Hoppe Rambow cues on ebay

[cueaddicts]

Sean,

You said "your letter should have been clearly titled something like "Titlist Conversion Cue - Formerly Rambow Redone By Hercek". This cue is reworked to the point where very little Rambow is left.... "

You are exactly correct and that is exactly what my appraisal details. By the way, in the world of antiques and appraisals, all of that is what "Fully Restored" typically means. Any intelligent person who reads that knows that there is little if any at all originality left to the cue or any antique that is "Fully Restored," especially when they read in my appraisal that the cue has been brought to "non original status." When I do an appraisal, I don't use pool room language; I use appraisal language. If the owners are interested in a pool room assessment, they can take the cues to the pool room and save the $300 I charge.

As far as Joe's restored Balabushka, if the cue really needed to be restored, fine I guess. However, if it was restored it should be titled a restored Balabushka plain and simple. It is not. As far as the cue's value, I am not the one who has it reduced. I never said that a restored Balabushka was worthless...just worth less than a like original. Joe has so nicely proven that point for me despite the fact he has argued the contrary in the past.

Finally, when buying and selling, things rarely ever get bought or sold at their true value. It is not uncommon for someone to pick up something cheap that is not popular right now or to pay way too much for something that is. I have paid double what something is "worth" in order to complete a sector of my collection or to complete a set of something. And I have bought stuff on ebay at 10% of its value and turned them around for a profit. When you do an appraisal you valuate the cue based on what it would cost to replace the cue or one just like it. When it comes to this cue, it is a fully restored Rambow with work done by Joel Hercek. Pretend that this cue was stolen. If the owner wanted to replace this piece with a piece like it with similar traits...meaning a fully restored Rambow with the work done by one of the greatest cue makers ever, you can be assured that you are not going to find another like it for much less than my valuation.

Deno

So let me get this right, you charged $300 for this appraisal that says that this cue should be valued at $2700-$3000? I, for one, hope that this seller doesn't pull the auction so it runs its course to see just how right you are/were, because, and I quote,

"...as a restored Rambow, I wouldn't pay a penny for it...but because the work was done by Joel, I am considering making a modest bid to add it to my Hercek collection."

Sean

And BTW, to me saying a cue is "refinished" is clear enough for an average person when that's what was done...and not mistitled. That's how we would describe such a cue that we are offering. Saying that it is "fully restored" implies more that structural/functional elements have been reworked, kind of like with this Rambow/Hercek. Just my opinion.

 

[classiccues]

a cue is a consortium?
better to stick to the "it's not brain surgery" line [/QUOTE

I didn't say those things...

Sorry...

Joe

 

[classiccues]

you do a very good job of not answering questions directly or in detail that way you can't be pinned to any particular answer!
i dont think it's very hard to stand behind those type posts joe!

Seemingly most people get my answer, most of the time.

Joe

 

[classiccues]

As far as Joe's restored Balabushka, if the cue really needed to be restored, fine I guess. However, if it was restored it should be titled a restored Balabushka plain and simple. It is not. As far as the cue's value, I am not the one who has it reduced. I never said that a restored Balabushka was worthless...just worth less than a like original. Joe has so nicely proven that point for me despite the fact he has argued the contrary in the past.
Deno

Nice try.. now you are trying to reduce a cue ad to a "title", symantics. If you look the cue has been refinished by PT, the cue we just put up has been restored by, which is what we try and do. If you want to nit pick the placement of the language its really a stretch.
BTW I have never argued that a restored Bushka is worth more than an unrestored. Unless the unrestored cue is a piece of junk. Then its obvious.

Joe

 

[icon]

Seemingly most people get my answer, most of the time.

Joe

well here is a prime example! hard to fault this since it doesnt state anything definitively!
course it does make one wonder how you would know what most people think?

 

[classiccues]

If you read the appraisal, you would learn why and answer your own question.

your question:
"Based on this and other parts of that thread, you clearly are looking the other way for this cue, and I can say all Rambows. So I will ask you again, if an all original Rambow in 70% gets $ 1500 (your number) HTF does a cue with no original shafts, refinished, replaced parts, rewrapped go for 2700-3000?"

If the owner wanted to replace this piece with a piece like it with similar traits...meaning a fully restored Rambow with the work done by one of the greatest cue makers ever, you can be assured that you are not going to find another like it for much less than my valuation.

Well this is just a bunch of bunk. Because the flip side to this is that if Joel only ever restores this Rambow, you could say it was worth more than any cue because its the only one.

So is it worth 2700 as a Hercek or as a Rambow?

Since you want to nit pick about titles... you titled it a "Fully Restored Herman Rambow Custom Cue c.1962" But by your past statements, it doesn't have enough Rambow left to be called a Rambow and as a Rambow its not worth a penny, but you still called it a Rambow in your appraisal and said it was worth 2700-3000. So unsuspecting buyers are going to think that a fully restored Rambow is worth 2700. So why not take your own advice and not call it a Rambow at all?

Talk about painting a vague canvas..

Joe

 

[classiccues]

well here is a prime example! hard to fault this since it doesnt state anything definitively!
course it does make one wonder how you would know what most people think?

Exactly the point I was trying to make...

Joe

 

[icon]

Exactly the point I was trying to make...

Joe

what point? nothing?
i stated my opinion and you stated an undefined broad genralization!
just another post you can "stand behind" because it has no real meaning!

 

[classiccues]

what point? nothing?
i stated my opinion and you stated an undefined broad genralization!
just another post you can "stand behind" because it has no real meaning!

To you its an undefined broad generalization.. to me its an answer...

tomatoes.. tomatos.. all that..

Joe

 

[icon]

To you its an undefined broad generalization.. to me its an answer...

tomatoes.. tomatos.. all that..

Joe

you've become an expert at meaningless answers

 

[Bamacues]

Runscott, let me state that in spite of the bickering, etc, I think I personally picked up on some valuable info, but it is pretty much what I thought all along.

1. Is a restored Rambow or Balabushka (or other) cue worth as much as an original cue in close to the same condition? No way...probably not close...

2. Can restoration of a cue add to its overall value? Yes, but only if the cue was in relatively poor condition in the beginning and the restoration is performed by a top notch cuesmith...

3. Are there significant differences in the value of classic (and other) cues that may be stated in the Bluebook? Certainly, the Bluebook is flawed, some high and some low, no one really pays those prices anyways...I personally don't have a problem with the Bluebook as it is written. I think it gives me an insight to the cuemakers who have risen up since the last book, but it isn't really a price guide, IMO...

4. Do folks have a significant difference of opinion on the value of a cue? Certainly...my cue is always worth more than your cue, blah, blah...

Why last year at Valley Forge, one vendor offered me $1500 for my new 6 point, 3 veneer with the rings, etc SW...he said he knew I had not paid more than that for it since it was new, unchalked, etc (never mind the 7 year wait) and that was what Laurie was going to charge him for the one he had just ordered. His cues of similar design were $2200-2500 and worth every penny, he said....just depends which side of the fence you are on....

 

[icon]

3.Are there significant differences in the value of classic (and other) cues that may be stated in the Bluebook? Certainly, the Bluebook is flawed, some high and some low, no one really pays those prices anyways...I personally don't have a problem with the Bluebook as it is written. I think it gives me an insight to the cuemakers who have risen up since the last book, but it isn't really a price guide, IMO...

no offense meant bama! but i dont undestand how you can say:
"the bluebook is flawed"
"no one really pays those prices anyways"
"it isn't really a price guide, IMO"
and then state "i personally don't have any problem with the bluebook as it is written"
most of the book is the price guide! if you think it's flawed and useless it would seem you do have a problem with the bluebook as it is written.

 

[Bamacues]

no offense meant bama! but i dont undestand how you can say:
"the bluebook is flawed"
"no one really pays those prices anyways"
"it isn't really a price guide, IMO"
and then state "i personally don't have any problem with the bluebook as it is written"
most of the book is the price guide! if you think it's flawed and useless it would seem to you do have a problem with the bluebook as it is written.

No offense taken, Jeff. I don't think of the bluebook as a price guide as much as a history of cuemakers, an index and maybe as a reference point as to the value of one cuemaker's cue in relation to another, etc (but ti doesn't do a real good job of that). At least I can find out if that Glenn cue is made by a reputable or known cuemaker or not...... Heck, I have been a collector of old Meucci cues for years...never seen one go for the prices that the OLD bluebook had, let alone the new ones. Maybe I am ignorant (wouldn't be the first time)....remember that I am from Alabama!!!

I have been going to shows over the last few years, and see a lot of the "real" prices of cues there, but I have gotten far more out of being able to correspond with all the folks on AZB, and I think I have gotten better info from here than the bluebook, but you can't be expected to query the forum for opinions and knowledgable advice everytime you have a potential transaction. If I see something in the bluebook or a cue question comes up, at least I can present it to the forum and you guys almost always have some knowledge of a cuemaker, value, etc. Also, I find most folks are pretty honest about their opinions, or should I say very few have any reservation about giving it.....and that's not a bad thing...the difference of opinions is what often leads to a better true understanding of an issue as more people enter with their part.

 

[keepitreal]

Sean,

You said "your letter should have been clearly titled something like "Titlist Conversion Cue - Formerly Rambow Redone By Hercek". This cue is reworked to the point where very little Rambow is left.... "

You are exactly correct and that is exactly what my appraisal details. By the way, in the world of antiques and appraisals, all of that is what "Fully Restored" typically means. Any intelligent person who reads that knows that there is little if any at all originality left to the cue or any antique that is "Fully Restored," especially when they read in my appraisal that the cue has been brought to "non original status." When I do an appraisal, I don't use pool room language; I use appraisal language. If the owners are interested in a pool room assessment, they can take the cues to the pool room and save the $300 I charge.

As far as Joe's restored Balabushka, if the cue really needed to be restored, fine I guess. However, if it was restored it should be titled a restored Balabushka plain and simple. It is not. As far as the cue's value, I am not the one who has it reduced. I never said that a restored Balabushka was worthless...just worth less than a like original. Joe has so nicely proven that point for me despite the fact he has argued the contrary in the past.

Finally, when buying and selling, things rarely ever get bought or sold at their true value. It is not uncommon for someone to pick up something cheap that is not popular right now or to pay way too much for something that is. I have paid double what something is "worth" in order to complete a sector of my collection or to complete a set of something. And I have bought stuff on ebay at 10% of its value and turned them around for a profit. When you do an appraisal you valuate the cue based on what it would cost to replace the cue or one just like it. When it comes to this cue, it is a fully restored Rambow with work done by Joel Hercek. Pretend that this cue was stolen. If the owner wanted to replace this piece with a piece like it with similar traits...meaning a fully restored Rambow with the work done by one of the greatest cue makers ever, you can be assured that you are not going to find another like it for much less than my valuation.

Deno

This is well stated & I appreciate both points of view, and respect both (highly experienced) opinions/positions. Personally the cue is quite attractive to me, mainly because the re-finish & wrap, other components, etc. were done by Joel. I do know that it's certainly not a given (by any stretch) that Joel will even touch another makers cue, (I know, first hand).. so the fact that he did the work is a tremendous temptation for me to hit on this ebay action, and I may. I should preface this by saying Joel is certainly one of my favorite makers, past or present. If it were Rambow in original condition, needing a re-finish or not, I'd not give it another look. By Joels laying his hands on it, working his magic, and bringing it to pristine, that's the best of both worlds, and quite appealing to me. Have a great weekend all, and again, much respect to these fine members and positions therein.

 

[icon]

Maybe I am ignorant (wouldn't be the first time)....remember that I am from Alabama!!!

hey now! you know i'm in bham!

 

[Bamacues]

hey now! you know i'm in bham!

Alabama born and Alabama bred, and when I die, I'll be Alabama dead!!

Roll Damn Tide!!

 

[Bamacues]

hey now! you know i'm in bham!

BTW, now I have been to B'ham, Gardendale, Mountain Brook, etc, but have you been to Enterprise, New Brockton, Clio, Elba, Ariton, Goodman etc.....my part of Bama is different from B'ham.......

 

[icon]

BTW, now I have been to B'ham, Gardendale, Mountain Brook, etc, but have you been to Enterprise, New Brockton, Clio, Elba, Ariton, Goodman etc.....my part of Bama is different from B'ham.......

huh?
kidding! been thru enterprise a million times on the way to and from the beach! does that count?
you know old wiley?

 

[runscott]

Response to Bama

Runscott, let me state that in spite of the bickering, etc, I think I personally picked up on some valuable info, but it is pretty much what I thought all along.....

I learned that this cue was originally made by Herman Rambow, which was part of what I was looking for. The rest of this is interesting, but I'm not sure what the takeaway message is. I agree with your first two points, and like you, had those same thoughts previously - they are common sense assumptions that most collectors of anything vintage would make. We're learning that some in the cue-collecting world feel differently.

If I were presented with an original Rambow, I wouldn't restore it as long as it were presentable. If it were too ugly to show as an original Rambow, then maybe it's appropriate to send it to someone like Joel Hercek. What do you have when done? I'm not sure, but it's a beauty. A few choices I've made recently:

I picked up three vintage Brunswicks a few months ago - one was an unplayable Hoppe with a severely warped shaft, bad grip,bad joint, and chewed-up at the bottom of the butt. I sent it to Jerry Rauenzahn for "re-working". Can't call it a "restoration" since it will undergo massive changes, despite the fact that it will still be recognized as a former Brunswick Hoppe when completed. I was looking for just such a cue when I bought it - a good forearm with nice Titlist points, and nice butt wood, but I didn't want to destroy a good presentable, playable, original Brunswick Hoppe. In fact, I'm still looking for a bargain on one, and plan to alter as little as possible.

On the other hand, I also picked up a late '60s/early '70s Brunswick that was still in playable condition and looks nice. I considered refinishing, but never really considered "re-working" or restoration - I eventually decided instead to just have the broken ferrule replaced and to get rid of the screw-on tip - now it will be playable and I still have a near-original condition antique. That was my preference, but someone else might have preferred to refinish or completely "re-work" it.

I also have an early 1900's snooker cue that could easily have been restored, or left "as-is". I'm not sure how either choice would have affected value, but I decided to have it made into a 2-piece conversion cue. I'm completely lost as to how that decision will affect value, but in this case I don't care - I wanted a conversion cue with a vintage look, not an original snooker cue. In the end, I think any decision is a personal preference, and is fine as long as we are honest about what has been done to the cue.

 

[Bamacues]

I learned that this cue was originally made by Herman Rambow, which was part of what I was looking for. The rest of this is interesting, but I'm not sure what the takeaway message is. I agree with your first two points, and like you, had those same thoughts previously - they are common sense assumptions that most collectors of anything vintage would make. We're learning that some in the cue-collecting world feel differently.

If I were presented with an original Rambow, I wouldn't restore it as long as it were presentable. If it were too ugly to show as an original Rambow, then maybe it's appropriate to send it to someone like Joel Hercek. What do you have when done? I'm not sure, but it's a beauty. A few choices I've made recently:

I picked up three vintage Brunswicks a few months ago - one was an unplayable Hoppe with a severely warped shaft, bad grip,bad joint, and chewed-up at the bottom of the butt. I sent it to Jerry Rauenzahn for "re-working". Can't call it a "restoration" since it will undergo massive changes, despite the fact that it will still be recognized as a former Brunswick Hoppe when completed. I was looking for just such a cue when I bought it - a good forearm with nice Titlist points, and nice butt wood, but I didn't want to destroy a good presentable, playable, original Brunswick Hoppe. In fact, I'm still looking for a bargain on one, and plan to alter as little as possible.

On the other hand, I also picked up a late '60s/early '70s Brunswick that was still in playable condition and looks nice. I considered refinishing, but never really considered "re-working" or restoration - I eventually decided instead to just have the broken ferrule replaced and to get rid of the screw-on tip - now it will be playable and I still have a near-original condition antique. That was my preference, but someone else might have preferred to refinish or completely "re-work" it.

I also have an early 1900's snooker cue that could easily have been restored, or left "as-is". I'm not sure how either choice would have affected value, but I decided to have it made into a 2-piece conversion cue. I'm completely lost as to how that decision will affect value, but in this case I don't care - I wanted a conversion cue with a vintage look, not an original snooker cue. In the end, I think any decision is a personal preference, and is fine as long as we are honest about what has been done to the cue.

Like you, I would also like to have a nice titlist conversion cue made just to play around with. While I don't think I would mess up a Rambow if I knew I had one, I never cared for those really fat cues even when I was younger, but to have a full splice with Titlist points, some classic inlays, and for it to be done by a really top notch cuemaker......well that is my cup of tea!!