When will Bonze Age books start to creep up to SA pricing?

[Jeffro.]

Remember for every item you can name that would fall under this supposed 'ideology of 25' (calling it a rule would be a fallacy in my anaylsis); there are ten or more who failed.

 

Everyone remembers vintage Star Wars figures, GI Joe (both classic and 80's revival), Transformers, and more.

 

What about Pocket Monsters, Exo-Squad, Swamp Thing figures, MUSCLE Men; and a TON of other toys that when you factor in all transaction costs and inflation; come out to be a major loss? Again, most 'skew the facts' of the item in question.

 

On top of that there are buying and selling transaction costs and fees to consider; not to mention storage and insurance. This is without taking into consideration inflation and the opportunity cost of buying one item over another; or simply investing in the financial markets instead. This is a very risky market when a full analysis is made.

 

 

Well, you're correct in that the item(s) in question have to have been fairly popular at the time in order to take advantage of the "Whatever" or 25 idea. Star wars, GI Joe, and Transformers certainly fit that bill.

I wonder if TMNT figures will fit the bill. Given the market for action figures these days, I tend to doubt it.

[Gatsby77]

I did the same with Marvel Star Wars comics in 1996--bought 85 NM issues marked at $2 per, with a negotiated 40% bulk discount, $1.20 net.

 

Sold them in1999 for $5-7 per. It's not rocket science.

 

And folks on these boards tend to be educated +/or smart, picking up only that 5-20% of comics that are the keys or due for an increase, not the vast majority that never was popular or will forever be quarter fodder.

[R Steinhoff]

Great chart Whetteon!

 

I am always amazed at what people will say to convince themselves that something is an 'investment.'

 

Me too. Comics are NOT investments. They do not have any intrinsic value. A comic is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. If you buy a comic and hope to profit then you are speculating. There is nothing wrong with that. If you know what you're doing you can a) have fun and b) make a bit of money along the way.

 

That being said... here's some food for thought. Using Whetteon's data, I overlayed his Bronze Index with the S&P 500. Bronze comics, despite the pretty big correction over the last few years, have held up pretty well in comparison

 

[whetteon]

Nice work there Henry! Definitely interesting stuff we're talking about here once data becomes involved. (thumbs u

[mintcollector]

Remember for every item you can name that would fall under this supposed 'ideology of 25' (calling it a rule would be a fallacy in my anaylsis); there are ten or more who failed.

 

Everyone remembers vintage Star Wars figures, GI Joe (both classic and 80's revival), Transformers, and more.

 

What about Pocket Monsters, Exo-Squad, Swamp Thing figures, MUSCLE Men; and a TON of other toys that when you factor in all transaction costs and inflation; come out to be a major loss? Again, most 'skew the facts' of the item in question.

 

Those are the ones you stay away from. If you were a child or teen in the 1980s you knew Transformers and GI JOE were kings like Spider-man and FF were in the 1960s. The ones you mentioned Pocket Monsters, Exo-Squad, Swamp Thing figures, MUSCLE Men never had the mainstream appeal like Transformers and GI JOE had.

 

This incorrect. There was a saturday morning cartoon devoted solely to Muscle Men and I believe Pocket Monsters. Looking back in hindsight it is easy to suggest what to buy and avoid, but I assure; even high paid analysts working for major auction houses, or even dealers; have trouble doing this.

[mintcollector]

Great chart Whetteon!

 

I am always amazed at what people will say to convince themselves that something is an 'investment.'

 

Me too. Comics are NOT investments. They do not have any intrinsic value. A comic is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. If you buy a comic and hope to profit then you are speculating. There is nothing wrong with that. If you know what you're doing you can a) have fun and b) make a bit of money along the way.

 

That being said... here's some food for thought. Using Whetteon's data, I overlayed his Bronze Index with the S&P 500. Bronze comics, despite the pretty big correction over the last few years, have held up pretty well in comparison

 

 

 

As someone educated in finance, you are forgetting one major flaw, the S&P 500 index, is the

most violate of all the major stock indexes. This is why gold and coin dealers use this index in their advertisements to show you how much you could have made by buying their so called investments. Use a standard US stock market index, I.e Total stock market index, then I would be more impressed.

 

Edited to include: Happy Thanksgiving to all, I will be back later to check in, but have a great holiday and God bless to all!

[OveraboundingMint]

To answer someone's question, in my expert opinion, there is no RULE of 25. For every item that became worth money you can name ten others that had a following in their time that never kept up with the cost of inflation. Even some of the items that people assume are worth a lot; are worth a lot less when you factor inflation and transaction costs into the equation.

 

In reality, and I can point to expert articles and analysis that deal with these issues, it is more like an 'ideology', than a 'rule.' Again, it is speculation at it's finest.

 

 

Well said! A Happy Thanksgiving to one and all!

[Jeffro.]

Wait a minute, what's the Bonze age?

[Lazyboy]

Remember for every item you can name that would fall under this supposed 'ideology of 25' (calling it a rule would be a fallacy in my anaylsis); there are ten or more who failed.

 

Everyone remembers vintage Star Wars figures, GI Joe (both classic and 80's revival), Transformers, and more.

 

What about Pocket Monsters, Exo-Squad, Swamp Thing figures, MUSCLE Men; and a TON of other toys that when you factor in all transaction costs and inflation; come out to be a major loss? Again, most 'skew the facts' of the item in question.

 

Those are the ones you stay away from. If you were a child or teen in the 1980s you knew Transformers and GI JOE were kings like Spider-man and FF were in the 1960s. The ones you mentioned Pocket Monsters, Exo-Squad, Swamp Thing figures, MUSCLE Men never had the mainstream appeal like Transformers and GI JOE had.

 

This incorrect. There was a saturday morning cartoon devoted solely to Muscle Men and I believe Pocket Monsters. Looking back in hindsight it is easy to suggest what to buy and avoid, but I assure; even high paid analysts working for major auction houses, or even dealers; have trouble doing this.

Popularity and existence are very different things. Just mentioning that since you seem to be confused. Pocket Monsters? Isn't that just the translation for Pokemon?

 

The "Rule of 25" is basically whatever was popular among young boys 25 years ago will be in demand now. It certainly doesn't say that everything that's 25 years old is valuable, not even the popular stuff.

[Cimm]

Wait a minute, what's the Bonze age?

 

It was an age of barbarism, of dramatic upheavals, an age undreamed of... It was an age of horrors, romances, and sorcery... It was an age where weird heroes flourished, it was an age of burgeoning darkness... It was an age when the voice of the common man went underground, and the voice of the underground was heard throughout the land... It was an age of innovation, rebirth and Marvels...

[Sal]

ugh.

 

the rule of 25 was never supposed to be a guarantee of liquidity or profit. it is merely a way of looking at what the group of items that should be worth trying to profit on.

 

take what kids are enjoying today and in 25 years, there should be some of those items that are worth disproportionate amounts of money solely due to nostalgia.

 

it's supposed to eliminate or reduce the "shot in the dark" effect, but is by no means a rule to follow; "rule" in this case is an idiom rather than a noun

[Bunky Brian]

It already did--10 years ago.

 

Now it's sliding back to the abyss.

 

Seriously--I love BA books, but you can get most BA cheaper now than at any point of the past decade.

 

Even 7 or 8 years ago, people on the boards were going on about how rare 9.4 BA books were, now it has to be 9.8 to be worth slabbing (w/ a few noteworthy exceptions).

 

Now demographics are going to take over. People like me are now over the hill, and real life is taking over (kids, medical issues, college bills, etc). Combine this with incredibly deep supplies of most books, and the market will become stagnant, at best.

 

And I got news for you--non-uber HG SA is right behind.

 

Sad to say, but I agree with this 101%, seems all true to me

[mintcollector]

ugh.

 

the rule of 25 was never supposed to be a guarantee of liquidity or profit. it is merely a way of looking at what the group of items that should be worth trying to profit on.

 

take what kids are enjoying today and in 25 years, there should be some of those items that are worth disproportionate amounts of money solely due to nostalgia.

 

it's supposed to eliminate or reduce the "shot in the dark" effect, but is by no means a rule to follow; "rule" in this case is an idiom rather than a noun

 

First, the main issue is that there are hundreds, if not thousands of items that would supposedly fall under this 'ideology'. Let's look at what is popular now. When I get more time (I am actually at the office all day and part of the evening today); I will compose just a partial list of what is popular right this moment (understand this is a very, very long list and has many sub-categories). The main point being that if one were to attempt to buy all these items (in regards to proposed 'investment' potential); they would be much better off buying one vintage item with a good solid track record. I think most could agree on that; yet people spend thousands on certain items and convince themselves that these items are 'investments'. It should be noted that if you are buying an item because you like it; I have no problem with that. Just don't convince yourself that your room of 1999 Star Wars action figures is or ever was an 'investment.' If you however, happen to like these items and knew they had or have very little to no 'investment' potential; then by all means collect them. No one should tell another person what he or she should collect. I believe though that it is an ethical responsibility of a dealer that if anyone asks about the 'investment' potential of an item; he or she should answer honestly, or at least provide relavant market information. I do this; even on eBay when I am asked. I also probably lose sales in the antiques and collectibles business as a result. That being said a lot of people also trust me. I have advised people to buy from my competition at conventions and various shows (the few I have time to attend) because they either had an item that better fit their needs; or one that I knew would appreciate over time. Any responsible dealer wants collectors to be happy, make money (when possible), and remain in the hobby. This is basic business ethics and etiquette; in my opinion. Keep in mind though that I am a part time dealer; working full time hours in this business (usually in the Spring and Summer); and have a career as well.

 

To sum up my above statement, I have no problem with people buying items in the antique and collectible fields for 'investment' purposes. I can tell you first hand that there are a lot of great items to buy and hold for a long period of time. The issue I have is with someone spending a great deal of money on something because they like it; and then trying to convince themselves that it is an 'investment.' Unfortunately, this is what most people do; buy first, research later...then hope for the best.

 

I get TONS of emails about the potential value of an antique or collectible over the long term. The people who have the best chance at making money in this regard are those with an open mind. When someone emails me and asks what Lego Star Wars set should be kept for 'investment' purposes; they just limited themselves to Lego Star Wars products only. One must ask if they are buying for true investment or if they just want justification to spend money on something that will at least hold its value? The most successful dealers and collectors who invest in these areas have an open mind. I can name categories of items that are what I consider great investments. That being said, if you don't like the item; are you really going to buy it? If you do buy it; are you going to hold it for the right amount of time? What about storage, insurance, and transaction fees? What about inflation and the opportunity cost associated with buying an item of this nature (i.e. one you don't even like)? In regards to my example above, I chose Lego Star Wars because I know many 'speculators' who are buying cases of certain sets and holding them. Lego, doing what any normal company would do, in trun just makes or releases more of them. How long has the Lego Death Star been on the market? Average life span of a Lego set was once two years; yet this set has been going strong for almost four. Why is that? Because people keep speculating on it! This is just one example. Will it go up in value? Not as much as the UCS Millennium Falcon. That set was only on the market for well less than two years. Much less were made; but both were mass produced.

 

To answer someone else's question; yes 'Pocket Monsters' is a foreign property. There was a US based toy of a similar nature produced by Matchbox called Monsters in my Pocket. It was 'speculated' on, and is on or at the 'ideology of 25' time frame; but is not worth much. This is just one of the MANY failed examples of this ideology. I could name a ton more. You remember the most popular ones that became pop culture icons. This is not a true representation of the market as a whole.

 

If I have the time I will look for the articles I have read on the internet by Harry Rinker and others and see if I can post a link. Normally, only their current articles are listed though.

 

Sincerely,

 

'mint'

[underthebigw]

It already did--10 years ago.

 

Now it's sliding back to the abyss.

 

Seriously--I love BA books, but you can get most BA cheaper now than at any point of the past decade.

 

Even 7 or 8 years ago, people on the boards were going on about how rare 9.4 BA books were, now it has to be 9.8 to be worth slabbing (w/ a few noteworthy exceptions).

 

Now demographics are going to take over. People like me are now over the hill, and real life is taking over (kids, medical issues, college bills, etc). Combine this with incredibly deep supplies of most books, and the market will become stagnant, at best.

 

And I got news for you--non-uber HG SA is right behind.

 

Sad to say, but I agree with this 101%, seems all true to me

 

C'mon, Brian. You could at least tell me I'm not over the hill.

 

Now buy some glasses for your store and make it up to me.

[whetteon]

ugh.

 

the rule of 25 was never supposed to be a guarantee of liquidity or profit. it is merely a way of looking at what the group of items that should be worth trying to profit on.

 

take what kids are enjoying today and in 25 years, there should be some of those items that are worth disproportionate amounts of money solely due to nostalgia.

 

it's supposed to eliminate or reduce the "shot in the dark" effect, but is by no means a rule to follow; "rule" in this case is an idiom rather than a noun

 

First, the main issue is that there are hundreds, if not thousands of items that would supposedly fall under this 'ideology'. Let's look at what is popular now. When I get more time (I am actually at the office all day and part of the evening today); I will compose just a partial list of what is popular right this moment (understand this is a very, very long list and has many sub-categories). The main point being that if one were to attempt to buy all these items (in regards to proposed 'investment' potential); they would be much better off buying one vintage item with a good solid track record. I think most could agree on that; yet people spend thousands on certain items and convince themselves that these items are 'investments'. It should be noted that if you are buying an item because you like it; I have no problem with that. Just don't convince yourself that your room of 1999 Star Wars action figures is or ever was an 'investment.' If you however, happen to like these items and knew they had or have very little to no 'investment' potential; then by all means collect them. No one should tell another person what he or she should collect. I believe though that it is an ethical responsibility of a dealer that if anyone asks about the 'investment' potential of an item; he or she should answer honestly, or at least provide relavant market information. I do this; even on eBay when I am asked. I also probably lose sales in the antiques and collectibles business as a result. That being said a lot of people also trust me. I have advised people to buy from my competition at conventions and various shows (the few I have time to attend) because they either had an item that better fit their needs; or one that I knew would appreciate over time. Any responsible dealer wants collectors to be happy, make money (when possible), and remain in the hobby. This is basic business ethics and etiquette; in my opinion. Keep in mind though that I am a part time dealer; working full time hours in this business (usually in the Spring and Summer); and have a career as well.

 

To sum up my above statement, I have no problem with people buying items in the antique and collectible fields for 'investment' purposes. I can tell you first hand that there are a lot of great items to buy and hold for a long period of time. The issue I have is with someone spending a great deal of money on something because they like it; and then trying to convince themselves that it is an 'investment.' Unfortunately, this is what most people do; buy first, research later...then hope for the best.

 

I get TONS of emails about the potential value of an antique or collectible over the long term. The people who have the best chance at making money in this regard are those with an open mind. When someone emails me and asks what Lego Star Wars set should be kept for 'investment' purposes; they just limited themselves to Lego Star Wars products only. One must ask if they are buying for true investment or if they just want justification to spend money on something that will at least hold its value? The most successful dealers and collectors who invest in these areas have an open mind. I can name categories of items that are what I consider great investments. That being said, if you don't like the item; are you really going to buy it? If you do buy it; are you going to hold it for the right amount of time? What about storage, insurance, and transaction fees? What about inflation and the opportunity cost associated with buying an item of this nature (i.e. one you don't even like)? In regards to my example above, I chose Lego Star Wars because I know many 'speculators' who are buying cases of certain sets and holding them. Lego, doing what any normal company would do, in trun just makes or releases more of them. How long has the Lego Death Star been on the market? Average life span of a Lego set was once two years; yet this set has been going strong for almost four. Why is that? Because people keep speculating on it! This is just one example. Will it go up in value? Not as much as the UCS Millennium Falcon. That set was only on the market for well less than two years. Much less were made; but both were mass produced.

 

To answer someone else's question; yes 'Pocket Monsters' is a foreign property. There was a US based toy of a similar nature produced by Matchbox called Monsters in my Pocket. It was 'speculated' on, and is on or at the 'ideology of 25' time frame; but is not worth much. This is just one of the MANY failed examples of this ideology. I could name a ton more. You remember the most popular ones that became pop culture icons. This is not a true representation of the market as a whole.

 

If I have the time I will look for the articles I have read on the internet by Harry Rinker and others and see if I can post a link. Normally, only their current articles are listed though.

 

Sincerely,

 

'mint'

 

[mintcollector]

Whetteon,

 

Wouldn't it be wise to keep MY post on the CGC forums, should one want to debate it? I understand that you may agree in my analysis, but attempting to 'move' it to another forum where I may or may not be a member; would be self-serving, as I cannot debate my statements on a forum in which I am not a member. A lot of people attempt to 'copy' my eBay guides for further analysis, as well as articles I had published regarding these same issues. My request is if you want another's opinion on what I have wrote, have them come to where it was originally posted. Not the other way around. I have no problem sharing my knowledge in this regard. That way everyone 'wins.'

Still if you do want to move a post I have written at least let me know. I should not have to learn of this from an email or PM coming from a 'third party.'

 

I thank you for reading.

 

'mint'

 

 

[Gatsby77]

I've posted the only response over on Whetteon's board so far. Here it is:

 

"I vehemently disagree with the guy for two reasons:

 

1) Of course the "rule of 25" doesn't mean invest in the 95% of or that which was popular and *speculated* on back when it was released.

 

2) He's approaching it from an *antiques* perspective, not a *comic book* perspective, and i think the rule is industry-specific.

 

the "rule of 25" does _not_ mean to be stockpiling copies of X-Factor # 1 that were hoarded from day 1. But it _may indeed_ mean to pick up every 9.6/9.8 potential mainstream $.65 cover Marvel and DC book you can find in the $1 bins.

 

Because 5-6 years from now, they won't be there. They'll be selling quickly for $8-9 a piece.

 

It also means that it wouldn't be a bad thing to start stockpiling books like the Punisher mini, and McFarlane ASMs and Hulks. Were they stockpiled at the time? Somewhat. But the nostalgia is strong enough among the right generation to push those (small, unrepresentative proportion of) books higher over the next 3-5 years."

 

[whetteon]

Whetteon,

 

Wouldn't it be wise to keep MY post on the CGC forums, should one want to debate it? I understand that you may agree in my analysis, but attempting to 'move' it to another forum where I may or may not be a member; would be self-serving, as I cannot debate my statements on a forum in which I am not a member. A lot of people attempt to 'copy' my eBay guides for further analysis, as well as articles I had published regarding these same issues. My request is if you want another's opinion on what I have wrote, have them come to where it was originally posted. Not the other way around. I have no problem sharing my knowledge in this regard. That way everyone 'wins.'

Still if you do want to move a post I have written at least let me know. I should not have to learn of this from an email or PM coming from a 'third party.'

 

I thank you for reading.

 

'mint'

 

 

If you feel that I should remove the post than I will remove it. Why we are busy talking on this thread instead of in pm's seems a bit embarrassing for the both of us. But the good news to take away from this exchange is that you looked around on the LyriaComicExchange forums and website and for that I say, "Thank you". (thumbs u

[the blob]

But it _may indeed_ mean to pick up every 9.6/9.8 potential mainstream $.65 cover Marvel and DC book you can find in the $1 bins.

 

Because 5-6 years from now, they won't be there. They'll be selling quickly for $8-9 a piece.

 

-------------

 

I hope that's true, but I don't see it re: books from 1982 or 1983 yet, so I wouldn't be so sure about 1987 or whatever. With that said, I knind of do it anyway, at least for 60 cent or earlier, though I try to get a bulk discount.

[ComicConnoisseur]

But it _may indeed_ mean to pick up every 9.6/9.8 potential mainstream $.65 cover Marvel and DC book you can find in the $1 bins.

 

Because 5-6 years from now, they won't be there. They'll be selling quickly for $8-9 a piece.

 

-------------

 

I hope that's true, but I don't see it re: books from 1982 or 1983 yet, so I wouldn't be so sure about 1987 or whatever. With that said, I knind of do it anyway, at least for 60 cent or earlier, though I try to get a bulk discount.

Good point as always Blob.