Is there a pre-war set likely to decrease in value?

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Brehm

Peter your analysis may be correct but I think there are too many uncertainties to be able to predict what will happen when certain high end collectors complete their sets or decide to sell off portions of their collections. And while such events may cause local perturbations in prices realized, they will likely have little effect over the long term.

Over the long term, I would look at prices for key cards such as T206 Cobb, 1933 Goudey Ruth, and from the post-war period, Mickey Mantle cards, as the best indicators of the general health of the hobby. Those are the cards that many new collectors will probably want initially (sticker shock notwithstanding), before they develop an interest in acquiring cards of lesser-known players, assembling complete sets, etc. In any case, if the Cobbs, Ruths, and Mantles start to decline significantly, I would start to get concerned.

I remember reading an interview with Al Rosen about ten years ago, in which he suggested that he had become much more conservative in his buying practices, and said that "when the music stops, I want to be sitting down." When I got back in the hobby last year, I was amazed at the amount of interest there still is in baseball cards -- not as many shows as there used to be, and not as many card shops, but a huge volume of activity on the internet. I don't think the music will be stopping any time soon.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

I think Jeff's buying patterns may be more typical than the handful of big name collectors putting together T206 sets in PSA 8s. Though there will also be more of those types of collectors on the way as well. It is not as though once Marshall Fogel, Scott Ireland, and Don Luchios all have their sets, the market will crash. For sets like T206 or 33 Goudey, the market is simply not that thin. SOme people want just a few samples. Some collect players or teams. Some collect HOFs. My T206 set ranges from PSA 1 (a Drum back example) to PSA8 (I sold a PSA 9 Johnson this year and replaced it with 5). OVerall my set averages EX and 90% of the set or more is in the vg/ex to ex/mt range, but I do have a handful of really nice HOFs in high grade that I love. Already having a mid-grade Lajoie with bat won't preclude me from buying a high-grade example some day because it has always been one of my favorites in the set. I was lucky enought to put together a high-grade E93 set before most of the prices got too crazy. But I am also happy with nice looking vg and vg/ex cards in other E sets and in 19th century material. My point is that there are a lot of collectors who purchase a wide range of conditions. It is tough to pin people down to one strict pattern.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Guys,

What you all said was true, especially the comment about Ron Santo, unfortunately I'm trying to behave.

It still comes back to the collector breaking the fall of the prices. A person who wants an all PSA 8 set of T206s will pay more for a PSA 8 Heinie Smith than somebody that collects primarily PSA 4 and 5s. The guy that collects PSA 4 and 5s is willing to let the price drop further. If the card gets into his price range, he might bid.

Ultimately it is up to the collector to break the fall. If he doesn't emerge the price will keep dropping.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Spaeth

Your wrote PS: "Jeff et al" is not a person's name; it means Jeff and others.

It's French for Jeff and Al, no?

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian

we.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

Guys,

We really are splitting hairs. You are basically confirming my theory. The set that will drop the most is the set without the strong collector base. You have basically said that the T206 has a strong collector base, so they will not be the set that drops the most. But there are a heck of ugly pre-war sets out there that many of us would not be caught dead collecting, well that's the set that will drop the most.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian

"But there are a heck of ugly pre-war sets out there that many of us would not be caught dead collecting, well that's the set that will drop the most"



Name five.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Spaeth

Prices will be stronger for sets that are more heavily collected. An interesting insight, where have I seen that before? Oh yeah, Econ 101, demand and supply.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian

I will quote myself from the 6th response to this thread....




Re: Is there a pre-war set likely to decrease in value? May 31 2007, 11:52 AM


In the short term, I would be concerned with issues that are thinly traded.

In the long term, I would be concerned with the rate of new collectors joining the hobby versus the expansion of supply (natural or unnatural).

[Archive]

Posted By: dstudeba

Everything but t206s, e95s, t205s, t204s, and Cracker Jacks are ugly.

Dump them or live with shame.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter chao

T203, T205, W512, W9316, and '43 MP and Co.

Peter

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Unlike the post above yours that was probably tongue in cheek (a little bit) yours doesn't seem so. Lumping T205 in with the other ones you noted is kind of weird....I guess I should consider the source .....take care

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Spaeth

Leon, it's all in the eye of the beholder.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

At least you didn't say it's all in the eye of the "holder"....then we would have 200 posts on the merits of raw vs slabs.....I haven't seen one of those in what must be hours now......

[Archive]

Posted By: JK

Peter C.,

The problem with your theory on ugly sets that none of us would be caught dead collecting is exactly that - most dont collect those sets (t205 excluded as many think this is a beautiful set and Im sure it will have no shortage of collectors). Therefore, with demand already thin, they do not sell for as much as more "collectable" sets to begin with, so there wont be huge drops in my opinion.