Which would you rather have in your collection?

V

Victor

Senior Member
Location
midwest USA
I wonder--which is better to have or prefer: something in poor condition but valuable, maybe rare.
Or some thing in excellent condition but not so valuable and relatively common?
Assume both cost the same and have the same meaning to you.

condition is very important for collectibles, especially coins.
Rather have a fake replica of an old gun in new condition or a real authentic gun in bad condition?
a valuable real antique in bad condition or a real antique not so valuable in great condition?
I'd rather have my Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle cards in bad condition than, say, Nolan Ryan that is new.
 

We are busy getting rid of things. The wife and I sure don't need to start refilling the attic, garage, shed, or closet.
Downsizing to move into an apartment has been hard, gut wrenching work. Fortunately, we have kids and grandkids where we unload the good stuff. The rest goes to the Salvation Army, recycling and trash.
Where did all this stuff come from anyway. Personally, I think it has been quietly reproducing all on its own.
 
Last edited:
I'd rather have a newly found rare, beat up, dirty, ripped, broken, gunky, mouse turdy, smelly old Monet painting than a fake reproduction at Rooms-to-Go. I'd be willing to clean up that Monet myself and have it finished off by a good restoration professional. Just the thought of it sends chills.

It depends on the item but generally I'd find it much more interesting to see an authentic antique in bad condition than a new replica. But dusted and cleaned please ☺
 
Last edited:
Okay, forget the collection..

Which would you rather have, hypothetically, besides artworks,
ugly poor condition of a valuable item, or a newish excellent condition,
not so valuable thing. Assume that you cannot restore the first one.
E.g. I have a fake derringer replica from 1860's. New.
Or would you prefer
a real authentic one in lousy condition?
 

Back
Top