Investors in Collectable concerned: 'They are holding our items hostage'

[Peter_Spaeth]

So an investor in a particular item is stuck until Collectables deems it appropriate to sell the item?

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So an investor in a particular item is stuck until Collectables deems it appropriate to sell the item?

I (very) lightly dabbled in it when it first came out. There’s two main ways to get your money as far as I recall. First, after you buy your shares in a large item you can just sell your shares to other investors. If the market has gone up / others perceive the value of the piece has gone up, the price you get will be more (and, obviously, vice versa). Second, if an offer comes in on an item there is a vote on whether to accept it or not. If the vote passes, shareholders are cashed out that way. The tiny shares I bought when the market was COVID hot all seemed to go down a little, but that’s just anecdotal.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I (very) lightly dabbled in it when it first came out. There’s two main ways to get your money as far as I recall. First, after you buy your shares in a large item you can just sell your shares to other investors. If the market has gone up / others perceive the value of the piece has gone up, the price you get will be more (and, obviously, vice versa).

Second, if an offer comes in on an item there is a vote on whether to accept it or not. If the vote passes, shareholders are cashed out that way. The tiny shares I bought when the market was COVID hot all seemed to go down a little, but that’s just anecdotal.

It looks like that 1st option is no longer available, and why anybody who put money into this should rightfully be pissed (not me LOL) at how they've been misled.

Fine print and sociopathy should not be a valid excuse to scam people IMO.....greedy victims or not.

The two biggest red flags seem to be getting glossed over here.

#1. The company as originally founded was sold off to somebody else, likely without the knowledge of the "investors" of all the memorabilia assets.

#2. This little nugget which made option 1 stated above to sell your stake impossible.

What about investors who are still actively trading the memorabilia? Well, they're not. Trading was halted in late April, when Collectable failed to file the necessary financial paperwork with the SEC.

I also don't like the fact that owner #1 cut bait and ran the second he realized this might not have been a sound financial idea, leaving all of his customers in the lurch, and then expressing concern about their predicament from a safe distance away, while owner #2 seems to have a George Costanza clone acting as an uncommunicative figurehead, while financial strip mining is going on in the background.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Starting with Brent, it seems many folks want to turn sports collectibles into Wall Street. While of course it's quite possible for an individual to do well buying and selling, it seems the gimmicks trying to turn collectibles into securities don't work and are ultimately just schemes by other people to siphon off fees.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Starting with Brent, it seems many folks want to turn sports collectibles into Wall Street. While of course it's quite possible for an individual to do well buying and selling, it seems the gimmicks trying to turn collectibles into securities don't work and are ultimately just schemes by other people to siphon off fees.

Agree -- collectibles and art should not be securitized.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by bk400

Agree -- collectibles and art should not be securitized.

Every day another ding dong puts "great investment" on his listing. So much for just adding a dam card to your collection. I

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

So an investor in a particular item is stuck until Collectables deems it appropriate to sell the item?

This is actually commonplace in real estate investments and independent movie production investments. The operating agreement leaves the 'investor' virtually no recourse, except as the organizing state laws may limit. Cali, for example, does not allow the management of an LLC to completely insulate itself from all fiduciary duties; that would be a license to steal. Even if there is something stinky in the potpourri, however, filing a civil case is expensive and in an ironic twist, the sued manager often can tender the defense of the case to the LLC and use its assets to pay his lawyers. What worries me about the combination of a valuable underlying asset that is controlled by management with only a small ownership stake and extraordinarily wide discretion, is exploitation, even if not illegal. It is too tempting for management to legally destroy the other investors' equity simply by continuing to operate by lending the entity the money needed: the longer the entity goes on, the more it owes to the manager for floating its operations, until the entity is either restructured to dilute the other investors' equity to nothing in order to prevent a creditor action, or the assets are sold to pay the debts. Not in any way saying that is what is happening here--I have no inside information--just that when my clients bring me deals to review that have this sort of structure I warn then not to do it because of the potential for loss of their investment.

[conor912]

Fractional ownership is going south?! Shocker.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by conor912

Fractional ownership is going south?! Shocker.

NFTs I hear as well. Another shocker

[Seven]

Originally Posted by conor912

Fractional ownership is going south?! Shocker.

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

NFTs I hear as well. Another shocker

Fellas, I just started investing in some Tullip bulbs. No way this can go wrong! Message me for more info!