<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 6/18/01 12:14:59 PM Central Daylight Time,
<BR>rbrekne@broadpark.no writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">"Steinway and Sons grand pianos need of course no introduction. I
<BR>would, in spite of that, remind (you) that they still build their
<BR>instruments in the classic piano building tradition., which imparts
<BR>to the soundboard a unique lifespan, 70 to 100 years. This, in
<BR>contrast to ordinary grand pianos, where crown disapears after just
<BR>a few years. Steinway grand pianos are to be viewed as collectors
<BR>items from the day of delivery from the factory"
<BR>
<BR>All in all... I knew I just had to share this with you. This in no
<BR>way reflects my own opinons, and I am quite uncertain just how much
<BR>Steinway and Sons themselves would support the statement... in which
<BR>case they might be interested in making their real position clear on
<BR>this matter given the rather official "Steinway and Sons" appearance
<BR>to this letter.
<BR>
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>The statement about crown is not in contention. There are some of you who
<BR>feel a soundboard needs to be replaced every 25 years, regardless of crown.
<BR>Some think a soundboard is functional until it looses crown. Like I said, I
<BR>am not debating that.
<BR>
<BR>What I have a problem with is the last sentence of the quote, that Steinways
<BR>are to be viewed as a collector's item. Steinway even goes as far as to imply
<BR>that their instruments actual are a good investment, and that they increase
<BR>in value.
<BR>
<BR>The following is taken directly off the Steinway web site.
<BR>
<BR>"According to Forbes, over the past ten years, the retail value of a Steinway
<BR>concert grand has appreciated nearly 200%.* An impressive record, to be sure
<BR>- but one that tells only part of the story. The fact is, the appreciation of
<BR>Steinway pianos is even more impressive when you look past the previous ten
<BR>years - and take an historical look at appreciation over the past few
<BR>decades. The numbers are nothing less than remarkable: Today, if the owner of
<BR>a vintage Steinway grand decided to gauge the value of his or her piano on
<BR>the open market, it is likely that the piano would command a price 4.3 times
<BR>higher than the original retail cost.**"
<BR>
<BR>Basically what they are saying is that the retail price of a new Steinway
<BR>piano is selling for twice as much as it was 10 years ago. Well, guess what?
<BR>According to my collection of Ancott book, just about every piano
<BR>manufactured in the world is selling for almost twice as much today as it was
<BR>10 years ago. So there is nothing new there. Furthermore, they are saying
<BR>that a used Steinway will sell for 4.3 times more than the original retail
<BR>price. Again, if you compare the original retail price of almost any piano,
<BR>it will sell for about 4.3 times the original retail price. What they are not
<BR>saying is that the used piano, whether it is a Steinway or a Wurlitzer, has
<BR>to be in perfect condition for it to qualify for that calculation.
<BR>
<BR>Don't get me wrong. I think Steinway pianos are great instruments. But the
<BR>posts recently about Steinways being a Steinway if the parts are changed, and
<BR>the implication by the company that their instruments should be bought as an
<BR>investment that will increase in value over the years, gives me the
<BR>implication that perhaps there is something wrong with the marketing
<BR>techniques used by the company. Why would they go to such great length to
<BR>give the public misleading information? What are they hiding?
<BR>
<BR>Personally, I think it degrades the name. I think Steinway should sell their
<BR>instruments based on the fact that they are a good instrument, one that will
<BR>give years of enjoyment, instead of the piano being a good investment that
<BR>will increase in value.
<BR>
<BR>Just my view
<BR>
<BR>Willem </FONT></HTML>