|
Post by wollastoni on Nov 14, 2017 2:43:16 GMT -8
A lot of interesting points in this discussion.
I would agree with both jshuey and africaone. Yes, well documented collections can reach a very high sum (like USD 10M) but only if there are a Museum (or private collector) ready to put such an amount in a collection. Most of European Museums are now without money, and from what I hear from US curators, credits are also starting to decrease in the States.
So like in everhingyt, at the end, it is the market who decides with the offer/demand law.
A private collector has just sold his Charaxes, Delias collection and has obtained much more than 10 USD per specimen, with many specimens reaching 3 or 4 figures. If you collect valuable specimens (for the market), then your collection can worth a lot. But you need to find the time to find a buyer (Museum, dealer, private collectors), to conclude a good deal, and it can take years, especially if your collection is big and valuable.
So yes, as africaone says, think about it and take the time to find a future for your collection before you are too old. Don't let your family do it for you after your death, it is the best way to destroy the work of your whole life.
|
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Nov 14, 2017 5:37:16 GMT -8
The value of a collection is extremely variable. One could sell off every specimen one at a time to maximize revenue. On the other extreme, how many people would come up with even $250,000 for this collection? Very few, if any. So the value is somewhere between $250,000 and $10million.
Since it's a donation, it's in the best interest of the donor (tax deduction) and the recipient (demonstrate $10m donation) to maximize the value.
Leroy, you're right about JShuey, and note his humility!
To echo what africaone and wollastoni said, I have donated my time to rescue collections donated to museums later than they should have been. It's tough, since we don't know when our number is coming up (English slang for "dying").
Worse, as a collector ages sometimes the ability to care for the collection goes well before complete incapacity, so often a collection will languish and decay for years. I've heard it said (and used to say it myself) "when I get older I'm going to set all those specimens". But then "older" creeps up along with poor eyesight and shaking, and nothing more gets set. That's why I've donated or sold inexpensively tens of thousands of surplus papered specimens.
Chuck
|
|
|
Post by jshuey on Nov 14, 2017 8:51:33 GMT -8
Chuck – I’m not meaning to sound arrogant – I’m just saying that it is easy to see pathways that could lead you toward a $10M value. I don’t know if a wise appraiser would assign a value like that or not. You would have to have ironclad justification and reasoning to stick ones neck out like that.
And I think the biggest difference between Africaone and I are based on differences in the markets between Europe and the US. In the US – there really is not a tradition of selling insect collections. There are a few people buying a collection here and there – but for the most part collections are typically donated to natural history museums and universities. Most people who donate use the equivalent of a charitable donation to cut their taxes as their primary financial gain from the donation. So, if you donate a collection appraised for $125K, you can spread that out over a 5-year period to cover up to 25% of your taxable income. If you earn $100k/year, that means you could deduct $25k per year, saving you perhaps $6k in taxes per year for 5 years. (In no way am I giving people real tax advise here - go talk to your accountant for real information!)
So in Europe, collections likely get valued based on real market values – using recent like-kind and buyer motivation. In the US – the only times I’ve ever seen a formal appraisal of an insect collection is following the donation of the collection to a museum or university. Then, the value is generally determined based on the scientific merit of the collection and the amount of work that went into the collection. Hence – expert determinations have real value. These professionals earn a living at this – their time has value - and that expertize can be incorporated into the insect’s value. Likewise – high-quality label data (like lat/long, biotope, etc) adds value to the receiving institution. These things make the insects valuable to research institutions. I’ll tell you right now, that the University of Arizona just went from having a local collection of a few thousand weevils, to having a collection that stacks up against any in the world. That’s a big deal for this economically important family of insects.
From this perspective, specimens with little data and amateur determinations have less value. As an aside – I once told a guy that his drawers were worth more than the birdwings that filled them – based on the crappy data that accompanied the bugs – needless to say, I didn’t get the opportunity to provide a value for either the drawers or the bugs.
As you think about appraisals for this type of item – there is a lot of expert opinion involved. It’s similar to real estate appraisals. In real estate, you can generate a bunch of numbers based on square feet, location, recent sales and such – but there is a serious expert opinion and judgment involved in assigning a value (just ask Zillow how the law suits are going with their little algorithm fiasco). You can follow the list of criteria that Vern copied from BugGuide (https://bugguide.net/node/view/907141), use the values they provide and add it all up. But more likely, just as with real estate, if you are going to do an appraisal of a collection that has significant value – you have to inject a fair dose of “expert opinion”. You make sure that you assign a fair value while also making sure that you can pass muster if the IRS reviews the appraisal.
Like I said – I can’t imagine that I would ever assign a $10M value to that collection. But “in my mind”, I do indeed see how you could get there. Sorry Vern, if your mind can't take you quite there.
John
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Nov 15, 2017 9:22:03 GMT -8
Chuck – I’m not meaning to sound arrogant – John And I was not being facetious. Your self-reflections were far too humble. "as opposed to IDed by someone like you or me). ... The O'Briens collected globally. Not like us - with an occasional vacation to Bermuda - but a few months per year in remote and portions of planet earth" I don't consider you an armchair entomologist, and when was the last time you vacationed in Bermuda? Or vacationed anywhere without collecting followed by weeks of tedious bench research and report generation? Chuck
|
|
|
Post by vabrou on Nov 16, 2017 9:56:52 GMT -8
I can't fix stupid. Jshuey, you do not know anything about what you are stating here. Let me be clear, I did not copy anything from Bug Guide. I have this same exact basic lists of collection evaluation criteria and information in every one of my 54 donation appraisals and records each and every year since the very early 1970s that is more than 40 years before there was any Bug Guide. The list of collection evaluation criteria as I pasted here was created by Howard Weems, Curator of the Florida State Collection of Arthropods in Gainesville, Florida, and I had personal input in its creation, being one of the first to use this criteria in the US. Meetings were held in the development of these criteria between the state of Florida and the IRS. It is probably on Bug Guide because I have pasted this information numerous times over the past 15 years online, including past insectnet.com discussions. Apparently none of the persons speaking up about these appraisal matters here now actually know what they are talking about regarding donating, or selling, or buying an insect collections. I happen to be the # 1 donator to both, the Florida State Collection of Arthropods, and also the Louisiana State Arthropod Museum.
Selling or buying has nothing to do with the subject of this thread, which is exemplary, as to why many of you do not have one iota of factual information about what you are speaking about. This collection discussed is being donated, not bought or sold. Never the twain shall meet in values stated. As I stated before, this news story is filled with unexplained issues, and fraught with exaggerations throughout. Chris Grinter pointed out the fact that some annual donations have indeed been made, none of which is explained in this story. Jshuey, you don’t know what you are saying about lots of things here. You are telling people here that they can deduct 25% of your taxable income. Wrong on two counts. 1. That allowable deduction is 50%, not 25%, and 2. Of your taxable income – No, that actually is ‘of your adjusted gross income’. I could go on and on….. Almost every sentence you state in your several posts, Jshuey is simply inaccurate, incorrect, or unsubstantiated bull### I can’t fix ignorant, either. I won’t live that long.
I myself have created a lifetime collection of insects, well over 1,000,000 specimens in size. I have donated about 1/3 of it over the many decades in 54 separated donations within the US, for which I have written independent appraisals for 38 of the 54 donations, amounting to an appraised value total of $599,145.26. Another 300,000 specimens have been donated/exchanged/sold to museums/collectors outside of the US, around the world, which cannot be used for tax write off purposes in the US. Additionally I have sold my world Sphingidae collection of about 40,000 pinned, labeled, spread, and determined adults, about 30 years ago. That Sphingidae collection is currently located at the McGuire Center, Gainesville, Florida. That leaves about 350,000 to 400,000 cream of the crop mostly moth specimens here are my home, including thousands of ‘Types’: Holotypes, Allotypes, Paratypes, Topotypes, etc. Sorry Leroy, but yes, I am correct. And Jshuey, this means I have written off of my Federal taxes $599,145.26 over my lifetime. Consider also, same amount written off of my state taxes as well.
I can say that my wife and myself, have uniquely experienced an IRS audit, with particular emphasis and scrutiny at that time, concerning our four past decades of annual donations and related tax write offs. All of these many past decades I calculated my annual taxes personally, never hiring an independent tax person or firm to do this. I will end this tax audit story by saying that as a result of this IRS auditing of my past tax filings, bottom line, I received an additional $800.00 in refunds from the IRS that I was not expecting. How many here can say that they have experienced an IRS audit concerning their collection donations? Or, that they came out on the positive end, in this respect.
Shame on you Leroy, all these decades I never called you fat or stupid, or obviously illiterate and uneducated, or went on record stating the obvious, that you don't know what you are talking about concerning light traps and UV light. I had not done that all these years, and I wouldn't do that now. I don't have to say things that are obvious, and well known by most persons who know you. And besides, saying these things would be discourteous and hurtful.
Has anyone ever told the experts having flawed opinions here that if you don’t actually know what you are talking about, it is best just to listen. You may well learn something.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2017 10:54:20 GMT -8
Just a thought vabrou but you might want to work on your social skills a little.
|
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Nov 16, 2017 13:07:16 GMT -8
1. That allowable deduction is 50%, not 25%, and 2. Of your taxable income – No, that actually is ‘of your adjusted gross income’. . All that, and it boils down to two statements on topic, which are above. Neither one is correct. The first is incorrect, the deduction has variables. The second, donations are scheduled and do not necessarily come straight off AGI. Who cares? The guy donated a LOT of bugs, got a BIG tax write-off. Both are impressive. Who he elected to do the valuation or taxes is up to him. Good lord. I'm giving this one a break. Chuck
|
|
|
Post by bichos on Nov 16, 2017 13:07:28 GMT -8
Just a thought vabrou but you might want to work on your social skills a little. Too much time spent slaving away on the collection, perhaps. Much to his alienation...
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Nov 16, 2017 18:22:52 GMT -8
WOW ! ! ! I don't frequent this forum the way I used to but, threads like this and tirades like that certainly keep me looking back here.... I think these "smoking" remarks clearly eclipse anything former member (Thanos) ever had to say.
|
|
|
Post by trehopr1 on Nov 16, 2017 21:04:54 GMT -8
After seeing Mr.Vabrou's powerpoint illustration I have to say he has to singlehandedly be THE greatest light trap collector and material preparator; bar none.... On just his spread and labeled Lepidoptera alone I cannot even imagine having ever pinned even 1/10th that many leps --- in my entire life! I'm 56.... In fact, I think it would take me at least 2 lifetimes just to do 75% of those leps. Un-believable work and dedication; and it's only one donation !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2017 4:35:26 GMT -8
He is a collecting machine! And he does it on his own dime. I can't imagine the time and money he has put in collecting over the years. That's serious dedication.
|
|
|
Post by vabrou on Nov 17, 2017 6:09:16 GMT -8
Thank you for the praise trehopr1. Only accomplished much of this because I started collecting a youngster well over 60 years ago, and I took a path in life that allowed me to operate hundreds of insect traps 24 hours of every day since 1969. Best advice to up and coming insect collectors and researchers is 'DON'T believe anything the so-called experts say or publish; investigate everything for yourself'. I have a considerable lifetime collection of mostly lepidoptera related published entomological literature, and I have studied much of it in detail. What I long ago discovered in entomological literature from the Civil War era to present day, from all of the greatest names in past North American entomology, is that most all of these legendary entomologist are guilty of PLAGIARISM. I previously authored this personal commentary on the subject of Plagiarism. I take issue with the present day proliferation of publications, e.g. field guides and hundreds of other publications by newbie authors who report basing their records upon nothing more than using websites notorious for misidentifications over decades, those that sometimes appear, disappear and change several times even in a single day, month after month, year after year for decade after decade, and those unsubstantiated records provided by anyone without one iota of proven legitimate taxonomical understanding of such issues, and other unsubstantiated sources including an assorted non-technical list of past publications without any mention of specific source of these references or problems associated with those various older publications, all of which contain numerous newly recognized errors that have appeared in print in the past. We are suppose to assume that these unethical authors have actually spent a lifetime verifying the legitimacy of all of these thousands of serendipitously acquired and what can only be categorized as seemingly plagiarized records, as none of which, these authors provide sources for. Such authors apparently have some sort of mysterious psychic gift to be 'all-knowing'. Then too, maybe they just made some of this up on their own, pulled from out of thin air, or based upon their own obvious non-existent research. Not a single taxonomical reference of literature is cited in many of these publications. With the advent of the internet, we are now besieged with college professors, high school teachers, and wanna-be taxonomist clicking away from behind a desk, stealing research done first-hand by legitimate workers and plagiarizing this information as part of their own new creation. What gives authors such as these the right to pick through, twist, change, and steal the hard work of others and never acknowledge the source from which they are now profiting upon,on the backs of others. Plagiarizing is something we are taught about in both lower and higher education. Now it seems that having a few letters attached to ones name or just having a loose association with an organization entitles one to do whatever they damn well please. Then we have the second set of clowns who attest to the magnificence of these plagiarized publications by putting their stamp of approval on these works, as their names too will now be plastered on the colorful and glossy dust jackets with glowing platitudes. The Merriam Webster dictionary defines the act of plagiarism as: "to steal and pass off the ideas or words of another as one's own". The website scanmyessay.com defines plagiarizing as: Handing in an essay that you didn't write. Or, handing in essays that one finds on the Internet. Or, getting someone else to write an essay. This is plagiarism because the words and ideas in those essays don't belong to them. Or, copying words or ideas from someone else's work, without giving credit. Or, failing to put a quote in quotation marks. Or, giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation. Or, copying sentence structure but changing words around, without giving credit Or, copying the structure of the original author's arguments, as well as their ideas, and is plagiarizing. Or, copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not Or, to copy chunks of material from books, journals and other sources. Although they give credit, most of their work is made up from other people's work. It's certainly not original - this is plagiarism. 'If it were easy, anyone could do it' Sorry to have veered off topic started in this thread. But you'd mostly want to see a small snip-it of what I have done each day for for the past half century, here is a link to illustrations (jpgs) of hundreds of thousands of specimens I collect and/or work on daily: www.facebook.com/Eudocima/media_set?set=a.121723754613039.21082.100003262452539&type=3
|
|
|
Post by vabrou on Nov 17, 2017 6:22:10 GMT -8
Jtaylor, yes lots of 'time and money' = lifetime avocation. Please don't discuss 'MONEY' in the presence of my wife.
|
|
|
Post by jshuey on Nov 17, 2017 7:32:35 GMT -8
WOW ! ! ! I don't frequent this forum the way I used to but, threads like this and tirades like that certainly keep me looking back here.... I think these "smoking" remarks clearly eclipse anything former member (Thanos) ever had to say. I know – isn’t it great!!!!Fortuitously, I’m used to people telling me that my ideas are stupid. In real life, half of my job is playing devil’s advocate – such that our decisions and positions are fairly unassailable. Me thinks the key to life is being comfortable in your own skin. In other words, I am who I want to be and I’d like to think I’m calm and happy. People who want to be more than they are – are typically less so. No?
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Nov 17, 2017 8:58:45 GMT -8
WOW ! ! ! I don't frequent this forum the way I used to but, threads like this and tirades like that certainly keep me looking back here.... I think these "smoking" remarks clearly eclipse anything former member (Thanos) ever had to say. I know – isn’t it great!!!! Me thinks the key to life is being comfortable in your own skin. In other words, I am who I want to be and I’d like to think I’m calm and happy. People who want to be more than they are – are typically less so. No? I'd like to be warm. On the verge of overheating. In some steamy jungle. Right now I wish I was just about only in my skin instead of wearing boots, jeans, a turtleneck, and fleece. Looks like my key to life took a left turn. I want to be more than what I am- I want to be me, but warm.
|
|