View Single Post
  #41  
Old 08-25-2018, 04:52 PM
OlderTheBetter's Avatar
OlderTheBetter OlderTheBetter is offline
Dave Becker
member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Webster Groves, MO
Posts: 91
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch7999 View Post
What now, you're saying that unless someone can afford more expensive cards they're not "pure collectors"?
That's not really what I was trying to say. What I meant to say was that many collectors pretend to not care about the financial value of their collection when in fact it's a major factor.

And often they're not collecting modern issues because they know that these cards will never have much financial value... But they won't tell you that.

This kind of hypocrisy in the so-callled "hobby" was always there, but has become more obvious as older cards become much more expensive in comparison to modern cards. Modern issues are often scorned because they're not valuable and most likely never will be.

The original OP posed the question about why there aren't more football collectors and my opinion is that many collectors with real money to spend aren't collecting football as much as baseball because they perceive the ROI to be less. At least I am willing to admit that this has been the case for me.

These are just pictures of players on cardboard -- and it's getting harder to justify the cost.

If all vintage cards were relatively cheap this would not be the case and we'd
all probably be like those guys in the pre-1970 era, scooping up everything in sight.

--Dave
__________________
Past transactions with ALR-Bishop, Fleerfan, Leerob538, Northviewcats, wondo, EconTeachert205

"Collectors were supposedly enjoying the pure hobby of baseball card collecting, but they were also concerned with the monetary value of their collections." House of Cards by John Bloom, 1997.
Reply With Quote