Return of the Booth Babes: The 2007 SHOT Show
This page has been moved to http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut
If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Gun Nut at its new location: www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nut.
Safari Club International Convention Photos
Shotguns for $160,000. Jewelry carved from mammoth tusk. $12,000 plain-stocked rifles. You can't afford this stuff, but you can look at the pictures. See them here.
Maybe it's just jealousy, but I can't understand why anyone in their right mind would spend $12,000.00 on a rifle, much less $160,000.00 on a shotgun.
Does the phrase "more money than sense" come to anyone else's mind.
Jim
Posted by: jstreet | January 31, 2007 at 09:52 AM
Yes, jstreet, I agree, but like being a pro-ball player it's not about practical needs, it's about status. We complain,but if I had just signed by contract making 2 million a year, for 5 years; I would have my photo taken with DP holding that 160k shotgun.
Smile and say Cheeeese*
Posted by: Ralph the Rifleman | January 31, 2007 at 12:24 PM
To js street: If you bought that Fabbri today at $160,000 and took care of it, the gun's value would increase by 30 and 50 percent in the next 10 years. That's a pretty good reason.
Posted by: Dave Petzal | January 31, 2007 at 02:02 PM
Dave,
For the same money I could buy 80 acres in Indiana to hunt on. It too would appreciate 30 to 50 percent over 10 years and I could truly enjoy the property over that time. If you shoot the fancy gun the value goes down. My property value (even if left unimproved) will only go up.
I guess we just look @ things from a different standpoint.
Jim
Posted by: jstreet | January 31, 2007 at 04:27 PM
Thanks for the look at the finer things in life. I suggest that you contract with Wayne McLaughlin of Blue Loon Fine Arts to paint a portrait of you and your trophy Nauga when you return from Africa.
Posted by: PbHead | January 31, 2007 at 07:11 PM
$160,000 is a steal relative to the $269,000 asking price for a double rifle in 470NE that I saw. This unquestionably beautiful gun was sitting next to a double 700NE for a paltry $105,000. Perhaps the prospect of shooting a double .70 caliber rifle knocked a bit off the price.
Posted by: James Florence | February 01, 2007 at 09:31 AM
To PbHead: Wayne did propose just such a project last fall, for a great deal of money. I told him no thanks. Probably the most offensive thing at the Show was the paintings of rich guys leering happily over the bodies of animals they had killed, and which would have killed them had it not been for the PH and the trackers.
to James Florence: I know the rifle of which you speak. It was at the convention last year, too. No one wants to buy the thing. A quarter mil for the gun and a quarter mil for the orthopedic surgeon after you shoot it.
Posted by: Dave Petzal | February 01, 2007 at 04:35 PM
To PbHead: Wayne did propose just such a project last fall, for a great deal of money. I told him no thanks. Probably the most offensive thing at the Show was the paintings of rich guys leering happily over the bodies of animals they had killed, and which would have killed them had it not been for the PH and the trackers.
to James Florence: I know the rifle of which you speak. It was at the convention last year, too. No one wants to buy the thing. A quarter mil for the gun and a quarter mil for the orthopedic surgeon after you shoot it.
Posted by: Dave Petzal | February 01, 2007 at 04:36 PM
To PbHead: Wayne did propose just such a project last fall, for a great deal of money. I told him no thanks. Probably the most offensive thing at the Show was the paintings of rich guys leering happily over the bodies of animals they had killed, and which would have killed them had it not been for the PH and the trackers.
to James Florence: I know the rifle of which you speak. It was at the convention last year, too. No one wants to buy the thing. A quarter mil for the gun and a quarter mil for the orthopedic surgeon after you shoot it.
Posted by: Dave Petzal | February 01, 2007 at 04:37 PM
The Shot show and SCI Conventions unite and bring the whole Shooting sport/ outdoor fraternity together, and we need that.
As to the value, I agree land is a better value, but let the "Market" determnine the demand.
If no one one purchased the items, they would soon disappear.
"Let the Market Prosper."
Alex Sokolik
Lifetime SCI
Lifetime RMEF
www.realty1031sales.com
Posted by: Alex Sokolik | February 07, 2007 at 06:59 PM
Despite the high cost, which is probably a write-off anyway, think of what the money is used for................
Posted by: Jack Roe | February 08, 2007 at 01:43 PM
What is beatiful about a rifle or pistol or even a revolver, is not the cost or what it looks like. It is how it shots and the op-ptunity to shot, plus I guess the cost for you have to be able to purchase it. That means a 160,000 for a gun, is so far out of reach for the average person it sounds stupid for antone buying such a thing. Why not invest with a re-sponsible trader that can actually get a good return on your money, and that would get a faster return. Unless you are the type who likes to rub in the faces of others, and that will not work here for I would rather shot a ragged gun that really shoots than one I can just look at.
Posted by: John Dale | February 16, 2007 at 04:50 PM
Can anyone give me an estimate on the value of a Manton double rifle in .470 caliber?
Sharon
Posted by: Sharon | March 12, 2007 at 05:36 PM