Why It Pays To Invest InHigh Grade Pre-War Cards

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Barry,

We will see how it ends up at the end. I believe condition trumps rarity and I believe the results bear that out. You see a psa 10 of any player pre 1960 and the price goes nuts--don't see that happening if a common beater card appears nearly to the same extent.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Well of course a PSA 10 will garner tremendous interest and bidding. It's state of the art.

What about a card that is a sharp PSA 7 but not particularly rare? How would you feel about that? Most people would qualify that as at least pretty high grade.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Depends on the vintage--for me no but I do not collect many of the pre-war sets.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Here's an example why rarity trumps condition. If people are given a choice between a beat up t208 Fireside and PSA 8 t206, I don't think there are too many people that would take the t206.

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Jay,

I hate beat-up looking cards--If the Fireside is that valuable I would immediately sell it to buy a psa 8 or 9 card. Not saying thats the right answer for everyone but its how I feel.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Jay, Jim: it really depends on the individual card. I collect as many high grade cards as I can get my hands on but some of my favorite cards are ones residing in holders with a grade of 5 or less that are just very difficult to find. Depends on the card.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron M.

Great points in this thread. I wholeheartedly agree with those who have pointed to the vast difference in price simply having two determined bidders competing against each other can make. (Especially given that there is a relatively small consumer base for most of the vintage, higher-end cards and memorabilia we collect.) I have had the pleasure of being part of several one-on-one bidding wars that have significantly driven up the price on an item to the point where I will almost certainly lose money were I to re-sell.

I have two competing views on the whole "investment" topic. On the one hand I try and follow the adage to collect what I like regardless of value. But on the other hand I bet I would probably spend maybe a tenth of what I normally do if I didn't know that most of the items I buy will hold their re-sale value.

I think that's the real question for investors vs. collectors. If you knew what you were buying had no monetary value and you would never see that money again (kind of like travel -- great experience, but you can't recoup the money), how would it effect your buying habits?

If you would spend significantly less then even if you consider yourself the purest of collectors, you are an investor in a large way.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Good points Aaron, and it's hard to imagine too many people spending thousands upon thousands on baseball cards and not thinking even a little bit about what they are worth now, or may be worth in the future.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

I assume my cards will be worth more. So far the assumption holds true but the price of these cards have to come down sooner or later.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I kept saying that in the late 80s and never it never happened except on the high end of the market, which Bruce seems to love so much. Prices just tend to flatten out when the market gets soft. When the economy goes bad, people quit buying collectibles. The true collectors will stick it out, but the casual collectors will bail. The hardcore collectors won't let prices on mid and low grade stuff fall much because they will want their fix.

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave S

"He "stole" the Peckinpaugh card"???

Years ago, an old lunatic gave me some advice...as to whether or not cards should be considered worthy of investment. I think his crazy principle held true then, still does, and always will...
You're never going to see CONSISTENT returns with the "Peckinpaugh's" and commons of the hobby. If you're looking only from an investment standpoint..short-range or long-range..low-grade or high-grade..limit your collecting to 8 players: Babe, Honus, Ty, Walter J, Matty, Cy, Gehrig, and Joe J. Forget the Peckinpaugh's, forget the commons...regardless of condition..

To those of us that enjoy collecting for the chase, and the FUN it entails, how much we'd miss by limiting our collections to these 8 players. But think we'd always be able to unload without a loss...
Not so true with the Peckinpaugh's...

[Archive]

Posted By: Greg Theberge

A Collector purchases an item for his or her collection for the love of an item, the history to which it represents, and the hobby to which it belongs. It should not be purchased for the monetary value that is placed on it.

Obviously, it's wiser to purchase items that are well researched and that will at least hold their value in the event that a collection has to be liquidated, but, that being said, there's nothing wrong with purchasing items of lower value, or quality, if, indeed, this is of interest to the collector, or, all that he or she can afford.

In my humble opinion, to belittle collectors, or collectibles of lower monetary value, makes an individual shine more as a pompous ass than a collector. It never ceases to amaze me how certain individuals think nothing of their fellow collectors and what they collect, or how they would feel about their own personal interests, by the remarks that they make. A true collector can find interest in anything about a hobby, not just specifically items that they would like to acquire for their collection. A huge part of this hobby is the comaraderie one shares with their fellow collectors, not what the monetary worth of their "portfolio" is worth.

I've been a "collector" of multiple sorts for 35 years. Not until I started reading this baseball card forum have I ever come across such arrogant (as well as ignorant) statements at times. "Whilst" the monetary value of our (I don't mean me as a plural, I mean my father and I - this forum needs more psychologists at times) collections have become substantial over the years, it is never THE topic of conversation. Sure, some items may be very costly to add to our collections, but that's just a part of collecting. It's not the reason for having a collection. Most of the time, we feel embarassed at the amount of money we have spent on items, not boastful of it.

By the way, I personally think the original transaction given for this post is a ridiculous example for the arguement. In the collecting world, you do well at times, even at times, and downright blown away financially at times. If "high grade" was the critical factor in this transaction, how does the original consignor feel about selling it so low, in addition to the commission that was taken off the top of the sale? I know I wouldn't have thought my "investment" paid off.

Anyway, maybe it was the "yankeefan51" that set me off..it's been a bad baseball week. Sorry for the rant

edited for spelling

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Newcomb

Greg-- very well said. There's something pathological about the Dorskind need to parade the superiority of his method of collecting.

Tim

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

edited to try not and get too personal....

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Nieves

edited.....too personal in nature...

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob Pomilla

I don't get involved in the Dorskind weirdness, but since you guys brought it up, I too believe that this repeatedly displayed contempt for those less well off, is pathological. Doesn't take much to figure out this behavior is compensation for feelings of inadequacy in other areas. Poor dear.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron M.

I imagine that Bruce grew up with little money or surrounded by those who had more money than his family (and he in turn viewed those people as "better" than him) did and it has left him with a vast inferiority complex. So for him, it's not enough to have money, and it's not even enough that he tell everyone he has money, but that he actually feels contemptuous toward those who don't have money. Really, Bruce just hates himself.

I think this is why Bruce uses terms like "whilst" and refers to hismelf in the plural. It's how he imagines cultured or well-heeled people conduct themselves and that is what he so desperately aspires to be.

Bruce would make for a fascinating character study.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Quit picking on Bruce, I've recieved e-mail from him before, he's just a very sensitive guy just like I am or many of us are. If you show him respect and simply explain your position to him, he will respond in kind.

Look at it this way, I assume he speaks the same way or at least in a similar way that he writes. If that is the case, then don't you think there have been many people that have told him it's better to use "I" instead of "We."

He starts feeling that people are just making fun of him, just like kids who make fun of other kids who have accents. Once you treat him that way...Bruce just tune-outs and thinks that we are just like other unfriendly kids. If that happens, he begins tuning out and becomes unresponsive.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Peter, how many times have you made fun of Bruce over the past few weeks? I think you've repeatedly referred to him as "The Dorskinds" and even yesterday you gave him a jab. Are you like Sybil?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

If Bruce and I were having a conversation in person and he used the term "whilst" and "we" (for himself) I believe I would just start laughing. I don't hate or dislike Bruce but the way he acts and says things about less fortunate folks isn't very nice. You reap what you sow....

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Somehow I suspect Bruce does not speak that way in public -- at least to me, it's fairly clear that he's just having fun with those on the board...

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

When you speak to Bruce in person he uses "I", and I have never heard him use "whilst" once in 20 years. This is done purely to rile the board.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Jeff,

You're absolutely right I have poked fun at Bruce and he sent me an e-mail and I politely responded. Bruce e-mailed me back saying he understood. He strikes me as being a civil and reasonable guy.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

"Ya know, I have always said there is a fine line between being an idiot and being a genius. In many card situations that line is 1 bidder....."

Truer words were never spoken Leon.
I have sold cards on ebay, usually because I have upgraded, occasionally because I have lost interest in a set and moved on to another one and my cards have not been PSA 7s, 8s and 9s, but it usually worked out quite well. Sometimes you take your lumps and shake your head but sometimes you catch lightning in a bottle like the VGEX T206 Rhoades arm extended I sold for $500 which I bought for $40. Bruce, that arbitrary transaction was an abberation and I use it as an example to show that the Peckinpaugh card was a similar one and not indicative of the value of flipping high grade cards only.
tbob

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Peter, don't let the nice guy act fool you. If you want more details, email me and I'll tell you about his dark side.

Jay

The richest person is not the one who has the most, but the one who needs the least.

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron M.

Peter, Bruce does not speak that way in real life. I saw Bruce's little youtube-type clip for some kind of collector channel he was helping to promote and he sounded just like you or me.

Barry has said he met him several times over the last 20 years -- what say you, Barry?

Never mind, I see Barry already responded.

[Archive]

Posted By: steve

Investing in High grade pre-war one must seriously consider the difference amonst cards with the same grade, ie. not all PSA 8's are created equal.

Examples: All other qualities equal, the near 50/50 both PSA 8 card could command upwards of additional 30+ percent over the 60/40 PSA 8 card. Or the rough cut PSA 8 vs. the non-rough cut PSA 8. Or the slight tilt cut PSA 8 vs. the straight PSA 8.

Be careful - One can lose quite a bit of cash if not in tune with the differences within the grade.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Many people assume a certain persona on the boards--this is Bruces--who cares. Its the quality oof a person's posts that matter and Bruce is one of the most thoughtful posters on Net54.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Thoughtful?

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

LOL -- I think Jim means that Bruce's posts are thoughtful.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Perhaps thought provoking, but thoughtful means considerate and kind.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Thoughtful as in full of thought(ha ha). I don't know why I keep defending the guy--probably(I will try again here) because his posts are among the most interesting on Net54.

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

that so many food conniseurs will only eat Wagyu beef, when so many sportscard collectors prefer the taste of In n' Out burgers.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

thoughtful: characterized by or manifesting careful thought.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Thoughtful: showing considerate regard for others

Quoted from my Webster's

[Archive]

Posted By: Aaron M.

Yeah, LOL, "thought provoking" would be more accurate than "thoughtful". (Bruce is "thoughful" like a bull in a china shop.) Bruce's posts are intentionally insulting, but they also usually never fail to spark intense debate.

So I might think that Bruce is certifiable, but I don't have any desire for him to stop posting and I don't even want him to change his posting style -- it's too much fun.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

I confess to misusing the word.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

There are more than one usages for the word 'thoughtful.' The one I used came from Webster's online dictionary.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Trivia: what word in the English language has the most definitions?

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

I believe the answer is "set"

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Marc gets a gold star!

[Archive]

Posted By: Chad

They always have a high entertainment value, though, and I hope we'll see many more posts in the future. I only wish the posts would expand from the subject of baseball cards to other things. I think Leon should give him carte blanche to start threads about anything and everything. I would love to know his thoughts on socks, for example.

--Chad

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Chad,

So far all my posts have been on point, wait until I start posting my O/T posts.

Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: PAS

Peter C. LOL. Keep them on topic, please.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chad

I meant Dorskind, but what the heck, you go for it, too!

--Chad

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Now that I got Chad's explicit approval...watch out Net54.

Peter C.