and ottoman?
So I'm in the process of buying an Eames lounge and ottoman... probably black/walnut, but I digress.
Anyway, early on in my search for the perfect one, I flip-flopped between getting a vintage 1950's antique, or just picking up a new one at DWR. During my research, I also began to consider a third possibility, that is, saving a few bucks and getting a nice used one. Here's where it gets fuzzy... where exactly is the line between "used" and "antique" drawn?
Clearly, a nice example from the 50's is an antique, being that it was produced early in the chairs run, and therefore, is worth a premium. Equally clear is that a pre-owned mint example from say, 2002, can only be called "used", and therefore the sellers asking price should be somewhat less than retail.
In between, it gets dodgy. For instance, I recently looked at a near mint cherry/black chair and ottoman from 1981. The seller was asking a little over retail, and apparently had it appraised at well into the 4000's.
This seems off to me. While I understand and appreciate the significance of an example of a modern classic that was produced early on in the design's run, I fail to see how one produced thirty years later can be any more relevant than one produced fifty years later. To my (perhaps limited) way of thinking, a near mint example from 1981 should fetch less than a new chair... and appraising it at roughly $1000 more is lunacy.
Thoughts?
You are right
Your assessment is dead on. If it's not old enough to have the rosewood veneer, it's just used furniture and should be priced accordingly in my opinion. That is to say, it does not have any of the collectable cachet or value. Which begs the question, if you are going to spend $3000 or $4000 on an Eames chair, why wouldn't you get a nice vintage example in rosewood (as it was intended) that will at least hold its value if not appreciate?
The idea of buying a used one
when it's still being produced, is 1) to save money, or 2) to get closer to the original manufacturing style of the vintage original.
I chose not to go after the Eames lounge chair - too 'iconically' a choice, and I didn't want a lounge chair that swivilled.
Then after making my choice to buy a Saarinen Grasshopper lounge chair and ottoman (and having to have it repaired and recovered), I then started seeing thread after thread concerning problems with the Eames chair, I seemed to have make the right decision.
Bottom line, if you can save a bundle of money on the 30 year old model, go for it. If you want a rosewood veneer vintage original (a better term than antique), then hold out for one. There's plenty of them around.
Putting
the 'antique' correction aside, i understand what Starter is asking.
His/her search is well researched. I could have written the same 5 years ago
when i started looking for the perfect birthday gift. I had 6 months.
At the same time a friend was looking for one for his wife finishing law
school.
I had to have 'vintage' and found one on e-bay.
He bought Herman Miller new.
We are both happy with our decisions. I paid 800. Mine has much nicer
leather but has developed a few splits that i have repaired with similar
leather placed under. And a shock mound gave out. Repaired with
West-Systems epoxy like a boat...
(I was unaware of this possible failure until it happened. It doesn't come
with a manual like a car!...sit gently, listen for squeaks and loose connections.
When this occurs you have 'shock mount failure' and will need to send in at
great expense...)
Ours is worth nothing. (The ottomon is mint! )
Theirs is worth about what you would think. His
leather is gaining a patina after a few years...
Neither of us care about value. It's the best seat in the home in both
households.
I just looked on e-bay. It is about the same senario as it has been for
5 years. Old ones, new ones, fake ones, repaired ones. And still one or
two plycraft ones that are listed as original or 'eames era'. And still multiple bids on
many that are pretty ratty. Prices are much higher. Seems to be an
over-exposed 'must have' item.
If i was searching today i would still look for vintage. With patience one
will turn up at a reasonable price.
Mine was delivered to work. A construction co-worker said "you bought
that? I had one, gave it to my brother for his first apartment. It was ugly
so it sat in his attic. He threw it out to make room..."
Same guy that tossed a wassily chair in the dumpster one day. It is in my
studio now.
Got a flu shot last week. In a vintage shell chair. Stack of them in the corner
of a warehouse in Brooklyn. 95% of the world thinks all of this stuff is
ugly...NY, NY!
Rockland
I'm kind of surprise that lots of people consider the Eames Lounge chair "ugly", since it's SUCH a famous icon of well designed post-war.
I guess the French Provencial crowd will never like it, but most people with knowledge and taste consider it to be worthy of its fame.
By the way, if I hadn't found my Grasshopper, I would've gone for the Womb before the 670/671...but that's just me.
Depends what you want
I think the big distinction here is between what is 'exceptional' and what is 'standard' in the run of the Eames Lounge. Like all things it's a spectrum - with the first production chair made for Billy Wilder being 'exceptionally' valuable at one end, and the soggy rain-soaked, split eared, chipped veneer heap of a chair thats sitting in the trash next to the Magic Dumpster being rather unvaluable.
Most people opt for somewhere in the middle. There are a few different ways to approach the problem.
Practical value: do you want a chair that you can sit in and be comfortable? If this is your main criteria then perhaps you want a more recent year of production.
Collectible value: do you want a chair that will have the potential for monetary return in the future? If this is your focus go older and focus on the provenance.
Both: This becomes an issue of both finding a good vintage, and then having the discipline and knowledge to keep the piece in good shape.
My own experience was a matter of practicality . I really wanted the chair for comfort and style - not for collectible value. I had a limited budget so I went the route of rehabbing a broken chair. The fact that it was broken severely affects future collectible value, but not much of the practical daily use value.
I also personally don't hold much stock in the differences between the 'original' rosewood veneers (dalbergia nigra) and the current Palisander veneer. To me lusting after the old rosewood is merely scarcity creating desire. It all depends on the piece of wood the veneers are cut from. Below is a rather boring Nigra.
As the original thread title...
As the original thread title has been answered, how about 'used' and 'vintage' - I personally class a vintage piece of furniture something that is approx 30 years old or over. I would think cars are much the same, a 'classic' is usually classed at around 30yrs+ One would usually assume a used piece of furniture to maybe fall into single year figures.
If you need any help, please contact us at – info@designaddict.com