Dominion of Canada and Potential Disposal Story/Rumour

Someone pass me the eye bleach...

 

2850 is a fine looking machine . there is some good footage of 2860 on youtube

 

A warning for those of a delicate constitution: There is some rather "colourful" language in the video!

Keith

 

With Brexit coming up maybe the time is right for an A4 hauled exhibition train to tour the world drumming up new trading opportunities for the UK. Like Alan Pegler tried to do with Flying Scotsman in the USA. He went bust but we’d just joined the EEC (I think it was called that) at the time. You’d have to change the loco’s name of course (Flying Ulsterman?) and my tounge is slightly in my cheek.

 

OTOH - some heritage items are collected in a global marketplace and traded at auction, partly presumably for enjoyment and partly presumably as an investment. Vintage cars and vintage aeroplanes spring to mind as objects that are actively collected and traded by the super-wealthy. So it is at least worth asking the question why vintage locomotives shouldn't also be collectible?

I can think of reasons why not (cost of ownership, though presumably a Spitfire or Mustang isn't cheap to run either...) Maybe some are seen as too utilitarian, though people collect Austin 7s and North American Harvards, and an A4 ought to have similar cachet to a V12 warbird or vintage Ferrari, i.e. top end of the respective market. Maybe it is just that historically so few have ever come to sale that it has been hard for anyone wealthy buying with an eye on investment potential to be confident that the market is well enough developed to be able to accurately judge value. Markets where they exist have tended to be national, not international. Nonetheless, the fact that a working steam loco is expensive to run isn't automatically a reason to suggest that there is no investment potential - maybe it is just that the market has never really properly developed.

Tom

 

Quite. Valid points well made.

There would be considerable interest to purchase her for investment purposes with no view to restoration. There could also be interest to purchase and restore with the view of selling again to make a return.

There isn't an active market in trading these machines, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest there could be demand for one.

In fact, aren't steam locomotives a bit of an anomaly in that there isn't really a functioning market in purchasing/selling them.

Yes they are large cumbersome expensive etc, but so are yachts, and numerous other things.

 

I had visions of a 'Mallard' clone at some tourist park type place. After all in a foreign country few would know that they were looking at a imposter.

 

Yachts are a different kettle of fish to a steam loco. You can pretty much sail where you want in one or moor it up in a millionaire's playground to throw lavish parties on board. Not a lot of room to do that on an A4 footplate.

 

Is there?

 

Not much room for partying in a Spitfire either, but they are collectible. So given suitable marketing, it’s not a completely silly question to ask why vintage aircraft or racing cars are collectible, but vintage locomotives aren’t.

Tom

 

But within limits you can fly a Spitfire* almost anywhere you want. I live near Old Warden airfield and it's not unusual for a warbird owner to fly in for lunch. One UK owner has just announced his retirement from the UK display scene but he's keeping his Spitfire just so he can fly it for pleasure without all the hassle involved in displaying flying.
*Other classic aircraft are available.

 

That's fair enough. I could see that, but who'd be a likely contenter...

Messers Hosking, Riley and Lee certainly leap to mind when I think of people collecting locomotives.

 

Probably not as an investment though. They like to see their locos earning their keep. And as more than one loco owner has opined, the only way to make a small fortune from owning a steam loco is to start with a large fortune. By and large they are money pits.

 

So do some vantage aircraft owners surprisingly. I know of at least three such aircraft that are kept aloft thanks to revenue earning service.

 

But why is, say, Flying Scotsman, which is unique, a money pit, whereas a Spitfire (of which there are scores) seen as an investment? It can’t be down to scarcity value. My hunch is that it is simply that the locomotive market has never developed, such that there are insufficient wealthy collectors to set a firm level to prices. Potential buyers are largely national, rather than international. But there is no inherent reason why locomotives should be different from historic aircraft or cars, given the right marketing.

(The fact that artworks by Banksy are (a) worth millions and (b) increase in value when shredded suggest to me that there is nothing intrinsic about what is seen as a valuable investment; it only depends on having sufficient people in the market to lead to a degree of self re-inforcing of prices).

Incidentally - I’d be much happier without such a market, and would prefer that locos - or cars, or planes - were bought simply for the pleasure they afforded their owners with no real concern for investment value. I’m simply pondering why, by and large, that is true for locomotives but isn’t true for many other vintage machines or artworks.

Tom

 

Exactly Tom.

 

Honestly?

We already have approximate vales for most engines dependant on what they are, condition etc.

We know small engines fetch sub 100k prices due to size with four wheeled engines typically pricing in at, what? £25k?

0-6-0s go for £50-80k as seen by the recent public sale of empress who hit the top end of that.

The bigger the engine, the bigger the price tag. But note they are "approximate" prices which is perhaps a good thing as once one starts slapping definitive prices onto things, people expect them to be paid that amount...

 

A Spitfire is only an investment if you can sell it for more than it has cost you to buy/restore/operate it or any combination of those three. With the number of airworthy Spitfires increasing year on year, they are getting less rare than they were so their rarity value may well be not what it was.

 

Here's something else that is definitely poorly informed and entirely a rumour. Having only been following the forum I apologise if this has been discussed and debunked before. I only remembered this afternoon.

Back in 2013 I went to see the A4s at York, and queued up for my allottted 5 minutes in the cab of each loco. Naturally you get chatting with other folks who are in the group you are let aboard with.

Aboard (I think it was) 60008, a gentleman spoke about several wannabe buyers bringing seven figure offers to the table, which the museums rebuffed at the time. Along with this, he said that one potential buyer had wanted to resteam 4489, but not only that, this mystery person had wanted to construct a new set of (presumably coronation style) coaches to run with her. Even at the time, I though the suggestion rather extravagant and wondered how much truth there was to his claim. He seemed very confident of it, but perhaps we've all been guilty of overconfidently stating falsehoods before Has anyone ever heard anything to confirm or deny this? If it were true and this buyer were still interested, I suppose we should not have to fear the loco disappearing to Saudi Arabia or anywhere else.

 

Those prices seem to be an intrinsic value for buying something for operational purposes (as shown by the fact that an in ticket loco sells for more than an out of ticket loco). 40 years ago you could buy a Spitfire for a few tens of thousands; in the intervening years, they have acquired a value of millions that is unrelated to what they would be worth simply as a functional object. They have increased in value more than 100 - 250 fold between the 1970s and now. Over the same period, a steam locomotive might have increased perhaps 20 - 50 fold. So what is intrinsically different between vintage locomotives and vintage aeroplanes?

True, but at the same time, no-one is restoring A4s on the basis of a builders plate and a few corroded remains dug up from 20 feet under the English Channel. So shouldn't that suggest that over time, while Spitfires lose their rarity value, the six remaining A4s will retain theirs? (And as you allude - the value of any investment can go down as well as up. But that doesn't explain why in recent years Spitfires (*) have been seen as investments, while by and large A4s (**) haven't).

(*) Other warbirds are available
(**) As are locomotives

Tom