doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Rocket Man...makers tiers

RMan
Do you have a list of how you rate a makers name brand in previous posts?...I DID look,I know I've seen it in the past,but could n't find
Like where would you put WW Greener?..same league as WC Scott?...second tier , third?
Greeners best stuff was awesome for sure,right up there in my opinion.
And the top Scott Guns were right up there in price with the big boys, even perhaps more at some stage of the game
I reckon you should write and publish a little price guide/calculator with the stuff you do.
Or put it up in the FAQ section...seems your pretty damn close on your price,according to other posters
cheers
franc

BV1 = Boss, H&H, Purdy, and Woodward

BV2 = Wesley Richards, Grant, Rigby, Dickson, Beesley, Powell, Atkin, Churchill, Henry, Lancaster, Evans, Watson, Wilkes, Greener, Boswell, Gibbs, Lang

BV3 = All other Brit brands and well known Continental makers associated with high OQ

BV4 = Lessor known Continental makers and/or associated with lower quality

BV5 = Little known Continental makers and/or associated with poor quality

Remember, it is unwise to try to associate Original Quality grade of an individual gun with the makers name. OQ stands alone. The issue with building high quality guns was not ability to build them, rather the ability to attract orders for them. Shops were run by masters and they knew how and/or who to hire. The Brit trade always knew how to earn the money for an order.

DDA

I'm sure others will have names they would like to see in the list.

For me the stand out name missing from BV2 is Hussey. Particularly HJH, but also his son HHH, not only built extremely fine guns of very high quality, but also built very valuable connections very quickly. Most HHH guns were built in pairs and most to his Grade A Imperial Ejector standard. He was a hands on gunmaker and had a very skilled team of workers at his own workshops, including John Ross.

Okay, I got it off my chest!

Tim

Rocketman?? Reginald Dwight Hemion? OK- Sir Elton John-great song indeed..

The elegance of Don's model is that it is market based, not opinion based.

It has very high confidence intervals because he works hard at it.

btw, where would you place TsKIB SOO of Soviet Union?

+1

There are a number of "names" that the market does not recognize as BV2; Scott was the biggest surprise for me. I did identify five factors that correlate well to the market's BV rankings. We can discuss if there is interest.

A BV3-OQ1-CC3 is "as good as" a BV1-OQ1-CC3. The difference is that the market values the BV3 gun at only half of the BV1 gun. This is the snag in trying to lumping OQ and BV into one factor.

Rocket man, I second the motion that you publish a booklet or a post in the FAQ section! I for one have greatly appreciate reading about this, and would really enjoy the background info on how you have compiled the list. From your posts, it is one of the most researched, informative, and readily understandable lists!

And Scott is a surprise to me as well, I would have thought it's a much better known and respected brand.

I'll need some help with this one. I think we can place the BV at three (well known Continental maker associated with high quality) or four (lesser known Continental maker and/or associated with lower quality). If the gun is the one I'm thinking of it is OQ1 (best work). Of course, CC is what it is for any individual gun.

DDA

The rankings sound like a dealer oriented tool judging by the rankings and apparently directed primarily at the SXS sector.

It is unlikely that a savvy OU buyer would rank any of the top three UK names, including the hallowed Boss name, higher than the top Italians.

Equally, anyone with enough gunsmithing-engineering knowledge is unlikely to be swayed by brand names, especially if they spot recurring faults. Checkering is an example of such a recurring fault even on BV1 items. I guess this would be called a connoisseurship factor especially when it comes to judging an unsigned but obviously quality item, whether a fine gun or fine wine.

There are two damascus knives, both made in India. One bears a hallowed gunmaker's name, sells for 1200 sterling, the other has the Indian name, sells for one tenth of the price. One hell of a premium for a BV name.

Thank you. I wasn't thinking of any particular gun, just the maker's rank.

HD, would you say the maker is well known and usually associated with high quality firearms? If so, BV3. Please remember that BV is value added by the maker's name, not at all a comment on the maker's ability to produce high quality guns. It is necessary to separate quality (OQ) from the name (BV) as most "names" supplied a broad range of quality (best work SLE to farmer grade BLNE).

DDA

Rocketman, I understand your points and the usefulness of your guide. I particulary agree with this:

"Like it or not, it is necessary to consider brand name in any valuation."

Valuation is the key. Revelations sometimes happen and one of mine was a call to evaluate, along with others, the worth of an unsigned SXS, Brimingham proofed, superb craftsmanship.

Everyone looked intently for a name, or hint of one. No one considered the plainly visible quality features. Objectively it was a superb SXS boxlock ejector which the learned company seemed to agree would have to be valued at under an AYA No 4 due to lack of a name. That was the day I learned a lot about shotguns and lots more about people.

Rocketman,

Do you think we'll see a bit more stratification in the BV2 group over time? For example, Westley Richards continues to build guns and therefore their brand, with presence at shows, in magazines etc.

I would assume there would be some effect on "perceived" value of older WR's over time as new people become familiar with current WR production, (which I think would be considered BV1).

A corollary might be wines from Bordeaux - there are 5 first growths today, but there were only 4 (Haut Brion, Latour, Lafite Rothschild and Margaux) in the original 1855 Napoleonic classification. Mouton Rothschild was moved to a first growth in 1973 due to their perceived performance as a first growth over an extended period.

While there's a lot more intrigue to the Mouton Rothschild First Growth matriculation than I'll go into here, suffice it to say that any pre-1973 wines from Mouton Rothschild are now considered by the market to be "first growth".

In a weighted average, the more transactions, the harder it is to move the average.
Conversely, (and I think the valuation issue with continental guns) is that too low a number of transactions doesn't solidify confidence.

It's hard for many people to separate BV from OQ. But having worked with brands all my life, I have a great deal of faith in Rocketman's system. He's not making judgements, the market is.

An excellent example of why sorting OQ from BV is necessary for valuation. This is a poster child case of where a functional bargain could be had. Be warned, though, that the market will value it low if/when you try to sell it.

DDA

Intuitively, we short-cut the quality factor of purchasing decisions by ascribing certain quality grades to brands. This eases the difficulty/complications in making a buy decision. Unfortunately, there is no long term assurance that the brand will uphold its quality or that all products of the brand will have equal quality. For example, a few years ago I'd have said Woodward sold nothing but best work SLE's. Now, I say, as the owner, proud owner, of three Woodward vended BLE of middlin' OQ, I would be in serious gastrointestinal distress if I'd have paid for the BLE's as I would have for a SLE.

DDA

I would submit too that part of the BV is the pride in owning a double with a certain name on it. For example, the Holland I just bought and is posted on here, I bought simply and only because it was a Holland and Holland. That name conjures up the Great Shots, of safaris like Teddy's, of India during the Empire, etc to my mind. It would not have the same effect if the name on the outside was "John Stanton", or any other name. And while it's rather prideful, the old timers a my club say it's the first time they've ever heard of a Holland coming through the doors. What owner doesn't like that sort of thing? My gun is of no better OQ than many other makes, and certainly would not be now considered a London Best, but that does not alter the famous name on it. And I happily shelled out more than I otherwise would have for her!

Don, anything I learned about astringent valuation of Euro guns, I learned from you. It wasn't a big step. It's quite similar to Weighted avg cost of capital, and capital budgeting in finance.

However, YOU did the work, and continue to do it. So, in my mind, You deserve to reap all of it's benefits.

It has not gone unnoticed by me that the derivation of certain factors continues to remain shrouded in mystery. As I hope it ever does.

That, in a nutshell, is why brand names are important in our free market system. They are simply "shortcuts" to an understanding of potential quality.

The value of brand names as guides was probably true when the clientele of the top tier was mostly shooting men. It is doubtful if these days they are shooting folk.

Brand names can also act as barriers to new, dynamic companies achieving their righful status, and naturally they carry a premium not realisable in actual use.

Personally I would rather have a Dominion bearing the original maker's name, rather than the Holland stamped one for a premium. The name game is no longer the thing once you get to the point where you can judge good gunmaking.

Shotgunlover. It all depends on why you buy them.
Which is a personal matter for every buyer.

Value, reflected in price, unconcerned with utility, is a community aggregate of all kinds of reasons.

Interesting question, why you buy them. Back in the 1900s, I think it would never have been asked, since the answer would have been obvious: to shoot. Ironic that in the golden age of gunmaking collecting was not a priority.

The Eric Clapton collection sale is indicative of today's market for the top names. Bought to be sold to fols who buy them to sell them on to folks who will.... you get the picture.

Is that a real market for any utilitarian object? I can't really tell. That kind of "market" can deflate pretty fast.

The market for psychic income is inexhaustable in humans, so yes, as long as someone wants them, the market exists.

Even though the late Stevie Ray Vaughn will always be my top rock/blues guitarist, I have read and followed Clapton's life and music career-he was not "to the manor born" and invites to high society Limey shooting parties are not given to the lower class folk-no matter their cheque book balance. Why did Eric Clapton order these expensive shotguns anyway? I like some of his stuff, but have zero respect for him as a man who follows the "Guy Code"--he stole Patty Boyd away from her beatles guitarist husband-George Harrison- then wrote the hit song Layla after the fact. He's a "Fuddy-Bucker" and a wanker-no matter his musical great talents..

The key word here, of course, is "KNOWN", and next thing we get to ask is "in what market?" The Gun Digest Book of Gun Values (2011) quotes TsKIB guns at max. $1000-1500, even for their best SLE - apparently the market "thinks" "It's Russian, so it's got to be sort of like Baikal". At the same time, in Russia TsKIB is clearly at least BV3, if not higher, and I know a couple of gun dealers who used to make a living tracking down MC guns in the West and selling them in Russia at anywhere from 5000 to 15000 USD (the plunge of the ruble put an end to this). It would be interesting to do a cross-market comparison of your model.

P.S. As far as a prof. of English as a Second Language teaching at a school of Business can pass judgment over such things, your model and your work on it, if you published them as an academic paper, would get a whole lot of interest and quotations.

Thank you for the kind words, HD; I have great respect for your point of view. I hope to make the model/system more widely available in the future. I have had a great deal of fun working with it here on this board.

The goal of the model is to serve all gun markets; we now live in a well developed global market system. The USA has historically led in the gun market and siphoned off the more desirable guns of much of the world. As above, when any one market gets out of step, the products go somewhere else. Obviously, some Americans lost "their shirts" by considering TsKIB a BV5 maker. $5,000-$15,000 for best work SLE's makes TsKIB a BV3 maker.

DDA

Yes, but the firearms market is not a free market in the true sence. There are legal restrictions and import dues that make some markets virtually closed. E.g., importation of a gun from the U.S. to Russia may mean anywhere from the cost of a return trip to the U.S. (if you go the "personal use" route) to 150% of the value in taxes. Oh, yes, and if the make and model is not on the official registry list, you have to pay to have the gun "sertified" (inluding Russian proof).

Claycrusher, could you explain what is wrong with your Holland? Also, Rocketman, can you tell us what is wrong with your Woodwards? It isn't very clear in your posts. Further, we didn't get much if any explanation why the Hussey is not second tier like I always thought it was.

8-b, I'll try. My 1879 JUL double rifle (.450-400 2 3/8"), 1882 12 bore TL hammer gun, 1911 12 bore BLE, and 1947 12 bore BLE pigeon are all in fine fettle, used and loved. The 1892 12 bore BLE needs trigger pulls lightened. 1894 pair of 12 bore UL Automatics need trigger work to mitigate doubling. 1897 12 bore
TL SLE --- beautiful action to be rebarreled and restocked.

Hussey is a poster child of a maker with a world of talent but an insufficient business model. Hussey, per se, was not in business nearly long enough to suit the market. Unfortunately, the later association of the Hussey name with business making lower quality guns was not helpful, either. Hussey's output of guns was low. I'm unsure of the % of said production being high grade. Also, Hussey did not contribute any of the major patents, to my knowledge.

Remember, lower BV means more opportunity to buy best work guns at good prices --- as long as you keep in mind that they will resell at the lower BV.

DDA

Thanks, Don.