Bursting Bubble

[moogpowell]

Impossible to ascertain magnitude and timing of any selloff but I think HOF baseball players from 1950s to 1970s roughly graded PSA 6 to 8 offer a healthy risk/reward regardless of market conditions. Sort of equivalent to large-cap value with a 2.5% to 3% dividend yield. You won’t get make a lot fast but downside seems limited.

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by moogpowell

Impossible to ascertain magnitude and timing of any selloff but I think HOF baseball players from 1950s to 1970s roughly graded PSA 6 to 8 offer a healthy risk/reward regardless of market conditions. Sort of equivalent to large-cap value with a 2.5% to 3% dividend yield. You won’t get make a lot fast but downside seems limited.

They are absolutely different. The former, regardless prewar or postwar high grade vintage are non income producing alternative assets. They are also illiquid assets, unique in each example similar to real property.

The latter are income producing assets that carry a risk premium (cards cant default or cut your divy) and are based on discounted cashflows of that stock (whether to use the dividend discount model or discounted free cashflow yield remains to be seen). Liquidity is much better as transaction costs are minimal and there is a open marketplace that provides daily liquidity. Also, those stocks are dictated by passive ETF investing and are subject to flow.

I think what you mean is that those investment grade cards are better investments, which I agree, due to the fact that there will always be higher liquidity and demand for that type... but not the same as large cap stocks.

[moogpowell]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

They are absolutely different. The former, regardless prewar or postwar high grade vintage are non income producing alternative assets. They are also illiquid assets, unique in each example similar to real property.

The latter are income producing assets that carry a risk premium (cards cant default or cut your divy) and are based on discounted cashflows of that stock (whether to use the dividend discount model or discounted free cashflow yield remains to be seen). Liquidity is much better as transaction costs are minimal and there is a open marketplace that provides daily liquidity. Also, those stocks are dictated by passive ETF investing and are subject to flow.

I think what you mean is that those investment grade cards are better investments, which I agree, due to the fact that there will always be higher liquidity and demand for that type... but not the same as large cap stocks.

Think we ultimately agree. I am extremely well versed with investing and recognize the difference between non-income producing assets and income producing assets. I didn't mean for my words to be taken literally. I was making a quick comparison in three sentences and said "sort of equivalent" to underscore that the parallel was meant in spirit.

I read your previous long take in this thread. You clearly know your stuff. What do you have most conviction in be it that player x's cards, or such and such sport's cards from a year or decade etc. are undervalued/overvalued.

I am starting to think that the increased grading, volume and visibility of cards will make a somewhat (but less so over time) inefficient market place, regarding price, become ever more "liquid" and dynamic and reduce the variance between prices. A stock market comparison is apt. I think the internet changes a lot for the hobby for the better. It makes it global and grading facilitates buying/selling/trading and adds trust.

I have zero interesting in cards from the '90s to present and would not cry myself a river if the sky high prices in modern basketball tanked. Some hard lessons wouldn't be bad for novices chasing outsized gains.

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by moogpowell

Think we ultimately agree... I was making a quick comparison in three sentences and said "sort of equivalent" to underscore that the parallel was meant in spirit... What do you have most conviction in be it that player x's cards, or such and such sport's cards from a year or decade etc. are undervalued/overvalued...

I am starting to think that the increased grading, volume and visibility of cards will make a somewhat (but less so over time) inefficient market place, regarding price, become ever more "liquid" and dynamic and reduce the variance between prices. A stock market comparison is apt. I think the internet changes a lot for the hobby for the better. It makes it global and grading facilitates buying/selling/trading and adds trust.

I have zero interesting in cards from the '90s to present and would not cry myself a river if the sky high prices in modern basketball tanked. Some hard lessons wouldn't be bad for novices chasing outsized gains.

I gotcha. “Brevity is the soul of wit” - quote from another board member...

I have no conviction, I have no clue, but collect who I like . That said, I am using this time to move some of my less liquid sets and less popular players. As Kennedy said, “The time to repair the roof is when the sun is shining.” By next month 2/3 of my small collection would be Ruths and Cobbs, with an example or two of Gehrig, Williams, mantle and Aaron. If I had to choose a popular sport, basketball... but my heart is in baseball.

I agree on your comment regarding the grading. I made a comment a few months ago that the standardization of grading cards, plus accessible online venues like eBay, have led to commoditization of our hobby. This is a good thing; increased fungibility and liquidity, increasing inherent card values.