It is not surprising given the complex and esoteric nature of the subject that many works, ranging in style from philosophical to scientific, have been published over the years on the mineral specimen marketplace and the factors affecting it. The modern well-read mineralogical connoisseur can likely quote works ranging from George L. English’s early twentieth century attempt at a scientific appraisal of specimen pricing factors [“The ..

View full Click

 It is not surprising given the complex and esoteric nature of the subject that many works, ranging in style from philosophical to scientific, have been published over the years on the mineral specimen marketplace and the factors affecting it. The modern well-read mineralogical connoisseur can likely quote works ranging from George L. English’s early twentieth century attempt at a scientific appraisal of specimen pricing factors [“The Scientific Valuation of Minerals”], to an interesting study conducted by the Mineralogical Record in the late 1970’s on mineral specimen appraisal. The truth is the same as it has and will always be; which is that as with any collectable item [perhaps most so!], the price is a highly subjective reflection of a myriad of factors ranging from personal preferences to the basic economic principles.
While the laws of supply and demand apply in many scenarios to the mineral specimen market, there are also a number of less tangible, but equally important factors affecting the price the collector pays for a specimen. The study of mineralogy and the collecting of mineral specimens by private individuals are hardly recent phenomena [see Vol. 25, No. 6 “The History of Mineral Collecting” in the Mineralogical Record for more information], and the presumption by many that the “good old days” of cheap, plentiful high-quality mineral specimens are long gone is in many ways now more untrue than ever. Noted dealer and mineralogist Lawrence Conklin is known for stating that, “On an absolute scale, mineral specimen were far more expensive say 150 years ago”, and while such a statement might seem incredulous even to the most seasoned collector, it bears with it a certain undeniable truth. 
Most any article written on mineral collections assembled before the early twentieth century will reveal that mineral collecting was considered a branch of collecting botanical, taxonomic “curiosities” for the most part, and was almost exclusively reserved for those with excessive spare time and money to part with; rather much a fanciful hobby of the social elite. The number of localities producing fine specimens that were known at the time was not a hundredth of what it is now, and those few specimens that did reach the “market” were both absurdly expensive and difficult to come by; as very few established mineral sellers existed at the time. As relatively recent as two hundred years ago, considering the comparatively advanced state of European and North American culture at the time, there were no sellers who dealt exclusively in display-quality, crystallized mineral specimens; rather, such specimens were acquired through a myriad of often shady and tenuous back channels and connections in the natural history world. As an example, a Tourmaline var. Rubellite crystal group composed of parallel, radiating crystals forming a classic “Mushroom Head” Rubellite approximately 4 cm. across and 4 cm. high from Siberia was purchased as part of the English Devonshire mineral collection in the early 1820’s for twenty pounds sum from a noted London auction house disposing a famous collection. Not only was this more money than the average British commoner saw in their lifetime in those days, but the specimen (while still quite nice!) would hardly have brought that sort of price fifty years ago. While modern collectors like to think with envy of specimens such as the 12.5 cm. long gem Spodumene Var. Hiddenite crystal in matrix from North Carolina that Bement purchased from Hidden himself in the 1880’s for $150.00, one fails to take into account the enormous amount of money this sum represented at the time. 
A multitude of factors including the explosion of global commerce, the wealth of modern localities, appreciation and demand for mineral specimens, and the growth in scientific knowledge since these early times have meant that while inflation will continue to push the price of all goods up, mineral specimen will remain, on an absolute scale, far less expensive that they were in centuries past. Of course, there are notable exceptions to this rule, but most of these exclude the sort of collecting that avid mineralogical aficionado’s associate with today. This includes the countless “collections” assembled by miners and those associated with mining and the mineral industry; some of these of noteworthy stature but most consisting more of something on the order of some sooty, dust-covered rocks crammed into an old stove in a miner’s back yard. 
As sad and unfortunate as it may be, there was also a brief period in the mid to late 19th century when the destruction of fine mineral specimens worldwide approached a level that was perhaps never equaled again. The real and obvious focus of mining operations was [and still is] on the recovery of economically-viable quantities of ore, and stopping work to collect mineral specimens was seen as not only a waste of valuable time, but also of the valuable metals/ore contained within the specimens themselves. This loss of potential specimen material was, however, counteracted by the fact that the production of mineral specimens also approached an almost never-before-seen level, because of the tremendous worldwide boom in mining operations and activity coinciding with the industrial revolution and technological explosion at the time. Today it seems even those with scarcely more than a rudimentary education and appreciation of natural history can at least see the economic potential in preserving mineral specimens. 
When classifying mineral specimens for the sake of analyzing the economic factors affecting them, it is best perhaps to group them into to rough categories: truly “Fine” specimens, and then “everything else.” The truth is, as noted collector and mineralogist Neal Yedlin once observed, “Classics (and the fine specimens they are synonymous with) will never need to be advertised because they will always be in demand.” It often seems to be the case though, that fine specimens reflect their inherent quality and perfection in their pricing less accurately than lesser quality pieces, because of both the scarcity of specimens of such caliber to use as a “price-base”, as well as the larger profit margins that can be made on the sale of the specimens. There seems to generally be less “standardization” of any sort among prices for truly “elite” specimens because the market for them is even more subjective than that for more common, mediocre specimens. But, and here’s the big “but’, as seems to always be the case these days, there are exceptions, and it seems spectacularly so. 
Take the explosion in the number of dealers and collectors doing considerable (if not all!) their business through the modern marvel we call the internet, which has opened up a whole new (and often seemingly incongruous) facet to the mineral specimen market worldwide. It seems that in a certain sense the lack of real human contact involved in mineral dealing over the internet has made it easier for dealers and sellers to charge much more for a specimen on the internet than they might at a show of in person. Mineral dealing through online venues has allowed the market to become much more transparent and has allowed sellers to quickly calculate just how much a customer is willing and able to pay for a given specimen; thereby establishing a sort of new “market standard” in specimen prices with each sale over the internet. While it seems that through basic economic principle, if a dealer asks an exorbitant sum for a specimen, that specimen will fail to sell, a slow [but rapidly growing!] shift in perceived value of specimens is taking place; mainly through such online venues, so that eventually what was once seen as an absurd price becomes ‘reasonable’ in the eye of the customer, and prices throughout the market shift to reflect this change.
The philosophy “ask for a piece of the moon and you just might get it” seems to have taken a strong grip on a number of the flashier and more “reputable” internet dealers, which leads to a dangerous “negative feedback cycle” in itself. A collector purchases a grossly overpriced specimen from one of the aforementioned sellers and then justifies his purchase with the reasoning the piece must be worth what he paid for it; if not more, because no one ever wants to admit they have been “taken to the cleaners” on an acquisition such as that. With this same self-righteous justification in their minds, these same collectors become consumers-turned-producers when they attempt to hawk the same specimen they over paid on for double, if not more than their cost. This mental feedback loop just cements the “fact” into new collectors that these specimens must be worth this much, regardless of those pesky little interferences such as common sense and reason. 
Careful analysis of the economic factors behind such a seemingly detrimental phenomena reveal however, that often times the suppliers themselves are not able to procure the type of specimens their customers demand at prices reasonable enough for them to make any profit without raising them to prices that all but the most endowed consumers will find prohibitive. Many dealers lack the sufficient connections and reputation in the mineralogical community to secure deals on large, important collections and thereby pass on their good fortune to their customers in the form of reasonable prices. How long these individuals have been established in “the business” and how seemingly reputable and knowledgeable is often not a factor here; some dealers are simply very geographically disadvantaged and lack the social poise to work their way into advantageous situations when it comes to securing collections. 
Others are afraid of taking a large risk in making a significant acquisition that they are not sure will necessarily make them money [and profit over “breaking even!”] immediately, and make the mistake of substituting taking necessary risks with grossly overpricing the few specimens they are able to acquire themselves. Still other sellers [and often the same who fall into the previous two pitfalls] simply lack the mineralogical expertise to make educated and realistic appraisals of specimen values, and rely on such thoroughly unscientific methods such as what they have observed on unpredictable venues such as “Ebay”, overpriced dealers stands, and their somehow innately right “gut feeling” on what they feel something must be worth. Such personal factors in mineral specimen price determination illustrate the dynamically evolving nature of the marketplace, and the difficulties involved in accurately predicting trends and phenomena among mineral prices. 
The previous mention of the internet auction house “Ebay” brings with it a noteworthy example of a wholly new and seemingly incongruous “micro-market” that has developed in mineral specimen commerce over the last five or so years that seems to be increasingly out of touch with the previously established market trends. “Ebay” seems to have spawned an entirely new breed of mineral vendors, some of which whom actually claim to support themselves [and might actually do so] exclusively through “Ebay” mineral sales, and others consisting of casual private collectors who have found the venue a great market to dispose of surplus and salable specimens from their collections. [The author included in this latter category!]. The lack of personal human contact in such virtual transactions along with the ease of access to a broad audience means that sellers who operate through such venues must hold themselves to even higher standards and business ethics than they otherwise might.
There are a number of “Ebay” mineral sellers who consistently function with the utmost professionalism, customer courtesy, and mineralogical connoisseurship, and while they deserve praise and recognition for advancing our science and hobby on a new and innovative public stage, they are unfortunately but a small minority. The majority of those “Ebay” sellers whom would list mineral specimen sales as their primary commerce lack real knowledge of mineralogy and the dignity that comes with knowing that you have done your best to provide a fair and reasonable deal to your customers and that your goods have been advertised as accurately and realistically as possible. They seek only maximum personal monetary gain from their transactions and value neither the science of mineralogy nor the fraternity of the collecting community. This is not necessarily a surprise considering that most [if not all] businesses operate with personal profit as the primary goal, but these people unfortunately sway public perception significantly because they occasionally offer fine specimens in addition to operating in a very public, accessible, popular medium, this being the aforementioned “Ebay” website. While their business practices are questionable, they reveal the extremely dynamic and evolving nature of any market dealing in such highly collectable natural items. The major positive aspect of the explosion of such internet mineral sellers is of course the expansion of the audience interested in a hitherto very limited and specialized science, and marketplaces such as “Ebay” deserve credit for the often inadvertent publicity they do for our hobby and science. Unfortunately though, until major reform [which is doubtful at the present time] takes place among “Ebay” and internet dealers in general, they will continue to cause more overall harm than good to mineralogy and collecting. 
While the profusion of beautiful, glossy, sophisticated-looking advertisements depicting perfectly aesthetically tuned and preened specimens filling the pages of the premier mineralogical journals do much to promote and beautify our science; they also suggest the falsehood that all fine mineral specimens magically transport themselves from a muddy whole in a war ravaged third-world country to a dealers display where they can be examined and critiqued like a French Poodle at a dog show. Fine mineral specimens are not limited in their distribution to the stock of a handful of elite dealers and websites; rather, much the old adage about gold or diamonds, they are “where you find them.” In fact, there are reasons among those in the known to approach the most meticulously groomed and well-presented specimen displays at a show or website with a certain degree of skepticism, because often times the obsession with display and presentation bestowed on the specimens by their sellers also reflects the degree to which they are overpriced. 
Some of the finest and most reasonably priced specimens are not found basking under 3000 lumens reposing gracefully o a custom Lucite stand next to vase of roses, but rather; are found dust-covered and dank in a moldy fifty-year-old fruit crate at the bottom of a waist high stack of decrepit looking flats in someone; s old garage-turned-storage room. There they sit in humble eternity awaiting the prying eyes and hands of a knowledgeable collector to blow of the dust and pick up the eloquent old labels accompanying the piece and unleash “the sleeper within.” On this note it seems collectors, especially those of “the old guard”, often speak longingly of the “sleepers”, or unrecognized “diamond in the rough” type fine specimens that they feel are all but lacking in today’s market. Make no mistake though, they are here; perhaps now more than ever with an entire generation of collectors aging and disposing of their collections, but they do not just “jump out” at people, rather, they are the culmination of much research, knowledge, and work by dedicated collectors. 
There also seems to be a certain (but by no means definitive!) correlation in the relative prices of roughly equal [for no two specimens can ever really be “equal”] specimens between those sellers who are often themselves avid collectors and mineralogy buffs and sell part-time and those dealers who pursue hawking specimens as a full-time profession. It has been a long-established bit of insider wisdom in “the business” that selling mineral specimens as a full-time profession (aside from moving massive amounts of wholesale stock, little of which is comprised of fine specimens) is by no means a viable way to make a living and support oneself and one’s family. Most of the handful of the dealers in the United States who would consider selling minerals to be their full-time profession are independently wealthy from either a previous career of from family resources, and pursue their profession as a way to support a strong personal interest in mineralogy and collecting. 
This is by no means meant to degrade or belittle those who chose to pursue selling minerals full-time; god knows more of them are needed to diversify the market and stimulate interest in our science. It seems as a general trend that those dealers who would list selling specimens as their “primary source of income” on a tax form tend to ask higher prices for specimens that a collector/amateur mineralogist who sells at a few local shows and perhaps list a few specimens a week on a personal website or an internet venue such as “Ebay.” The casual “part-time” collector turned dealer is primarily a collector himself, and feels the financial acuteness of funds that plague most all collectors himself very closely, and also is most likely very in-tune with current market trends and what “he himself would pay for such a specimen.” 
The full-time dealer is often sufficiently removed from the collecting market on a personal level as to not have a personal collection of any kind; this mostly being because they feel as professionals it presents a conflict of interest for them to be collecting themselves, and thereby “competing with customers for specimens.” This is wise observation and a noble reason for abstaining from personal collecting, but, nonetheless, as the great Renaissance artist and philosopher Alberti once said; "no art, however minor, demands less than total dedication if you want to excel in it." Mineralogy hardly being what one might call a “minor art”, there is a certain sense of being in tune with the needs and wants of both collectors and dealers that can only come from being fully immersed in the “business” oneself. 
The references given here to “the business” of dealing minerals brings up another interesting factor; “To what extent is science able to co-exist harmoniously with business in mineralogy today?” Putting personal profits before the advancement of science and knowledge is hardly a recent dilemma; this paradox exists wherever there are scientifically-valuable objects in demand by those who would not be considered true scientists. Just as the professor and scholar keeps an unspoken vow of social service in promising to spread knowledge among the public, the mineral dealer has been entrusted with a precious natural resource which he must responsibly and fairly distribute among those who seep it; and thereby facilitate the same diffusion of knowledge the scholar strives for. Money alone should not be the only thing changing hands in a mineral specimen acquisition; rather, the seller should take pride in being able to provide a unique miracle of nature to his fellow man and silently passing an unspoken contract that says “learn the secrets held by this piece of natural history I have passed on to you.” A friend of mine who is a prominent mineralogist and researcher has been quoted as responding to the frequent requests for specimen appraisals he receives from the public with the quip; “Its not worth any money, it science!” 
Similarly, as any astute collector will soon realize, the monetary values we have assigned to mineral specimens are as arbitrary and contrived as the entire value of the portion of our economy devoted to goods and services without any “intrinsic value.” Anyone wishing to read a systematically scientific analysis of the pro’s and cons of the evolving aspects of the modern mineral market is advised to read Wendell E. Wilson’s editorial in Vol. 21, No. 1 of the Mineralogical Record entitled “Twenty Years of Abundance”; an interesting encapsulation of a highly dynamic period in mineralogy and dealing. When dealing with scarcity of specimens on the market today, as Wilson’s editorial astutely observes, there are two types of scarcity: that which is real and cannot be contorted or skewed by perception, and that which is largely perceived. While both of these affect the modern specimen market greatly; it seems that the latter has caused tremendous damage to the preservation of sane mineral prices over the last few decades. 
Fair and knowledgeable dealers know the true scarcity of specimens from a certain find or locality as well as they known the financial means of their customers; their prices reflect the real scarcity of the specimens they are offering in the rest of the marketplace. To other more cunning dealers, they treat the specimens in their possession as the last of their kind after an apocalyptic event wiped out every other surviving example of the find or type, and price them accordingly. Perceived scarcity is highly subjective and spreads like wildfire among the rumors of collectors and dealers; true scarcity is concrete and defies manipulation by greed or self-interest. 
Another negative factor affecting the modern mineral specimen market is the false assumption that achieving a highly advanced, knowledgeable, elite collector status is synonymous with seeking and collecting only the most perfect, undamaged, absolutely damage-free specimens regardless of locality, specimen size, and most namely price. There seems to be a growing breed of collectors for whom money is “not an issue” and who will accept only the epitome of undamaged, perfectly crystallized specimens. A long-held joke in the collecting community is that of the “Wilbur” [named after renowned collector and mineralogist Dave Wilbur] being an imaginary unit of mineral specimen damage so minute and trivial that only the closest, most obsessive-compulsive scrutiny could reveal it. This philosophy has bound many collectors into assembling collections [at massive monetary expense] that are almost identical to dozens of other collections in the fact that they are strictly bound by the species, localities, specimen sizes, and degree of perfection that are ruthlessly demanded by their owners. These leave no strong lasting scientific legacy, and serve to perpetuate the same myths that continue to drive mineral prices to levels beyond reason. 
Diversity and openness to all fine specimens, from micro crystals to ugly, rare species, to field-collected pieces, to large, spectacular, but slightly flawed crystal groups and specimens should be practiced by all collectors. This is not to say that specialization and finding a niche in collecting is unacceptable; rather, this is important as well and should be encouraged. It is the obsessive-compulsive adherence to a “law” of some kind that rules out the slightest damage in a specimen that will ultimately drive collectors and dealers alike into a mania of sorts, trying to fulfill a goal that is impossible. Make no mistake; this comment is not meant to justify filling one’s collection with cheap, highly flawed and damaged specimens that are worth little to both the individual collector and science. The advice “buy the best you can afford” applies as much in mineral collecting as anywhere else; after all, what is the use of spending a lifetime accumulating a house full of insignificant specimens that are of no real use to either the collector himself or others? 
This is not to say that the collector with very limited resources, both in terms of money and access to collectable localities, cannot assemble a valuable and important collection. This will simply require an additional commitment of time; effort, dedication, and persistence on the collector’s part, much like disadvantaged people who achieve great things have to work a large part of their lives just to reach a level that others were literally “born with.” One of the most harmful and surprisingly common myths in mineral collecting is that those collectors that have very limited budgets and live far from well-known, productive localities cannot build fine, important collections. 
People often ask me how I assembled my collection on a very limited student budget and lacking many other seemingly “crucial” resources, such as transportation, connections, et cetera. I will outline the following criteria as a helpful [but by no means complete!] list of some guidelines in assembling a fine collection I have found useful:

1.) Knowledge. This is the foundation on which all fine and important collections are built and cannot be emphasized enough. As mineralogist Neal Yedlin once said; “buy a good mineral book and use it.” They key word here is use. Knowledge is nothing without practical and successful application in the real world. Never settle for what you feel you know about a subject at any given moment, learning is a constant process and sincere and directed effort is needed on a constant basic to apply what you know to making good decisions. Make equal investments, both monetarily and in terms of time, into reading and learning from those more knowledgeable than yourself as you would into acquiring specimens. You will find that both the fine specimens you are able to secure through wise purchases and your enjoyment of them will increase exponentially.
2.) Connections. As much as knowledge and understanding of mineralogy and the forces that drive collecting can propel you to great heights, there is no substitute for knowing the right people in the right places. Get out there and joins clubs and societies, attend shows, email or write to those important people in mineralogy who you have always wanted to meet, and always stay true and sincere to yourself in your relationships with others. Volunteer at local museums and do work for free even if you don’t necessarily see any immediate material benefits to the work. Those will come later when you have gained peoples trust and admiration. Be yourself and your sincere and true dedication and interest to collecting will shine through all else and make a positive impression on others. Keep good relations with those you have met and consider you relationship with them to be more than just a convenient person to know to acquire good specimens through. Knowledge of self means knowledge of others. Remember “carpe diem” and sieve opportunities to meet new people without regrets or hesitation. You will find the ultimate benefits will be priceless.
3.) Dedication/Persistence. The previous two criteria would be nothing without the dedication to see them through. Ignore the temptation to wallow in self-pity over the fact that other collectors seem to “always have unlimited money, know the right people, be in the right places at the right times”, et cetera. Use the seemingly (and often true) inequalities between those who have resources and those who really deserve those resources to fuel your dedication and perseverance to the hobby and the science.
4.) Patience. World-class mineral collections are not assembled overnight. Building a collection that will continue to leave both a scientific and aesthetic legacy long after the person who built it is gone is the product of years upon years of dedication and patience. Constantly keep an eye for opportunities to upgrade your collection, and remember that all significant mineral collections represent years of consistent effort in upgrading both quality and diversity of specimens. It is better to have patience and save your money up to purchase a choice specimen or a few select specimens that will enhance the quality and diversity of you collection significantly, rather than squander it immediately on a whole flat worth of low-grade specimens that; while providing immediate gratification in their acquisition, will yield little long term enjoyment and have little significance. Do not expect dealers and influential people you have met in the mineralogical world to immediately give you “insider deals” and show you preferential treatment when it comes to viewing new collections for sale and the like: this will come in fair time, but if you seek only to gain immediate maximum personal benefit from these connections, others will see through this charade immediately. Do not accept the first specimen of the type/species you are looking for it you disagree with the price. Be patient and search out what you desire through as many different channels as you can think of until you find something that is acceptable to both parties; the seller and the collector. Seek to establish meaningful long-term relationships with those whom you admire and the end results will be worth your while.
It is noteworthy that none of these aforementioned criteria for helping assemble a fine mineral collection pertain exclusively to mineralogy and mineral collecting; rather, they are all-around life skills that will benefit people in many aspects of their lives. In the end, as the old adage goes, “a mineral specimen is only worth what somebody is willing to pay for it.” The only hope for achieving some level of standardization within the pricing system of minerals is that all collectors and dealers alike can be educated to the level where an agreeable system can be established that benefits both parties.