[meteorite-list] pairing and collecting

From: David R. Vann <drvann_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:24:50 -0400
Message-ID: <95120183407049D98247F2213391E020_at_sas.upenn.edu>

I'd like to make a couple of observations about both pairing and collecting.

Several comments have been made regarding preserving the value of a meterorite,
with reference to pairings decreasing value, etc. I don't know why you collect,
heck, I don't even know why I collect things. It is apparently a part of human
nature (for at least some) . Sure, we rationalize it by saying "it is a
beautiful thing", "it has an interesting story", etc., but in the final
analysis, these things are not necessities. Somewhere along the line, I think it
was with baseball cards, the rarity of some items, combined with an increasing
market from an expnading population, drove the price for these items out of
sight. And thus, the concept of "investibles" had its genesis. This is a
marketing ploy to get you to buy things. However, if you think that collectible
items are an investment with a monetary return, you need to think very, very
carefully about this idea. The vast majority of collectible items will not make
you rich. An example: a friend bought a Saint Gaudens gold coin a while back.
Whereas his stocks declined, he ultimately sold the coin for twice what he paid
- so he thought he made out. The actual rate of return was just about 3 1/2
percent. Guess how much inflation went up during that time? I have watched many
types of collectible investments over the years. Most actually lose money after
you account for inflation. Many of them return the same buying power you had
when they were bought. A few, very few, bring a great return on investment.
Where do meteorites fall? I doubt that you will make much money on them, Bob
Haag nonwithstanding. There is always a point in a new market where there is
money to be made, but after that, not so much. As a dealer, can you make a
living? Quite possibly, yes - that can be answered by others. Will there be a
return as an investment - I seriously doubt it. No collector should collect
because he or she expects a return on investment - you should collect because
you like the item, like looking at it, like its story/history, or as Martin
said, because you can be involved in some way with the science. In other words,
for the pleasure brought to you by the possession of the object. If you make
money on it, well then, that's a great bonus. But it should never be the
purpose, as you will be disappointed. I'm sure many on this list can add their
own experiences in this regard. Just remember, next time the speculating bankers
take down the world economy (again...how many times is it now?), meteorites will
have no value - but your can of Spam will.

So, if my meteorite now has a new friend, a pair, am I to despair? Well, not
from the scientific point of view, because that is supporting evidence. How
about from the investment point of view? Does the value decrease because we now
have two stones? Does it? (see above) How about from the point of view of the
collector? Now you can buy two, rather than just one. What are we collecting,
after all? We are collecting names. Yes, names, like Orgueil, Almahatta Sitta,
Weston. If the current understanding is correct, the lithological classification
of a meteorite has something to do with the body(ies) it may have originated on,
and the processes on that planetoid. In other words there is a very good
likelihood that ALL H5 stones are Paired!!! OMG!!! What does that do to the
value of my Bassikounou? Nothing, actually. Almahatta Sitta is just another
ureilite, after all. But one with the best story of all (from the scientific
point of view). Many, many stones will be paired in the end, because they came
from the same source. Occasionally, they will be "lauch-paired", i.e. knocked
off the source at the same time. After all, if the current ideas are correct,
the entire class of HEDO meteorties were probably launch-paired in a colossal
impact that knocked off a quarter of Vesta. Does having several specimens of
different names (whether Frankfort or Kapoeta or NWA 1929) make any one of them
less valuable? I don't think so. Collecting Frankfort or Kapoeta, you are
collecting a story (they are falls). Collecting NWA1929, you are collecting a
name, but only the story that it is a Howardite, and likely some part of a
shattered asteroid. The first two cost more because of their story, not so much
because of their classification. For NWA5400 and NWA6162, we are collecting
stories again. Whether Greg H. charges more than Peter M., or vice versa, has to
do with what they want to get - it is theirs, after all - they can charge
anything they want. Will I pay it? Well, that depends on whether can afford it
and want a piece of that story (it might be an 'Earthite", in case you haven't
been paying attention).

So, in summary: don't collect because you think you will get rich colecting -
you won't. Don't imagine that pairs affect really affect actual value; they
don't because, in the end everything will have pairs. My fifty dinars worth (to
paraphrase Mike G., actual mileage can and does vary).

OK, that's enough for now, back to analyzing rocks....




David R. Vann, Ph.D.
Department of Earth and Environmental Science
THE UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA
240 S. 33rd St.
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6316
drvann at sas.upenn.edu
office: 215-898-4906
FAX: 215-898-0964
Received on Tue 28 Sep 2010 01:24:50 PM PDT