The end results of hoarding

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Not exactly the same as hoarding, but it can have the same end effect when a card that was previously thought to be scarce or in short supply is found out to exist in higher numbers. For some post-war examples, see the Gil Hodges Dormand postcard, 1964 Topps Giants (though high grades of those have risen quite a bit lately) and the 1967 Topps Brooks Robinson. The Hodges and '64 Giants were the victims of a stash of cards that were later found and the Brooksie was found to exist in higher numbers than previously thought.

Of those, I believe the Hodges pc find had the biggest effect on price.

I would posit the 54 Bowman Ted Williams 66a card too.

[G1911]

A card being found to be more common than thought, or a discovery of a whole ton of them like the 1964 Giants seems to do the opposite of hoarding. Public hoarding makes the price go up, because of a perception of scarcity of availability. The perception of abundant supply tends to make prices go down.

[cardsagain74]

Hoarding anything in a marketplace at the expense of everyone else is a dick move. Obviously it's a more serious matter if it involves goods that people need to function in society, but still.

When a collector is stuck between not completing a set and paying an artificially highly inflated price, it's naturally a no-win situation. The worst experience of my (or likely any) '52 T build was, of course, Bartirome.

Some people actually celebrate it. This guy has been proud and very vocal about his attempt to "corner the market" (as he admits) on a '57 T mid-series card that he picked at random. And many of the responses he gets find it funny or praiseworthy. I hope those who do have to buy their own hoarded card sometime.

Anyway, he gave up on that hoard as it didn't work. And now there's this

https://www.ebay.com/itm/115372068351

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

Hoarding anything in a marketplace at the expense of everyone else is a dick move. Obviously it's a more serious matter if it involves goods that people need to function in society, but still.

When a collector is stuck between not completing a set and paying an artificially highly inflated price, it's naturally a no-win situation. The worst experience of my (or likely any) '52 T build was, of course, Bartirome.

Some people actually celebrate it. This guy has been proud and very vocal about his attempt to "corner the market" (as he admits) on a '57 T mid-series card that he picked at random. And many of the responses he gets find it funny or praiseworthy. I hope those who do have to buy their own hoarded card sometime.

Anyway, he gave up on that hoard as it didn't work. And now there's this

https://www.ebay.com/itm/115372068351

I guess I'm a dick. Buying anything that has more than one potential bidder is at the expense of someone else. I'm an all-collect-no-invest type but I don't believe anyone is entitled to buying a card at X price they want. Whether it's this guy taking 300 Paul Smith's off the market or 300 different collectors driving up the price of Roberto Clemente, I don't see much of a difference. Investors stockpiling stars, player collectors, set builders, they don't seem to offend people but having many of a card for non-investment (I don't believe one of these hoards has ever really panned out financially, and besides bnorth's account above not a single divested hoard has been identified yet) seems to be upsetting. I'm not quite sure why that is beyond the fact it seems quaint.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by G1911

I guess I'm a dick. Buying anything that has more than one potential bidder is at the expense of someone else. I'm an all-collect-no-invest type but I don't believe anyone is entitled to buying a card at X price they want. Whether it's this guy taking 300 Paul Smith's off the market or 300 different collectors driving up the price of Roberto Clemente, I don't see much of a difference. Investors stockpiling stars, player collectors, set builders, they don't seem to offend people but having many of a card for non-investment (I don't believe one of these hoards has ever really panned out financially, and besides bnorth's account above not a single divested hoard has been identified yet) seems to be upsetting. I'm not quite sure why that is beyond the fact it seems quaint.

The difference is that when it comes to paying way up for an item, a deliberately created market shortage or price gouging situation is not going to be considered the same by many (as one that happens from genuine supply/demand effects in a marketplace.)

Let's say a gas station buys out all the other gas stations in a remote area (and forces people with no other option to pay $10 a gallon when they'd normally pay $3.) Do you really think that station will be viewed the same by customers as if a $10/gallon price there was the result of a nationwide shortage that was out of their control?

Even if none of these situations panned out financially for the hoarder, that doesn't change the fact that it can cause people to pay way up for something that they wouldn't have had to otherwise.

And of course no one is entitled to buy a card for "x price they want". But wanting to avoid that price gouging situation that only exists because of malicious intent from one entity (and pay a reasonable market price for something)? That has nothing to do with any sort of "I want to name any price I choose" entitlement

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

The difference is that when it comes to paying way up for an item, a deliberately created market shortage is not going to be considered the same by many (as one that happens from genuine supply/demand effects in a marketplace.)

Let's say a gas station buys out all the other gas stations in a remote area (and forces people with no other option to pay $10 a gallon when they'd normally pay $3.) Do you really think that station will be viewed the same by customers as if a $10/gallon price there was the result of a nationwide shortage that was out of their control?

Even if none of these situations panned out financially for the hoarder, that doesn't change the fact that it can cause people to pay way up for something that they wouldn't have had to otherwise.

And of course no one is entitled to buy a card for "x price they want". But wanting to avoid a price gouging situation that only exists because of malicious intent from one entity (and pay a reasonable market price for something)? That has nothing to do with any sort of unreasonable and selfish "name your price" entitlement

It's no more deliberate of a shortage than any other card being collected; everybody wants Willie Mays driving up his price. That is the result of deliberate buying by people. It's okay if a group drives up the price of X card, but not if it's one collector?

Nobody is hoarding odd cards and selling them back at triple the price. I am not aware of any example of this happening in hobby history where a hoarder hoarded a card and kept his hoard for sale one at a time at a higher price. Happy to stand corrected if an example can be found.

These hoarders don't seem to be doing it to price gouge - they do it because they want the card and value it more than others do. We've not yet been able to name a single card where it appears to be financially motivated. I fail to see how this is malicious intent; it's the same thing we all do for cards we want. We buy the cards we want. If there's more demand for X card than there is supply (or perception of supply, actual supply seems to have surprisingly little to do with it much of the time), it's price goes up on the market. I collect a card because I like it and it strikes my fancy, I don't see the maliciousness in this.

If I want a bunch of the same card, why should I not collect it? Why should I ensure it is available to you at the price you think it should be worth?

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by G1911

It's no more deliberate of a shortage than any other card being collected; everybody wants Willie Mays driving up his price. That is the result of deliberate buying by people. It's okay if a group drives up the price of X card, but not if it's one collector?

Nobody is hoarding odd cards and selling them back at triple the price. I am not aware of any example of this happening in hobby history where a hoarder hoarded a card and kept his hoard for sale one at a time at a higher price. Happy to stand corrected if an example can be found.

These hoarders don't seem to be doing it to price gouge - they do it because they want the card and value it more than others do. We've not yet been able to name a single card where it appears to be financially motivated. I fail to see how this is malicious intent; it's the same thing we all do for cards we want. We buy the cards we want. If there's more demand for X card than there is supply (or perception of supply, actual supply seems to have surprisingly little to do with it much of the time), it's price goes up on the market. I collect a card because I like it and it strikes my fancy, I don't see the maliciousness in this.

If I want a bunch of the same card, why should I not collect it? Why should I ensure it is available to you at the price you think it should be worth?

You keep conflating "collecting lots of a card cause I like it" with hoarding one w/ only the specific intent to drive price way up. Yes, I feel the latter is a different situation. And those are the spots I'm referring to.

No, the examples like Bartirome and the '57 Paul Smith from my link are not being done by people who just do it for the love of the game. Look at Cole Bartiromo's past. And as mentioned before, the Smith guy has been very vocal in FB groups about hoping to corner the market and drive the price up for a pump and dump.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by G1911

I guess I'm a dick. Buying anything that has more than one potential bidder is at the expense of someone else. I'm an all-collect-no-invest type but I don't believe anyone is entitled to buying a card at X price they want. Whether it's this guy taking 300 Paul Smith's off the market or 300 different collectors driving up the price of Roberto Clemente, I don't see much of a difference. Investors stockpiling stars, player collectors, set builders, they don't seem to offend people but having many of a card for non-investment (I don't believe one of these hoards has ever really panned out financially, and besides bnorth's account above not a single divested hoard has been identified yet) seems to be upsetting. I'm not quite sure why that is beyond the fact it seems quaint.

The post you responded too also ignores the other side of the equation. The 'hoard buyer' is most likely actually pulling more of those cards INTO the market place as the price rises, which obviously weren't viable for sale at previous prices (otherwise, they would have sold). And those now pulled in to SELL their cards are actually reaping the benefits as well.

[butchie_t]

What about the accidental hoarder????

I truly believe Topps was following me to the store every time I bought baseball cards in 1974. It was unbelievable how many Winston LLenas cards I freaking pulled. I truly stopped counting after around 20 of them. Never EVER saw his cards increase in value, then or now. (And no I did not hold onto them. I made them even rarer with my bike spokes.)

Sort of off topic but, jeeze one would have thought I had cornered the Llenas market in my part of the neighborhood back then.

Cheers,

B. T.

[Ronnie73]

There's a few T206's that I hoard, but only with certain backs. So they have gone unnoticed. There's one modern card that I hoard, and because others can look at eBay sold listings and prices, every time another shows up, I have to pay a little more. I'm my own worst enemy. The first couple cards I paid around $17 each. Now I have to expect to pay about $80.

[Bigdaddy]

Originally Posted by G1911

A card being found to be more common than thought, or a discovery of a whole ton of them like the 1964 Giants seems to do the opposite of hoarding. Public hoarding makes the price go up, because of a perception of scarcity of availability. The perception of abundant supply tends to make prices go down.

Yes, you are correct. But the OP asks:

"I'm mostly curious about hoards that have stopped, and their end results."

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Yes, you are correct. But the OP asks:

"I'm mostly curious about hoards that have stopped, and their end results."

Has any of these halted hoards led to a crash in prices or a return to pre-known hoard pricing? We haven't yet identified a card that this has happened too. Even no-longer hoarded cards that are publicly known still seem to have elevated price tags.