<< <i>BTW, Fergie23, I like the way you do business. My dad's business grew over a thirty year period, the company share price going from twenty five to four hundred over that time frame, and it was all done on small margins and lots of honest handshakes. Good luck to you. >>
Thats not surprising that your Dad's business was "all done on small margins." If the stock price went from 25 to 400 over 30 years, thats an IRR of less than 10%....He'd have done better just sticking the cash in a mutual fund instead of starting the business. That hokey "honest handshakes" approach comes at a cost.
Great post from CaliforniaCards as well. Good to know I'm not the only one on here that believes in hard work and capitalism. I wonder if all of these "cardboard heroes" would want to take all of their collections and put them all in a big pot and then redistribute equally among all collectors? >>
Thanks, Vette. I'm glad you saw the humor. My posts usually seem a lot more angry than they actually are. What's funny is that I don't even really mind if people want to behave like socialists!! I admire generous people. I even tend to vote for those who want to help others on that basis alone. It's a great quality for people in leadership positions to have.
What I have a tough time with is self-righteous people making value judgments about others who choose to direct their time and energy elsewhere. I'm pretty sure that helping lazy people should be a choice, not a pre-requisite for achieving societal goodness (not that anyone explicitly made that argument). Right? Or maybe not? I don't know anymore. Maybe I missed a memo?
So what are the rules, then? If your ROI is 300+% you are a rip off artist ashole? Pure evil? If your ROI is 200% you are a jerk but maybe it's not your fault? Maybe you were raised poorly? If your ROI is 100% you are a redeemable human being, but just barely? If your ROI is only 20% because you took time out to educate a lazy seller, then you are a good person and a perfect candidate to teach others how to behave like you? If your ROI is -100% because you actually paid the seller and decided to take no goods in return, you are a saint and there should be an angelic bust of you somewhere in your home town?
And who's the arbitor of this? Who decides what percentages correlates with what degree of character flaw?
<< <i>over 30 years, thats an IRR of less than 10%....He'd have done better just sticking the cash in a mutual fund instead of starting the business
Not true, the total return for equities over most 30 year periods is less than 8%. Almost no mutual funds have compounded for 10% for 30 years. >>
S&P 500 provided about an 11.1% annual total return over the last 30 years (1980-2010). I was simply working backward from today. Even if that number were a few points off, my point would still hold. Nobody starts a business hoping for single digit returns on their equity.....unless your business is investing in bonds or running a public utility :>
There are plenty of funds that are not all equities that have made 10% compounded over the past 30 years.
The real issue here is ethics.
It is not the OP's responsibility to educate the seller but he runs a huge risk of low balling him and losing the deal completely.
A low offer to an educated seller is a deal killer. While I have no way of knowing what the true level of knowledge of the seller is, you better hope it is much less then you realize.
Any ounce of card value knowledge above what the OP suggests is a deal killer with his insulting offer.
I suggest making a fair offer where both sides win or you most likely will blow up your profit oppurtunity. Remember a good profit is better then no profit.
<< <i>I suggest making a fair offer where both sides win or you most likely will blow up your profit oppurtunity. Remember a good profit is better then no profit. >>
Agreed!
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
<< <i>BTW, Fergie23, I like the way you do business. My dad's business grew over a thirty year period, the company share price going from twenty five to four hundred over that time frame, and it was all done on small margins and lots of honest handshakes. Good luck to you. >>
Thats not surprising that your Dad's business was "all done on small margins." If the stock price went from 25 to 400 over 30 years, thats an IRR of less than 10%....He'd have done better just sticking the cash in a mutual fund instead of starting the business. That hokey "honest handshakes" approach comes at a cost. >>
maybe that's just the share price of the company. the person may have had a yearly salary of 100k plus. maybe his wife and kids were employed too at the company. share value is just the value of the company...you can make salary on top of that and also take profits out of the company
<< <i>BTW, Fergie23, I like the way you do business. My dad's business grew over a thirty year period, the company share price going from twenty five to four hundred over that time frame, and it was all done on small margins and lots of honest handshakes. Good luck to you. >>
Thats not surprising that your Dad's business was "all done on small margins." If the stock price went from 25 to 400 over 30 years, thats an IRR of less than 10%....He'd have done better just sticking the cash in a mutual fund instead of starting the business. That hokey "honest handshakes" approach comes at a cost. >>
maybe that's just the share price of the company. the person may have had a yearly salary of 100k plus. maybe his wife and kids were employed too at the company. share value is just the value of the company...you can make salary on top of that and also take profits out of the company >>
That's very true. He's living very comfortably today because he put a lot of hard, honest, decent work in. His salary in 1975 was around 8k/year. In his last ten years of work his salary was between 100k-150k. It's a privately held company, so his 5k shares when he retired could not be manipulated by the crooks on wall street. That too was a wise decision by the company. Never let crooks (or even close friends) play with your money.
So the gentleman with the collection says, "my friends collection was much larger and he sold it for 8k" has no bearing. You need to offer him more?
That's ridiculous... If anything If you offer more, it will most likely throw up a red flag to the seller, and then if he hasn't already will shop around. If that's what he truly said, there is nothing wrong with getting this case done around 5 to 7k.
We all have a fiduciary responsibility first and foremost to our selves. Again if this guy is hurting financially, that changes the sale IMO. Then I would want to help him out and wouldn't care if I only made a much smaller amount. The seller set the terms when he brought up his friends collection.
<< <i> He did tell me his friend that he collected with when he was a kid sold his collection about 10 years ago for 8 grand. >>
So from the above quote some here can say with certainty that the collections were the same, the conditions were the same plus the fact that it was sold 'about 10 years ago' (maybe even said in passing) as a starting point as to the value of this specific collection?
<< <i>The way he came accross, it sounded like his friends collection was much better because of the amount of mantles he had. You could be right though, I dont know. >>
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
so...what happened?-Did OP not buy the collection, or did he refuse to talk about it because this thread got derailed?
Would have been cool to see some scans if he bought all or part of it. If another thread was started regarding this deal, someone please post a link. I tried a search, but did not see it (if it exists).
I collect Vintage Cards, Commemorative Sets, and way too many vintage and modern player collections in Baseball (180 players), Football (175 players), and Basketball (87 players). Also have a Dallas Cowboy team collection.
Comments
<< <i>BTW, Fergie23, I like the way you do business. My dad's business grew over a thirty year period, the company share price going from twenty five to four hundred over that time frame, and it was all done on small margins and lots of honest handshakes. Good luck to you. >>
Thats not surprising that your Dad's business was "all done on small margins." If the stock price went from 25 to 400 over 30 years, thats an IRR of less than 10%....He'd have done better just sticking the cash in a mutual fund instead of starting the business. That hokey "honest handshakes" approach comes at a cost.
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
Not true, the total return for equities over most 30 year periods is less than 8%. Almost no mutual funds have compounded for 10% for 30 years.
<< <i>lol, great post.
Great post from CaliforniaCards as well. Good to know I'm not the only one on here that believes in hard work and capitalism. I wonder if all of these "cardboard heroes" would want to take all of their collections and put them all in a big pot and then redistribute equally among all collectors? >>
Thanks, Vette. I'm glad you saw the humor. My posts usually seem a lot more angry than they actually are.
What's funny is that I don't even really mind if people want to behave like socialists!! I admire generous people. I even tend to vote for those who want to help others on that basis alone. It's a great quality for people in leadership positions to have.
What I have a tough time with is self-righteous people making value judgments about others who choose to direct their time and energy elsewhere. I'm pretty sure that helping lazy people should be a choice, not a pre-requisite for achieving societal goodness (not that anyone explicitly made that argument). Right? Or maybe not? I don't know anymore. Maybe I missed a memo?
So what are the rules, then?
If your ROI is 300+% you are a rip off artist ashole? Pure evil?
If your ROI is 200% you are a jerk but maybe it's not your fault? Maybe you were raised poorly?
If your ROI is 100% you are a redeemable human being, but just barely?
If your ROI is only 20% because you took time out to educate a lazy seller, then you are a good person and a perfect candidate to teach others how to behave like you?
If your ROI is -100% because you actually paid the seller and decided to take no goods in return, you are a saint and there should be an angelic bust of you somewhere in your home town?
And who's the arbitor of this? Who decides what percentages correlates with what degree of character flaw?
<< <i>over 30 years, thats an IRR of less than 10%....He'd have done better just sticking the cash in a mutual fund instead of starting the business
Not true, the total return for equities over most 30 year periods is less than 8%. Almost no mutual funds have compounded for 10% for 30 years. >>
S&P 500 provided about an 11.1% annual total return over the last 30 years (1980-2010). I was simply working backward from today. Even if that number were a few points off, my point would still hold. Nobody starts a business hoping for single digit returns on their equity.....unless your business is investing in bonds or running a public utility :>
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
The real issue here is ethics.
It is not the OP's responsibility to educate the seller but he runs a huge risk of low balling him and losing the deal completely.
A low offer to an educated seller is a deal killer. While I have no way of knowing what the true level of knowledge of the seller is, you better hope it is much less then you realize.
Any ounce of card value knowledge above what the OP suggests is a deal killer with his insulting offer.
I suggest making a fair offer where both sides win or you most likely will blow up your profit oppurtunity. Remember a good profit is better then no profit.
<< <i>I suggest making a fair offer where both sides win or you most likely will blow up your profit oppurtunity. Remember a good profit is better then no profit. >>
Agreed!
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
<< <i>
<< <i>BTW, Fergie23, I like the way you do business. My dad's business grew over a thirty year period, the company share price going from twenty five to four hundred over that time frame, and it was all done on small margins and lots of honest handshakes. Good luck to you. >>
Thats not surprising that your Dad's business was "all done on small margins." If the stock price went from 25 to 400 over 30 years, thats an IRR of less than 10%....He'd have done better just sticking the cash in a mutual fund instead of starting the business. That hokey "honest handshakes" approach comes at a cost. >>
maybe that's just the share price of the company. the person may have had a yearly salary of 100k plus. maybe his wife and kids were employed too at the company. share value is just the value of the company...you can make salary on top of that and also take profits out of the company
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>BTW, Fergie23, I like the way you do business. My dad's business grew over a thirty year period, the company share price going from twenty five to four hundred over that time frame, and it was all done on small margins and lots of honest handshakes. Good luck to you. >>
Thats not surprising that your Dad's business was "all done on small margins." If the stock price went from 25 to 400 over 30 years, thats an IRR of less than 10%....He'd have done better just sticking the cash in a mutual fund instead of starting the business. That hokey "honest handshakes" approach comes at a cost. >>
maybe that's just the share price of the company. the person may have had a yearly salary of 100k plus. maybe his wife and kids were employed too at the company. share value is just the value of the company...you can make salary on top of that and also take profits out of the company >>
That's very true. He's living very comfortably today because he put a lot of hard, honest, decent work in. His salary in 1975 was around
8k/year. In his last ten years of work his salary was between 100k-150k. It's a privately held company, so his 5k shares when he retired could not be manipulated by the crooks on wall street. That too was a wise decision by the company. Never let crooks (or even close friends) play with your money.
That's ridiculous... If anything If you offer more, it will most likely throw up a red flag to the seller, and then if he hasn't already will shop around. If that's what he truly said, there is nothing wrong with getting this case done around 5 to 7k.
We all have a fiduciary responsibility first and foremost to our selves. Again if this guy is hurting financially, that changes the sale IMO. Then I would want to help him out and wouldn't care if I only made a much smaller amount. The seller set the terms when he brought up his friends collection.
"Live everyday, don't throw it away"
<< <i> He did tell me his friend that he collected with when he was a kid sold his collection about 10 years ago for 8 grand. >>
So from the above quote some here can say with certainty that the collections were the same, the conditions were the same
plus the fact that it was sold 'about 10 years ago' (maybe even said in passing) as a starting point as to the value of this specific collection?
<< <i>The way he came accross, it sounded like his friends collection was much better because of the amount of mantles he had. You could be right though, I dont know. >>
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Would have been cool to see some scans if he bought all or part of it. If another thread was started regarding this deal, someone please post a link. I tried a search, but did not see it (if it exists).
"Live everyday, don't throw it away"