Liquidity & Investing vs collecting

[the 'stache]

Sure it does. Gambling is defined by the act itself, not the possible financial implication of the outcome. Suggesting otherwise is reckless, in my humble opinion.

If a billionaire goes to the Luxor in Las Vegas, and puts down a $1 million chip on black at the roulette table, regardless of the outcome, or how he tolerates any potential loss, he's gambled. He may have risked a very small portion of his net worth, but he's gambled, nonetheless.

As I said before, I've got no problem with the guy doing whatever he wants with his money. To each their own. If he wants to rent a limo, and blow $100k on hookers at the Bunny Ranch, God Bless America! But that's not how he framed this whole discussion. He came here espousing an extremely risky investment strategy, and gently chided those who are going to, or have already "missed the move."

"Give me the liquidity, give me the commodities, give me the transparency."

First of all, in this hobby, I find there is a shocking lack of transparency. If there is any, at all, it is because hobbyists, like the fine folks here on Net 54, are fed up with the rampant criminality that has become all too commonplace. Unlike commodity trading, there is no inherent transparency within the hobby. There is no regulatory body in baseball cards; no oversight. One of the third party grading companies began its existence by facilitating a gross misrepresentation of a Wagner T206's quality. Major auction houses have been complicit in criminal behavior warranting FBI investigation, and federal prosecution (cough Mastro cough); and, you've got rampant shill bidding on Ebay. Oh yeah, and you've got a criminal mastermind somewhere in Mexico flaunting their ability to create high-value graded cards out of thin air. This is the environment in which I'm going to risk hundreds of thousands of dollars? Discretionary income, or not, to bank on the continued upward trend in pricing, which day and night is being responded to here with utter disbelief, is displaying questionable logic.

"Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results." Especially when the system is being gamed against the individual investor. Even the most principled auction houses, through no fault of their own, and even after employing the strictest guidelines, and independent transparency--they get caught in the muck. We've seen highly-visible persons on our own board, people who work their tails off to make this hobby as safe as is humanly possible, caught up in the middle of dealings with stolen goods. If a man with that level of hobby sophistication, with this incredible tool at his finger tips, can get blindsided, what chance does an honest investor truly have?

I may no longer be able to work, but when I became a broker, I vowed to be held to a higher level, ethically, in my business dealings. I had a fiduciary responsibility to my clients, and though I'm no longer actively associated with a broker-dealer, I still take that responsibility very seriously. I cannot sit idly bye while I see risky investment advice, even in the guise of a "friendly suggestion", being dolled out.

Originally Posted by LukeLyon

His second post was phrased nicer, but he is right either way. $300k (since we're using that number) is a lot of money to a lot of people on this board, but that doesn't mean that it can't represent a small and reasonable percentage of someone's net worth to be invested. High end sports cards have been a good investment in recent history. Calling it gambling just because the number is big doesn't make any sense.