Another card investment thread

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by conor912

This was my first thought. This is not good. Once people who have no idea what they're doing start getting in, it usually signifies a problem.

For me not one bit. TPGs have limitations, but they are commoditizing (raw cards into value buckets) makes it easier to assign value, thus adding liquidity, thus adding value. In fact, the more we get to i) a market where graded cards are the standard and ii) price indications as a result of online sales research (ebay and auctions), the more our cards will retain value and withstand future market dislocations.

The fact that people are interested and looking into card collecting is a GOOD thing, not something to be weary of. (I'd be more weary of having no where to hide in this asset bubble environment we are in.)

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by Leon

LOL

And Barry, I don't personally care if people want to invest in cards without knowing or even liking them. It's American and I have a laissez-faire attitude.

That's perfectly fine, but my point was that if investors who don't collect are buying cards to sell to other investors who don't collect, that's not the bedrock for a solid market. People are of course free to do whatever they want, I'm just suggesting that it's the real long term collectors who make the hobby what it is. Speculators on the other hand create the bubble economy. You're confusing what we are free to do versus what is prudent to do.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

I think we may be seeing things from a different angle. But from my corner of the hobby (and I am one of the smaller-scale collectors out there), and forgive me if this is addressing a different point than you are making, this IS happening in ways, shapes and forms. Investors do appear to be lining up, and have been. Various threads on this board address the numerous articles by Forbes on investing in baseball cards, collectors here and elsewhere often bring up the specter of "foreign investors" or somesuch when diving into price surges, PWCC has a section on their website for "Investors," the term "investment grade" is now well-established in the hobby, and even threads on this board dating from 2002 discuss investment in cards - and I'm sure there's many many other examples out there.
Anyway, I feel like this is a big tangent on a thread designed to help a board member's family in finding cards to fit their goals, and the tangent is perhaps belabored by now. Apologies to the OP if this has detracted from your inquiry!

Regardless of how you try and rationalize it, the point is irrefutable that investing in baseball cards in no way compares to making investments in the stock market, and never will. How knowledgeable people are is inconsequential, for investor security and peace of mind, the stock market will always trump fly by night investments... period.

[Orioles1954]

PSA graded Michael Jordan rookies.

[Throttlesteer]

Dare I say that most of the suggestions are biased from actual collectors, not investors. I'm not claiming that Cobbs, Ruths, or some of the other suggestions haven't appreciated quite a bit. But, if you truly were in it to maximize your return, you probably wouldn't ask a bunch of collectors their opinions or base you approach on the last 12 months of anecdotal trending. I suggested T206 commons earlier because they seem to outpace most of the HOFers as a percentage over the past several years. Additionally, if you evaluate the risk of higher grade T206, 33 Goudey, 52 Topps HOFers being altered and at some point being "outed", the lower grade stuff or commons provide a little more security over the long haul.

Again, these are just my opinions and anyone serious about investing in cards should do a lot more research and a lot less listening to the collectors on this board. We're just going to tell you what we want and what we're willing to throw our wallets at.

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

Regardless of how you try and rationalize it, the point is irrefutable that investing in baseball cards in no way compares to making investments in the stock market, and never will. How knowledgeable people are is inconsequential, for investor security and peace of mind, the stock market will always trump fly by night investments... period.

Clearly at an impasse. I respect your unwavering commitment to not budge on the point, but will respectfully disagree that these two investments, or any two things in general, cannot be compared. I've had many a productive discussion on the matter and will look forward to others who are willing to explore the topic.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

For me not one bit. TPGs have limitations, but they are commoditizing (raw cards into value buckets) makes it easier to assign value, thus adding liquidity, thus adding value. In fact, the more we get to i) a market where graded cards are the standard and ii) price indications as a result of online sales research (ebay and auctions), the more our cards will retain value and withstand future market dislocations.

The fact that people are interested and looking into card collecting is a GOOD thing, not something to be weary of. (I'd be more weary of having no where to hide in this asset bubble environment we are in.)

I pretty much agree with all of this... within the context of modest, steady growth. But when a market becomes so hot so fast that Joe Schmoe down the street starts asking about what cards to "invest in", that has historically signified the end of the food chain. That's when the insiders dump everything on Joe for inflated prices and leave him with the shit end of the stick. That said, I think you make an interesting point that grading has caused a bit of a paradigm shift which may very well be a permanent disruption. Only time will tell.

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

Clearly at an impasse. I respect your unwavering commitment to not budge on the point, but will respectfully disagree that these two investments, or any two things in general, cannot be compared. I've had many a productive discussion on the matter and will look forward to others who are willing to explore the topic.

What is there to budge on? If you were able to provide a cogent counter to what I stated, you would've done so, and with all due respect, I saw no evidence of that. In my opinion, you were not able to dispel the fact that the stock market to most would be a safer investment than baseball cards.

It's nothing at all personal, you seem like a well spoken, intelligent individual. I'm sure there are many topics we would agree on.

And be fair, there are certainly things in life that are not comparable.... like maybe a Ford Pinto and Ferrari F40

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by Huysmans

In my opinion, you were not able to dispel the fact that the stock market to most would be a safer investment than baseball cards.

If this was what we were talking about, it was totally unclear to me. I wasn’t addressing this, and I didn’t get that train of thought from what I was reading.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Schultz24]

Thanks so much for all of the comments thus far! I sort of mentioned it in the first post, but this family member already has money in the market and is familiar with that, but wanted to branch out a bit from that or precious metals. It may be art or something else, but I am a sports card collector and having seen some of the gains being shown in the "blue chip" vintage sports cards, I thought I would ask the question since I haven't had that kind of money to potentially invest. I sort of doubt they will go the way of investing in cards, but just like art or wine etc., there is definitely an upside to collectibles if the right ones are selected. Thanks again!

[Bigdaddy]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

So people now want to invest in baseball cards without being card collectors and without any knowledge of what they should buy. Does that concern anyone?

Ummm...did you read the OP? They are asking questions of knowledgeable folks, like you would ask an investment adviser about which stocks/funds to buy. Face it, sports cards have become a commodity.

Originally Posted by groundskeeper

Cobb seems like a blue chip legend but if even a TASTE of the social justice movement gets into this hobby, he is going to take a serious hit. I know I avoid Cap Anson cards for this reason. Try selling that in 20 years for a profit (over inflation).

Ruth is the king. The gold standard.

Ummm....Ruth was no golden boy. If the social justice movement is now asking to remove Thomas Jefferson statues and his name from buildings (they are), what makes you think they will ignore Ruth. Pretty soon Yankee Stadium will be "The House that Ruth Mantle Arod Whitey Billy Mo Built" Mo may be the only one left standing.

And back to the OPs question, I would invest in high grade, recognizable names - Ruth, Cobb, Mantle, Robinson, Aaron, Mays, Williams, Dimaggio, etc.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Ummm...did you read the OP? They are asking questions of knowledgeable folks, like you would ask an investment adviser about which stocks/funds to buy. Face it, sports cards have become a commodity.



Ummm....Ruth was no golden boy. If the social justice movement is now asking to remove Thomas Jefferson statues and his name from buildings (they are), what makes you think they will ignore Ruth. Pretty soon Yankee Stadium will be "The House that Ruth Mantle Arod Whitey Billy Mo Built" Mo may be the only one left standing.

And back to the OPs question, I would invest in high grade, recognizable names - Ruth, Cobb, Mantle, Robinson, Aaron, Mays, Williams, Dimaggio, etc.

Yeah how offensive to name something after Jefferson. Who's next, Lincoln?

[MVSNYC]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

And back to the OPs question, I would invest in high grade, recognizable names - Ruth, Cobb, Mantle, Robinson, Aaron, Mays, Williams, Dimaggio, etc.

+1

Add to that...

Joe Jackson...Derek Jeter, Mike Trout, Bryce Harper.

Oh, and T206 rare backs.

PS- Barry (Hi Barry), where have you been brother? Non-Collectors have been dipping into the Hobby for YEARS! And as someone above mentioned, that's a good thing for the Hobby. Recognize that.

[pokerplyr80]

I'd pick one card you'll enjoy owning and looking at for a while. Go with a big name and hope for the best. I'd stick with Cobb, Ruth, Gehrig, Joe Jackson, or Mantle.

I wouldn't worry about any social justice warriors. I doubt many are in the hobby and I also doubt many in the hobby care much for their opinions. I sure don't.

[Directly]

10,000 to spend

Checking some recent EBAY "sold"

1951 Bowman Mantle

PSA 7 $31400

PSA 4 $7800 - $8500

PSA 5 $9400

1933 Goudey Ruth (most colors)

PSA 4 $5800 range

1934 Gerhig #37

PSA 8 $28801 (PWCC)

PSA 6 $5996

PSA 4 $3153- $4276

1934 Goudey complete set VG/EX $5200 Jan/19 (Good Buy) #37 and #161 PSA 2.5

1993 Jeter SP

PSA 9 around $4800

PSA 8.5 & 9 $9500

I assume these might be bought off line at a little better price ? (except may be the 1934 Goudey complete set?)

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

+1

Add to that...

Joe Jackson...Derek Jeter, Mike Trout, Bryce Harper.

Oh, and T206 rare backs.

PS- Barry (Hi Barry), where have you been brother? Non-Collectors have been dipping into the Hobby for YEARS! And as someone above mentioned, that's a good thing for the Hobby. Recognize that.

Hi Michael,
I sold baseball cards for thirty years, but never knew the level of commitment of each buyer. I didn't know who was a serious collector and who was a speculator. I just cashed the checks.

But my point is learn something about the hobby before you sink serious money into it. The more you learn yourself, the better off you will be.

[toledo_mudhen]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Years ago I always went to the barber shop to get investment advice, but since I now have no hair, I’m stuck with Net54.

When I was a kid - the Barber Shop had a Pristine example of a Jackalope mounted on the wall. Such a rare creature - Haven't seen another one since.

[buymycards]

Yelich

[Republicaninmass]

Unlike coins, which have an intrinsic value, Stocks (without dividends) only carry a perceived value, similar to cards. They are only worth what someone will pay, and are subject to a catalysts within and outside if their respective marketplace.

In this regard, cards are are a similar "investment vehicle" to (non-dividend) stocks.

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Unlike coins, which have an intrinsic value, Stocks (without dividends) only carry a perceived value, similar to cards. They are only worth what someone will pay, and are subject to a catalysts within and outside if their respective marketplace.

In this regard, cards are are a similar "investment vehicle" to (non-dividend) stocks.

I respectfully disagree on these points. Everything is “perceived”.

Coins intrinsic value is limited to face value which is nominal. Anything above is collectible value, same as baseball cards but without the attachment to history.

Stocks without dividends are valued based on its growth rate of future free cash flows (augmented by one time tax cuts, unsustainable accommodative central banks, and admittedly a strong economy) discounted by a historically low Goldilocks discount rate, and impacted by smoke and mirrors stock buybacks and positive headline risk fomo.

Cards are impacted by general asset (re)valuation, employment, and people’s liquidity requirements as it impacts short term supply and demand.

They all have different coefficients, but would suspect coins and cards have higher correlation and r squared than cards and stocks.

[Throttlesteer]

Beanie babies are making a comeback. Invest now! Especially those with a sick patch

[Republicaninmass]

Intrinsic - belonging naturally; essential. ie face value, even melt value


Stocks - you don't even own a piece of paper anymore. What does future cash flow, or this "value" growth rate you speak of, allow you to spend? it's only worth what someone will pay at a given time based on what they think it will be worth.

edited: and each there is someone selling a stock convinced it will go down, to someone convinced it will go up. This happens with cards sometimes

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by buymycards

Yelich

Location: Wisconsin

Biased!!

[Bicem]

Well said Joshua.

[Econteachert205]

I do believe that there will continue to be price appreciation in the best such as Jordan or Mantle rookies. Beyond that, though, long term I believe many bad investments abound. How many millennial or gen z kids exist that will shell out hundreds or thousands for high grade commons? What about middling hof rookie cards, tough or not. There may always be a hard core few who need a Kiki cuyler auto rookie but if I were holding these types of “investments” I would not feel any more secure than the speculative equivalent in any other market.

The card I bought as an investment that I worry about the least is my 86 fleer Jordan. Remember the best investments are those which appreciate quickest after purchasing. For me it is that card.

[joshuanip]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Intrinsic - belonging naturally; essential. ie face value, even melt value


Stocks - you don't even own a piece of paper anymore. What does future cash flow, or this "value" growth rate you speak of, allow you to spend? it's only worth what someone will pay at a given time based on what they think it will be worth.

edited: and each there is someone selling a stock convinced it will go down, to someone convinced it will go up. This happens with cards sometimes

Don’t mean to hijack the thread to stocks but growth (no dividends) is particularly (over) valued in low rate environments because it’s the compound affect of discounting that future growth is muted.

Hence value without any dividends (spending $). Add demand from stock buybacks and lack of options being us (market) is the best house in a bad neighborhood and the reduction Of publicly availble stocks from pe buyouts, and you have a meltup

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

I respectfully disagree on these points. Everything is “perceived”.

Coins intrinsic value is limited to face value which is nominal. Anything above is collectible value, same as baseball cards but without the attachment to history.

Stocks without dividends are valued based on its growth rate of future free cash flows (augmented by one time tax cuts, unsustainable accommodative central banks, and admittedly a strong economy) discounted by a historically low Goldilocks discount rate, and impacted by smoke and mirrors stock buybacks and positive headline risk fomo.

Cards are impacted by general asset (re)valuation, employment, and people’s liquidity requirements as it impacts short term supply and demand.

They all have different coefficients, but would suspect coins and cards have higher correlation and r squared than cards and stocks.

Originally Posted by joshuanip

Don’t mean to hijack the thread to stocks but growth (no dividends) is particularly (over) valued in low rate environments because it’s the compound affect of discounting that future growth is muted.

Hence value without any dividends (spending $). Add demand from stock buybacks and lack of options being us (market) is the best house in a bad neighborhood and the reduction Of publicly availble stocks from pe buyouts, and you have a meltup

My nomination for the Net54 Bryson DeChambeau Award.

However you failed to mention the spin rate of the spokes in the card market, which is less of a factor in stocks with potential dividend accrual resulting.

[TanksAndSpartans]

I'd be lazy to do the book keeping - same way I feel about bitcoin. With my TD Ameritrade account I can make as many trades as I want - I know I'll be getting a tax statement at the end of the year.

I think it would be interesting if we started seeing funds that invest in sports collectables - maybe they already exist.

[Exhibitman]

I tend to look at relative values. Like why has the green Cobb T206 skyrocked but the 150 series Young portrait hasn't? They used to be much closer in value. I'd pick up a nice Young or two. I'd also focus on nice eye appeal T206 portraits. Boring but solid. I'd also throw in a bet on a few of the top Mike Trout RCs in PSA 10 or Beckett 9.5 condition. They've doubled in recent months but given their potential for a LeBron like further surge, maybe worth it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I tend to look at relative values. Like why has the green Cobb T206 skyrocked but the 150 series Young portrait hasn't? They used to be much closer in value. I'd pick up a nice Young or two. I'd also focus on nice eye appeal T206 portraits. Boring but solid. I'd also throw in a bet on a few of the top Mike Trout RCs in PSA 10 or Beckett 9.5 condition. They've doubled in recent months but given their potential for a LeBron like further surge, maybe worth it.

Beckett 9.5s are dead for the most part. Sell at a huge discount to PSA 10s.