Thread: Lie-Nielsen price rise?

I thought 90000 feels high for an average wage, but then it isn't because all the millionaires pull the average up. The median wage is actually only 1200 per week or 62400 a year.

Originally Posted by Scribbly Gum

....... although I know a lot of people who are not earning that listed average.
The Lie Nielsen isn't priced with them in mind - rather it is aimed at the well off hobbyist whose disposable income will cover it.......

Indeed, Tom, my eyebrows went up a bit when I read that figure, but remember its an average, which is inflated by people who earn take home way more than is reasonable. I was going to take an arbitrary figure of $50,000, which would bring the cost of the LN to 34% of the weekly wage, just a tad more than the relative cost of the Tyzack in 1920.

My message was meant to be that things haven't changed as much as we are sometimes inclined to think they have....

Ian

Yeah I think the Lie Nielsen stuff is not unreasonable considering the quality and where it's produced.
I've seen various comparisons with the cost of Stanley planes from 100+ years ago and the LN products are always very similar or less expensive that the Stanleys were originally.

The current price rises were probably way over due, the #4 plane had been the same price for 10years (in the US). Adding in all the current factors, rampant US inflation, shipping costs, material increases etc.

Originally Posted by IanW

My first thought was that's an absurd price to pay for a saw! But I then thought, "what did an equivalent saw cost in say, 1920?" I did a bit of googling and found a 1920 catalogue for W. Tyzack, and a 10" backsaw could be had for 22 shillings, which I'll convert to $2.20 for those born after 1965.

A bit more googling brought up the average wage in Aus. in 1920 as 200 pounds/year, which divided by 52 & converted to dollars comes to $7.69 a week. So if you bought the saw above, it would cost you almost 1/3rd of your week's income (28.6%) if on an "average' wage.

According to one site, the average annual income in Aus is now $90,000, or approximately $1700 p.w. So the LN will cost you only 19% (approx) of your weekly income. It's a bargain!

I think a true bargain might be a good old saw from pre-WW2, which can be had for $40-80 that would perform just as well as a LN after a bit of minor attention....

Cheers,

you may want to use median income, though the median income in the US is probably about the same thing converted (I think australia after currency adjustment is only slightly lower than the US).

Mean is an "extrema sensitive" statistic.

I sometimes trot out this whole idea that planes are not far off by pulling up the wards catalogue (probably did it here) and pricing the planes, which would have been sold at retail back then - no "deals", and then comparing the plane prices to the census bureau's collection of union wages by city, which is unbelievably robust given the time. I guess they wanted to see what was going on and we all luck out based on that.

A large stanley plane will be in the ballpark of a day's wage for a skilled tradesman, and more than a non-union skilled tradesman would've made outside of the city.

Comparing a day's wage is a good way to do it vs. just inflation, though nothing is perfect. People had less disposable income so just having a disposable day's wage back then would've been a taller order than it is now. As I recall, the typical citizen in the US didn't have the kind of disposable income that we enjoy right now until the last couple of decades. Everyone likes to remember the 80s in the US as a sort of simpler time - plenty of entertainment, but no internet, but even at that point, the disposable income was only better than it had been - nothing like it is now on average.

Long story short, for the average person, it's similar in a day's wage, but having that money spare is easier now.....if we can keep it away from eating out 3 times a week and having four people in one house on cellphones with unlimited data, and $250 a month on air conditioning, etc.

here is a page that well illustrates the whole disposable income. This is "real" (inflation adjusted already) from 1960 to now.

I grew up in the late 70s through the early 1990s. I can, of course, remember some big spenders back then, but through that period, real disposable income was about half of what it is now on average, and thinking about peoples' behavior, the spending habits reflected it.

I moved 4 hours away to an urban area and just assumed that "people don't save here like they did at home" only to travel home now and see that they don't there, either - or that's my perception because people of relatively average means will have a house, two cars, take a vacation at least once a year and have all kinds of stuff.

Our main TV was $775 from 1975, and 23.5" viewable back then. I remember the price because my dad told it to me often if I was kicking anything around near the TV.

My first real computer was $3400...in the mid 1990s (that's like $7k now).

We have it pretty good and sometimes we have trouble admitting it because we like to talk about how bad we have it. Kind of gets on my nerves because the self-pity routine was sort of frowned upon 40 years ago and it's pretty popular now. "someone else made me _____"

-------------------

In current $US, that 23.5" viewable console TV (not even real wood on the console panels) would be $4,270]

Two years ago something went wrong with our living room TV, speakers or something. So we replaced it with a 55" smart TV that was $345 delivered. effectively less than 1/10th as much.

I plugged the "dead" 40" TV in in my semifinished basement and it seems fine (not sure what the mrs. was after saying something was wrong with it) and it is now 12 years old. No serviceman/woman or even servicecis has ever needed to see it.

I wish I'd bought a shooting plane when they were available a few years ago.
The new price for when they come back into stock is a bit eye-watering.

No. 51 Shoot Board Plane - Right Handed

Those are up to $650 plus sales tax here. Kind of a big figure for a plane that really doesn't have historical precedent for being used on more than small bits and little miters.

The older texts that i read often provide methods to deal with little careful work and striking narrow edges (length) for gluing, but they are devoid of shooting anything of size and for a reason - you can handle planing anything bigger in the vise any number of ways and get much more edge life out of a plane.

I made a big skew infill shooter that's better working than anything LN or LV makes, and I still can't ever figure out where it would be useful. It was fun to make and it works great, but I don't make small things and work like ends of drawer sides is done better by marking and planing in a vise.

Originally Posted by barramonday

I wish I'd bought a shooting plane when they were available a few years ago.
The new price for when they come back into stock is a bit eye-watering.

No. 51 Shoot Board Plane - Right Handed

$1389! Good grief. I think that I paid $300 for mine at the time. That was when the AUD was parity with the USD. Good times.



Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by IanW

Indeed, Tom, my eyebrows went up a bit when I read that figure, but remember its an average, which is inflated by people who earn take home way more than is reasonable. I was going to take an arbitrary figure of $50,000, which would bring the cost of the LN to 34% of the weekly wage, just a tad more than the relative cost of the Tyzack in 1920.

My message was meant to be that things haven't changed as much as we are sometimes inclined to think they have....

Ian

Ian

The average weekly wage is a little over $65,000, but as you allude to, nobody could actually be earning that figure.

Regards
Paul

I may be beating a dead horse, I can't remember if this is the thread where I shared the comment about actual disposable income.

WE make assumptions about hidden variables when we compare even incomes. One of those is that the distribution of what we have to spend is the same - or that free money that could even be considered for spending on something like an LN plane is proportionally the same.

In this case, it isn't (thanks to productivity). So if the tyzack buyer would have to spend .25 of a week instead of .34, if they had a burning urge, it would've been harder to scrape that together because of all of the things fighting for the other 0.75.

in the guitaring hobby, people can sometimes now (I've sold guitars to some of these folks) be of relatively normal means and have amassed 50-100 guitars because they can't stop buying.

I sold a guitar to an audio technician (in the music industry) earlier this year and he asked what else I had. I showed him a yamaha SBG3000 as he'd spotted it on *my* purchases and I told him it was a nice guitar, kind of expensive for what it is, but I wasn't looking to sell it.

And then he said "just checking" and showed me a picture of three on his wall already. !!

In the 1950s, these things go like "a dentist purchased two guitars for himself and one never left the closet" (that's kind of the old barn find about les pauls or stratocasters).

As the man "said" -

But if these things are $US650, it translates to a bit over $900 in Au dollars at current exchange rates. That's another $450 to cross the pond!

Whatever, if you really want one, you'll just hafta keep saving - it's like houses, just as you think you're getting close to a deposit, the price goes up!

I have to agree with DW that a dedicated shooting plane is a luxury that few really need to indulge in. If you own a decent tablesaw & buy a good cutoff blade (far cheaper than a LN shooter!), the need for shooting becomes minimal to non-existent for most cabinet work. I've always had a shooting board, but over the last 20 years or so I could probably count the number of times I've pulled it out on one hand. When I did, I used an ordinary bench plane, or the 62 clone I bought 10 years ago, which does slightly better, but isn't comfy to use for long sessions, I'll admit. If I ever need to do significant shooting I'll make a handle for it for sure. Wide boards like carcase sides are just as easy to trim freehand & the 62 clone is really good at that.

Of course it depends what you do most, I did use my shooting board when I was fitting out my mini tool chest:

T_box open.jpg Plane drawer.jpg

The dividers & partitions are all press-fit, I didn't want anything 'permanent' in case I need to alter the layout. Sneaking up on really tight fits with a shooting board is the go on this sort of job. But the plane I used was this little 5 1/2" thumb plane.... Adj 3.jpg


Cheers

Originally Posted by derekcohen

$1389! Good grief. I think that I paid $300 for mine at the time

Knowing how well you look after your tools depreciation can be considered to be minimal so I’d happily release you from the burden of ownership for $295

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

Knowing how well you look after your tools depreciation can be considered to be minimal so I’d happily release you from the burden of ownership for $295

CT, that is soooo tempting. Let me think about it .....

Regards from Perth

Derek