What would persuade you to spend £20,000 on a guitar?

HarrySeven

Strat_a_tat_tat said:

Gassage said:

It would need to be formally owned by @HarrySeven - with provenence.

You should see the ones he informally owns!

True...

DartmoorHedgehog

I'm not sure I'd spend that much even if I was filthy rich.  Perhaps I'm a bit of a miser, but to me it would be like spending £20 on a pair of socks now.  A good guitar doesn't cost £20,000 and I'm not really into the "it was once touched by somebody famous" thing.  If it could make me PLAY as well as <insert famous guitarist here> then it'd be a different matter.

I think if I were to spend tens of thousands on a musical instrument (assuming it is to play rather than just as an investment) it would much more likely be a bass sax or something rather than a guitar.

Bridgehouse

After my modmin hat post, I thought I'd post a personal view. Mostly because I find the question a bit odd actually.

What would persuade me to spend £20k on a guitar? Nothing. Then again, I'm a bass player.

What would persuade me to spend £20k on a bass? Again, nothing. I've got some basses that more than do the job for 10% of that amount. 

Now, that's my view. There's all sorts of questions that come out of this though. 

Is any guitar worth £20k?
Is it morally right to spend £20k on a guitar?

The first question - well, again I think that's down to personal motivation and desire. I don't have a problem with anyone spending any amount of money on a guitar. And that leads into the second question..

Is it morally right to spend £20k on a guitar? Or, indeed, on anything that's not an essential purchase? 

I'm firmly in the "it's your money - spend it how you want" camp. We have a taxation system to pay for community services etc. If that's not right, then there's a political system in place to lobby, vote and ultimately change this. Could we collectively do more to change the balance between rich and poor? Of course. But I don't think that we should feel morally obliged not to spend money on things because the societal balance isn't quite right. Like it or not, we live in a market economy, and we need market transaction to keep things going. If everyone stopped spending and sat on their money we'd be in a right mess. Equally, giving everything surplus away hides the fact that our government economic model isn't working - it's the old give a man a fish vs teach the man to fish argument. 

However, back to the OP - Is it morally right to spend £20k on a guitar?

For me - this is the most important bit. Moral arguments aside over spending £20k on anything, why is a guitar any different to any other big purchase? Personally, I don't think it is. 

I have plenty of friends who have spent £20k on all sorts of unnecessary shit over the years - one who spent twice that on a Porsche for their midlife crisis, two who have spent far more than that on individual art and antiques purchases, and one who has a £50k motorhome. Oh, and of course, a close friend who has dropped pretty much that amount on a large and quite unnecessary motorbike. In another life I'm into sailing - £20k doesn't buy you a lot of boat - usually a 30 or 40 year old mouldy bathtub with bits dropping off it and a lot of upcoming repair bills. 

And here's the rub for me. Not only do I not really care what others spend their money on, so long as it wasn't gained illegally, and they have paid their fair dues, I don't think it's any of my business either. 

And this is coming from someone who's in the process of setting up a new business which is a social enterprise (a community interest company) whereby the majority of our profits are legally locked from being distributed to shareholders and have to be distributed to the public or 3rd sector...!

Ted

I think that is an interesting point Bridgehouse, but there may be a moral case to tax £20k guitars or £50k Mercs more than essential items like washing machines. It might be difficult to administrate within the VAT system.

I don't find the original question odd within the context of a guitar forum, given that many guitars do sell for over £20,000 - (George Harrison's fender being one example)

SteveRobinson

Ted said:

I think that is an interesting point Bridgehouse, but there may be a moral case to tax £20k guitars or £50k Mercs more than essential items like washing machines. It might be difficult to administrate within the VAT system.

When I was a lad there was a two-tier VAT system (well, 3-tier as food was, as now, zero rated) whereby luxury good had a higher rate of VAT applied. I think standard rate was 10% and luxury rate 25% for a while.

pintspiller

If I had that kind of money, I'd just buy it. Obviously if someone gifted the money, I would buy something that would not lose value.

Bridgehouse

Ted said:

I think that is an interesting point Bridgehouse, but there may be a moral case to tax £20k guitars or £50k Mercs more than essential items like washing machines. It might be difficult to administrate within the VAT system.

I don't find the original question odd within the context of a guitar forum, given that many guitars do sell for over £20,000 - (George Harrison's fender being one example)

On the first point, yes. I don't see why not. Course, VAT doesn't apply on used goods in a private sale so one might argue that many of the private vintage sales wouldn't get picked up by this. To be honest I think our whole taxation system needs reforming. Personally I think more goods need to be zero VAT rated (essentials) and the rate for non essential items hoiked up a percent or two. 

Or we could just scrap VAT and add a chunk onto corporation tax and the income tax brackets. 

Anyway, I digress. The reason I found the question odd was that it was "what would persuade you to..." The £20k seems arbitrary. What would persuade anyone to spend any amount on any guitar?

Bridgehouse

Ted said:

I think that is an interesting point Bridgehouse, but there may be a moral case to tax £20k guitars or £50k Mercs more than essential items like washing machines. It might be difficult to administrate within the VAT system.

I don't find the original question odd within the context of a guitar forum, given that many guitars do sell for over £20,000 - (George Harrison's fender being one example)

Actually, thinking about it - in your example, there is now an increase in tax on cars over £40k - road fund for the first 3 years has an extra £300 per year lumped on it as it's a "luxury car"

Bridgehouse

SteveRobinson said:

Ted said:

I think that is an interesting point Bridgehouse, but there may be a moral case to tax £20k guitars or £50k Mercs more than essential items like washing machines. It might be difficult to administrate within the VAT system.

When I was a lad there was a two-tier VAT system (well, 3-tier as food was, as now, zero rated) whereby luxury good had a higher rate of VAT applied. I think standard rate was 10% and luxury rate 25% for a while.

TBH I think that's probably a fairer system. I don't like VAT as it's a flat rate that everyone (regardless of income and spend power) pays. On £10k a year? you pay the same VAT on some of your essentials as someone on £100k a year.

Philly_Q

SteveRobinson said:

Ted said:

I think that is an interesting point Bridgehouse, but there may be a moral case to tax £20k guitars or £50k Mercs more than essential items like washing machines. It might be difficult to administrate within the VAT system.

When I was a lad there was a two-tier VAT system (well, 3-tier as food was, as now, zero rated) whereby luxury good had a higher rate of VAT applied. I think standard rate was 10% and luxury rate 25% for a while.

I didn't remember that at all!  But you're right, Wikipedia tells me Denis Healey introduced the two rates of VAT in 1974 at 8% and 12.5%, then for about 18 months put the higher rate up to 25%.  Then the Tories introduced a single rate of 15% which has gone up to 17.5% and then 20% (although gas and electricity etc are 5%).

I tend to think that having multiple rates of VAT or tax complicates administration, which is expensive in itself (a bit like the current talk of taking away flat rate winter payments, free TV licences etc for some pensioners).  And 20% of a Merc is a lot more than 20% of a washing machine.

goldtop

Wait, what! Means-tested guitar prices? I feel faint...

Simon_M

Current financial state: absolutely nothing would make me buy a £20K guitar. I’m trying to buy a house. 

If I had £20K lying around and burning a hole in my pocket: might buy a limited edition Gibson or Fender or perhaps a nice acoustic and still have lots of change for n amp, a few pedals, a new pair of jeans, some trainers, couple of crates of beer, buy the dogs some new toys and comfy bed, some decent cymbals for the missus and pay for a few more months of lessons, take my parents out for a nice meal and a few drinks and donate a grand to local homeless charities.

If 20K was literally nothing to me because I had loads on the bank: I probably wouldn’t spend it on guitars. I would hope that if I had enough money to make real change in the world I would
be doing it. 

RandallFlagg

A '54 Goldtop...and having £20K spare. I would drop it in a heart beat.

Bridgehouse

RandallFlagg said:

A '54 Goldtop...and having £20K spare. I would drop it in a heart beat.

You’d break the headstock off if you did that..

Barney

It would need to be made of solid Gold

Ted

The original question was inspired by this 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Gibson-Les-Paul-Super-Custom-Carved-Art-Piece-Electric-Guitar/183754060659?hash=item2ac8987373:g:63kAAOSwy6ham1vD

But I have no connection with the seller - honest gov. I did find some people's original comments on a bit insulting - just because it was not their taste does not mean that it automatically should reside in a drug trafficer's mansion.

I think it is an interesting question as to why anyone would buy anything for more than it's value as a utility. For instance you can get a decent fridge for less than £1k but some fridges cost £15k. Equally you can get a pair of trainers for £20 but many people pay £50+.

Simon_M

Ted said:

I did find some people's original comments on a bit insulting - just because it was not their taste does not mean that it automatically should reside in a drug trafficer's mansion.

It is fucking ugly though isn’t it?

Ted

Simon_M said:

Ted said:

I did find some people's original comments on a bit insulting - just because it was not their taste does not mean that it automatically should reside in a drug trafficer's mansion.

It is fucking ugly though isn’t it?

I think it looks nice.

Barnezy

It’s like anything, the rarer something is the more it’s going to be worth. They can’t produce anymore 59 LPs or 64 Strats so as long as there are people with money, who are in to guitars, they are probably decent investments long term, plus you get the enjoyment of using it, which you can’t do with an investment fund. People will look back on this in 10 years and think £20k for a 64 Strat was a bargain. 

Nikc

OOOh I might hold back on the hookers - naaaaa just kidding