Just seen the price that Eddie Parker's "I'm Gone" is up to on Manship's Auction 4017 UKP.... & it still has 10 day's to go....How Much will this fetch, what is the Average Price ????I bet Eddie Parker :angry: wished he had kept a few :angry: ....

JB

Edited May 29, 200520 yr by jonbuck

Bugger been out bid again !!!

Bet it makes at least double that

Isn't this the third copy for sale this year?

Just seen the price that Eddie Parker's "I'm Gone" is up to on Manship's Auction 4017 UKP.... & it still has 10 day's to go....How Much will this fetch, what is the Average Price.... I bet Eddie Parker wished he had kept a few....

JB

link

I'd pay £50 tops

Why are people always stressing each other and intentionally hyping prices very far above what things have ever sold for before in recorded history? Makes you wonder if some people are on a commission from record dealers or if they want others to make the same mistake (pay too much) they already did so they at least won't look foolish alone. £10.000?! I don't think so and certainly don't hope so. £4000 is already quite a a lot. Have heard (though not confirmed) of one sold for £5000. The last copy on ebay made around or slightly below £4000, the one before that (in 2003) made around £2800. Mick H. said he bought one earlier this year for £2700. Most well known big spenders I can think of already have it. It seems that a lot of people think it is clever and a good way to impress mates these days to take another mortgage on the house and pay triple the usual rate for things. It is a fantastic record, one of my all time favourites, and I would consider buying a clean copy at maximum £3000, and not a penny more. If that won't get me one, well that's tough, but there are other records out there.

Why are people always stressing each other and intentionally hyping prices very far above what things have ever sold for before in recorded history? Makes you wonder if some people are on a commission from record dealers or if they want others to make the same mistake (pay too much) they already did so they at least won't look foolish alone. £10.000?! I don't think so and certainly don't hope so. £4000 is already quite a a lot. Have heard (though not confirmed) of one sold for £5000. The last copy on ebay made around or slightly below £4000, the one before that (in 2003) made around £2800. Mick H. said he bought one earlier this year for £2700. Most well known big spenders I can think of already have it. It seems that a lot of people think it is clever and a good way to impress mates these days to take another mortgage on the house and pay triple the usual rate for things. It is a fantastic record, one of my all time favourites, and I would consider buying a clean copy at maximum £3000, and not a penny more. If that won't get me one, well that's tough, but there are other records out there.

link

I'm sure with any auction of this nature there will be appointed "secret & mystery bidders"

Why are people always stressing each other and intentionally hyping prices very far above what things have ever sold for before in recorded history? Makes you wonder if some people are on a commission from record dealers or if they want others to make the same mistake (pay too much) they already did so they at least won't look foolish alone. £10.000?! I don't think so and certainly don't hope so. £4000 is already quite a a lot. Have heard (though not confirmed) of one sold for £5000. The last copy on ebay made around or slightly below £4000, the one before that (in 2003) made around £2800. Mick H. said he bought one earlier this year for £2700. Most well known big spenders I can think of already have it. It seems that a lot of people think it is clever and a good way to impress mates these days to take another mortgage on the house and pay triple the usual rate for things. It is a fantastic record, one of my all time favourites, and I would consider buying a clean copy at maximum £3000, and not a penny more. If that won't get me one, well that's tough, but there are other records out there.

link

i take your point christian, and i agree with you in general terms, but once you say you'll pay three grand for a record you've kind of lost the argument. three grand is a lot of dough to most people, but ten grand isn't a lot to some...

The price of a record is determined by what an individual will pay, nothing more nothing less, this then unfortunately becomes the benchmark (and why the hell shouldn't it) Never liked this 45' by the way so I don't give a monkeys if it fetches more than the annual budget of Angola

Edited May 29, 200520 yr by Brett

Grumpy sod today arent you Brett.....

Need a night out by the sound of it.

Last I heard..this was ONLY ( ) worth around £3K! This is an big record though..with quite a big price.(Not the biggest by a long chalk though)...and as an added bonus though.. "Crying Clown" on the flip....

You don`t even see the boot/reissue anymore (also on green Awake but different design,styrene, Monarch Recordings (MR) stamped....Betcha they`re not cheap either....40 or 50 quid now?

Edited May 29, 200520 yr by The_Soul_Intention

i take your point christian, and i agree with you in general terms, but once you say you'll pay three grand for a record you've kind of lost the argument. three grand is a lot of dough to most people, but ten grand isn't a lot to some...

link

very true

Last I heard..this was ONLY ( ) worth around £3K! This is an big record though..with quite a big price.(Not the biggest by a long chalk though)...and as an added bonus though.. "Crying Clown" on the flip.... 

You don`t even see the boot/reissue anymore (also on green Awake but different design,styrene, Monarch Recordings (MR) stamped....Betcha they`re not cheap either....40 or 50 quid now?

link

I've got one of these , but wouldn't sell it because of " Crying Clown " on flip side ,which is awesome Detroit midtempo , glad you dig it too !! Best ,Eddie.

i take your point christian, and i agree with you in general terms, but once you say you'll pay three grand for a record you've kind of lost the argument. three grand is a lot of dough to most people, but ten grand isn't a lot to some...

link

I don't think I have lost any argument. If you knew me better you would know I am a person of integrity, not one of those jokers you constantly see trying to either inflate the value of things that they already have (and perhaps paid too much for) or underrate the value of things they want. You often see someone saying "ohh, that's hard, must be at least £350" and when I know the person paid £150 or something, and I have failed numerous times to get even £60 for the record in question, you know they are just full of it. Same goes for the pathetic attempts like "Al Williams is worth around £700" when everyone knows it will sell for £1500+. To my knowledge EP has never before in the history of mankind sold for a lot more than £4000, and before that not more than £2000 - £3000. This was not long ago either, has the UK suffered an inflation of a few hundred percent I never heard of? Or are there new collectors on the scene that were not around 2 - 3 years ago? I don't think so. £3000 is a very large amount of money for me, very large indeed. I would still be prepared to try and raise £3000 somehow to pay for a clean copy of EP. If some nutter now pays double or triple that my chances of getting it might not increase of course, I'll just bide my time and sooner or later I will get it. £10.000 will get you a vintage 60's sports car in nice condition or something like that. Think about that...

Don't see how people can rely on Manship's auction prices.

The whole system is open to abuse.

Its too easy in theory for Manship to bid up the price of a record.

He can't lose as he's on commission.

Col

Isn't this the third copy for sale this year?

link

================================================

YES

I've got one of these , but wouldn't sell it because of " Crying Clown " on flip side ,which is awesome Detroit midtempo , glad you dig it too !! Best ,Eddie.

link

Sell it, buy Eddie Sha Raes version of "crying clown" and make a good 3975£ in profit

best

Leo

Billy Sha Rae's version is pretty weak IMO. Instead buy Eddie Parker "Crying Clown" on Triple B...

Don't see how people can rely on Manship's auction prices.

The whole system is open to abuse.

Its too easy in theory for Manship to bid up the price of a record.

He can't lose as he's on commission.

Col

link

I don't think there is anything fishy with his auctions. And even if there is, the high bidder still have to pay up. No one is holding a gun to anyone's head (as far as I know, you do wonder sometimes though ) and no one forces anyone to bid ridiculous amounts for records.

Don't see how people can rely on Manship's auction prices.

The whole system is open to abuse.

Its too easy in theory for Manship to bid up the price of a record.

He can't lose as he's on commission.

Col

link

Agree Ebay may not be perfect but its better

Billy Sha Rae's version is pretty weak IMO. Instead buy Eddie Parker "Crying Clown" on Triple B...

link

For real? Man i LOVE Billy S. version , i would say his is the best and the weakest is Freddie Butlers "they say i'm afraid of losing you" which has the same backing..

best

Leo

Eddie Parker could have been one of the giants of soul along David Ruffin, Teddy Pendergrass, Chuck Jackson etc. if he had been handled and marketed properly. EP is as good as, or better, than some of the best male vocalists from the 60's and 70's, Billy Sha Rae is mediocre at best in comparison. I would have thought that this was pretty obvious to most people.

Edited May 30, 200520 yr by Guest

Billy Sha Rae is mediocre at best in comparison. I would have thought that this was pretty obvious to most people.

link

Not to all I guess as I've allways prefered Billy Sha Rae's version ("I'm gone" that is) to E.P.

But hey, what do I know...

Cheers,

CB

Edited May 30, 200520 yr by cC B

Billy Sha Rae's version is pretty weak IMO. Instead buy Eddie Parker "Crying Clown" on Triple B...

link

I agree Christian and you get a pretty decent flip on the Triple B outing. BTW is Crying Clown the same on this as or is it slightly different to the Awake release?

Not to all I guess as I've allways prefered Billy Sha Rae's version ("I'm gone" that is) to E.P. 

But hey, what do I know...

Cheers,

CB

link

Nothing apparently

Eddie Parker could have been one of the giants of soul along David Ruffin, Teddy Pendergrass, Chuck Jackson etc. if he had been handled and marketed properly. EP is as good as, or better, than some of the best male vocalists from the 60's and 70's, Billy Sha Rae is mediocre at best in comparison.

I would have thought that this was pretty obvious to most people.

link

===============

do you know how sarchastic this sounds christian?

In terms of Billy Sha-rae vs Eddie Parker I agree Eddie Parker is better but is it a thousand times better? Not to my mind. So therefore value for money wise give me Billy Sha-rae.

===============

do you know how sarchastic this sounds christian?

link

Not sure which part you had in mind exactly, but some of it was indeed meant to be sarcastic.

Not to all I guess as I've allways prefered Billy Sha Rae's version ("I'm gone" that is) to E.P. 

But hey, what do I know...

Cheers,

CB

link

Sounds familiar, have this been discussed before some time maybe? I know you, Sebastian and maybe 2 or 3 other persons on the planet prefer Billy Sha Rae. Good for you, even if I will never understand how it is possible.

In terms of Billy Sha-rae vs Eddie Parker I agree Eddie Parker is better but is it a thousand times better? Not to my mind. So therefore value for money wise give me Billy Sha-rae.

link

EP easily 1000 times better but since BS (BS indeed ) is not good at all IMO the comparison is irrelevant.

EP easily 1000 times better but since BS (BS indeed ) is not good at all IMO the comparison is irrelevant.

link

I don't know how to say this but i'm finding myself agreeing with Christian H 100% who'd have though it possible

If it does I got a vg spare thats going up 4 sale straight away.

link

It would surprise me Andy - most of the stuff he sells makes on average double the going/ebay rate and it made $7500 (approx £4000) early last year....but in the words of Chris B "Hey what do I know!"

I don't think I have lost any argument. If you knew me better you would know I am a person of integrity, not one of those jokers you constantly see trying to either inflate the value of things that they already have (and perhaps paid too much for) or underrate the value of things they want. You often see someone saying "ohh, that's hard, must be at least £350" and when I know the person paid £150 or something, and I have failed numerous times to get even £60 for the record in question, you know they are just full of it. Same goes for the pathetic attempts like "Al Williams is worth around £700" when everyone knows it will sell for £1500+. To my knowledge EP has never before in the history of mankind sold for a lot more than £4000, and before that not more than £2000 - £3000. This was not long ago either, has the UK suffered an inflation of a few hundred percent I never heard of? Or are there new collectors on the scene that were not around 2 - 3 years ago? I don't think so. £3000 is a very large amount of money for me, very large indeed. I would still be prepared to try and raise £3000 somehow to pay for a clean copy of EP. If some nutter now pays double or triple that my chances of getting it might not increase of course, I'll just bide my time and sooner or later I will get it. £10.000 will get you a vintage 60's sports car in nice condition or something like that. Think about that...

link

'You've lost the argument' is a colloquialism...forget it.

Alright. Try and read this slowly. Use your finger to follow the words if it helps?

For someone who talks a lot of sense, you do talk some bollocks as well.

You use a lot of abusive words to describe other collectors (and dealers); today it's 'jokers' and 'nutters', simply because their view of what a record is worth, as a sale or a purchase, differs from yours.

I believe your favourite epithet is 'morons' (but I think I can remember 'lunatics' as well? Anyone else able to add to the list?)

The point is, there is no set value for an Eddie Parker or any other record.

First off, it's not available retail.

Second, there isn't a real 'market rate' either. In a mature and genuinely world-wide market, with equal access to information (as to availability, supply and demand) between buyers and sellers, there would be a market rate but these conditions don't exist in record collecting so there isn't a market rate - there's a 'best guess' rate which is coloured by rumour, lies and misinformation about past sales (some of it perhaps deliberately spread by your 'jokers').

But even that isn't a real rate because as everyone has said, ad nauseam, the next Eddie Parker is only worth what someone will pay. That amount is volatile and very easily distorted by individuals with unusual amounts of money to spend.

Now, you scornfully deride the 'morons' who pay what you consider to be 'over the odds' on a record.

The irony is that - using your own logic - many people would say anyone who was prepared to spend £3,000 they could ill-afford (which you are by your own admission in this case) on a seven inch piece of plastic, in an uncertain market with no rules and absolutely zero protection, was a moron.

On the other hand, a millionaire who was willing to spend £10,000 on the same record is not a moron because the only thing that defines a 'moron' is risk (as an aside, I agree with you that there are few new collectors around but maybe some existing collectors' personal circumstances have changed in the last two or three years?).

Let's say a £3k buyer who can't afford it gets the next Eddie Parker. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that maybe he lives in Sweden?

Meanwhile, a £10k buyer with a Porsche gets one the next day.

The day after that, 200 copies turn up (unlikely but it could happen).

Who's the moron?

In my opinion, the moron is the £3k buyer who can't really afford it.

The sensible buyer checks his own bank balance before spending, not what you or anyone else says he should spend.

None of which is to say it's a good thing and I won't be spending any 'k's of my own money on Eddie Parker any day soon.

However, not everyone who spends big money on records is a twat and maybe, just maybe, you ought to find a mirror and have a gander at yourself?

cheers

I'm a moron but I don't own a copy of Eddie Parker.

How does that work then

Godz

Let's say a £3k buyer who can't afford it gets the next Eddie Parker. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that maybe he lives in Sweden?

Meanwhile, a £10k buyer with a Porsche gets one the next day.

The day after that, 200 copies turn up (unlikely but it could happen).

Who's the moron?

link

The tw@t who finds 200 copies and can't keep his trap shut!!!

Kung Fu Mace makes an appearance then.

Thought you'd be off chopping innocent planks of wood....

Kung Fu Mace makes an appearance then.

Thought you'd be off chopping innocent planks of wood....

link

Talking about planks of wood......how's your bank holiday been Joe?

You've gone off topic again mate.......

Alright, i'll bring it back on topic.

If I even think about bidding for the Eddie Parker my missus will crown me with said lump of wood.

Alright, i'll bring it back on topic.

If I even think about bidding for the Eddie Parker my missus will crown me with said lump of wood.

link

Please think about it.....just for a few minutes to give your missus enough time to get a good swing in.

Personally, I'd wait till the other 200 show up.....

Edited May 30, 200520 yr by Mace

The irony is that - using your own logic - many people would say anyone who was prepared to spend £3,000 they could ill-afford (which you are by your own admission in this case) on a seven inch piece of plastic, in an uncertain market with no rules and absolutely zero protection, was a moron.

On the other hand, a millionaire who was willing to spend £10,000 on the same record is not a moron because the only thing that defines a 'moron' is risk (as an aside, I agree with you that there are few new collectors around but maybe some existing collectors' personal circumstances have changed in the last two or three years?).

Great points. The best way to collect records imo is to buy em, file 'em, then forget 'em, (as in completely write off the cost as gone, finito, dead money. etc). Only buy what you really want so then if the price tumbles...who gives a rats ass? You ain't selling 'em anyway right? You didn't buy them with an eye on the future......right? And so on that note, my 30 year old record collection is worthless. Just the way I like it!

Regards,

Dave

www.hitsvillesoulclub.com

The point is, there is no set value for an Eddie Parker or any other record.

First off, it's not available retail.

Second, there isn't a real 'market rate' either. In a mature and genuinely world-wide market, with equal access to information (as to availability, supply and demand) between buyers and sellers, there would be a market rate but these conditions don't exist in record collecting so there isn't a market rate - there's a 'best guess' rate which is coloured by rumour, lies and misinformation about past sales (some of it perhaps deliberately spread by your 'jokers').

But even that isn't a real rate because as everyone has said, ad nauseam, the next Eddie Parker is only worth what someone will pay. That amount is volatile and very easily distorted by individuals with unusual amounts of money to spend.

However, not everyone who spends big money on records is a twat and maybe, just maybe, you ought to find a mirror and have a gander at yourself?

cheers

link

Also don't forget the banks in the City are paying big bonuses again, and the UK economy remains "buoyant" (probably more so if house prices stall for a while in the SE).

As it happens, working near to some of these banking types, I have seen people "blow" more than the Eddie Parker price on a few bottles of "bubbly" with their team in the space of a couple of hours....so everything in perspective....and of course the next day they have nothing except a few million fewer brain cells and a stonking hangover. Now if I was in that enviable position and given a choice I'd go with Eddie Parker every time of course, but my missus would opt for the "shampoo" as she detests Eddie Parker.

BTW I am not bidding on EP either, much as I think it's a fantastic record - price is out of my league already. But with a couple of "keen to haves" outbidding each other, and the testoterone rush when the auction starts to close, we can only guess where this will end up.

I'm a moron but I don't own a copy of Eddie Parker.

How does that work then 

Godz

link

'You've lost the argument' is a colloquialism...forget it.

Alright. Try and read this slowly. Use your finger to follow the words if it helps?

*Trying to score cheap 'academic points' and a generally condescending tone might be a successful approach against some of the less literate members of the forum, you're not achieveing anything with me though, unless it is just another provocation of course.

For someone who talks a lot of sense, you do talk some bollocks as well.

You use a lot of abusive words to describe other collectors (and dealers); today it's 'jokers' and 'nutters', simply because their view of what a record is worth, as a sale or a purchase, differs from yours.

I believe your favourite epithet is 'morons' (but I think I can remember 'lunatics' as well? Anyone else able to add to the list?)

*Well, there are plenty of morons, as in unintelligent, uneducated plain dumb people out there. People are different, some are very intelligent, some are normal, some are not quite so intelligent. I don't make fun of the mentally impaired though, what I and most others I have ever met in the record world consider moronic is stupid acts by people who should perhaps know better.

The point is, there is no set value for an Eddie Parker or any other record.

First off, it's not available retail.

Second, there isn't a real 'market rate' either. In a mature and genuinely world-wide market, with equal access to information (as to availability, supply and demand) between buyers and sellers, there would be a market rate but these conditions don't exist in record collecting so there isn't a market rate - there's a 'best guess' rate which is coloured by rumour, lies and misinformation about past sales

(some of it perhaps deliberately spread by your 'jokers').

*Exactly.

Now, you scornfully deride the 'morons' who pay what you consider to be 'over the odds' on a record.

*Yes I occasionally do, and so do you and most others on a regular basis as an integral part of normal record chat, so what??? You could have picked on most other active members for the same thing, why me Dan?   Usually a person who pays say £300 for a relatively common £20 record deserves all the scorn they get IMO. There is just no defense for it or reason behind in most cases, face it, some people are just plain stupid.

The irony is that - using your own logic - many people would say anyone who was prepared to spend £3,000 they could ill-afford (which you are by your own admission in this case) on a seven inch piece of plastic, in an uncertain market with no rules and absolutely zero protection, was a moron.

On the other hand, a millionaire who was willing to spend £10,000 on the same record is not a moron because the only thing that defines a 'moron' is risk (as an aside, I agree with you that there are few new collectors around but maybe some existing collectors' personal circumstances have changed in the last two or three years?).

Let's say a £3k buyer who can't afford it gets the next Eddie Parker. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that maybe he lives in Sweden?

Meanwhile, a £10k buyer with a Porsche gets one the next day.

The day after that, 200 copies turn up (unlikely but it could happen).

Who's the moron?

In my opinion, the moron is the £3k buyer who can't really afford it.

The sensible buyer checks his own bank balance before spending, not what you or anyone else says he should spend.

None of which is to say it's a good thing and I won't be spending any 'k's of my own money on Eddie Parker any day soon.

However, not everyone who spends big money on records is a twat and maybe, just maybe, you ought to find a mirror and have a gander at yourself?

cheers

link

*I agree with most of your points, and a relatively poor person with low income (like me) who spends £3000 on a record is obviously crazier (in some ways) than a multi millionaire who spends £10.000, a very true observation. You have for a long time had some kind of agenda against me and if you want to you can find things to attack with everyone, if you really want to. You know I am right, but your hurt pride (or whatever problem it is you have that makes you have a go at me every now and then) won't let you admit it. You see it all the time, jokers (yes jokers) who say things 'are worth' say £400 when the record in question has NEVER sold for more than £150 and I personally offered the same record for sale the week before (for the 4th time or something), or indeed still have it for sale, and can't even sell the damn thing at £60. In such a situation don't you agree that person is a joker, a person who is not serious? I know you agree.

Regards

Christian

Alright. Try and read this slowly. Use your finger to follow the words if it helps?

*Trying to score cheap 'academic points' and a generally condescending tone might be a successful approach against some of the less literate members of the forum, you're not achieveing anything with me though, unless it is just another provocation of course.

of course it was a 'provocation'. i didn't literally expect you to read with your finger you muppet.

i wouldn't say it was an 'academic point' though - i was taking the piss, as i was with the 'generally condescending' tone.

but you give your own prejudices away mate - it 'might be a successul approach against some of the less literate members of the forum'????? what crazy viking planet are you on??????

all i can say is: 'less literate members of the forum, rise up!'

no point continuing with this on here, though...totally off-topic.

have PMd you to continue the discussion.

Edited May 31, 200520 yr by Dan

no continue it here I was enjoying it

Alright. Try and read this slowly. Use your finger to follow the words if it helps?

*Trying to score cheap 'academic points' and a generally condescending tone might be a successful approach against some of the less literate members of the forum, you're not achieveing anything with me though, unless it is just another provocation of course.

of course it was a 'provocation'. i didn't literally expect you to read with your finger you muppet.

i wouldn't say it was an 'academic point' though - i was taking the piss, as i was with the 'generally condescending' tone.

but you give your own prejudices away mate - it 'might be a successul approach against some of the less literate members of the forum'????? what crazy viking planet are you on??????

all i can say is: 'less literate members of the forum, rise up!'

no point continuing with this on here, though...totally off-topic.

have PMd you to continue the discussion.

link

I will PM you later tonight Dan, must go out and do some stuff soon. It's not prejudice I think. For instance when debates go along the lines "I'm not so keen on red cars" and someone jumps in "why the hell don't you like blue bicycles for?!" it is obvious that many have a real difficulty understanding sentences and contexts, not to mention making themselves understood in writing. I dare not speculate on the reasons for this in individual cases, but there are more than a few.

" it is obvious that many have a real difficulty understanding sentences and contexts, not to mention making themselves understood in writing. I dare not speculate on the reasons for this in individual cases, but there are more than a few.

link

Hey I'm one of these!!

As for the reason - well Mrs G says it's because I'm a tw@t. Difficult to argue with such a succinct analysis innit?

Godz