Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/12/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl $2,299 in 2001 is has the same buying power as $2,808.26 in 2009; translating to about 2.5% annual inflation. An investment of $2,299 with a value of $4,295 in 8 years has returned in nominal terms about 8% annually. The real (inflation-adjusted) rate of return is about 5.5% annually--ignoring transaction and storage costs. That's not too shabby considering how low rates have been during much of this period. I wish my portfolio had done so well... -rei Mark Rabiner wrote: >> Mark, >> Have you factored in inflation? The investment return is far less than >> what you think. >> Cheers >> Jayanand >> > > > I didn't factor in a whole lot of things I'm sure. > But a 21mm ASPH Elmarit I got in December of 2001 and I have socks that old > for $2,299 not cost $4,295. > a 35mm Summicron M I got for February of 2000 for $1495 now cost > $2,795. > And on from there. My Noctilux went from 3 grand to 6. > > A nikon lens I got back then for 500 bucks I can leave on the sidewalk > outside my apartment with the used furniture and it will be there in the > morning. A flee bitten mattress has more allure. > > Not that a picture you might take with that lens assuming it didn't rain > that night would not turn out just great. > Its just that you couldn't sell it for 20 bucks. > I love the stuff. The Nikon stuff. > Its just a small issue that my beloved stuff I make my images with everyday > does not exactly keep its value any better than a Ford Pinto. > > > Mark William Rabiner > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >