Cue Questions for Collectors

[Drawman623]

I recently spoke to a cuemaker who described the effort to program for a fancy CNC cue. In short, it took longer to program than to actually build. (Resting time between lathe passes aside). That is a lot of work to build a 1 of 1 cue.

To me this seems difficult to accept given that one of the greatest strengths of CNC is repeatable precision. Skins suggested a change to the ringwork of one of my cues posted in the gallery section and I began thinking about how many is too many when building collectable cues?.

I was once told that Richard Black, for instance, sold off pieces of the machine that built a series of exquisite cues. Thus guaranteeing they would never be made again. Other cuemakers have done the exact opposite and taken their most beautiful designs and put them into catalogs where they are to be remade over and over.

When Art Cantando made a rectangle cue to my request, he asked me if I minded his building 2 based on the design. Did the value of mine change? Now Cantando's original is being remade with different proportions by another builder.

Must a design be truly 1 of 1? Is it OK for the original builder to make a very similar cue with subtle differences? (i.e. wood or ring changes). What are your thoughts?

 

[manwon]

I recently spoke to a cuemaker who described the effort to program for a fancy CNC cue. In short, it took longer to program than to actually build. (Resting time between lathe passes aside). That is a lot of work to build a 1 of 1 cue.

To me this seems difficult to accept given that one of the greatest strengths of CNC is repeatable precision. Skins suggested a change to the ringwork of one of my cues posted in the gallery section and I began thinking about how many is too many when building collectable cues?.

I was once told that Richard Black, for instance, sold off pieces of the machine that built a series of exquisite cues. Thus guaranteeing they would never be made again. Other cuemakers have done the exact opposite and taken their most beautiful designs and put them into catalogs where they are to be remade over and over.

When Art Cantando made a rectangle cue to my request, he asked me if I minded his building 2 based on the design. Did the value of mine change? Now Cantando's original is being remade with different proportions by another builder.

Must a design be truly 1 of 1? Is it OK for the original builder to make a very similar cue with subtle differences? (i.e. wood or ring changes). What are your thoughts?

First, I will comment on CNC, in my opinion time will bear out this technique in cue building. As far as CNC taking longer to set up, initially that may certainly be true, but, once it is set up and running programs can be used over and over and over again. Many tasks that are finished can be stored and modified for other uses, so in the long run the time spent becomes less and less. Now it is a fact that many of the beginning cue makers today are using this type of equipment from the beginning. The truth be know, they have not learned to build cues any other way, and can't build any other way, because it takes a great deal craftsmanship to duplicate what a CnC can do by hand.

Then we have to look at how cues today are selling, cues made using CnC techniques do not fetch near what cues made without them or by people who claim not to use them are selling far. The master Cue makers today could use either technique to build their cues, and this is what give them master status and make their cues more sought after and collectible.

Just my thoughts

 

[JB Cases]

I don't agree Craig. I think most of the super high end cues on the market were made using CNC technology.

Ernie Guttierez of Gina Cue proudly shows off his CNC equipment and he gets what he wants for his cue without question.

I work with a laser cutter. Most of the work is in the setup, learning what the machine will do, what materials require which settings, documenting all that, fiddling with the files to get it right.

Once all that is done then yes it's much easier to go back and take a file that has been created and modify it. But if you spend a lot of time on something that will only be used once then that time has to be compensated for somehow. Either by charging a high amount and never touching that design again or by making more of that design.

I just did a case where the handle holders alone took me about a week to design and make using the laser. I must have made about 20 versions before I finally got to the right ones. I don't plan to make these again but if I do then the time to do it will be considerably less. (and for the record I didn't charge nearly enough to cover the work - but it was my choice to do it this way and not a customer request).

Using a CNC and the time it takes to learn it - whether for decorative purposes or for repeatable tasks - is no different than the time people invest in making jigs and taper bars to do the same thing. And as far as using a pantograpgh goes - someone had to use a CNC driven machine to make the pantograpgh templates.

To answer the original poster's question. It's really a decision between the customer and the cue maker. I think that if the customer arrives with a full design already ready to go in the CNC with minimal work from the cuemaker then the customer owns that design. However if they give up a rough sketch and the cuemaker has to take it from concept to cue then the customer should be willing to pay enough to compensate for the time spent.

As Ernie says, "if money is no object then start talking and I'll put you on the clock".

 

[RRfireblade]

Everyone thinks they own a 1 of 1 anyway.

To me what matters (assuming equal quality of contruction) is whether it 'looks' like the time and effort went into to it or does it 'look' like a machine cranked it out.

As for the time aspect , time to program is like anything else , a skill that some have a strength for or maybe not so much. I myself can usually draw and program many things faster than I can draw by hand (drawing true to scale). Definately faster than I can crank handles on a mill if it has anything but straight machine moves in it. The real key to CNC programming is max efficiency of run time at minimum material waste, set up and fixturing/operations. That where you make or break a production run. In a one off, that hardly a concern.

I'll even run parts thru the dongle before turning handles if I can.

Bottom line beyond all that is perception of the market. In cues , generally speaking , 'hand made' implies greater value over 'machine made' even if those with the perception don't really understand what that means.

I recently spoke to a cuemaker who described the effort to program for a fancy CNC cue. In short, it took longer to program than to actually build. (Resting time between lathe passes aside). That is a lot of work to build a 1 of 1 cue.

To me this seems difficult to accept given that one of the greatest strengths of CNC is repeatable precision. Skins suggested a change to the ringwork of one of my cues posted in the gallery section and I began thinking about how many is too many when building collectable cues?.

I was once told that Richard Black, for instance, sold off pieces of the machine that built a series of exquisite cues. Thus guaranteeing they would never be made again. Other cuemakers have done the exact opposite and taken their most beautiful designs and put them into catalogs where they are to be remade over and over.

When Art Cantando made a rectangle cue to my request, he asked me if I minded his building 2 based on the design. Did the value of mine change? Now Cantando's original is being remade with different proportions by another builder.

Must a design be truly 1 of 1? Is it OK for the original builder to make a very similar cue with subtle differences? (i.e. wood or ring changes). What are your thoughts?

 

[manwon]

I don't agree Craig. I think most of the super high end cues on the market were made using CNC technology.

Ernie Guttierez of Gina Cue proudly shows off his CNC equipment and he gets what he wants for his cue without question.

I work with a laser cutter. Most of the work is in the setup, learning what the machine will do, what materials require which settings, documenting all that, fiddling with the files to get it right.

Once all that is done then yes it's much easier to go back and take a file that has been created and modify it. But if you spend a lot of time on something that will only be used once then that time has to be compensated for somehow. Either by charging a high amount and never touching that design again or by making more of that design.

I just did a case where the handle holders alone took me about a week to design and make using the laser. I must have made about 20 versions before I finally got to the right ones. I don't plan to make these again but if I do then the time to do it will be considerably less. (and for the record I didn't charge nearly enough to cover the work - but it was my choice to do it this way and not a customer request).

Using a CNC and the time it takes to learn it - whether for decorative purposes or for repeatable tasks - is no different than the time people invest in making jigs and taper bars to do the same thing. And as far as using a pantograpgh goes - someone had to use a CNC driven machine to make the pantograpgh templates.

To answer the original poster's question. It's really a decision between the customer and the cue maker. I think that if the customer arrives with a full design already ready to go in the CNC with minimal work from the cuemaker then the customer owns that design. However if they give up a rough sketch and the cuemaker has to take it from concept to cue then the customer should be willing to pay enough to compensate for the time spent.

As Ernie says, "if money is no object then start talking and I'll put you on the clock".

As Ernie says, "if money is no object then start talking and I'll put you on the clock".[/QUOTE]

You know Ernie is certainly one of great living cue makers today, I would not argue with that point in any why. Ernie is also a great example of what I am talking about, Ernie can build any kind of cue a customer wants. He can build using traditional techniques or he can use CnC it all depends upon the customer. Yes it will cost a person some serious money to get what they want, but they would not go to him in the first place if they did not realize that.

Now Ernie and a few others can do this with outstanding success either way, but they are the exception and not the rule. However, my comments are concerning those who are unable to a to meet the standards of those few outlined above using any cue making technique. When you look at the number of cue makers in the USA alone today, less than 5% would qualify when faced with the ability, or standards of those few.

We have to agree to disagree on this subject John, but that is a good thing because at least that shows we are both thinking!!

 

[ratcues]

It is not the CNC or the pantograph that draws the money or the collectible nature of certain cues. It is the maker. He hones his skills over many years using all techniques available or needed to craft a cue that suits their vision. Ernie could whittle a cue while sitting on his porch and it will bring more than one I made using any means. Why? Because he is Ernie. .....because he is Richard Black. .....because he is Bill Stroud. Time and experience will do more for a cue maker than any machine, CNC or not.

 

[i210mfu]

Cue maker is not a profession that is schooled somewhere at tech. university etc. ... it is an array of several "jobs" put together in a professional level just beeing able to built a decent and good hitting plane jane cue. Knowledge and plenty of skills in a broad variety of fields such as, woods, finish, construction, tooling, etc etc etc needed. Not to mention the devotion needed. Most of this knowledge comes with years of trial and error and experimenting. Therefore, at least in my humble opinion, the value of a cue lies within the abilities and experience of the maker.

Will this determine if a cue is a collectible?

Not alone. Consistency is another important fact. All the great cue makers known for there high end super $ sticks are known for beeing around for quite some time with consistent quality and customer perception. A lot of them are also known for bringing up new designs, techniques etc. - new twists and turns in every aspect of cue making. The combination of all of this will determine the status of the cue maker and if his cues are collectible cues or not.

From our cue maker position: The most important thing is that our client is satisfied 100% in regards to his personal cue. The more happy clients you gain, the better. Everything else : Time will tell.....

No you can start flaming me...
Markus

 

[hangemhigh]

First, I will comment on CNC, in my opinion time will bear out this technique in cue building. As far as CNC taking longer to set up, initially that may certainly be true, but, once it is set up and running programs can be used over and over and over again. Many tasks that are finished can be stored and modified for other uses, so in the long run the time spent becomes less and less. Now it is a fact that many of the beginning cue makers today are using this type of equipment from the beginning. The truth be know, they have not learned to build cues any other way, and can't build any other way, because it takes a great deal craftsmanship to duplicate what a CnC can do by hand.

Then we have to look at how cues today are selling, cues made using CnC techniques do not fetch near what cues made without them or by people who claim not to use them are selling far. The master Cue makers today could use either technique to build their cues, and this is what give them master status and make their cues more sought after and collectible.

Just my thoughts

Wake up and smell the coffee,Craig. Black Boar, Aurthur Cue, Manzino,Haley,Cantando,....all use CNC to create masterpieces that fetch 5 figures, some even 6 figures. No living cue maker is gonna get 6 figures for a cue he made without CNC. There is maybe one living maker that gets 5 figures for a non-CNC cue, sans Ivory handle.

 

[thepavlos]

When I ordered my cue from John Showman , it was my wife who came up with the inlay idea with the notched diamond (she really doesn't know that much about cue designs and I know similar things have been done before)
When John delivered the cue to me he actually asked me if it was OK for him to use that inlay in future cues since he liked it so much. That is fine with me because I know he put a lot of work into making the template and it would be a waste otherwise.
Paul

 

[hangemhigh]

When I ordered my cue from John Showman , it was my wife who came up with the inlay idea with the notched diamond (she really doesn't know that much about cue designs and I know similar things have been done before)
When John delivered the cue to me he actually asked me if it was OK for him to use that inlay in future cues since he liked it so much. That is fine with me because I know he put a lot of work into making the template and it would be a waste otherwise.
Paul

Wow, are you talking about that gothic notched Ivory diamond? Cool.

 

[ratcues]

When I ordered my cue from John Showman , it was my wife who came up with the inlay idea with the notched diamond (she really doesn't know that much about cue designs and I know similar things have been done before)
When John delivered the cue to me he actually asked me if it was OK for him to use that inlay in future cues since he liked it so much. That is fine with me because I know he put a lot of work into making the template and it would be a waste otherwise.
Paul

Why won't my wife do that? All she comes up with is a list of things for me to do.

 

[Snapshot9]

Lol

Why won't my wife do that? All she comes up with is a list of things for me to do.

Don't they all, Ryan? And they can't understand how we got along before they came into our lives .... :grin:

 

[ratcues]

Don't they all, Ryan? And they can't understand how we got along before they came into our lives .... :grin:

I know! In all honestly, I don't know if I could get along without mine, even though she's never come up with an inlay or cue idea.

 

[manwon]

Wake up and smell the coffee,Craig. Black Boar, Aurthur Cue, Manzino,Haley,Cantando,....all use CNC to create masterpieces that fetch 5 figures, some even 6 figures. No living cue maker is gonna get 6 figures for a cue he made without CNC. There is maybe one living maker that gets 5 figures for a non-CNC cue, sans Ivory handle.

No maybe you need to wake up and smell the coffee, because there certainly are cue makers who can fetch that kinda money if they choose to. What about Ron Haily, what about Bill Schick, What about Ernie G and the list can go on and on. The fact is that Ernies most expensive cue that was ever made was made without using anyCNC, and he has turned down offers of $100,000 for that cue. So please Tommy, name another cue from a living cue maker exceeding $100,000 Craftsmanship is just that, and believe it or not most of the top collectors in this country do not put their dollars in cues built entirely using CNC construction techniques, and I have that information from the horses mouth. In fact Bill Schick personally told me that when he was considering the switch in the late 1980's his customers ( 4, 5, 6, figure collectors) would bot be interested in his cues if he did. The most valuable cues today dollar for dollar were made without CNC, and that is a proved fact, now I am not saying that some of these men that are still alive won't use it today, however, their greatest master pieces were made without it.

Please Tommy I mean no disrespect, however, you are wrong and maybe you should do a little research before you tell others they have no clue.:smile:

 

[ratcues]

I want to pose this question;

Are cues collectible because of how they were made or who made them?

I believe this debate could show examples of each on both sides but I believe a collector will buy a Gina and spent the $$$ because Ernie made it, not because of how. I am positive Ernie could make both a manual and CNC cue that could both fetch 6 figures.

If manual cues were more sought after, Kikels would way more collectible than they actually are. IMHO, undervalued for that quality of work. No CNC. I also see hundreds of unsold or used CNC cues in the for sale section.

Everything has a place and it is up to each individual collector to determine what aspect of cues they want to collect. Some collect on hit, others on rarity, yet others on aesthetics. For us to have a debate over what is more collectible is a waste when we could be building our own legacy in our own special way.

<~~~buy RAT cues. I will not live forever.

 

[Drawman623]

The most valuable cues today dollar for dollar were made without CNC, and that is a proved fact, now I am not saying that some of these men that are still alive won't use it today, however, their greatest master pieces were made without it.

I agree that the most valuable cues tend to be non CNC. But they need not be fancy, or 1 of 1 to be valuable when certain builders make them. The basic 4 window 4 point Gus Szamboti cue was hand made and there are many similar cues in existance, yet they command a huge value. They continue to bring that value under the caring production of son Barry. Now Gus' grandson is doing it...I'm sure Jimmy has a line of buyers too. (I would count myself among them)

That example aside, Manzino, Black Boar, Thomas Wayne cues all bring in huge dollars. I thought they were CNC products.

Bill Grassley is selling an Arthur cue for $175,000. I have no idea of Bill's markup, but I expect that cue is CNC and sold to him for $100K or more.

 

[RRfireblade]

I want to pose this question;

Are cues collectible because of how they were made or who made them?

I believe this debate could show examples of each on both sides but I believe a collector will buy a Gina and spent the $$$ because Ernie made it, not because of how. I am positive Ernie could make both a manual and CNC cue that could both fetch 6 figures.

If manual cues were more sought after, Kikels would way more collectible than they actually are. IMHO, undervalued for that quality of work. No CNC. I also see hundreds of unsold or used CNC cues in the for sale section.

Everything has a place and it is up to each individual collector to determine what aspect of cues they want to collect. Some collect on hit, others on rarity, yet others on aesthetics. For us to have a debate over what is more collectible is a waste when we could be building our own legacy in our own special way.

<~~~buy RAT cues. I will not live forever.

Well , who made them is number 1 reason which is usually tied to the perception of the quality that said maker puts into them. Multiply that by the availability of thier work and/or the markets demand. Probably 90% or better that anything collectable IS collectable is based purely on public perception.

IMO , when people trash a CNC cue it refers to "those" cues that have a far more apparent 'mass' production quality and lack of attention to detail. Blindly machine made , little to no human quality control , sub par skill level compensated for by machine whether that actually be the case or not

I think all in all , people don't care how anything was made as long as it appears to be high quality and posses the attributes considered to be high end , hand crafted and/or 'not' mass produced brought forth by a trust worthy and reputable seller/maker.

IMO.

The real brain twister is after having a discussion like this and then realizing that Predator is the number 1 "high performance" cue in sales on the market.

 

[ratcues]

IMO , when people trash a CNC cue it refers to "those" cues that have a far more apparent 'mass' production quality and lack of attention to detail. Blindly machine made , little to no human quality control , sub par skill level compensated for by machine whether that actually be the case or not.

I'll tap that three times.

 

[manwon]

I agree that the most valuable cues tend to be non CNC. But they need not be fancy, or 1 of 1 to be valuable when certain builders make them. The basic 4 window 4 point Gus Szamboti cue was hand made and there are many similar cues in existance, yet they command a huge value. They continue to bring that value under the caring production of son Barry. Now Gus' grandson is doing it...I'm sure Jimmy has a line of buyers too. (I would count myself among them)

That example aside, Manzino, Black Boar, Thomas Wayne cues all bring in huge dollars. I thought they were CNC products.

Bill Grassley is selling an Arthur cue for $175,000. I have no idea of Bill's markup, but I expect that cue is CNC and sold to him for $100K or more.

There is certainly a big difference between a Artistic Cue and a high end players cue that is collectible and functional. Now, as time passes and markets go up and down or completely change the Non-player cues will be hit the hardest, like they are being hit in this market.

In the current market works of Art are not as highly valued as they were a few years ago and if tastes change their value can fall even farther, so are they a good investment long term, I do not claim to know? Now, one thing that is certain in any market traditional craftsmanship is always something that will maintain and increase in value through time. Especially when it is executed to highly artistic standards by exceptional craftsmen and this true for any wooden item, from furniture, to molding for a home.

Another factor that will influence a cues collectible status long term outside of who built it, is who owned and played with it. Again, even in this market cues that belonged to famous players are also still increasing in value. Over the last 10 years many of the great players from the 1950's and 1960's have passed away and their estates have gone to public auctions. The cues these players used on a regular basis were very hot and pricey items. Not only because they were made by Famous cue makers, but also because they were used to make billiards history. The cue built specifically as art will never have this distinction, because they will never be used and become a functional part of future history.

Just my opinion