Doesn't even have to be hackers, remember the major power outage from back in August, 2003 that took out 21 power plants throughout the Northeast US and Canada, affecting over 50 million people? Took them a couple days to finally get everything back to normal. The whole thing started when a tree branch in Walton Hills, Ohio, about 10 minutes from my house, fell on a power line and started a chain reaction.

Technology is great.............until it isn't. The more we use it, the more totally dependent we become on it. Remember the Enron debacle, that would have never been able to happen if computers weren't involved. And hackers and cyber criminals just make everything worse, especially as we are being slowly forced to do virtually everything electronically/digitally anymore.

One of the nice things about cards (or other old time collectibles) is you can still hold, feel, look at, and even smell them, in person if you want. Not the same with NFTs or stuff held in someone's vault, where you can only see pictures of what you have online, without having to make a special trip to go visit them. And if the power goes out or the internet goes down, I still have and can enjoy my cards.

Interestingly, the Keystone was only 2% done when canceled. So you are correct.

As to perceptions about current tone, the facts are what matter:

Federal data shows the Biden administration approved 3,557 permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands in its first year, far outpacing the Trump administration’s first-year total of 2,658.

This isn't political spin by them or me or anyone on this board. These are simply numbers.

Nearly 2,000 of the drilling permits were approved on public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management's New Mexico office, followed by 843 in Wyoming, 285 in Montana and North Dakota, and 191 in Utah. In California, the Biden administration approved 187 permits — more than twice the 71 drilling permits Trump approved in that state in his first year.

And there are currently 9,173 approved oil drilling permits that have been approved but are going unused by the oil industry.

Meaning that the oil companies here at home could be going to town pumping out oil but are not doing so. But more production could lower prices and the profits that the oil companies are currently pocketing precisely because gas prices are high.

Even so, oil production in the U.S. in 2021 (Biden) was on par with 2020 production and exceeded yearly production from 2016-18 (Trump), data shows. Again, no spin and no politics. Numbers.

But why let the facts get in the way of a good story about the current administration killing oil production? Maybe the current administration wants to, but they sure haven't done so, which actually has led to angry press releases from environmental groups. So they've managed to anger both their own constituents and those of their political opponents.

But take heart, at least oil company execs probably are using all their newfound cash to buy expensive baseball cards and contribute to increased card prices, right? This last statement is pure speculation, of course. Maybe they prefer buying comic books and NFTs of cartoon gorillas more than cards!

Here are some pictures of players and cars. They definitely had the cash to fill up:

Attachment 506852Attachment 506853Attachment 506854Attachment 506855Attachment 506857Attachment 506858Attachment 506859Attachment 506860Attachment 506862Attachment 506864Attachment 506866Attachment 506868Attachment 506870Attachment 506871

While that is true, the oil coming into the US and potentially from Venezuela is also heavy crude. Refineries in and around Houston, on the Gulf Coast, are currently built to process that crude. That is why heavy oil from Western Canada was to travel down through Keystone to the Gulf Coast, to be refined and shipped.
As for environmental standards, while I do not have any exact metrics, I would be shocked if oil extracted from Russia (or Saudi, for example) via a well, pumped to a loading station, loaded into tankers, loaded onto a barge, having that barge travel across the Atlantic, unloaded from the barge, transferred to a refinery in the US, and then refined is (in the end) a lower carbon footprint than shipping product directly from Western Canada to the US Gulf Coast via a pipeline.
As for environmental standards in Russia, I have known some pipeline people who have worked in Russia. A pipeline spill over there is almost fixed with duct tape, with product continually spilled onto the ground. The environmental standards are nil.

Thank you. Sometimes we in Western Canada almost feel abandoned.
As for your point, we have the production capabilities to fill the void. We cannot get it all to market (read that to mean the US and Europe) because of the lack of pipeline capacity to both the East and Gulf Coast. Our glorious sock loving man-child Prime Minister is more interested in looking good on the world stage instead of actually solving problems and supporting our own country. Impressing Michael Bloomberg, Jane Fonda, Bill Gates, and others is more important to him than supporting people and an industry that will provide highly paid and skilled job to folks in his own country, while providing energy independence to North America. Finally, the world is starting to see Justin for who he really is, a failed part time drama teacher and snowboard instructor with a nine figure trust fund behind him, and no discernible skills as a leader.

I'm a cardaholic and I approve this message!

First, let me deal with the bold text. Yes, it is meant to be political because I know the left-leaning BS source of information for your post (see screenshot below). Nice copy and paste skills by the way.

Second, yup those are real numbers, but the numbers don't tell the entire story. Do you want to dissect those numbers? How many of those were new permits? How many of them were permit extensions? You do know a drilling permit only lasts 2 years in most states, don't you? You also know that sometimes it is more profitable not to drill, don't you? You also know that sometimes permits are issued on land that has no producible oil and gas, don't you (it's leverage used against competition)? Drilling permits only cost a few hundred dollars and a lot of time they're obtained just as a game for one reason or another.

Last, as I stated earlier in this thread, I've spent the last 15 years in the oil in gas industry. I don't know everything, but I know a lot. Please tell me what industry you work in so I can school you all about it. :rolleyes:

For the last 10 years, and the next 3 months, I've been in the pipeline industry. I remember a few years back, my employer was sending railcar loads of Y-Grade NGLs from East Texas up to Canada to dilute the tar sand oil so they could actually get it viscous enough to move down a pipeline. It is nasty stuff.

A couple of related thoughts. First, a slight peeve of this pipeliner: President Biden did not cancel the Keystone pipeline, which has been in service since 2010. He canceled Keystone XL, which is duplicative of Keystone. KXL was a more direct route and was problematic from the start, since it went through the heart of the Oglala aquifer. Sometime in 2017, I was visiting the Welspun pipe mill in Little Rock and there was acre after acre of whitewashed KX pipe sitting in outside the mill. You could actually see it in satellite photos.

As others have pointed out, canceling KXL has little to do with current prices. Nor does a ban on drilling in federal land, where less than 10% of the US production originates. The Russia situation is contributing, but there is a bigger gorilla in the room. As of yesterday, there was 663 rigs operating in the US. As recently as December 2014, there were over 1900 rigs operating. And, between 2017 and 2019, the count was consistently over 900 to 1000. There is theoretically the ability to increase US production. The question is what exactly is impeding it. My more financially inclined friends tell me that shale production has never produced the promised return. Whether we are seeing increased capital discipline on the part of production companies or less willingness on the part of Wall Street to write blank checks for drilling is above my pay grade. But, it does appear there is some structural issues in the industry unrelated to the changing political winds.

And because every thread needs a card.

Attachment 506913

Yes, a lot of the Venezuelan reserves are also heavy, but not as viscous as Canadian oil sands. And yes, we (the Texas Gulf Coast) do have local refineries designed to process the heavier stuff, but it's also more costly and time consuming. The abrasiveness wears out the equipment faster - pipes, pumps, valves, tanks, separators, etc. - and that equipment has to be replaced more often.

The refining process of heavy oil sands leaves behind a bunch of nasty hazardous coke (and not the stuff you drink). Can we ship that crap back to Canada? Maybe make the pipeline bi-directional and send that stuff back to y'all? :D

Please don't take what I said the wrong way. I'm not in disagreement with you. I actually agree with you. I'm just trying to explain why (in my opinion) we don't get more oil from Canada. If it were up to me, we would.

We need to open up drilling....in America. Plain and simple.

All roads lead to energy.

The spike in prices has sent many drivers rushing to the pump to get ahead of increasing pump prices. Those rushes exacerbate weaknesses in an already stressed supply chain. On top of the truck driver shortage, US crude supply is well-below the 5yr avg, gasoline is low, and diesel is even worse. Now, with Europe in such need, a lot of product is going to be exported to those countries.

Tying into to baseball... there's a fun Moneyball scene edited for the current oil situation:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1501762759209504769

I like reading the perspectives held by long-time hobbyists, who have lived the economic ups & downs and seen the impacts on cards. It's great and appreciated.

I'd lean toward the idea that the middle gets squeezed the most. Inflation, cost of everyday goods/needs, plus a lot of travel expected this year, and people will have to spend more to do so - all siphoning away some of the funds that might have otherwise gone to cards.

I guess it all boils down to what you wish to hold; cash, stocks and bonds, oil futures, gold, AR15's, fine wines, real property, jewelry, art or........baseball cards.

I have a fairly modest personal budget on a monthly basis, which I spend almost entirely on cards. I also try to find loopholes to fit them into other categories but most of those have been closed :o

The cost of gas and other goods is going up quickly but it would have to get super tight here to affect cards (job loss or something along those lines) - I'll simply keep buying what I can get every month with my current budget.

I very much feel this.

I'm 27, only a year older than your daughter. It seems like every time something settles down, or we're getting ready to do something, a world changing event happens.

Right before the pandemic occurred, I was getting my finances in order to finally purchase a home. Housing prices in New York were already high to begin with, but I was looking at a nice little Co-op for a shade over 250K. I would be able to put down enough to have an affordable mortgage, on my modest salary. I budgeted everything, and crunched the numbers and figured "well if things keep going the way they do, I can definitely buy something like this within the year"

Then Covid hits, the Real Estate boom as crushed any thought of that. The one that I was looking at? Just sold for 325K, it's absurd. I'm considering ditching the state all together, and looking for a job elsewhere because at the rate we're going I'm never going to be able to afford a house.

As for the cards? Who knows. I don't think anyone thought a global pandemic would turn cardboard into an extreme asset class, that doubled or tripled the value of certain cards in some cases.

It is indeed hard out there, life sure has speedbumps.

Think about setting yourself up with work and a location to do more of what you like to do.

Just before I got into my career, I went thru a big book called "Places Rated". It went thru all the major/semi-major metro areas of the country and rated them all on many categories - schools, medical care, recreation, weather, home prices, crime, population density, etc.

For me it came down to Seattle, Portland OR, and Boise. I chose Portland - very glad I made decision. I love fishing and Oregon is quite good - trout salmon, steelhead, bass. The Deschutes River is world class and just over Mt. Hood couple hours away. The Oregon coast is also only 2 hours away, very nice.

Anyways, be smart and calculated about your life decisions, will definitely pay good dividends for the rest of your life.

It's a tricky situation. I have older parents, who are likely to leave the state as well. They're very tired of dealing with the cold that comes with the winter months in NY. I've spoken to them about moving somewhere down south, potentially South Carolina or Florida, they seem more interested in the latter, which is fine by me.

The work situation, well I'm a teacher. Fortunately I've been smart with my money, and the paycut wouldn't matter too much, because I'd be able to afford a decent home. It's the benefits that come with the profession in NY that are hard to give up. Great health insurance and a very nice pension plan, a TDA as well.

I could fall back into my old career, as I worked in Finance for a bit before I made the switch to teaching, but to be honest, I absolutely hated that profession. So Who knows?

Of course I copied the data, Vintagetoppsguy.

Do you think I manually counted the permits?

The info comes from the US Department of the Interior and the resulting audits by the Center for Biological Diversity and most importantly by the nonpartisan Politifact fact checking service.

Here are 2 such fact checking links, for instance:

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...9000-unused-o/

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...ear-par-trump/

Poitifact has spent years checking claims and calling out both Democrats and Republicans when they stretch the truth. As per Wikipedia: "PolitiFact has won the Pulitzer Prize and has been both praised and criticized by independent observers, conservatives and liberals alike. Both liberal and conservative bias have been alleged at different points..."

By the way, you definitely are an expert in gas and oil and you do have an agenda, as well, politically. That's OK. These two things don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Neither does having an inquisitive mind, which you also clearly have. And so do I.

You make some good points, as you clearly know your stuff. But why is it that it can be more profitable not to drill in some instances, as you state? And when your country and the world need such production, can these companies step up and do the right thing even if it is less profitable? I honestly don't know the nuances of such answers, but think the question is relevant and deserving of being asked by the public, our leaders and journalists.

And since you so politely asked:

My background is in journalism, research and later marketing communications. I covered media, technology and politics before going to work for agencies and marcom companies representing Fortune 500 brands (no political work of any kind). Precisely because I started out covering politics is why I am a registered Independent -- so that I wasn't a card carrying member of either political team. You can't give people a fair shake and fair analysis if you're allied either with or against them. And I think the Congressional leaders I interviewed appreciated that.

And while I was a journalist I wrote a book on media and politics for MIT Press, with an emphasis on how political candidates and leaders used new media technologies to sway the public and spread their messages, dating back to around 1788 up to and into the 1990s.

My main coverage areas were media and technology for magazines and wire service distribution, but I also covered some Democrats and Republicans and subcommittee meetings on the Hill. I then moved exclusively into PR and communications for clients of all stripes, both in-house and at agencies -- again, all non-political work...!

But more importantly: what did you think of the baseball player transportation images of Type 1 photos and postcards?

How do you think they will be impacted by current price swings?

Lastly, if I ever went to work in gas and oil, I most certainly would need "schooling," just as some others on this board would clearly need some "refining" of their manners if they chose certain lines of work dealing with other people. [emoji6]

I want to clear up one thing first. You stated earlier that "there are currently 9,173 approved oil drilling permits that have been approved but are going unused by the oil industry." That is correct. However, those 9,173 unused permits are on federal land. That's important to note.

I'm trying not to get political, but Biden ran on a campaign platform based partially on green energy and climate change, and even promised to ban drilling on federal land. So why is his administration issuing drilling permits on federal land? I don't know the answer to that. But put yourself in the shoes of the oil companies. Are you really going to invest all that money into new drilling on federal land knowing that the administration could impose a moratorium on it at any minute? Think about that and certainly you can understand the reluctancy to drill? Maybe that’s why those federal land drilling permits go unused, but I’m only speculating. That’s way beyond my pay grade.

Last year, Chevron, Shell, ExxonMobil and BP all had record profit years. Good for them. I hope they continue to do so (I own Chevron and ExxonMobil stock). If one owns a business and they have a record profit year we look at them as a symbol of success. But when the oil companies have record profit years, they're considered greedy and evil. Why? Where is the line drawn between successful and greed/evil? Is it a dollar amount? Is it a profit percentage?

Now to answer your question above. Why would they bring more oil to market? What incentive do they have? If you found 10 T206 Wagners and wanted to sell them, would you release them all on the market at the same time or slowly over a long period of time? Of course you wouldn't flood the market. So why would the oil companies? It also has to do with not reporting the reserves (no drilling - no reports), but I won’t get into all that because I don’t know how to explain it properly. A friend explained it to me and I understood it, but I don’t want to misspeak.

I’ll leave you with this. I’m not the one that brought up drilling in this thread. It was you and others as if somehow more drilling solves the current problem. Oh, really? How’s that? Are there gas shortages in America right now where people are waiting in long lines? Are refineries not operating at near full capacity? So how would drilling solve the problem? I don’t think the current gas prices are the result of a lack of drilling or production issue at all. We only got on that topic because others brought it up.

Thank you for you reply and perspective.

So what you are saying is that the current administration has not actually DONE anything to cause people to blame it for current gas prices.

Production is the same, there are no shortages, just some promises to go greener that actually have not been kept (which is likely why so many environmental groups are actually angry at the current administration). What the stats show and you just stated is that over the last year and two months since the administration has been in office, we have just experienced more of the same, in terms of drilling, production, oil and gas company profits, etc.

So, it seems to me after reading your reply, you are saying exactly what Politifact said after they did their research on this topic that you already knew about. It seems to me and others who have just learned the facts or already knew them, that pointing fingers at the administration is just an easy target with no basis in factual reality.

So am I correct after reading your reply, to assume that what seems to be causing the price of gas at the pump is the FEAR of actual shortages here coupled with the more realistic fear of shortages elsewhere in Europe where they do rely more on oil and gas from Russia?

I also just read this obvious fact: "The coronavirus pandemic prompted a big fall in oil demand and gasoline prices, due to declines in driving and air travel. As the economy has slowly rebounded, growing demand has boosted prices at the pump."

Also, are the numbers in this article correct from The Hill about where our oil and gas actually comes from:

https://thehill.com/policy/internati...lies-come-from

It seems to show that we only get around 1% of the oil that actually makes it to our gas pumps from Russia. And that this amount is easily replaceable and that the percent from Russia was falling in 2021 BEFORE the invasion of Ukraine.

So when you combine this with what you and Politifact both mentioned about domestic production, it seems like we are doing OK.

So wouldn't this suggest that current higher prices should only be temporary?

And that, politics aside, the main culprit behind higher gas prices is actually the administration that moved to invade Ukraine and not the administration that rattled its sword on the campaign trail, making vague promises about going green that have not actually been kept.

And if we actually went greener wouldn't that mean that over the long haul we would be less dependent on any foreign producers and the price of our energy would actually fall over time? This is probably a conversation for another thread [emoji3] .

I thank you Vintagetoppsguy and the Socratic method and, as Exhibitman Adam has quipped in other threads, don't forget to tip your servers on the way out tonight...

Nope, it's still 100% the current administration's fault. Since you lack the understanding why, I'll PM you the answer when I get back later today because I don't want to get an infraction for talking politics. I've actually touched on it twice in this thread, but I'll just come out and say it in my PM..

Future Alternative
 

Synthetic fuel or synfuel is a liquid fuel, or sometimes gaseous fuel, obtained from either syngas, a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen, or a mixture of carbon dioxide and hydrogen. The syngas could be derived from gasification of solid feedstocks such as coal or biomass or by reforming of natural gas. Alternatively a mixture of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and green hydrogen could be used for an almost climate neutral production of synthetic fuels.

Common ways for refining synthetic fuels include the Fischer–Tropsch conversion,[1] methanol to gasoline conversion,[2] or direct coal liquefaction.[3]

As of July 2019, worldwide commercial synthetic fuels production capacity was over 240,000 barrels per day (38,000 m3/d), with numerous new projects in construction or development, such as Carbon Engineering. (Fuel for thought)

I wondered about the exact impact of 2008 since I wasn't in the vintage game then.

I collected cards as a kid in the Junk Wax era of the 1980s and early 1990s, then came into vintage cards in 2012 in my mid-30s. I did a lot of collecting from 2012-2015 but then tailed off after my kids were born, but an circling back now.

In 2012 (if I recall correctly) people saying prices were just starting to get back to where they were in 2008 for low and mid-range cards in particular. By the time I stopped collecting in 2015 I noticed that many cards that I'd bought in 2012-2013 were selling for 20-25% higher than what I'd paid for them. It was a pretty rapid climb.

Last year I had heard about how during COVID people got into cards as a hobby (thanks in part of stimulus checks) and prices were spiking, especially for marquee names. I was pleasantly shocked to see, for example, that the PSA 3.5 Cy Young portrait I bought in 2013 for $600 was selling for something like $2,500. My PSA 7 of Babe Ruth's 1932 Sanella was somehow selling for 15 times what I got it at.

I imagined as COVID was waning and people stopped getting stimulus checks that prices would correct. And now you add inflation and then the war in Ukraine and all these sanctions (which will probably spur some massive cyber criminal activities) and now I wonder just how far they'll drop and for how long.

I'd guess things will discourage low and mid-range card buyers from snatching up as much as they have the past few years, and that this will drop prices for several years. Then again, I'm really bad at predicting things!

Agree John…..low grade and middle grade stars are not selling anywhere close to what they were selling for last year….they never should have sold for those numbers in the first place.

People are being very very frugal….as I mentioned before higher end graded in auction is immune from any downturn/bear market or recession….it doesn’t matter to them. They’re still gonna go crazy for PSA 8’s and 9’s.

There are many things about today that remind me of the junk wax era, where card values spiked like the gold rush and then crashed like a Led Zeppelin (that’s how they got their name). There are also things today that remind me of the Great Recession in 2008, when card prices dropped and did not rebound, in some cases, until a decade later. Like those periods, I would think we are currently in a bubble, poised for a price tumble, but for several factors that did not exist during the junk wax and Great Recession: namely, serious outside investment by third parties, considerable innovation within the industry, and widespread press and acceptance as an “asset class” by large financial and media sources. Because of these new variables, I don’t think card prices go down. In fact, I think there is a lot of room for prices/values to grow. I am not sure this applies across the board- and I certainly don’t pretend to know enough about modern to make any conclusions there- but I believe that Ruth, Cobb, Wagner, Jackson, t206, cracker jacks, etc (the vintage blue chip stuff) has room to grow as the hobby continues to mature into an asset class. I believe this is true regardless of gas prices and/or a war in Ukraine; all bets off, however, if Ukraine turns into WWIII

Wow. 100%. That means that there isn't even 1 percent of blame placed at Putin's feet or that of any other party.

Even the right-est of right wingers on the Hill won't express such certainty. Even they lay a little of the blame on the guy sending in those tanks and bombs.

You should probably PM Republican Congressional leadership first before you PM me. They would love to be able to use your talking points.

"Reductivism: the practice of considering or presenting something complicated in a simple way, especially a way that is too simple."

I really thought you were making some good points until your last post. Of course, unlike you, I wasn't 100 percent sure of this last sentence of mine. You probably had even changed some minds. Oh well. Easy come, easy go.

Leon, can we just get rid of this thread already.

Speaking to Rotchkiss: The "special/new factors" you cite as likely to mitigate any correction in collectable values strike me in an opposite way -- likely to exacerbate the severity of the correction, which is now virtually certain to occur soon. There is no way to stop an inflationary trend once it reaches double digits (Putin's contribution, despite Biden's rheteric, is not in the numbers yet) except by 1) limiting the availability of money until interest rates exceed the rate of inflation: and 2) limiting federal spending until it becomes credible that the existing debt can be serviced and eventually repaid. The recession that will occur when these steps are taken will have the same effect on card values as 2008, but worse because interest rates will be much higher.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

Who is forcing you to read it?

As with filling up a truck for more than $125 (my last purchase), it comes down to what one can afford. There are wants and needs.

Do you need gas? Most of yes. Do you need that card? If your answer is yes then you can afford the current inflation. The more this current administrations policies increase inflation it is only natural that our needs and wants will change.

At least my talking points are MY talking points based on my own opinions, experiences and knowledge. You on the other hand are a typical modern-day journalist. You lack the intelligence to formulate your own talking points so you copy and paste from others. Sad really.

Refresh my memory. Who was it that got caught plagiarizing Neil Kinnock's speech as well as the speeches of several others? His name is on the tip of my tongue, but I just can't recall it. :rolleyes:

Here i thought I might learn something from an expert. I naively thought that mistakes had been made by Obama, Trump, Biden, Merkle, Putin and others, in terms of dealing with Russian expansion and energy policies. I thought we would all learn that the answer was nuanced and came with data and statistics and facts not readily known by those not fluently conversant with the realities of your industry (gas, oil and energy). I naively thought that the price at the pump was due to a plethora of factors.

But nope, I've now been told by an expert that the answer is simple and 100% the fault of one party.

And that answer comes with personal insults.

Well done.

You must be proud.

I am good with that.
.