Quote:
Originally Posted by moogpowell
Think we ultimately agree... I was making a quick comparison in three sentences and said "sort of equivalent" to underscore that the parallel was meant in spirit... What do you have most conviction in be it that player x's cards, or such and such sport's cards from a year or decade etc. are undervalued/overvalued...
I am starting to think that the increased grading, volume and visibility of cards will make a somewhat (but less so over time) inefficient market place, regarding price, become ever more "liquid" and dynamic and reduce the variance between prices. A stock market comparison is apt. I think the internet changes a lot for the hobby for the better. It makes it global and grading facilitates buying/selling/trading and adds trust.
I have zero interesting in cards from the '90s to present and would not cry myself a river if the sky high prices in modern basketball tanked. Some hard lessons wouldn't be bad for novices chasing outsized gains.
|
I gotcha. “Brevity is the soul of wit” - quote from another board member...
I have no conviction, I have no clue, but collect who I like . That said, I am using this time to move some of my less liquid sets and less popular players. As Kennedy said, “The time to repair the roof is when the sun is shining.” By next month 2/3 of my small collection would be Ruths and Cobbs, with an example or two of Gehrig, Williams, mantle and Aaron. If I had to choose a popular sport, basketball... but my heart is in baseball.
I agree on your comment regarding the grading. I made a comment a few months ago that the standardization of grading cards, plus accessible online venues like eBay, have led to commoditization of our hobby. This is a good thing; increased fungibility and liquidity, increasing inherent card values.