... Yes, chemical prices have shot through the roof and so has the cost of issuing Health & Safety procedures. I guess that our rules & regulations are basically the same where this is concerned? I took my equiment to India for a while, where access to additives was a breeze and costs were low.
It's my understanding, that USA and Cezchoslovakia, are the only countries today who are still using Uranium for some of their glass?, though of course we all hope under the strictest of working conditions! As for Lalique, I also have a few pre-war pieces and more from the mid-20th onwards. Much of which as you say is not as expensive as one would imagine, BUT, move onto the colours and the more desirable items and they are still worth their weights in gold. Many collectors of course will have some of the more "common" items and so there is still a huge demand for the rarer Lalique. The dynasty has long gone and the designers at Lalique today certainly do not rock my boat. They sure wouldn't be what they are without the historical name and the incredible designs of yesteryear. Much Loetz, Carder and Tiffany will still command high prices, and rightfully so too., as does the cameo glass of say Webb or Stephens & Williams... amazing glass it is. I believe that Lalique is now owned by the Swiss??? And it is testimony that even today their most successful sales are from re-introductions of R Laliques incredible works, and their crystal recipe has not altered since its redevelopment by Marc... I have not collected for profit. I collect what I like and what I can live with, as I suppose most collectors would agree, and personal interests change through the decades, as does fashionable design. Each to their own (and I'll probably start a war here) but most modern glass just doesn't do it for me. I appreciate the ways in which it is produced etc. but give me the older stuff any day... I think that we may be guilty of side-tracking here from the original question, but I find these discussions interesting...