Are Baseball Cards Destined to Slowly Diminish in Value?

[Rich Klein]

But one of the most important aspects of this discussion has already been brought up -- which is the cost of the new products for anyone to enter.

Let's face it, when most of us were young, the average cost to enter by buying packs was at the most 50 cents. Now, the only inexpsnive way to enter is through packs at a place such as target or walmart.

I'll do more later -- but this is a big 1st stop into this whole isue

Rich

[Exhibitman]

I agree, Rich. Another related issue is the extreme difference between worthless base sets and extremely valuable chase cards. The chase has always been a factor busting a pack--I can recall the thrill of finding a Hank Aaron instead of a Hank Allen in a new pack--but it has become so much more extreme over the years. Now, you open a pack of [expensive] cards, pull the chase cards, and throw away the base cards. For example, at the Baltimore National I busted a box of cards, pulled one chase card that I was able to flip to a dealer for the cost of the box, and walked away with a stack of worthless base cards. When we were kids and Topps was the only game in town, everyone collected the set. Even a double of a common card had its use as a trader. IMO the downfall of the modern card market was the creation of the factory set and the rise of the extreme insert card. Set buyers need not work a set and pack busters received items with no use or value that they toss aside [I think we've all seen pack busters at open tables at shows leave the base cards with the empty box and wrappers and walk away; I know I have seen that].

[abothebear]

I agree about the factory sets. There is no point or economic advantage to buying packs now except for the chase cards. It is pretty much like buying a scratchers ticket, buying the chance and what is left is garbage. I was thinking the other day how easy it would be for Topps to not produce and sell the factory set. I am no business man, but I bet there would be a long term gain that would cover whatever short-term loss they'd have from not selling sets.

The only way I pick up cards for my son now is to buy "cast-off" boxes of commons. Packs are too expensive, and he's too young to care about insert cards anyway. And I can sometimes get a lot of jersey cards from ebay and make him a grab bag with an insert anyway.

We have collected rare high-grade baseball type cards and significant
memorabilia (excluding autographs,balls and equipment) for more than three decades.

In the past 5 years,75% of our significant transactions ($1500+) have emanated from one of the top twelve baseball and sports auction firms.

On average we bid on 100-150 items per year. From 2007-2009 our winning
percentage hovered between 15% and 25%. Over the past 18 months, it has risen to nearly 40%.

We attribute this to five factors

(1) Five major collectors who have left the hobby or passed away
(2) Highly priced items tend to bring out 2nd, 3rd and 4th examples
quickly and prices drop accordingly
(3) A weak economy
(4) A number of sets and items have gone out of fashion
(5) concerns about integrity in the hobby.

Within our sphere of collecting, we believe that overall prices on many items have dropped by 15-20%. We believe the hobby still has a great future, but as prices rise, it will require sophisticated (and often wealthy) collectors to maintain or increase the price levels of many of the better items.

Over the past two years, the notable exceptions to the price drop have been

T205 PSA 8 or SGC 88
Ramly PSA 7 and PSA 8
E-96- SCG 84/PSA7 and SCG 88 and PSA 8
E-97- SCG-84/PSA 7 and SCG 88 and PSA 8
Wilson Wieners 1954- PSA 8 (NQ)

Would welcome your comments.


Bruce Dorskind
America's Toughest Want List

[barrysloate]

Hi Bruce- good post, and welcome back!

[Rich Klein]

Your dreams were your ticket out

In all seriousness, like I say on many occassions, Bruce is absolutely correct when it comes to high end merchandise. In just about any field; the highest end merchandise is not only going to maintain it's value but will grow exponetially higher than most other items.

For the rest of us mortals, the decision is a bit harder; the odds are real good that not all the value of cards will maintain. The longer we are away from when the cards were produced; the less we care about the Jim Qualls of the world. Thus, we do need a lower Barrier To Entry (BTE) to get collectors back into the game. I'm giong to use the National as an example. I may be a couple of dollars off here but stay with my point.

In 1984, The National was hend at the no longer existing Aspen Hotel in Parsipanny NJ. There was no fee to park and admission was somewhere between $3-5. One also received a free autograph, granted the best player was Bobby Thomson with the admittance if so desired.

Nowadays, the cheapest admission to get in is $18 -- (usually Sunday about noon it does become Free) and there are advanced MVP badges which gets one double the promo sets, some free autographs, etc. I think that cost is about $150 and yes it is worth it on many levels. But just like when our pack price went from 50 cents or so in 1991 for the basic packs to whatever some of the most expenisve packs are today --- and some go past $50 -- then we are shutting out future generations which is problematic.

Yes, even when packs were cheap -- people only wanted the good cards. At the store I used to frequent in the late 80's -- people would buy the 1985 packs and if Gooden, Clemens, Big Mac, E Davis, etc did not come out -- then the rest of the cards would be left on the counter. Same principle Adam brought up about the commons from his box after he sold the "chase" card. But again, the issue is the cost of entry -- whether it is to the National or to an unopened product.

So, unless we can get future generations in at a level they can afford, the hoddy many decrease just because there are less people entering because of the price.

Regards
Rich

[vargha]

Not to cause trouble . . . okay, I'm causing trouble. But did anyone ever figure out who comprises the rest of "we"?

[theseeker]

I was going to ask the very same thing.

Gettin back to the discussion at hand:

The last, large scale hobby participation of kids is the generation now entering their early thirties. They were the first generation to enter the hobby with an eye on investment, due to the excessive greed and shortsightedness of manufacturer's and dealer's. It has forever changed the hobby landscape. A large part of the longterm decline can be traced to how those late 80's/early 90's investments turned out, IMHO. It's still a hobby. My golf clubs are a much worse investment, yet are well worth the cost to me in terms of the pleasure I derive from their use. My card collecting hobby fits into the same basic category-- one of life's pleasant deversions. A balancing act to the serious stuff.

If the opinions of the posters here, on this topic, that fall into that early thirty-something demographic group are correct and the postwar cards have a drop in value due to their lack of interest, in favor of the prewar stuff, I'll happily jump in at the reduced prices. Although I am also not old enough to remember most of the 50's, 60's, and early 70's, I see the Topps series issued era as arguably the best of all time. I'll always feel a closer kinship to this era of early TV and classic radio than I ever could for anything from 1911. Then again, I'm not looking at it as an investment and can strictly allow my passions to rule.

In your early thirties and you have no interest in cards from the 60's and 70's because "you never saw them play?" Yet, there is interest among this age group in cards from the much more distant past? Sounds like investment still is the force leading the younger generation of card collector. It is, at the heart of the matter, resembling the cautionary tulip investment tale.

[itjclarke]

I' ve been reading this thread for a few days and had to chime in. I, like many of the others to post am in my 30's (34). Being this age I feel like I came from one of the last generations, who as small kids enjoyed the gum almost as much as the cards. I still have my old shoebox of circa 1980-1984 Topps cards, which also included 5 mysterious/AMAZING cards from a time prior to my existence, 1971. I doubt many people much younger kept and carried their collections around in shoeboxes.

I enjoyed bringing my box to school everyday, sticking cards to my desk, trading between classes, etc.. Loved my cards so much, I wrote my name on the back of most. Around 1986-1987 this changed for us. At this point we'd all upgraded to binders with plastic pages. People started coming to school with 1987 Topps Mark McGwires in sleeves, which in the Bay Area were selling for $7. It was amazing! There were a few dozen hot cards that were worth the cost of 2, 5, 10 packs. Everything changed. All of a sudden some kids (w/ generous parents) had 3 and 4 year old Mattingly, Strawberry, and Gooden rookies. One kid even had the Rated Rookie Canseco. Our innocent hobby had become something very different... BUT needless to say much more exciting at the time.

I've often wondered about the questions being asked. Will cards' demand fade over time.. specifically once my generation, the last to have collected in the same style kids had from 1914-1970, ages? Younger people may continue to be drawn by baseball's incredible history, or the obvious investment/$$$$ motivations.. But I think there'll generally lack the nostalgia of collecting with that total innocence. For me I like to think it's more that nostalgia and love for history that drives me to spend lots and lots of money now.. I have never sold a card.. Though the investment side minded side of me is always present.

ANYWAY- sorry for the long windedness.. The main point/idea I want to add, is this- I've always wondered about the demographic makeup of the current collecting population. I've come across dozens of threads surveying back variations/errors/font colors, most of which yield interesting data. I'm curious if similar data on collectors' info (age, collecting interests/goals, willingness to spend) has, or can be gathered. Most who've posted seem to think the age of collectors is a general indication of the health, and future of the hobby (more younger=better). Can we gather this data? Maybe just starting with info based on what's listed in Net54 user profiles.. Then possibly get more specific and chart.. % of different age ranges, what different ages collect or even spend in a year, will they continue, etc?? It seems like a big task, but any real data from a poll/survey could be very interesting.

[Exhibitman]

Good points again, Rich, on the cost to buy packs. This I published on my web site after the last National:

Ringside was there at a corporate booth with a box-breaking promotion: break a box of the 2010 product at their table and get an entry in a drawing for signed memorabilia. I broke down one box but didn't win anything in the drawings. As for the product itself, my feelings were mixed. The box I broke had only 40 cards in it. They were very thick (4 normal cards thick each). which is really inconvenient. Most of the cards were retired fighters, which I found disappointing. Of the 40 cards I pulled (no dupes) only two--Floyd Mayweather and Miguel Cotto--were of active fighters. As for inserts, it is just gambling, plain and simple. The final pack I opened had a "1 of 1" card of Vito Antuofermo. Not even signed. I could have cared less but the guys working the table acted like I'd pulled out a golden ticket to the Wonka factory. A dealer sitting next to me breaking down boxes of Sport Kings product invited me over to his table and bought the card for more than I paid for the entire box! I will confess that I am baffled by the insert mania of the modern card market. I totally "get" autographed cards' appeal. I even see (though do not share enthusiasm for) the appeal of fighter-worn swatch cards. But the 1 of 1 and parallel set stuff is alien to me. I just do not understand the appeal of manufactured rarity. Why is a card that was intentionally made 1 of 1 and that isn't even signed and doesn't contain any fight-worn equipment swatches worth money to anyone? It seems so contrived. As for the base product, my feeling is that if collectors are going to basically throw away the base cards, the set is a failure. And what's with all the old dudes? I'd much, much rather see a set of base cards devoted to active fighters with autographs (like the 2008 Topps Co-Signers) or fight-worn materials on each "significant" card. We also need cards at base price far below the price point of the Ringside cards. At $85 a box retail for the TKO--40 cards total spread through 10 packs--and $175 for the KO--16 cards total but guaranteed at least 2 autographs and 1 memorabilia card--the issue is way too pricey to get a casual collector interested. I had to think long and hard over buying a TKO box and even then I'd not have done it but for the drawing promotion. My trepidation was financial--even the TKO boxes, which guarantee nothing by way of insert cards, cost over $2 per card.

[Big Ben]

Interesting thread. Agree with a lot of points that have been posted especially the following in no particular order.

High entry cost for kids to get started in the hobby
Demographics
Cyclical nature of the hobby
Economy
Different sports competing for the interest of today's youth. (soccer)


Personally I left the hobby in the early 1990's as it wasn't fun anymore and I refused to pay over $1.00 per pack for new cards. lol

I returned to the hobby in 2008 as cards I have always been interested in, (pre-world war II) seemed to be decent values when found on the internet.

IMHO, some things that will help the hobby..

Internet- ie message boards
Integrity or some form of policing in the hobby--in some ways I think that card grading helps the hobby. (I realize there are some cons to grading as well)
A marquee player who can capture the nation's attention ie Jordan in the NBA
Oddly enough a return of wealthy investors purchasing high profile cards in which the purchase makes headlines.

Just my two cents on a rainy day in my area.

[joeadcock]

Ian

There were 2 particular threads in 2010 dealing with the demographics of the net54 population such as age, career, education, etc.

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by joeadcock

Ian

There were 2 particular threads in 2010 dealing with the demographics of the net54 population such as age, career, education, etc.

Thanks Joe.. I'll take a look for them. I joined a couple months ago, and am slowly, but steadily reading through some of the older threads. I'll venture to guess a large drop off in the 18-29 group for vintage/pre war.

[Rich Klein]

18-29 is that in many cases; these are the people who are just getting into the job world; marrying -- having kids, etc. They have not yet built up extra money for vintage cards and frankly in that age group -- they are usually more into modern cards.

Leon came to a little show my local card show owner had in his store and when I commented about how the audience at that show looked younger than at the more traditional card shows, he pointed out that the target audience was a bit different.

Yes for many reasons there are less 18-29 years old here, but that is not always a function of interest in cards; rather a function of interest in what type of cards

Rich

[ls7plus]

As long as there is baseball, the nature of the game is such that there will always be interest in its history--that history is what we hold in our hands every time we buy a Cobb, Ruth, DiMaggio, Matty, Jackson, etc. It is, as several previous posters have pointed out, a story of America, and early Americana that is both rare and significant has and will continue to gain and retain substantial value. Just a few weeks ago, I watched an episode of "Pawn Stars," where the pawn shop owner turned TV star made an offer of $125,000 for a rare John Wilkes Booth wanted poster WHICH ITS' OWNER, A COLLECTOR/DEALER OF SIGNIFICANT ITEMS OF THE ERA, TURNED DOWN!

Baseball cards, as collectibles, are not now and have not been in the past, separate and distinct from other collecting areas with regard to the forces driving collectible markets. Instead, they are merely different examples of the very same phenomenon. There have always been economic upturns and downturns, accompanied by many a prediction that "the sky is falling!" I have at least attempted to study the coin market dilligently for the last 20 years or so, because it became obvious to me that coins had already gone through many of the things our hobby later experienced (Topps and company didn't start the contrived scarcity phenomen with their insert cards, for example; Philadelphia mint officials did that with their creation of scarce to downright rare pattern coins in the 1850's, which were intended from the outset to generate a personal profit by being sold to collectors), and the same, basic collector mind-set prevailed in that forum. Coin collectors have believed that values had peaked since at least the 1930's! Yet the following examples of truly rare and significant coins well illustrate what has happened in the coin market over the last half-century or so (values taken from well-known coin dealer Jeff Garrett's book, "100 Greatest U.S. Coins," published by Whittman):

1796 "No Stars" quarter eagle ($2.50 gold piece)--1960: $2500;
1980: $20,000; 2003: $75,000; 2005: $85,000;
2008: $150,000 Note that this is a coin which is believed to have a
surviving mintage of 100-200 examples. Values given are for one in
about uncirculated condition [think ex-mint to near-mint for cards]

1802 half dime--this one is a coin where less than 50 examples are
believed to have survived (a number, which in coins, is deemed to
warrant being categorized as extremely rare)--1960: $2000;
1980: $25,000; 2003: $75,000; 2005: $100,000;
2008: $150,000 Values given are for an example in extremely fine
(think EX+ in cards).

It might be interesting to note that these two examples were picked entirely at random from the book, simply by opening it to the pages where they were discussed without forethought. It is also noteworthy that the advancing average age of collectors, and a seeming inability to attract younger participants to collecting, has been a source of major concern in that field for at least 20 years!

Coins also went through the equivalent of our late '80's, early '90's era, where cards like the '89 Upper Deck Griffey Jr., '90 Leaf Frank Thomas, etc., which were actually quite common, soared in book value, based primarily on speculative investing. Only in coins, the speculative but quite common items were the darlings of the late '50's to early '60's, like rolls of 1950D nickels (which went from $100 per roll to as much as $1300, then fell back to the $300 range), or later on, common date and mintmark Morgan silver dollars, graded and slabbed in extremely high mint grade (can anyone say modern PSA 10 cards?).

The point is, of course, that rare and significant items have an inherent ability to withstand changing trends and economic times and conditions--always have, always will. It's simply part of the human psyche that these things are highly desireable and thus valuable.

But what if I'm wrong? Can the bottom fall out of the market? I think the answer to that one lies in the reasons for the downturn, but would suggest that barring an ability on the part of counterfeitors to utilize modern technology to duplicate original vintage cards to the point that their product was truly indistinguishable from the original, what would happen is that there would be a lot of people like me and others who are members of this board that would be delighted to jump back into the market to pick up items like E107 HOF's, 1914 Baltimore News Babe Ruths, 1907 W600 Cobbs and 1910 T210 Jacksons at a mere fraction of their current values! So many, in fact, that there wouldn't be much of a fall in values to be had, for very long. As the bottoming out occurred and was followed by a resurgence as the market picked up steam, new collectors/investors would be drawn in, and it wouldn't be long before rare and significant items were booking at their old values.

As I've posted before, my wife, upon accompanying me to one of the Strongsville shows in the early '90s, thought $5,000 was too much to pay for a 1916 M101-4 Ruth rookie in near-mint/mint condition. Undoubtedly, she believed an old piece of cardboard with ancient ink on it would never be more valuable than it was at that time. The flaw in that line of thinking is that we collectors are not buying an old piece of cardboard with ink configured thereon to present Mr. Ruth's image--what we are buying is part of baseball's storied, glorious past; indeed, as best we can accomplish it, WE ARE BUYING BABE RUTH HIMSELF, just as purchasers of ancient Roman coins are buying a part of that empire, a still-preserved portion of days of glory and world dominance that we cannot help but see as utterly fascinating.

Just my $2.50 worth!

Best regards, and what a great thread!

Larry

[CharleyBrown]

Larry, incredibly well said..

[barrysloate]

Larry- I've always been wary of judging the soundness of any collectibles market by looking at the prices of extreme rarities. Most collectors don't buy 1802 half dimes; they more likely are buying coins, cards, or anything in the $50-250 range. In fact, I'll bet 90% of the transactions are for these moderately priced items. Studying those might give a more accurate picture of the strength or weakness of the market.

[Rich Klein]

Both Larry and Barry are correct

The very hiigh end material is not always indiciative *sic* of the market however, when the high end stuff goes up in price and gets noticed then in many cases the rest of the material goes up as well

2nd --- yes most of the trading is obviously done on a lower end, since we're talking about rarities, they just don't show up that often

And one other issue to go with why we don't have many 18-29 year old here (in addition, usually at that age we don't have the perspective that we gather a biit later)

The other issue is that beginning with the true movement of the hobby to a focus on adults after the BB Strike of 94-85, there ended up being an insane growth on number of products.

That culminated in 2004 when we had approximately 90 products issues or one ever 4 days. About 20 years earlier -- we really had maybe 5-6 major products for a year which also allowed collectors to go backwards in time easier.

That's another story for another day -- but the current monopoly in baseball cards by Topps is not neccessarily a bad thing because it controls the number of products issued. If, let's say Panini was granted a licence again to print BB cards --- then there would also have to be a limit on combined products from the 2 companies.

This is a different story, but we'll go more into this later as well

Rich

[benderbroeth]

i have to jump on the money bandwagon one of the reasons why i do not buy cards in packs today is the huge cost...and remembering when i used to but packs get that great card currently worth $50..i keep it and 4 months later the fad has passed and i am sitting with a piece of junk that no one wants..i still have tons of shaq rookies....this being said i have always loved old collectibles and for my money i would rather own the $450 1953 mantle than the 450 $1 shaq rookies i want to throw away...that is why i collect the older cards, i was burned to much on packs..and now do i rally want to spend $5 a pack??????

[grundle20]

Yes, Larry, very well put. Additionally, after looking through the posts and giving a "thumbs up or thumbs down" vote, you were also in the minority in feeling that the hobby will continue to see an upward trend.

[ls7plus]

Great! That means increased opportunity in the short term! As well-respected coin dealer/proflic author Q. David Bowers once said about the 1936 Cincinnati commemorative half dollars (a not really rare item, with a total mintage of 5,005 sets), after they had taken a cyclical downturn in the early days of their collectability in 1939 from $50.00 per three-coin set (one example from each of the three mints) to $15.00, that was the time to buy them--a nice, hand-picked MS-65 set subsequently did quite nicely, appreciating fairly gradually over the years until it soared to $7,000 in 1987, at the time of a speculative boom. A set currently lists at $2175 raw, unslabbed. And by the way, Barry, the more common but still truly collectable coins also went up, but at a lower rate over the last 20 years, in direct proportion to their surviving mintages and popularity of their series. Sort of like '60's stars in PSA 8--nice and collectible, but a lot of them out there. ECON 101 in action. These types of cards will probably demonstrate the characteristics of their counterparts in coins, and be more cyclical in value, which is allright too. Just be aware of their price history.

The lesson I learned from the coin analogy was to buy rare, and buy significant (HOF'ers, and preferably upper echelon HOF'ers). There are newly emerging cards that fit this bill, and not just those that are currently at the top end of the market--does anyone think that the last Lections Ruth that sold will set the high water mark for this card for all time? If it does, then the one I bought for $6200 some years back from Mastro is in trouble. If they do think that, then how do they explain a 1933 Buttercream Ruth going for $111,000 at one of the REA auctions a few years ago? Broken down into the simplest terms, each of these cards have two things going for them: They're Babe Ruth, and they are extremely rare! IMHO, the 1907 Dietsche Fielding Cobb, barring a discovery of a hoard of them, is still in the process of emerging into a well-respected and significant great rarity, as are several of his other true rookie postcards (love the Wolverine News portrait, but haven't run across one at a time when finances would have permitted its purchase, in light of other recent buys). I see great longterm futures for each of these cards, and others like them. Hell, the 1914 Baltimore News Ruth was just emerging a bit over 20 years ago, when it might have been easy to simply dismiss its ability to draw collectors' dollars out of their bank accounts as a fad--after all, the '33 Goudey's were where the real Ruths were found then. Ditto cards like the '23-'24 Exhibit Ruth for prospective exponential growth, where the toughest part should not presently be buying but finding one (although I might be surprised at the price, should one come on the market)!

Look outside the envelope, think outside the box, and analyze and imagine what can likely be, rather than simply looking at what the market presently is (my philosophy is definitely that the glass is half full, rather than half empty--I've found that I've won quite a few court cases that otherwise would have been lost through abandonment thinking that way). But really, all value concerns aside, sometimes you just have to buy what you like, and those are some of the best buys you'll make in your heart. And if your purchases substantially increase in value and provide significant financial security for very rainey days, all the better! Immensely interesting thread.

Best wishes,

Larry

[bh3443]

(graded cards suck.....raw is the way to go)[/QUOTE]

Great comments here. While were discussing this, I was thinking of the thousands of graded cards that sell for a few dollars each. I see that the lowest PSA price is 5.00 (and shipping) for 100 or more cards valued under $100.00 each. Look on ebay or at a show and you'll see decent graded cards such as 50's-70's commons/hi's, stars selling and sometimes not selling for a few dollars.
Who's taking the huge hit on the grading fees? How long can it go on with people losing money like this?
I like PSA but at this point I feel it's just a nice expensive holder for cards!

[grundle20]

Bill - I think you're right in many instances. Think about WHY PSA allows cards valued under $100 bucks to be graded for five bucks. I mean, the market for the people buying cards under $100 bucks, how much of a margin is there really for a dealer to buy a raw, get it graded, and *pray* that with some stroke of luck that card comes back a 6 or higher. Any card with a value under $100 dollars, at the $5 grade PLUS insurance and shipping they make you pay, I mean, geez, you just ate up at least 7-9% of the card's value when it's under $100 to begin with!

Clearly, the exceptions are getting rare, desired cards graded. Why? Again, the price of grading those cards are not 7-9% of the value. Heck, grading cards like that could be half a percent or 1% of value, or even LESS. Clearly, having an amazingly valuable card graded for the "high rollers" of the hobby is worth it's weight.

That's my two cents - it's a question of grading as a factor of card value. If those mathematics come to 5% of card price or higher, forget it, you need to sell at a margin that's not worth the time, cost and effort.

[campyfan39]

Great thread! I think many of us will pass the love for the history to our kids. I love 50's and 60's cards because my dad did. I am doing everything I can to get my kids into it as well!

[ls7plus]

Chris, I think that is terrific! Hope you have tons of fun together!

Sincerely,

Larry

[teetwoohsix]

My mother has decided that she wants to sell things on ebay as a hobby, she retired recently. She is into Hummel spoons, antique jewlery, glass type art, etc. So I suggested she search around to see what type of things are getting bid on and that may give her an idea of what people seem to be interested in. She is very new to ebay, so as an example, I told her to look at T206 baseball cards.

She called me back later and said " out of every type of item I searched for, NOTHING was being bid on like those old baseball cards you told me to look at"....

[sportscardpete]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

My mother has decided that she wants to sell things on ebay as a hobby, she retired recently. She is into Hummel spoons, antique jewlery, glass type art, etc. So I suggested she search around to see what type of things are getting bid on and that may give her an idea of what people seem to be interested in. She is very new to ebay, so as an example, I told her to look at T206 baseball cards.

She called me back later and said " out of every type of item I searched for, NOTHING was being bid on like those old baseball cards you told me to look at"....

Clayton, great post! My mom is into amber/antiques and her auctions usually end with 1 or 2 bids. Maybe we just don't appreciate how popular our hobby is!

[Leon]

Originally Posted by sportscardpete

Clayton, great post! My mom is into amber/antiques and her auctions usually end with 1 or 2 bids. Maybe we just don't appreciate how popular our hobby is!

agreed.

Popular hobby = addiction = popular hobby = addiction