Stop the Insanity!!!

[clobberintime]

Jason's mother - Mrs. Voorhees- did it! Well we have 2 bottles of my favorite wine - FatBastard - and since it is the 13th a perfect night for watching Scream again. Wish the new Texas Chainsaw was on dvd already!

[Timely]

Do you have the balls to lose gracefully?

[sfilosa]

The crash is happening right now. High light or low light per diamond.scoop reporting that Heritage just sold ASM 101 cgc 9.8 for a mere $3,450. Net $2,553 to the consignor. Major price correction on this semi-key Morbius book.

 

I hope your not serious.

 

The sale of one or a few books for less then past sales DOES NOT MAKE A CRASH.

 

Nor does the:

 

The sale of one or a few books for more than past sales DOES NOT MAKE BULL MARKET.

 

Certain Marvel Silver-Age Keys seem to be setting record prices, yet I have bought a few CGC 9.4 Marvel Silver-Age Semi-Keys in the past few months for prices less than any shown on GPAnalysis for that grade.

 

 

 

 

[r100comics]

All I have done recently is to try and get the pejorative word "crash" out of people's vocabulary because it does not accurately describe the scenario that I have consistently laid out on this Board - it implies a massive decline in a very short period of time in most peoples' minds, something I have never forecast.

 

Agreed. The term "crash" definitely implies a series of events in a SHORT period of time, i.e:

 

crash-diet = a diet designed to achieve an intended result in the shortest possible time.

crash-land = to descend or dive quickly and steeply

crash = sudden decline or failure.

 

Now you have distanced yourself from the concept of an outright Market Crash, does that just leave Joe Collector (who has specifically targeted 2004 as the date of the crash) Does anyone else believe there will be an actual Market Crash (i.e. over a very short period of time) ?

 

Look at the stock market. The average stock topped out in 1997-98 and went into a bear market. But, the "hot" stocks continued to soar into 1999. Then, most of the dot-coms topped out in mid-to-late 1999. But, the "blue chip" tech stocks kept soaring into early 2000.

 

Gene, this is a comparison you always make in order to support your ideas but does this actually have ANY validity ? You are comparing apples and oranges. There are a million difficult variables at play in the markets that just have no bearing on high grade comic books. Companies announce poor forecasts, poor results, a possible takeover, a share split, financial irregularities, a security scare etc etc. Any one of these will affect market price, and if this is the price of a sector giant it will also pull many other prices around with it. The largest factor across markets as a whole is undoubtedly the economy, but even this does not provide a correllation between shares and comic books since many people actually move across to commodoties (incl. collectibles) in uncertain times. (Not including Doug Schmell, who already told us the Metropolis promo was not strictly accurate before you mention this example.)

 

I would appreciate it if you would please refrain from making any further misrepresentations, erroneous assertions and snide remarks about my views.

 

Gene

 

I apologize if you construed my comments as snide, as this is not how they were intended.

[delekkerste]

I apologize if you construed my comments as snide, as this is not how they were intended.

 

Apology accepted. I'm all for constructive debate here on the Boards.

 

 

Gene, this is a comparison you always make in order to support your ideas but does this actually have ANY validity ? You are comparing apples and oranges. The largest factor across markets as a whole is undoubtedly the economy

 

This is where the apples & oranges argument falls apart. The largest factor across markets is not the economy. It is psychology. A company announces great earnings but its stock price tanks. Happens all the time - why? Terrorists attack and bring down the Twin Towers - a big, market-shaking move, right? I defy anybody to look at a chart of the S&P 500 without the dates attached and show me where 9/11/01 shows up on the chart. You won't even see it, because the market psychology was already so negative by then.

 

If anything, I would say my analysis is even more relevant to comic books than the stock market. Why? Because stocks and bonds generate underlying cash flows, so there are "no-arbitrage" boundaries to how low they can go. Comics are not bounded on either the upside or the downside - their prices are driven solely by the psychology of the market. Right now, after 40 years of rising prices and an explosion in prices in recent years, most collectors literally believe prices on many books to be bulletproof. Sure things. Can't miss opportunities. That type of mentality has eventually spelled trouble in EVERY market.

 

 

(Not including Doug Schmell, who already told us the Metropolis promo was not strictly accurate before you mention this example.)

 

Don't even get me started on what I think of this ethical travesty.

 

Gene

[Aman619]

Happens all the time - why? Terrorists attack and bring down the Twin Towers - a big, market-shaking move, right? I defy anybody to look at a chart of the S&P 500 without the dates attached and show me where 9/11/01 shows up on the chart.

 

I think it was that huge drop in the week after when the markets finally reopend. Surely that downward spike shows up...

 

 

(Not including Doug Schmell, who already told us the Metropolis promo was not strictly accurate before you mention this example.)

 

One man's "not strictly accurate" is another man's FRAUD. I suppose certain individuals should be thanking their maker that this ISN'T the stock market, because if these types of comments had been made in a promotion for an investment firm (instead of a comic dealer), I can say with metaphysical certainty that the individuals involved would, at the very least, face substantial fines (with a large chance of being permanently barred from the industry and a small chance of facing jail time).

 

How is this behavior any different from the "creative license" and hyping that got Henry Blodget and Jack Grubman fined, barred from the securities industry and facing numerous civil lawsuits and criminal investigations? I am severely disappointed in many of my fellow Board members for letting their awe for big dealers and BSDs allow themselves to minimize the severity of this gross ethical lapse in their minds.

 

Gene

 

Difference is that the Market CRASHED and the regulators then sought out who to finger for the blame. (not that they didnt deserve it, but I hope you agree that the choices and selective prosecutions were more than a little politically motivated).

 

And, since you now agree that there wont be any CRASH in comics (as per your recent thread here) rather a gradual disappearance of values, there wont be any Federal or even State charges for Schmell, Metro, or Chuck for goosing the market with "stretched truths".

 

 

[delekkerste]

I think it was that huge drop in the week after when the markets finally reopend. Surely that downward spike shows up...

 

There was a large drop, but in the context of a bear market that had already been going for nearly 2 years, I defy anyone to find that week on a chart without the dates listed. And what about Pearl Harbor and other supposedly calamitous events in U.S. history? One could make a strong argument that external events that aren't strong enough to change the prevailing psychological mood are IRRELEVANT.

 

 

Difference is that the Market CRASHED

 

Did it crash? We saw values whither away over a 3-year period (5-year period if you include some segments of the market). It was not like October 1929 or October 1987, that's for sure. I could see comics doing the same thing in a concentrated 3-5 year timeframe...that's not a crash.

 

 

there wont be any Federal or even State charges for Schmell, Metro, or Chuck for goosing the market with "stretched truths"

 

No, because the securities industry is supposed to hold itself to a higher ethical standard. And, for the most part, it does. Billions of dollars exchange hands on nothing more than a phone call. I'm not sure if Doug or Vince or Chuck have broken any regulations or laws (probably not), because obviously the comic book industry is not regulated like banking/securities. However, just because it's not illegal doesn't mean that it's ethical. Far from it.

 

Gene

[FlyingDonut]

I defy anyone to find that week on a chart without the dates listed.

 

Its pretty damned easy to see on the chart. Dow was down what, 700 that week?

 

[FlyingDonut]

Fun with comparisons: eBay vs. the Dow

[delekkerste]

Post deleted by delekkerste

[delekkerste]

Where is 9/11 on this chart (dates removed)? Even if you can pinpoint it (those who are familiar with the market probably can find it from memory, but I doubt Joe Sixpack can), wouldn't you agree that, in the big picture, it did nothing to alter the prevailing market trend/psychology that had already been in effect for some time?

 

 

The #1 thing you need to know about ANY market, whether it's comics, cards, stocks, gold, art or real estate is whether participants are too bearish (BUY) or too bullish (SELL). You can draw your own conclusions about the recent "supahot" comic sales.

 

Gene

[namisgr]

Maybe it would be more constructive to get rid of the word "crash" and consider, instead, whether the current high grade early Silver market might be experiencing a bubble. The mention of Blodget and other dotcom analysts is apt here, since the tech bubble that peaked in March of 2001 is a prime example of how changing market psychology can couple with fundamentals to drastically alter prices.

 

From my admittedly inexperienced perspective, it is difficult to evaluate the likelihood that our current market is in a bubble. It does sometimes seem to me that key and topline books change hands from dealer to dealer in a game of "hot potato" - you are fine (and making money) as long as you don't get stuck holding the mylar, but eventually profit may lie beyond a price anyone else is willing to pay.

 

Since company stock comes with tangible assets (cash, real estate, product revenues) that comics lack, I suggest that the better analogy for our comics market is the art market, which undergoes enormous price fluctuations at its high end owing to combinations of economic and psychological factors. It is most assuredly not a market that goes up forever and ever. I strongly suspect the comic market won't, either.

["Believing is seeing"]

[FlyingDonut]

Where is 9/11 on this chart (dates removed)? Even if you can pinpoint it (those who are familiar with the market probably can find it from memory, but I doubt Joe Sixpack can), wouldn't you agree that, in the big picture, it did nothing to alter the prevailing market trend/psychology that had already been in effect for some time?

 

 

The #1 thing you need to know about ANY market, whether it's comics, cards, stocks, gold, art or real estate is whether participants are too bearish (BUY) or too bullish (SELL). You can draw your own conclusions about the recent "supahot" comic sales.

 

Gene

 

I don't know how to make the little circle thingies on graphics, but 9-11 is towards the right side of the second to last full box. There was a massive sell off that week, just taking it down the continued slide.

[delekkerste]

I don't know how to make the little circle thingies on graphics, but 9-11 is towards the right side of the second to last full box. There was a massive sell off that week, just taking it down the continued slide.

 

Well, duh, you just looked at that chart from the Washington Post! Plus, you knew what to look for (one-week blip on the chart) whereas Joe Sixpack would have looked for the point which triggered the biggest decline.

 

Gene

[sfilosa]

From my admittedly inexperienced perspective, it is difficult to evaluate the likelihood that our current market is in a bubble. It does sometimes seem to me that key and topline books change hands from dealer to dealer in a game of "hot potato" - you are fine (and making money) as long as you don't get stuck holding the mylar, but eventually profit may lie beyond a price anyone else is willing to pay.

 

The biggest difference between the stock market and the comic market is that:

 

ALMOST NO ONE WOULD KEEP A STOCK IF THEY FELT IT HAD NO CHANCE FOR AN INCREASE IN VALUE!

 

Like you said, it's a game of "hot potato", yet eventually a comic book will find a home in a LONG TERM COLLECTOR (not investors) hands. And then it will not be for sale any longer.

 

That said, the sale of a key book for a very high price, does not guarantee that the next sale of the same key book (same grade and such) will attain the same price.

 

 

[Aman619]

I'm a little dense and certainly not a markets specialist...but I'm getting the feeling that this whole "pick the 9/11 day out of a DOW chart" is a classic straw man argument. What was your point again? That there isnt ONE event that precipitates a crash? Who said that? Why are you disproving it??

[r100comics]

I'm a little dense and certainly not a markets specialist...but I'm getting the feeling that this whole "pick the 9/11 day out of a DOW chart" is a classic straw man argument. What was your point again? That there isnt ONE event that precipitates a crash? Who said that? Why are you disproving it??

 

We cannot use the term "crash" anymore, we need to think of something else in it's place. "Market Correction" isn't catchy or sensational enough, howabout "Market Decay" or "Market Slump" ?

[delekkerste]

What was your point again? That there isnt ONE event that precipitates a crash? Who said that? Why are you disproving it??

 

My point, as I have repeated several times in these posts, is that PSYCHOLOGY rules the markets and not even a major, world-shattering fundamental event like 9/11 (which only shows up as one of several blips in a protracted downtrend) is more important than the mood of market participants.

 

That said, the more bearish psychology gets, the closer you get to a good buying opportunity. Conversely, the more bullish psychology gets, the closer you get to a good selling opportunity. In the current marketplace, people have come to expect staggering prices and price appreciation as normal, even for books that are not hard to find. People have come to believe that certain books in certain grades are "bulletproof" and can never lose money over time. I ask you, is this psychology more symptomatic of a market top or a market bottom? And so, is NOW a good time to be "buying comics for the long-run"?

 

Gene

[Aman619]

What are buyers feeling in the middle of that spectrum? Why is it either of two extremes? People believe their purchases today still have upside ... nobody thinks we're at a bottom, so rule that out. But where on the curve are we. You no longer state that we are nearing the finish line any month now, so we agree we are somewher on the curve.

 

Having said that (if we do agree) then please tell us WHEN we are in the red zone. Otherwise, I think all you are telling us is we're going to run out of track somewhere. I think all of us but the most dense blindered buyers know this.

 

Like the line in the great old song "Cocaine": "They say it'll kill me but they dont say when!"

[Timely]

We cannot use the term "crash" anymore, we need to think of something else in it's place. "Market Correction" isn't catchy or sensational enough, howabout "Market Decay" or "Market Slump" ?

 

 

Call it a Market...

Decline

Desent

Downslide

Reversal

Deterioration

Reduction

Abatement

Waning

Depreciation

Abridgment

Dwindling

Ebbing

Lessening

Shrinkage (sorry Seinfeld!)

 

Timely