Hypothetical Vs. Actual Values(Was 55 Imperial not

[Crownking <crownking62@xxxxxxxxx>]

This topic shows up from time to time here and the opinions expressed
are always quite interesting to me.  It seems to me that what a body
is willing to pay for a thing is as much related to why that body
wants to have it as much as what the thing is, its condition or its
rarity.  Economists simmer the flavor of it down to consumer
preferences or some such saltine-type descriptor.

As for me, I am a car guy by blood, by early occupation, by
geography, and by environment and yet I'd not heard of Imperial until
I was nine years old and I did not actually see one until I was
twelve when I fell in love with a very run-down '62 on the back row
of a sawdust-in-the-differential shyster lot on the outskirts of
hicktown population 1700. It was five years older than any operable
car in the county and dad refused to consider letting me buy a car
for which parts could not be located. The car held no nostalgic
value.  Its rarity did not appeal or distract.  I simply adored the
styling.  It would be 15 years before I saw another and to date
(another 15 years) I've never seen one I do not own going down the
street under its own power although I am happy to report I have now
seen one operative '63 convertible heading southbound on US59 in
Houston.    

What can something like this be worth?

So I liked the styling when I was a pre-teen.  Why on Earth would I
buy one (or four)?  For me, the idea of owning an old car gives me a
connection with the great men of the past.  Men with vision like
Henry Ford who lived in a time when doing was a whole lot more
important than what you said or what you thought; Men who held
principled opinions irrespective of popular thought.  Men who could
mobilize an industry, motivate a nation and win a World War. Men
whose goal was to provide a commodity to the average Joe at a LOWER
price each year while constantly increasing value.  As individuals,
we generally don't "do" any more.  In our silly vision of the world
as a village and government as grantor of rights and provider,
individuals are impotent and incapable of achievement.  Short of
revolution, great American men will never again be.  Of course, due
to socioeconomic fatal flaws, no other civilized nation has a chance
at producing great Men--maybe some third world country still has a
shot, if we can kill Kyoto.

You might argue that a real connection could be established by owning
a true Classic--the best offered by the great men of the industry--a
V16 Caddy, '30s Packard, a Duesenberg, Cord Sportsman, dual cowl
Imperial phaeton, etc--but my practical nature would shy away from
such a toy even if circumstances allowed.

The '62 Imperial offers styling cues from that Classic era.  At the
same time it retains some of the flair of the late '50s cars and is
as reliable as anything made today.  Contrary to dad's perspective,
since everything on it is rebuildable, as opposed to today's design
goal of recyclable, and nothing is electronic (instantly obsolete)
there will never be a reason to retire any of my '62s to the scrap
heap.  

The '62 Imperial therefore seems to me to be invaluable.  Still, I
balk at high prices.  I guess that means I'm willing to pay more for
a '62 Imperial--for my use--than for any other car.  What places a
ceiing on the value of a '62 to me is what I am willing to pay for
any car.  

Then again, in ten or fifteen years when the last of the kids are
gone, if my bride still wants that '59 Cad convertible, my guess is
that I'll end up shelling out premium dollars for something I
personally value considerably lower than a '62 Imperial.  Go figure.
There is no accounting for taste.

(Note: I was able to get through this without throwing stones at
others' cars with Jeep-like interiors and Checker styling.)



     




__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com