posted 09-18-2009 10:02 AM               

Contrary to popular thought, a collecting venue needs more and more people to become interested and have a stake in order for the venue not only to grow, but to survive. I have seen a number of great collecting venues die on the vine because of the same issue, that only 50 to 100 people dominated the hobby and traded back and forth among themselves. At some point, one or two top dogs get tired, bored or die and the venue implodes.

Christie's never followed up after the 1999 sale and the hobby went into a funk. Prices languished and actually dropped considerably for a few years. The efforts by other smaller auction houses and dealers really sent everything back to the way it had been before Christie's.

Yes, things have changed and I believe for the better since 2006/07. I believe that the hobby has grown strong roots beyond the 50 to 100 people and now a whole new audience is being exposed to the idea that they can own pieces of this incredible history. This growth has occurred because of the participation, support and marketing efforts of the large auction houses, spearheaded by Heritage Auction Galleries (the 3rd largest auction house in the country), Swann for a time, and now Bonham's. These firms had the pocketbook to send catalogues to people who never knew about space collecting.

Unfortunately, most of existing space collectors only saw and complained about prices rising as a result. Yes, new collectors unfamiliar with the market might have paid over what seasoned collectors thought they should, but that was the consequence of a flood of new blood. Now that they are interested and getting the catalogues, prices again leveled out in the new price ranges. However, this time I believe that the audience has grown globally, as evidenced by the international participation I am advised of. The international publicity of the auctions of the last two years, and the participation by astronauts who were previously concerned about the quality of how their items would be offered, has brought in big money desiring the great items. And there have been many great items.

As an aside, the depreciating US dollar has had an effect on big money desiring the placement of cash into assets that seem likely to hold their value long term. It seems that space came along at the right time.

Not all collectibles are the same though. Some will fade in popularity (i.e., Beanie Babies) rather quickly and will leave people holding the bag. Space represents serious and lasting history and solid blue chip artifacts are likely to always find a buyer.

posted 09-18-2009 11:03 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by lunareagle:
Christie's never followed up after the 1999 sale...

---

The Christie's East sale did not perform as the auction house hoped, estimates were set based on the 1999 prices and many lots went unsold.

The Christie's New York sales, Swann Galleries auctions and recent Bonhams sale are all to the credit of Gregg Linebaugh, who was the driving force behind all three auction houses entering the market.

quote:

---

This [hobby's] growth has occurred because of the participation, support and marketing efforts of the large auction house...

---

For every new auction house that enters the market, only a small percentage of their larger customer base appears to join the hobby. Harking back to Christie's 1999, those who bid for the first time then and are known to still be collecting today are a small number. Unless there is a secret community of space collectors, the growth of the market has been not equivalent to the growth of the hobby.

That's not to margianlize the role of the auction houses. They just serve a different purpose. They have grown a segment of the market that caters to placing the one-of-a-kind and few-of-a-kind items. Hobbies however are most easily grown based on the the more widely available collectibles, which eBay has been uniquely positioned to facilitate, even with all the caveats that accompany it.

posted 09-18-2009 11:24 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
It would be interesting however, if auction houses published alongside their sale totals a report as to how many bidders and winning bidders those results reflected, and how many among them were new to the auction. If we had that historical data, we could draw more conclusions about the effectiveness of their outreach efforts.

---

posted 09-18-2009 12:10 PM               

Big pieces of authenticated flown Apollo hardware for the price of today's John Young autograph... so YES, that 1999 day was quite a weird situation for me. Everything changed, impossible to buy big pieces any more, but some financial gain for some stuff I sold. A blessing... and a malediction. But always a great fun collecting.

posted 09-18-2009 02:14 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
It would be interesting however, if auction houses published alongside their sale totals a report as to how many bidders and winning bidders those results reflected, and how many among them were new to the auction. If we had that historical data, we could draw more conclusions about the effectiveness of their outreach efforts.

---

posted 09-18-2009 02:41 PM               

In my opinion it doesn't take many new collectors with deep pockets to keep prices up. I see this with space patches all the time - a new collector comes along who wants to acquire all the rare patches - immediately, and at almost any cost. Every rare patch that comes to market suddenly leaps in value. I'm sure the same is true for other areas of space collecting.

As a late-comer to space collecting myself I could only look with amazement at the low prices fetched by incredible items in the 90s.

That said, there have been many bargains to be had over the last decade. Things I was kicking myself for not bidding higher on in the mid-2000s look like even better bargains now.

posted 09-18-2009 04:01 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Unless there is a secret community of space collectors, the growth of the market has been not equivalent to the growth of the hobby.

---

I certainly wouldn't rule out there being a sizable amount of collectors (some with very deep pockets) whose names are relatively secret/unknown among the collecting community. At least, I suspect a number of collectors don't frequent the internet collecting sites and discussion forums. For example, a collector with deep-enough pockets may not have as much desire to spend time online hunting down a good bargain (as the rest of us often have to do). They can essentially "shop" out of the auction catalogs.

As Chris hinted at with his post, these collectors with deep pockets will get a bug in them to collect a complete set of something that strikes their fancy (like patches) and will pay almost any price necessary to obtain what they like. Of course, collectors like this may be more fickle over the long term and tend to vary their purchasing habits based on what interests them at the moment. For example...one day it's sports cars, the next it's flown space artifacts, and a while later it's vintage toy trains. So their longevity in any particular aspect of the hobby may not be the same as that of other collectors, but their impact on the market is often just as strong.

posted 09-18-2009 10:41 PM               

I would say there are most likely more "secret" collectors than participants here or in any other forum. I've dealt with a ton of them that if I mentioned a name (I will not) I'd wager not more than 1 or 2 people at most, would know who they are.

posted 09-26-2009 11:49 AM               

I understand that a dominant part of space collecting is autographs in every shape and form, and that autograph collecting is a long-time respected hobby of its own. I recognize and respect that.

However, separate from autographs, I believe that the space artifacts that collectors have been saving, preserving and displaying with honor over this last 10 to 20 years are so much more than a hobby. Think about it!

I must first qualify again that I believe collecting is great and a wonderful pastime. In fact, a collection of most anything, when assembled in numbers, looks incredible. Consider a vintage corkscrew or bottle opener collection. When viewed as single items, they may not excite, but when seen as a group or collection framed together, they look great. I believe that most genres of collecting fit into this idea that the collections are fun, beautiful, therapeutic and everything else that the idea of collecting brings to an individual. However, I believe that collecting space artifacts is different and that maybe not all collectors of this material realize it. And this is my point.

Space artifacts are important parts of history. Many museums have been erected to display the history of space and people travel to see the items that have flown. In fact, it still amazes me that you and I can acquire any of them. Think about what I have just said. There are no museums for thimble collections or Beanie Babies or baseball cards. All are great and fun to collect but they are just fun, and although important in terms of showing a snapshot of time to future generations, I believe that their importance is minor.

So, when I have put out money to acquire some of these historic space items, I really am not concerned about them keeping their value into the future. An old friend taught me early on with his great wisdom when he said to me, "what are you afraid of, you aren't buying stereo equipment." It took some time for that to sink in but he was right. Important historic pieces of history will always have a market, so if I determined at some point that I couldn't afford to own something I could sell it. My point in bringing in the other collecting venues is that the liquidity and reliability of values in most other venues is much lower than space artifacts, which brings me to my last point - prices.

There are a number of factors that go into determining prices. Why do some things go up in value or hold their value, while others drop or become near worthless? My short answer is that once a fad (like Beanie Babies) runs its course and everyone recognizes them for what they were, everyone wants out and prices drop. When you can look at an important historic item and critically think about its importance and its historic place, you can then understand that its value will never follow the same path as a Beanie Baby.

Another critical fact in understanding price is devaluation of the currency. The U.S. Dollar has depreciated about 35% against other world currencies over the last 10 years. Add to that an inflation rate as well and you can see another reason why prices go up. Oil is $70 a barrel not really because oil is scarce. It is because the paper used to purchase it is worth less. This is a critical argument for people to understand because this is another reason why important historic artifacts, whether it be medals, coins, Chippendale furniture, Monet's, Picasso's or important space artifacts hold their value or increase in value. Wealth is always looking for a place to store itself, for a safe place to maintain or increase its value over time, in order to protect against the devaluation of a currency as well as inflation. If I had $10,000 put away for long term savings and did not expect a need for it (similar to the IRA idea of investing for retirement), would I rather have it in cash in a savings account (subject to devaluation and inflation), in shares of stocks (which may or not be there in the future), or in a tangible and real artifact that not only is there but one that I can enjoy by holding it and looking at it everyday? I think I might rather have one of those complete James Lovell checklists, or John Young's Lunar Module bracket that is certified as having been on the moon. Maybe that's just me!

Add all of this to the fact that it has only been a few short years that the idea of owning some of the greatest space artifacts was a possibility or a known quantity to people of wealth. One only has to look at the most recent Bonham's space sale to see that the many great flown artifacts went for record prices or maintained high levels while other less important or not important items around the auction world continue to suffer neglect or declining values.

I sound like a broken record but I always say that the supply of these flown artifacts is indeed limited, even though at some points it seemed like an endless supply was upon us. I assure you there is no endless supply. And I can't put enough emphasis on the privilege we have all had and will again have with the Heritage space auction of being able to acquire these incredible items directly from the astronauts themselves.

I have believed and continue to believe that more and more people will continue to find out about this great and still quiet hobby, and that prices will continue higher, not just because of the reasons previously mentioned, but because the importance of them will continue to dawn on people.

posted 09-26-2009 01:10 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by LCDR Scott Schneeweis:
Guess unflown space artifacts are less worthy of being collected, preserved and appreciated....

---

For example, individual medals and sets of Franklin Mint space medals from the 1970s can still be bought without much effort for the same and many times at lower prices than they were offered for at the time of original distribution. They still are attractive, educational, etc., but like collecting limited edition Hummel or Lladro figurines, Winter Cottages, etc., one would be mislead to really believe that they are important or will ever increase in value.

I understand that increases in value are not the sole reason for collecting, and I have often assembled collections of inexpensive things for the reasons cited for collecting. However, snob or not, at some price level, maybe $500 or more, I would not put my money into something that I did not think had a chance of increasing or at least maintaining its value. And whether collectors publically agree or not, value is a large part of the appeal of collecting. Antiques Roadshow is the greatest example of this. The whole concept is about how exciting it is to find out the value and to hear about what a great buy it was, or how important it is, etc.

posted 09-26-2009 04:42 PM               

I recognize that for some collectors, in the hierarchy of desirability, flown status trumps all but in my case at least -- not true. Desirability for me is gauged on the basis of what level of significance an artifact had in enabling the program, the degree of challenges that had to be overcome in its development and production, the extent to which it was a progenitor of spin-offs in the commercial sector.. Of course rarity is also a factor but an articles flown status is incidental to the aforementioned criteria. Within my collection I curate a number of flown items to include possibly the largest flown Command Module artifact in a private collection but if compelled to make a decision to retain only 3 artifacts and shed the balance, none of the flown material would make the cut - simply because their impact, from a historical context was not as great.

posted 09-27-2009 06:09 AM              

So Howard, have you seen Scott's collection? Have you spent any time in the Udvar-Hazy Center at the National Air and Space Museum? People LOVE unflown hardware.

I'm also a collector of both flown and unflown artifacts. And I'm not talking keychains and shot glasses. Real artifacts.

When I show non-collectors my stuff, they are amazed that I own the Astronaut Preference Kit that flew on the Lunar Module to the lunar surface with the commander of the last Apollo mission. They love to hold it in their hands and think that it had been on the lunar surface for several days.

But what are they more interested in seeing? Things like my Lunar Module decent engine thrust chamber or my Command Module flight panel which has switches everyone remembers from the movie Apollo 13.

It is still possible to get a major unflown item for less than half the price of a flown flag. And flags are but one example of literally thousands of utterly identical items, Howard, I'd be careful discounting the potential value of unflown hardware. The museum curators I have spoken with would certainly side with me and with Scott.

posted 09-27-2009 01:31 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by lunareagle:
In answer to a number of direct questions I need to clarify that my points for quality Space artifacts are not strictly limited to flown items, but should also include unflown items that were historically important and/or also belonging to important participants in the Space program. Thank you.

---

posted 09-28-2009 08:59 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Larry McGlynn:
Is everybody in this debate talking about quality over quantity regardless of the flown vs unflown moniker?

---

There are no doubt many items, flown and unflown, that were critical to a mission's success, and possibility very rare or unique as well. However, if it isn't sexy or it didn't have a prominent place in a movie or in the press, I still believe that the value will remain stagnant.

Look at the Apollo 13 carbon monoxide filters that were rigged together. I doubt that the filters would be given much of a second look today if it wasn't for the story of how they saved the crew from poisoning. Those filters have now come to represent the greatness of American ingenuity and there is a market for them.

posted 10-03-2009 03:05 PM               

It seems that prior to Christie's 1999 auction flown items were practically given away.

Here's just a few examples of prices realized (fees included) from the Superior Spring 1995 auction:

[Warning: Post-Christies space collectors of a nervous disposition may find these results deeply upsetting]

• Several pens/pencils flown by Gordon Cooper of Faith 7 - $109-$172.50 each
  
• Cooper's Gemini 5 patch from his spacesuit - $1,995
  
• Buzz Aldrin's Gemini 12 space suit patches - $2,300 [resold at Heritage Spring 2008 for $30,000]
  
• Aldrin's Apollo 11 LM PPK bag - $1,150