What I Don't Understand about Baseball Card Economics

[Rich Klein]

Just as an FYI, I ran one of small Plano card shows this weekend. Out of the 125-150 people who were in the room at some point, maybe 3 even mentioned this subject and maybe one really cared. This "IS" an important issue but remember we're a very small percent of the hobby as an whole.

[drcy]

I think investors invest in how they're invested.

If it is known there are irrational variations in grading, but the prices still go along a line, they are investing in that line.

Investors have been keeping their heads in the sand about certain issues, because everyone else has been keeping their heads in the sand. Most everyone, including registry mebers with a brain must have already realized the irrational variations and margins in error in the number grades on labels, and many people have already been of the belief that many high-grade cards in holders are altered-- I've been of that belief for many years.

Also, what facts don't affect prices today, doesn't mean they won't affect prices tomorrow.

I think longterm investment in "high grade" vintage cards is a bad idea. Nice looking cards will still fetch good prices, but I don't believe in the future someone will pay $100,000 for a one grade increment knowing the card is likely altered to get to that grade. I, and of course many others, already thought it looney considering the normal variations (margins of error) in assigning a grade itself. Considerations the margins of error and variations is grading, paying $500,000 more for a 10 over a 9 is, in many people's opinion, silly enough, but paying $500,000 for a trimmed edge in someone's basement is beyond the pale of expectations.

My assumption, my opinion, is that the majority of high-grade vintage cards have been altered, or 'conserved' if you prefer. And, if and when that sets in with the hobby as a whole, I assume it will affect pricing.

Also, it doesn't take the entire hobby or current 'investors' to give up the ghost on high-grade cards to affect the market. It can just take a substantial minority, in particular, if they are big spenders.

[Dpeck100]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1984-Donrus....c100033.m2042

Is this normal for a 1984 Donruss Don Mattingly? I remember when these were in the $600 to $700 range.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Dpeck100

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1984-Donrus....c100033.m2042

Is this normal for a 1984 Donruss Don Mattingly? I remember when these were in the $600 to $700 range.

16 retraction bidder running it up.
https://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI....p2471758.m4792

[Peter_Spaeth]

April 4 Probstein sells one for 1025.
April 14 PWCC sells one for 1601.
Ok.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by drcy

I think investors invest in how they're invested.

If it is known there are irrational variations in grading, but the prices still go along a line, they are investing in that line.

Investors have been keeping their heads in the sand about certain issues, because everyone else has been keeping their heads in the sand. Most everyone, including registry mebers with a brain must have already realized the irrational variations and margins in error in the number grades on labels, and many people have already been of the belief that many high-grade cards in holders are altered-- I've been of that belief for many years.

Also, what facts don't affect prices today, doesn't mean they won't affect prices tomorrow.

I think longterm investment in "high grade" vintage cards is a bad idea. Nice looking cards will still fetch good prices, but I don't believe in the future someone will pay $100,000 for a one grade increment knowing the card is likely altered to get to that grade. I, and of course many others, already thought it looney considering the normal variations (margins of error) in assigning a grade itself. Considerations the margins of error and variations is grading, paying $500,000 more for a 10 over a 9 is, in many people's opinion, silly enough, but paying $500,000 for a trimmed edge in someone's basement is beyond the pale of expectations.

My assumption, my opinion, is that the majority of high-grade vintage cards have been altered, or 'conserved' if you prefer. And, if and when that sets in with the hobby as a whole, I assume it will affect pricing.

I think two things are going on with some of the high roller investors:

1. When PSA assigns a card a high grade, that then is what the card "becomes." If you're holding a PSA 9 Mantle, forget what the card looks like; what it is, to the investor, is a PSA 9 Mantle, period. How it got there (overly generous grading, unnoticeable alteration) is basically irrelevant.

2. The PSA population report creates artificial rarity. A seasoned collector will understand why a T206 Doyle in fair condition is quite highly desirable because of its (legitimate) rarity, while an investor will look at a 1967 Card #1 The Champs in PSA 10 and see that only one exists. So, to the investor, that card is unique. If he wants the BEST 1967 set, he must have that specific instance of that card (so his thinking goes.)

I have often thought that PSA, and other TPG, basically have a business model that allows them to create wealth out of thin air. I think collectors who buy cards that are legitimately scarce will, in the long run, have a "portfolio" of "assets" that will grow in value, while those who are paying huge multiples for those 9s and 10s are just inflating a false bubble.

[RollieFingers]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

Just as an FYI, I ran one of small Plano card shows this weekend. Out of the 125-150 people who were in the room at some point, maybe 3 even mentioned this subject and maybe one really cared. This "IS" an important issue but remember we're a very small percent of the hobby as an whole.

interesting

[RollieFingers]

how many people even work at these places? 2 months wait sounds like bad business anyway

[mark evans]

Due to the inherent subjectivity in grading, I've believed for some time that the hobby is due for a 'correction' to redress the tremendous disparity in values at the high end of the grading scale. Of course, to date, this correction has existed only in my imagination.

But, I now wonder whether the current scandal, assuming well publicized, will trigger or help facilitate such a correction.