Resale value

Lee B.

I stitch my wings and pull the strings.
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
561
Location
Seattle
So true! And it's sad.
Does PRS have such a model? Is there an investment quality that doesn't cost an arm and a leg currently. I know I'm not asking much LOL I just want one that plays and sounds fantastic and looks like a piece of art.

The best PRS Core values I've seen trolling Reverb are 2000-2010 models, especially the "hollow bird" ones from 2007-2008. Other than perhaps a general cold shoulder to the hollow bird aesthetics, there is literally no sane reason why these instruments are going for the prices they are. My 2008 SC-250 is easily the best guitar I've ever owned, it completely blows the doors off any Gibson I've ever owned or played. In terms of a new current-model PRS that wouldn't cost an arm and a leg, it'd be pretty hard to go wrong with an S2 or CE.

I think treating PRSi as an investment is a mistake from any sort of financial viewpoint. Barring a paradigm shift of ridiculous proportions, the best they'll ever do over time is hold steady, and even then you're technically losing whatever the annual inflation rate is. Even Dragons typically lose value over time once you adjust for inflation. The sole reason to buy a PRS is to play it; you'll never be disappointed in it as an instrument.
 

DCDetector

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
36
By investment I'm not so much referring to a guitar that will appreciate in value over the years, although I see nothing wrong with that, but more a short term investment. That is to say I'd hate to pay $3,000 for a PRS and decided I didn't like it and when I go to sell I'm lucky to get $800 for it.
 

bodia

Authorities said.....best leave it.....unsolved
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
29,845
Location
Suburban Chicago
By investment I'm not so much referring to a guitar that will appreciate in value over the years, although I see nothing wrong with that, but more a short term investment. That is to say I'd hate to pay $3,000 for a PRS and decided I didn't like it and when I go to sell I'm lucky to get $800 for it.

That's not going to happen
 

veinbuster

Zombie Three, DFZ
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
13,745
Location
GTA or wandering aimlessly
By investment I'm not so much referring to a guitar that will appreciate in value over the years, although I see nothing wrong with that, but more a short term investment. That is to say I'd hate to pay $3,000 for a PRS and decided I didn't like it and when I go to sell I'm lucky to get $800 for it.
I’m with Bodia. The price isn’t going to drop nearly that much while you decide if you like it or not.
 

walrus

New Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
607
I paid (for me) quite a bit for my '08 Hollowbody Spruce. But a fair price, I thought, given the research I did. But I am not a collector, I love this thing and I am playing it daily. My acoustic is an '84 Guild (bought new), and Guild's slogan has been "Made to Be Played" for decades. The Guild is the only acoustic I've owned since I bought it, and the fretboard divots are proof that it has been played!

That's how I feel about my PRS, too. If my kids end up selling it because I'm gone, they can worry about the used market then - but until that happens I am playing it as much as I can! For whatever reason, I never took a serious look at PRS until fairly recently, I was on a quest to find a light yet versatile guitar after some major surgery. I'm embarrassed to admit that, now that I know what I was missing. But I never gave a thought to it's potential as an "investment".

So I think I paid a fair price for the PRS in the used market - got it through Guitar Center because of their great return policy - just in case! But I have no intention of putting it back in the used market, it is a keeper!
 

DCDetector

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
36
It’s a shame that guitars have become a commodity. They’re made to be played. Admire them as you do!

Now replace the word guitar with car and played with driven. Now you see reality.

I don't see the problem. Gibson's and Fender's are a commodity you can also play, invest in or both.
 

DCDetector

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
36
Without a doubt PRS is making a name for itself. I'm a perfect example. Been a Gibson fan most my life, although I do like Fender as well, but PRS has caught my attention like many others.
 

dogrocketp

I drank the PRS kool aid, and it was tasty!
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
4,312
Location
Washington, DC
I've never quite under stood the whole guitar value scheme anyway. I mean it doesn't follow the same logic as most collectible items. You take a car, lets say the 64.5 Mustang Convertible again, in mint condition we're looking at a book value for 60k. Of course like collectible guitars book value and what you can actually get are two different things. Really it's only worth what someone is willing to pay. Anyway, You take that same 64.5 Mustang and it's got the crap beat out of it and looks 42 years old you'll be lucky to get 10k. Not true for guitars. Now this is where I'm lost.

I can have a closet queen mint vintage guitar and get good money, or I can take a new guitar, beat the crap out of it so it looks old, or I guess its called "relic", and get a fortune for it. WTF? The whole concept of a relic'd guitar escapes me. Why would someone not prefer a old guitar in mint shape over a new guitar that looks like it ws drug through the mud for 50 miles? I'm just bewildered.
I think the thing is that a relic`d guitar looks like it`s actually been played (like the owner was a gigging musician by proxy). So instead of quitting playing for the day gig and family, the owner becomes an instant road dog and his/ her guitar shows it. I knew when I played my first PRS, I was down the right road. I played for 40 years before I played a PRS. And Dumazz that I am, I live about 70 miles from the factory. Screw the money part, I just want to sound good to my own ears.
 
Last edited:

DCDetector

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2016
Messages
36
Nothing wrong with a few battle scars, although personally I would prefer none, but some of these relic jobs I've seen look like the guitar was used as an oar for a row boat for 20 years. I've got a 42 year old Electra I personally gigged with no mercy that still looks pretty nice. Got a few chips but still in great condition. Oh course I've always tried to take care of my guitars. I guess if you treated it like crap it would look like crap.

My 42 year old gigged hard and hung up wet 1975 Electra.

Electra-done-5.jpg


Electra-24.jpg


loosechange-1.jpg
 
Last edited:

bodia

Authorities said.....best leave it.....unsolved
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
29,845
Location
Suburban Chicago
Nothing wrong with a few battle scars, although personally I would prefer none, but some of these relic jobs I've seen look like the guitar was used as an oar for a row boat for 20 years. I've got a 42 year old Electra I personally gigged with no mercy that still looks pretty nice. Got a few chips but still in great condition. Oh course I've always tried to take care of my guitars. I guess if you treated it like crap it would look like crap.

My 42 year old gigged hard and hung up wet 1975 Electra.

Electra-done-5.jpg


Electra-24.jpg


loosechange-1.jpg

Duane, is that you?
 

sergiodeblanc

Don’t you ever cry again for the rest of your life
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
25,300
Nothing wrong with a few battle scars, although personally I would prefer none, but some of these relic jobs I've seen look like the guitar was used as an oar for a row boat for 20 years. I've got a 42 year old Electra I personally gigged with no mercy that still looks pretty nice. Got a few chips but still in great condition. Oh course I've always tried to take care of my guitars. I guess if you treated it like crap it would look like crap.

My 42 year old gigged hard and hung up wet 1975 Electra.

Electra-done-5.jpg


Electra-24.jpg


loosechange-1.jpg


And there I am in the white shirt.
 

tonytester

PIC YOUR STRINGS WISELY
Joined
Jun 6, 2017
Messages
267
Location
parma ohio
I've never quite under stood the whole guitar value scheme anyway. I mean it doesn't follow the same logic as most collectible items. You take a car, lets say the 64.5 Mustang Convertible again, in mint condition we're looking at a book value for 60k. Of course like collectible guitars book value and what you can actually get are two different things. Really it's only worth what someone is willing to pay. Anyway, You take that same 64.5 Mustang and it's got the crap beat out of it and looks 42 years old you'll be lucky to get 10k. Not true for guitars. Now this is where I'm lost.

I can have a closet queen mint vintage guitar and get good money, or I can take a new guitar, beat the crap out of it so it looks old, or I guess its called "relic", and get a fortune for it. WTF? The whole concept of a relic'd guitar escapes me. Why would someone not prefer a old guitar in mint shape over a new guitar that looks like it ws drug through the mud for 50 miles? I'm just bewildered.

ok what about jeans that kids buy that look like the ones I just threw out all cockeyed ripped and faded .
 
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
672
Location
Whoville
PRS doesn't have poor resale value. Gibson and Fender just happen to have really good resale value, but even that only extends to certain models.
 
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
672
Location
Whoville
I'd have to agree about the "hero worship and age.". But will it continue to advance or remain the same? That is to say we know the 1959 Les Paul is currently a collector's dream, but will say a 2016 Traditional, sort of a modern favorite, have the same collector value in 60 years as the 1959 does now? I don't think it will. I don't think we will ever see the collector values we see for the original old guitars ever again on any model no matter the age.

Gibson has spent years telling us that '59 was the pinnacle and then charging a fortune for a small taste of the action. '59 must be better because the '59 reissue costs more than the '58 reissue.

Fender does the same with guitars and amplifiers... '52, '58, '63. '64, '65, '74.

If PRS put out a re-issue of the 1993 Custom 24 with an interesting marketing blurb then a real 1993 Custom 24 would jump in price because people would suddenly desire the real thing.
 

sergiodeblanc

Don’t you ever cry again for the rest of your life
Joined
Apr 26, 2012
Messages
25,300
Gibson has spent years telling us that '59 was the pinnacle and then charging a fortune for a small taste of the action. '59 must be better because the '59 reissue costs more than the '58 reissue.

Fender does the same with guitars and amplifiers... '52, '58, '63. '64, '65, '74.

If PRS put out a re-issue of the 1993 Custom 24 with an interesting marketing blurb then a real 1993 Custom 24 would jump in price because people would suddenly desire the real thing.

Ehh... It was more than just a company's marketing hype that made Les Paul's from that era so valuable. Way before then players discovered them and made music that changed the world with them while they were discontinued. Maybe if future generations discover Linkin Park in their dad's record crates and worship them, then maybe PRS and Mesa can hype their reissues. PRS already did a run of "Throwback" CU24's to recreate the magic of those 85-86 guitars, and while prices on those did rise for a time... now not so much.

Not that I'm that into that old music made with LP's, which may be why I don't have any anymore?
 

Elliot

Gandalf the Vintage Yellow
Joined
Oct 13, 2016
Messages
939
If PRS put out a re-issue of the 1993 Custom 24 with an interesting marketing blurb then a real 1993 Custom 24 would jump in price because people would suddenly desire the real thing.

Yeah this is spot on. edit: not that I know '93 is the best year, but if they did this for any year, that year would jump up in value like crazy.

...Not that I'm that into that old music made with LP's...

SRSLY?
 
Top