<VV> Was 1965 Monza; Now Old Car Price Guide

[RoboMan91324 at aol.com]

J. R. and Joe,
 
You said that the OCPG is not a bible and I would like to  elaborate.
 
I haven't used the OCPG in years because I haven't bought or  sold a car in 
years but I assume the publication hasn't changed that much.   So, 3 points.
 
1.  For the most part, the OCPG is a seller's tool.   I have found that it 
consistently overstates the value of cars in every level of  restoration.  
This excludes cars that have been "over" restored if that is  what you are 
looking for.  I have never, ever paid anywhere close to the  estimated price 
in the OCPG and this isn't because I am a super  negotiator.  Again, this 
opinion is based on past  experience but the present day OCPG may have become 
more realistic since I last  used it.  Maybe others here on VV can weigh in.
 
2.  In the past, when faced with a seller with the OCPG  in-hand, I found 
that they were sometimes optimistic about which category their  car was in.  
This is the old double whammy where you are faced with both  the inflated 
values in the publication and the owner's inflated view of his  car's 
condition.  This could be the normal optimism a seller has when  viewing his "baby" 
or it could be a negotiating ploy.  Either way, it could  be difficult to 
bring the seller down to a reasonable price when he has what he  believes or 
hopes to be "proof" of the inflated value of his car.
 
3.  I don't recall if OCPG has regional editions but  values of cars are 
different in different areas of the country.  Here in  SoCal, cars survive 
longer than in New England, for example.  A true Class  2 car in NE would be 
more valuable than one in that condition here because of  the "law of supply 
and demand."  If the OCPG is standard across the nation,  the stated values 
should be adjusted depending on where you are.
 
If the car is a Class 3 at a stated value of $7430 in OCPG, my  opinion is 
that it has lower value than that for the reasons stated above.   If the 
owner has set a starting price at $10,500, it may be a tough negotiation  
getting it to the OCPG price much less below it.
 
The fact that the owner pointed out the flaws is great.  assuming he was 
doing it honestly.  I always do this when selling a car for  several reasons.  
First, it saves time.  Second, it tells the buyer  that the price was set 
with full knowledge of the faults and his pointing them  out is not a 
negotiating point.  Third, it minimizes the risk of an unhappy  buyer 
after-the-fact when he finds some faults he didn't notice when he made an  offer.
 
By the way, I have been lucky in the past that the "cocktail  shakers" were 
in the ragtops I have owned.  However, I understand that they  are quite 
difficult to come by which means they are costly.  You should  check into this.
 
Good luck,
 
Doc
 
1960 Corvette, 1961 Rampside, 1962 Rampside, 1964 Spyder  coupe, 1965 
Greenbrier, 1966 Canadian Corsa turbo coupe, 1967 Nova SS, 1968  Camaro ragtop

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
In a message dated 3/23/2014 8:44:08 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
virtualvairs-request at corvair.org writes:

Message:  2
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 01:00:29 -0500
From: "J. R. Read"  <hmlinc at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: <VV> 1965 Monza  convertible
To: "Joe Lewis" <joelewis33 at cox.net>,     <virtualvairs at corvair.org>
Message-ID:  <65B5867741F54CCB84F6626AA2586424 at jrd5ed88692d59>
Content-Type:  text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
reply-type=original

Joe,

I'm back home now and have a better  monitor to view.  Also, today the Old 
Car Price Guide arrived.  It  says that a '65 Monza Vert in class 3 
condition is valued at $7,430 PLUS add  20% for the 140hp engine.  From what I can 
tell in the pictures, I'd  suspect that it will fall into the class 3 
category once you get up close and  personal with it.

The 13 inch tires have become hard to find, so the  larger wheels might be 
a blessing in disguise.

PS - OCPG is NOT a  bible, just a guideline.

Later,  JR