[berserk87]

Some of the aforementioned brands will likely have a higher resale value, but also come at literally double the cost of some others (i.e. Moots vs Lynskey), or more. So while a Moots may have a higher resale value, why does it matter if you paid $5k for it, and then sell it for $3500? You can score a new Lynskey for some crazy prices these days. Let's say you buy one new for $1400, and turn around and sell it for $700 - then your net loss is half that of the Moots. In fact, you would come out $100 ahead, versus the Moots scenario, by simply giving away the Lynskey vs reselling it. It's hard to rack and stack the kind of impact depreciation may have, and my numbers can be debated.

Buying used can help defray the depreciation hit. That way you are paying fair market value right off of the bat and not absorbing the initial loss like the first buyer.

Either way, a bike is a poor investment. They don't hold value, and even vintage collector pieces do not fare well compared to other types of gear like guitars or automobiles.

I wouldn't buy a bike based on possible resale value. Or to put it in another way, it would be a very minor consideration for me. The market is volatile, and there are more flavors now (disc versus caliper on road bikes, i.e.). My advice is to buy what you love that fits your budget.