An opinion or two (ok more than two)

[keyzick]

Good stuff Jerlins. I believe you've posted at other times, but in case some people reading this aren't aware - sports card trading IS your business, correct? I just wanted to make sure people understand yours is a credible opinion on these matters.

By the way - as someone who was fortunate to have been gifted a ton of older cards from his older brother (by 9 years), I have quite a few valuable ones in safe deposit box for the last 20 years or so. Now, mind you, this was before the whole grading system (or what I understand of it) really came into play...my question is - how would you suggest I go about getting these cards graded (am I even using the right term?)?

Thanks!

[Jerlins]

[quote:2f521115cf="keyzick"]Good stuff Jerlins. I believe you've posted at other times, but in case some people reading this aren't aware - sports card trading IS your business, correct? I just wanted to make sure people understand yours is a credible opinion on these matters.

By the way - as someone who was fortunate to have been gifted a ton of older cards from his older brother (by 9 years), I have quite a few valuable ones in safe deposit box for the last 20 years or so. Now, mind you, this was before the whole grading system (or what I understand of it) really came into play...my question is - how would you suggest I go about getting these cards graded (am I even using the right term?)?

Thanks![/quote:2f521115cf]

Well, a few things:

1. Are the cards valuable and in decent enough condition to grade? Old does not necessarily translate into valuable. The only reason to grade something in off condition is to verify it's authenticity. We recently had a 1933 Gehrig graded that was in wretched condition, but still had it graded for that very reason. It came back a 1 (out of 10), but the purchaser happily bought it because he knew it was real.

2. If you are not familiar with the industry on the whole, seek the advice of a reputable dealer. An honest one will be more than happy to advise you as to your next option. (Yes, there are still scumbags out there). As a member of B2B Dealernet, I am in contact with a near 1000 owner/operators out there, and familiar with most. I'd be happy to suggest the ones in your area.

3. Personally, if you opt for grading I wouldn't use any other service but Beckett Grading. They have a reputation of tougher grading and because of that, their graded cards command the most money. Some other grading companies have the reputation of grading according to the volume their customers bring to them, Beckett is not one of them.

And to answer your question, yes, sportcards is and has been my business since 1988.

[Detroit-Tigers]

[quote:14e207f348="Jerlins"][quote:14e207f348="rmilter"]Jerlins said:[quote:14e207f348]

17. For those that invest in baseball cards, you can purchase 1 Strasburg rookie card, I'll spend the same amount on 20 Stanton rookie cards and we'll compare the total value in 10 years. [/quote:14e207f348]

Personally I would not buy any card newer than 1989. And for the most part I like them to be 1979 or older. Some guys will not deal with cards unless they are from 1969 or older. But if you want to make good sound investments; buy mint condition, graded and slabbed 1970s Hall of Fame cards. Particularly guys like Hank Aaron and Willie Mays. As the old racists of card collecting die off, Aaron and Mays cards (that are graded 8 or better) will go through the roof. They were not printing nearly as many of these cards as in the 1980s, and there is no reason a Nolan Ryan card should be up to five or ten times as expensive as a Hank Aaron card from the same year, in the same condition. Other than racism. I am sure a lot of people will disagree with my analysis, but those people will be wrong. Why in the World would a 1971 Nolan Ryan (in the same graded condition) sell for ten times what a Hank Aaron from the same year sells for,...other than the fact that most card collectors (not all...) are old white racists? Why? Why is Nolan Ryan worth so much more (from the same year and condition) as a Willie Mays or a Hank Aaron?

Buy vintage graded and slabbed cards. Baseball will not die, and these guys are selling for fractions of what white player's cards are selling for. Trust me on this! You can get nice late 60s and early 70s Hank Aarons and Willie Mays for cheap!

They print too many sets and copies of the new cards for them EVER to be worth anything. That is my three cents on the matter.

Alright here comes the deluge of criticism. Give me your best shot, I can handle it. Tell me there is no more prejudice in America. Actually I can tell, just listen to Dr. Laura. Racism is dead. And I am the next Tony Gwynn.....[/quote:14e207f348]

There are two reasons why a 1971 Ryan goes for tens times that of a Hank Aaron, neither of which has to do with racism. For one, it's Ryan's 3rd year card, it's Aaron's 16th. Cards in general are more in demand in the earlier years of a player. Second, and most important, is the fact that back in the early 70's, Topps issued cards in series. The packs that Ryan were in were printed in much less quantity due to the lack of vendor demand as the season and the summer moved to a close. Topps stopped this practice after the 1973 series and began printing all its cards in one series.

Nice attempt to add your political views to a subject.

As for your opinion on older versus newer cards, well, that's another debate. I will tell you however, that if you purchased a 12 box case of 2010 Bowman baseball in May for $850. (my case price when issued), I'd be willing to pay you $1600. for that same case today. That isn't a bad 2 month return on investment. :wink:[/quote:14e207f348]

Why is it worth $1600 now

[the splinter]

[quote:ef131e03a4]Why is it worth $1600 now[/quote:ef131e03a4]

I'll take a stab at this one..

1) the rookie class has proven to be outstanding!!!!

2) the rookie class has proven to be outstanding !!!

3) the rookie class has proven to be outstanding !!!

[pkwmati]

[quote:06016d04da="Jerlins"]And to answer your question, yes, sportcards is and has been my business since 1988.[/quote:06016d04da]

How much are you seeing of young kids involved in sportscard collecting nowadays?

I was a lad back in the late 70s and all us neighborhood kids collected baseball cards. But it seems to me that two factors are hurting the hobby with regards to kids: 1) So much other competition for their interest/time (Xbox, etc) and 2) kids are priced out now. I think a pack was 15c back in 1978, but what are they now $2 or more? I bought 2 boxes of Heritage back in April for I think $60/per. That doesn't seem conducive to getting kids into the hobby. Oh and I forgot that 3rd factor - of course, racism :roll:

But what are you seeing on the kids front, Jerlins?

[Jerlins]

[quote:4bee448ac0="PM770"][quote:4bee448ac0="Jerlins"]And to answer your question, yes, sportcards is and has been my business since 1988.[/quote:4bee448ac0]

How much are you seeing of young kids involved in sportscard collecting nowadays?

I was a lad back in the late 70s and all us neighborhood kids collected baseball cards. But it seems to me that two factors are hurting the hobby with regards to kids: 1) So much other competition for their interest/time (Xbox, etc) and 2) kids are priced out now. I think a pack was 15c back in 1978, but what are they now $2 or more? I bought 2 boxes of Heritage back in April for I think $60/per. That doesn't seem conducive to getting kids into the hobby. Oh and I forgot that 3rd factor - of course, racism :roll:

But what are you seeing on the kids front, Jerlins?[/quote:4bee448ac0]

Probably more kids than I did 3 or 4 years ago, but still a very small percentage of my clientele. The biggest factor is indeed the competition of time and interests, as it is with anything in this day. Back when I was a kid, I couldn't wait to get to the park for our nightly pick-up baseball game. Now those same fields are just weeds. The computer/video game industry is a big factor both in my industry and sports in general.

The hobby has price points for every type of collector/investor. The basic Topps card is $2 a pack, but the $5., $10., and $25. packs are just as commonplace. If I had to venture a guess on the retail end of my business, I'd say it's an even 1/3 each of collector, investor, and gambler. I often joke how I'm a lottery dealer as much as a card dealer.

[pkwmati]

Thanks for the insight Jerlins. I hope enough kids are getting into it to allow the hobby continue to at least remain at its current level of supply and demand if not growing.

That is my concern - that as the older diehards start to die off, that the kids won't be there to replace them and that demand will take a huge hit. I continue to collect because I love it and it does take me back to my youth. I do have, I think, a pretty good collection, but I don't have aspirations of getting rich on it - I just hope when I die my kids will either have picked up the hobby or they'll be able get out of it what I put into it.

Good luck with the business.

[Jake Squid]

[quote:1ecccf596d="the splinter"]I think I might leave Ichiro off my ballot the first year(if he retired tomorrow)...not that he isn't awesome and deserving...I just dont see him as one of the top 10 RF of all time...a singles hitter with great D doesn't blow my skirt ...now if he plays another 5-6 years at this level at his advancing age...thats another story[/quote:1ecccf596d]

Are you voting for HR & RBI or are you voting for value? The singles hitter comment makes me guess it's the former. I believe that's a mistaken way of judging a player. WAR (Wins Above Replacement) is a much, much better measure as it is comparable across eras.

Ichiro has averaged 5 WAR/season. That's the same as Cal Ripken and Roberto Clemente and Al Kaline and, before he lost his skills, Ken Griffey Jr, a bit better than George Brett and Carl Yastrzemski, way more than Paul Molitor or Jim Rice or Lou Brock or Ryne Sandberg or Eddie Murray.

5 WAR is certainly HOF level, although not the highest level in the HOF. That's reserved for players like Ty Cobb and Albert Pujols who are 8 WAR players.

It's been a 10 year ML career, so far and that's on the short side, but it isn't unprecedented at all.

[kimkrichbaum2]

I want to go back to the salary cap/salary floor discussion.

I have a radical plan, that would give owners consistent costs each year, players more freedom, and the ability to get paid what they're worth every year, and will take money out of most baseball transactions.

Here's the plan- Owners all pay the same set percentage of their team's income into a pot every year (similar to the percentage that now goes into player salaries) That money gets divided into 30 equal parts and redistributed to the teams, but modified by the team's record. The team with the best record in baseball will get 135% of a share, and the worst will get 62.5%, going down 2.5% for each place of finish. There will be a bump for teams who win playoff series.
The money for each team will be redistributed to the players like this: You have a panel of baseball "experts" (ex-players, sportswriters, stat geeks, etc.)[b:2f4d1119f4] hired by the players[/b:2f4d1119f4] who will meet in November, and decide what each player deserves depending on their play in that year. They will begin with a floor or the major league minimum for players with less than 3 years experience, and 1/2 of last year's salary for players with 3 years or more (giving the players some kind of security).
Players will get the right to become free agents after their 4th year of service, and the ability to refuse trades after their 5th year - but they can only refuse trades if they have not used their free agent power in the last 3 years. Players can either move at will, or stay in one place, their choice. The players would actually have more free agent freedom than now, because they can go where they want, without money being the major concern, as long as they go to a team where they can play.

I have many more details worked out, but won't bore you with them.
What do you think?

[keyzick]

Sooo....

- a crappy team, with little income or capital, puts in and gets back the least amount of money.

- An independent pannel has decided what a player will get, so what does free agency do for a player...

- ...and the crappy team is limited in its options, based on the set values of players that were established (ie, they can only afford so much..kinda like current day)

- the rich teams (ie, have the capital regardless of team income) can still afford the highest quantity of the best players


At least those are 4 quick issues I surmised right away...maybe the additional details address these?