Posted by marvin Amstey on April 11, 1999 at 12:26:27:
In Reply to: repair vs. condition posted by Yon Bard on April 11, 1999 at 08:06:34:
: Marvin, it seems to me that there is a confusion here between the effects of condition and the effects of repairs. The first thing to do with an extensively repaired or restored rug is to ask how much it would be worth if the repairs were removed, i.e., to judge it on condition alone. Then, if you think that the repairs enhance its visual appeal, add the cost of the repairs; if not, subtract the cost (if any) of removing the repairs. So basically what I am saying is that it's condition that matters and repairs are almost irrelevant.
: As for the examples you cite, I can't say anything about the Ushak, but Chodor chuvals of any merit at all are sufficiently rare (at least compared to Yomuds, Ersaris, etc.) that the Skinner price does not seem outrageous. And though others may have a different taste, to me buying a damaged though mostly-there piece for 1000-2000 is preferable to buying a perfect one at triple the price (I am not the one who bought that Chodor, though).
: Regards, Yon
Yon, You touch on one of the questions I raised; what formula does one use - consciously or not - that leads to valuation of a repaired, restored or poor-condition rug?
As to the repaired rug vs condition, another question: if 29-25% of the Ushak is missing - including the center, the corners and the minor borders - is it really worth $11,500? Marvin
Post a Followup