<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 7/16/01 9:35:20 PM Central Daylight Time,
<BR>dnereson@dimensional.com writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Even though the M&H is prestigious and might sort of retain its value
<BR>because of the name, it's already 75 years old and will need major action
<BR>work in the next 2 or 3 decades, whereas the new K & C will just need minor
<BR>stuff (light hammer filing, screw tightening, regulation touch-up, voicing)
<BR>and probably nothing major for at least 20 years. And after that length of
<BR>time, the K & C will be worth maybe 2/3 what she paid for it while the M & H
<BR>will only be worth $5, 6, 7K (today's prices). (?)
<BR> Should I tell her to just buy the one she thinks sounds best in terms of
<BR>tone, or should I tell her you're always better off buying a brand-new
<BR>instrument, even if it's not a high-end brand? Thanks for any
<BR>pinions. ---- Vascillating, --Dave Nereson, RPT, Denver
<BR>
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>The M&H needs to be rebuilt. Not counting refinishing, that will cost about
<BR>$7000. Therefore, it is worth $3 - 4000 at most. This will result in an
<BR>instrument worth at least $12,000. (If she spends another $4000 to get it
<BR>refinished, the piano will be worth $20,000.)
<BR>
<BR>In the long run, that rebuilt M&H will last another 75 years. The K&C will
<BR>last 25 years, if that long. Now which is the better buy?
<BR>
<BR>Willem </FONT></HTML>