Help! The Hobby is DYYYINNGGGGG!!!!

[ALR-bishop]

At 65 it is still just a hobby for me. Since it is just a hobby , I do not care if it has peaked or not.

[Matthew80]

I enjoyed the nostalgic read as well. I was born in 80 and love the boom in the late 80s-early 90s. So many great memories with dad and friends...

I'm pessimistic about the hobby, though. That said, anyone who thinks it's dead right now just needs to look at eBay.

[ALR-bishop]

If you are looking at eBay to cheer yourself up about the hobby be sure not to compare how it looks now to a few years ago

[frankhardy]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

At 65 it is still just a hobby for me. Since it is just a hobby , I do not care if it has peaked or not.

Ditto for me......except I'm not 65....I'm 40.

[ALR-bishop]

"Life begins at 40, but so do fallen arches, rheumatism, faulty eye sight, and the tendency to tell a story to the same person three or four times"...Helen Roland

[ls7plus]

Anyone who thinks the hobby is dying should take a look at the changes in REA's auction catalog over the last 20+ years--I have one I believe is from 1993, and its about 6-8 double-sided pages on newspaper-type stock. Now, it seems to grow and grow every year, and is presently over 500 pages of the highest grade, glossy stock available. Of course, REA focuses on where the true value lies in the hobby: rare, truly significant items in the best grade you can find or afford.

The fatal flaw with new cards is that the highest demand and hence price tends to be for "one of...(insert limited quantity)" of such players as Mike Trout or Bryce Harper, where the significant aspect will not be determinable for many years. Pay $50K for a one of three Trout refractor rookie and you may be near tears when he later turns out to be Pete Reiser, Rick Reichardt, Tony Conigliaro, Ron Swoboda, Kerry Wood, Joe Mauer, Steven Strasburg, or even Rocky Colavito, let alone A-Roid (Reichardt and Swoboda were also "the new Mickey Mantle" for awhile in their time). Let him age into his mid to late 30's to see where he really ends up at. His cards will all still be out there. Demand for the latest and greatest is speculative and transient, while that for rare and significant items tends to be lasting and growing, as the number of knowledgeable collectors grows.

The hobby certainly isn't dying, and won't, as long as baseball is around, and collectors are interested in its history. There is, however, a maturing process that occurs within the hobby, and it seems every generation of collectors must learn and accept the above. Paying big bucks for the latest wunderkind to burst upon the scene is no different than taking your wad to the craps or roulette table--which is perfectly fine, so long as you realize exactly what it is that you are doing (and given the asking price for some of these modern "gems," craps and roulette may well have a higher upside). Patience is the order of the day when thinking about spending any significant sums on these kinds of cards/players. You can't make something worth the price you'll have to pay if you submit to the GOTTA HAVE HIM NOW urge by wishing it to be so. Time is the factor that will reveal true and growing value.

May your collecting bring you joy, rather than pain,

Larry

[ALR-bishop]

This takes a real load off my mind

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

This takes a real load off my mind

many stars lose their power..guys like George foster are considered commons...guys with 4+ all star years who aren't HOFs and the POP isn't low for the grade in the era that's most sought out for in set building are commons to most people..

Ruth , Gehrig....those are different issues....but when I collected the 1952s..im pretty sure I was bidding and losing on certain 'star' cards but to me they were just commons...but eventually the bidding died down on those type of players...Mantle no...but Smokey Burgess for example..i never heard of the guy..to most people we only cared about his POP and high number status and grade....the fact that he was an all star meant nothing...

so basically the stars of today..maybe 2% of the next 40 stars become the 'mantle' for people buying those cards 30 years from now and on...etc......but in the short term to people seeing them as current stars..they aren't paying for them knowing that only a small number of the stars will be the guys that collectors 30 years from now care about ..besides the card, grade, POP etc..

[JustinD]

I think the hobby is certainly transitioning.

It seems the short memories and attention span of most of the new Millennial generation makes these new cards seem like a good short term and poor long term investment. Todays new cards are a flipper or speculators dream. I believe this is the reasoning behind demand for "Superfractor" type cards as the loss risk is there but the gains can be exponential. The problem in my mind would be holding these cards long term as it seems the interest in that generation is generally nill the moment those players leave the sport. Only to return for a short term if a HOF possibility is mentioned.

The older cards are certainly in a renaissance currently which I see as holding strong for at least the next 20 years. The issue is the collectors of those cards, even those up to the 1970's are certainly aging. I don't think these cards will hold demand after the Boomers have left except in a much smaller circle. I see a large supply vs. demand of many issues, especially of the modern card era coming around 2025.

To be quite honest as a 41 year old collector, facing the possible accessibility of numerous cards I have always coveted around age 60 sounds nice. However, I think the price I am paying today is going to be regretted.

In retrospect, the happiness these cards bring is worth quite a lot.