It appears that the post on Goldie has proven popular and provoked a great deal of discussion on her merit and value in terms of history and financial worth. Typically, I would weigh in with my comments on such a day and many of you have raised the points that I would be raising on my own. Unfortunately, today was busy and I have not had much of a chance to interact. Reading the comments, however, got me to thinking. The bottom line is this, regardless of her value in terms of dollars and pounds, Goldie does have significance in historical terms as a factory show car. Whether her execution resulted in a more valuable car than stock is a matter of taste and personal preference. This raises the issue of fame versus infamy. Generally speaking, fame is a positive thing as it technically refers to renown and reputation (the Kardashian sisters are infamous rather than famous) while infamy is an inherently dubious proposition. Seven years ago an MGB was offered for sale on eBay. The seller of the car referred to it as one of the most famous MGBs in existence, a car of value and a solid investment. Was this a car that had competed at the 12 Hours of Sebring, made the show at Earls Court or been a factory prototype? None of the above, although like Goldie it also sported gold-plated trim and a bespoke paint job. What was this cars claim to fame? It appeared in a 2007 Eddie Murphy film called Norbit (compare this with the 911 driven by Steve McQueen in Le Mans). The movie was utterly forgettable, described by IMDB as the story of a: A mild-mannered guy who is engaged to a monstrous woman meets the woman of his dreams, and schemes to find a way to be with her. Famous? Nope. Infamous? You betcha. A solid investment? Hardly. Not a famous car, but an infamous one. Theres a difference. Not everyone understands but hopefully you do now. There was great discussion when an E-Type owned by Sir Elton John sold for less than a similar condition car owned by an unknown owner at an auction several years ago. The pundits laughed with hilarity and made cruel jokes about what Eltons ownership had done to the value of the car. Truth is, celebrity ownership must either be extraordinarily notorious or somehow related to the cars reputation in some way for it to be an advantage in value. I once saw an XJ-S owned by Frank Sinatra have a tough time beating low Blue Book at an auction but have also seen a car that Steve McQueen drove quintuple in value. It all depends on the connection. Other than that, its just a used car.
Posted on: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 02:11:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015