I asked this same question to John Spencer, Hey Yoda(about 25? yrs ago?) when I was buying his E102 Cobby for 1k.....more small value or less large value....so, I went with best value for me....
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman
As a collector, I've always been about more cards of lesser value: why have one really nice Ruth when I can have ten messy ones instead? 10 Ruths are better than one, duh! As a collector, give me a run of Mantle cards instead of a 1952 T. If I am trying to make money, though, I don't see it that way. I would rather put my eggs in one marquee card than in a card I hope might some day become a marquee card. The Mantle is so expensive that a small % movement on price equates to a much larger % movement on a cheaper card. A PSA 1 Robinson can be had for about $3,000-$3,500; a Mantle is $25,000+. A 10% bump on the Mantle is an 80% bump on the Robinson, in $$ terms. Is it more likely that a Mantle will go up 10% or a Robinson will go up 80%? I realize that the investment on Robinson is much smaller, but is it necessarily a better way to make money? If that's the goal. Not that there's anything wrong with that...
|