351CJ said:
You're right, I was playing it safe and conservative, knowing that even then, it wouldn't paint a pretty picture.
I collect cars... But I never approached it from an investment standpoint, just like most art collectors could give a damn what the future may bring for a painting they love. But when I hear of people collecting cars purely on financial speculation, I can't help myself from injecting a dose of reality.
Fact is, I suspect that ALOT of these Shelbys are going to be "stashed". As-such, 20 years from now, the market will be flush with low-mile examples, which will drive costs DOWN, as there's a limited market for vehicles that are so low-mile, you can't feel real good about driving them or enjoying them. That leaves you stuck selling to serious collectors, who are (by and large) a fairly shrewd and savvy lot. Case-in-point, 1978 Corvette Pace Cars. Chevy made a bunch (relatively speaking), and a bunch of them (also relative) got stashed away still in-the-plastic by speculators and collectors. In today's dollars, just adjusted for inflation and nothing else, those cars are worth less now then they were new.
People who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it.
BTW, I never said that gas prices exclusively killed the first muscle car era. I just said it was a contributing factor, among safety, insurance issues, smog issues, etc... Even still, Pontiac still managed to slip out the SD455 up 'til 1974. And the gas crisis also played an instrumental role in muscle cars being dirt-cheap as used cars in the mid-70's, subsequently causing their high rate of attrition as folks used 'em like toilet paper, and then flushed 'em once they were used-up.
Good thread....
