Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark17
People who buy things low hoping to sell them high are "worthless losers?"
If you had a stock broker who advised you, and his recommendations helped give you a nice return, would you call him a "worthless loser" and fire him?
Or would you be happy when YOU buy low and sell high?
|
Good post, Mark. As a former stockbroker, I would hope not.
After someone like Bryant dies, it's only natural for fans to want a tangible piece their career (especially when they're athletes), be it a jersey he wore, or a card he autographed. That's because human beings are sentimental creatures. Demand goes up. The supply won't increase all that much, unless someone who didn't have their items for sale puts them on Ebay immediately after Bryant's death (darned opportunists!) So, given the increase demand, shouldn't the items available command a premium? You can buy now, and pay more, or, you can wait, and see what happens, knowing you might miss out on the very best items, altogether.
If a seller raises their item's price, and a buyer pays the price they ask, what's the problem? The seller has made a profit. The buyer has what they wanted, at a price they were willing to pay. Nobody held a gun to their head. They could have waited, no? And while we demonize the seller for raising the price-who's to say that the seller isn't also sentimental? Maybe they would have kept it if they could, and they're selling the item(s) to pay for something like their kid's medical bills, or helping a family member out. Don't be so quick to assume that a seller raising their price is doing so out of pure greed. I've helped friends out in a tight jam before, and one of the ways I did so was to sell a few cards. They never knew how I got the money, but I asked what I felt was a fair price, and got it. The money never went in my pocket.
This will sound cold, but it's true: Kobe won't be any less dead a month from now when prices will normalize some. In two months, I would expect the market to return closer to the mean, or average price. Three months, closer still, if not all the way back. You can still be "a part of Black Mamba's career", owning a fat, overpriced 1/1 shiny card with his sticker auto, and jock strap tag in two months, and likely pay less to acquire it. That's economics.
I'm a movie collector. I'm on disability, and have been for ten years, permanent disability for about the last seven. I build my film collection for two reasons: one, I love film, and my collection keeps me entertained while I'm in bed almost 24/7. Secondly, and equally important, because my plan is to write about film (and sports) for a living, as I try to get off disability, and pay my own way again. There's nothing worse than having to rely on the government to survive, even though I worked my nuts off, and paid into the system.
I have x amount of dollars to spend on my collection every month. I can pay $20 + tax for a movie when it comes out on blu-ray. Or, if I wait, I can get the same film for less in a few months. I know when all the sales are each year, for each major label (Warner Bros, Fox, MGM, Disney) and boutique label (Criterion, Kino Lorber, Twilight Time, Warner Archive, and in England, Eurkea, Arrow Films, etc). I have much of what I'm going to buy plotted out months in advance. Some of the films I buy have limited print runs, like Twilight Time, a boutique label that typically does just 3,000 copies on blu-ray. They keep their licensing fees down by doing a smaller run. Occasionally, when demand outpaces supply, they might negotiate a second print run. If I wait a while after release, I might get it at a lower price. If the demand is high, I might miss out on it completely, or, be forced to pay a scalper $100 for a film that sold for $30. Or, I can hope the film was released on blu-ray in another part of the world, and import it from them. That's capitalism in a nut shell. Everything has a cost, and it's driven by demand. I don't think seeking a profit on an item, be it on a Kobe card, or a film with a low print run, is wrong. Again, nobody is forcing the consumer to buy it. I could always get my film on DVD which has no advertised print run. The quality is lesser (480p vs 1080p), but you pay for quality. It's up to each person to determine what they want, and what they're willing to comfortably pay.