The Gamble

[Kohai999]

In 2005, I was working with three new makers- Charles(Chuck) Gedraitis, John Young and Nick Wheeler(pretty much the last time I worked with new makers until recently with David Sharp and Charles Vestal). I hate lost value on knives and don't generally work with new makers because they often stop making knives, thereby tanking the original investment.

Am happy to report that all three makers are still making knives. The initial prices on all the knives were roughly $1,000.

Here are the Gedraitis knives:



On these, I figure I could pretty much break even, or make $100-$200, maybe, to the right buyer at the right time....I'm not sure that these would be an easy sale.

I only have one of the Wheeler knives with easy photo access, the other is a random pattern damascus fighter with ironwood handle-


Either one of them will get between $1,500 to $2,000, and that is a fast sale, and pleasing knowledge to me. What I am NOT sure of is how long that will be the case, it is more on Nick than anything else.

The John Young knives Dirk (fighter purchased through Plaza Cutlery), lousy picture/scan of the Dirk this is


These knives will bring about $2,500....when I last spoke with John he had a 6 year waiting list.

You never know exactly what price a knife will bring until you sell it, so this is educated conjecture, but it is fairly satisfying to know that gambling on these "new" makers did not result in a loss, and I have very much enjoyed owning the knives.

Do you have any new maker "gamble" stories?

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

 

[petah]

Interesting... I really hate sitting on knives that don't give me that feeling of lust. At first I never made a penny except for ridiculously dumb luck and snagging a deal. That changed when I changed who I sell too. 'tactical' Knives do VERY well here in Japan. 'Artistic' stuff that you gambled on does not. Luckily I love more user finishes, stuff that you would consider lower end/value priced from said makers. So I collect what I like and I can sell EASILY as well when I want to change what I own. I know of a few makers who market in Asia. I'd like to hear what they have to say...

 

[betzner]

STeven, great subject. Don't remember one like this before. Really looking forward to what's in store.

 

[Lorien]

still really new to this custom knife collecting thing, so take the following as the words of a novice.

I recently commissioned a knife, (by a 'new' maker) which has led to me having to liquidate knives that I thought I'd have forever, knives that I bought on the secondary market exclusively. The best return I saw from the knives I sold so far was a neck knife made by Michael Burch, who's climbed the ladder pretty well over the past 3 or 4 years.

Sure, I've sold a few over the past few years, but I don't really have a handle on the 'gamble' yet. I still buy what I like, when I can, and balance my desire for a knife against the reputation etc of the guy who made it.

With that being said, exposure to this forum has evidently been a huge benefit for me when it comes to making smart purchases.

There have been a couple of knives that I spent more on than I sold them for, but not by much, and considering I've used them all I think that's pretty good.
To balance it out, I actually made money on some knives I've sold so it's pretty much been a wash for me when it comes to dollars and cents.

Most of the knives I have in my little collection are definitely worth more than I paid, but they were all commissions which I received directly from the maker, which is my preferred method of buying knives, and will likely stay in my collection unless something desperate happens. I see these knives as investments, but I don't expect to ever pursue a return if that makes any sense.

Buying knives in the aftermarket is trickier for sure, so it's important to research.

I really enjoyed Don Guild's latest article in Blade. Seems like his point is that if you want to come out ahead in 'the gamble', buy the maker, not the knife.

For makers, Don says it's important to track the prices your knives are getting on the secondary market to ensure that your pricing is at least 15%, (to my recollection) lower. Seems counter intuitive, but he makes a good point, if you have an eye to the future and good enough chops and enough desire to stay in the business.

Props to you, Steven. This is a good conversation.

 

[betzner]

I really enjoyed Don Guild's latest article in Blade. Seems like his point is that if you want to come out ahead in 'the gamble', buy the maker, not the knife.


Props to you, Steven. This is a good conversation.

Ditto, again, on the quality of this thread, that's for sure.

It may be that quite a few forumites will read through these posts, given the author of the thread and the great subject matter. It's probably important to expand a bit on what Don Guild more than likely meant by these comments ("...buy the maker, not the knife"). Most certainly, it's the maker that counts first, with investment considerations. But the "right" knife by that particular maker counts very, very much. The wrong knife can mean an investment lost.

Just a thought (from a resident tire-kicker) that this part might deserve clarification for those who might otherwise read Don's comments literally.

Sorry to digress, STeven.

Bob

 

[sheathmaker]

I can hear A T Barr's sage advice ringing in my ears right now just as clear as it was those many years ago. To wit:...................

"Don't you buy no ugly knife"

Paul

 

[betzner]

I can hear A T Barr's sage advice ringing in my ears right now just as clear as it was those many years ago. To wit:...................

"Don't you buy no ugly knife"

Paul

That is, first and foremost, what begins to make a knife "right", IMHO.

 

[2knife]

"dont buy no ugly knife" is a statement i have thoughts about. Many so-called ugly knives are not made for anything other than using. With these, it isnt fair to criticise because they are "field" knives. They are not meant as art pieces. I think it is an injustice to insult them. Case and point, Daniel Winkler's II knives, they are the furthest thing from an Erickson art dagger. Is it necessary to say one is ugly? How often do we hear "wow, what a gaudy thing" that knife is.. Or, seeing many Loerchner knives, these are strictly art-deco sculptures, hailed as absolute masterpieces. I myself dont see it. The latest one i saw looked more like a letter opener than a dagger.. To each his own i guess.
Why does a Ron Lake knife command the priced they do? They are all essentially the same knife with different handle dressings.. There are many ways to look at it. Ugly isnt the defining term of value. Dont say you value function if your knives are never meant to cut anything. Go buy an uglier knige that works better.
End of rant.
David

 

[Joss]

Good topic. I have bought from somewhat new makers from time to time. It's never been a bad gamble so far, even when I bought a Brad Duncan piece (it was second hand and I resold it quickly at a low-but-above-my-cost-I-think price.) I have a small user from Nick, and if I were to sell it (no way!) I would easily make a decent profit on it.

I think that it's important to not overpay on those pieces, and sometimes new makers develop their skills so quickly that they produce ambitious (and somewhat expensive) pieces early on. I have steered away from those. If you buy a piece with a high value and a low-ish price point, you can generally make your money back even if the maker disappears. A good example of this is knives by Terry Primos, who were and still are high quality / lowish price knives. I don't think anyone who took a gamble on a user grade knife from Terry has regretted it.

The gamble I should have made was to buy a couple lovely (& big) ivory-handled bowies that Jason Knight had many years ago at the ABS show, in Reno. He was relatively new then. They were steals and would have been a wise investment.

My only bad gamble has been to commission a Jpz-styled piece. By the time the piece was polished and mounted it was clear that the blade had flaws that couldn't be corrected. Everybody in this transaction - me first, but also maker and polisher / mounter - share some of the blame. I still have a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Kevin Jones]

I know of no maker (alive or dead) whose every knife is or will be a good investment, however the formula below has worked for me over the years and will reduce your gamble/risk.

Right maker* + Right knife** @ right price*** = Excellent investment potential.

* makers who possess excellent design and knifemaking skills, are good business people and promotes themselves and the custom knife community in general.

** quality knives which have time-proven classic designs that stand out among others over time.

*** knives purchased at knifemaker price or below. Avoid paying inflated prices. The "right" makers will have usually maintained stable pricing structures that have appreciated modestly over time.

It's by no means easy to successfully invest in custom knives, especially while only buying the knives which interest you. However, many do it successfully by doing their homework. It takes a tremendous amount of hours studying the makers the knives and the market.

 

[betzner]

"dont buy no ugly knife" is a statement i have thoughts about. Many so-called ugly knives are not made for anything other than using. With these, it isnt fair to criticise because they are "field" knives. They are not meant as art pieces. I think it is an injustice to insult them. Case and point, Daniel Winkler's II knives, they are the furthest thing from an Erickson art dagger. Is it necessary to say one is ugly? How often do we hear "wow, what a gaudy thing" that knife is.. Or, seeing many Loerchner knives, these are strictly art-deco sculptures, hailed as absolute masterpieces. I myself dont see it. The latest one i saw looked more like a letter opener than a dagger.. To each his own i guess.
Why does a Ron Lake knife command the priced they do? They are all essentially the same knife with different handle dressings.. There are many ways to look at it. Ugly isnt the defining term of value. Dont say you value function if your knives are never meant to cut anything. Go buy an uglier knige that works better.
End of rant.
David

David, your problem is nothing more than the fact that you love ugly knives. Nothin' wrong with that.

 

[Lorien]

"dont buy no ugly knife" is a statement i have thoughts about. Many so-called ugly knives are not made for anything other than using. With these, it isnt fair to criticise because they are "field" knives. They are not meant as art pieces. I think it is an injustice to insult them. Case and point, Daniel Winkler's II knives, they are the furthest thing from an Erickson art dagger. Is it necessary to say one is ugly? How often do we hear "wow, what a gaudy thing" that knife is.. Or, seeing many Loerchner knives, these are strictly art-deco sculptures, hailed as absolute masterpieces. I myself dont see it. The latest one i saw looked more like a letter opener than a dagger.. To each his own i guess.
Why does a Ron Lake knife command the priced they do? They are all essentially the same knife with different handle dressings.. There are many ways to look at it. Ugly isnt the defining term of value. Dont say you value function if your knives are never meant to cut anything. Go buy an uglier knige that works better.
End of rant.
David

hard to describe ugly. But I know it when I see it.

Winkler IIs might be at the other end of the scale from and Erickson art dagger, but I find them to have, (generally) a purposeful and well conceived design which I would not personally categorize as ugly.

Embellishment and artsyness do not a beautiful knife make, and similarly, simplicity and function do not an ugly knife make.

 

[Kevin Jones]

"dont buy no ugly knife" is a statement i have thoughts about. Many so-called ugly knives are not made for anything other than using. With these, it isnt fair to criticise because they are "field" knives. They are not meant as art pieces. I think it is an injustice to insult them. Case and point, Daniel Winkler's II knives, they are the furthest thing from an Erickson art dagger. Is it necessary to say one is ugly? How often do we hear "wow, what a gaudy thing" that knife is.. Or, seeing many Loerchner knives, these are strictly art-deco sculptures, hailed as absolute masterpieces. I myself dont see it. The latest one i saw looked more like a letter opener than a dagger.. To each his own i guess.
Why does a Ron Lake knife command the priced they do? They are all essentially the same knife with different handle dressings.. There are many ways to look at it. Ugly isnt the defining term of value. Dont say you value function if your knives are never meant to cut anything. Go buy an uglier knige that works better.
End of rant.
David

Interesting in that I was looking through my "Knives 2013" when it arrived the other day and I noticed two "Winkler II" knives and thought, Damn they are good looking.
Perhaps not in the same sense as a Loerchner or Erickson Art Dagger, but beautiful in their way including the beauty of design and execution for an intended purpose.

 

[JParanee]

If I buy a knife purely worrying about resale it is usually a knife I bought with the intention to sell.

With that said I usually don't loose money on knives I sell.

Like everything in life of you don't buy right you can and will loose money. I have paid more for knives than I wanted to but usually they are knives I really wanted and have no interest in flipping

The 2 great buys I made recently fom David and Claudio where absolute bargains and I believe both makers work will command more money and attention as time goes on.

 

[Lorien]

I noticed two "Winkler II" knives and thought, Damn they are good looking.

yeah, but you're a Winkler fan boy!

 

[JParanee]

yeah, but you're a Winkler fan boy!

Hey I just bought a Winkler also

 

[Kevin Jones]

yeah, but you're a Winkler fan boy!

Maybe you're right . But not really a fan of tactical knives, but certainly appreciate a fine design and perfection in execution of anything.

In regard to Dan, and Karen, I haven't purchased one of their pieces in years. I'm still interested and appreciate primitive style knives however my
collection preferences have changed a little.

I will say that a photo of Dan could go right under the definition I supplied in my previous post of the "Right Maker", as he is certainly a great example.

I purchased quite a few of his knives early on as he and Karen are among the few makers who really got me interested in custom knives. I've sold them all after enjoying them for years and did quite well on the sales.

 

[2knife]

This is my latest best buy, a woodcarving knife. It is a great tool, and value. Made by Dave Lyons.

 

[Kohai999]

Ditto, again, on the quality of this thread, that's for sure.

It may be that quite a few forumites will read through these posts, given the author of the thread and the great subject matter. It's probably important to expand a bit on what Don Guild more than likely meant by these comments ("...buy the maker, not the knife"). Most certainly, it's the maker that counts first, with investment considerations. But the "right" knife by that particular maker counts very, very much. The wrong knife can mean an investment lost.

Just a thought (from a resident tire-kicker) that this part might deserve clarification for those who might otherwise read Don's comments literally.

Sorry to digress, STeven.

Bob

1. I read Don's article and did not find much illumination there, and tried to put myself in the mindset of someone who would, but I couldn't.

2. The bolded section here is gold.

"The Gamble" can be ANY aspect of purchasing a custom knife, or anything that you will use or collect.....but on that I was much more specific in my OP. I was working with "new" makers, and the gamble was that they would stop making knives, that the value would tank or that even working with them would be difficult....Nick took flippin' forever to make my dagger, but beyond that, he saw it through....and almost never really stopped making knives, or showing his face at different venues, online or in person....making the gamble less risky for himself, me and many other collectors.

Kevin has done it with Kyle Royer, and to some degree Bob has done it with Curt Erickson(Curt is an "old" new maker in that he gave it up for a while and came back to it). These are some of the examples that could be used to further the thread discussion, not focusing on what is attractive or not....one, that has been done to death and two, it does not bring value to this thread.

I've shown three examples and even put values on them....I'm trying to show, tell and educate.... something that Forumites are always asking for.....or seem to be....am I wrong?

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

 

[betzner]

1. I read Don's article and did not find much illumination there, and tried to put myself in the mindset of someone who would, but I couldn't.

2. The bolded section here is gold.

"The Gamble" can be ANY aspect of purchasing a custom knife, or anything that you will use or collect.....but on that I was much more specific in my OP. I was working with "new" makers, and the gamble was that they would stop making knives, that the value would tank or that even working with them would be difficult....Nick took flippin' forever to make my dagger, but beyond that, he saw it through....and almost never really stopped making knives, or showing his face at different venues, online or in person....making the gamble less risky for himself, me and many other collectors.

Kevin has done it with Kyle Royer, and to some degree Bob has done it with Curt Erickson(Curt is an "old" new maker in that he gave it up for a while and came back to it). These are some of the examples that could be used to further the thread discussion, not focusing on what is attractive or not....one, that has been done to death and two, it does not bring value to this thread.

I've shown three examples and even put values on them....I'm trying to show, tell and educate.... something that Forumites are always asking for.....or seem to be....am I wrong?

Best Regards,

STeven Garsson

Hell no, you're right. And you mention the very reason I didn't add my two cents - specifically because you are addressing "new" makers, not usually my "market segment".

My own thoughts about why this is a great thread are that it's the new makers that are really the most important to "invest" in. They are the future, whatever the return one does or doesn't expect, whatever the return one does or does not achieve. When you break even and have a great time doing it, cool, cool.

Keep it going and let's hope you get some really good examples.

Bob