[HN Gopher] Leica 0-Series no. 105 owned by'Oscar Barnack
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Leica 0-Series no. 105 owned by'Oscar Barnack
        
       Author : marban
       Score  : 26 points
       Date   : 2022-06-12 15:29 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.leitz-auction.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.leitz-auction.com)
        
       | ofrzeta wrote:
       | It's amazing when things have survived in such good condition for
       | so long.
        
       | fortysixdegrees wrote:
       | 14 million... Wow. Capital really is looking for a place to run
       | to right now
        
         | martin_a wrote:
         | Yeah, but will you have any ROI on that?
         | 
         | If Leica dies (even more) and the brand image and the fans are
         | dying too, what will be left in the end? Will that camera be
         | anything worth in 50 years?
         | 
         | I find collectibles like these really hard as something to put
         | your money in.
         | 
         | edit: lots of auctions seem to only reach the low estimate,
         | some are unsold. probably doesn't work as expected.
        
           | Finnucane wrote:
           | As a long-term investment, art and collectables are pretty
           | high-risk. To the extent that we could guess what _anything_
           | will be worth fifty years from now. Owning things like this
           | are partly about bragging rights, a kind of dick-waving for
           | the ultra-wealthy.
        
             | _ph_ wrote:
             | On the other side, I expect this camera to hold value much
             | better than some coastal real-estate in Florida. /s
             | 
             | The big question of course is: does out civilization and
             | society mostly survive the next 50 years. If so, the value
             | of that camera should be reasonably high, as it is
             | basically the first compact photo camera and the ancestor
             | to all 35mm photo cameras. So if there is still a market
             | for historic items towards the end of this century, this
             | camera should be valuable.
        
               | Finnucane wrote:
               | Oh sure, the camera will still be a valuable historic
               | artifact. But that is a different question from whether
               | it makes sense to pay $14 million as a financial
               | investment.
        
               | themadturk wrote:
               | I wonder if it's really (or entirely) a financial
               | investment. If was me paying 14.4 million euros, it would
               | be because it's an emotional investment.
        
           | brk wrote:
           | >Yeah, but will you have any ROI on that?
           | 
           | There is an old joke, 4 art collectors are stranded on a
           | desert island with only a Picasso painting (or, a rare
           | camera), and they all managed to make a living.
        
             | Jistern wrote:
             | I really did laugh out loud. Here: take your upvote.
             | 
             | That reminds me of the saying, "The lottery is a tax on the
             | stupid." To me, it's also reasonable to say, "Buying
             | lottery tickets is a cry of the desperate."
             | 
             | By the way, while we are on the subject of gambling, I
             | don't like the phrase "casino capitalism" because the term
             | "capitalism" is usually a smokescreen which distorts and
             | obfuscates how, for example, the US economy actually works
             | (hint: the powerful collude to enrich themselves). But I do
             | like the "casino" part of the phrase.
        
               | cduzz wrote:
               | Gambling is entertainment; ideally you buy the lottery
               | ticket to make the 2 minute "numbers bouncing around"
               | show entertaining.
               | 
               | In the same way poker is only an engaging game if there
               | are stakes, and the 2 universal stakes are "money" and
               | "time".
               | 
               | Anyhow, this is a cool artifact. I'm not sure if its 14
               | million metric units of cool or not but I'm not part of
               | that market.
               | 
               | Uses for this include:
               | 
               | 1. Show it off! It's cool!
               | 
               | 2. Make 2 more of them, sell them both secretly, keep the
               | original
               | 
               | 3. Look for DNA from the leica inventor, make an army
               | baby leica inventors
               | 
               | 4. put in a box, move it to another country, sell it and
               | not pay taxes
               | 
               | 5. look at it, it's cool
               | 
               | 6. sell it to someone else with lots of money and in
               | interest in camera stuff
        
               | Jistern wrote:
        
           | ginko wrote:
           | >Will that camera be anything worth in 50 years?
           | 
           | I'd be very very surprized if that camera wouldn't be
           | extremely collectible in 50 years time. To be honest the only
           | cameras more iconic than this are the Apollo 11 Hasselblads
           | which are currently on the Moon.
        
             | christkv wrote:
             | I wonder if the next person on the moon can claim salvage
             | rights lol
        
               | progre wrote:
               | I think there is some kind of heritage site agreements
               | for the the moon landing gear.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-14 23:02 UTC)