Collected Works

As most know by now, I collect modern first by my favourite writers and
focus on "complete works" by any given writer. Even cookbooks are added to
the stew.

So, the old question. For valuation purposes, what would you add to the
basic price of each of the books for a complete run?

An example. Robert B. Parker has over 50 titles to his credit. Mostly the
Spenser books, but a few stand alone books and two other small series. All
first/firsts and in very good to fine. Some limited editions, some signed
directly, others by bookplate, but all are there.

It would be a shame to break up the set, even if a single buyer for the
whole is harder to find.

So, for the "complete works" what sort of enhancement to the valuation would
be appropriate? +10%? More? Less?

Willow

In article Lp8fg.215575$WI1.43755@pd7tw2no,
"Pangarune Corner" wrote:

Even cookbooks are added to
the stew.


Cookbooks ... stew ... nyuck! :-D

So, the old question. For valuation purposes, what would you add to the
basic price of each of the books for a complete run?

I wouldn't add a dime. If anything, I'd expect a discount.

For me, as well as for most collectors I know, much of the thrill is in
the chase and the individual joys of finding a new piece to add.

What's the point of buying a complete collection of anything? Not much
fun in that, for my money.

Hi Willow:

Unfortunatly, I have to agree with Scot, given that I follow the same
collecting focus as you (find an author one likes and obtain
everything by them). No one really wants a complete set, everyone just
wants to complete their own. Perhaps if it was a set desirebale enuf
to make it into an auction house, you might get a dilletante with
money looking to fo from zero to xixty in nothing flat. O/W, we just
have to chase the complete set for the fun of it.

Some of the signed sets I have complete or nearly so are Hiassen,
Mosley, Nick Hornby, Hijuelos, Ishiguro, Amy Tan, Alice Hoffman, and
Jim Crace. Nothing particularly rare or valauble, but fun to create
and good reading.

I also have complete sets of Saramago and Coetzee, unsigned. I hope
one day to luck out but Nobelists tend not to do your average book
signing, especially when they have to travel to the USA.

Denton



On Wed, 31 May 2006 03:52:11 GMT, "Pangarune Corner"
wrote:

As most know by now, I collect modern first by my favourite writers and
focus on "complete works" by any given writer. Even cookbooks are added to
the stew.

So, the old question. For valuation purposes, what would you add to the
basic price of each of the books for a complete run?

An example. Robert B. Parker has over 50 titles to his credit. Mostly the
Spenser books, but a few stand alone books and two other small series. All
first/firsts and in very good to fine. Some limited editions, some signed
directly, others by bookplate, but all are there.

It would be a shame to break up the set, even if a single buyer for the
whole is harder to find.

So, for the "complete works" what sort of enhancement to the valuation would
be appropriate? +10%? More? Less?

Willow

Pangarune Corner wrote:
As most know by now, I collect modern first by my favourite writers and
focus on "complete works" by any given writer. Even cookbooks are added to
the stew.

So, the old question. For valuation purposes, what would you add to the
basic price of each of the books for a complete run?


I don't have the knowledge or credentials comparable to those of
the other two replies, but I'd reach the same answer using slightly
different math. I think that there is a bit of a premium for the time
and organization involved in having assembled a complete set of
anything. However, the premium would be measured not from the sum of
the individual prices but from the value of an accumulation of 60 books
by an author. If I bought 60 out of 100 possible items from any
collecting catagory, I'd expect a substantial discount from the total
of the 60 individual prices. Thus, a complete collection of 60 out of
60 items would go for more than the other 60, but no premium compared
to the individual prices.

chiwito

Pangarune Corner wrote:

For valuation purposes, what would you add to the
basic price of each of the books for a complete run?

I think it probably depends on what, precisely, you are talking about.
Valuation for insurance purposes? For resale? And what kind of "run"?
One that a collector might reasonably expect to assemble him- or
herself? An archive of some sort? All the volumes in a particular series?

Most of what I collect myself doesn't really come in "runs", but a lot
of the material I buy and pass on probably comes under that heading.
There are many serial publications, or multi-volume editions in the
Japanese publishing world, and there is a kind of pattern to the pricing
of them.

Basically, one would expect a complete set to cost more per volume than
an incomplete set, but less than the cost of buying each volume
individually. For example, I had only assembled ten of an eleven-volume
set of books on Japan's war with Russia in the late 19th century when
someone inquired after it and I sold it incomplete. Had I located the
final volume I would have considered it well-priced at $650-$700; in the
event, though, I sold ten of the eleven volumes for $500, and am still
looking for the remaining volume, which - if I ever locate it - I would
hope to pass on to the buyer for around $50. But if I got a request out
of the blue for a single volume I might have to charge up to around $80
for it.

Similarly, I'd sell a 9-volume set of the Hinotori manga series for $80
(that's the second edition; I have yet to put together a complete set of
the first), but would ask more for odd volumes (at least $10 apiece),
but if someone wanted the set at a time when I only had eight of the
nine volumes, I'd probably let them have it for, say, $60 and charge an
extra $10 or so when the missing volume turned up (which, in this case,
it invariably would, in the course of time).

I know these examples are taken from my own, rather obscure, corner of
the book-collecting world, but I think they illustrate a general
principle. I would expect to pay less per volume for an incomplete set
of, say, the serial publication of a Dickens novel (usually 20 parts
issued in 19 monthly installments) in the original wraps than for a
complete set. On the other hand, assembling a full set from odd volumes
would probably, in the end, turn out to be more expensive than buying a
complete set intact.

It would seem that the most cost-effective approach over a short period
would be to buy an incomplete set and then hunt out the missing volumes.
Over a longer period of time, assembling sets from odd volumes is
probably a good idea since, if one's collector's nose is working
properly, the first volumes acquired should have increased in value over
the period of collecting.

Let's say that at the end of a five-year quest you had put together a
"run", and that volumes which you bought for $20-$50 are now selling for
around $60 apiece (reality is never quite as tidy as this, but for the
sake of argument these figures will do). Your set (let's say it's of 20
volumes) might only fetch $1000 (compared with $1200, if sold off
piecemeal), but you'd still have acquired it at a very good price and,
if you did ever decide to sell, settling for $1000 for a single
transaction would be a lot cleaner and quicker and less hassle than
sticking out for $1200 over 20 separate transactions.

There may be other areas of book-collecting where these rules would not
apply, and I can think of exceptions even as I type, but I think this is
probably a reasonable rule of thumb in the majority of cases.

John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com

John R. Yamamoto-Wilson wrote:


There are many serial publications, or multi-volume editions in the
Japanese publishing world, and there is a kind of pattern to the pricing
of them.

Basically, one would expect a complete set to cost more per volume than
an incomplete set, but less than the cost of buying each volume
individually.


I know these examples are taken from my own, rather obscure, corner of
the book-collecting world, but I think they illustrate a general
principle. I would expect to pay less per volume for an incomplete set
of, say, the serial publication of a Dickens novel (usually 20 parts
issued in 19 monthly installments) in the original wraps than for a
complete set. On the other hand, assembling a full set from odd volumes
would probably, in the end, turn out to be more expensive than buying a
complete set intact.


I agree with Mr. Y-M's analysis; in fact it is exactly what I
tried less articulately to say. In other hobbies which involve complete
sets or runs, such as comic books and sports cards, the same valuation
would definitely apply.

Going back to Ms. Willow's original question, I would expect the
same pricing to apply to complete collections of catagories, such as
all the works of a given author. Again, the full "set" should go for
less per book than individual titles but more than an incomplete
accumulation.

chiwito

Scot Kamins wrote:
I wouldn't add a dime. If anything, I'd expect a discount.

For me, as well as for most collectors I know, much of the thrill is in
the chase and the individual joys of finding a new piece to add.

What's the point of buying a complete collection of anything? Not much
fun in that, for my money.

Is the point that Will is the only "book collector" here that does not
understand this concept lost on anyone at all?

Can anyone say "dillitante"?
I knew that you could....

(hmmmm...can anyone spell "dillitante"? I'm guessing I can't )

Scot Kamins wrote:
In article Lp8fg.215575$WI1.43755@pd7tw2no,
"Pangarune Corner" wrote:

Even cookbooks are added to
the stew.


Cookbooks ... stew ... nyuck! :-D

So, the old question. For valuation purposes, what would you add to the
basic price of each of the books for a complete run?

I wouldn't add a dime. If anything, I'd expect a discount.

For me, as well as for most collectors I know, much of the thrill is in
the chase and the individual joys of finding a new piece to add.

What's the point of buying a complete collection of anything? Not much
fun in that, for my money.

That is a rather large oversimplification. For
one thing, simply having all the books by one
author would not mean that the collector has
no more books to hunt for. What is to stop
the collector, even though he has purchased
all the books by one author in one fell swoop,
from proceeding to collect books by other]
authors? There are lots of other things to
consider also. For instance, let us imagine
a new collector who has only recently
become aware of those wonderful
Edgar Rice Burroughs Ace Paperbacks
from the 1960's with the covers by Roy
Krenkal and Frank Frazetta. Now, these
ooks have been getting scarcer and scarcer.
Yes, you can still find a number of them
on Addall, but you certainly can't find
anything close to all of them offered
in near-fine or fine condition. It is
reasonable to conclude that it might
take someone a few years to hunt down
all of the books in that Ace series, and of
course, if the books were purchased
singly on the net from many dealers,
there would be a number of annoyances
caused by dishonest or generally clueless
sellers.

All right, so what is wrong with our new
collector buying the entire Ace collection,
providing he can find it offered on ebay
or wherever? As to price, for something
as rare yet popular as this run of
paperbacks in near-fine or fine condition,
I think a wise seller a should
ask two or three times what the books
may be offered for singly, once he
adds up the prices for all the books.

[Memo from the upstairs office.]

Denton Taylor wrote:
Hi Willow:

Unfortunatly, I have to agree with Scot, given that I follow the same
collecting focus as you (find an author one likes and obtain
everything by them). No one really wants a complete set, everyone just
wants to complete their own.

In my other post I focused on the fact
that there are all sorts of variables
involved here, any number of which could
inspire a collector to buy a complete set
of works by an author ---and even pay
several times per book what single books
from the set might be priced at invidually,
such as the Ace E. R. Burroughs paperback
run from the 1960's with the Krenkal/Frazetta
overs.

[I might have added that would NOT apply
in many other instances, such as with those
very common complete paperback Narnia
sets. In that case, the sets are so common
that there is no good reason for anyone to
pay more per volume when buying a complete
set. Conversely, the Ace/Burroughs books
in my example were not marketed as a
"set" in the first place, though they have
proved so enduringly attractive to collectors
that "complete sets" of them are highly
prized.]

Even so, I will agree that often complete
sets of authors are not very desirable.
Many authors have published one or a
few good books yet have missed the
mark with quite a few others. A
collector might be delighted with a
First of "Little Big Man" and "Rabbit,
Run," but how many people would
want to dedicate their shelf space
to the complete works of Thomas
Berger or John Updike? Or how
about a complete set of John
Galsworthy -- now, for most people
that would prove a dust-gadthering
shelf-hog if there ever was one. Of
course, it is far more common for a
collector to go after the complete
works of a very few authors at most.
I am sure there are a great many
people who would love to have the
complete works of Jack Kerouac or
Charles Bukowski, and many others
would want the complete works
of Philip K. Dick

Even so, in general the other poster
is correct in suggesting that most
people don't want the complete
works of an author. In my view
that is because while they might
enjoy one or more books by the
author, they don't have
enough interest in the person's
other works to wish to devote the
shelf space to them.

[...]

[Memo from the upstairs office]