Just to show how times have changed

[Archive]

Posted By: Rich Klein

From the Old Judge (Lew Lipset) review of the Copeland Collection Sale.

Bruce Dorskind: Advanced Collector and Hobby Historian

"The auction (Copeland Sale by Sotheby's in 1991) established that there are only 8 guys who will spend more than $5K on any 19th century card."

Somehow I think 15 years later -- there are a bit more than 8 guys

Regards
Rich

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

The vintage card market in general was lackluster in 1991. Copeland did not pick an ideal time to sell.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Masson

Speaking of Copeland, does anyone out there know definitively why he sold when he did? It seemed very abrupt to me. He bought everything in sight for a short period and then turned around and sold everything. Odd, to say the least. I have heard numerous theories, but none ring true to me.
Does anyone know the story behind that whole episode?

[Archive]

Posted By: Dustan Hedlin

I was 10 years old in 1991, but if I had been interested in pre-war then....ugh, I don't want to think of the kind of collection I could have today. My dad was into collecting then, and he was the one with the money (and easy to talk into purchases too

You could say I'm now attempting to make up for lost time.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

There was a story that a baseball card dealer in San Luis Obispo was murdered in his store, and that was Jim's hometown. That apparently made him extremely nervous, but I think he was also getting burned out because he was getting bombarded nearly daily from dealers who had something to sell him. I never spoke to him directly, but had a couple of dealers I could ask to broker for me when I had something I wanted to move. So this is to some degree speculation.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rich Klein

Nothing was hotter than the "new card" market in 1991. Stores opening up right and left; almost all of them specializing in new cards. I could go to six shows in the Detroit area on an average Sunday (I did that as part of a business trip); I could go to a show in the NY Metropolitan area almost every night of the week -- and if there was not a show -- there was an auction.

And I wanted to point this out -- for everyone who slags on Bruce for his comments -- please note that a respected hobby figure (Lew Lipset) called Bruce an hobby historian. So, I believe Bruce could add quite a bit to the board, with the understanding that he's seen many things most of us have not.

Some of his stores about meeting with collectors such as the legendary Wharton-Tiger would really add so much to everyone's knowledge.

Regards
Rich

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

I can just envision the interview. "We entered the room and sat down. One of us questioned him whilst the other one of us took notes". Happy holidays to all!

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Jay- have you ever heard this one:

Roses are red
Violets are blue
I'm schizophrenic
And so am I.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay

I have, but we always enjoy hearing it again

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Touche!

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

I'm a believer that most collectors in it for the long haul have a focus to what they collect, which they constantly refine and perhaps augment over time. Copeland, on the other hand, didn't fit this mold. He seemed to collect practically everything, which is why he was continually being bombarded by dealers wanting to sell him things. Whenever he would learn about something else out there he didn't have, he had to have it. It's like the rich boy who for a time has a fancy for something, spends like crazy to satisfy his yearning, then gets tired of it and sells out. I remember being at a card show in the late 80's with a long time collector who told me his prediction that Copeland would sell out in the relatively near future. And he was right.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I agree with Corey, and our late friend Walter who made that prediction. The collectors most likely to burn out are the ones who have to have everything all at once and show little patience for building a collection over time.

[Archive]

Posted By: jeff drum

Barry,
Shouldn't you have said, "Two-che!"

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

"The collectors most likely to burn out are the ones who have to have everything all at once and show little patience for building a collection over time."

barry -

sadly, that is a pretty good description of me.

I do have to learn that 'patience' thing. And that 'over time' thing.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Joe- you won't burn out so fast. You will eventually find a rhythm and a love for the hobby and stick with it. Copeland had multi-thousand dollar packages arriving nearly daily. I think he just had enough.

[Archive]

Posted By: bruce Dorskind

1991 was certainly a challenging year for those who had invested
heavily in the more obstuse and eclectic early cards.

If one factors in inflation and the impact of grading on the
$5000 card in 1991, the equivalent card today sells for $20-25,000.

The number of collectors and/or investors who actively pursue
cards at this level remains small, at best.

The competition may be fierce for certain items. Major auction houses
may boast about record prices, but the actual number of different "realistic"
bidders on the most desirable 19th century pieces rarely exceeds four people.

Our best guess is that of the 8 gentlemen who were willing and able
to acquire cards at the 5K level in 1991, only five are actively in
the market today. There are still less than 20 individuals with both
the resources and the interest to spend $20,000 or more on any one
19th century item.

If one traces performance of individual 19th century items at the top
6 or 7 auction houses over the past decade, it is clear tprices
continue to flucuate wildy. The market is thin and fickle. Collectors
and investors entering this market should be prepared for said
market behavior.


Bruce Dorskind
America's Toughest Want List

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

20 individuals seems low to me since we have at least 5-7 regular posters here that I think do on occasion pay that much for a card. It would be interesting to see the buyers list from say the last 10 auctions from one of the major auction houses though.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

The estimate of how many people can afford five-figure cards is wrong. Let's not confuse able to purchase with willing to purchase. I'd hazard a guess that most of the frequent posters here spend into five figures a year on cards and could buy a $20,000 card but that many of them may not want to.

With regard to the good old days, how many here went to the 1991 National? I think that has to be defined as the mother of all shiny crapfests. For those of you who weren't there, you got into a gigantic line that snaked around the entire convention center, waited 3-4 hours to get inside, then (if you cared) got into another line that snaked through the entire hall to fill up your goodie bag with shiny crap that you could turn over immediately for anywhere up to $200. People were going in, getting the bag, selling it, then getting back in line to be readmitted to get another bag. The dealers were going nuts because of the inside line; no one could get to a lot of the tables. On the next day they bundled the promo crap to hand out at the door but it was still a nightmare. The whole hobby back then was upside down. You could not sell vintage cards but you could not keep 100-count stacks of rookies on your table. And the money the shiny-crap-sellers were making was unreal. I set up at a show with vintage stuff next to a guy with thousands of modern rookies. I barely sold anything; he was selling Ken Griffey Jr. rookies he'd bought a few years ago for a few bucks each at five bucks under Beckett and making an absolute killing, I mean thousands of dollars. We got to talking, he started bragging about all of the money he'd made (all cash, as he emphasized, so no taxes), and then he asked me what I did. I said I was a lawyer, he asked who with and I told him I was with the IRS enforcement division and we'd be in touch. One of my best practical jokes; I actually saw a man turn ash white then green.

Given how nuts the hobby was over new junk, I am not surprised that a vintage accumulator like Copeland would have felt unloved and perhaps have lost interest at that point. No Mastro books on his collection...

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

There are MANY, MANY people here who spend well into 5 figures approaching 6 figures annually without ever spending $5K on a single card. Many people, as discussed previously, are mid-range 4-6 type collectors who value clean, but not perfect cards. And many of the people here collect issues that just CAN'T be found in the condition to warrant that type of expense. Anyway, would be cool to see what Copeland would have brought in 2006 dollars........

[Archive]

Posted By: Rich Klein

Was trade show night of the 1991 National. We had entered the building early to go to the seminars and had no idea about the whirlwind going on outside.

After about an hour, I found a couple of Arkansas dealers whom I had met after I moved to Dallas for Beckett and we adjourned to the cafeteria to get out of the way. Worst food but best move I ever made in my life.

At least I had nothing of "value" other than my life. Several dealers had incredible inventory lifted during that show.

Rich

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Bruce- First of all thanks for taking out the "we" and "our" from most of your statements. You irritate people far less when you do that. I am not sure you care but I am just letting you know. Second of all you said, to paraphrase:

"There are still less than 20 individuals with both
the resources and the interest to spend $20,000 or more on any one
19th century item."

I think that is an idiotic statement. I know 30 people that would spend 20k on the right item and I bet I only know 5%-10% of that (20K) group, on a good day. You make some great points and have a wealth of information. If it were only disseminated in a different manner it would be taken more seriously.
kind regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

Was the 1991 show in Arlington (Dallas)? I am trying to remember if this was the National I went to with my dad...

[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

Adam,

You do make some good points though as far as Copeland was concerned, from all I know and have heard about him, I'd be very surprised if his decision to sell had anything to do with the goings-on at shows or the obsession with modern "crap". To my knowledge, he did not attend shows and I would think that the events you describe would to real vintage collectors (as opposed to accumulators) be more amusing than distressing. Much the way I feel today about the staggering premium people are willing to pay for condition rarities.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Bob: It was the infamous Anaheim show that drew over 100,000 people in four days and became the ridiculous benchmark against which future National attendance was measured. Every time the press says the hobby has collapsed it is that darn show that they use as the high water mark.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard

Bruce mentions 20 people who are willing to spend 20k on a "19th century item."

I don't know if that is accurate or not, but I think that if the question were rephrased as "any time period item" rather than "19th century item," Bruce's estimate would be higher.

I am sure we all agree that the number of people who are willing to spend 20k on a 20th century item is far, far greater than 20.