WTB: Good Investment cues of up & coming cue makers
- Thread starter Shizzy319
- Start date
- Status
one guy im really impressed with is steve klein. him and leon sly are possibly my 2 favorite cue makers. even though their prices have already gone up lol.
How can Randy Mobley got a mentioned for a up and coming cuemaker ....when his 4 point simple cue is priced 3000$:thumbup:
i think he already there with Ron Haley, Showman, and else
It's Too Bad.....
It's too bad that discussions like this don't seem to fit in with the new forum rules that are pending for 2012 in the sense that it isn't directly related to the listing of a pool cue for purchase or sale versus trying to obtain information and opinions that might eventually lead to such a transaction.....possibly here on the forum which is the supposed ultimate goal.
I hope these type discussions will eventually transition over to the main forum or some other section because I enjoy reading other forum members comments and opinions on topics like this. I also am interested in seeing photo sof cues that others may have recently gotten and have in their collection that could be for sale under the right terms. In any event, I didn;t mean to distract from the original postre's question.
Personally, I think two upcoming cue-makers that might become a couple of the more esteemed names in due time is Phil Coker and Steve Klein. Defintely though Coker for investment purposes....his cues are quite nice.
It's too bad that discussions like this don't seem to fit in with the new forum rules that are pending for 2012 in the sense that it isn't directly related to the listing of a pool cue for purchase or sale versus trying to obtain information and opinions that might eventually lead to such a transaction.....possibly here on the forum which is the supposed ultimate goal.
I hope these type discussions will eventually transition over to the main forum or some other section because I enjoy reading other forum members comments and opinions on topics like this. I also am interested in seeing photo sof cues that others may have recently gotten and have in their collection that could be for sale under the right terms. In any event, I didn;t mean to distract from the original postre's question.
Personally, I think two upcoming cue-makers that might become a couple of the more esteemed names in due time is Phil Coker and Steve Klein. Defintely though Coker for investment purposes....his cues are quite nice.
My recomendation is Scott Gracio
not that I am putting him in the up and coming,
seeing that he made what is possibly the cue of the year
see cue gallery
but Scott is doing things other cue makers are not even thinking about
I recommend Scott to you for two reasons
1.He can really make anything
2.He is a humble likable guy who is not afraid to work
3.His work is terrific
not that I am putting him in the up and coming,
seeing that he made what is possibly the cue of the year
see cue gallery
but Scott is doing things other cue makers are not even thinking about
I recommend Scott to you for two reasons
1.He can really make anything
2.He is a humble likable guy who is not afraid to work
3.His work is terrific
Like Rodney Dangerfield get little respect, and has been at the Craft a very long time.
Jim Buss the Rocket Scientist is another sleeper.
Adam Franks... That's who I go with. He does everything one off and uses all natural stuff, no veneers all wood and he also does precious stone work, real stuff not that man made crap some of these cue makers use. His cues play so well and feel amazing when yiu strike a ball, unlike anything youve even played with... Look him up, that's my guy!
Can't lose with tascarella..
As far as cues that are worth more the minute you pay the cuemaker.
1. Szamboti
2. Haley
3. Gina
4. Searing
5. Showman
6. Mobley
7. Southwest (used to be anyway)
I may have missed a few but these are the bluechips. BB may be but I've never bought one and tried to sell it so I really don't know
1. Szamboti
2. Haley
3. Gina
4. Searing
5. Showman
6. Mobley
7. Southwest (used to be anyway)
I may have missed a few but these are the bluechips. BB may be but I've never bought one and tried to sell it so I really don't know
Not to change direction on this thread, but what is a fair assessment of how long a cue maker's work appreciates to noticeable value? At what point do you consider a cue maker's work worthy of investment in the first place?
One could argue that if the cue is worth more than you paid for it new, then it's got to be an investment right? Some makers have been around a very long time (Dayton and Shurtz come to mind as I own them). Their cues never really command what they cost to purchase new. Yet they are established and are relatively household names in the industry. I'm sure there are a plethora of established builders with a great deal of respect in the pool world, yet still maintain a very accessible price point.
I researched the heck out of Paul Dayton's work. I want a player first, collectibility is not a factor.
The Daytons all seem to have some very unique detailing whether it's the woods he uses, the rings he makes, even his construction. And I have never read a bad review of the playability of a Dayton. So I went and bought one. Should be here next week.
I guess I am wondering why some makers enjoy an active secondary market whereas other makers, something with a far longer and more established track record, never seem to quite get to that Elite status of a Schick or a Gina. Not that I care...I got a killer Dayton for pennies on the dollar compared to a more valuable maker's cue.
Amazing how some builders immediately shoot up in value, especially considering there's maybe not even enough cues out there to justify the reputation. Not that a certain maker is not deserving.
I think the "sleepers" category if you want to talk about investment potential is enormous. You might even say the Black Boars, Bill Schicks, Gina's and other elite are still in the sleeper category. These cues are only getting older and their value is certain. These may actually still be a steal if you consider their value ten years from now.
I just wanted to comment on the seemingly random amount of time it takes for a builder's work to reach collectible status and value. There seems to be no ryme or reason. The whole Jimmy Szamboti is a perfect example. Barry was lucky to possess his father's talent...but talent isnt passed through the blood by right. A last name is not a guarantee of quality, though it is apparently a guarantee of value and sales in this case. John Lennon's kid is never going to achieve what Jon did, Wayne Gretzky's kid can play....but he's not Wayne. To say Jimmy's cues will be on the same level of craftsmanship as Gus or Barry is extremely presumptuous at best, and downright obtuse at worst. ...Does his name alone guarantee that his work does not have to be tested in the world of playability and style? Or is cue making a craft that is so accessible that ANYBODY, given the right teacher, can build a Szamboti quality cue?
I guess in the end a collectible cue's value is based almost solely on the perceived value...as perceived by the customer. Bill Schick's reputation slowly gained steam over years of player's talking about how well they play. And that was before the internet was there to help. And Jimmy Szamboti cues are at legendary status already and how many has he made? Who has seen one much less played with one? ...Are they that good already? THAT to me is an investment cue. The name on the stick is more valuable than the stick itself...and that doesn't even take into account any of it's possible playability, or lack thereof.
It seems that the collectible market these days is driven almost exclusively by advertising and branding, and less and less by a single cue's merits on the table. Not that there is anything wrong with it...the collectable market is purely customer driven...always has been and always will be. it just seem there is a large shift as to the criteria for what makes a cue collectable.
I know a lot of people will disagree with this opinion, but try to be objective. I think value and collectibility needs to be earned the old fashioned way. And a great many makers listed in this thread alone are worthy of it. I think one of the greatest compliments a cue maker can have is to see his work become valuable. It must be nice to know that something you pour your heart and soul into, often times for up and comers for less than minimum wage concerning their labor costs, is so valued by people and players that their willing to pay a premium just for your name. ...Just make sure it's not ONLY your name that their paying for. ...The established greats can be confident that their cues are not all glitz and glam. But my friends....there are a LOT of cues out there who deserve this same distinction. They just might not know how to market their name/brand as well as some others.
To find the sleepers, do your homework. I think everything you need to know is literally buried in this forum. The best, most knowledgeable proponents of billiards as both a sport and a collectable reside in this forum and are regular contributors. Find an inexpensive cue by a maker that's been around a while and has a stellar reputation for playability.
One could argue that if the cue is worth more than you paid for it new, then it's got to be an investment right? Some makers have been around a very long time (Dayton and Shurtz come to mind as I own them). Their cues never really command what they cost to purchase new. Yet they are established and are relatively household names in the industry. I'm sure there are a plethora of established builders with a great deal of respect in the pool world, yet still maintain a very accessible price point.
I researched the heck out of Paul Dayton's work. I want a player first, collectibility is not a factor.
The Daytons all seem to have some very unique detailing whether it's the woods he uses, the rings he makes, even his construction. And I have never read a bad review of the playability of a Dayton. So I went and bought one. Should be here next week.
I guess I am wondering why some makers enjoy an active secondary market whereas other makers, something with a far longer and more established track record, never seem to quite get to that Elite status of a Schick or a Gina. Not that I care...I got a killer Dayton for pennies on the dollar compared to a more valuable maker's cue.
Amazing how some builders immediately shoot up in value, especially considering there's maybe not even enough cues out there to justify the reputation. Not that a certain maker is not deserving.
I think the "sleepers" category if you want to talk about investment potential is enormous. You might even say the Black Boars, Bill Schicks, Gina's and other elite are still in the sleeper category. These cues are only getting older and their value is certain. These may actually still be a steal if you consider their value ten years from now.
I just wanted to comment on the seemingly random amount of time it takes for a builder's work to reach collectible status and value. There seems to be no ryme or reason. The whole Jimmy Szamboti is a perfect example. Barry was lucky to possess his father's talent...but talent isnt passed through the blood by right. A last name is not a guarantee of quality, though it is apparently a guarantee of value and sales in this case. John Lennon's kid is never going to achieve what Jon did, Wayne Gretzky's kid can play....but he's not Wayne. To say Jimmy's cues will be on the same level of craftsmanship as Gus or Barry is extremely presumptuous at best, and downright obtuse at worst. ...Does his name alone guarantee that his work does not have to be tested in the world of playability and style? Or is cue making a craft that is so accessible that ANYBODY, given the right teacher, can build a Szamboti quality cue?
I guess in the end a collectible cue's value is based almost solely on the perceived value...as perceived by the customer. Bill Schick's reputation slowly gained steam over years of player's talking about how well they play. And that was before the internet was there to help. And Jimmy Szamboti cues are at legendary status already and how many has he made? Who has seen one much less played with one? ...Are they that good already? THAT to me is an investment cue. The name on the stick is more valuable than the stick itself...and that doesn't even take into account any of it's possible playability, or lack thereof.
It seems that the collectible market these days is driven almost exclusively by advertising and branding, and less and less by a single cue's merits on the table. Not that there is anything wrong with it...the collectable market is purely customer driven...always has been and always will be. it just seem there is a large shift as to the criteria for what makes a cue collectable.
I know a lot of people will disagree with this opinion, but try to be objective. I think value and collectibility needs to be earned the old fashioned way. And a great many makers listed in this thread alone are worthy of it. I think one of the greatest compliments a cue maker can have is to see his work become valuable. It must be nice to know that something you pour your heart and soul into, often times for up and comers for less than minimum wage concerning their labor costs, is so valued by people and players that their willing to pay a premium just for your name. ...Just make sure it's not ONLY your name that their paying for. ...The established greats can be confident that their cues are not all glitz and glam. But my friends....there are a LOT of cues out there who deserve this same distinction. They just might not know how to market their name/brand as well as some others.
To find the sleepers, do your homework. I think everything you need to know is literally buried in this forum. The best, most knowledgeable proponents of billiards as both a sport and a collectable reside in this forum and are regular contributors. Find an inexpensive cue by a maker that's been around a while and has a stellar reputation for playability.
Bill Schick definitely belongs up near the top. In my opinion the best of that entire group. Even for value. And I agree about Southwest...I have never seen such a high-demand cue take such a drubbing in the aftermarket. But hey....that's good for people that want one.
Jimmy's cues will look and play exactly like his dads and grandfathers. By the time Jimmy puts his own cues out, he will have many years building cues with his dad. Making his cues exactly the same as his teachers.
Jmo
QUOTE=Soulweb;3449092]Not to change direction on this thread, but what is a fair assessment of how long a cue maker's work appreciates to noticeable value? At what point do you consider a cue maker's work worthy of investment in the first place?
One could argue that if the cue is worth more than you paid for it new, then it's got to be an investment right? Some makers have been around a very long time (Dayton and Shurtz come to mind as I own them). Their cues never really command what they cost to purchase new. Yet they are established and are relatively household names in the industry. I'm sure there are a plethora of established builders with a great deal of respect in the pool world, yet still maintain a very accessible price point.
I researched the heck out of Paul Dayton's work. I want a player first, collectibility is not a factor.
The Daytons all seem to have some very unique detailing whether it's the woods he uses, the rings he makes, even his construction. And I have never read a bad review of the playability of a Dayton. So I went and bought one. Should be here next week.
I guess I am wondering why some makers enjoy an active secondary market whereas other makers, something with a far longer and more established track record, never seem to quite get to that Elite status of a Schick or a Gina. Not that I care...I got a killer Dayton for pennies on the dollar compared to a more valuable maker's cue.
Amazing how some builders immediately shoot up in value, especially considering there's maybe not even enough cues out there to justify the reputation. Not that a certain maker is not deserving.
I think the "sleepers" category if you want to talk about investment potential is enormous. You might even say the Black Boars, Bill Schicks, Gina's and other elite are still in the sleeper category. These cues are only getting older and their value is certain. These may actually still be a steal if you consider their value ten years from now.
I just wanted to comment on the seemingly random amount of time it takes for a builder's work to reach collectible status and value. There seems to be no ryme or reason. The whole Jimmy Szamboti is a perfect example. Barry was lucky to possess his father's talent...but talent isnt passed through the blood by right. A last name is not a guarantee of quality, though it is apparently a guarantee of value and sales in this case. John Lennon's kid is never going to achieve what Jon did, Wayne Gretzky's kid can play....but he's not Wayne. To say Jimmy's cues will be on the same level of craftsmanship as Gus or Barry is extremely presumptuous at best, and downright obtuse at worst. ...Does his name alone guarantee that his work does not have to be tested in the world of playability and style? Or is cue making a craft that is so accessible that ANYBODY, given the right teacher, can build a Szamboti quality cue?
I guess in the end a collectible cue's value is based almost solely on the perceived value...as perceived by the customer. Bill Schick's reputation slowly gained steam over years of player's talking about how well they play. And that was before the internet was there to help. And Jimmy Szamboti cues are at legendary status already and how many has he made? Who has seen one much less played with one? ...Are they that good already? THAT to me is an investment cue. The name on the stick is more valuable than the stick itself...and that doesn't even take into account any of it's possible playability, or lack thereof.
It seems that the collectible market these days is driven almost exclusively by advertising and branding, and less and less by a single cue's merits on the table. Not that there is anything wrong with it...the collectable market is purely customer driven...always has been and always will be. it just seem there is a large shift as to the criteria for what makes a cue collectable.
I know a lot of people will disagree with this opinion, but try to be objective. I think value and collectibility needs to be earned the old fashioned way. And a great many makers listed in this thread alone are worthy of it. I think one of the greatest compliments a cue maker can have is to see his work become valuable. It must be nice to know that something you pour your heart and soul into, often times for up and comers for less than minimum wage concerning their labor costs, is so valued by people and players that their willing to pay a premium just for your name. ...Just make sure it's not ONLY your name that their paying for. ...The established greats can be confident that their cues are not all glitz and glam. But my friends....there are a LOT of cues out there who deserve this same distinction. They just might not know how to market their name/brand as well as some others.
To find the sleepers, do your homework. I think everything you need to know is literally buried in this forum. The best, most knowledgeable proponents of billiards as both a sport and a collectable reside in this forum and are regular contributors. Find an inexpensive cue by a maker that's been around a while and has a stellar reputation for playability.[/QUOTE]
Jmo
QUOTE=Soulweb;3449092]Not to change direction on this thread, but what is a fair assessment of how long a cue maker's work appreciates to noticeable value? At what point do you consider a cue maker's work worthy of investment in the first place?
One could argue that if the cue is worth more than you paid for it new, then it's got to be an investment right? Some makers have been around a very long time (Dayton and Shurtz come to mind as I own them). Their cues never really command what they cost to purchase new. Yet they are established and are relatively household names in the industry. I'm sure there are a plethora of established builders with a great deal of respect in the pool world, yet still maintain a very accessible price point.
I researched the heck out of Paul Dayton's work. I want a player first, collectibility is not a factor.
The Daytons all seem to have some very unique detailing whether it's the woods he uses, the rings he makes, even his construction. And I have never read a bad review of the playability of a Dayton. So I went and bought one. Should be here next week.
I guess I am wondering why some makers enjoy an active secondary market whereas other makers, something with a far longer and more established track record, never seem to quite get to that Elite status of a Schick or a Gina. Not that I care...I got a killer Dayton for pennies on the dollar compared to a more valuable maker's cue.
Amazing how some builders immediately shoot up in value, especially considering there's maybe not even enough cues out there to justify the reputation. Not that a certain maker is not deserving.
I think the "sleepers" category if you want to talk about investment potential is enormous. You might even say the Black Boars, Bill Schicks, Gina's and other elite are still in the sleeper category. These cues are only getting older and their value is certain. These may actually still be a steal if you consider their value ten years from now.
I just wanted to comment on the seemingly random amount of time it takes for a builder's work to reach collectible status and value. There seems to be no ryme or reason. The whole Jimmy Szamboti is a perfect example. Barry was lucky to possess his father's talent...but talent isnt passed through the blood by right. A last name is not a guarantee of quality, though it is apparently a guarantee of value and sales in this case. John Lennon's kid is never going to achieve what Jon did, Wayne Gretzky's kid can play....but he's not Wayne. To say Jimmy's cues will be on the same level of craftsmanship as Gus or Barry is extremely presumptuous at best, and downright obtuse at worst. ...Does his name alone guarantee that his work does not have to be tested in the world of playability and style? Or is cue making a craft that is so accessible that ANYBODY, given the right teacher, can build a Szamboti quality cue?
I guess in the end a collectible cue's value is based almost solely on the perceived value...as perceived by the customer. Bill Schick's reputation slowly gained steam over years of player's talking about how well they play. And that was before the internet was there to help. And Jimmy Szamboti cues are at legendary status already and how many has he made? Who has seen one much less played with one? ...Are they that good already? THAT to me is an investment cue. The name on the stick is more valuable than the stick itself...and that doesn't even take into account any of it's possible playability, or lack thereof.
It seems that the collectible market these days is driven almost exclusively by advertising and branding, and less and less by a single cue's merits on the table. Not that there is anything wrong with it...the collectable market is purely customer driven...always has been and always will be. it just seem there is a large shift as to the criteria for what makes a cue collectable.
I know a lot of people will disagree with this opinion, but try to be objective. I think value and collectibility needs to be earned the old fashioned way. And a great many makers listed in this thread alone are worthy of it. I think one of the greatest compliments a cue maker can have is to see his work become valuable. It must be nice to know that something you pour your heart and soul into, often times for up and comers for less than minimum wage concerning their labor costs, is so valued by people and players that their willing to pay a premium just for your name. ...Just make sure it's not ONLY your name that their paying for. ...The established greats can be confident that their cues are not all glitz and glam. But my friends....there are a LOT of cues out there who deserve this same distinction. They just might not know how to market their name/brand as well as some others.
To find the sleepers, do your homework. I think everything you need to know is literally buried in this forum. The best, most knowledgeable proponents of billiards as both a sport and a collectable reside in this forum and are regular contributors. Find an inexpensive cue by a maker that's been around a while and has a stellar reputation for playability.[/QUOTE]
I think Southwest values have climbed in the market in the last year or so since Laurie raised the delivered prices . The exotic wood forearm cues especially Ebony ones have reached new highs . I can think of one particular cue that brought $4400 real money . Two years ago that cue was 2800-3200.
- Status