Question: Which of the 1st edition (first print 2003) ----or---- 1st edition, (re-print 2005) of Min Ron Nee's book is most valuable?

[99call]

Question:  Which of the 1st edition (first print 2003) ----or---- 1st edition, (re-print 2005) of Min Ron Nee's book is most valuable?

Seem able to find lots of recent sold prices of the re-print (2005).  but not the (2003)

Any help brothers and sisters of FOH?........................................

 

[Puros Y Vino]

In the book collecting world. the 1st Print is always king.  If that 2005 reprint has more pages/content it "might" be more valueable.  If there are more copies of the 2005 print, that could make the 2003 edition rarer and more sought after.  It's a tough call with such a niche book though. My brother used to own a bookstore and ran it for 35 years. He dealt in a lot of rare editions here and there. I worked a bit with him and got a feel for why some books were valueable.  Being a former comic nerd also exposed me to the 1st print vs subsequent print economics too. 

[99call]

1 minute ago, Puros Y Vino said:

In the book collecting world. the 1st Print is always king.  If that 2005 reprint has more pages/content it "might" be more valueable.  If there are more copies of the 2005 print, that could make the 2003 edition rarer and more sought after.  It's a tough call with such a niche book though. My brother used to own a bookstore and ran it for 35 years. He dealt in a lot of rare editions here and there. I worked a bit with him and got a feel for why some books were valueable.  Being a former comic nerd also exposed me to the 1st print vs subsequent print economics too. 

The main drive of my thought is 

Yes,  2003 was obviously the real 1st edition, but if the re-print was to rectify certain mistakes, then which considered the first edition of the book, in the form that Min Ron Nee was happy with?

Then you have the curve ball that you get with collectable Coins etc.   I.e. mistakes are hugely valuable and sought after.  

 

 

[Puros Y Vino]

4 hours ago, 99call said:

The main drive of my thought is 

Yes,  2003 was obviously the real 1st edition, but if the re-print was to rectify certain mistakes, then which considered the first edition of the book, in the form that Min Ron Nee was happy with?

Then you have the curve ball that you get with collectable Coins etc.   I.e. mistakes are hugely valuable and sought after. 

Yeah. Error cards in baseball, hockey cards etc have their fans. There's some really famous ones, like the Billy Ripken one. Mistakes or not, a first edition book always tends to be the most valuable. Whenever I go into a used bookstore and find a book of interest I always check for that. I recently sold a few H.R. Giger art books(the artist who designed the Alien in Alien). 4/5 of them were first prints and I got good money for them.

[chris12381]

How much are copies going for these days? I remember paying less than $100 per copy for 2 of them when first published. That was a lot of money for a college student... 🤣 

[Silverstix]

I've heard people say that book is really out of date now with the new tobacco strains and the changes to the aging and curing process since the 80's and 90's. Thoughts?

[99call]

3 hours ago, Silverstix said:

I've heard people say that book is really out of date now with the new tobacco strains and the changes to the aging and curing process since the 80's and 90's. Thoughts?

The book can't be out of date. Due to the fact it covers and restricts itself to a focused topic. Alex Groom has covered the next period of time. And likely another another book will be required in another 20-30 years. That's if HSA doesn't go under!

[Silverstix]

3 hours ago, 99call said:

The book can't be out of date. Due to the fact it covers and restricts itself to a focused topic. Alex Groom has covered the next period of time. And likely another another book will be required in another 20-30 years. That's if HSA don't go under!

I thought a lot of the information in there pertaining to aging, maturation, etc. wasn't really the most current anymore.

[99call]

3 hours ago, Silverstix said:

I thought a lot of the information in there pertaining to aging, maturation, etc. wasn't really the most current anymore.

It's just to say everything is of its time. Life moves on. But it doesn't stop works of the past being accurate to their day.

[BrightonCorgi]

How much are either worth?

[99call]

3 hours ago, BrightonCorgi said:

How much are either worth?

Something is only worth what someone is will to pay for it. Recently a 2005 sold for £1710. Plus fees. Feels like someone holding a lot of copies and trying to fix a price by also buying high. But still...

[BrightonCorgi]

3 hours ago, 99call said:

Something is only worth what someone is will to pay for it. Recently a 2005 sold for £1710. Plus fees. Feels like someone holding a lot of copies and trying to fix a price by also buying high. But still...

Buyer and seller are both known to each other is what you're implying? They were under $200 new if not mistaken. I got mine from a German LCDH at the time.

[99call]

3 hours ago, BrightonCorgi said:

Buyer and seller are both known to each other is what you're implying? They were under $200 new if not mistaken. I got mine from a German LCDH at the time.

Not necessarily. If you are holding 50 copies. It may be in your interest to buy another copy at a inflated price (you wouldn't have to know them). If it also raised the value of your held stock. The art world had been doing it for decades. And you can see instances of it in the cigar world.

[Silverstix]

3 hours ago, 99call said:

It's just to say everything is of its time. Life moves on. But it doesn't stop works of the past being accurate to their day.

Kind of like buying the user manual for an 8-track player. 

[99call]

2 hours ago, Silverstix said:

Kind of like buying the user manual for an 8-track player.

Yes. If you want to put it that way. But the same overarching truism prevails. You cant hold people historically accountable for what is essence.. simply hindsight. 

[Fugu]

2 hours ago, 99call said:

Yes. If you want to put it that way. But the same overarching truism prevails. You cant hold people historically accountable for what is essence.. simply hindsight. 

Plus, it’s not as if not a great deal of the cigars treated there (MRN) weren’t still in the secondary/collector’s market today.

Depends in what you’re interested in. I got a lot of “outdated“ cigar literature, which is still holding a lot of historical value/information for me.

[Jack]

9 hours ago, 99call said:

Something is only worth what someone is will to pay for it. Recently a 2005 sold for £1710. Plus fees. Feels like someone holding a lot of copies and trying to fix a price by also buying high. But still...

I still have a 2003. Sold a used one many years ago and a sealed 2005 a few years ago for US$800.

Now, for 1,700 I'd have to think a bit...