So often, the right answer comes down to this - communication. If a collector has invested 30-50 pieces worth of $1,500 to $5,000 knives in the work of a given maker, it is hard to imagine that there wouldn't be pretty good communication between the two. Significant decisions of this type would likely be discussed.
I think if we are equating "responsibility" with "obligation", then that is putting it too high. Of course it would not be good for a collector to suddenly flood the secondary market with a huge quantity of the work of one maker - definitely not good for the maker or likely for other collectors who own a number of examples of that maker's work. But I wouldn't put it as high as that collector having an obligation not to do so. They are his knives, bought with his cash.
Roger
I agree Roger, as communication is key in solving many issues and problems between maker and collector.
In addition, I believe the collector does
not have an obligation, however more a responsibility as one would assume that the collector and maker have built a friendship and/or mutual respect for each other over the long term relationship in the collector acquiring that many knives.
No, but the collector/investor would also be destroying the market for his collection. Emergencies happen in life, but having to liquidate tangible assets for instant cash is a classic recipe for disaster. Anyone who has that much money tied up in steel, from a single maker no less, and doesn't have liquid assets that FAR exceed the value of his collection is nuts, imho.
P
I certainly agree on both points Peter. Especially one's liquid assets should always exceed the value of their "collectible-investment assets".
I don't think its all that rare that established makers have supporting collectors that hold large quantities of their knives.
Makers such as Fisk, Loveless, SR Johnson, Dean, Hancock and many others have multiple collectors who own dozens of their knives.
Yes, all established makers IMO with long term customers face confronting this problem someday if they have not already.
In addition, I think most equate liquidation with financial emergencies or hard times, however at times wealthy collectors who get tired of or lose interest in whatever their collectible will turn them over to an auction house, dealer or just dump on the market to get out with the lease effort or aggravation possible. Even if it means they sell them for under market value. Heck, very often less than wealthy collectors sell their knives for less than market value.
This is evident form the GREAT DEALS we see showing up on a dealer site from time to time.
The savvy collector will be finished liquidating before anyone knows he is doing it. This is done by selling over time through multiple channels, however obviously does take more time.
