Money in the Hobby

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

I agree with this to an extent. The exception will be that the best quality and rare pieces will continue to go up. But I do question who will care to pay anything for a mid grade 1958 al Kaline in the future.

People aren't buying nice Ruth cards and Type 1 photos because it reminds them of being a kid. They are buying because they see the appreciation over time, have a lot of money to invest, and think why not plow a small amount into something cool like sports memorabilia. Can't call your buddies over and excitedly pass around stock certificates.

I agree that Al Kaline's rookie card won't mean much to anyone in 25 year. But the stuff at the top of the Heritage catalog will hold its value and likely appreciate.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

People aren't buying nice Ruth cards and Type 1 photos because it reminds them of being a kid. They are buying because they see the appreciation over time, have a lot of money to invest, and think why not plow a small amount into something cool like sports memorabilia. Can't call your buddies over and excitedly pass around stock certificates.

I agree that Al Kaline's rookie card won't mean much to anyone in 25 year. But the stuff at the top of the Heritage catalog will hold its value and likely appreciate.

Sorry but I think that's wrong and that you're looking at it the wrong way. You're right, no one is buying Type 1 photos of Ruth because it reminds them of being a kid. But how many people bought a Type 1 Ruth photo before they bought a pack of baseball cards? I would, again, just a guess, feel confident in saying almost no one.

[Exhibitman]

Pointless to try and predict the future.

Collect what you like and can afford

Drool over what you like and cannot afford

Shine the rest

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Pointless to try and predict the future.

Collect what you like and can afford

Drool over what you like and cannot afford

Shine the rest

Agreed.

[cardsnstuff]

Will all cards keep their value? Absolutely not. But many vintage will. Just because of supply an demand.

I personally never saw Mickey Mantle play but whenever I list his cards on ebay they sell very fast compared to some other players of the same decade. I suspect the same will hold true for many other players as well.

But the modern market is a different beast, the supply is infinite. Just check the pop reports and see how many PSA 10's their are of Aaron Judge already.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Agreed.

That's ok if you're a pure collector, but I, and I suspect a significant number of others are more "collestor," i.e., a hybrid, or cross between a collector and investor. Yes, we love our cards,but we also want them to increase in value over time.

Just my two cents worth,

Larry

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Pointless to try and predict the future.

Collect what you like and can afford

Drool over what you like and cannot afford

Shine the rest

Bingo.

[joshuanip]

I would say that demographic fear is probably priced in to some degree. But there will always be a market. Stamps, toys, etc. But who knows. Here is my bullish view:

The availability to sell online provided liquidity and reduced transaction costs (no longer selling at a dealer haircut like the 80's and 90's, and having visibility in real time price discovery). The grading from TPAs, has created fungibility in cards, providing further transparency to "value".

All of these factors have aided the upward stability of card prices, along with macro factors like monetary liquidity from global QE, improving unemployment, and yes a rising stock market.

So I say there are many positive aspects of card collecting that makes it a fun asset diversification. And they are just plain kool to look at.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

The availability to sell online provided liquidity and reduced transaction costs (no longer selling at a dealer haircut like the 80's and 90's, and having visibility in real time price discovery). The grading from TPAs, has created fungibility in cards, providing further transparency to "value".

Collecting should be all about "fungibility". If you no longer have the ability to have fungi with your cards, you should consider getting out of the hobby.

Brian

[Steve_NY]

I tend to agree with Adam, and have been telling collectors since 1976 "when they ask" to "buy what they like" because the chances of making huge gains quickly is often slim to none. On the contrary, I have bought collections and items during a day at a show, and broke them up later in the day and sold them for a large profit. But every sports card dealer has such stories.

I find three types of collectors:

1 -- those that buy what they like or collect

2 -- those that are just investors, and

3 -- a combination of 1 and 2.

I buy for resale and can spot a true #1, #2, or #3 immediately. But I also think that there will always be opportunity to make a killing if you pick the right items.

Look at "Black Panther" which has made over $1 billion; did comic book collectors know that there early Black Panther comics would ever be worth big bucks?

Collectors kept them, and now investors are jumping in.

It can happen when you least expect it.

Look what Shaq and Jordan and Gretzky did for their respective sports card collectors.

My 2 cents: Collect what you like, and hope to make a profit someday, if that day ever comes.

Steve

[rjackson44]

Agree with Steve ,,

[Exhibitman]

We've all got flip stories, Steve. Many of us have also won a round or two of PSA lotto (I just took a risk on a raw card that came back an 8 and parlayed $90 plus a grade fee into $750, if the card was to go for sale, which it isn't). I even pulled a pricey insert card out of a pack once (1997 Topps, pulled the Jeter signed insert; still one of my favorite cards).



My point isn't so much that money isn't/shouldn't be a concern as it is that the obsession over what card collecting will be like in 10-20-30 years from now based on financial concerns is just a bit silly in the context of a pasttime. Unless you (the hypothetical "you", not you specifically) are making a living on this, the idea of this should be a diversion from work and money and other real world concerns, as Burdick says in the intro to the ACC. If you're going to replicate the financial stress of retirement planning, get out of cards, put the money that 'has to' work for you in equities, and go to a stock chatroom instead of here.

[Stampsfan]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

...If you're going to replicate the financial stress of retirement planning, get out of cards, put the money that 'has to' work for you in equities, and go to a stock chatroom instead of here.

+1.

Separate that money. I'm a pretty avid golfer, but I don't buy a new driver or wedge every year. I'd rather buy cards. However I have buddies that spend money on new clubs of some sort every year. That is where they choose to spend their extra cash. Their retirement money is not tied up in clubs, and I'm sure they don't sit around hoping the M1 driver they bought a few years ago is worth more today than it was. It doesn't even enter into the discussion.

I bought cards before the big money got in. I'll buy cards after the "crash" that so many folks believe will come. The fact that my hobby has increased in value is simply a pleasant byproduct, but not something I depend on or worry about.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

My point isn't so much that money isn't/shouldn't be a concern as it is that the obsession over what card collecting will be like in 10-20-30 years from now based on financial concerns is just a bit silly in the context of a pasttime. Unless you (the hypothetical "you", not you specifically) are making a living on this, the idea of this should be a diversion from work and money and other real world concerns, as Burdick says in the intro to the ACC. If you're going to replicate the financial stress of retirement planning, get out of cards, put the money that 'has to' work for you in equities, and go to a stock chatroom instead of here.

+1. Even if you're a "collestor" (Steve's #3), your retirement money should be primarily in other areas where it can work for you. If your collection turns out to appreciate in value, great; if not, you'll have your other avenues going for you.

Best to all,

Larry

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ls7plus

+1. Even if you're a "collestor" (Steve's #3), your retirement money should be primarily in other areas where it can work for you. If your collection turns out to appreciate in value, great; if not, you'll have your other avenues going for you.

Best to all,

Larry

I have found a balanced approach is best for me, as others have alluded to also.

.

[samosa4u]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

People aren't buying nice Ruth cards and Type 1 photos because it reminds them of being a kid. They are buying because they see the appreciation over time, have a lot of money to invest, and think why not plow a small amount into something cool like sports memorabilia.

Exactly. I also want to add something to this: look at the folks who spend crazy amounts of money on paintings - did they even care about art when they were younger? Did they go to museums? Take art courses while in school? No, no and no. As they got older, and their disposable income increased, they decided to just put that money into awesome things, like art.

[packs]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

Exactly. I also want to add something to this: look at the folks who spend crazy amounts of money on paintings - did they even care about art when they were younger? Did they go to museums? Take art courses while in school? No, no and no. As they got older, and their disposable income increased, they decided to just put that money into awesome things, like art.

Many people go to museums. In fact, I would bet it would be pretty difficult for you to find a single person who hasn't been to one. You can show almost anyone in the country a photo of the Mona Lisa and they'll know what it is. That could not be said for any baseball card. I also doubt anyone buys art just to spend money on something. It is true that people will invest in artwork, but at it's base level art has a utilitarian purpose that baseball cards never will.

[MR RAREBACK]

the collecting gene, either you have it or you dont

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by packs

Many people go to museums. In fact, I would bet it would be pretty difficult for you to find a single person who hasn't been to one. You can show almost anyone in the country a photo of the Mona Lisa and they'll know what it is. That could not be said for any baseball card. I also doubt anyone buys art just to spend money on something. It is true that people will invest in artwork, but at it's base level art has a utilitarian purpose that baseball cards never will.

I disagree with your opinion on the utility of cards. As stated earlier, the TPGs and online venues have increased the utility of the cards. For art, its a 1 of 1 market (sans the giglees, lithos, and other crap out there). For cards, there is more than one and a standardized grading system, so you have a baseline of what the market is. That baseline is accretive to the utility and thus value of the asset.

But hell, as others say, who cares, we are all dead eventually (and what else am I going to do in the meantime).

[packs]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

I disagree with your opinion on the utility of cards. As stated earlier, the TPGs and online venues have increased the utility of the cards. For art, its a 1 of 1 market (sans the giglees, lithos, and other crap out there). For cards, there is more than one and a standardized grading system, so you have a baseline of what the market is. That baseline is accretive to the utility and thus value of the asset.

But hell, as others say, who cares, we are all dead eventually (and what else am I going to do in the meantime).

By utilitarian I meant that artwork serves a purpose beyond being valuable. We all have homes, I assume we all have something on the wall too. And that doesn't take into account other forms of artwork, like furniture, lawn ornaments, comic books, comic strips, cartoons, posters, t-shirts, shoes, logos, etc.

[buymycards]

I'm still waiting for Beanie Baby prices to rebound.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by buymycards

I'm still waiting for Beanie Baby prices to rebound.

Was an article last year about the absolute worst things to have collected in the last 50 years. Had to send a copy to my parents as they touched most of the bases. Hummels. Yadro. Norman Rockwell plates. Check check check.

Beanie babies were there of course. But the biggest disaster was Thomas Kinkaid paintings. What a debacle that turned into. People were paying big bucks for those and the market just got saturated. Every shopping mall in America was selling them. Poor guy died before it all collapsed. Probably for the better.

[Huck]

Originally Posted by buymycards

I'm still waiting for Beanie Baby prices to rebound.

That comment made me laugh out loud.

Everything is cyclical and don't forget it is just cardboard. Would the bottom falling out of the card market even make the front page of the local paper or a leading story on a 24 hour news channel? I think not. Card collecting is a niche thing. Yes, there are deep pocket types who want to own the best card, nicest car, biggest house etc. It remains to be seen if there are enough newbies to the hobby to sustain current price levels. Fact is, like Bill Murray said in "Meatballs" - "It just doesn't matter. I just doesn't matter."

I am enjoying the discourse. One thing missing from the discussion (or I missed it) is having enjoyed playing the game. Soccer, lacrosse, cup stacking, hockey (ice time was scarce in Hawaii) were not options during my childhood. But baseball was a constant. Around 9-10 years of age trading cards at school was popular.

I want to believe that the majority of collector's out there enjoyed playing the game or have some emotional tie (went to games with a family member etc.) to the game. How many of you out there never played the game, woke up one day and said "I am going to start collecting baseball cards"? Quite a few folks on the board have lamented the fact that their offspring have zero interest in maintaining the collection. My two boys enjoy attending card shows, but it isn't a given that they will continue the collection I have amassed.

I have never looked at the hobby as an investment. I just enjoy collecting. I have the collecting bug.

(The Graduate - Updated)

Mr. McGuire: I want to say one word to you. Just one word.

Benjamin: Yes, sir.

Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?

Benjamin: Yes, I am.

Mr. McGuire: Bitcoin.

Benjamin: Exactly how do you mean?

Mr. McGuire: There's a great future in bitcoin. Think about it. Will you think about it?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by packs

By utilitarian I meant that artwork serves a purpose beyond being valuable. We all have homes, I assume we all have something on the wall too. And that doesn't take into account other forms of artwork, like furniture, lawn ornaments, comic books, comic strips, cartoons, posters, t-shirts, shoes, logos, etc.

I have baseball paintings, baseball pictures, baseball posters, uncut sheets of baseball cards, baseball autographs and other baseball display items. Most of what you listed, I would consider worthless. I would agree that baseball cards printed in larger numbers, most postwar, will probably see lower values in the future. Top names in higher grades will continue to increase in my opinion.

[packs]

Originally Posted by rats60

I have baseball paintings, baseball pictures, baseball posters, uncut sheets of baseball cards, baseball autographs and other baseball display items. Most of what you listed, I would consider worthless. I would agree that baseball cards printed in larger numbers, most postwar, will probably see lower values in the future. Top names in higher grades will continue to increase in my opinion.

Worthless in what way? What does that mean? How are shoes worthless? How is a house worthless? Do you not consider architecture to be art? Advertisements are worthless? Do you wear clothes? Do you have furniture? Do you watch television?
Go to the movies? Art affects your life every day.

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

I disagree with your opinion on the utility of cards. As stated earlier, the TPGs and online venues have increased the utility of the cards. For art, its a 1 of 1 market (sans the giglees, lithos, and other crap out there). For cards, there is more than one and a standardized grading system, so you have a baseline of what the market is. That baseline is accretive to the utility and thus value of the asset.

But hell, as others say, who cares, we are all dead eventually (and what else am I going to do in the meantime).

This is actually a myth.

There are 5 versions of Rodin's "The Thinker" all in bronze which were created under his supervision. There is also the original production plasters of the statue.

Jacques-Louis David painted 5 versions of "Napoleon at Saint-Bernard Pass" also known as "Napoleon Crossing the Alps" between 1801 and 1805. They are all about the same size at 2.6 x 2.2m. The differences are in the color of the cape and the background. All are considered originals. I saw the 1803 version at The Belvedere in Vienna, Austria in September.

There are exceptions to every rule, but people state the mantra that art is 1 of 1 when there are many cases when it is just not true.

[MVSNYC]

The cream will always rise. The best cards (or memorabilia) of the best players, will always be considered "blue chip" material, and will always be in demand. Obviously they'll be peaks & valleys, but the better/best items will hold their value.

In addition to vintage, I think this can/will hold true for more contemporary items, such as important game used bats (Jeter, Trout, etc), uniforms, and some very limited production cards.