Since we're not arguing how much an insurance claim should pay... and I know I don't understand all the nuances about how the "replacement value" clause is applied, I'd argue that the ultimate price any bike/frame would command would be driven by market demand, and not by how much it went for when it was manufactured/sold as new.
In the case of Rivendell bikes, my position would be that if I absolutely want that bike/frame for whatever reason, I'd be willing to pay more for them. If I just consider them older/used, then I'd expect to pay less for them than a brand new equivalent I'd buy from Rivendell. An analogy, although perhaps not the best one, would be that as soon as production was stopped on a given model, just like a photographer destroying the negative of a given picture (Ansel Adams did this), the price for existing ones could actually go up as they are now potential collector's items. Should an original parallel top tube Bombadil command a higher, equal or lower price than a new diagonal tube Bombadil? It all depends on what you're after. René -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
