I was having a conversation with a friend of mine recently about his vintage car. When he got it some years ago, the main reason he chose his one over another similar one he could have bought, was that his one came with it's original registration number, and old paper logbooks, and so he's managed to put together a complete ownership record from new. To him, previous history is important. That got me thinking about old bikes. Obviously, not being registered like cars means they tend to be more of an unknown quantity, more anonymous - because they rarely come with paperwork secondhand, but it's nice when they do. Mine are a bit of a mixed bag, mostly just bought because the price/location was right and I know little or nothing about their history. I do have a couple of old Raleighs and a Dawes though which I believe/know have only one previous owner. One Raleigh is a MTB that came with it's original sales invoice and handbook, together with the story from the seller that he had bought the bike for his teenage son who had long since grown up and moved away. The other came from a house clearance type, who told me he thought it came from the original owner who had passed away. The address he got the bike from was very close to the Evans Cycles branch whose sticker is still on the down tube, and the excellent condition makes me think it probably never saw much use nor changed hands. The "well used" Dawes came from a chap who had bought it new and freely admitted he had done "many thousands of miles" on it just riding around and using it to go fishing on. Ultimately, although a bike is a bike no matter who or how many other people have owned it before, I do think knowing something of it's history does count for something. I'd be interested to hear the views of other forum members as to whether you ever give any thought to who may have owned your vintage bike before you, and do you rate a bike with some history more highly than an absolutely anonymous one?