Gas prices and buying cards

[parkplace33]

Will the rise in gas price affect collectors buying cards?

I think in the long term no, but short term, definitely. When you are paying $50 plus to fill up your tank, other areas have to get cut 😕

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Will the rise in gas price affect collectors buying cards?

I think in the long term no, but short term, definitely. When you are paying $50 plus to fill up your tank, other areas have to get cut 😕

Inflation will definitely cut into card prices, not the biggies so much but cards in the $500-$2500 range will take a hit.

[ullmandds]

agreed...shipping will cost more too. This will affect the lower 2/3 of the market imo.

[jingram058]

No, the well-heeled, as so many who frequent these threads are, will go right along, totally indifferent.

A while back I was buying gas for my Honda Civic. Fellow pulls in with a giant dualie truck, all black and chrome with an electric step that slid out for him to get out. He's dressed in black, with white shirt, cowboy hat and boots, string tie. I casually asked how he liked putting gas into that big rig. "Son", he says, looking at me over his Roy Orbison sun glasses, "I've reached that station in life where I can afford nice things, like this here truck. I'd pay $20 a gallon if that's what it goes to."

[iwantitiwinit]

I doubt very much that the current increase in gas prices will hamper someone willing to pay $1,000 for a card. That said if gas hits $10 a gallon (which I think it will) I might have to up that to $2,500.

[Johnny630]

People are going to be very skirmish and tight with their moneys online, eBay and at shows...especially middle and low grade...it’s gonna be tight.

Auctions are a different animal especially for the higher end Graded Cards inflation and Rising Gas Prices Don’t really matter for the elite class.

[rjackson44]

Gas prices I just went to Boston chicken ,$20 for a half a chicken lol..time to sell my 66 orr😳

[Foo3112]

If someone here will be affected by gas prices, then I don't think they should be buying cards - especially at today's prices.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by rjackson44

Gas prices I just went to Boston chicken ,$20 for a half a chicken lol..time to sell my 66 orr��

You eat at Boston Market and the gas comes with the meal.

[Bobbycee]

You may be right on $10 a gallon- although that might be a bit high. If so, this country is in for a very bad time. Many products and services are derived from oil. That would mean massive inflation, and a hard pause for some of us collectors.

[mrreality68]

Gas prices going up will not effect most people buying cards the bigger issue would be what happens to their investments like their 401k and stocks. If they start losing money in the market to me that would have people slowing down or the card purchases or stepping back from the “bigger cards” they might have bought.

[Tyruscobb]

Psychology and the stock market are also factors. The stock market is down this year, and prices are up across the board. Even though the gains are only on paper, people feel richer and spend more when they see their retirement accounts rising. People typically tighten their belts when the market goes down.

[VintageBall]

If anybody really thought my comment was a statement in the belief that Russia has truly free elections, well I have a nice T206 Wagner to sell you together with the Brooklyn Bridge.

A baseball card forum is not the place that people go to for serious political discourse. Unfortunately too many people vote for and root for the success of political leaders as if they are baseball teams -- where you support your chosen uniform no matter what.

And before anybody assumes I support one party unfailingly, know that I am a registered Independent who has voted for candidates from different parties depending on their platforms.

Stop just rooting solely for laundry and a symbol of a donkey or an elephant. Unless it's Yankee pinstripes or Packer Green and gold or Giants blue or whatever sports team you suppport. Then, by all means, go nuts.

I visited this thread to read how people were reacting to economic realities, in terms of sports card collecting. For the most part, that's what I got and I appreciate the different opinions about how prices will be impacted. The political stuff is a different story.

[Exhibitman]

Yep, go to a politics site.

As for the OP, look at history. We've had several economic issues since collecting became a thing. Hell, the first few Nationals were held during a nasty recession. Don't forget 2007-2008, either. I came home from the 2007 National to find half my client base (real estate-related businesses) had collapsed. I had to sell cards that August to cover my expenses. Got better.

But I digress.

My $0.02 is that in times of economic downturn the super-expensive stuff moves independent of the news because the rich are basically immune from the sort of concerns that would affect sales. The art market is an example. It has no cyclical ties to the economy because the people buying are not reliant on the economy for their already-amassed wealth. The same is true of the low end. Guys who buy $1-$5 cards will still collect. It is cheaper and funner than a Starbucks. Even in the 2008-2009 recession, the dollar box tables at the National were hopping.

You also cannot forget the role of hybrid and electric cars in this. My wife has a Chevy Volt (electric) and I have a Ford C-Max. She puts in a small amount of gas once a year or so, and I fill up about once a month. At ten bucks a gallon my gas costs will go from $55 a month to $120 a month. Not an issue for me.

The part of the hobby that gets killed in a recession is the middle class of the hobby: the several hundred to low thousands segment. I wouldn't have an issue buying a $100 card in a downturn but definitely would have an issue buying a $5,000 card.

[egri]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

You also cannot forget the role of hybrid and electric cars in this. My wife has a Chevy Volt (electric) and I have a Ford C-Max. She puts in a small amount of gas once a year or so, and I fill up about once a month. At ten bucks a gallon my gas costs will go from $55 a month to $120 a month. Not an issue for me.

A couple years ago, two guys I used to work with who drove trucks and had killer commutes went out and bought Teslas. Even with a $500+ monthly payment and increased electric bill, the savings more than made up for it, and with gas prices now, I'm sure the math is even more in their favor.

[joshleon]

Originally Posted by egri

A couple years ago, two guys I used to work with who drove trucks and had killer commutes went out and bought Teslas. Even with a $500+ monthly payment and increased electric bill, the savings more than made up for it, and with gas prices now, I'm sure the math is even more in their favor.

I've read it depends on which electric utility market you're in. PacNW (for example) it makes sense bc electric costs are lower and gas prices higher.

The 100 mile range keeps me wary.

[Deertick]

Originally Posted by joshleon

The 100 mile range keeps me wary.

There is only one EV that has a 100 mi range, only six under 175. 90% are 200+ with the median around 260.

[joshleon]

Originally Posted by VintageBall

If anybody really thought my comment was a statement in the belief that Russia has truly free elections, well I have a nice T206 Wagner to sell you together with the Brooklyn Bridge.

A baseball card forum is not the place that people go to for serious political discourse. Unfortunately too many people vote for and root for the success of political leaders as if they are baseball teams -- where you support your chosen uniform no matter what.

And before anybody assumes I support one party unfailingly, know that I am a registered Independent who has voted for candidates from different parties depending on their platforms.

Stop just rooting solely for laundry and a symbol of a donkey or an elephant. Unless it's Yankee pinstripes or Packer Green and gold or Giants blue or whatever sports team you suppport. Then, by all means, go nuts.

I visited this thread to read how people were reacting to economic realities, in terms of sports card collecting. For the most part, that's what I got and I appreciate the different opinions about how prices will be impacted. The political stuff is a different story.

This is how I feel 100%! What I have learned this past decade is that in order to stop this political insanity we (starting with "me") have to stop rooting for politicians like fanboys...our side, your side BS. I have chosen to completely tune out the "politics as theater" side of things. Until we all do this, there will be a market for our body politic to continue as they have been; like actors in kabuki theater.

If we all tune out to the "politics as entertainment" industry, politicians can go back to being boring bureaucrats, getting work done on behalf of all people.

Get with the 20s...rooting for political parties is over. Let's stop talking about it (I realize I am here).

That all being said, I do think the ME (Sauds, UAE) have more to do with the current oil issue than anything else. They have favorites in the west.

Edit to add: Some of my favorite people have completely opposite political views than I do...some people I detest have the same views. So I don't engage on political views bc life is better without doing so.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

Will the rise in gas price affect collectors buying cards?

I think in the long term no, but short term, definitely. When you are paying $50 plus to fill up your tank, other areas have to get cut 😕

Ha. I would kill for a $50 fillup. I filled it today for a cool $89.82.

[VintageBall]

Here are some pictures of players and cars. They definitely had the cash to fill up:

Honus_Fishin.jpgRegal_Wagner2.jpgCopy_of_Conlon_Clarke.jpgJack_Scott_c22_24_re.jpgc1909_Washington.jpgBrush_Coughlin.jpg1909_Players_Entering_Cin.jpg1900s_oldfield_tinker.jpgTinker_Case.jpgCarrigan_Auto.jpg1911-12-Drummers-PC-C.jpg1913_White_Sox_Oakland.jpg1914_or_16_Ennis_TX_Tigers.jpg1912-Snodgrass-MattyCar-PC.jpg

[VintageBall]

Of course I copied the data, Vintagetoppsguy.

Do you think I manually counted the permits?

The info comes from the US Department of the Interior and the resulting audits by the Center for Biological Diversity and most importantly by the nonpartisan Politifact fact checking service.

Here are 2 such fact checking links, for instance:

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...9000-unused-o/

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...ear-par-trump/

Poitifact has spent years checking claims and calling out both Democrats and Republicans when they stretch the truth. As per Wikipedia: "PolitiFact has won the Pulitzer Prize and has been both praised and criticized by independent observers, conservatives and liberals alike. Both liberal and conservative bias have been alleged at different points..."

By the way, you definitely are an expert in gas and oil and you do have an agenda, as well, politically. That's OK. These two things don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Neither does having an inquisitive mind, which you also clearly have. And so do I.

You make some good points, as you clearly know your stuff. But why is it that it can be more profitable not to drill in some instances, as you state? And when your country and the world need such production, can these companies step up and do the right thing even if it is less profitable? I honestly don't know the nuances of such answers, but think the question is relevant and deserving of being asked by the public, our leaders and journalists.

And since you so politely asked:

My background is in journalism, research and later marketing communications. I covered media, technology and politics before going to work for agencies and marcom companies representing Fortune 500 brands (no political work of any kind). Precisely because I started out covering politics is why I am a registered Independent -- so that I wasn't a card carrying member of either political team. You can't give people a fair shake and fair analysis if you're allied either with or against them. And I think the Congressional leaders I interviewed appreciated that.

And while I was a journalist I wrote a book on media and politics for MIT Press, with an emphasis on how political candidates and leaders used new media technologies to sway the public and spread their messages, dating back to around 1788 up to and into the 1990s.

My main coverage areas were media and technology for magazines and wire service distribution, but I also covered some Democrats and Republicans and subcommittee meetings on the Hill. I then moved exclusively into PR and communications for clients of all stripes, both in-house and at agencies -- again, all non-political work...!

But more importantly: what did you think of the baseball player transportation images of Type 1 photos and postcards?

How do you think they will be impacted by current price swings?

Lastly, if I ever went to work in gas and oil, I most certainly would need "schooling," just as some others on this board would clearly need some "refining" of their manners if they chose certain lines of work dealing with other people.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by VintageBall

But why is it that it can be more profitable not to drill in some instances, as you state? And when your county and the world need such production, can these companies step up and do the right thing even if it is less profitable? I honestly don't know the nuances of such answers, but think the question is relevant and deserving of being asked by the public, our leaders and journalists.

I want to clear up one thing first. You stated earlier that "there are currently 9,173 approved oil drilling permits that have been approved but are going unused by the oil industry." That is correct. However, those 9,173 unused permits are on federal land. That's important to note.

I'm trying not to get political, but Biden ran on a campaign platform based partially on green energy and climate change, and even promised to ban drilling on federal land. So why is his administration issuing drilling permits on federal land? I don't know the answer to that. But put yourself in the shoes of the oil companies. Are you really going to invest all that money into new drilling on federal land knowing that the administration could impose a moratorium on it at any minute? Think about that and certainly you can understand the reluctancy to drill? Maybe that’s why those federal land drilling permits go unused, but I’m only speculating. That’s way beyond my pay grade.

Last year, Chevron, Shell, ExxonMobil and BP all had record profit years. Good for them. I hope they continue to do so (I own Chevron and ExxonMobil stock). If one owns a business and they have a record profit year we look at them as a symbol of success. But when the oil companies have record profit years, they're considered greedy and evil. Why? Where is the line drawn between successful and greed/evil? Is it a dollar amount? Is it a profit percentage?

Now to answer your question above. Why would they bring more oil to market? What incentive do they have? If you found 10 T206 Wagners and wanted to sell them, would you release them all on the market at the same time or slowly over a long period of time? Of course you wouldn't flood the market. So why would the oil companies? It also has to do with not reporting the reserves (no drilling - no reports), but I won’t get into all that because I don’t know how to explain it properly. A friend explained it to me and I understood it, but I don’t want to misspeak.

I’ll leave you with this. I’m not the one that brought up drilling in this thread. It was you and others as if somehow more drilling solves the current problem. Oh, really? How’s that? Are there gas shortages in America right now where people are waiting in long lines? Are refineries not operating at near full capacity? So how would drilling solve the problem? I don’t think the current gas prices are the result of a lack of drilling or production issue at all. We only got on that topic because others brought it up.

[VintageBall]

Thank you for you reply and perspective.

So what you are saying is that the current administration has not actually DONE anything to cause people to blame it for current gas prices.

Production is the same, there are no shortages, just some promises to go greener that actually have not been kept (which is likely why so many environmental groups are actually angry at the current administration). What the stats show and you just stated is that over the last year and two months since the administration has been in office, we have just experienced more of the same, in terms of drilling, production, oil and gas company profits, etc.

So, it seems to me after reading your reply, you are saying exactly what Politifact said after they did their research on this topic that you already knew about. It seems to me and others who have just learned the facts or already knew them, that pointing fingers at the administration is just an easy target with no basis in factual reality.

So am I correct after reading your reply, to assume that what seems to be causing the price of gas at the pump is the FEAR of actual shortages here coupled with the more realistic fear of shortages elsewhere in Europe where they do rely more on oil and gas from Russia?

I also just read this obvious fact: "The coronavirus pandemic prompted a big fall in oil demand and gasoline prices, due to declines in driving and air travel. As the economy has slowly rebounded, growing demand has boosted prices at the pump."

Also, are the numbers in this article correct from The Hill about where our oil and gas actually comes from:

https://thehill.com/policy/internati...lies-come-from

It seems to show that we only get around 1% of the oil that actually makes it to our gas pumps from Russia. And that this amount is easily replaceable and that the percent from Russia was falling in 2021 BEFORE the invasion of Ukraine.

So when you combine this with what you and Politifact both mentioned about domestic production, it seems like we are doing OK.

So wouldn't this suggest that current higher prices should only be temporary?

And that, politics aside, the main culprit behind higher gas prices is actually the administration that moved to invade Ukraine and not the administration that rattled its sword on the campaign trail, making vague promises about going green that have not actually been kept.

And if we actually went greener wouldn't that mean that over the long haul we would be less dependent on any foreign producers and the price of our energy would actually fall over time? This is probably a conversation for another thread .

I thank you Vintagetoppsguy and the Socratic method and, as Exhibitman Adam has quipped in other threads, don't forget to tip your servers on the way out tonight...

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by VintageBall

Thank you for you reply and perspective.

So what you are saying is that the current administration has not actually DONE anything to cause people to blame it for current gas prices.

Production is the same, there are no shortages, just some promises to go greener that actually have not been kept (which is likely why so many environmental groups are actually angry at the current administration). What the stats show and you just stated is that over the last year and two months since the administration has been in office, we have just experienced more of the same, in terms of drilling, production, oil and gas company profits, etc.

So, it seems to me after reading your reply, you are saying exactly what Politifact said after they did their research on this topic that you already knew about. It seems to me and others who have just learned the facts or already knew them, that pointing fingers at the administration is just an easy target with no basis in factual reality.

So am I correct after reading your reply, to assume that what seems to be causing the price of gas at the pump is the FEAR of actual shortages here coupled with the more realistic fear of shortages elsewhere in Europe where they do rely more on oil and gas from Russia?

I also just read this obvious fact: "The coronavirus pandemic prompted a big fall in oil demand and gasoline prices, due to declines in driving and air travel. As the economy has slowly rebounded, growing demand has boosted prices at the pump."

Also, are the numbers in this article correct from The Hill about where our oil and gas actually comes from:

https://thehill.com/policy/internati...lies-come-from

It seems to show that we only get around 1% of the oil that actually makes it to our gas pumps from Russia. And that this amount is easily replaceable and that the percent from Russia was falling in 2021 BEFORE the invasion of Ukraine.

So when you combine this with what you and Politifact both mentioned about domestic production, it seems like we are doing OK.

So wouldn't this suggest that current higher prices should only be temporary?

And that, politics aside, the main culprit behind higher gas prices is actually the administration that moved to invade Ukraine and not the administration that rattled its sword on the campaign trail, making vague promises about going green that have not actually been kept.

And if we actually went greener wouldn't that mean that over the long haul we would be less dependent on any foreign producers and the price of our energy would actually fall over time? This is probably a conversation for another thread .

I thank you Vintagetoppsguy and the Socratic method and, as Exhibitman Adam has quipped in other threads, don't forget to tip your servers on the way out tonight...

Nope, it's still 100% the current administration's fault. Since you lack the understanding why, I'll PM you the answer when I get back later today because I don't want to get an infraction for talking politics. I've actually touched on it twice in this thread, but I'll just come out and say it in my PM..

[VintageBall]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Nope, it's still 100% the current administration's fault. Since you lack the understanding why, I'll PM you the answer when I get back later today because I don't want to get an infraction for talking politics. I've actually touched on it twice in this thread, but I'll just come out and say it in my PM..

Wow. 100%. That means that there isn't even 1 percent of blame placed at Putin's feet or that of any other party.

Even the right-est of right wingers on the Hill won't express such certainty. Even they lay a little of the blame on the guy sending in those tanks and bombs.

You should probably PM Republican Congressional leadership first before you PM me. They would love to be able to use your talking points.

"Reductivism: the practice of considering or presenting something complicated in a simple way, especially a way that is too simple."

I really thought you were making some good points until your last post. Of course, unlike you, I wasn't 100 percent sure of this last sentence of mine. You probably had even changed some minds. Oh well. Easy come, easy go.

[Foo3112]

Leon, can we just get rid of this thread already.

[Gnep31]

Originally Posted by Foo3112

Leon, can we just get rid of this thread already.

Who is forcing you to read it?

As with filling up a truck for more than $125 (my last purchase), it comes down to what one can afford. There are wants and needs.

Do you need gas? Most of yes. Do you need that card? If your answer is yes then you can afford the current inflation. The more this current administrations policies increase inflation it is only natural that our needs and wants will change.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Foo3112

Leon, can we just get rid of this thread already.

I am good with that.
.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by VintageBall

You should probably PM Republican Congressional leadership first before you PM me. They would love to be able to use your talking points.

At least my talking points are MY talking points based on my own opinions, experiences and knowledge. You on the other hand are a typical modern-day journalist. You lack the intelligence to formulate your own talking points so you copy and paste from others. Sad really.

Refresh my memory. Who was it that got caught plagiarizing Neil Kinnock's speech as well as the speeches of several others? His name is on the tip of my tongue, but I just can't recall it.

[GeoPoto]

Speaking to Rotchkiss: The "special/new factors" you cite as likely to mitigate any correction in collectable values strike me in an opposite way -- likely to exacerbate the severity of the correction, which is now virtually certain to occur soon. There is no way to stop an inflationary trend once it reaches double digits (Putin's contribution, despite Biden's rheteric, is not in the numbers yet) except by 1) limiting the availability of money until interest rates exceed the rate of inflation: and 2) limiting federal spending until it becomes credible that the existing debt can be serviced and eventually repaid. The recession that will occur when these steps are taken will have the same effect on card values as 2008, but worse because interest rates will be much higher.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[VintageBall]

Here i thought I might learn something from an expert. I naively thought that mistakes had been made by Obama, Trump, Biden, Merkle, Putin and others, in terms of dealing with Russian expansion and energy policies. I thought we would all learn that the answer was nuanced and came with data and statistics and facts not readily known by those not fluently conversant with the realities of your industry (gas, oil and energy). I naively thought that the price at the pump was due to a plethora of factors.

But nope, I've now been told by an expert that the answer is simple and 100% the fault of one party.

And that answer comes with personal insults.

Well done.

You must be proud.