Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/10/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] leicas, chevies, and inflation (was M camera parts)
From: Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 16:36:41 -0500 (Central Daylight Time)

Thanks, Marc and Rei....you got my point....the inflation rate is less 
accurate than going by prices of things that normal folks buy...
that's why I chose a mid-income job/family sedan to use as reference.
A modest family home in the 'burbs would be another good reference, but 
WHAT 'burbs?   !!!!

Walt

On Thu, 18 Oct 2001 16:41:54 -0400 (EDT) Rei Shinozuka 
<shino@ubspainewebber.com> wrote:
> 
> there's an inflation calculator at
> 
> http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/bu2/inflateGDP.html
> 
> according to this, the $288 in 1954 is $1,586.42 in 2001 dollars.
> 
> but if you must measure by chevies, the 1954 chevy corvette convertible
> was $3,498 and the 2002 chevy corvette convertible is $47,530.  if the leica
> were to remain at 8.233% of the price of the vette, it would now cost
> $3,913.14.
> 
> -rei
> 
> 
> > From: Marc James Small <msmall@roanoke.infi.net>
> > 
> > In 1954, a new Chevy, if you could have found one, would have been around
> > $1,000.  A Leica M3 body had a list price of $288 -- and that list price
> > was far more rigidly policed then than now.  So, a Leica body cost you
> > around 30% the price of a new car.  The Leica has fallen substantially in
> > relative cost, unless there are some $7,500 new cars around I've missed
> > hearing about.
> > 
> > Marc
> > 
> > msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
> > Cha robh bąs fir gun ghrąs fir!
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html