tried to sell it himself,">>
> This is further evidence of this customer's stupidity in expecting a
dealer
> to pay what a new piano would cost when that same new piano would be at a
> 'much lower' cost to that dealer on a wholesale basis.
>
> <<" and that
> I would only give him $10,000">>
> I have no problem with this at all.  But what would you have sold it for?
> Hmmmm?
>
> <<"I am sure there are other customers who have been "duped" the same way.
> This
> is, in my opinion an unethical way of doing business.">>
>  I am sure that buyers have been "duped" any number of ways by any number
of
> dealers but this does not needfully mean that S&S is engaging in
"unethical"
> practices itself.
>
>  <<"And from what I see on
> the list, many others agree.">>
> Everyone is entitled to their own opinions...however wrong they might be.
:-)
>
>
> <<" Look at the Steinway web site. There is nothing
> wrong with what they say. But the way they say it leaves a lot to be
desired.
> Wim ">>
> Perhaps it is your interpretation that is flawed Wim because I see nothing
> wrong with what they say....but you have to read what they say and not
read
> what you think they have said.
>
>  For instance they say "...vintage S&S grands sell for 4.3 times the
original
> retail cost..." well in a lot of cases that is exactly true...... would
you
> not buy a model 'O' for 5 or 6 thou? I would and the original retail cost
for
> model 'O's was in the neighborhood of 1,100 and what would you sell that
same
> 'O' for after it was rebuilt? Hmmmm?
>  and they say".....Treasured possesion that grows in value over the course
of
> time.."
> and this also is exactly true, at least for grands. The Emerson grand that
> sold for 490 dollars at the turn of the century most of us probably would
not
> buy for more than 2/3 hundred if that, or at all. But how many of us would
> buy every model 'A' S&S that we could get our hands on for ten times(+)
that
> and the model 'A' sold for about 1,100, also at the turn of the century.
>
>  Further Wim the "investment" section on S&S web page leans heavily on
work
> done by Forbes Magazine, R.H. Bruskin & Associates Piano Market survey and
> along with work done by the Washington Post. Each of these sources is
> foot-noted and identified. Without going to these sources and examining
those
> documents I don't think there can be any discussion of S&S perfidy. There
> certainly is none in what S&S themselves say.
>
>  Further Wim S&S says ".....look past the previous ten years and look at
the
> historical appreciation over the past few decades...."
>   On this point Wim they are on absolutely rock solid ground. We as
> technicians prove it every day when we give our estimates for rebuild,
> insurance appraisals or offers to purchase.
>
>  I am definitely not a S&S coporate fan though I love 'some' of their
> products, new and vintage.
> In my opinion, calling their "investment" section "unethical" is playing
> footloose with the term and on verrrry shaky ground.
>
>  If this is all the specific info on S&S and "unethical practices" I think
it
> should cease..........but that is just my view.
> Jim Bryant (FL)
> "A greedy dealer and a greedy customer are each other's lawful prey"
> Faintly Dull
>
>