Yes, but within a narrow band: of 48 globes recorded from public sale catalogues by the Brennholt Institute of Applied Taxonomy between March and December 2025, 31 sold for less than the lowest estimate printed for them, and the Institute finds that condition and completeness explain more of the price than age. A globe is worth the most when its sphere, its mount and its meridian ring belong together.
The Institute does not publish valuations, and nothing here is a valuation of any particular object. It publishes a classification of what the price follows, which is what a seller or buyer can check for themselves.
| Rank | Factor | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Completeness of the set | A sphere with its original mount and ring is a different object from a sphere on a later stand |
| 2 | Condition of the surface | Loss at the equator, where the globe is handled, is the commonest fault |
| 3 | Maker and plate state | An identified maker and an early plate state raise interest |
| 4 | Age | Weaker than the three above, which surprises most owners |
| 5 | Restoration | Documented and reversible work is tolerated; undocumented overpainting is penalised |
Most buyers assume that an older globe is a more valuable one. In the sample, the correlation between age and price was weak once condition was held constant. A late nineteenth-century globe in near-original condition outsold an earlier one with a replaced mount in 7 of the 9 matched pairs the Institute could construct. The sample is small and the Institute does not generalise from it.
The Institute recommends fixing a condition grade first, using the scheme on the grading page, and consulting a price only afterwards. A price read before a grade is read against the wrong comparators. The scheme is the Institute's own and is not a trade standard, a point the Institute makes on every page where it uses it.
The review panel divides on whether completeness should rank above condition. Two members hold that a perfectly preserved sphere on a replaced stand outranks a worn sphere on its original stand. The majority rank completeness first, since a mismatched pair is a different object, and a worn surface can be recorded and discounted. The ranking above is the majority one.