Which Cobb would be a better investment

[rats60]

Another vote for T205. One of the most beautiful cards ever made.

[T206Collector]

E95 — when in doubt pick the one that has a neck, and isn’t a floating, bloated face, with his eyes too close together.

Never liked the T205s much. Sometimes they get it right (Mathewson), but there are so many poorly thought out examples.

[Vintageclout]

T205 all day long. In lieu of the T206 Cobb pricing spikes, the T205 subject will continue to follow in it’s footsteps.

[darwinbulldog]

I think the expected future value of the cards is already factored into their current prices, so there's no particular reason to think either one is a better investment than the other.

[Phil68]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I think the expected future value of the cards is already factored into their current prices, so there's no particular reason to think either one is a better investment than the other.

Really? Interesting. You believe the supply/demand has found its level and it's got nowhere to go but downward? Is this a response to the market being held up by a select few and the confidence of TPG companies?

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I think the expected future value of the cards is already factored into their current prices, so there's no particular reason to think either one is a better investment than the other.

100% agree.

If one card is valued at twice another, then it’s a tossup whether that card will be twice the others value 20 years from now. So either one is as good as the other regarding investment potential over the other

[seff]

I'd go with E95.

[nat]

"Really? Interesting. You believe the supply/demand has found its level and it's got nowhere to go but downward?"

That isn't what he said. Say that there's an X% chance that the T205 will increase by $Y and a Z% that it will increase by $W, over the course of some number of years. The idea is that the price of the T205 includes ((X*Y)+(Z*W))*(some discount rate for future money). And that the same is true for the other card (with different X,Y,Z,W). They can still appreciate in value, but for whichever one you can expect to appreciate more in value, you'll pay a proportionally higher cost in order to capture that increase in value.

The appreciation can be due to the discount rate, or if the actual amount by which the card increases in value ends up being greater than (X*Y)+(Z*W).

I'm not endorsing this idea, just explaining it. You'd expect it to be true if all of the cards were purchased by rational investors who are equally well-informed. Whether it would be true in other markets I don't know.