Posted By:
warshawlawBen: are you trying to hurt me??? 
Mark: the issue isn't 1954 vs. 1970, it is 1954 vs. 1955. The post regarding the disparity in Mantle card prices is in line with what I'm saying. There is a big premium on "rookie" status and my argument was simply that it isn't merely age that accounts for the premium nor is it age as a shorthand for scarcity that causes the premium. It is a construct, a perception, the same one that leads some folks to pay $100 for a share in Google.
Hal: You asked: "does ANYTHING really "make sense" about spending money on pieces of cardboard?" Depends on your perspective. I think the real question is whether it makes sense to NOT to spend money on cards when it would otherwise be squandered by the wife on junk like home improvements, douvet (sp?) covers (don't know what one is, but she just dropped $150 on it), or retirement savings. This logic is flawless; I'd even apply it to sex. What would you rather drop cash on: the dinner-show-flowers-etc. inducements needed to get the wife in the mood or a nice caramel card? We all know why caramel card prices are surging, don't we? Still not convinced? Ask yourself this question: can I go longer without booty or without cards? Since we've all done months at a stretch w/o the former, especially us married guys ("How is a gay man like a married man? Neither has had sex with a woman for a really long time." Jeff Foxworthy), I think we all know the answer. This accounts for the breadth and depth of our respective card hoards... Final question: Which is more likely to convince you to go to Cleveland: gettin' some or a card convention?