Collectors of baseball cards striking out

[arexcrooke]

Ok. When you get a chance. Might want you to bring a couple down with you to heroes.

 

 

[Hepcat]

Man. Looking at that '58-59 Hockey set is bringing teatrs to my eyes. I had the Hull rookie. It, along with alot of other vintage cards, was stolen when my house was burglarized back in '96. It would have graded a PSA 7 if not an 8 if I still had it today.

 

Oh, I hate to hear stories like that! So sad.

 

[Hepcat]

You could have smiled.

 

I was, but I was just outside the picture. It's tough to get the big, pink clumsy one to smile as well.

 

 

 

[Hepcat]

A lot of folks won't like these b/c of the very minimalist style, but that's exactly what I love about the 61 Parkhurst.

 

 

I like those 1960-61 Parkies enough to collect them. There's five or so I still need to upgrade because they're not quite perfect enough when it comes to sharpness and whiteness for my tastes. (I'm actually not that fussy about centering.) I have all the wrappers for the 1960-61 through 1963-64 Parkhurst hockey sets as well.

 

 

 

[Hepcat]

I do remember some baseball cards back in the day with drawn images of the players, maybe called Diamond Masters or some such.

 

The 1952 Topps cards were drawings not photos. Here's a pic from the web:

 

 

So were the 1953 Topps. Another pic from the web:

 

 

I don't like the design of either set at all. I have to admit though that having a really nice Satchel Paige of the St. Louis Browns card would be very cool indeed.

 

[delekkerste]

I used to be an avid baseball card collector and still get the catalogs from REA and Legendary (formerly Mastro) and follow the auctions (in fact, I was the underbidder on a PSA 8 '52 Topps Mantle last year). In my view, there is zero doubt that card collecting is in a secular decline. Sure, certain blue chip vintage cards can still fetch big money, but we're talking about a minuscule percentage (and, frankly, prices on the whole pale in comparison to what better comics have been fetching the past few years). Most cards are well below their peak value from years ago, the number of collectors has plummeted, the number of shops has plummeted, the number of shows has plummeted, the attendance at shows has plummeted and the number of kids involved in the hobby has plummeted. To say that the hobby is thriving because the T206 Wagners and 1952 Topps Mantles (or some of the more recent examples that some have cited) still fetch big money is just inaccurate. There are stamps that still fetch much more than anything in either the card or comic book hobbies, but that hobby is also aging and in a secular decline - to point to the big stamp sales as proof of a thriving hobby would be similarly wrong.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean that the bottom is going to fall out of the high-end card market anytime soon, as the better quality material will continue to be hotly pursued by an ever-aging collector base (not unlike stamps), but the hobby will undoubtedly get more and more irrelevant over time. But, it will be a slow process that takes years/decades. I took a course on genetics in college and it takes a long time for a "deleterious recessive gene" to be weeded (almost) out along an asymptotic decline curve. Card collecting will follow a similar asymptotic decline curve similar to the one that stamps are following. Comics will likely follow in time as well, but are much earlier in the decay curve and things still look relatively better.

 

Speaking of comics, in the long-run, comic book movies are not going to save comic books any more than record gate receipts for baseball games has saved baseball cards. If anything, they will just shift the interest of kids away from comics and into their preferred mediums of movies and videogames, much as easy cable/satellite/online access to baseball games and baseball statistics and participation in fantasy baseball has co-opted people who might have collected baseball cards in another era (and kids today hardly ever use stamps anymore with e-mail and e-payment systems having become very much the norm). That said, there are enough people out there that were born in the pre-Internet, pre-Marvel Studios era that the secular decline in comic book collecting will be stretched out over an even longer period than baseball cards. The hobby is certainly healthier now than card collecting, and the rate of decline is likely to be slower. But, the writing is on the wall - comic books themselves are in a long-term secular decline (if not books themselves) and so is comic book collecting. You see it now in terms of the long-term decline in circulation volumes and comic book shops, and you will eventually see it manifest itself in terms of pricing and liquidity, though that is something that is still some ways away.

[bill977]

I used to be an avid baseball card collector and still get the catalogs from REA and Legendary (formerly Mastro) and follow the auctions (in fact, I was the underbidder on a PSA 8 '52 Topps Mantle last year). In my view, there is zero doubt that card collecting is in a secular decline. Sure, certain blue chip vintage cards can still fetch big money, but we're talking about a minuscule percentage (and, frankly, prices on the whole pale in comparison to what better comics have been fetching the past few years). Most cards are well below their peak value from years ago, the number of collectors has plummeted, the number of shops has plummeted, the number of shows has plummeted, the attendance at shows has plummeted and the number of kids involved in the hobby has plummeted. To say that the hobby is thriving because the T206 Wagners and 1952 Topps Mantles (or some of the more recent examples that some have cited) still fetch big money is just inaccurate. There are stamps that still fetch much more than anything in either the card or comic book hobbies, but that hobby is also aging and in a secular decline - to point to the big stamp sales as proof of a thriving hobby would be similarly wrong.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean that the bottom is going to fall out of the high-end card market anytime soon, as the better quality material will continue to be hotly pursued by an ever-aging collector base (not unlike stamps), but the hobby will undoubtedly get more and more irrelevant over time. But, it will be a slow process that takes years/decades. I took a course on genetics in college and it takes a long time for a "deleterious recessive gene" to be weeded (almost) out along an asymptotic decline curve. Card collecting will follow a similar asymptotic decline curve similar to the one that stamps are following. Comics will likely follow in time as well, but are much earlier in the decay curve and things still look relatively better.

 

Speaking of comics, in the long-run, comic book movies are not going to save comic books any more than record gate receipts for baseball games has saved baseball cards. If anything, they will just shift the interest of kids away from comics and into their preferred mediums of movies and videogames, much as easy cable/satellite/online access to baseball games and baseball statistics and participation in fantasy baseball has co-opted people who might have collected baseball cards in another era (and kids today hardly ever use stamps anymore with e-mail and e-payment systems having become very much the norm). That said, there are enough people out there that were born in the pre-Internet, pre-Marvel Studios era that the secular decline in comic book collecting will be stretched out over an even longer period than baseball cards. The hobby is certainly healthier now than card collecting, and the rate of decline is likely to be slower. But, the writing is on the wall - comic books themselves are in a long-term secular decline (if not books themselves) and so is comic book collecting. You see it now in terms of the long-term decline in circulation volumes and comic book shops, and you will eventually see it manifest itself in terms of pricing and liquidity, though that is something that is still some ways away.

very well written and valid points one cannot deny

[the blob]

I was always under the [mis?]impression that perhaps some of the topps higher #s were short printed....

 

Topps baseball cards were printed in series of 88 cards in the fifties and through at least the mid-sixties. The last series was indeed short printed compared with the earlier ones, quite simply because most kids had lost interest by then so had stopped buying!

 

Worse yet, retailers would end up over ordering the first few series and would then end up stuck with a box of unsold packs. Until that box was sold, they wouldn't order any more cards, meaning the subsequent series. So in my neck of the woods, a kid couldn't even find any cards beyond the third series (#264) for several straight years from 1962 onward! Very frustrating!

 

If you check the pricing in the catalogue of a large dealer such as Kit Young Cards, the relative scarcity of the high numbers is reflected in higher asking prices.

 

The last year Topps produced series for were 1973. And that is exactly why some of the unknown commons from the higher series bring big money. They just arent there in quantity as the others. In comics it would be like an issue in a run being tougher than the ones around it for whatever reason. Say black border, brown border like Avengers 93, or for no damned good reason like Thor 168.

Im working on a 1966 Topps set and there are some cards in the 5th series that are very tough. Also, Aaron is a high number, McCovey, Gaylord perry, and a few others.

Lemme get my thoughts together and I will explain how some cards are short prints and others are regular or double prints.

 

The examples I posted for unknowns getting big $ for psa 9s were relatively low # cards (a #15 for one) and there seem to be a fair # of the cards up on ebay, just not in psa 9. the mccovey that fetches a nice price raw and in mid-grade is indeed a high # card, but then again, it's mccovey and there are a ton of them on ebay as well. could these psa 9s be rare because nobody wants to send in that horatio pina card or is that just not going to happen because there are so many card collectors sending in every card that looks perfect trying to put together a set?

[the blob]

 

my local shop busts out pre-76 boxes every now and then...football and baseball...and makes them 50 cents. there will be stars mixed in there. i i get first crack at them they really do look pretty sharp...nice corners, etc. like they really haven't been messed with, straight out of a pack. i wonder why he doesn't send them in when they're this sharp looking? does psa do a 9 pre-screen? i could see how 7 and 8s would be money losers though.

When he does ill take every Schmidt, Munson, and Catfish he has.

 

The 78 munsons and catfish went into the 50 cent box. 76-77 would likely be $1. before that $2-$4 (other than the munson RC, of course).

 

Shmidt gets premium priced at the shop 78 and before, so like $2 and up.

 

 

[originalisbest]

I used to be an avid baseball card collector and still get the catalogs from REA and Legendary (formerly Mastro) and follow the auctions (in fact, I was the underbidder on a PSA 8 '52 Topps Mantle last year). In my view, there is zero doubt that card collecting is in a secular decline. Sure, certain blue chip vintage cards can still fetch big money, but we're talking about a minuscule percentage (and, frankly, prices on the whole pale in comparison to what better comics have been fetching the past few years). Most cards are well below their peak value from years ago, the number of collectors has plummeted, the number of shops has plummeted, the number of shows has plummeted, the attendance at shows has plummeted and the number of kids involved in the hobby has plummeted. To say that the hobby is thriving because the T206 Wagners and 1952 Topps Mantles (or some of the more recent examples that some have cited) still fetch big money is just inaccurate. There are stamps that still fetch much more than anything in either the card or comic book hobbies, but that hobby is also aging and in a secular decline - to point to the big stamp sales as proof of a thriving hobby would be similarly wrong.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean that the bottom is going to fall out of the high-end card market anytime soon, as the better quality material will continue to be hotly pursued by an ever-aging collector base (not unlike stamps), but the hobby will undoubtedly get more and more irrelevant over time. But, it will be a slow process that takes years/decades. I took a course on genetics in college and it takes a long time for a "deleterious recessive gene" to be weeded (almost) out along an asymptotic decline curve. Card collecting will follow a similar asymptotic decline curve similar to the one that stamps are following. Comics will likely follow in time as well, but are much earlier in the decay curve and things still look relatively better.

 

Speaking of comics, in the long-run, comic book movies are not going to save comic books any more than record gate receipts for baseball games has saved baseball cards. If anything, they will just shift the interest of kids away from comics and into their preferred mediums of movies and videogames, much as easy cable/satellite/online access to baseball games and baseball statistics and participation in fantasy baseball has co-opted people who might have collected baseball cards in another era (and kids today hardly ever use stamps anymore with e-mail and e-payment systems having become very much the norm). That said, there are enough people out there that were born in the pre-Internet, pre-Marvel Studios era that the secular decline in comic book collecting will be stretched out over an even longer period than baseball cards. The hobby is certainly healthier now than card collecting, and the rate of decline is likely to be slower. But, the writing is on the wall - comic books themselves are in a long-term secular decline (if not books themselves) and so is comic book collecting. You see it now in terms of the long-term decline in circulation volumes and comic book shops, and you will eventually see it manifest itself in terms of pricing and liquidity, though that is something that is still some ways away.

 

I don't disagree with much of what you say, Gene, but you're always singing this same song - I've never seen you not sing it. What is your ultimate point - that we're all collecting a variety of things which are destined to ultimately lose money and whose best collectible gains days are behind them? So be it, as long as you're not collecting with money you can't afford to lose.

 

It's tiresome to hear this dirge again and again for all manner of collectibles. I suppose one could argue that Magic cards and the like are still on their upswing, but as a collector I couldn't care less, as they interest me not in the least. Video games, ditto - but there are those who love them. I would expect that your profession causes you to think first, last, only and always in terms of potential profitability, which is fine, as I also like to feel that my collectible purchases aren't money wasted, but money isn't everything (I know, it's the only thing.)

 

As far as worrying about whether card, comic or butterfly collecting, as a whole, is on the decline, that's an academic argument. In your daily work, you don't care what the market is doing as a whole, ultimately, other than how that may be affecting your chosen positions, correct? And it may affect your timing as to acquiring/liquidating. If a collector happens to be collecting the "right" things that are still in strong demand for the forseeable future, and can thus be sold at a profit should they choose to sell -- do they care about the overall state of things? Sort of a tree in the forest viewpoint. And as for those examples that have fallen by the wayside, if one still likes them, maybe they can be bought for next to nothing, or better yet, for free out of someone's discards. Then all it costs the collector is the inconvenience of storing said stuff. Hopefully, with both perceived high demand items and things that one coldly calculates they'd be lucky to give away in 10 years, as long as it's understood going in, the collector will be fine.

[the blob]

I used to be an avid baseball card collector and still get the catalogs from REA and Legendary (formerly Mastro) and follow the auctions (in fact, I was the underbidder on a PSA 8 '52 Topps Mantle last year). In my view, there is zero doubt that card collecting is in a secular decline. Sure, certain blue chip vintage cards can still fetch big money, but we're talking about a minuscule percentage (and, frankly, prices on the whole pale in comparison to what better comics have been fetching the past few years). Most cards are well below their peak value from years ago, the number of collectors has plummeted, the number of shops has plummeted, the number of shows has plummeted, the attendance at shows has plummeted and the number of kids involved in the hobby has plummeted. To say that the hobby is thriving because the T206 Wagners and 1952 Topps Mantles (or some of the more recent examples that some have cited) still fetch big money is just inaccurate. There are stamps that still fetch much more than anything in either the card or comic book hobbies, but that hobby is also aging and in a secular decline - to point to the big stamp sales as proof of a thriving hobby would be similarly wrong.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean that the bottom is going to fall out of the high-end card market anytime soon, as the better quality material will continue to be hotly pursued by an ever-aging collector base (not unlike stamps), but the hobby will undoubtedly get more and more irrelevant over time. But, it will be a slow process that takes years/decades. I took a course on genetics in college and it takes a long time for a "deleterious recessive gene" to be weeded (almost) out along an asymptotic decline curve. Card collecting will follow a similar asymptotic decline curve similar to the one that stamps are following. Comics will likely follow in time as well, but are much earlier in the decay curve and things still look relatively better.

 

Speaking of comics, in the long-run, comic book movies are not going to save comic books any more than record gate receipts for baseball games has saved baseball cards. If anything, they will just shift the interest of kids away from comics and into their preferred mediums of movies and videogames, much as easy cable/satellite/online access to baseball games and baseball statistics and participation in fantasy baseball has co-opted people who might have collected baseball cards in another era (and kids today hardly ever use stamps anymore with e-mail and e-payment systems having become very much the norm). That said, there are enough people out there that were born in the pre-Internet, pre-Marvel Studios era that the secular decline in comic book collecting will be stretched out over an even longer period than baseball cards. The hobby is certainly healthier now than card collecting, and the rate of decline is likely to be slower. But, the writing is on the wall - comic books themselves are in a long-term secular decline (if not books themselves) and so is comic book collecting. You see it now in terms of the long-term decline in circulation volumes and comic book shops, and you will eventually see it manifest itself in terms of pricing and liquidity, though that is something that is still some ways away.

very well written and valid points one cannot deny

 

 

There are things Marvel/DC could do to increase their circulation, probably double or triple it, but they don't want to bother as there are other more profitable venues and squeezing a few million more in profits out of publishing is meaningless compared to their piece of a movie or cartoon series or toy line. Their idea of trying to cater to the kids market is creating some Marvel magazine for the 7-11/Walmart crowd with a $9.99 cover price. This is not cheap disposable entertainment parents can buy their kids to shut them up! as things stand, especially with Borders closing up, even if a kid was potentially interested, there are now so few places to buy the stuff and I don't think the lack of venues if simply due to lack of demand.

[the blob]

Card collecting may be on the decline, but I have to imagine there are plenty more active card collectors than active comic collectors, particularly if you're talking about all of the the big 4 sports, given that 20 years ago every other male was collecting cards and it was only maybe 1:20 for comics (or so it seemed).

 

 

[delekkerste]

I don't disagree with much of what you say, Gene, but you're always singing this same song - I've never seen you not sing it. What is your ultimate point - that we're all collecting a variety of things which are destined to ultimately lose money and whose best collectible gains days are behind them? So be it, as long as you're not collecting with money you can't afford to lose.

 

Mine is solely an academic argument, not a market argument. Market prices are barely tangential to the point I'm making. As we have seen, prices can be sustained for some time by smaller numbers of collectors in a niche hobby - again, just look at stamps for proof of that - so I am not telling anyone to sell their cards or comics or to buy videogames or other items that may (or may not) have a longer collecting lifespan. All I'm saying is that many of the collecting hobbies that were popular in the 20th century and are still popular to some extent today are in long-term secular declines. We can argue about the rate of decline and what it might mean for market prices, but it is undeniable that they are in decline (again, an asymptotic decline curve will never reach zero and may take a long, long time to play out, longer than the lifetimes of most people here I'm sure). That's all I am saying - if you are hearing the same old songs about market prices and market calls, I ain't the one singing 'em.

[originalisbest]

I don't disagree with much of what you say, Gene, but you're always singing this same song - I've never seen you not sing it. What is your ultimate point - that we're all collecting a variety of things which are destined to ultimately lose money and whose best collectible gains days are behind them? So be it, as long as you're not collecting with money you can't afford to lose.

 

Mine is solely an academic argument, not a market argument. Market prices are barely tangential to the point I'm making. As we have seen, prices can be sustained for some time by smaller numbers of collectors in a niche hobby - again, just look at stamps for proof of that - so I am not telling anyone to sell their cards or comics or to buy videogames or other items that may (or may not) have a longer collecting lifespan. All I'm saying is that many of the collecting hobbies that were popular in the 20th century and are still popular to some extent today are in long-term secular declines. We can argue about the rate of decline and what it might mean for market prices, but it is undeniable that they are in decline (again, an asymptotic decline curve will never reach zero and may take a long, long time to play out, longer than the lifetimes of most people here I'm sure). That's all I am saying - if you are hearing the same old songs about market prices and market calls, I ain't the one singing 'em.

 

If you're not singing them, you sure seem to be humming along! But point taken. Much like collectibles of the past, all things desirable today may eventually go into decline, such that infinitesimally few will even care about their existence at some point. Today, the Cotton Gin Collectors of America (CGCA) probably has as many members as the Shakers' Recruiting Society, etc. But secular decline or no, I think interest in comics and sportscards overall is not likely to significantly weaken in my lifetime in the manner you foresee, though I would bet Magic cards will someday prove to be yet another "cautionary tale" for the collector paying high prices today.

[MisterX]

I don't disagree with much of what you say, Gene, but you're always singing this same song - I've never seen you not sing it. What is your ultimate point - that we're all collecting a variety of things which are destined to ultimately lose money and whose best collectible gains days are behind them? So be it, as long as you're not collecting with money you can't afford to lose.

 

Mine is solely an academic argument, not a market argument. Market prices are barely tangential to the point I'm making. As we have seen, prices can be sustained for some time by smaller numbers of collectors in a niche hobby - again, just look at stamps for proof of that - so I am not telling anyone to sell their cards or comics or to buy videogames or other items that may (or may not) have a longer collecting lifespan. All I'm saying is that many of the collecting hobbies that were popular in the 20th century and are still popular to some extent today are in long-term secular declines. We can argue about the rate of decline and what it might mean for market prices, but it is undeniable that they are in decline (again, an asymptotic decline curve will never reach zero and may take a long, long time to play out, longer than the lifetimes of most people here I'm sure). That's all I am saying - if you are hearing the same old songs about market prices and market calls, I ain't the one singing 'em.

 

How are you feeling about comic OA these days?

[delekkerste]

How are you feeling about comic OA these days?

 

I enjoy the hobby and am still building my collection. The hobby seems to be hitting its stride now, but whether it will be 40 years (or whenever) from now when I'm selling off my collection, who knows. I think it's pretty obvious that the biggest players in the hobby today are late 30-to-mid-50 somethings and I think it will be very difficult for the next generation to match (let alone exceed) this group in terms of numbers, spending power and comic book knowledge/nostalgia. Not to mention, the barriers to entry with prices where they are now are so high and, unlike the thriving contemporary fine art scene, interest in newer comics and comic art is relatively low these days, which also makes it tough to hook younger collectors into OA. I suspect we are in sort of a Golden Age of OA collecting at the moment, though I don't expect the hobby to be going away anytime soon, even after this period ends.

[the blob]

Perhaps there are smaller #s of collectors than 20 years ago (ok, not perhaps, definitely), but the shows get a lot of foot traffic, dealers can justify the expense of setting up tables and there's a lot of volume on ebay, stores have problems, but I think that's the nature of the beast with a smaller collector base...finding someone who is looking for a VF Avengers 87 and hoping they walk through the door... Some stores don't even bother trying to sell certain publishers/genres beyond the $1-$2 box if, let's say, they have a super hero collecting clientelle. But the average collector, I'm guessing, has a heck of a lot more disposable income (even in this economy) than the average collector 20 years ago hoping to make a buck on their stack of Spawn 1s. Of course, this may not last forever, but if the average collector spends 500% more on back issues now than the average collector did 20 years ago (let's forget inflation for a moment), it can offset a substantial drop in the # of collectors. Obviously some prices are way down (like my x-o manowars), but in general, most are up since then.

[Hepcat]

Card collecting may be on the decline, but I have to imagine there are plenty more active card collectors than active comic collectors, particularly if you're talking about all of the the big 4 sports, given that 20 years ago every other male was collecting cards and it was only maybe 1:20 for comics (or so it seemed).

 

You've put your finger on precisely why the market for baseball cards has declined so precipitously in the last 15-20 years. As a result of the press coverage given to the prices at which certain baseball cards such as the 1909 American Tobacco Co. Honus Wagner and the 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle were changing hands, it seems that every single baseball fan became an enthusiastic baseball card collector in the late 1980's. It was a mass market frenzy/cultural phenomenon triggered by all these sports fans seeing cards as their ticket to future riches, even the cards that were being issued right that year! The rookie cards of hot prospects instantly sold for premiums.

 

This seemed to be particularly true in Toronto because it corresponded to the period in which the Blue Jays started to field contending teams.

 

And it extended to women too, women who didn't even know the teams for whom any of Ty Cobb, Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and Micky Mantle had played let alone any of the biggest stars playing in the other league from the one in which their home team played.

 

But of course these new "collectors" were simply sports fans investing/speculating in cards. They didn't have the collecting gene. I remember barely being able to restrain my contempt for all the johnny-come-latelies thinking they would get rich on their cards.

 

But the enormous surge in demand for cards acted to push up their prices across the board. And the card companies geared up production enormously to feed this upsurge in demand. Then of course when prices faltered because everybody and his dog had already hoarded enormous quantities, all the fan/investors lost interest and went away.

 

But there has been no closely analogous situation in comics. All the kids watching cartoons on TV did not then and do not now en masse graduate to collecting/ hoarding comics. Neither do all the people who enjoy watching superhero movies. Comic collecting has over the years stayed by and large a niche counter culture phenomenon. Which is why demand for back issue comics has declined by attrition only very slowly.

 

There are things Marvel/DC could do to increase their circulation, probably double or triple it, but they don't want to bother as there are other more profitable venues and squeezing a few million more in profits out of publishing is meaningless compared to their piece of a movie or cartoon series or toy line. Their idea of trying to cater to the kids market is creating some Marvel magazine for the 7-11/Walmart crowd with a $9.99 cover price. This is not cheap disposable entertainment parents can buy their kids to shut them up! as things stand, especially with Borders closing up, even if a kid was potentially interested, there are now so few places to buy the stuff and I don't think the lack of venues if simply due to lack of demand.

 

Precisely correct. The only thing that could/would stem the slow decline in demand for back issue comics due to an aging demographic is if comic publishers were to make comics available at kid friendly prices at corner convenience stores and newstands again. But they won't because that market is such small potatoes compared with the revenues that can be generated by premium editions at premium prices marketed to adults and blockbuster movies.

 

[the blob]

But there has been no closely analogous situation in comics. All the kids watching cartoons on TV did not then and do not now en masse graduate to collecting/ hoarding comics. Neither do all the people who enjoy watching superhero movies.

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

 

1990 - 1993/4 or so were for comics what a slightly earlier period was for cards. All the same nonsense was going on, it's just that the comic collecting craze was not as prevalent as cards, but it was still all over the place. People who weren't collectors were buying scads of comics to speculate on (including some folks who had just been burned with baseball cards!). How else do you have print-runs in the MILLIONS for some #1s and close to seven figures generally on some titles (x-men) during this period that had been 1/3 - 1/2 as much in the 80's. new companies popping up producing tons of product, etc. Comics managed to survive, probably because the collectors who were around before the bubble did not get that wrapped up in speculating on new stuff and weren't killed/totally disillusioned when it died, but believe me, at my old shop in the mid/late -90s he was continually getting guys bringing long boxes of 1990-1993 drek who didn't know jack about comics expecting to cash in on their "investment" of a few years earlier only to be shocked by his fairly reasonable offer of 5 cents a book.

 

with that said, comics seem to have been able to survive various implosions (the B&W implosion of the 80's, people losing their shirts speculating on GI Joes, Howard the Duck #1, getting burned buying cases of Shazam 1s, etc...)

[the blob]

Case in point..Fall of 1993, Howard Stern was touting the Philly Wizard con on his pre-satellite radio show, Village Comics in NYC was running TV ads on local television, when I worked down on wall street on Broadway (pre-9/11 security) there would typically be between 10-15 street vendors selling a mix of cards and comics...tons of comics. Remember, this was "Death of Superman" time, X-Men 1, spawn 1 and then Turok 1, not to mention a bunch of other 7 figure print-run type books.