<< <i>...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now >>
Can you elaborate? >>
Because the supply remains constant and demand is shrinking.
Next! >>
You really believe every single card will be worth much less in 50 years. Really. >>
You know what? I have no idea. From a probabilistic perspective it seems unlikely. But who cares? The main point is that, speaking generally, sports cards will be worth less in 50 years than they are now, and that's all but guaranteed if the hobby base continues to shrink.
Lets see you were having an argument with a specific person and said quote
<< <i>I think the correct word would be "frustrated" posts. I get frustrated when dealing with morons. >>
The word here is "dealing". The person you were frustated in dealing with was Steve so it is logical to conclude you were stating he is a moron. Nice try and weasle out of it, just be a man and say what you really think or are you afraid of being bammed?
Currently completing the following registry sets: Cardinal HOF's, 1961 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1972 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1980 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, Bill Mazeroski Master & Basic Sets, Roberto Clemente Master & Basic Sets, Willie Stargell Master & Basic Sets and Terry Bradshaw Basic Set
Also, nobody can really say what will happen 50 years from now so there is now way to prove or disapprove the claim, best to let it slide there home slice.
Currently completing the following registry sets: Cardinal HOF's, 1961 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1972 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, 1980 Pittsburgh Pirates Team, Bill Mazeroski Master & Basic Sets, Roberto Clemente Master & Basic Sets, Willie Stargell Master & Basic Sets and Terry Bradshaw Basic Set
<< <i>...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now >>
Can you elaborate? >>
Because the supply remains constant and demand is shrinking.
Next! >>
You really believe every single card will be worth much less in 50 years. Really. >>
You know what? I have no idea. From a probabilistic perspective it seems unlikely. But who cares? The main point is that, speaking generally, sports cards will be worth less in 50 years than they are now, and that's all but guaranteed if the hobby base continues to shrink. >>
Cards from 50 years ago and older are not worth less now than they were then. Why would that all change starting right now. And why would those cards all of a sudden start decreasing in value starting now. Is the T206 Honus Wagner going to be worth less in 50 years? Is a Ted Williams rookie card going to be worth less in 50 years? Please explain to me why all cards will go down in value in 50 years.
<< <i>Lets see you were having an argument with a specific person and said quote
<< <i>I think the correct word would be "frustrated" posts. I get frustrated when dealing with morons. >>
The word here is "dealing". The person you were frustated in dealing with was Steve so it is logical to conclude you were stating he is a moron. Nice try and weasle out of it, just be a man and say what you really think or are you afraid of being bammed? >>
Why would I WANT to be banned? Are you serious? I didn't call anyone a moron, so stop with the message board police routine. It's not funny or amusing. Why not add to the thread instead of being only an instigator.
<< <i>calling longtime board members morons will not get you a cookie. what were those coin forum rules again............. >>
Countdown to a comment about the blind protection of board members with high post counts in 5...4...3...
In all seriousness, though, is there the possibility that 'all' sorts cards will be worth less 50 years from now? Of course. None of us have the ability to see tomorrow, much less 50 years in the future. If we're using cards from 50 years ago as a benchmark, you could build somewhat of an argument. The parallel loses steam quickly though, because in this age of overproduction and artificial scarcity, the two periods of time really can't be compared.
My God, to consider that '92 Donruss might have some value in the future is somewhat frightening.
<< <i>I would just like to point out this simple fact.
The original comment was " All our cards will be worth less in 50 years and many of us will be dead.
That person never said every single card, now unless the total membership of PSA owns an example of every single card
then what we have been arguing would have some merit, however I would think that we all combined do not own every single card.
I used the word "our' to mean us.
Just like to point that simple yet important fact out.
Boo I'll leave the rest to you, go easy on him.
Steve >>
Like I said, you only see what you want to see. Here is the quote I have been talking about, yet again.
"...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now..."
So clearly you are simply making stuff up to keep your "point" in tact. You are clearly changing the wording to suit your "needs", which is apparently trying to make me look like the bad guy. "and we will be dead" is a completely separate point from the point I'm talking about... thus the word AND. You guys can stop with the piling on now, please.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
How about lets take the full quote word for word, I was going on memory, please show us where the comment states EVERY SINGLE CARD
That is your argument is it not?
<< <i>To the CU board that is getting all pansy about the bickering, lighten up Francis...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now, and most of you will be dead. >>
How about lets take the full quote word for word, I was going on memory, please show us where the comment states EVERY SINGLE CARD
That is your argument is it not?
<< <i>To the CU board that is getting all pansy about the bickering, lighten up Francis...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now, and most of you will be dead. >>
Steve >>
"THEY WILL ALL BE" What else could that possibly mean other than "THEY WILL ALL BE"? Are you on meds or something???
It's like watching my 7-year olds argue ---- "pot, meet kettle".
One guy is "predicting" the future to make a point. The other guy is using HIS OWN prediction of the future to call the first guy a lunatic.
Something a wise board mod on another site shared with me one time -- "Message boards would be SO much better if everyone had a mirror on their monitor so they could see the problem more clearly"
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
How about lets take the full quote word for word, I was going on memory, please show us where the comment states EVERY SINGLE CARD
That is your argument is it not?
<< <i>To the CU board that is getting all pansy about the bickering, lighten up Francis...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now, and most of you will be dead. >>
Steve >>
Quite the benign, fuzzy comment. The OP could have meant all cards, all the cards we own, or just all the cards in the discussion about the rip. To dig ones heels in and take exception with the INFERRED meaning is silly at best.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>It's like watching my 7-year olds argue ---- "pot, meet kettle".
One guy is "predicting" the future to make a point. The other guy is using HIS OWN prediction of the future to call the first guy a lunatic.
Something a wise board mod on another site shared with me one time -- "Message boards would be SO much better if everyone had a mirror on their monitor so they could see the problem more clearly" >>
I really don't get you. Do you really believe all cards will be worth less in 50 years? I think you DON'T in fact believe that to be true, but have to act like it's the vagueness of the whole argument that is so crazy so you don't get in bad with all the members who are piling on me. In essence, what you are saying is that you don't have an opinion and everyone who has an opinion is wrong because you can't predict the future. I can't even begin to explain how lame that sentiment is.
Perhaps this all could have been avoided had YOU simply asked the person that made the comment what HE meant when he used the word ALL.
That has been basically what you keep harping on. Is it not?
At least 7 or 8 people have given you answers yet you continue to spin away, your head must hurt, I know mine does.
When I replied to his comment and simply said "I can't argue with that" I was saying I can't argue with the fact that all MY cards could be worth less and that I'd be DEAD. I was speaking only of my specific situation. Nothing more nothing less, Then simply as a courtesy to you tried to answer your questions which were directed to me. If you need please go back and re read them.
<< <i>Perhaps this all could have been avoided had YOU simply asked the person that made the comment what HE meant when he used the word ALL. When I replied to his comment and simply said I can't argue with that I was saying I can't argue with the fact that all MY cards could be worth less and that I'd be DEAD.
That has been basically what you keep harping on. Is it not?
At least 7 or 8 people have given you answers yet you continue to spin away, your head must hurt, I know mine does.
When I replied to his comment and simply said "I can't argue with that" I was saying I can't argue with the fact that all MY cards could be worth less and that I'd be DEAD. I was speaking only of my specific situation. Nothing more nothing less, Then simply as a courtesy to you tried to answer your question which was directed to me. If you need please go back and re read them.
Steve >>
Funny how you are just now elaborating on what you in fact meant when that's all I asked you to do originally and you took offense to it for some reason.
<< <i>I elaborated then, I took no offense. I simply gave you my reasons for thinking that I would not argue another person's comment.
It did not dawn on me that i had to share my innermost self to you at that time. And what I was exactly feeling and thinking deep down within.
The only thing funny here is that you continue to prolong this BS.
Steve >>
Yep... it's all me. I guess you had no choice when submitting this post. I made you do it in my attempt to prolong this BS. I'll take my gun away from your head now.
P.S. Thanks for finally answering the very simple question, after refusing to do so, that started this nonsense.
My original post answering your request for me to elaborate:
SCT He said 50 years FROM NOW not what has happened in the past 50 years. Not sure what else I can say. I will be dead in 50 years (that's a fact) and since we have more people leaving the hobby then entering it IMO what that person said could be true. I simply said that I could not argue with it. Hope that clears up any misconceptions. Steve >>
Now pick it apart for all to see that I was being hostile towards you.
Comments
I already said that on page 2 or 3. :-)
BB......good one, I saw it too. Too bad the person that it was meant for missed it.
Steve
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now >>
Can you elaborate? >>
Because the supply remains constant and demand is shrinking.
Next! >>
You really believe every single card will be worth much less in 50 years. Really. >>
You know what? I have no idea. From a probabilistic perspective it seems unlikely. But who cares? The main point is that, speaking generally, sports cards will be worth less in 50 years than they are now, and that's all but guaranteed if the hobby base continues to shrink.
Steve
<< <i>I think the correct word would be "frustrated" posts. I get frustrated when dealing with morons. >>
The word here is "dealing". The person you were frustated in dealing with was Steve so it is logical to conclude you were stating he is a moron. Nice try and weasle out of it, just be a man and say what you really think or are you afraid of being bammed?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now >>
Can you elaborate? >>
Because the supply remains constant and demand is shrinking.
Next! >>
You really believe every single card will be worth much less in 50 years. Really. >>
You know what? I have no idea. From a probabilistic perspective it seems unlikely. But who cares? The main point is that, speaking generally, sports cards will be worth less in 50 years than they are now, and that's all but guaranteed if the hobby base continues to shrink. >>
Cards from 50 years ago and older are not worth less now than they were then. Why would that all change starting right now. And why would those cards all of a sudden start decreasing in value starting now. Is the T206 Honus Wagner going to be worth less in 50 years? Is a Ted Williams rookie card going to be worth less in 50 years? Please explain to me why all cards will go down in value in 50 years.
<< <i>More titallating: Watching Paint Dry or Quest for 206Wagner? >>
What does that have to do with anything.
<< <i>Lets see you were having an argument with a specific person and said quote
<< <i>I think the correct word would be "frustrated" posts. I get frustrated when dealing with morons. >>
The word here is "dealing". The person you were frustated in dealing with was Steve so it is logical to conclude you were stating he is a moron. Nice try and weasle out of it, just be a man and say what you really think or are you afraid of being bammed? >>
Why would I WANT to be banned? Are you serious? I didn't call anyone a moron, so stop with the message board police routine. It's not funny or amusing. Why not add to the thread instead of being only an instigator.
If you werent talking about Steve specifically did you mean it as a blanket statement for anyone here that disagrees with you?
<< <i>Then why did you use the term "morons" to describe people you were frustrated by on this board.
If you werent talking about Steve specifically did you mean it as a blanket statement for anyone here the disagrees with you? >>
Just give it up, dude. You are not sucking me in. I really couldn't care less about what you are talking about.
The original comment was " All our cards will be worth less in 50 years and many of us will be dead.
That person never said every single card, now unless the total membership of PSA owns an example of every single card
then what we have been arguing would have some merit, however I would think that we all combined do not own every single card.
I used the word "our' to mean us.
Just like to point that simple yet important fact out.
Boo I'll leave the rest to you, go easy on him.
Steve
I know I probably do. I'm hanging my head right now.
<< <i>calling longtime board members morons will not get you a cookie. what were those coin forum rules again............. >>
Countdown to a comment about the blind protection of board members with high post counts in 5...4...3...
In all seriousness, though, is there the possibility that 'all' sorts cards will be worth less 50 years from now? Of course. None of us have the ability to see tomorrow, much less 50 years in the future. If we're using cards from 50 years ago as a benchmark, you could build somewhat of an argument. The parallel loses steam quickly though, because in this age of overproduction and artificial scarcity, the two periods of
time really can't be compared.
My God, to consider that '92 Donruss might have some value in the future is somewhat frightening.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
<< <i>I would just like to point out this simple fact.
The original comment was " All our cards will be worth less in 50 years and many of us will be dead.
That person never said every single card, now unless the total membership of PSA owns an example of every single card
then what we have been arguing would have some merit, however I would think that we all combined do not own every single card.
I used the word "our' to mean us.
Just like to point that simple yet important fact out.
Boo I'll leave the rest to you, go easy on him.
Steve >>
Like I said, you only see what you want to see. Here is the quote I have been talking about, yet again.
"...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now..."
So clearly you are simply making stuff up to keep your "point" in tact. You are clearly changing the wording to suit your "needs", which is apparently trying to make me look like the bad guy. "and we will be dead" is a completely separate point from the point I'm talking about... thus the word AND. You guys can stop with the piling on now, please.
How about lets take the full quote word for word, I was going on memory, please show us where the comment states EVERY SINGLE CARD
That is your argument is it not?
<< <i>To the CU board that is getting all pansy about the bickering, lighten up Francis...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now, and most of you will be dead. >>
Steve
<< <i>Really?
How about lets take the full quote word for word, I was going on memory, please show us where the comment states EVERY SINGLE CARD
That is your argument is it not?
<< <i>To the CU board that is getting all pansy about the bickering, lighten up Francis...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now, and most of you will be dead. >>
Steve >>
"THEY WILL ALL BE" What else could that possibly mean other than "THEY WILL ALL BE"? Are you on meds or something???
<< <i>I saw Felicia and Elvis together at a gas station in northwest Nashville last night. That shook me up. >>
you had me at Elvis.
One guy is "predicting" the future to make a point. The other guy is using HIS OWN prediction of the future to call the first guy a lunatic.
Something a wise board mod on another site shared with me one time -- "Message boards would be SO much better if everyone had a mirror on their monitor so they could see the problem more clearly"
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Really?
How about lets take the full quote word for word, I was going on memory, please show us where the comment states EVERY SINGLE CARD
That is your argument is it not?
<< <i>To the CU board that is getting all pansy about the bickering, lighten up Francis...they're just cards. 50 years from now they will all be worth much less than they are now, and most of you will be dead. >>
Steve >>
Quite the benign, fuzzy comment. The OP could have meant all cards, all the cards we own, or just all the cards in the discussion about the rip. To dig ones heels in and take exception with the INFERRED meaning is silly at best.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>It's like watching my 7-year olds argue ---- "pot, meet kettle".
One guy is "predicting" the future to make a point. The other guy is using HIS OWN prediction of the future to call the first guy a lunatic.
Something a wise board mod on another site shared with me one time -- "Message boards would be SO much better if everyone had a mirror on their monitor so they could see the problem more clearly" >>
I really don't get you. Do you really believe all cards will be worth less in 50 years? I think you DON'T in fact believe that to be true, but have to act like it's the vagueness of the whole argument that is so crazy so you don't get in bad with all the members who are piling on me. In essence, what you are saying is that you don't have an opinion and everyone who has an opinion is wrong because you can't predict the future. I can't even begin to explain how lame that sentiment is.
when he used the word ALL.
That has been basically what you keep harping on. Is it not?
At least 7 or 8 people have given you answers yet you continue to spin away, your head must hurt, I know mine does.
When I replied to his comment and simply said "I can't argue with that" I was saying I can't argue with the fact that
all MY cards could be worth less and that I'd be DEAD. I was speaking only of my specific situation. Nothing more nothing less, Then simply as a courtesy to you tried
to answer your questions which were directed to me. If you need please go back and re read them.
Steve
Edited for clarity.
<< <i>Perhaps this all could have been avoided had YOU simply asked the person that made the comment what HE meant
when he used the word ALL. When I replied to his comment and simply said I can't argue with that I was saying I can't argue with the fact that
all MY cards could be worth less and that I'd be DEAD.
That has been basically what you keep harping on. Is it not?
At least 7 or 8 people have given you answers yet you continue to spin away, your head must hurt, I know mine does.
When I replied to his comment and simply said "I can't argue with that" I was saying I can't argue with the fact that
all MY cards could be worth less and that I'd be DEAD. I was speaking only of my specific situation. Nothing more nothing less, Then simply as a courtesy to you tried
to answer your question which was directed to me. If you need please go back and re read them.
Steve >>
Funny how you are just now elaborating on what you in fact meant when that's all I asked you to do originally and you took offense to it for some reason.
It did not dawn on me that i had to share my innermost self to you at that time. And what I was exactly feeling and thinking deep down within.
The only thing funny here is that you continue to prolong this BS.
Steve
<< <i>I elaborated then, I took no offense. I simply gave you my reasons for thinking that I would not argue another person's comment.
It did not dawn on me that i had to share my innermost self to you at that time. And what I was exactly feeling and thinking deep down within.
The only thing funny here is that you continue to prolong this BS.
Steve >>
Yep... it's all me. I guess you had no choice when submitting this post. I made you do it in my attempt to prolong this BS. I'll take my gun away from your head now.
P.S. Thanks for finally answering the very simple question, after refusing to do so, that started this nonsense.
SCT He said 50 years FROM NOW not what has happened in the past 50 years. Not sure what else I can say. I will be dead in 50 years (that's a fact) and since we have more people leaving the hobby then entering it IMO what that person said could be true. I simply said that I could not argue with it. Hope that clears up any misconceptions. Steve >>
Now pick it apart for all to see that I was being hostile towards you.
Steve
I have to finish something.
Take care SCT
Steve