The term "Logoman" is rather asinine. How about paying a bit more tribute to Jerry West by referring to the logo using his name? At least Harmon Killebrew isn't called "Logoman".

Perhaps my even bringing this up only serves to show my complete lack of interest in the sport. Maybe I'm missing something obvious in the history of it being referred to in that way. I'm fine with that. ;)

The Logoman market for NBA is it's own world.

A few years ago a triple-Logoman Lebron that's far away from his rookie season and not even autographed fetched over $2m.

A relic card of a living and still playing guy that's not a RC or has an autograph fetched $2m.

I don't understand it. It's been going on for years. *big ass shrug*

Many, many more people around the world go to professional baseball games each year than go to pro basketball games, or any other sport, for that matter. It's not even close.

Really? I'm definitely going to read up a bit on that when time permits.

But why is it signed "Mr Zul?"

As I've stated, if there were no modern collectors today our hobby would go the way of Stamp collecting - dead and buried.

Also, I wonder how many collectors that state they wouldn't buy any modern-day cards are secretly looking for a Cal Raleigh right now. How many that hate modern collecting have never sought out a rookie Ohtani, Trout, Judge, Skenes, Skubal, etc.

I think I enjoy reading more about how someone would spend their 13M rather than reading about someone telling someone else they've never met how they should spend theirs.

Net54 has pretty savvy collectors and intelligent members. The collective knowledge base is impressive. I am glad I joined and enjoy reading the daily posts, just like reading the daily paper and getting caught up with the news.

The nice thing about reading threads that you don't agree with, or upset you, is one can always simply not read the thread.

This one reminds me of "The Days or Our Lives" tv show. I'll continue reading it daily until it spirals too far down the rabbit hole.

I wouldn't think so. I'm pretty sure the average human goes to more pro soccer games than pro baseball games each year, but I think he was right about the "it's not even close" bit.

Let me know what you find out, since I made that up entirely. But think about it: with seasons twice as long and attendance/game about the same, even AAA baseball and probably even AA and many A leagues outdraw the NBA every year. Who goes to minor-league basketball games? And I know basketball is popular in many other countries, but so is baseball, with longer seasons and bigger arenas. I honestly don't see how it can be close, using live attendance as a measure of popularity: Baseball is King!

I don't know, is minor-league soccer the big deal around the world that minor-league and independent baseball is here and probably many other countries, too? So many teams playing so many games drawing so many thousands of fans per game, I can't see any other sport in the same ballpark as baseball when it comes to attendance.

Sports ranked by total # fans (not total attendence)
 

Rank Sport Name Amount of Fans Regions
1 Football (Soccer) 3.5 Billion Europe, Africa, Asia, America
2 Cricket 2.5 Billion Asia, Australia, UK
3 Hockey 2 Billion Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia
4 Tennis 1 Billion Europe, Asia, America
5 Volleyball 900 Million Europe, Australia, Asia, America
6 Table Tennis 850 Million Europe, Africa, Asia, America
7 Basketball 800 Million America, Oceania, Middle East
8 Baseball 500 Million America, Japan
9 Rugby 475 Million Oceania, South Africa, England
10 Golf 450 Million America, Oceania, Europe

Presented without comment
 

We all seem to be kicking the ball down the road now.:eek:

Clearly volleyball and table tennis cards are grossly undervalued.

Kind of a funny observation, but how does Hockey list Africa and Austraila, but not America? Does Africa have more than a dozen ice rinks on the whole continent?

i believe it is actually field hockey and not ice hockey, which makes sense for the regions

Except they can't make this card again. It contains the logo from a NBA 50th Anniversary Jersey and was signed by Kobe Bryant, who is dead. This is a true 1/1, that is why it went for so much.

Also, unless Upper Deck gets a NBA license again, the few Michael Jordan logoman cards that exist are all that are going to be made. This is driving the market up on those.

I agree. In most parts of the world the default meaning of "hockey" is "field hockey" and if you mean ice hockey, you say "ice hockey". In the US and Canada (and maybe other places like Scandinavia?) the default meaning of "hockey" is "ice hockey" and if you mean field hockey, you say "field hockey".

This. What does the list have to do with anything? What are "fans?" How does this correlate to collecting at all? And where are swimming, running, frisbee, etc.?

450 million golf fans ? Apparently people who play golf as a hobby are not fans

There are lots of people that think its crazy that thousands and millions of dollars get spent on cards of players the buyers never seen play too. Its all crazy. If I had it my way we all would wake up tomorrow and 52 Mantles and 33 Goudey Ruths would be worth $25 bucks ea. But that's just not going to happen. I keep thinking this bubble is going to burst but I don't see an end in sight. Its already bad for the working man collector and getting worse every day.

National Treasures (NT) is the top of the basketball mountain, IMO. Upper Deck lost the NBA license around 2009 and Panini has been making the NT RPAs for the past fifteen years. Many of the top basketball rookies were made during the Panini era: Steph Curry, Luka Doncic, Jayson Tatum, Greek Freak, Caitlin Clark, etc.

I would agree that an NT RPA is the peak of currently manufactured cards. But Exquisite blows it out of the water in terms of overall basketball card history. And it's not close. If Lebron had an NT RPA, it wouldn't be anywhere near what his Exqusite is in terms of value or collectability. Exquisite is on another level in the basketball market. Heck, you could argue Flawless gives NT a run for its money in current cards.

Interesting! I don't know whether I'm typical but I now collect Baseball cards that were issued seven years, but only seven, before the first Baseball cards I bought as a kid.

:)

Yes. I don't think anyone calls it minor league soccer, but there is substantially higher attendance at professional soccer games below the top tier than there is at minor league baseball games.

Exactly. Also, where is the money? 1,000 fans in the USA will spend more money in the hobby than 1,000,000 fans in central Africa.

UD produced Exquisite basketball from 2003 to 2010 and Panini has been making them from 2010 to 2025. So, this just gives Panini a huge advantage. That's seven years vs. fifteen. Think of all the great players that joined the league over the last fifteen years. Without LeBaby, nobody would care about Exquisite basketball, IMO.

OK, first I've heard of that. What do they call it, how many teams, and do they draw the tens of thousands of fans a game as minor-league baseball at all levels in the Americas and elsewhere? Asking for a friend.

OK, let's get real now. Any list that has field hockey, as great a sport as it is (!), ahead of baseball in popularity, has just forfeited it's claim to any kind of legitimacy or seriousness.

I play my fair share of golf as a hobby. None of my friends I play golf with or myself could tell you anything about any pro golf player. I don't know anyone that watches golf but a lot that play it very badly and have a blast doing it.:)

None of that changes just how big the Exquisite cards are in the hobby. Panini doesn't have Jordan autos, let alone Jordan patch autos, so it's disingenuous to claim Lebron is the only reason Exquisite is legendary. Jordan rules the basketball market. And he's a UD exclusive. Some of the top basketball cards ever are from Exquisite. Case in point, this Jordan/Kobe. Prefer NT all you want, but it's foolish to deny the significance of Exquisite. And my point had nothing to do with arguing other top sets. It was in relation to someone claiming this Jordan/Kobe wasn't from a significant product. And that's objectively wrong.

Any list that has field hockey ... ahead of ice hockey in popularity has already forfeited its claim to any kind of legitimacy or seriousness. Quite simply what are the great receipts for your typical pro(?), semi-pro or top amateur field hockey game? And how much do the fans spend on the bric-brac associated with the sport, e.g. cards, jerseys, their own equipment?

:confused:

In a nod to baseball lore, it sounds like Trout is suffering from the Curse of Vegas Dave's Card Sale.


Brian

Maybe a dual signed Travis Kelce Taylor Swift 1/1?

I’m really surprised a Topps Now card hasn’t been announced.

Yeah, that's a good point. There is also the Exquisite Kevin Durant RPA as well (though I think he's a b*tch for joining a loaded Warriors team lol).

Not in Spokane. Our MiLB team pulls better attendance than our male/female professional soccer. But they're fairly new, I'll give them a little bit longer to mature.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Africa is the youngest continent in the world according to population age. They have a ton of Gen Z and Gen Alpha. I believe economists think Africa will have robust economic output by the end of the century - some label it the century of Africa if they can live up to their promise. Their youngsters will help populate stagnant populations all around the world. That will help create new markets in Africa for cultural food and other items. Just like you see an Asian market today, you will eventually see an African market in a decade...or two. In the last world cup, Morocco had an amazing professional team. I think you will see more African teams competing on the world's biggest stages.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Last thought about the ranking of the sports list. I lived in Thailand for two years. Soccer was by far the most popular sport, and no one cared about MLS teams from the US. They all had knock off jerseys of Arsenal, Man City, Man U. For US sports, people asked me about football and basketball. Golf was higher than baseball since Tiger Woods is part Thai. I would say they knew more about random Olympic sports than baseball.

My wife lived in Argentina. Soccer, and Messi, ruled the streets. She said when the National team played, it was a national holiday. The next morning, even the dogs were hung over. After soccer, everyone cared about NBA and Manu Ginobli, who is Argentinian. No one asked her about MLB.

When I think about the NBA and NFL, I see international players. The NBA specifically has an amazing roster of international stars. The NFL has a long list of Polynesians who are getting into Canton. While the US has the Caribbean, and Japan and Korea, they are lacking star power in the rest of Asia, Africa, Europe and South America. And as I said in another post, Africa is the next great economic factor according to economists.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

I'm hoping to live that long but most observers don't think I have much of a chance.

:(

Don't underestimate the Samoan market!

Field Hockey and Cricket are national sports in India and Pakistan. With a combined population well in excess of 1 billion, that's a lot of fans.

Yes, that is a lot of fans. Question: I assume they have cards of the players, and I'm wondering how active the market for those, especially vintage, is? Shows, auctions, etc., any info on those?

Lemme cynically throw this out there: treating cards as an asset is something that the vast majority of us do, and we vintage card collectors are acting like feces flinging chimps over this sale not because these investors are getting into cards but because they are padding their portfolios with stuff that isn't what we own and would like to see be worth a fortune. Cards selling for record prices and making the news is a net positive for all of us collector/investors, even if the buyers aren’t into our specific part of the hobby. My hope is that buyers like this help further the case for treating cards as an asset class worthy of investment and that the effect spreads to vintage cards too.

I’m still waiting for pickleball and cornhole cards to take off. I have a bunch of 1/1s. How much longer before a sweet pickleball logoman is released. One can dream.

I literally laughed out loud on this one. Well done!

Probably true for some of us?

Remember that this is the internet, which is the greatest forum ever conceived for complaining about stuff, so I suspect that’s the bigger factor at play here.

Art routinely sells for 2-3x what this 13M basketball card sold for — and many of us would laugh at the art the way we did at the card. It’s a new world and sports cards are considered an asset class now, much the way art is. Art is purchased fractionally, by investment syndicates and no one blinks an eye. Same with sports cards now.

That prices are going through the roof means we won’t be able to afford cards we once could; our collections, of course, are going up commensurately. For anyone with a collection that’s a significant part of their net worth, this is a good thing, even if you’ve never purchased a card for investment purposes.

Precisely.

Man, I hope so.

No, I flatly disagree. First of all you're conflating collectors with investors when there's an enormous chasm between their interests. Investors are on the side of scarcity since they'd like to see an increase in the value of their holdings. Meanwhile collectors are on the side of plenty and thus low prices since they want to be able to readily afford additions to their collections. Otherwise they're not "collectors" since collecting is all about precisely that.

Not I. Some of us collect because we truly like cards and thus want to be able to afford adding ever more cards to our collections. I'm one of those.

But only if you sell!

:eek:

How can you suggest that collectors are not also investors? I've been a baseball card collector since I was 4-5 years old. I collected through my childhood, spending peanuts on the cards until I got an adult job, then a career, and began spending more and more discretionary income on the cards I loved. I never once bought a card for an investment purpose. I never once considered the cards I bought to be part of my net worth, or an asset. They were purchased in my mind, with the same money I'd use for recreational purposes. The money was spent, the fun was had, and that was it. And I steadily spent money on cards, month after month, the amounts increasing as my income increased.

Decades into my collecting journey, someone out of the blue offered me 32.5K for a Ty Cobb postcard of which I had paid 3K for just a couple years earlier. Suddenly I realized that I had a very valuable collection as I had numerous rare Cobb postcards -- along with hundreds of other rare cards. And then I checked a database I used to determine how much money I had spent on my "hobby" and saw that it was well into a range that was worth more than my home. And that was over ten years ago and I have spent multiples of that number since then. While I am a passionate collector, I acknowledge that my card collection is a very valuable asset of mine and is no longer to be considered the product of just throwaway, recreational income. It had grown too valuable.

So while I am still a passionate collector, I am forced to also be an 'investor' even though the number of cards I have purchased for 'investment' purposes can be counted on one hand. So there is hardly an 'enormous chasm' between the interests of collector and investor, assuming the investor got into collecting for the love of the hobby, and things just snowballed over time.

Now maybe some collectors never spent a large amount of their income over time on cards and were capable of exercising some self-control, limiting their collections to a rounding error on their net worth. Does that make them more of a collector than me? No chance. I still buy the new Topps factory set that comes out every year and have since 1978. I still buy $20 cards and the next day I might spend 6 figures on a card. That doesn't mean that I don't concern myself with what my collection is worth as someday I'll be cashing out -- or just leaving it for my kids to cash out after I'm gone. So yeah, I'm all for someone spending 13M on a dopey basketball card because it ultimately increases the value of my collection -- and unless you're a communist, socialist or an idiot, the value of our collections matter to us.