Conspicous Consumption as it relates to Trading Cards...
Dpeck100
Posts: 10,912 ✭✭✭✭✭
Conspicous Consumption
I was discussing the collectables market in the office yesterday afternoon with a few co workers and one of them brought me in an article from this months Road and Track magazine.
The article discusses the Ferarri 250 GTO and it unreal price appreciation over the years. The green Ferarri referenced in the artcile was sold for 3.5 million in 1996 and changed hands last summer for 35 million and the current owner declined an offer of 45 million this year.
There are cards in the card market that seem to never go down and only go up over time with pricing data to support that claim.
I have had intense discussions with mutual fund managers and economists about cards such as the 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle PSA 10 and the Honus Wagner PSA 8 and made the claim these cards will continue to sell for more and defy the logic of economics becuase they are the ultimate bragging pieces.
They are essentially immune from the gyrations of the macroeconomy becuase the people chasing them have such vast wealth and their desire to own the best and show others their wealth will not decline and as more indivduals become wealthy the class of people who can afford such a card increases and since the supply is so limited you have major price gains over time.
If a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle PSA 10 were to come for sale the price it sells for will blow peoples minds as the competition for the card will come from all angles and could be the only trading card the winner owns. Just imagine a hedge fund manager from New York who is worth billions and what kind of enjoyment they would get out of showcasing this nearly one of a kind collectable to all of their rich friends at a party in their 62 floor loft in Manhatten.
The definition of conspicous consumption is the exact reason that these cards continue to rise.
This is the first time I have read the term and I thought I would share it with others becuase it truly explains the logic of bidding these masterpiece items higher.
I was discussing the collectables market in the office yesterday afternoon with a few co workers and one of them brought me in an article from this months Road and Track magazine.
The article discusses the Ferarri 250 GTO and it unreal price appreciation over the years. The green Ferarri referenced in the artcile was sold for 3.5 million in 1996 and changed hands last summer for 35 million and the current owner declined an offer of 45 million this year.
There are cards in the card market that seem to never go down and only go up over time with pricing data to support that claim.
I have had intense discussions with mutual fund managers and economists about cards such as the 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle PSA 10 and the Honus Wagner PSA 8 and made the claim these cards will continue to sell for more and defy the logic of economics becuase they are the ultimate bragging pieces.
They are essentially immune from the gyrations of the macroeconomy becuase the people chasing them have such vast wealth and their desire to own the best and show others their wealth will not decline and as more indivduals become wealthy the class of people who can afford such a card increases and since the supply is so limited you have major price gains over time.
If a 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle PSA 10 were to come for sale the price it sells for will blow peoples minds as the competition for the card will come from all angles and could be the only trading card the winner owns. Just imagine a hedge fund manager from New York who is worth billions and what kind of enjoyment they would get out of showcasing this nearly one of a kind collectable to all of their rich friends at a party in their 62 floor loft in Manhatten.
The definition of conspicous consumption is the exact reason that these cards continue to rise.
This is the first time I have read the term and I thought I would share it with others becuase it truly explains the logic of bidding these masterpiece items higher.
0
Comments
1) Rarity- Obvious, but rare is used alot to describe items that are not really rare
2) Historical/Social/Cultural Significance- This should cross several segments of collectors and would not be limited to just sports fanatics.
3) Quality- In this case the highest graded
I think if you could find things that hit all three of those I don't see why they couldn't make a great investment.
In the case of the Ferrari... It is certainly rare and of high quality and the cultural and social significance is high so that fits the bill
The Wagner could also make that claim. Mantle too, but I might argue the future significance of Mantle to younger collectors. I have always thought Jackie Robinson fit that mold better, but Mantle has always won out.
T222's PSA 1 or better
The thing is, it doesn't carry over to very many other cards.
Theres often an implication with these types of articles about how the entire market is being lofted and that just isn't true.
however as stated above, there is a really limited number of cards that fall into this category. the 1 BGS 86 Fleer Jordan (while there is also only 1), will continue to reach obscene $ numbers (especially for a modern card), especialy with the western money involved in bkball collecting.
I think it is fair to say this concept only applies to a limited segment of the market but the demand for collectables in many ways is driven by the desire to showcase something of value.
Once a collectable is deemed valuable, if there is limited supply it doesn't take many new market participants to enter the fray for the price to continue expanding.
If you take the 1986 Fleer Michael Jordan, it is not even remotely rare but the number of people that wouldn't mind owning an example is cleary greater then the number that exists. If this card was much more scarce the price would be significantly higher and it's current price is quite impressive for how many cards do exist.
A great example of a card that falls into this category is the only PSA 10 Wayne Gretzky OPC rookie. Card grading has in many ways turned standard cards into insert cards. The reason a super refractor can command such strong prices is there is only 1. What you get for that price is the bragging rights that you have the only copy ever made. Card grading has essentially made common items rare and this appeals to collectors becuase you can clearly say that you have the best or at a minimum your example is better then many others.
I think this concept is the primary driver of the value of PSA 10 graded cards. In many cases you can see a strong PSA 9 and match it up to a PSA 10 and if the flip is covered many choose the PSA 9 as the stronger card. That being said it is not the best and with the best comes value and power. Many of these cards though do not have the nearly bullet proof protection against market declines as the two examples stated in my first post.
It is clear you can not make a blanket statement that all cards can be considered a good investment but I do believe that in many cases you can and if one were to bet against the platinmum cards in the hobby it would be a losing proposition becuase everyone has an ego and some are quite large and come with an even larger bank account.
I can see a "sector" of collectors who may fit the category of "conspicuous consumers."
But, many of us here - do not collect on a "luxury" level - and just like connecting to older stuff and showing it off.
IMO - "conspicuous consumers" are not collectors but rather accumulators of goods and services for "Power and prestige."
Hardly describes the hobby collectors here for the most part.
It doesn't really address the average collector, nor does it discuss(from an investors view point) liquidity and auction fees.
Take a signed jersey or basketball. There are many people who have these type of items on display in their home or office and they get enjoyment out of seeing their item of value. They also get enjoyment when others come over and say wow that Michael Jordan signed basketball is awesome. If it was stuffed in the closet I do not think they would get the same enjoyment out of owning the item.
There might be a few who frequent these boards that can afford cards in the price range I referenced but not many so in many ways this would not completely apply to most here.
The basic point is that what drives the top of a market in many cases is ego and bragging rights and that holds true for most types of collectables.
Someone purchasing an Andy Warhol for 32 million is not doing it just becuase they like the painting and I believe this holds true for a 2 million dollar trading card.
In the end items near the top are the only one's I believe that are truly imune from the macroeconomy. Did card prices fall in many cases in 2008 and 2009. Probably and especially at the low end of the market. Did a PSA 10 Mickey Mantle fall during those times. No.
<< <i>The basic point is that what drives the top of a market in many cases is ego and bragging rights and that holds true for most types of collectables. >>
Just wanted to make "my" point clear.
In no way was it directed at your post or its intention - but rather a general statement after a cursory evaluation of the concept.
I agree with your "point" - what motivates people of means to buy stuff.
I was only thinking of what motivates me to collect board games, e.g. Hardly worthy of conspicuous consumption.
BTW - very good thread - and worthy - IMO - of discussion.
Last - I'm sure there's some "boards" out there where up tight megalomaniacs strut their stuff in front of one another for the sole purpose of demonstrating who's hung lower?
This is a card that was sold in the historic SCP Auction last year. I think it is fair to say most would believe this is a poor quality PSA 10. It is hard to look at this card and say wow that is an awesome card.
I view this as an example of a card that fits the description I wrote where the market for many PSA 10's is driven by the fact that you have the bragging rights of saying I have the only one that is graded Gem Mint.
Those bragging rights are worth something to all and more to a few.
<< <i>I can see a "sector" of collectors who may fit the category of "conspicuous consumers."
But, many of us here - do not collect on a "luxury" level - and just like connecting to older stuff and showing it off.
IMO - "conspicuous consumers" are not collectors but rather accumulators of goods and services for "Power and prestige."
Hardly describes the hobby collectors here for the most part. >>
I disagree. With both types mentioned in your post, it's all about pride of ownership. It's just on a smaller level here for most.
I'd also argue that you're in denial. As an example, I'll use the 1963 Fleer baseball set you've said you've been working on for years. The reason it has taken you years is because you're only interested in centered cards in PSA 8+.
<< <i>
<< <i>I can see a "sector" of collectors who may fit the category of "conspicuous consumers."
But, many of us here - do not collect on a "luxury" level - and just like connecting to older stuff and showing it off.
IMO - "conspicuous consumers" are not collectors but rather accumulators of goods and services for "Power and prestige."
Hardly describes the hobby collectors here for the most part. >>
I disagree. With both types mentioned in your post, it's all about pride of ownership. It's just on a smaller level here for most.
I'd also argue that you're in denial. As an example, I'll use the 1963 Fleer baseball set you've said you've been working on for years. The reason it has taken you years is because you're only interested in centered cards in PSA 8+. >>
I don't know which part of Mike's post makes you think he's living in a state of denial, but I'll submit that nobody who's putting together at $3000 set- which is, roughly, what a '63F set in PSA 8 is going to run-- is doing so out of a desire to accrue power and prestige on a hobby message board.
<< <i>I don't know which part of Mike's post makes you think he's living in a state of denial, but I'll submit that nobody who's putting together at $3000 set- which is, roughly, what a '63F set in PSA 8 is going to run-- is doing so out of a desire to accrue power and prestige on a hobby message board. >>
If he were just looking to connect to older stuff, as he claims to be, a VG-EX set would certainly do the trick.
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't know which part of Mike's post makes you think he's living in a state of denial, but I'll submit that nobody who's putting together at $3000 set- which is, roughly, what a '63F set in PSA 8 is going to run-- is doing so out of a desire to accrue power and prestige on a hobby message board. >>
If he were just looking to connect to older stuff, as he claims to be, a VG-EX set would certainly do the trick. >>
Well, obviously there are degrees to this stuff- and from what I've read of your posts you seem smart enough to get that. Perhaps the post was poorly phrased, but it's clear he's drawing a line between guys who buy cards for the purpose of showing them off and guys who buy cards just because they like to assemble nice looking sets.
<< <i>
<< <i>I can see a "sector" of collectors who may fit the category of "conspicuous consumers."
But, many of us here - do not collect on a "luxury" level - and just like connecting to older stuff and showing it off.
IMO - "conspicuous consumers" are not collectors but rather accumulators of goods and services for "Power and prestige."
Hardly describes the hobby collectors here for the most part. >>
I disagree. With both types mentioned in your post, it's all about pride of ownership. It's just on a smaller level here for most.
I'd also argue that you're in denial. As an example, I'll use the 1963 Fleer baseball set you've said you've been working on for years. The reason it has taken you years is because you're only interested in centered cards in PSA 8+. >>
Hiya Maurice
I can see your point - but I think we're just not connecting in our beliefs.
First - I said in my initial post that I would have to give this some thought but hastily gave a first impression.
From the link - that type of consumption is of "Luxury" good and services for the purpose of showing off.
I never said or thought that showing off isn't part of collecting - I just thought that most of us don't have the "luxury" of that kind of spending?
Also - I started collecting the 63F set back in 2004 - still working - and some where along the way decided to make it a bigger challenge of centered cards - not realizing how hard it would be. And - the cost of a 63F set in 8 and some 9s is hardly a luxury set IMO.
On the denial? Not really sure.
I collect what I enjoy - if you had read my thread on some games I picked up - they were very rare - and all 4 cost me 69 bucks. I was super happy with my purchases and hardly would call it "luxury."
Also - I think there's something insidious about "conspicuous consumption" as opposed to what we do here - I guess that's part of my point?
Last - and to be sure - I do like showing off - that's part of the fun - but to be honest - I kind of viewed it as "sharing" with my hobby friends here that I've grown to like and respect over the years.
*mind asplodes*
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't know which part of Mike's post makes you think he's living in a state of denial, but I'll submit that nobody who's putting together at $3000 set- which is, roughly, what a '63F set in PSA 8 is going to run-- is doing so out of a desire to accrue power and prestige on a hobby message board. >>
If he were just looking to connect to older stuff, as he claims to be, a VG-EX set would certainly do the trick. >>
Maurice - now you're trying to rationalize my collecting intent.
I have many sets in Vg-Ex - most earlier Topps.
Because of the size of the 63F set - I thought it would be fun to have "one" really nice set to look at.
And - to be honest - I'm not a big card collector anymore.
I would never dream of "telling" you how to connect to the past.
<< <i>Did you just claim that spending a few thousand dollars on purely decorative or indulgent items is not a luxury expense?
*mind asplodes* >>
Hiya John
I don't get into pissing matches here.
That's not fun.
You're twisting my words.
3K is a lot of money - I'm retired Army. What I'm saying is: in the spirit of the link on conspicuous consumption - I believe they're talking about owning expensive sports cars, joining exclusive clubs, wearing 40K watches, e.g. So in perspective a 3K set is pedestrian.
Thus - showing off - like we all do - what I collect would "not" be in the spirit of what conspicuous consumption is.
Tho, I sure wish I had that kind of dough!
<< <i>
Card grading has in many ways turned standard cards into insert cards.
>>
I agree. Although the superfractor in this example will always be a 1/1 and a pop 1 common doesn't hold that guarantee.
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
<< <i>A Pop 1 star card is just like a super refractor. That is where card grading has enhanced the value of rare cards dramatically. >>
I just meant that there is always a chance that a 2nd or 3rd psa 10 of a given common may be discovered. For an ego-driven person, I'm sure that would diminish the value somewhat. With a superfractor, the chance of that happening is nil.
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
Or the retired army guy with the PSA 8 set of 1963 Fleer with every card centered no worse than 52-48 in either direction.
Or the wall street guy with over 100 complete sets in PSA 8.
Or the owner of a major league baseball team with the PSA 8 Wagner.
For the most part the motivations are the same across the board. The difference lies in the resources.
<< <i>[L=Conspicous Consumption]Just imagine a hedge fund manager from New York who is worth billions and what kind of enjoyment they would get out of showcasing this nearly one of a kind collectable to all of their rich friends at a party in their 62 floor loft in Manhatten. >>
Has anyone attempted to measure how much happiness this sort of conspicious consumption brings? For both the billionaires and those of us with a little bit less money
Last nite I was thinking about the whole consumption thing.
Not sure what's in the head of "the" consumers they're referring to: those who consume for conspicuous power and attention?
The people that are in my 'group' post their pickups:
They show off because - no matter what they paid for something - they just plain love collecting.
They post threads on topics - with background on the subject - because they just plain love collecting.
They give people accolades on what they've posted - because they just plain love collecting.
They get excited about what they just picked up - because they just plain love collecting.
They're ecstatic about picking up that "last" card/item and completing the set - because they just plain love collecting.
My hobby in college? Drinking beer and playing Euchre.
I don't think there is any coincidence that high end cards are selling for such high prices at the moment.
Hard assets remain very much in favor.
It may not fit into the top end category like the high grade Mantle's but for a PSA 10 to sell for over 20 times as much as the PSA 9 and 162 times the PSA 8 I think it meets this definition.
This painting went for a huge number. I heard today on CNBC that the estimate was $140 million and up and it blew that number away.
The record setting prices in cards go hand in hand.
"An industry insider surnamed Xu told the paper that the high prices may be the result of insider agreements among breeders to boost their dogs' worth. A lot of the sky-high priced deals are just breeders hyping each other up, and no money actually changes hands, Xu said."
https://kennerstartinglineup.blogspot.com/
<< <i>Gold toilets and toothbrushes are fine examples of conspicuous consumption, not trading cards. >>
Spend a few more minutes thinking about this topic. It will become very clear.
<< <i>
<< <i>Gold toilets and toothbrushes are fine examples of conspicuous consumption, not trading cards. >>
Spend a few more minutes thinking about this topic. It will become very clear. >>
Not seeing the connection. Trying to, though.
Just because something is expensive doesn't mean it is purchased conspicuously.
Mantle PSA 10, Gretzky 79 OPC PSA 10, et cetera.
These are likely purchased for investment purposes and/or because the owner wants a card PSA certifies as gem mint.
If one were to buy these for the sole intention to show off (conspicuously) it still wouldn't qualify because they're not items that the general public would see as flashy.
In general (but not always) the item has to be a need; and without a psychological examination we don't know if the purchaser of sports cards and paintings are seeing these as truly needs.
Examples:
House for family of 5.
2000 sq ft home vs 4000 sq ft home. No conspicuous consumption with the larger home. Add a silver plated roof to either house, though, and that home becomes a conspicuous purchase. Anybody who drives by will see it as wasteful spending to gain attention. Another example of homes - mansions. Not necessarily a conspicuous purchase (motive of purchase unknown) but adding a platinum gate to the entrance for all to see makes it one.
To tell time.
Timex vs Rolex. Just because it's a Rolex doesn't necessarily make it a conspicuous purchase, but to the general public it can be perceived as one.
Cell phone (arguably a need)
standard cell phone vs smart phone. No conspicuous consumption with the larger purchase. Make either gold plated and it becomes one.
I guess the closest thing I can think of with conspicuous consumption and sports cards is the registry, but doesn't even apply because the general public has no clue what the registry is (and it's not a need).
Conspicuous consumption purchases are very hard to justify. One can justify the purchase of a rare painting, a Rolex, a Ferrari, a PSA 10 Mantle, et cetera.
Conspicuous consumption is the spending of money on and the acquiring of luxury goods and services to publicly display economic power—either the buyer's income or the buyer's accumulated wealth. Sociologically, to the conspicuous consumer, such a public display of discretionary economic power is a means either of attaining or of maintaining a given social status.
There are plenty of cards that can fit this criteria.
Instagram: mattyc_collection
<< <i>Here is the definition from the link in the first post.
Conspicuous consumption is the spending of money on and the acquiring of luxury goods and services to publicly display economic power—either the buyer's income or the buyer's accumulated wealth. Sociologically, to the conspicuous consumer, such a public display of discretionary economic power is a means either of attaining or of maintaining a given social status.
There are plenty of cards that can fit this criteria. >>
Not a huge fan of tertiary sources.
The crux here is knowing the motivation behind these purchases. It's pretty clear to find the motivation behind gold plating common items and studding them with precious jewels; it's a bit more difficult to do with cards.
<< <i>I think for sure there is invidious consumption in the card hobby, having read that article's definitions. It need not be to brandish the item to the world at large, just a community or subset. The card hobby community qualifies, as would other communities with passionate followers. Interesting article. Guess it all comes down to what's in the heart of the buyer, and the motives and emotions behind the purchase. Good food for thought and introspection. >>
Not every single person who purchases a GTO does so just to show off but the mere fact that it costs what it does instantly gives one bragging rights and they can say they are in an elite club.
There are plenty of card collectors who want to be able to say they own a 1952 Topps Mantle in which many have never even witnessed him play. Why? Because it is just one of those cards that carries a different level of response and appeal.
I scan random cards to my threads all of the time. Most get little to no response. You scan a Mantle or some other ultra-premium card and you get the immediate WOW's like one would expect. This is what comes with the price that is paid.
Why does anyone need a Gem Mint graded card? They don't. Think how many PSA 9's look just like PSA 10's or worse yet where the appearance is reversed. Does it stop people from paying huge prices? No. The entire idea of the registry is based on bragging rights. My set is better than your set. I have this card in a grade you don't or in some cases can't.
If you walk into a room full of collectors with the top level cards the response is predictable just like it is when driving up in a top level car at a car show or in art circles when someone can say they own a Picasso.
There are 2,000 billionaires and it is said that there are 100 or so that are fighting over the top art in the world. Sounds familiar just on a smaller scale in price.
<< <i>
<< <i>Here is the definition from the link in the first post.
Conspicuous consumption is the spending of money on and the acquiring of luxury goods and services to publicly display economic power—either the buyer's income or the buyer's accumulated wealth. Sociologically, to the conspicuous consumer, such a public display of discretionary economic power is a means either of attaining or of maintaining a given social status.
There are plenty of cards that can fit this criteria. >>
Not a huge fan of tertiary sources.
The crux here is knowing the motivation behind these purchases. It's pretty clear to find the motivation behind gold plating common items and studding them with precious jewels; it's a bit more difficult to do with cards. >>
If one posts a 1952 Topps PSA 10 Mantle it is assumed they are loaded and maintain economic power over me or you. Their motivation for the purchase is not something we need to concern ourselves with. It doesn't change the fact that they can afford to own a 3 million card. What does their house look like? What kind of art do they own? Etc. are immediate questions that would come to one's mind.
<< <i>The crux here is knowing the motivation behind these purchases. >>
Well said. It also dovetails with the age-old 'Card vs. Holder' discussion that so many collectors have with themselves, at one point or another in their collecting journeys.
Instagram: mattyc_collection
is it conspic. consump. if I'm buying some mid to high end cards,,lets say just high end cards but only 4 or 5 people really know about it and i don't post the pics for any "tertiary" gain?
say i bought the molitor for 10x the going rate just because its the last card i need to complete my psa 10 set...is that the definition and if not what changed?
or is the OP say were in a bubble now?
Merriam-Webster defines conspicuous
Merriam-Webster defines consumption
Merriam-Webster defines conspicuous consumption
BusinessDictionary online (not sure how credible a source this is) defines conspicuous consumption
There's actually a conspicuousconsumption.org .... lol. Anywho, here's a few examples they illustrate of the practice conspicuous consumption examples
There is nothing necessary about trading cards.
If you don't think that high end collectors are not at all motivated by what other high end collectors think then I guess we just disagree.
You might not be able to walk into a roof top bar and have a young lady say wow that is a really awesome card but as soon as they know the value it changes their opinion instantly. You can walk into a room of collectors and whip out your Mantle, or Wagner etc. and people's facial expressions instantly change.
I personally believe there is a ton of ego that goes into collecting at all levels. Whether you are collecting cheap cards or expensive. The sheer fact that a printing blemish or surface wrinkle can radically change the value of a card proves that. Why does the card have to be perfect? Sure some do not want the detraction of flaws but many others want to see the highest grade possible on the flip and it is not just for potential price appreciation.
We as humans get turned on by having the best or at least thinking we do. It is no secret.
There are plenty of status symbol cards in the hobby and guess what they are zooming higher in price. Why? No one truly knows but I believe a big part of it is derived from the ability to say I own that card and others wishing they could.
There is no telling if it is a bubble. I am sure that when the Wagner sold in the 90's for a record setting price many said that is crazy or insane. Who is dumb enough to pay that for a card? Well someone paid six times as much as Gretzky and McNall. The Picasso I posted was last sold for just under $32 million in 1997. I personally think they are correlated. Rich people like owning expensive things that others know are expensive.
"for displaying" is the tricky point....some say that it doesn't matter....say i buy a .....an aston martin.... and use it but don't brag about it, park it in the back, don't care what others think and don't want to race every car that pulls up does that make it conspicuous? its comfortable, great ride, engine, should last... just because its an expensive item now it would get its haters
<< <i>umm thanks merriam i know the definition....missed my point...people here are giving it diff meanings and applying it to diff scenarios...trying to figure out the true intent of the OP.
"for displaying" is the tricky point....some say that it doesn't matter....say i buy a .....an aston martin.... and use it but don't brag about it, park it in the back, don't care what others think and don't want to race every car that pulls up does that make it conspicuous? its comfortable, great ride, engine, should last... just because its an expensive item now it would get its haters >>
The definition was in response to Patrick. If you read the opening post I had never heard of the term and first found it in an article. I was simply drawing in my view the connection to trading cards which I think is fair one.
What drives someone to want to own an expensive car like an Aston Martin is all over the place. Some want the performance, some like brand name items, others use it to enhance their image but whatever the case may be, at the end of the day it is still an Aston Martin and will draw attention whether one wants it or not. This is one of the primary reasons that high end brands can charge what they do.
If you ever discuss card collecting with people there are a few cards that they are quick to bring up or when you tell them what is happening to prices recognize. These are the cards that for the most part I am referencing. They are pieces of history that matter and are considered significant.
<< <i>$179 million
This painting went for a huge number. I heard today on CNBC that the estimate was $140 million and up and it blew that number away.
The record setting prices in cards go hand in hand. >>
Edit to add: if anyone actually wants to read the book PM me and I will send you one of the 1500+ copies I have, no charge.