On 6 August 2010 01:54, <mcdangerous@verizon.net> wrote:
> Shouldn't that make it a bit more attractive when compared to Mk1s?
> What's the outlook for values? What's the current value and outlook for
> Mk2s? If this is the level of Tiger values, then I don't even understand
> how anyone can consider putting money into an Alpine to create a Tiger
> clone, considering that someone said in another thread that clones are
> bringing 50% of Tiger values. None of this makes sense to me... Please let
> me know what you think re. Thanks. M
>
Most of us are in this for fun.. not trying to make a $... its rare you ever
see the money you put into your car back unless you are very lucky.
The value difference between MKI's and IA's is not much.. and its just
personal preference.. for me the early MKI's with leaded seams and hood
boxes are about as nice a body as you get.. the cheaper MKIA style has some
practicality but is not as classy (rootes chepened the car by leaving joints
exposed, softtop bag is easier to use but not as elegant and the seat design
on the MKI's was better looking and nicer.. but more expensive.. so out went
the seperate cusion backrest) MKII's are worth more because of the raroty..
and only MKII's earlier cars with MKII items will not be worth more than a
normal MKI .. and in theory.. less than a correct MKI as the real value
always lies in a car with history or that is factory stock.
Speculation is generally what ruins the market for real enthusiasts.. by
this attitude ALL Tigers would be gone as they were very cheap beaters 20
years ago... and alpines cost about the same to restore as a Tiger yet will
not yeild 50% of a Tiger value.. or even that of a clone, so by this logic
people should just walk away from them.
These are not about money,,, they are about enjoyment.
--
Regards
Michael King
_______________________________________________
Tigers@autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
|