PWCC expands its lending activities

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

That is tax avoidance, and those people could get in trouble. Also, it would make sense if the vault was required to collect and pay over state taxes for items removed from a vault and sent to a tax state within X months of receipt. I don’t know if such a law/requirement exists.

I believe it is up to the individual to pay state use tax, I can't see how that is the vault owner's burden.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I believe it is up to the individual to pay state use tax, I can't see how that is the vault owner's burden.

I’m guessing it’s just a matter of time until CA and other states get wise to the vaults and start requiring reporting to get their use tax from the collector. I just don’t see the states being willing to forego that much revenue without a fight.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by raulus

I’m guessing it’s just a matter of time until CA and other states get wise to the vaults and start requiring reporting to get their use tax from the collector. I just don’t see the states being willing to forego that much revenue without a fight.

If the Feds or states wanted to collect more taxes, it'd probably be easier for them to extend to PWCC and auction houses to send 1099s to consignors who sell over $600 like they already do for ebay.

[Rhotchkiss]

Phil, I agree with you 100% that this is likely not a good deal for the borrowers. And I also agree that it’s real good to be the lender on this one. Nevertheless, the arrangement provides liquidity for a relatively illiquid asset and I feel consenting adults should be able to transact however they choose, even if it’s more dangerous for one party. And, I believe that people should be responsible for their actions- if you are a big enough boy to buy a card and borrow against it, then don’t bitch when you lose your card to pay back the lender.

Regarding a propped up industry, this does smack of the Big Short in many ways (in a mini sense). Similarly, a super-high stock market propped up by buyers on margin loans. It most definitely appears that this will have an unhappy ending for some; I suspect most own the shiny stuff. But that’s how we learn and grow. Maybe it takes some pain to get regulation and oversight. Ultimately, these loans have utility.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Phil, I agree with you 100% that this is likely not a good deal for the borrowers. And I also agree that it’s real good to be the lender on this one. Nevertheless, the arrangement provides liquidity for a relatively illiquid asset and I feel consenting adults should be able to transact however they choose, even if it’s more dangerous for one party. And, I believe that people should be responsible for their actions- if you are a big enough boy to buy a card and borrow against it, then don’t bitch when you lose your card to pay back the lender.

Regarding a propped up industry, this does smack of the Big Short in many ways (in a mini sense). Similarly, a super-high stock market propped up by buyers on margin loans. It most definitely appears that this will have an unhappy ending for some; I suspect most own the shiny stuff. But that’s how we learn and grow. Maybe it takes some pain to get regulation and oversight. Ultimately, these loans have utility.

Agreed. Institutional lending on collectibles has been around for a long time but the asset class is more mature. It's one thing to have a Monet sitting in a Bank vault as collateral, another having a Luka Doncic sitting in an AH vault.

Sports cards as an asset class is very, very young, with that comes a lot of volatility and risk, and as an asset class leans more towards the stock market model than the Art market. How are those NFT's working out for ya'? Meme stocks? Crypto? Sometimes we're not as smart as we think we are and it's never a good idea to over leverage an asset class to buy more of the same asset class. There will be some investors that may use this tool wisely but there will be plenty who don't.

Live and learn though.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I believe it is up to the individual to pay state use tax, I can't see how that is the vault owner's burden.

I am sure there is something agency or bailment law that states could use to impose some burden on the vault. I know it’s somewhat different, but if eBay has to issue 1099s to anyone who sells more than $600 (or something like that), than I am sure “they” can find a way to make a vault collect sales taxes on item received and released within a certain period.

It’s a brave new world. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. The states love all of this new revenue. They will fight hard to ensure it if they start losing enough to vaults.

Personally, I don’t think state sales taxes should be due on items bought for investment. We don’t pay sales tax on stock, bonds, and precious metals in many states. Why cards held for investment? We don’t “use” or consume cards.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I am sure there is something agency or bailment law that states could use to impose some burden on the vault. I know it’s somewhat different, but if eBay has to issue 1099s to anyone who sells more than $600 (or something like that), than I am sure “they” can find a way to make a vault collect sales taxes on item received and released within a certain period.

It’s a brave new world. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. The states love all of this new revenue. They will fight hard to ensure it if they start losing enough to vaults.

Personally, I don’t think state sales taxes should be due on items bought for investment. We don’t pay sales tax on stock, bonds, and precious metals in many states. Why cards held for investment? We don’t “use” or consume cards.

I meant that under current law there is no such burden. Absent some constitutional impediment there can always be new laws and regulations.

[Kidnapped18]

I think this is great news! PWCC saw a need and filled it for their customers. I have never had a problem with PWCC and still use their platform to purchase cards most recently this week. I even have a handful of cards in the Vault. I know not all on this board agree with or deal with PWCC but I like the loan concept and cards as collateral.

FWIW PWCC collects state taxes when you pay for the items and have them shipped to you.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kidnapped18

I think this is great news! PWCC saw a need and filled it for their customers. I have never had a problem with PWCC and still use their platform to purchase cards most recently this week. I even have a handful of cards in the Vault. I know not all on this board agree with or deal with PWCC but I like the loan concept and cards as collateral.

FWIW PWCC collects state taxes when you pay for the items and have them shipped to you.

As seller, but not when you buy a card off ebay and have it shipped to the vault, as I understand it.

[Schlesinj]

I know the Alt platform announced they would be offering a similar program several months ago. If I remember correctly the rate was nearly 10% and the loan to value was something like 60% of perceived value.

So now people can leverage off their house value or stock portfolio or sports collectibles or some type of unsecured loan. You can buy a fraction of a stock, baseball card or a house too. Very interesting times we live in.

[Casey2296]

Two words: Leverage and betting on the come.

It's a nice lending model and very profitable, the risk is all on you and the asset. When the chips are down they don't even have to come after you, they just lock down your asset which they already have in their possession. I'm in lending and I would love to read the fine print on this program and would probably participate in it as a lender.

You have a collection of cards that are valued at today's value but if your precious 48 Jackie drops in value I'm keeping your card and you owe me money and I'll come get it.

Same model as mortgage backed securities in 2008, or putting 20k in card purchases on you credit card and not doing the math. My vote is no if you want to sleep at night.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Two words: Leverage and betting on the come.
.

Makes me wonder how much in these loans is outstanding.

Certainly if there’s a lot out there, then that just further raises the odds that a significant downturn leads to forced liquidations and a downward spiral.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by raulus

Makes me wonder how much in these loans is outstanding.

Certainly if there’s a lot out there, then that just further raises the odds that a significant downturn leads to forced liquidations and a downward spiral.

It's a fools errand.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

It's a fools errand.

“Leverage upon leverage upon leverage. What could possibly go wrong?”

- every banker in the country in 2007

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It won't happen unless someone makes it happen. Who is that someone?

Originally Posted by Schlesinj

I know the Alt platform announced they would be offering a similar program several months ago. If I remember correctly the rate was nearly 10% and the loan to value was something like 60% of perceived value.

So now people can leverage off their house value or stock portfolio or sports collectibles or some type of unsecured loan. You can buy a fraction of a stock, baseball card or a house too. Very interesting times we live in.

This will have the same effect as "negative AM" loans and 100% financing did on the housing market, which led to great financial crisis. I just don't think it will wreak havoc any further than the hobby itself. Although a little different to the hype when I was collecting in the 80s, it certainly does rhyme.

[Casey2296]

[QUOTE=Schlesinj;2261823If I remember correctly the rate was nearly 10% and the loan to value was something like 60% of perceived value.[/QUOTE]

That would be my model, although 60% might be a little high. You can also do a deep dive and offer 8% on Ruth, Gehrig, Cobb, etc. and 12% on the shiny stuff, adjusting the ltv accordingly.

[mrreality68]

It could make the collecting market interesting and it could lure alot of people to their vault that might not normally go to them.

For example. Collectors like me tend to miss out on some great items that we need to have (really I want but we are addicted). Sadly not liquid enough and miss out alot and I know i can pay things back most times fast but I cannot buy the item do to lack of funds. IF I put it in their vault. WHICH I AM NOT CURRENTLY CONSIDERING. I would have the funds available so if a "must have" came available I could get it and not miss out.

That could be a strong incentive.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by mrreality68

Sadly not liquid enough and miss out alot and I know i can pay things back most times fast but I cannot buy the item do to lack of funds.

Unless I’m misunderstanding the offer, you would still need to put 40% down up front. Obviously 40% is less than 100%, but for nice pieces that don’t come cheap, it might be similarly challenging to come up with 40% as to come up with 100%.

If you’re not buying from PWCC directly, it’s also unclear to me whether PWCC would front you the cash to buy it from someone else. If you’re buying an item from another auction house, then I suspect you would need to pay 100%, have it shipped to the vault, and then you could borrow the 60% against it.

Bottom line is that I’m not sure that it solves the problem of coming up with the cash to pay for the item in the first place.

Now, if you had a bunch of items in the vault, and you wanted to go out and buy some more, then borrowing against the items in the vault definitely could solve the problem of coming up with cash to make the original purchase for your new item(s).

[Snapolit1]

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...03ffa-83282852

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by raulus

Unless I’m misunderstanding the offer, you would still need to put 40% down up front. Obviously 40% is less than 100%, but for nice pieces that don’t come cheap, it might be similarly challenging to come up with 40% as to come up with 100%.

If you’re not buying from PWCC directly, it’s also unclear to me whether PWCC would front you the cash to buy it from someone else. If you’re buying an item from another auction house, then I suspect you would need to pay 100%, have it shipped to the vault, and then you could borrow the 60% against it.

Bottom line is that I’m not sure that it solves the problem of coming up with the cash to pay for the item in the first place.

Now, if you had a bunch of items in the vault, and you wanted to go out and buy some more, then borrowing against the items in the vault definitely could solve the problem of coming up with cash to make the original purchase for your new item(s).

Hi

I am sure you do not have to put money down to borrow money. Basically they will loan you up to 60% of the value of your cards that you have in their fault. This way if you default on the loan they have your cards already but can take possession of it and then sell it. And the 40% covers them and their expenses and the loan plus interest you have paid if you did not default