Will boutique basses be good long-term investments?

[Clarky]

Was just musing over the fact that jsixties' lovely NYC Sadowsky is currently worth a bit more than my 1972 sunburst Precision. And then thought, in say 20 years time will these boutique basses (including my Alleva) prove to be good investments or will an old Fender always out-strip these as an investment. Are we paying for exclusivity and quality today for Allevas/Sadowskys etc only to face long-term depreciation because these are not household names? I realise of course that any calculations wouldn't take into account the pleasure from playing in between times ....

What do you guys think?

Edited August 27, 2010 by Clarky

[neepheid]

Dunno, but if anyone sees winning lottery tickets in their crystal ball, let me know

[Clarky]

[quote name='neepheid' post='937830' date='Aug 27 2010, 09:30 AM']Dunno, but if anyone sees winning lottery tickets in their crystal ball, let me know [/quote]
I'm not of course asking anyone to predict the value of these things in 20 years time, more asking whether boutique basses are destined to depreciate relative to Fenders. Or to put it another way, if you spent 2k on a 70s Fender or a NYC Sadowsky today, which would you guess would be worth more in 20 years time

[risingson]

No. I love Sadowskys, F-Basses, MTD's and such but realistically a lot of them trend as flavour of the week a lot of the time and I can't see them being a wise investment. A Fender is a good investment due to it's timeless design and the likelihood that a good Fender from the early 50's to the very late 70's will never stop going up in price.

Most boutique basses depreciate massively in value very quickly, just like a new Aston Martin or the newer Ferrari's.

Edited August 27, 2010 by risingson

[JTUK]

I'd say the Fender would be more. I have an old boutique bass..say 17 yrs or so, and it worth what I paid for it, they say, which I am grateful for.
I also had a 70's Jazz which was a pile of poo by comparison and people are asking..and getting, it seems, £1400 plus for them..which I find laughable. My friend has a 62 P-bass and god knows what that is worth..and again, it is an average bass, but he is talking about 1000's for it.

So, to me, it seems the market is vibrant and very taken in by older Fenders.

[Muzz]

The fact that old Fenders are worth multiples times their original value seemingly regardless of quality or useability means that it's Fender all the way. The market dictates these things, and the market for Fenders is very much bigger than the market for any boutique brand. Fender is an iconic brand, and it's a sad fact that a significant proportion of the people who spend a lot of money on iconic instruments have their actual playability and quality fairly low on their priority list.

[Muzz]

The fact that old Fenders are worth multiples times their original value seemingly regardless of quality or useability means that it's Fender all the way. The market dictates these things, and the market for Fenders is very much bigger than the market for any boutique brand. Fender is an iconic brand, and it's a sad fact that a significant proportion of the people who spend a lot of money on iconic instruments have their actual playability and quality fairly low on their priority list.

[Musicman20]

[quote name='risingson' post='937847' date='Aug 27 2010, 09:52 AM']No. I love Sadowskys, F-Basses, MTD's and such but realistically a lot of them trend as flavour of the week a lot of the time and I can't see them being a wise investment. A Fender is a good investment due to it's timeless design and the likelihood that a good Fender from the early 50's to the very late 70's will never stop going up in price.

Most boutique basses depreciate massively in value very quickly, just like a new Aston Martin or the newer Ferrari's.[/quote]

Big plus 1.

I'd love a boutique bass, but I can't see them having that charm of an old Fender.

I agree in addition that boutique basses tend to be all about flavour of the month.

I do like Sadowsky, but I won't buy one as they just don't look that special to my eyes. Plus, I thought their customer service was a little rough round the edges. The Metros are pretty much mass produced now.

[davidmpires]

That is not the case, there are some people out there that would prefer a Fender over a boutique bass anyday for playability reasons.
Boutique instruments are not always best, sure they have the best woods and the best finishing and the amount of customization usually is fairly high but they are not by any means the best basses out there.

And Fender managed to have half the world playing their instruments for half a century that's saying something

[Kiwi]

No. What makes basses valuable is nostalgia. If a bass brand isn't associated with someone's teenage years then it won't be collectable. Warwicks might be collectable based on this theory in about 15 years. Get purchasing all those pre 91 instruments.

[JTUK]

That is saying nothing in terms of quality.

The 70's jazz necks could be awful..the general finish average, tone poor...and the 3 bolt neck with tilt was a poorly executed design on the one I had, in fact awful QC, IMV and if you read a bit here, they still have the same issues..as do other mass market makers.
And I bet you will still see someone chancing their arm and asking for £1450 for a '77 or so.
You really have to be careful what you pay that money for, because there is a lot of crap still out there.
The only thing that determines its value appears to be its age and if you think a bass has survive 35 yrs, there must be something about it. I would have made mine firewood by now though.

[chris_b]

Fender's and Wal's used to be a good bet for maintaining and even increasing their value. Fender’s because they were old (and Fender!) and Wal because they were difficult to get hold of. Now Wal's are back in production I think that might have put a cap on their potential, so it's old Fenders all the way.

You might think the price asked for vintage Fender basses is high but it isn't when you compare to the prices being paid for vintage Strats!!

Find some cheap, vgc 70's or 80's original Fenders, with cases, and lay them down (like a good port) for your kids. With interest rates as they are Fenders are a better bet than the bank!

[hillbilly deluxe]

Original and iconic,which Fender P & J basses are will always hold there value better than copies,no matter how refined the copies are.If these companies that make these high end "copies" are so good/inovative,why can't they come up with an original idea,without it looking like a P or a J bass ?
Just look at almost anything American from the 50's - early 60's,cars,bikes.............etc

For example,

57 Chevy or Vauxhall Cresta ?
60's Fender or 60's Burns ?
Harley Panhead or Sunbeam ?
Levi's originals or Staypressed ?
I know which i'd rather have.

Edited August 27, 2010 by hillbilly deluxe

[BigRedX]

IMO if you want to look for a boutique brand that will increase in value over the next 20 or so years look at what happened with Wal.

1. No longer in production (or the method/place of production has changed). That immediately puts a limit on the number of basses in circulation. After all what's the point of buying an old boutique bass when you can get the same model brand new and made exactly to your specifications.

2. Used by some high profile players with very distinctive bass tones. Wal basses get an awful lot of interest from people who want to emulate Justin Chancellor or Mick Karn (despite the fact that the bass is only a small part of Justin Chancellor's sound, and Mick Karn got much the same sounds out of the Travis bean he was using before he got his Wal).

3. Looks distinctive. This is where IMO most of the Fender clone boutique basses fail from an investment PoV. They may be better made and tonally superior to the instruments that they are inspired by, but to the majority of musicians they are just Fender copies. For all the popularity of forums such as this one and TalkBass, most bass players don't have the depth of knowledge that people here do. Something like a Wal doesn't look like a Fender so therefore if you like what you're seeing and hearing you'll probably take note of the name on the headstock. To most players I would suspect that if the bass looks Fender-shaped they'll assume it's a Fender.

[Fat Rich]

Depends how wisely you buy - or luckily in my case!

I bought Japanese Fenders in the early 90s because they were better than any of the US one's at the time even though they didn't have the kudos, they seem to have gone up to 2 or 3 times what I paid for them.

I also bought a couple of Status Series 1s at about the same time and they're worth around 60% what I paid.

I'm fully aware that my new Status S2 classics wouldn't have the resale value of what I paid for them because I've gone for options that I like (headed, 2 piece bodies) when the majority of Status players seem to want a headless bass with the 80s vibe mainly thanks to Mark King. However with Chris Wotsisname from Muse now playing headed Status basses maybe they'll hold their value a bit better, probably not. But for me it's irrelevant as I'm planning to keep 'em.

If you get your order for boutique basses right and want to keep them for ever then it's not a problem, however getting the spec wrong and not being happy with the result is usually an expensive mistake.

[Mykesbass]

Vintage Fender all the way - most of these collectable basses are not going to get played again, so the value lies in the authenticity - original old school colours, not exotic woods, right shape headstock, original decals etc. No matter how brilliant a boutique bass is and how lovely their exotic woods are they won't create the right vibe hanging up next to the sunburst/gold top Les Paul in the city banker's office!

Of course, we as bass players should take advantage of this fact and pick off all the (relatively) cheap 20 year old boutique jobs as and when they become available

[bigjohn]

I reckon an easy rule of thumb is basses (or anything for that matter) that have started to appreciate over time are likely to be a better investment than those that haven't.

As soon as they do that it snowballs, people buy them and think of them as investments as well as possessions and don't trade them for less than they bought them for, which in turn further appreciates them.

A lot of boutique stuff when it goes out of production just falls off people's radar and becomes less desirable over time regardless of how good it is, people know they'll have difficulty shifting it on if they need to so will pay less for it.

You see the opposite of this when reissues of things come out, or a brand name goes back into production - suddenly the originals become more sought after.

It's simple demand & supply innit.

Edited August 27, 2010 by bigjohn

[BigRedX]

[quote name='hillbilly deluxe' post='937903' date='Aug 27 2010, 10:45 AM']...60's Fender or 60's Burns ? ...
...I know which i'd rather have.[/quote]
Slightly off-topic... I started off with a 60s Burns which is one of the reasons I find Fender basses pretty much unplayable. The Burns may have limitations but they're different limitations to those of the Fender. By the time I'd worked my way up to be able to afford a really good bass there were simply too many things in the Fender design that impeded my playing style. Of course if I'd started on a fender copy instead I'm sure my feeling would be completely different.

Also Burns basses never reached the same quality as their best guitars. I'm sure if you had an original 60s Black Bison Guitar it would be worth as much as a Fender Strat from the same year.

[Rich]

[quote name='chris_b' post='937900' date='Aug 27 2010, 10:43 AM']Fender's and Wal's used to be a good bet for maintaining and even increasing their value. Fender’s because they were old (and Fender!) and Wal because they were difficult to get hold of. Now Wal's are back in production I think that might have put a cap on their potential, so it's old Fenders all the way.[/quote]
I'd like to think that the early Wals will be unaffected by this and will continue to appreciate. I hope so anyway, my Pro IIE is one of my few appreciating assets and I'd like it to stay one!

[fingerz]

Fenders will always be more of a collectors bass and appreciate as time goes on - consistent with anything old in good condition, it really is something you can't buy off the shelf. So I can't see how anything can over take them in terms of value. Boutique basses seem to drop a lot from new but then hold their value at a certain point. Something about old timbers too, the way they've resonated say, for at least 20 years, seems to really effect the sound. But many have issues, and are better hung on the wall and being 'valuable'. This is where the Boutique sector will come in, as issues are far less likely. But they will never overtake old Fenders.

The only thing I can think is that these old basses can't live forever. So although those that still exist will be more valuable there will be more people in the market for something exclusive that can't find the Fender they want.. This may bring the old boutique stuff up. But I think it will be relative to now. Everyone knows Fender, not everyone knows Sadowsky, Celinder, Alleva, Bossa, Pensa, ESP.. the list goes on... you see?

[Golchen]

[quote name='risingson' post='937847' date='Aug 27 2010, 09:52 AM']No. I love Sadowskys, F-Basses, MTD's and such but realistically a lot of them trend as flavour of the week a lot of the time and I can't see them being a wise investment. A Fender is a good investment due to it's timeless design and the likelihood that a good Fender from the early 50's to the very late 70's will never stop going up in price.

Most boutique basses depreciate massively in value very quickly, just like a new Aston Martin or the newer Ferrari's.[/quote]

Yup. That says it all really.

[derrenleepoole]

A guess if you're buying a boutique instrument, you're actually buying something very unique and original to you. Sure there will be some continuity between basses from said boutique luthier. But ultimately you're paying for something that is bespoke to you with certain finishes or bespoke pickups etc. When you're selling that bass 5, 10, 15+ years down the line, is someone going to buy in to your particular take on what you perceived to be a good and albeit very personal statement for bass playing? Unlikely. Being so unique it becomes difficult to maintain boutique instruments should there be problem, especially if the luthier is no longer trading too. Unless of course that boutique bass was owned by a famous player, then it holds historic value potentially. Just my 2p's worth. Peace.

Edited August 27, 2010 by derrenleepoole

[JTUK]

[quote name='Musicman20' post='937868' date='Aug 27 2010, 10:11 AM']I do like Sadowsky, but I won't buy one as they just don't look that special to my eyes. Plus, I thought their customer service was a little rough round the edges. The Metros are pretty much mass produced now.[/quote]

I think the design is good and more attractive than most..he has a good eye for that, IMV...but as for mass produced..??
If this is true..how boutique are Sadowsky's now. Are they going the way of Warwick and have just gotten too big and popluar.
To my mind, I want to see the luthier whose started the company pretty much still involved in the making of the bass.
If they are shipping out parts and bodies to be made elsewhere, then they are on the road to being mass produced.
And I don't think being assembled and set-up at the home factory as being custom or boutique either.. and I would guess that would
disqualify more basses than you would care to name..
It depends how semantic you want to be...
A bit OT here ...........so back online,

the OP is all about how many people want a diminishing supply..nothing else

[bumnote]

Im not convinced Fender are a good long term investment at all with the possible exception of the 50s and maybe 60s production. Im talking about 25 or 50 years

Long term values depend on supply and demand, so if you look at any long term investment, cars, paintings, furniture, stradivarius violins, numbers made were small, except perhaps for cars, which rot away unless preserved.

Fender in particular have produced millions and millions of guitars and basses over the years, and while a proportion will have been destroyed, a lot will have survived.

At the moment, many of the older instruments are owned by people who were kids in the 50s and 60s, as part of their pension fund, to play, or just to remind them of old times.

Many of us old codgers have multiple old instruments, I dont, but I know loads of people of my age who have ten or twenty old guitars, but at some time or another, when we get too old to enjoy them, or we pass on, we or our dependents are going to want to cash those in.

To maintain the demand, unless non players start collecting, there neeed to be enough new people learning instruments to make up for old guitars coming back in the market plus any new production.


I know this flies in the face of conventional wisdom, but if you want to buy a guitar, buy it to play, not to stick on a wall.

Rant over

[fingerz]

[quote name='bumnote' post='938115' date='Aug 27 2010, 02:27 PM']To maintain the demand, unless non players start collecting, there neeed to be enough new people learning instruments to make up for old guitars coming back in the market plus any new production.[/quote]


I knew a bloke years ago, who couldn't play at all, but collected rare guitars and basses. I expect there are a lot of people like this who actually keep the top end of this market afloat. I think this is totally consistent with any collectors, often more like business men than enthusiasts for the nuts and bolts of their chosen field. It makes more sense this way too. I mean, how many of you go out gigging with your 70's Jazz or Boutique bass and constantly risk damaging it on a stage, or on a flight to some part of the world.... Now, I know these instruments are for playing and working, but a pure collector would have the upper hand in terms of re-sale as his bass is immaculate. Hopefully destined for the hands of someone who will really appreciate it one day!