Atlas shaft squares.

I ordered some more and got mostly break jump shafts , although the wood cuts real even , time will tell...:mad:

You got out cheap .
It could have been a lot worse.
You could have paid $20 a square or beaver munched AAA lot which half are
really rejects. And that's before you taper them and find more rejects.
 
I don't know about the maple wholesale price. As gas, specifically diesel, has multiplied in price over the last several years, so has the cost of cutting. I have lots of friends in the timber industry that struggle to survive because it costs more to cut in many cases than the timber is worth. Many of them have given up on the mills & now cut only pulp for paper mills. Loggers aren't selling logs for cheap anymore. Loggers & mills are always fighting over cost, but usually find a medium that both can live with. Now that fuel prices have inflated so drastically, they can no longer find a happy medium. It literally costs the loggers more to cut the trees than the mills will pay, and the mills are on a slim profit margin because lumber prices aren't climbing fast enough to keep up with fuel. Not only are loggers going out of business, but mills are shutting down all across the country. $6 shafts are a thing of the past unless you want junk. $6 shafts from a reseller are going to be even lower quality. The cost of operation is too prohibitive. The only feasible way I can figure to get $6 shafts from a reseller is if it's a byproduct of sorts. I'm not trying to rain on anyone's parade, just pointing out the situation as it is.
 
What is the optimum angle of the slope where the tree should be located? I heard a 41 degree angle is best but I once heard that 63 is also good. Perhaps you can clear this up for us. Now, once we establish the correct angle what percentage of sunlight would aid in the best growth possible? I can certainly understand the importance of water so what should the height of the water table be in relation to the slope and where on the slope should the tree be positioned? If it’s higher up then it would be further from the water table; yes, no? How do we go about getting iron and mineral content in the exact region of our optimum tree? Do we need to hire a geologist or something? Once we establish all that how do we determine the density of the forest? I looked on Amazon for a ‘forest density meter’ and it didn’t produce the results I had hoped for. Perhaps you can enlighten us what you’re using to determine the forest density. In winding this down, what are the best annual rain numbers and exact temperature we should seek for our trees?

Higher growth ring shafts are harder to come by and more costly so why would we want something that is not readily available or to supply something harder to obtain. Average shafts with 8 to 12 are the norm today so of course that is best and easiest to supply.

As far as diesel costs with sawmills -- none of the mills we deal with are having any difficulty what-so-ever. It's all about where on the food chain you are when you are in business. When we order 20,000+ shafts, the investment is considerable as opposed to a single cue maker wanting to buy $200 or even $1000 worth of lumber/shafts. You really don't know how this business operates when it comes to buying the proper wood for shafts nor what the actual costs are on a true volume and wholesale basis. I don't mean to be condescending but you really don't know the true costs. Small mills are and will always struggle. $6 shafts are readily available; it depends on what you consider a $6 shaft. You're stating that there are no good $6 shafts and quite frankly, there are very nice $6 shafts. It depends on what you consider a very nice shaft. Let me rephrase that. There are some very nice $6 shafts which are acceptable to a great many cue makers. The fact that you can't get a good $6 shaft may have to do with the volume or quality of the wood merchant you're dealing with coupled with your expectations.
 
Hi,

Where a tree or forest is located in reference to the slope of a valley and sun light, elevation to the water table, iron content and minerals of the region, age and density of the forest, annual rain numbers, temperature during winter season are just a few things that can create the ideal conditions. I believe the so called Magic forests do exist.

That is why I select all of my maple planks from stock that grows in the Iron Mt. Michigan Region.

That being said each tree is its own entity and in the so called magic forest there is no guarantee of the ideal shaft wood but the there are forest regions where the yield of good stuff is very good as opposed to regions where you don't want anything to do with.

Me myself, I want density in my shaft wood that has a straight grain. I also don't want high growth ring shafts either. 8 to 12 is what I look for with high density per unit volume. If you go through a few hundred planks and collate them the weight and ring count can vary a lot. This is mostly effected by the area that the quarter sawn plank came from the tree in cross section.

If you listen to and believe some who sell shaft stock and grade them in reference to grain count as the indicator for rating same, you might want to study a little more concerning what Eric has present to the forum, Cue making concerning shaft wood is all about due-diligence, being the replete observer and knowledge is directly proportional to the amount of reflected shafts that must be trashed after seasoning and turning. But you really never know till you go through you process with each unit.

JMO,

Rick

And you know for a fact your supplier only gets his stock from UP Michigan???
A re-seller claims he only gets his from UP Michigan.
Turns out it's a huge lie. But, it's a lovely story.

I've been told some makers use stair case maple planks too.
 
Why would you assume I have no idea about the timber industry? Because I don't purchase large volumes of specialty lumber? Because I'm a cue maker? Contrarily, I know the supply side of the industry fairly well, mostly from a logging point of view. I know how much mills pay for logs, and how much mills cost to operate. Bare with me while I break it down.

Consider a mill pays $900-$1200/mbf of prime hard maple log, and they average 25% waste on each log. One log with 1,000bf of volume costs them around $1000. Assuming the logs are delivered, they are $1/bf deep before they even begin milling. Take off 25% waste & they are $1.25 deep. If operation costs run in the neighborhood of $.10/bf then they are $1350 deep into a 750bf stack of green lumber. Depending on kiln type, it's fair to say they'll spend a nickel per bf per day, on a six week cycle they will be another $1700 into the endeavor. That's a little over $3G's so far for 750bf of shaft quality maple, considering there are no losses to degrade. The mill itself has paid $4/bf, and thus far it's only lumber, not shafts. That's absolute factual current market pricing. I'll have to speculate to go farther, based on my own experience.

If the mill processes the wood into shaft squares itself, then there will be about 35% loss to lacking quality and defects. That leaves 490bf remaining of the original 1000bf log. Considering there are 2.5 shafts/bf of lumber, they end up with 1225 shafts. That has them gross deep at $2.50/shaft and they haven't yet paid their laborers to process and grade the lumber into shafts. Assuming they are $3/shaft their cost after all expenses and everything went well, if they sold 20,000 shafts at $6/ea for a $3:50% profit then they gross $60G's for themselves. Seems like a good chunk off the cuff but when you begin factoring overhead and time into the mix, that profit gets much slimmer on the net. Now how often do you or anybody else buy 20,000 shafts at a time? Is it often enough to keep a mill and its employees with a solid income?

Point being, the cost of cutting is nearly prohibitive. If the stars were aligned and labor was cheap, it could almost be feasible for a small specialty outfit to make a go of it. $60G's is a single family income, and it would take several employees & a fairly immense facility to produce 20,000 shaft orders. If there were 10 people between the office to the kid running the tablesaw, that would mean 200,000 shafts/yr to keep the mill operating. I'm not so easily inclined to believe there are 200,000 shafts produced globally in a year, yet alone from a single supplier. That leaves me to conclude that in order for $6 shafts to exist, they are indeed not premium grade. Keep in mind this assumes every single shaft from the mill is cue worthy. Considering that no cue maker works at the mill, I have my doubts. Again, 20,000 at a time or not, $6 shafts are a thing of times past. Is it possible that somebody can supply quality shafts at high volume and only pay themselves poverty wage? Yes I suppose so, and if that's what you have on your hands then great for you. However, better sense & logic contradicts that. Given that a prime maple log has no run out, shafts produced from it will have no run out. Straight grain, clean shafts are what I'm talking about. Not talking coring dowels or second hand quality stuff, just straight clean grain. No mill I know can do it sustainably for $6. In Atlas' case as a retail seller, it's essentially impossible. That's not knocking Atlas. You get what you pay for & if they are selling $6 shafts then what can anybody expect?
 
Why would you assume I have no idea about the timber industry? Because I don't purchase large volumes of specialty lumber? Because I'm a cue maker? Contrarily, I know the supply side of the industry fairly well, mostly from a logging point of view. I know how much mills pay for logs, and how much mills cost to operate. Bare with me while I break it down.

Consider a mill pays $900-$1200/mbf of prime hard maple log, and they average 25% waste on each log. One log with 1,000bf of volume costs them around $1000. Assuming the logs are delivered, they are $1/bf deep before they even begin milling. Take off 25% waste & they are $1.25 deep. If operation costs run in the neighborhood of $.10/bf then they are $1350 deep into a 750bf stack of green lumber. Depending on kiln type, it's fair to say they'll spend a nickel per bf per day, on a six week cycle they will be another $1700 into the endeavor. That's a little over $3G's so far for 750bf of shaft quality maple, considering there are no losses to degrade. The mill itself has paid $4/bf, and thus far it's only lumber, not shafts. That's absolute factual current market pricing. I'll have to speculate to go farther, based on my own experience.

If the mill processes the wood into shaft squares itself, then there will be about 35% loss to lacking quality and defects. That leaves 490bf remaining of the original 1000bf log. Considering there are 2.5 shafts/bf of lumber, they end up with 1225 shafts. That has them gross deep at $2.50/shaft and they haven't yet paid their laborers to process and grade the lumber into shafts. Assuming they are $3/shaft their cost after all expenses and everything went well, if they sold 20,000 shafts at $6/ea for a $3:50% profit then they gross $60G's for themselves. Seems like a good chunk off the cuff but when you begin factoring overhead and time into the mix, that profit gets much slimmer on the net. Now how often do you or anybody else buy 20,000 shafts at a time? Is it often enough to keep a mill and its employees with a solid income?

Point being, the cost of cutting is nearly prohibitive. If the stars were aligned and labor was cheap, it could almost be feasible for a small specialty outfit to make a go of it. $60G's is a single family income, and it would take several employees & a fairly immense facility to produce 20,000 shaft orders. If there were 10 people between the office to the kid running the tablesaw, that would mean 200,000 shafts/yr to keep the mill operating. I'm not so easily inclined to believe there are 200,000 shafts produced globally in a year, yet alone from a single supplier. That leaves me to conclude that in order for $6 shafts to exist, they are indeed not premium grade. Keep in mind this assumes every single shaft from the mill is cue worthy. Considering that no cue maker works at the mill, I have my doubts. Again, 20,000 at a time or not, $6 shafts are a thing of times past. Is it possible that somebody can supply quality shafts at high volume and only pay themselves poverty wage? Yes I suppose so, and if that's what you have on your hands then great for you. However, better sense & logic contradicts that. Given that a prime maple log has no run out, shafts produced from it will have no run out. Straight grain, clean shafts are what I'm talking about. Not talking coring dowels or second hand quality stuff, just straight clean grain. No mill I know can do it sustainably for $6. In Atlas' case as a retail seller, it's essentially impossible. That's not knocking Atlas. You get what you pay for & if they are selling $6 shafts then what can anybody expect?
It might be a little tougher after this year.
I just talked to mountain man who I haven't heard for a while . He said last winter was the worst one they've had in a long time. It was so cold, steels were snapping.:eek:
And it's still muddy now.
 
And you know for a fact your supplier only gets his stock from UP Michigan???
A re-seller claims he only gets his from UP Michigan.
Turns out it's a huge lie. But, it's a lovely story.

I've been told some makers use stair case maple planks too.

Joey,

I buy from a hardwood supplier that gets all his maple stock from the UP. I know the owner and he has no reason to lie to someone like me who buys a small amount of material per year. I myself use 5/4 stair stock and I like this supplier because all of his lumber is stored inside.

Rick
 
Exactly and that was my whole point. We travel in different circles.

You seem to have taken my statement out of context. In that line, I was disagreeing with your statement. We can talk about this stuff all day so long as each is respectful enough to not twist words or attempt belittling the other. Once you resort to that, there's nothing further to discuss.

In a nut shell, $6 shafts are possible only with lower grade timber. You can certainly go well below premium grade logs, and naturally shafts from cheap, abundant logs will be cheap and abundant. Premium logs make premium shafts, but not at $6/ea. To sum it up, either the $6 shafts are the product of less than stellar timber, or else are a grossly miscalculated mistake that is unsustainable & will inevitably drive a company out of business. Simply put, you cannot buy a product for less than it costs to create, and then expect it to be sustainable or high volume. You certainly can't expect it to be competent quality. Spin it any way you like. Facts are inarguable.
 
This is like a poker tournament where the blinds go up every so often.

Popcorn.... $18.00 a bag. Get it while it's cheap.
 
Why would you assume I have no idea about the timber industry? Because I don't purchase large volumes of specialty lumber? Because I'm a cue maker? Contrarily, I know the supply side of the industry fairly well, mostly from a logging point of view. I know how much mills pay for logs, and how much mills cost to operate. Bare with me while I break it down.

Consider a mill pays $900-$1200/mbf of prime hard maple log, and they average 25% waste on each log. One log with 1,000bf of volume costs them around $1000. Assuming the logs are delivered, they are $1/bf deep before they even begin milling. Take off 25% waste & they are $1.25 deep. If operation costs run in the neighborhood of $.10/bf then they are $1350 deep into a 750bf stack of green lumber. Depending on kiln type, it's fair to say they'll spend a nickel per bf per day, on a six week cycle they will be another $1700 into the endeavor. That's a little over $3G's so far for 750bf of shaft quality maple, considering there are no losses to degrade. The mill itself has paid $4/bf, and thus far it's only lumber, not shafts. That's absolute factual current market pricing. I'll have to speculate to go farther, based on my own experience.

If the mill processes the wood into shaft squares itself, then there will be about 35% loss to lacking quality and defects. That leaves 490bf remaining of the original 1000bf log. Considering there are 2.5 shafts/bf of lumber, they end up with 1225 shafts. That has them gross deep at $2.50/shaft and they haven't yet paid their laborers to process and grade the lumber into shafts. Assuming they are $3/shaft their cost after all expenses and everything went well, if they sold 20,000 shafts at $6/ea for a $3:50% profit then they gross $60G's for themselves. Seems like a good chunk off the cuff but when you begin factoring overhead and time into the mix, that profit gets much slimmer on the net. Now how often do you or anybody else buy 20,000 shafts at a time? Is it often enough to keep a mill and its employees with a solid income?

Point being, the cost of cutting is nearly prohibitive. If the stars were aligned and labor was cheap, it could almost be feasible for a small specialty outfit to make a go of it. $60G's is a single family income, and it would take several employees & a fairly immense facility to produce 20,000 shaft orders. If there were 10 people between the office to the kid running the tablesaw, that would mean 200,000 shafts/yr to keep the mill operating. I'm not so easily inclined to believe there are 200,000 shafts produced globally in a year, yet alone from a single supplier. That leaves me to conclude that in order for $6 shafts to exist, they are indeed not premium grade. Keep in mind this assumes every single shaft from the mill is cue worthy. Considering that no cue maker works at the mill, I have my doubts. Again, 20,000 at a time or not, $6 shafts are a thing of times past. Is it possible that somebody can supply quality shafts at high volume and only pay themselves poverty wage? Yes I suppose so, and if that's what you have on your hands then great for you. However, better sense & logic contradicts that. Given that a prime maple log has no run out, shafts produced from it will have no run out. Straight grain, clean shafts are what I'm talking about. Not talking coring dowels or second hand quality stuff, just straight clean grain. No mill I know can do it sustainably for $6. In Atlas' case as a retail seller, it's essentially impossible. That's not knocking Atlas. You get what you pay for & if they are selling $6 shafts then what can anybody expect?


This has gone on too far for your lack of understanding of big business. We're not taking about anyone making $60k a year here. You're wrongfully assuming that the mill we're discussing is only cutting for cue makers. Any good mill will have and can provide a quality product and has virtually no waste; zero, zippo. Let's take a mill who has clients such as furniture manufacturers, broom handle buyers, tooth pick buyers, tenon buyers, and last but not least shaft wood buyers. When you put all that into the mix and the fact that they can produce a quality, white, well dried product then you have your $6 shafts at a retail price.

Using your numbers, you state that the price that the mill pays is $4 per BF after buying, cutting, drying, etc. Let's assume for a moment that your numbers are correct (which they aren't): a shaft is .0283333 BF times $4 per BF = a cost to the mill of about 83 cents a shaft. If the above mill took a 300% profit and sold the 300% profit shaft wood to a retailer at $2.50 per shaft then yes, there can be a quality $6 shaft. Remember, they have a 'home' for the "waste".

You also have to understand that at $2.50, the shafts will be straight grained to run-off, loose grain to tight grain. The retailer then grades the shafts out and sells the ugly for $2.50 and then grades the rest out into $6 quality shafts, $8 quality shafts, $12 quality shafts. The formula works.

Now, rather than go back and forth, the real problem here is the definition of the word "quality". You can have a quality $6 shaft. That "quality" may not perhaps be up to your standard but it may still be a quality product. What you are doing is denigrating anyone who buys a $6 shaft because you disagree and firmly believe that in order to have a quality shaft it has to be $12. This is just not so.

There are many cue makers out there who buy a quality $6 shaft and are very happy with their purchase. In fact, they make and sell hundreds of cues per year so they must be doing something right.

BTW - how many cues do you make a year?

BTW - your calculation, "Considering there are 2.5 shafts/bf of lumber" is incorrect; a shaft is .2083 BF or almost 5 shafts per BF but allowing for blade thickness, it's more like 4 shafts per BF. Remember, the mill has a home for all the "waste" so our calculations are very real.

BTW - This statement is also incorrect: "I'm not so easily inclined to believe there are 200,000 shafts produced globally in a year, yet alone from a single supplier". Truth is there are many more produced. Did you ever hear of container loads of shaft wood going to China? How many shafts do you think fit into a container? There is a 'one man' maple supplier in New York who we all know and he supplies containers to China or at least use to. How do I know this? The mill operator called us to buy the container because the Chinese buyer fell through on his last deal.

And lastly, how many cues did you say you make a year?

I'm done; knock yourself out.
 
Last edited:
I always read Rick's words thoroughly because, IMO, he's always freely given great information to this forum - information I felt most cue makers would keep secret. And, it has several times bothered me when his input has been meanly targeted by some of his colleagues. Granted, some of his cue building methods differ from the norm, but they've always appeared well thought out and, according to him, proven by track record. And his cues look great to me, with incredibly sharp points - way beyond the norm. Also, his credibility is enhanced by the fact he is not a merchant trying to sell something. So, when he's talking here about shaftwood quality, I'm listening.
Rick's post in this thread may be a good example of his divulging information others would keep secret and, as usual, it has elicited mean rebuttals.
He doesn't claim to understand the many forest variables that contribute to shaftwood quality, as implied by a respondant. Rick just listed some of the variables and stated his belief there are forest regions with higher yields of quality shaftwood.
What catches my attention most, however, is his input regarding ring count. He believes 8 to 12 ring count, in high density wood, is preferable to higher ring count. That is interesting since I always assumed ring count was directly related to density; in other words, higher ring count equals higher wood density. If density and ring count are independent, that opens a whole new way of looking at shaftwood.
I've always assumed that high growth ring count was the ultimate measure of shaftwood quality (given straight grain etc.) But when you consider things in this new context, it makes you question what really makes higher ring count desireable. A reason given in this thread is that it is comparatively rarer, and thus deserves a higher price. Really? That's a spurious conclusion if Rick is correct. If 8-12 ringcount is superior to higher ringcount shaftwood with comparable density, the high price attributed to high ringcount is unwarranted and is simply enabled by the propagation of misinformation that higher ring count makes better shaftwood.
Based on the above, it is understandable that high volume shaftwood merchants would benefit enormously from such a public misunderstanding, if it is such, because if they sort according to ringcount, they can significantly inflate the resale price of many squares/rounds/cones. No wonder Rick's post attracts controversy.
OK, men, get more popcorn and let's figure this out. I'm thinking Rick might not have his head up his butt, and his beliefs are shared with other high end cuemakers.
 
I always read Rick's words thoroughly because, IMO, he's always freely given great information to this forum - information I felt most cue makers would keep secret. And, it has several times bothered me when his input has been meanly targeted by some of his colleagues. Granted, some of his cue building methods differ from the norm, but they've always appeared well thought out and, according to him, proven by track record. And his cues look great to me, with incredibly sharp points - way beyond the norm. Also, his credibility is enhanced by the fact he is not a merchant trying to sell something. So, when he's talking here about shaftwood quality, I'm listening.
Rick's post in this thread may be a good example of his divulging information others would keep secret and, as usual, it has elicited mean rebuttals.
He doesn't claim to understand the many forest variables that contribute to shaftwood quality, as implied by a respondant. Rick just listed some of the variables and stated his belief there are forest regions with higher yields of quality shaftwood.
What catches my attention most, however, is his input regarding ring count. He believes 8 to 12 ring count, in high density wood, is preferable to higher ring count. That is interesting since I always assumed ring count was directly related to density; in other words, higher ring count equals higher wood density. If density and ring count are independent, that opens a whole new way of looking at shaftwood.
I've always assumed that high growth ring count was the ultimate measure of shaftwood quality (given straight grain etc.) But when you consider things in this new context, it makes you question what really makes higher ring count desireable. A reason given in this thread is that it is comparatively rarer, and thus deserves a higher price. Really? That's a spurious conclusion if Rick is correct. If 8-12 ringcount is superior to higher ringcount shaftwood with comparable density, the high price attributed to high ringcount is unwarranted and is simply enabled by the propagation of misinformation that higher ring count makes better shaftwood.
Based on the above, it is understandable that high volume shaftwood merchants would benefit enormously from such a public misunderstanding, if it is such, because if they sort according to ringcount, they can significantly inflate the resale price of many squares/rounds/cones. No wonder Rick's post attracts controversy.
OK, men, get more popcorn and let's figure this out. I'm thinking Rick might not have his head up his butt, and his beliefs are shared with other high end cuemakers.

Popcorn is still $18.00 a bag this round. It is denser though.
 
I sort my shaft blanks into 10 different weight classes. None of it has to do with growth ring count.
In Birdseye I have boards with over 40gpi. These are light in weight than the Curly with 8 gpi in those pieces that I have weighed and there are probably variations in both.
 
I sort my shaft blanks into 10 different weight classes. None of it has to do with growth ring count.
In Birdseye I have boards with over 40gpi. These are light in weight than the Curly with 8 gpi in those pieces that I have weighed and there are probably variations in both.

These are in my repeat customers bin.
Somehow they like them ugly looking.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    108.1 KB · Views: 153
particularly the last line!

Hahahaha!!!
Those are the keepers ( for a while ). :D

My mountain man resurfaced and he says he might have some veneer quality dense maple boards. Hopefully I'll get a hundred or two after he cuts , molds and sands them.
Wait, don't sand them, they might get too hot and catch fire.:eek:
 
Back
Top