PDA

View Full Version : Baseball cards as an asset class


Archive
08-30-2007, 07:55 PM
Posted By: <b>Jason</b><p>On a whim, I did a simple Google search on "baseball cards as an asset class" and found that our wonderful little pieces of cardboard are indeed beginning to sneak into formal discussions of investment personnel, included in lists of alternative asset classes amongst colelctables and art, etc.<br /><br />Among some of these discussion forums are Northern Trust, The Motley Fool, The Industry Standard, and Private Wealth.<br /><br />I was surprised.<br /><br />Anyone else see baseball cards discussed within this investment context lately?

Archive
08-30-2007, 08:07 PM
Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>Honestly, I've never thought of them as an asset. For the last 40 years they have always been a "variable expense." (The only variable being how much money I had to spend on them.)

Archive
08-30-2007, 08:09 PM
Posted By: <b>brian</b><p>This will be fun if everyone shows up...

Archive
08-30-2007, 08:19 PM
Posted By: <b>Dave Hornish</b><p>This is a rehash of events that occurred 15-20 years ago. I can see it as a small (5-10%) chunk of an investment portfolio but still I think it's very volatile to invest in bb cards solely for speculative purposes. It is, of course, a nice by product of collecting when the values go up.

Archive
08-30-2007, 08:38 PM
Posted By: <b>Jason</b><p>Now, don't get me wrong - nowhere in these articles were cards mentioned as anything but an alternative placeholder of value, (such as art or other collectables), within the context of a diversified portfolio of assets. <br /><br />Baseball cards were not discussed in detail, and they were not discussed as an active primary investment vehicle in any of these mentions.<br /><br />I was simply surprised to see them explicitly making the list at all within formal discussions of the investing "Establishment." Previously, I had always seen these lists of "other" assets to include art, coins, real estate, etc...

Archive
08-30-2007, 09:19 PM
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>Invest in mutual funds. Invest in stocks, or bonds. Invest in real estate. Invest in an education, your own or your spouse's, or your child's. Invest in your home. <br /><br />Baseball cards are not an investment. Even if someone wants them to be, even if someone thinks that's what they're doing... they're fooling themselves. Their frontal lobe needs further development.<br /><br />If baseball cards are an investment, then they're a poorly chosen investment. Worse than first edition books, better than Happy Meal toys.<br /><br />Collecting baseball cards is a hobby. Investing in baseball cards is foolishness.

Archive
08-30-2007, 09:29 PM
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Agreed. Not a good idea to invest in baseball cards.<br /><br />Three major weaknesses: 1) baseball cards are not liquid in comparison to stocks and bonds, 2) card market has a very short track record (maybe 20 years), and 3) the market is very thinly traded (so the absence of a 1/2 dozen collectors could have an impact).<br /><br /><br />Peter C.<br /><br />Edited to included 3) above.

Archive
08-31-2007, 01:10 AM
Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>How about the T206 Wagner?? <br /><br />Does anyone have an asset calculator or some other guide which could tell you what an investment in the stock market would have done over a certain number of years??<br /><br />I mean, you take what the Wagner sold for when Gretzky bought it and then take the $2.35 million it sold for earlier this year and then compare that to what an investment in various stocks would have been over that same time period. Compare it to Microsoft and Apple and then maybe an S & P 500 Index mutual fund and see how they compare.<br /><br />I KNOW the Wagner has performed better than Enron, Adelphia and Conseco shares....<br /><br />David

Archive
08-31-2007, 02:17 AM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>An experienced collector is far more knowledgeable about baseball cards than he is about any Fortune 500 company. If an expert collector knew as much about Microsoft, Exxon or real estate as he does about baseball cards, he'd be hired as a Wall Street analyst.

Archive
08-31-2007, 04:21 AM
Posted By: <b>Perry Eaves</b><p>There seems to be a stigma about admitting that baseball cards are an investment for the "old school" collectors. Vintage graded cards are an investment whether you like it or not. Good or bad but nonetheless an investment. You make some very good points Peter Chao. I noticed on the board awhile back you were interested in purchasing a t206 cobb in psa 4 for approx $1000. Assuming you eventually purchased, did you honestly believe you were saying goodbye to a grand forever so you could stroke an old baseball card for the love? The answer is no, you may enjoy the card but in the back of your mind you always believed that you would at least get your money back or perhaps a profit. If not for yourself then maybe for a child. Maybe the card goes up and maybe the card goes down, either way you have made a concrete investment in cardboard. If you put it in the closet for a rainy day and never look at it or take it out every night and drool on it, either way irrelevant. Still an investment. I have a relatively minimal investment in cards, but take solace in the fact that if times get hard can easily put on ebay and get investment back and perhaps profit. I propose this question, if you needed money quickly would you rather have a $100k house for sale or the equivalent in graded baseball cards?

Archive
08-31-2007, 05:35 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Baseball cards have been a good investment for collectors who have been in the hobby a long time and know what they are doing.<br /><br />But putting money blindly into an investment fund that has some designated card buyer for the fund is not likely to have a happy ending.

Archive
08-31-2007, 06:02 AM
Posted By: <b>ErlandStevens</b><p>I think it would be very hard to be a good baseball card collector and investor. Investing is trying to maximize wealth for future needs. Once you have an attachment to an item (like card collectors tend to have), then making rational buy/sell decisions would be almost impossible. If you are a portfolio manager and don't give a hoot about cards aside from their dollar value, then it could work in theory.

Archive
08-31-2007, 06:21 AM
Posted By: <b>bruce Dorskind</b><p>Collectibles are clearly an important asset class. Particularly<br /> among the top 1% of Americans who control 35% of the wealth.<br /><br />The private banks and family offices which assist the country’s<br />wealthiest citizens with their finances generally have<br />experts on staff to advise in the collectibles arena.<br /><br />Whilst trading in baseball memorabilia is certainly not as <br />“fluid” as the equity and bond markets, or for that matter <br />the rare coin market, one would be hard-pressed to argue <br />that a multi-million dollar collection of high grade cards is <br />not an asset class.<br /><br />No one is suggesting that a sophisticated investor should<br /> allocate 25% or 50% of his assets to collectibles, but if one <br />were to review the asset allocation of private banking customers, <br />one would find that equity, bonds, property and cash rarely represent<br />100% of a client’s portfolio.<br /><br />Whether it be art, antiques, coins or baseball cards, “collectibles”<br />often represent 2-5% of the overall assets.<br /><br />If liquidity were the primary concern, then the investor should limit <br />him/herself to cash, equity and government bonds. However, <br />we think that an investment in ultra high grade baseball cards <br />will generally outperform the other markets.<br /><br />Of course, the strategy for an investor will have to be quite<br />different from the strategy of a “pure collector.” One must<br />invest in items where there is active, consistent trading<br />and prices are not controlled by a handful of “investors/collectors.”<br /><br />For example, if one tracked public auction records for the <br />past 10 years for PSA 8 Hall of Famers from the three most<br />popular pre War Sets ( T 206, 1915 Cracker Jacks and<br />1933 Goudeys), one would find that the growth in portfolio <br />value would dwarf the equity, bond or real estate markets.<br /><br /><br />Bruce Dorskind<br />America’s Toughest Want List<br />

Archive
08-31-2007, 06:54 AM
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>I buy a stock because I think it is undervalued, or that it will gain in value relative to its current value. Any seller's remorse that I experience is directly related to the stock's gain after I sell.<br /><br />When I get a baseball card I think of the player, of the team, of the era. There's the "attachment" mentioned above.<br /><br />Maybe, just maybe, to invest in baseball cards, the investor would need to be clueless about who Cobb was, who Wagner was, who the Cubs were and are... Then there would be sufficient detachment.<br /><br />I agree that some card prices have gone up. So has copper prices, and crude oil prices... I still think that anyone "investing" in baseball cards (nay, sports cards, I'd like to have a National Chicle card of Bronko Nagurski, even in beat up shape) is fooling themselves, trying to rationalize where they've put there money.<br /><br />Invest in pencils. They were a nickel when I was a kid...

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:01 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I'm not sure the statement 1% of the top earners control 35% of the wealth is correct. They certainly control more than they should, but I believe the number is smaller than that.<br /><br />And certainly a portfolio of PSA 8's would have performed extremely well, but I would always have my doubts about the person chosen to put this portfolio together. Would it be a knowledgeable collector, or just a disinterested investor who reads the latest market quotes?

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:15 AM
Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>I agree with you completely (Except for that pencil part. Staples pencils 6 dozen for $2.99 is about 4 cents apiece.)<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Great! Another excuse to buy cards. <br /><br /><br />(Edited to take out a link that was way too long and making the page too wide. Sorry. Go to Staples.com)

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:18 AM
Posted By: <b>bruce Dorskind</b><p><br /><br />"The richest 1% of the population now owns <br />almost 35% of all the private wealth in <br />America, more than the bottom 90% <br />of the population combined." - The Wealth Inequality Reader <br /><br /><br />Bruce Dorskind<br />America's Toughest Want List

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:20 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Would you say that statistic is good for the country or bad?<br /><br />If a tiny group controls that much wealth, where does it leave the other 99%, particularly those in the bottom half?

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:37 AM
Posted By: <b>bruce Dorskind</b><p><br />August 30 2007, 9:37 AM <br /><br /><br /><br /> Our quote with regard to the distribution of wealth was made simply<br /> to support the fact that baseball cards, like other collectibles,<br /> are an asset class. Accordingly, wealth management firms<br /> have experts on staff who understand (or at least state <br /> they understand the collectibles market).<br /> .<br /> Before one is too quick to complain about the wealthy, remember<br /> a significant portion of that group is made up of people who the other<br /> 99% choose to worship like entertainers, athletes and politicians.<br /><br /> We believe that someone who wants to work 100 hours a week,<br /> risk his own capital and who has great creative talent has every right<br /> to earn whatever he can.<br /><br /> One should also remember a very old proverb "How you stand on an<br /> issue depends on where you sit" Look, for example, at the poor<br /> people who won a lottery or had a blue collar job at a hot IPO company<br /> that went public. You'll find a dramatic change in their politics as well as<br /> their stand on wealth distribution.<br /><br /> What we can say with great certainty is that the fact that 1% of<br /> population controls 35% of the wealth may or may not be good<br /> for the country, but it has certainly been terrific for the 10-15<br /> dealers who regularly hold rare card auctions. <br /><br /><br /> Bruce Dorskind<br /> Minds That Matter<br />

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:58 AM
Posted By: <b>boxingcardman</b><p>I hate to admit I am in partial agreement with the Dorskinds. Cards are an asset and anyone arguing to the contrary is overlooking decades of history. However, he is wrong on two points: <br /><br />1. "One must invest in items where there is active, consistent trading..." Wrong. The best way to make money in cards is to figure out what cards are going to be hot and get into those just ahead of the curve. We've seen it in E cards and certain T cards, and very soon we are going to see it in ___ cards. <br /><br /><br />2. "and prices are not controlled by a handful of “investors/collectors.”" That statement also is wrong as applied to the high numbered slabs that the Dorskinds tout. The ultra high slab number vintage card market is the essence of a thinly traded market, as there are only a handful of rich white boys fighting it out over those cards.

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:58 AM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I will have to respectfully disagree with those that say cards are not an investment. I think they are. One of the reasons they have done so well is that they are an investment that you can enjoy too. I don't buy cards "as" an investment but to not think of them as one is foolish, imo. I have only had resources to be in the stock market the last 12-13 years. I have been collecting cards, as an adult, for about 10 years. Want to guess which has performed better? Want to guess which has given me greater pleasure? I am NOT saying that cards should be your ONLY investment or be a major part of your asset portfolio (I am addicted and mine is, what can I say?) but to have them be a part of it is not a bad idea...again, just my opinion. For the record I get quite a few calls from folks that do a google search and find my personal website and collection and ask about buying something from it...which I politely answer "no" to almost every time. Each time I ask them how long they have been collecting they usually tell me a year or two. they usually say they collected as a kid and now as an adult want to collect pre-war stuff..I then point them to this forum and let them know they can interact with other collectors and have a lot of fun here. Last thing...my old story about Microsoft stock and my fave card. Back in about 1999-2000 I sold 300 shares of Microsoft at $71 ea. I put in another $5000 and bought my Four Base Hits Kelly (from a valued board member no less). I have about $26,500 into it...Microsoft is about $30 today...so that would be $9000 if I were to have kept it. I think the Four Base Hits is worth a little more than $14,500 today.....but had I not bought the card that is what I would have. I know this is isolated to one transaction but most rare, pre-war, baseball cards bought 8 years ago have done extremely well compared to the stock market in general. I have to mostly agree with the Dorskind Group, better known as "we", on this matter.....regards

Archive
08-31-2007, 08:13 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I actually feel Bruce stated his position well and I fully agree that those with talent and a strong work ethic deserve to be compensated. Where we might disagree is perhaps they are compensated a bit too well.<br /><br />Likewise, there are so many people who work themselves to the bone and get little in return. If my apartment were on fire, I'd rather have the services of a fireman over a hedge fund manager.<br /><br />Nevertheless, cards have performed well but I would only advise someone who has collected for years and knows the business to invest using his own expertise. I would not want someone with little knowledge of baseball cards to do my investing for me.

Archive
08-31-2007, 09:03 AM
Posted By: <b>Jimmy</b><p>I consider baseball cards as an asset just like my coins and antiques, I invest in what I know and follow through with collecting specific items. We are not buying and selling modern cards here, but investing in items that have the potential to do well in the hobby for years to come. If you asked me the same question 10 years ago, I would say baseball cards were just something I collected as a kid, the trend has changed with so many opportunities to learn and appreciate the hobby. It really does depend on the person and how you look at collecting and investing. I buy and sell what I know and sometimes keep a piece or two because I am still a collector. The knowledge I have gained from doing it this way has allowed me to invest and learn more about specific items and the hobby. I also would not have found this site if I was just collecting.<br /><br />Jimmy<br />

Archive
08-31-2007, 09:04 AM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>with the discussion of equity of America's class structure...<br /><br />But, I was just wondering if people were seeing more formalized presentation of cards as an alternate asset class??? I find these recent mentions to be interesting and I am wondering if that may foretell of future increased instiutionalized interest.<br /><br />I don't think there's any question that since they have proven to be a "store of value" in the aggregate, that it is correct to consider them as a subset of the "collectables" asset class.<br /><br />Echoing others' comments, some cards hold value or appreciate better than others, you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket, and there will always be collectors and investors - I don't push one or the other...<br /><br />Since this seems to be the direction in which it is evolving, grading companies, high-end auctions, pricing information (a la VCP), and enthusiast communities should only become more important as the market continues to develop.<br /><br />Here's a great question: Has anyone been pitched collectables investing as part of an overall strategy by an investment professional???

Archive
08-31-2007, 09:26 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I've never been pitched baseball cards as an investment, and I don't know if institutions would feel completely comfortable with them. I'll repeat, you need to have knowledge and a feel for them to make money. I wouldn't trust someone just throwing together a breadbasket of PSA 8's and calling that an investment. I'd rather build a mid-grade set of E93's, or buy a genuinely rare card, and hang onto it for a while.

Archive
08-31-2007, 09:31 AM
Posted By: <b>Larry</b><p>We feel as though the top 1% of wage earners in this country don't really care about the remaining 99% of the peasantry.

Archive
08-31-2007, 09:33 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Larry- you're probably right, and therein lies the problem.

Archive
08-31-2007, 09:48 AM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Bruce said,<br />"One should also remember a very old proverb "How you stand on an<br />issue depends on where you sit""<br /><br />This is why the great Harvard political philosopher John Rawls suggested that when we construct socio/political/economic system we should do so behind a "veil of ignorance". First you create a political system, and then you find out your place in the system. In other words, if you did not know if you would be a lawyer making 7 figures or flipping burgers at McDonalds, what kind of system would you create? If you did not know if you would be African American or white, or whatever, would you be in favor of a system with affirmative action, or not? If you did not know if you would be gay or not, would you favor gay marriage in the society you were creating or not? Honestly putting ourselves behind a veil of ignorance provides an interesting experiment in justice and fairness. Rawls was arguably the most important and influential American philosopher of the 20th century.<br />JimB

Archive
08-31-2007, 09:51 AM
Posted By: <b>Jimmy</b><p>I agree with Barry,<br /><br />"you need to have knowledge and a feel for them to make money"<br /><br />- experience and learning is the key -<br /><br />Jimmy

Archive
08-31-2007, 10:06 AM
Posted By: <b>Josh Adams</b><p>Jim,<br /><br />Best post on here in a long time. <br /><br /><br><br>Go Go White Sox<br />2005 World Series Champions!

Archive
08-31-2007, 10:17 AM
Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Hobby first, but yes, I agree with Leon, definitely an investment. Just ask the guy who bought 10,000 Joe Charboneau rookie cards, I bet he wasn't imbued with the hobby just looking for a rapid fire growth investment <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br />I also agree with Bruce that 1% of the nation owns almost all the wealth and with Barry that that same 1% could give a rat's patoot what happens to the other 99%. Sad but true...

Archive
08-31-2007, 10:22 AM
Posted By: <b>Eric Brehm</b><p>I would guess that most people who collect baseball cards don't buy cards because they want to make money on them, but because they want them for their collections. But of course collectors do hope that the cards they buy will at least hold their value over time, in case they want to sell them someday. So in that sense they are 'investing' their money in their collection.<br /><br />There are exceptions to this of course -- for example speculating on rookie cards, even to the extent of buying multiple copies of a particular player's card. That is not collecting. I don't know how many people actually do this however.<br /><br />Baseball card dealers buy cards with the intention of making money on them, but they usually want to turn them over quickly, as opposed to holding them for the long term. So that isn't really investing, it's buying and selling a commodity. (Some people do this in the stock market too.) I guess a collector who sees a good deal on a card and snatches it up because they know they can immediately 'flip' it to someone else for a profit would fit into the same category.

Archive
08-31-2007, 10:25 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I recently read that Bill Gates is no longer the wealthiest person in the world, and that the title now belongs to some robber baron in Mexico. Isn't it strange that the richest person in the world is from one of its poorest countries, where most of the people barely have enough to eat and live on?<br /><br />There's something wrong with that story.

Archive
08-31-2007, 10:54 AM
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>I have 95% of my money in real estate, stocks etc. There's less than 5% in baseball cards. However, I tend to worry about the money I put into my cards a lot more than the other 95%.<br /><br />The reason is quite simple. Baseball cards is a nontraditional investment vehicle. If you lose money in stocks you can explain it away by saying, "honey, there were all these accounting scandals and the market took a dive..."<br />There will be some sympathy and you simply try again.<br /><br />Now if you lose significant money on baseball cards you are basically on your own. Not only will your wife not understand, but it is doubtful that any of your friends or relatives will either. <br /><br />So that's why I end up worrying a lot more about the 5% I have in baseball cards. My goal is to keep decreasing the percentage in baseball cards until I no longer worry about it.<br /><br />Peter C.

Archive
08-31-2007, 11:04 AM
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>to view the world through. I think I'll carry that all the rest of my days.<br /><br />Thank you.<br /><br />Daniel

Archive
08-31-2007, 11:16 AM
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>I read John Rawls a long time ago, wonderful sentiments.<br /><br />Unfortunately, our society is focused on short term results and that makes it difficult for our law makers to act impartially.<br /><br />Peter C.

Archive
08-31-2007, 11:30 AM
Posted By: <b>David Davis</b><p>By the way, the elitists continue to steal from the masses. Howard Zinn, author of A People's History of the United States, is the person that coined the phrase about 1/3 of the wealth belonging to 1% of the people.<br /><br />He also said, 'Remember this: Even if you win the rat race, you're still a rat.” that quote makes me feel good. Maybe I'll decide to sell my Temple Cup broadside now.<br />

Archive
08-31-2007, 11:58 AM
Posted By: <b>Dave Haas</b><p>I'm sure if the IRS could figure out how to determine the cost basis and the final sales price of our cards when we sell them, they sure would want us to pay the 28% long term capital gains tax on collectibles. To the IRS the cards are definitely assets and not the cheap 15% tax ones either. Pretty soon the auctions will start sending out 1099's at the end of the year for items we auction, or do they already?

Archive
08-31-2007, 12:03 PM
Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>So all the Rawls fans would be willing to let the govt. redistribute their money/cards/real estate in order to help the poor and disadvantaged? I'll believe it when I see Jim's E93 Matty in my mailbox!<img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-31-2007, 12:07 PM
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Paul,<br /><br />Unfortunately, if a redistribution occurred we would likely end up with '88 Donruss commons. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Peter C.

Archive
08-31-2007, 12:20 PM
Posted By: <b>nbrazil</b><p>"I recently read that Bill Gates is no longer the wealthiest person in the world, and that the title now belongs to some robber baron in Mexico. Isn't it strange that the richest person in the world is from one of its poorest countries, where most of the people barely have enough to eat and live on?"<br /><br />Carlos Slim. Tycoon in the telecommunications industry. <br /><br />He leap frogged Gates and Buffett after both gave up huge donations to foundations.

Archive
08-31-2007, 12:29 PM
Posted By: <b>sagard</b><p>"He leap frogged Gates and Buffett after both gave up huge donations to foundations."<br /><br />Are these foundations actually advanced tax shelters that do good? I can't see either of those two actually giving up control over the wealth they donated.

Archive
08-31-2007, 12:34 PM
Posted By: <b>boxingcardman</b><p>If that involves card sales, so be it.<br /><br />Again, without veering too far off into politics or economics, I think a very good point was touched on but not expanded above, namely, that one of the reasons why certain investments (like cards) are marginalized is the reluctance of the conventional investment community to look at them. Stocks, bonds, real estate, etc., have been "canonized" as quality investments, nevermind the collapses and volatility that pops up to bite the investors in the behind every few years, by an industry looking to earn from them. The investment advice industy is not comfortable with collectibles as investments because (1) they don't understand them, and (2) there are no commissions or other money to be earned in advising a client to buy them. We live in an era where packaging an idea is often more important than the idea and where institutional hostility to new ideas is part of the background noise. Marshall McLuhan said "in big industry new ideas are invited to rear their heads so they can be clobbered at once" [see marshallmcluhan.com] and he has never been more right than with financial advisors. Conventional investment professionals don't want to be the first one to champion a new investment, so they don't take maverick positions and they certainly don't advise their clients to invest unconventionally. And it isn't like the investment industry doesn't advise people to buy crap, it just advises them to buy crap that fits into a specific classification it understands. I lost all my investment in Enron, but I can fall back on a whaddayagonnado, I invested it excuse. But if my same investment in T206 went into a freefall, I'd be ridiculed, even though I'd still have the cards to enjoy and possibly sell later on. I can show a financial planner 30 years of dramatic market price increases in cards but they will still advise me that I am wasting my money and I should buy stocks instead. <br /><br />Finally, look at who is buying this stuff. We have a lot of lawyers, investment pros, CEOs, etc. I do not believe that all of the educated, astute people who we know are 6 and 7 figures into cards are consciously pissing away their money; many are tighter than a bullfrog's butt and none of them are going to fritter away that kind of money on something they don't believe will pay off over the long term.

Archive
08-31-2007, 01:10 PM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>Thank you Mr. boxingcardman. that is exactly the kind of thought I was looking for here...<br />change is not embraced in the investment advice community until people are damn well sure they can't be sued for giving the advice, which means you need valuable data to back it up. That is where the aging of pricing databases such as VCP will proive to be invaluable over time...because if you chart it, and prove it happened...you can sell it!<br /><br />very interesting thought<br />thanks

Archive
08-31-2007, 01:14 PM
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Adam,<br /><br />I basically agree with you. However, you need to decide what your investment goals are. If you want to remain well-off and unbattered by your wife you go for conservative investments with a long track record. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />If you are younger and unmarried you can take more chances. If you are in the process of building a nest egg then you can allocate a larger percentage to nontraditional investments with short track records.<br /><br />Peter C.

Archive
08-31-2007, 01:35 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve f</b><p>Investment, and please leave it at that. My wife occasionally looks at this board!

Archive
08-31-2007, 01:41 PM
Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br /> Are you guys really that afraid of your wives???? <br /><br /><br /><br /> I hope not. Be well Brian

Archive
08-31-2007, 01:43 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>If you believe in the future value of baseball cards and want to invest in them, do it yourself. Learn what cards will always be desirable and buy them. Build a nice collection and it will likely take care of itself.<br /><br />But don't expect any investment advisor to do it for you.

Archive
08-31-2007, 01:57 PM
Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>cards (especially high-grade & rarities), are without a doubt, a great investment...i am a collector at heart, <br />and am by no means a "flipper", but i have certainly sold my share of cards when i have an opportunity to sell something at a huge profit (which i have done many times), i do it without a second thought.<br />

Archive
08-31-2007, 01:59 PM
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Brian,<br /><br />Your right I shouldn't be that afraid of my wife. But she is pretty tough.<br /><br />When you get older, there are simply more responsibilities, so you tend to get more conservative in your investments.<br /><br />Peter C.

Archive
08-31-2007, 02:26 PM
Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br /> Hi Peter C,<br /> I'm probably as conservative as they come, but I've also been collecting vintage for 31 of my 39 years, so I feel fairly confident in my investments.<br /> As far as wives go, I wouldn't trade mine for anything, but she doesn't handle the finances, she handles the kids and the house. Like most couples we discuss matters before making important decisions, but when consensus isn't possible, someone has to be in charge. And in my family that person is me..... Be well Brian

Archive
08-31-2007, 02:39 PM
Posted By: <b>Jimmy</b><p>My wife was concerned about me spending money when we first got married, but then I had the idea of buying and selling to help pay the bills and my hobby. It may have taken her five years to understand, but the last few years she has been very supportive and helps me sometimes go through boxes I get from dealers, helps me take pictures and goes to the post office for me. <br /><br />Jimmy

Archive
08-31-2007, 02:47 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Paul,<br /><br />"So all the Rawls fans would be willing to let the govt. redistribute their money/cards/real estate in order to help the poor and disadvantaged? I'll believe it when I see Jim's E93 Matty in my mailbox!"<br /><br />I would not create a society in which people had to redistribute their baseball card collections. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> And who said anything about government redistribution of wealth in general? I was just talking about a thought experiment on the meaning of justice. If you are inclined to think that implies a redistribution of wealth, more power to you. Just leave my E93 Matty out of it. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />JimB

Archive
08-31-2007, 02:50 PM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>"If you are inclined to think that implies a redistribution of wealth, more power to you. Just leave my E93 Matty out of it."<br /><br />Ah HA!!! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />indeed, justice is very different from equality!

Archive
08-31-2007, 02:56 PM
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>I am inclined to think that wealth should be in the hands of people that know how to handle the money. I have no problems with Bill Gates and Warren Buffett handling money because they know what to do with it.<br /><br />Baseball cards should be in the hands of those that appreciate them.<br /><br />Peter C.

Archive
08-31-2007, 03:56 PM
Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>JimB, <br /><br />I prefer Nozick anyway(surprise!)..."If the state did not exist would it be necessary to create it?"...or something like that. Interesting that neither Rawls nor Nozick mentions high grade caramel cards.

Archive
08-31-2007, 04:12 PM
Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>If I were rich and didn't give a damn about baseball cards, the players and the history of the game, I would buy every rare and high grade card out there for the next year. That would drive the prices up and take quality cards out of the market. <br /><br />Then, when the recession is in full bloom (and people are looking to places OTHER than stocks, bonds and real estate to park their money), I would dump the cards on the market with various auction houses and put that money INTO stocks, bonds and real estate.<br /><br />The old story of Buy low, Sell high and get into investments others are down on.<br /><br />David

Archive
08-31-2007, 04:28 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>"Interesting that neither Rawls nor Nozick mentions high grade caramel cards."<br /><br />Clearly, it is a glaring omission on the part of virtually all socio-political philosophers. I may have to rectify that. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br />JimB<br />

Archive
08-31-2007, 05:20 PM
Posted By: <b>Dave Haas</b><p>Boxingcardman,<br /><br />I was speaking in the plural "our/we" regarding paying capital gains taxes. Of course I personally adhere to all the IRS's tax laws and pay all appropriate taxes.

Archive
08-31-2007, 05:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>This has been a great thread as it really provides insight into our posters. Jim, as always, I appreicate everything you write (and appreciate that damn E93 Matty more); Brian, your words made me nearly laugh out loud and were also greatly appreciated. <br /><br />All that I can add to this is that I believe that once someone becomes a parent the desire to accumulate great wealth for the purpose of accumulating great wealth falls by the wayside; instead, we'd all like to leave our children a world that is a better place than how we found it.

Archive
08-31-2007, 06:04 PM
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Oh it is an investment allright. But if you are looking to collateralize a loan, your better off with a 7 year old pick up truck; a bank will lend you money on that. But that's ok. Just because those Simon Legree types think that pork bellies sound better than vintage cards, doesn't mean that it is true.<br /><br />In my humble estimation, what you need to do is to maintain your financial level of involvement with this hobby below the "important" stage. This stage, I identify as: when the baseball card prices are spiraling downward, and you have lost your job just at the point that you are facing catastriophic medical bills, while putting your kids through college; you can still slowly add to your collection as prices continue downward, and you have sufficient resources to "buy them all" when baseball cards bottom out.

Archive
08-31-2007, 06:04 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>This thread has been one of the most philosophically stimulating ones we have ever had, but as I interpret it, it all comes down to Jim B.'s E93 Mathewson. Nothing else seems to matter. Simply profound!

Archive
08-31-2007, 06:11 PM
Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>Jeff L,<br /><br />Nice thought but I don't believe that is true these days. The parents you are thinking about are the ones from the World War 11 generation and earlier. Those folks worked hard and sacrificed for the good of the country and their children's future. I don't see that type of sacrifice in a lot of today's parents. <br /><br />Look at the people who caused the Enron collapse. They were wealthy (compared to a "normal" person) and I imagine they had children, yet they continued to do illegal activities until they were caught. Enron collapsed and when it did thousands of people were harmed.<br /><br />On an every day, "normal" person level, people drive SUV's when they could just as easily drive smaller, less expensive autos that get better gas mileage. The difference in price between the SUV and smaller car could be used to pay down debt, add to a retirement account or start a college fund. Then there is also the difference in auto insurance and money saved in annual gasoline consumption not to mention the environmental impact aspect.<br /><br />Another example would be Starbucks coffee. Why pay $4 or $5 dollars for a cup when regular coffee is much cheaper?? I am sure the difference in cost could be used by most people to shore up their financial status but it isn't. This is especially true if people pay for their Starbucks with credit cards. (I don't drink coffee and so don't see the big deal with Starbucks. I also don't know if Starbucks even accepts credit cards but I imagine with prices as high as they are that Starbucks would).<br /><br />Just think, replacing a $4 dollar cup of Starbucks coffee once a week with a cup of $2 dollar "regular" coffee. If you did that one simple act for 15 years and took that $2 dollar difference and invested it in a mutual fund, by the time your child was 18, you would have enough to pay for a year of college at a state university and the "sacrifice" wouldn't be that great.<br /><br />David <br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2007, 06:31 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I brew my own Columbian/French Roast coffee every morning and boycott Starbuck's. They are just another symbol of what is wrong with America.

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:00 PM
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>It takes out the stresses and less enjoyable moments of life and makes me feel good. How many other ways do I get to pamper myself and feel special for $4 ? With all the times I have to say no to myself and my family, be financially restrained to the point of disappointment, I believe maintaining a little inner happiness and zen is worth every buck.<br />Downright cheap in fact.<br /><br /><br />Daniel

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:03 PM
Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>I think what Jeff means is that he is now planning to donate his Cobb collection to Peter C...I could be wrong though.

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:13 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Daniel- if you had a mug of my fresh brewed coffee, you would swear off of Starbuck's.<br /><br />Okay, I don't add all that vanilla latte stuff, but I make one mean cup of Joe.

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:28 PM
Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>If I could come over to your joint daily (which I'm sure is bright and airy <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>) and lean back on a kitchen chair while you brewed your meanest joe, chuckle a little about the daily do's and make the rest of the world fade from view - I'd never need Starbucks again <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14>.<br />However, I live in Lawrence Kansas with few real friends outside my wife (left them in Australia), the stress of a growing family.... and putting the pot on for myself just doesn't achieve that kind of reverie.<br /><br />And I'm also partial to the odd green tea frappacino. Do you make those too??<br /><br /><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>.<br /><br /><br />Daniel

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:43 PM
Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>from Australia to Kansas?!<br />You must miss being near water?...<br />

Archive
08-31-2007, 07:44 PM
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>After years of fooling around with coffee, my wife and I have settled on Papanicholas coffee. Their 5 star restaurant coffee. Whole bean. They don't wash the oil off of the beans, I think, and that is one of the ways they sell such great coffee. If you're always brand loyal and love Starbucks, don't try Papanicholas. You'll feel bad when you leave the green star... <br /><br /><a href="http://www.papanicholas.com/" target="_new" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://www.papanicholas.com/</a" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.papanicholas.com/</a</a>>

Archive
08-31-2007, 08:07 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>When I think of what I paid for it and the offers I have received on it, it seems like it was a good investment. However, I will wait a while before cashing in. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br />JimB<br />Edited to add: I thought I overpaid at the time, but knew I'd never get another chance.<br /><br /><img src="http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/7061/e93mattypu6.jpg">

Archive
08-31-2007, 08:11 PM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Don't make a green frappachino but do like a good cup of green tea.

Archive
08-31-2007, 08:59 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Jim, that card is like pornography to me. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive
08-31-2007, 09:00 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Jeff,<br />Thanks, but I hope your keyboard isn't sticky now. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br />JimB

Archive
08-31-2007, 09:57 PM
Posted By: <b>DD</b><p>That may very well be the sweetest card on the planet.

Archive
08-31-2007, 10:43 PM
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>I'm partial to Seattle's Best which is in most Border's bookstores in the Bay Area.<br /><br />JimB, great looking Matty. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Peter C.

Archive
09-01-2007, 09:47 AM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Thanks for all the kind words about my card.<br />JimB

Archive
09-01-2007, 09:57 AM
Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>its one of the ugliest cards I have ever seen.<br /><br />I don't know how you can stand having it as part of your collection.<br /><br /><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br /><br />edit: Jim - did you get email about that book I wanted to send your way?

Archive
09-01-2007, 11:00 AM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Hi Joe,<br />I did get your e-mail and was very appreciative. I sent a reply back within an hour or so of receiving it. Did you not get it?<br />JimB

Archive
09-01-2007, 11:02 AM
Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>I didn't get the reply.<br /><br />please resend to and cc:<br /><br />bjemarketing@yahoo.com <br />joe@internetville.com <br /><br />with both addresses, I am bound to get it.<br /><br />Regards,<br />Joe<br />

Archive
09-01-2007, 10:58 PM
Posted By: <b>Brian Lindholme</b><p>So, I don't know if this means anything philosophical or will have any relevance to my portfolio, but the first time I meant the kind JimB was in a Starbucks in Portland. We had some relaxing warm drink (...okay it was coffee) and talked baseball cards, and played some show+tell with cards.<br />Had we thought to bring up the writings of Rawls, or the wealth of Carlos Slim Helu it would have been just the perfect summation of this rather interesting thread.<br /><br />(Hey I also work in the telecommunications industry, where's my E93 Matty?)<br /><br />Actually that was a great day... Gotta do that again, Jim!<br /><br />Brian L<br />familytoad<br />

Archive
09-01-2007, 11:08 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>That was a lot of fun Brian. We should definately do it again.<br />JimB

Archive
09-02-2007, 08:37 AM
Posted By: <b>Fred C</b><p>Cardboard investments... wow, let's all go out there and start indiscriminantly dropping all of our expendable income on cardboard... oh yeah, we've already done that...<br /><br />It would be interesting to see what the "cardboard investment" gurus are touting as "investments". I'd have to guess that they've already selected "hi grade" material as a potential investment. I wonder what else they think is going to be "the stuff". <br /><br />I think to a lot of us these cards really don't represent an investment, they're more of an escape from the daily grind.

Archive
09-02-2007, 08:47 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Of course Bruce is correct here.<br /><br />Collectibles are a valid investment and certainly can be considered part of anyone's portfolio. I think anywhere between 10-20% of a portfolio can be put in collectibles--art, coins, sport cards etc. I wish the rest of my portfolio(real estate, stocks etc.) would have done as well as my sports cards.<br /><br />Jim

Archive
09-02-2007, 10:03 AM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Fred, why can't cards be both?<br /><br />I buy only cards I like and I pass on cards that could be thought of as giving me the possibility of a greater return on investment over time. So, if I'm an investor I'm a lousy one at that when it comes to cards. But in the end the money I'm putting into cards will come back to me and possibly bring large returns -- so why can't I at last have an investment vehicle that gives me pleasure, much like real estate? These are not mutually exclusive concepts as any time you drop large numbers into a collectible it becomes part of your net worth, whether you perceive it to be that way or not.

Archive
09-02-2007, 10:15 AM
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I agree that cards are both.<br /><br />They're a hobby and a form of relaxation, and along the way they generally increase in value.<br /><br />I would think even the person who buys baseball cards purely for investment at least derives some pleasure from them. They certainly have more aesthetic appeal than pork belly futures.

Archive
09-02-2007, 11:01 AM
Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Again, it goes back to what your investment goal is, it it's important to derive pleasure from your investments then baseball cards seems like a worthy investment.<br /><br />However, my goal is simpler. I don't want to get into another argument with my wife about the amount of space my cards take up at home. With a 3 car garage, there's only room for two cars, she thinks I'm way too involved in the hobby. According to her if I spent as much time working as I do on the hobby we would be living in Beverly Hills by now.<br /><br />Peter C.

Archive
09-02-2007, 11:31 AM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Peter,<br />Beverly Hills is overrated. However, baseball cards are still a relative bargain. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br />JimB

Archive
09-02-2007, 11:33 AM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Anyone who has invested a lot in graded baseball cards in the last decade has been a genius. Doesn't mean they will continue to go up--maybe they won't--but no question it is a viable asset class that has the dual benefit of being fun.<br /><br />CD's, muni bonds, ugh!<br /><br />If you don't have an oil well...get one!....and buy some high end vintage cards too.

Archive
09-02-2007, 01:15 PM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Jim, I hate to hijack this thread but here's a thought that must have crossed your mind: if the price of a barrel of oil went back to $50 overnight --Iran goes bankrupt in how many months?

Archive
09-02-2007, 01:28 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Jeff,<br /><br />Don't know the answer--but I think oil will stay high--at least another 3-4 years. Amazing given $70-plus bbl. global oil production can barely keep up with small demand growth.<br /><br />Jim

Archive
09-02-2007, 06:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Fred C</b><p>Jeff, <br /><br />I never said that cards weren't investments. I just don't view them as that. Maybe that's foolish. To be an investment I'd have spend money (or capital) in an enterprise with the expectation of profit. That's not what I'm doing. I collect the cards because it's something I've done for a long time because I enjoy it. When I started out (and even now) it never occurred to me to make a profit off this stuff. For example, if I see an OJ of a player I really want, I don't break out the calculator and begin to figure out how much it's going to be worth 10 years down the road. <br /><br />I suppose this stuff is very liquid in many cases and people could sell off a collection and buy a house with the money. Is a house an investment. To most yes, but to idiots like me it's just a place where I live. If I ever sold my house I'd have to find another or become a homeless person with a pretty nasty attitude because I'd have to carry all my frigging cards with me on the streets....<br /><br /><br />

Archive
09-02-2007, 07:54 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>You don’t seem to hear much in the way of barrels of crude oil having their edges spooned out to present better on the open market to investors, not much in the way of forged copies of stock certificates passed off as real. <br /><br />I also to date have never really heard of a person with a large stock or futures portfolio bouncing the idea of having a third party inspection/seal of approval letter process by yet another unknown third party to validate his or her investments worth. <br /><br />I think it would also be safe to say that this same genius better hope that as more issues continue to come to light. That the very set of standards in which the genius dropped so much cash and currently values his or her portfolio, is never questioned by the very community that the so called genius expects to reap his or her profits from??<br /><br />If that were to in fact happen, I think many so called investors could stand to lose quite a bit just a thought.<br /><br />Before we start to toss around the word GENIUS lets take a step back.<br /><br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/junkforumimages/small/einstein.jpg"> <img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/junkforumimages/sjff_03_img1191.jpg"> <br /><br /><i>edited to add pics for Jeff</i>

Archive
09-02-2007, 09:43 PM
Posted By: <b>Jim Crandell</b><p>Anyone who bought high end vintage graded sports cards 10 years ago could sell them today for multiples of what he paid for them-- today he is a genius. If they drop in half for whatever reason--not so smart. Baseball cards are relatively liquid and each auction confirms the investment appeal. Oil could drop in half too.

Archive
09-02-2007, 10:17 PM
Posted By: <b>Fred C</b><p>Jeff,<br /><br />"so why can't I at last have an investment vehicle that gives me pleasure"<br /><br />It would be nice to have an investment that can give you pleasure. I would love to have been one of the three people that paid $10K for John Henry (the race horse). That must have been an investment that brought a lot of pleasure to the purchasers of that horse.

Archive
09-02-2007, 10:49 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>I have a feeling that most anyone who bought high end cards 10yrs ago wasn’t thinking purely of ROI, but more collecting cards and enjoying a hobby. Are they worth more today, sure but the same could be said of most anything from 10yrs ago. That doesn’t make anyone a genius IMO.<br /><br />For arguments sake if this so called person was looking at a these purchases from the sole standpoint of ROI, there were many other things 10yrs ago which would have made this so called genius many times more wealthy than that of baseball cards.<br />

Archive
09-02-2007, 11:11 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>Whether or not baseball cards is an "asset class" is merely a rhetorical game.<br /><br />Which has higher a financial return for the owner: $1 million return on 'investment' cards or $1 million return 'collectible' cards? The answer, of course, is the returns are identical. Only the nicknames for the cards are different. If you had instead labeled one of the two groups 'purple monkeys from Mars' cards, the financial returns would again be the identical. <br /><br />As most baseball card 'collectors' hope that their cards appreciate in financial value and hope that the cards don't sell for 1/8th of the purchase price ten years down the road and try to buy and sell their cards at good prices, the difference between the self-professed investor and self-professed collector often is what they call themselves.

Archive
09-02-2007, 11:33 PM
Posted By: <b>Fred C</b><p>The funny part is that there were lots of people speculating on rookie cards about 20 years ago. I wonder how much an 89 Upper Deck Griffey sells for today? I can remember people paying well over a hundred bucks for that card. Me, nope, I never really got caught up into it that much. I remember buying a pile of a hundred Dickerson (football) rookies for .39 each and a pile of a hundred Marino rookies for .49 each. I pretty much sold all the Marino's many years ago when people were paying a lot for that stuff. I was never into paying $100 for a rookie card that was only a few years old... now if you look at people that "invested" in those cards I'm sure you can find a lot of people shaking their heads (and kicking themselves in the butt) because of their "investments"... sure, some people made good money on that stuff but I don't see that happening again any time soon. Hold that thought... there are some people that still fuel a hyped card and pay tons for it... (Alex Gordon - Topps comes to mind...).

Archive
09-03-2007, 12:35 AM
Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>Jeff- "...why can't I at last have an investment vehicle that gives me pleasure..."<br /><br /><br />Taken out of context, this statement makes you sound like a pimp with a stable of "ladies". &lt;LOL&gt;

Archive
09-03-2007, 08:08 AM
Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Jim, that's true -- the pimp does need to sample the merchandise...

Archive
09-03-2007, 08:53 AM
Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>Fred,<br /><br />Im a collector at heart, but IMO cards can obviously be an investment vehicle. I see nothing inconsistent with them being both a collectable and an investment. As for your comment about rookie cards, I think it proves the point that cards are viewed as an investment by many - doesnt mean its always a good investment. Of course, stocks and bonds arent always a good investment either - just ask anyone who purchased Sun, Cisco, Microsoft, Lucent, etc. right before the tech bubble burst.

Archive
09-03-2007, 08:57 AM
Posted By: <b>Ed Ivey</b><p>wonder what jim cramer would say about the performance of the e93 matty.

Archive
09-03-2007, 10:19 AM
Posted By: <b>boxingcardman</b><p>Comparing rookie cards from the 1990s to vintage cards is like comparing penny stocks to the DJ components. They may have the same general classification but they are about as different as can be. Every year since the early 1990s we see articles on how crappy the (new) card market is; yet vintage has gone through the roof. <br /><br />I'd trace the "investment" mentality back a lot further than 10 years ago (1997). Probably back to when Rosen and his crowd started self-promoting.

Archive
09-03-2007, 02:13 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>A difference between collecting and investing is no one ever collected 2,000 Todd Van Poppel rookie cards, but a whole lot of people invested in 2,000 Todd Van Poppel rookie cards.<br /><br />In other words, collecting often is a better investment than investing. Especially when your collecting involves looking for quality and beauty and rarity, rather than for Todd Van Poppel by the pound.

Archive
09-03-2007, 07:05 PM
Posted By: <b>Fred C</b><p>I would never compare vintage collecting to 80s/90s rookies hoarding... yikes!!! Although I sure wish I hoarded vintage back in the 70s and 80s.