[meteorite-list] Wisconsin Prices
From: Darryl Pitt <darryl_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 09:18:11 -0400
I would prefer not getting into this fray, but I believe something
needs to be said here. While I also personally prefer complete
--Meteorites are necessarily subdivided to assist researchers in their
--No true meteorite lover would thwart such research by preventing the
subdivision of their specimen;
--Joe's stone was already subdivided by atmospheric forces. It was
incomplete and I do not comprehend why the supposed largest stone
needs to be preserved as found;
I am personally in awe of those singular specimens which I believe can
be framed as "natural sculpture from outer space." But that's just
me. The comparison of Mineral Point to the Mona Lisa (chasing the
alliteration) does not hold up to scrutiny. Meteorites are not
paintings---which are typically not cut apart, except by art critics.
The criticism and condescension exhibited by some meteorite collectors
over the collecting or curatorial preferences of others leaves me
Wishing everyone a terrific weekend / Darryl
On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:00 AM, Jason Utas wrote:
> You don't seem to understand; I don't care about the price; $60/g is
> $60/g, and I wouldn't buy any slices for $10/g. Well, at that price,
> I might get some to resell, but I wouldn't keep them in the collection
> -- it's not what I collect. Prices on this fall will...fall, as they
> always do, and they'll likely settle in the $20/g range, as they
> usually do.
> Prices in the initial few weeks to months are always irrationally high
> - that's something I've come to accept over the past few years.
> You're simply advocating collectors' right to a piece of the fall,
> which I sympathize with to an extent - yes, I would like a piece too.
> But I wouldn't cut up a beautiful 300g stone to accomplish that goal.
> What I'm peeved about is the idea that there are people here who
> "love" meteorites and yet who see nothing wrong with cutting a
> beautiful stone up.
> They will ask for $60/g for their "dream" stone, and claim that it's
> priceless in the next email.
> There's a reason the Louvre isn't taking a pair of shears to the Mona
> Lisa, and asking $1million/cm^2.
> Yeah, they'd get more than it's "worth" ($4 billion, 81 million at
> that price per square centimeter. Ok, maybe it's worth more than
> that. It doesn't lessen the relevance of the analogy.).
> ...But all you'd have to show for it are a bunch of little bits
> indistinguishable from all of the others.
> $500/g, $60/g, $0.50/g, it's all the same.
> Little slices of rock from a stone that used to be beautiful.
> They're worth nothing to me.
> Jeff titled his recent movie "The Wonder of Meteorites." Perhaps we
> should look at them with a little more wonder, and a little less
> "gotta catch 'em all" mentality. Unless I'm lucky enough to head over
> to WI in a month or so with my dad and we happen to find a stone, I
> doubt I'll ever own one.
> And I'm fine with that.
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Gary Chase <garychase at live.com>
>> Now we have everyone complaining that Joe cut up his stone and sold
>> it for $60 a gram. WTF? that sure is a lot better than $500 a
>> gram and did some collectors a favor by allowing them to acquire
>> this fall at a much more reasonable price than "meteoritemen"
>> inflated prices.
>> Wishing for a second season of Meteorite Men? Be careful what you
>> wish for. If you did not like the prices of this fall just wait
>> until after season 2 of this train wreck.
>> Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from
>> your inbox.
>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Received on Fri 30 Apr 2010 09:18:11 AM PDT