The Cost of Toy Soldiers (1 Viewer)

[Russell]

I just received Toy Soldier Magazine today, issue #134, which is the July 2009 issue. It's June 1st .

In letters to the editor someone writes about the prices of toy soldiers and wonders whether or not they are more expensive now than they used to be. Considering inflation he writes that one US dollar in 1960 equals about seven US dollars now. He also mentions that the quality of the figures today is much better. So my questions to you all are, considering inflation, and quality, are toy soldiers more expensive now than they used to be? Is the letter writer about right on the question of inflation? Any comments?

I didn’t start collecting until the early 90s and so I don’t know about prices in 1960.

To help I checked out these prices.
In 2009
K & C foot figures WWII $32
K & C foot figures Crusades $29
K & C foot figures Napoleonic $25
K & C foot figures Civil War $25

Britain foot figures WWII $25
Britain foot figures Redcoats $22
Britain foot figures Museum C. $29

Tradition foot figures, $150/8 figures = $18.75 each
Bill Hocker foot figures, $160/8 figures = $20 each

In 1960 with $1 = $7

K & C foot figures WWII $4.50
K & C foot figures Crusades $4.15
K & C foot figures Napoleonic $3.55
K & C foot figures Civil War $3.55

Britain foot figures WWII $3.55
Britain foot figures Redcoats $3.15
Britain foot figures Museum C. $4.15

Tradition foot figures $2.65 each
Bill Hocker foot figures $2.85 each

I do remember paying about $1,500 for a new Triumph Spitfire around 1967. Now that was fun .
The motor blew within a couple of weeks .

 

[Njja]

I would certainly agree things are quite a bit more expensive today. Its true

that people probably make more money, but if you looked at the percentage

of your pay you had to spend to purchase the same item its going to be much

higher today.

At least today you have a wider variety of items to choose from, now if you

are one of the collectors that would like everything......you are in big trouble.

 

[kogu]

To say, wether or not Toy Soldiers are more expensive today it needs to compare the income of a collector in 1960 and 2009.
Like what was paid for the hour in a certain job back then and now or what was the annual salary for another job back then and now? That might shift the view a bit.
Konrad

 

[Russell]

John wrote,

now if you

are one of the collectors that would like everything......you are in big trouble.

So true, and actually this is good news. It underlines the variety and quality of what is available. It just requires some self-restraint .

I'm wondering, how much a Britain boxed set was around 1960.

 

[theBaron]

I would certainly agree things are quite a bit more expensive today. Its true

that people probably make more money, but if you looked at the percentage

of your pay you had to spend to purchase the same item its going to be much

higher today.

At least today you have a wider variety of items to choose from, now if you

are one of the collectors that would like everything......you are in big trouble.

Actually, I think the Census Bureau and the Treasury Dept have stats that show that the opposite is true, that generally we're working fewer hours today than we did in 1960, to earn enough to buy a market basket of goods (including larger-ticket items). You have to account for the rate of inflation, of course, which may be accelerating in the near future. But you're right, that is an important consideration in this comparison, what percentage of the buyer's income the purchase represents.

The comparisons about quality, and variety are good points to consider, too. It is true that we have, generally, a larger variety of detailed figures than were available in 1960. However, in 1960, we're still talking about toy soldiers as toys, and not collector's items. The figures Britain made in 1960, for example, were intended for a much broader market, and so, made in much higher numbers, than today's average K&C set, for example. That's something to be factored in as well. A more apt comparison might be with Stadden or Imrie-Risley figures of 1960, which were always intended to be military miniatures, rather than toys. Since they were sold as individual figures or kits (allowing for the Stadden group pieces, several mounted on one base), they were relatively more expensive than a set of Britain's toy soldiers. Even today, if we were to buy a Stadden custom figure or an Imrie-Risley kit, the prices are in the same range with figures from K&C, Britain, etc.

I think that Forces of Valor or 21st Century might be a better sample to use in a comparison of "toy" soldiers, since they're marketed more as toys, though many of us collectors buy them. I say that because you can find them in the toy aisle of department stores, as opposed to K&C, Frontline, etc, who sell through specialty shops and dealers. FoV/21st are using the same kind of outlets that toy soldier manufacturers used back then-the general retail stores (allowing, too, that there were specialty stores that sold Britains in 1960, too).

Just some observations (when I should be working )

Prost!
Brad

 

[Louis Badolato]

Brad,

I can't speak to census beaureu or beaureu of treasury statistics, but common sense and experience tells me this can't be true.

My father, on a transit cop's salary (I think about $12,000 a year), working 40 hours a week, earned enough in 1962 to but a house in Port Washington, New York (north shore of Long Island, Nassau County) for $16,000, or one and a third years salary at 40 hours a week. Today a house in Port Washington costs north of $500,000, or more then eight years of a Transit Cop's $60,000 base salary.

As far as the amount of hours worked, in my profession, attorneys are expected to bill 50 hours a week, which means that we must work 60-80 hours a week. And then there is vacation time. I have never taken more than a week worth of vacation days in a year of my career (and the year a took a full week was for my honeymoon). In fact, when working my way up from associate to Junior partner to full partner in law firms (before I opened my own practice and got out of the insanity) there were a couple of years when I took no vacation at all. And I took exactly one sick day in 8 years. If you wanted to make partner, taking vacation or sick days was out of the question.

Now that I have my own practice, my big vacation every year is taking 2-3 days off to go to the Chicago Show, and 2 days off for the NY Symposium.

The older attorneys I do appeals for tell me that it was never like this in the 50's and 60's, when being an attorney was a profession, not a business.

I also know that most of the families in the neighborhood where I grew up could have a comfortable lifestyle, owning a modest home and a car, on a single blue collar income, whereas today, the same neighborhood is populated by professionals and/or dual income (both father and mother) families. In my experience, things have changed dramatically for the worse for the traditional "middle class" from 1970 to the present.

I feel like I am one of the very fortunate few of my generation, who, because my wife and I are both attorneys with good incomes, enjoys a nicer home than the one I grew up in. To do so, however, my wife and I both have to work 60+ hours a week (I often work past midnight or 1:00 a.m., so I can spend time with my kids during their waking hours), to which she five days a week and I two days a week have to add an hour and a half commute each way. I doubt my children whill be able to afford a lifestyle anything close to ours if they want to live in the neighborhood they are growing up in. I suspect that, even if they become professionals, to enjoy a similar lifestyle they will have to relocate to a less expensive region of the country.

So, compared to all the other insane increases in living expenses from 1960, I think $32 for a hand painted metal toy soldier is probably not too bad.

 

[theBaron]

Brad,

I can't speak to census beaureu or beaureu of treasury statistics, but common sense and experience tells me this can't be true.

My father, on a transit cop's salary (I think about $12,000 a year), working 40 hours a week, earned enough in 1962 to but a house in Port Washington, New York (north shore of Long Island, Nassau County) for $16,000, or one and a third years salary at 40 hours a week. Today a house in Port Washington costs north of $500,000, or more then eight years of a Transit Cop's $60,000 base salary.

As far as the amount of hours worked, in my profession, attorneys are expected to bill 50 hours a week, which means that we must work 60-80 hours a week. And then there is vacation time. I have never taken more than a week worth of vacation days in a year of my career (and the year a took a full week was for my honeymoon). In fact, when working my way up from associate to Junior partner to full partner in law firms (before I opened my own practice and got out of the insanity) there were a couple of years when I took no vacation at all. And I took exactly one sick day in 8 years. If you wanted to make partner, taking vacation or sick days was out of the question.

Now that I have my own practice, my big vacation every year is taking 2-3 days off to go to the Chicago Show, and 2 days off for the NY Symposium.

The older attorneys I do appeals for tell me that it was never like this in the 50's and 60's, when being an attorney was a profession, not a business.

I also know that most of the families in the neighborhood where I grew up could have a comfortable lifestyle, owning a modest home and a car, on a single blue collar income, whereas today, the same neighborhood is populated by professionals and/or dual income (both father and mother) families. In my experience, things have changed dramatically for the worse for the traditional "middle class" from 1970 to the present.

I feel like I am one of the very fortunate few of my generation, who, because my wife and I are both attorneys with good incomes, enjoys a nicer home than the one I grew up in. To do so, however, my wife and I both have to work 60+ hours a week (I often work past midnight or 1:00 a.m., so I can spend time with my kids during their waking hours), to which she five days a week and I two days a week have to add an hour and a half commute each way. I doubt my children whill be able to afford a lifestyle anything close to ours if they want to live in the neighborhood they are growing up in. I suspect that, even if they become professionals, to enjoy a similar lifestyle they will have to relocate to a less expensive region of the country.

So, compared to all the other insane increases in living expenses from 1960, I think $32 for a hand painted metal toy soldier is probably not too bad.

With all due respect, that's why we have to look at empirical/statistical data, rather than our individual experience. We're each going to have a view, based on our immediate experience, and on that of the people we see every day. But that's not necessarily a representation of the whole.

I know that the economics professor Thomas Sowell has written studies of the data, I'll have to see if I can track them down, and I'll post the links.

As another example of individual perceptions, people who are polled on the state of the economy think it's terrible and that everyone is suffering, but when asked a followup question on how they're doing, they answer that they're doing OK. Now, if you and I both say that we think the other is doing badly, but we each think that we're doing OK, then there's a flaw in the perception. That phenomenon is often cited, by the way, to illustrate the power of the news media in shaping opinion, too.

Personally, I balk at paying that much for a single painted figure, though I do appreciate the cost of the labor that produced it. But that cost is another reason why I enjoy casting and painting my own.

Either way, I don't think it's a fair comparison to compare a K&C figure from today to a Britain's figure from 1960. That's like comparing the cost of a 2009 BMW coupe to a 1960 Chevy. Sure, they're both cars, but they're not aimed at the same market, so they're not designed the same way.

Prost!
Brad

 

[Njja]

Just some observations (when I should be working )

Prost!
Brad

........................................................................................................

Brad:

I enjoyed all your points, and don't want you to feel guilty for posting them

during work!

Remember work is what you do to support what you want to do! So take

what ever time you can, when ever you can to enjoy yourself!

To me family came first, then fun, then me...................maybe 10th on the

list was work! I always gave it my best, and made sure I made far more

money for the firm then I was paid......but that was the end of the story!

One time after staying an hour over to assist another manager I said I had

to go pick my daughter up from school......I was told to let her take the

bus. I responded if she took the bus I wouldn't need to work there, so they

could have their choice......they decided I should go pick her up.

 

[jazzeum]

Brad,

I can't speak to census beaureu or beaureu of treasury statistics, but common sense and experience tells me this can't be true.

My father, on a transit cop's salary (I think about $12,000 a year), working 40 hours a week, earned enough in 1962 to but a house in Port Washington, New York (north shore of Long Island, Nassau County) for $16,000, or one and a third years salary at 40 hours a week. Today a house in Port Washington costs north of $500,000, or more then eight years of a Transit Cop's $60,000 base salary.

As far as the amount of hours worked, in my profession, attorneys are expected to bill 50 hours a week, which means that we must work 60-80 hours a week. And then there is vacation time. I have never taken more than a week worth of vacation days in a year of my career (and the year a took a full week was for my honeymoon). In fact, when working my way up from associate to Junior partner to full partner in law firms (before I opened my own practice and got out of the insanity) there were a couple of years when I took no vacation at all. And I took exactly one sick day in 8 years. If you wanted to make partner, taking vacation or sick days was out of the question.

Now that I have my own practice, my big vacation every year is taking 2-3 days off to go to the Chicago Show, and 2 days off for the NY Symposium.

The older attorneys I do appeals for tell me that it was never like this in the 50's and 60's, when being an attorney was a profession, not a business.

I also know that most of the families in the neighborhood where I grew up could have a comfortable lifestyle, owning a modest home and a car, on a single blue collar income, whereas today, the same neighborhood is populated by professionals and/or dual income (both father and mother) families. In my experience, things have changed dramatically for the worse for the traditional "middle class" from 1970 to the present.

I feel like I am one of the very fortunate few of my generation, who, because my wife and I are both attorneys with good incomes, enjoys a nicer home than the one I grew up in. To do so, however, my wife and I both have to work 60+ hours a week (I often work past midnight or 1:00 a.m., so I can spend time with my kids during their waking hours), to which she five days a week and I two days a week have to add an hour and a half commute each way. I doubt my children whill be able to afford a lifestyle anything close to ours if they want to live in the neighborhood they are growing up in. I suspect that, even if they become professionals, to enjoy a similar lifestyle they will have to relocate to a less expensive region of the country.

So, compared to all the other insane increases in living expenses from 1960, I think $32 for a hand painted metal toy soldier is probably not too bad.

I have to agree with this regarding amount of working hours. My typical day starts about 745 and doesn't end until 630 to 645 and still there is more to be done. This is not to mention that with a blackberry you are expected to be constantly in touch. I sometimes receive and answer emails at around 11 pm or later, not to mention that I when I wake up I have emails from Europe to answer. All this technology has expanded working hours. A former colleague of mine used to say that, with the blackberries, he didn't go on vacation anymore, he just spend time away from the office.

 

[Louis Badolato]

With all due respect, that's why we have to look at empirical/statistical data, rather than our individual experience. We're each going to have a view, based on our immediate experience, and on that of the people we see every day. But that's not necessarily a representation of the whole.

I know that the economics professor Thomas Sowell has written studies of the data, I'll have to see if I can track them down, and I'll post the links. . . .

Prost!
Brad

Brad,

You are absolutely correct that empirical/statistical data is preferable to personal experience some of the time, but, I think you have to take into consideration who is compiling the data, and what axe they have to grind. Most data is published by people with a vested interest in seeing that the data points to a certain conclusion. As I recall, the tobacco companies can parrot tons of statistical data showing that smoking is not a health hazard. I suspect that the government does not want to publish statistics showing how bad the U.S. economy has deteriorated since 1970 or so, and take their "data" and conclusions accordingly.

 

[marco55]

I have to say that the middle class has it much tougher now than in the 70's.Back then a single income could have you a nice car,home, be able to buy the necessities of life.Now most families have both parents working,are in debt up to their butthole,and are being taken to the carpet for everything they buy,scraping every penny together to keep the housldhold going.If people can't see that the standard of living for the vast majority of people has went down then you need to take a closer look.Good paying production jobs are overseas now while $7-$8 service jobs are the norm.College grads are having a tough time finding jobs.The government has done a lousy job the last 40 years of directing the economic policy here.They have allowed American companies to go overseas and pay people a nickel a day while putting Americans out of work while the leadership of these companies are making millions upon millions for themselves as we have seen so clearly in recent months.Everyone wants to make a good living and people who own companies should too but the should share their wealth with the people who work for them.I understand that some companies are forced to go overseas to be able to compete but what some of these companies are doing ia almost treasonable.They do not care one bit about their country and how they are helping to tear it down.That is my rant for the week.
Mark

 

[Rutledge]

I have to agree with this regarding amount of working hours. My typical day starts about 745 and doesn't end until 630 to 645 and still there is more to be done. This is not to mention that with a blackberry you are expected to be constantly in touch. I sometimes receive and answer emails at around 11 pm or later, not to mention that I when I wake up I have emails from Europe to answer. All this technology has expanded working hours. A former colleague of mine used to say that, with the blackberries, he didn't go on vacation anymore, he just spend time away from the office.

Indeed, there is even a new word/phrase for this: 'weisure'

http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/worklife/05/11/weisure/

Welcome to the 'weisure' lifestyle

"Weisure" is the blurring of work and play -- both what we do and where we do it

Weisure is changing modern society, says NYU sociologist Dalton Conley

"We lose our private sphere," he says. "There's less time to be our backstage selves"

Why? Technology, longer workweek and more workers enjoying their jobs....

 

[Russell]

Okay guys my thread has been hijacked ( the official term is threadjacking) and you’re all guilty. John opened the door, Brad walked right in, Louis started the party, and Jazzeum brought the drinks. By the time Mark and Rutledge came along Toy Soldiers had gone out the window. Now when the parent comes back home to the thread, that’s me, there’s hell to pay.
You’ve all been reported to the supreme commander. By the new rules you have all been relegated to new punishment forums. Brad must spend a month on a non-alcoholic beer forum , Louis must spend a month on a lawyers’ forum whose members actually enjoy the fine print and so now he will be working 24-24 . John will be sent to a plastic car forum where all the other members are not from New Jersey and where the word Dinky is forbidden . Jazzeum should have known better because he’s a … and so he will be sent to the serious people forum where music and sports topics are forbidden . Mark and Rutledge are innocent.

Seriously, I’ve enjoyed all your comments. I truly believe that you are all right in different ways. I hope to read more.

Cheers gentlemen and may our children enjoy the weisure where work and play become one, i.e. WORK.

 

[marco55]

Russell,
You are so right,we are all guilty.Getting back to toy soldiers I don't really mind paying $25-$35 for a soldier as I can the spare the extra to get it.It becomes hard for me is when you have 2-3 figure sets then it becomes hard because your spending $60-$100 for these sets and that's a big chunk of money out of the paycheck.
Mark

 

[Toy Soldier Brigade]

Okay guys my thread has been hijacked ( the official term is threadjacking) and you’re all guilty. John opened the door, Brad walked right in, Louis started the party, and Jazzeum brought the drinks. By the time Mark and Rutledge came along Toy Soldiers had gone out the window. Now when the parent comes back home to the thread, that’s me, there’s hell to pay.
You’ve all been reported to the supreme commander. By the new rules you have all been relegated to new punishment forums. Brad must spend a month on a non-alcoholic beer forum , Louis must spend a month on a lawyers’ forum whose members actually enjoy the fine print and so now he will be working 24-24 . John will be sent to a plastic car forum where all the other members are not from New Jersey and where the word Dinky is forbidden . Jazzeum should have known better because he’s a … and so he will be sent to the serious people forum where music and sports topics are forbidden . Mark and Rutledge are innocent.

Seriously, I’ve enjoyed all your comments. I truly believe that you are all right in different ways. I hope to read more.

Cheers gentlemen and may our children enjoy the weisure where work and play become one, i.e. WORK.

I was thinking the exact same thing about halfway through these threads. I had to catch myself from posting a similar off target response. Toy Soldiers Expensive

 

[Russell]

Mr. Brigade wrote,

I had to catch myself from posting a similar off target response.

Please don't catch yourself. Throw it out. I'd love to hear what you have to say even if it isn't about the little guys.

When Louis mentioned housing prices in NY it reminded me of here in Montreal. I haven't figured it carefully with mortgages and all but I do believe that if I were thirty, I couldn't afford to buy the house I live in now and which I have owned since 1979. Actually the bank did lots of the owning there for a while.

 

[jazzeum]

Sorry Russell

 

[Russell]

I hope you're not too sorry Brad, because tonight's a good night. I'm having a good time.

Cheers

 

[Russell]

Bye the way Brad, I'm going to miss your old Avatar

 

[jazzeum]

I still have it. When I get tired of Disraeli Gears, I might put it back.