<< <i> Of the 287 listings on eBay for "Josh Hancok", with an extra "c", 281 started today. Nice.
Never underestimate how low someone will go to make a buck, I guess...disgusting is what it is. >>
People selling his cards and memorabilia are not stooping "low", or doing anything other than cashing in on a collectible item that they originally purchased for this very purpose. I have a theory that people just like to be outraged. They go looking for reasons to steam and stew. If you think about it, there's nothing wrong with what sellers are doing. Regardless what most admit to, nearly everyone is collecting cards for profit--either short term or long term. Nobody would buy them if they thought they'd never have any value. How or why a card becomes valuable is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if it's because a guy makes the hall, has a spectacular career, dies an early and tragic death, or is the focus of a large media circus. If it were wrong to profit after or because someone died, then the sale of Clemente and Munson cards should be banned. Forever and ever, because you can't be the judge of how long we need to "grieve". The market decides what it wants to buy--this guy wasn't in demand before he died and now he is. It's only the natural course of things that the number of items pertaining to him should now increase to suit this new demand. It has nothing to do with profiting on someone's death. The guy died, that's a fact. His cards were made for retail resale. People bought them then, and they held them as collectibles, and now it's time that they be resold. Hardly a scandal by any definition.
This same misguided outcry occured following 9/11 (when ebay banned the sale of WTC items) and Earnhardt's death. It's absurd and corny that people would expect, that following the death of a professional athlete, everyone is then required to hold on to the guy's cards for a period of 30 days or any set time period.
Comments
<< <i> Of the 287 listings on eBay for "Josh Hancok", with an extra "c", 281 started today. Nice.
Never underestimate how low someone will go to make a buck, I guess...disgusting is what it is. >>
People selling his cards and memorabilia are not stooping "low", or doing anything other than cashing in on a collectible item that they originally purchased for this very purpose. I have a theory that people just like to be outraged. They go looking for reasons to steam and stew. If you think about it, there's nothing wrong with what sellers are doing. Regardless what most admit to, nearly everyone is collecting cards for profit--either short term or long term. Nobody would buy them if they thought they'd never have any value. How or why a card becomes valuable is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if it's because a guy makes the hall, has a spectacular career, dies an early and tragic death, or is the focus of a large media circus. If it were wrong to profit after or because someone died, then the sale of Clemente and Munson cards should be banned. Forever and ever, because you can't be the judge of how long we need to "grieve". The market decides what it wants to buy--this guy wasn't in demand before he died and now he is. It's only the natural course of things that the number of items pertaining to him should now increase to suit this new demand. It has nothing to do with profiting on someone's death. The guy died, that's a fact. His cards were made for retail resale. People bought them then, and they held them as collectibles, and now it's time that they be resold. Hardly a scandal by any definition.
This same misguided outcry occured following 9/11 (when ebay banned the sale of WTC items) and Earnhardt's death. It's absurd and corny that people would expect, that following the death of a professional athlete, everyone is then required to hold on to the guy's cards for a period of 30 days or any set time period.