I have been wrong for the past 20 years, so I figure I will continue to be wrong, but I am always baffled that memorabilia and ephemera are so low valued compared to cards. I assumed that a lot of collectors would tire of cards and decide to pursue lemon peel balls, ring bats, or other displayable items and that those items would ultimately rise in value. Instead, most of the items I collect (like the above) are worth about what they were 20 years ago and some less. I still enjoy what I collect and am happy the prices are relatively stable/low as I have been able to add some incredible items for relatively small money (compared to cards).
One of my favorite examples is a 1933 All Star Game scorecard I own with Babe Ruth on the cover. There are not many known at least compared to most of his cards. I paid less than 500 for mine (it has condition issues) but even a nice went for about 3000 a couple of years ago. A 33 Goudey Ruth card in similarly nice condition sells for tens of thousands of dollars. I just do not understand the gap in price.
I do understand there are far more card collectors. I just assumed more would tire of that pursuit but I am doubtful enough ever will to change things. As I said, the relative affordability of memorabilia definitely allows me to have a deeper and larger collection than if I only collected cards.
To finally answer the question, I chose ephemera but probably should have chosen other (display memorabilia). Given my track record over the last twenty years though, I assume I am going to be wrong for the next five too.
Alan
|