Quote:
Originally Posted by TanksAndSpartans
Tennis13 touched on one of the things I was thinking, but articulated it better.
Say you quietly buy 5 PSA 8 cards over the course of a year (say Jim Brown rookies just as an example)
I'll use round numbers:
5*6K=30K
Then suddenly collude with someone to run an auction up to 17K
You now have 6 cards at a cost of 30K + 17K = 47K
The hope would be that 17K price acts a signal or whatever and the card gets hot. Even if the 6 are now sold over time, some auctioned off or however at 10K each (a bargain relative to the 17K price), you have:
6*10K=60K-47K=13K profit
|
So let's be real methodical here. All possible winners in this situation:
1). You corner market and outbid a few people that JUST MISS over and over. You have identified the buyers. Now pull the cards off market for 18 months or 24 months. Whatever. Or better (illegaly) yet, keep bid rigging so that guy keeps just barely missing out. Then Finally after he has been outbid and hasn't seen his big card for 18 months, you relist, see him chase and overpay. To get your sort of economics outlined above. Because you have cornered the market, you can release at whatever speed you want and control the supply. Contrived scarcity.
2). Card graders are charging by value. If i own a $100 million dollar company and spend $500k to generate 20% or 25% higher grading revs per year due to increased market value, AND I get to personally hold an "asset" in a card, well that's a leveraged win-win situation. Nothing illegal here, but definitely higher risk for ruin by leveraging yourself to same industry.
3). I am an auction house. I take a percentage of gross sales. I have indicated sellers, and I am trying to get them off the fence. I point to specific cards/auctions/factors that allow me to auction your card off and max your value. This would be a very legal, big data approach that would be really awesome to try to pull off. Let's build a regression off every possible sale we have from last 15 years and try to predict the factors that maximize card values. And if we have to buy a few to put it to the test, to strum up interest, nothing wrong with that.
Those are the only 3 possibilities I see for a sort of "ulterior" motive to prices going higher. None of which are illegal, unless there is collusion on #1. But cornering the market is not illegal if you do it alone, and it's often ruinous long-term.
I don't think any of the above 3 scenarios are very likely, because 1&3 are a high risk of ruin. Scenario 2 is possible, but I don't think those guys are rich enough to actually do what you all think is happening. My hunch is there are a handful of rich tech/hedge fund dudes that are in an arms race with each other, and these prices are rounding errors to billionaires, and they are just buying everything they never could buy growing up.
Never underestimate bored billionaires. Ballmer paid $2 billion+ for the Clippers because he needed something to do. $100,000 for a baseball card: big deal.