Originally Posted by puma1552 (Post 21097844)

So which is it?

Yeah, high end components from a decade ago that have now been superseded by the lower end components of today. Methinks someone doesn't understand trickle down engineering.

And besides, nobody will ever know this bike retailed for $2500 but was had new from the LBS for only $1200 (minus wheels/pedals), so in a decade, I can probably still sell it to you for a grand and laugh all the way to the LBS to buy my next new one:

Originally Posted by robnol (Post 21097478)

i will buy it for pennies on the dollar... u shell out the mega bucks and i will enjoy it just as much knowing i wasnt dumb enough to buy something that loses its value faster than an american car...

Originally Posted by teejaywhy (Post 21097787)

You PAID for that?

Originally Posted by 86az135i (Post 21098175)

Well on road bikes, components really haven't changed a whole lot. I would say my 26 year old shimano 600 ultegra tricolor components are near as good as your new 105 components if not better. Only reason I can say that is I have new ultegra components which aren't vastly superior and my wife has a bike with 105 components.

Originally Posted by AlmostTrick (Post 21098215)

Yes, but unlike buyers of used bikes, I'm pretty sure @indyfabz gets a small reimbursement every time he posts it on BF. My quick estimation has determined that the cost has more than likely been repaid in full by now. :D

Originally Posted by 86az135i (Post 21098180)

Why were you dumb enough to pay 1k for a 9 year old bike? I bought last year, a 2 year old bike that retailed for $4800 for $900.

Who cares how people spend their money. Some people have more money and can afford the latest and greatest and it be new. I would love to be able to do that.

Originally Posted by Koyote (Post 21097984)

We arent always doing this. I specifically said where my time is always worth money. Any decisions on what to do when time is worth money would take place when I am at work. The rest of my life is different and decisions made during hours outside of work are opportunity cost decisions, but not for money. Instead they are based on enjoyment, or responsibility, or whatever other basis I am using to decide what to do.

My point was that if my time were always worth money, meaning I could be paid the effective hourly rate of what I earn at work, I would have a tough time deciding to do things that I do right now.

Originally Posted by Metieval (Post 21097897)

well, when you are unemployed. You have the time to sort through 1,000's of bikes on ebay to find that pristine bike.

other wise time is Money, and its better to work, and then just spend that money at the bike store.

buying new is called "Time management"

Originally Posted by mstateglfr (Post 21097498)

Yes I am aware of how consumerism and supply/demand work.

What's your point with this post?

Originally Posted by AlmostTrick (Post 21098215)

Yes, but unlike buyers of used bikes, I'm pretty sure @indyfabz gets a small reimbursement every time he posts it on BF. My quick estimation has determined that the cost has more than likely been repaid in full by now. :D

Originally Posted by Koyote (Post 21098372)

All allocation decisions are based on opportunity cost, whether at work or not, and whether they involve direct monetary payments or not. It's a truism that every decision involves a trade-off, and that thing that you are foregoing is the opportunity cost. You're trying to make a false distinction.

Originally Posted by mstateglfr (Post 21097942)

I cant imagine living a life where my time is always worth money. It would be exhausting trying to calculate the opportunity cost for each activity at any given time.

Originally Posted by Koyote

All allocation decisions are based on opportunity cost, whether at work or not, and whether they involve direct monetary payments or not. It's a truism that every decision involves a trade-off, and that thing that you are foregoing is the opportunity cost. You're trying to make a false distinction.

Originally Posted by Kapusta (Post 21098146)

Except you are not buying a NOS 9 year old bike. You are buying a bike with 9 years of use. So how much you are saving depends on the condition.

It also depends on whether you care about design changes over the past 9 years. This could mean the components themselves or the compatibly with newer standards.

For example, you want a bike with a fairly “road” like geo and also tire clearance for 35s? I can tell you from experience (looking for such a thing in 2010) that there are not many 9 year old options.

It also depends on the TYPE of bike. For example, other than tire clearance, there is nothing I care much about that differentiates a road bike from today and 9 years ago. But with mountain bikes, the changes over any 9 year period are immense, and honestly, I doubt I would even pay $500 for a 9 year old FS MTB that retailed for $5K unless is was literally never ridden.

Also, while my overall experience with eBay purchases have been generally good, I have had less than stellar luck when it comes to bikes and bike frames.

And unless you live in a very populated large area, good used options can be limited.

Originally Posted by robnol (Post 21098784)

components can easily be upgraded if u have any mechanical aptitude a person acn easily doit ....its not hard at all

Originally Posted by robnol (Post 21098784)

components can easily be upgraded if u have any mechanical aptitude a person acn easily doit ....its not hard at all

Originally Posted by robnol (Post 21098784)

components can easily be upgraded if u have any mechanical aptitude a person acn easily doit ....its not hard at all

Originally Posted by Koyote (Post 21098372)

Thank you for this, Koyote. Being able to say that I'm working out the opportunity costs of my time allocation (while I'm laying on the couch watching TV) sounds so much better than "I'm being a lazy ass". :)

Originally Posted by mstateglfr (Post 21098499)

Interesting, Ill have to think about this. At first glance, I see the distinction as quite valid. Opportunity cost is how we make decisions all the time, agreed. But not all those are based on making money as one of the options to decide on. I really think that its valid to say that a single specific option is worth singling out here.

Tonight I will have to decide between watching some show I dont care about or exercise. Pretty sure I will choose the show because Im not in an exercise state of mind recently. To me, the opportunity cost of such a decision is completely different if I add in making money to that equation. If I had the chance to work for a random hour, like 9pm to 10pm and get an hour's worth of pay- I would probably do that. This is why I mentioned if money were to play a part, it would be a game changer when it comes to deciding what to do.

But Ill give it some thought. Perhaps it is a difference without distinction. Hmm.

Originally Posted by Leinster (Post 21098820)

Yes, but buying new components to upgrade an old frame can (and usually does) end up more expensive than buying a new bike. And you’re left with a big parts box full of old 9-speed gears that nobody will take off your hands.

Originally Posted by robnol (Post 21098369)

I never said I cared what people spend on a bike.... I just said it seemed like a waste of money....once again the thought police here on bf get an attitude towards anybody’s opinion or thoughts that don’t jive with the. Collective mindset...... and u bought a 4800 dollar bike that was 2 years old for 900 thank you for making my point so clearly