# Why don't people understand depreciation of electronics?



## RyanLilly (May 11, 2008)

I just saw 2 add on my local craigslist for Canon XTs with Kit lens, both with the "I paid $800 a year ago.." line and the asking prices were $475 and $500.
The price for them brand new at B&H is only $449! Why don't people understand that electronics, especially consumer grade electronics, don't hold their value. Its just stupid. I almost emailed them the link to the XT at B&H, but I restrained myself, for now.

OK, Rant over.
-Ryan


----------



## christopher walrath (May 11, 2008)

So that means that if I had been the one to purchase my sr-T101 in 1970 then I would be able to expect that (at the afforementioned 38% discount) that I should be able to sell the camera body for $174.00, down from the $279 it went for then.  'Course I'm not adding depreciation through time into the equation so, seeing as how a car drops to half its value when you dirve it off the lot and after one year that raises 12% to 38%, well we need one more mark to form a curve.  Let's assume a 25% mark after 5 years.  That would be 12% less after 14 years and up to 0%less after 30 years.  So given this equation I should actually be able to add about 4% to the original selling price of my sr-T101 if I were to sell it now.  What if I were to say that Princess Di accidentally peed on it in the eighties.  Might add another C-note or so.  Any takers?


----------



## Mike_E (May 11, 2008)

Got one thanks.  I paid 2 bills for it with a hard case and the 1.7 50mm.


----------



## notelliot (May 11, 2008)

christopher walrath said:


> So that means that if I had been the one to purchase my sr-T101 in 1970 then I would be able to expect that (at the afforementioned 38% discount) that I should be able to sell the camera body for $174.00, down from the $279 it went for then.  'Course I'm not adding depreciation through time into the equation so, seeing as how a car drops to half its value when you dirve it off the lot and after one year that raises 12% to 38%, well we need one more mark to form a curve.  Let's assume a 25% mark after 5 years.  That would be 12% less after 14 years and up to 0%less after 30 years.  So given this equation I should actually be able to add about 4% to the original selling price of my sr-T101 if I were to sell it now.  What if I were to say that Princess Di accidentally peed on it in the eighties.  Might add another C-note or so.  Any takers?


if you can confirm that she did indeed pee on it, i'll give ya 20 bucks.


----------



## RyanLilly (May 12, 2008)

Haha:lmao: I feel better, Thanks!


----------



## Antithesis (May 12, 2008)

Yeah, I saw a 20D on CL with a mediocre lens and a canon case... for $1500. It had some random quantaray accessories, but still, you'd think people would know better. Speaking of which, does anyone want to buy a D80 for $1000?


----------



## Garbz (May 12, 2008)

RyanLilly that's entirely beside the point. The worth of equipment isn't related to depreciation. It's related to how much both parties think it is worth. Ok firstly a DSLR isn't a consumer grade electronic device, it has quite a big mechanical component which probably hasn't changed in fundamental design in over 50 year.

But the fact is still if someone gives him $500 for it because they are ill-informed or in fact have a mental problem then the camera is most definitely worth $500 to the seller.

Caveat Emptor.


----------



## ThePup (May 12, 2008)

Garbz said:


> But the fact is still if someone gives him $500 for it because they are ill-informed or in fact have a mental proble



And therein lies the joys of selling on the innernet!


----------



## Jedo_03 (May 12, 2008)

Few ways to look at this...
1) say I buy a D3 and then jump on my personal jet and fly home and the missus doesn't like the colour - so I go on P-Bay to sell it... So 'cos I'm not a retail vendor then I can't sell it for near/close the retail price..?? Even if it's still in the cellophane wrap...?
2) My original Asahi-Pentax cost me abt 60 pounds sterling in the 60's... So say (rough) $120 AuD... So if I put it on P-Bay today, should I allow for depreciation and let it go for, what... 50 bucks...?
3) I had a Mino D7 at one point - bought it 2nd hand from the US of A for the paltry sum of 430 USD (close to 600 AuD) but then on-sold to a guy in one of the Russian Republics for close to 800 Aud...
4) I have an _ORIGINAL _Russian LOMO - takes 110 film... Bought it for a mere 35AuD from Asia... what's that worth..?? Well... Guy on the net has offered me 500 UsD for it...
One man's trash is another man's treasure...
Jedo


----------



## Judge Sharpe (May 12, 2008)

depreciation and value are two differant things. deperciation is a decrease in value due to the wear and tear, the total value is depreciation plus how desirable it is. 
Judge Shapre


----------



## Antithesis (May 12, 2008)

Anyone remember the Marshallian scissors from economics class? The market clearing price for a given item will lower as demand decreases. Demand will certainly decrease as new cameras are released and technology becomes dated. 

Cameras hold their value somewhat well right up until something new and better comes out. For example, the D200 was selling for about $1500 used on ebay right up until the D300 was announced. Then it slowly dropped until the D300 actually hit shelves and it plummeted to about $800. I imagine it will stay there for a while, atleast until the D400 comes out and it looks completely obsolete.


----------



## THORHAMMER (May 12, 2008)

your right, people DONT understand it. 

It always amazes me cause I have a buddy who does the same thing with cars... he expects to buy a car off the lot and 2 years later to get 95% what he paid for it... lol 


I've just been lucky to be able to buy used from a reputable network of studio shooters. I can sell my 20D for 3/4 what I paid for it and it had 400 cilcks on it when I bought it. Im getting reallllly tempted by the newer ones, but holding out to see what comes out next. well see how long I can continue shooting with the old brick....


----------



## Rhys (May 12, 2008)

I paid about $1000 for my XT back in 2005 not long after it came out. I could have paid another $200 and had a 20D. In fact, that's what I really should have done. I just had those last minute cheapskate wobbles and went cheap. Now I can buy a new XT for a little over $400. If I'd paid insurance for my XT over the past 3 years, I bet I'd have paid more in insurance than the thing's now worth.


----------



## jpegjenna (May 13, 2008)

christopher walrath said:


> What if I were to say that Princess Di accidentally peed on it in the eighties.  Might add another C-note or so.  Any takers?



I think I saw one of those on Antiques Roadshow a few weeks back...yours?

lol


----------



## christopher walrath (May 13, 2008)

Naw, just sold mine for 4,000,000 pesos.  Just bought a coffee and an apple fritter at WaWa.  I'm broke.


----------

