• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Opinions on a 'buy, keep, sell' thread?

Started by mintcollector,

39 posts in this topic

mintcollector

mintcollector

Posted
  • Author
Posted
So it depends on time horizons?

 

People knowing invest in ponzi schemes, because you can still profit from a ponzi scheme as long as you exit prior to the last major investor.

 

On a two-year clock, I think Iron Man 55 is a far better investment (by percentage return) than Walking Dead, Chew, or even Daredevil 1 in cgc 7.0-9.0.

 

On a ten-year clock, not so much.

 

Also, how would we ensure this is any more specific than:

 

"Sell Walking Dead 1, buy AF 15"?

 

It is all based on opinion and commentary. This is a forum. Anyone can participate. It facilitates debate. That is the whole point. Also understand that no one has to participate at all. I just think this is a much better and more organized reference tool; than having collectors and 'newbies' come on these forums and ask question and after question about books with no way to keep the responses in one specific area that is easily referenced and able to be contained.

 

To answer your question another way (and because I only had one cup of coffee and have to leave for work soon);you can make your same argument without a specific thread. Don't people advise other collectors in ideologoes we may not all agree with; without the use of this kind of post or forum?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gatsby77

Gatsby77

Posted
Posted

Oh--and not to derail, but I'd love to see your post updating your thoughts on the "Rule of 25."

 

I'd posit that last night's Heritage auction only valdiates the Rule of 25 (for comic books) as we saw world record prices for a slew of popular original art that is only 22-27 years old.

 

The fact that the world record original art piece was set not by a "traditional" Silver Age piece such as the recent Brave & Bold 34 (1st SA Hawkman) by Kubert, but rather by a McFarlane ASM cover drawn nearly 30 years later is a game-changer.

 

Last night's auction validates the rule of 25 for me because this was the first major original art aurction composed primarily of covers books I grew up buying was I was 10-14 years old, in 1987-1990.

 

Many of these are not old enough to be considered "antiques" and many were not even "key." Nearly $30,000 for the Venom # 1 cover I can understand; but nearly $10,000 for the Venom # 4 cover? Mind-blowing.

 

Last night's auction literally made a market for dozens of covers in the 1987-1990 period, proving that there's a generation of collectors out there willing to pay thousands of dolllars for generic covers of comics they enjoyed buying nealy 25 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeffro.

Jeffro.

Posted
Posted
The stuff I want to sell would obviously be in the strong buy grouping, while the stuff I need to finish a run would get a strong sell vote.

 

lol This post, whether meant to be humorous or not, illustrates why a 'buy, keep, sell' thread might not be a very good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeffro.

Jeffro.

Posted
Posted
Oh--and not to derail, but I'd love to see your post updating your thoughts on the "Rule of 25."

 

My own 'Rule of 25' means only date 25 year old women.

 

That would work if I (one) wasn't married and (two) had the kind of skills necessary to date 25 year olds. :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Underground44

Underground44

Posted
Posted
Oh--and not to derail, but I'd love to see your post updating your thoughts on the "Rule of 25."

 

I'd posit that last night's Heritage auction only valdiates the Rule of 25 (for comic books) as we saw world record prices for a slew of popular original art that is only 22-27 years old.

 

The fact that the world record original art piece was set not by a "traditional" Silver Age piece such as the recent Brave & Bold 34 (1st SA Hawkman) by Kubert, but rather by a McFarlane ASM cover drawn nearly 30 years later is a game-changer.

 

Last night's auction validates the rule of 25 for me because this was the first major original art aurction composed primarily of covers books I grew up buying was I was 10-14 years old, in 1987-1990.

 

Many of these are not old enough to be considered "antiques" and many were not even "key." Nearly $30,000 for the Venom # 1 cover I can understand; but nearly $10,000 for the Venom # 4 cover? Mind-blowing.

 

Last night's auction literally made a market for dozens of covers in the 1987-1990 period, proving that there's a generation of collectors out there willing to pay thousands of dolllars for generic covers of comics they enjoyed buying nealy 25 years ago.

 

This is :signofftopic: so I apologise "Mint" but here is an interesting article on this Rule of 25

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seanfingh

seanfingh

Posted
Posted
Oh--and not to derail, but I'd love to see your post updating your thoughts on the "Rule of 25."

 

My own 'Rule of 25' means only date 25 year old women.

 

That would work if I (one) wasn't married and (two) had the kind of skills necessary to date 25 year olds. :facepalm:

 

Like bowhunting skills, nunchuck skills, computer hacking skills . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Balls

Dr. Balls

Posted
Posted
I think it's a brilliant idea.

 

Until someone comes along, reads the first post in the thread and then asks if Hulk #181 is a good investment and doesn't read the rest of the thread.

 

:baiting: to all you thread skimmers.

 

 

The fact that some people are not as well 'versed' in 'reading comprehension' is no excuse for killing an idea.

 

I like that phrase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mintcollector

mintcollector

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Oh--and not to derail, but I'd love to see your post updating your thoughts on the "Rule of 25."

 

I'd posit that last night's Heritage auction only valdiates the Rule of 25 (for comic books) as we saw world record prices for a slew of popular original art that is only 22-27 years old.

 

The fact that the world record original art piece was set not by a "traditional" Silver Age piece such as the recent Brave & Bold 34 (1st SA Hawkman) by Kubert, but rather by a McFarlane ASM cover drawn nearly 30 years later is a game-changer.

 

Last night's auction validates the rule of 25 for me because this was the first major original art aurction composed primarily of covers books I grew up buying was I was 10-14 years old, in 1987-1990.

 

Many of these are not old enough to be considered "antiques" and many were not even "key." Nearly $30,000 for the Venom # 1 cover I can understand; but nearly $10,000 for the Venom # 4 cover? Mind-blowing.

 

Last night's auction literally made a market for dozens of covers in the 1987-1990 period, proving that there's a generation of collectors out there willing to pay thousands of dolllars for generic covers of comics they enjoyed buying nealy 25 years ago.

 

This is :signofftopic: so I apologise "Mint" but here is an interesting article on this Rule of 25

 

I knew someone would find it! Finally, proof that someone does read my threads and take my hints. Enjoy! I will post it in a separate thread, just for the naysayers who keep doubting my views...

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

 

PS You get a gold star. Did you take my subtle 'hints' or do you actually use worth point?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Underground44

Underground44

Posted
Posted
That being said, are there any more thoughts on a forum like this? Any at all?

 

 

 

Why not simply start a thread and see if it grows legs or grows moss.

 

+1

 

mintcollector will have to be the one who starts it and updates it though... It was his idea lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Underground44

Underground44

Posted
Posted
Oh--and not to derail, but I'd love to see your post updating your thoughts on the "Rule of 25."

 

I'd posit that last night's Heritage auction only valdiates the Rule of 25 (for comic books) as we saw world record prices for a slew of popular original art that is only 22-27 years old.

 

The fact that the world record original art piece was set not by a "traditional" Silver Age piece such as the recent Brave & Bold 34 (1st SA Hawkman) by Kubert, but rather by a McFarlane ASM cover drawn nearly 30 years later is a game-changer.

 

Last night's auction validates the rule of 25 for me because this was the first major original art aurction composed primarily of covers books I grew up buying was I was 10-14 years old, in 1987-1990.

 

Many of these are not old enough to be considered "antiques" and many were not even "key." Nearly $30,000 for the Venom # 1 cover I can understand; but nearly $10,000 for the Venom # 4 cover? Mind-blowing.

 

Last night's auction literally made a market for dozens of covers in the 1987-1990 period, proving that there's a generation of collectors out there willing to pay thousands of dolllars for generic covers of comics they enjoyed buying nealy 25 years ago.

 

This is :signofftopic: so I apologise "Mint" but here is an interesting article on this Rule of 25

 

I knew someone would find it! Finally, proof that someone does read my threads and take my hints. Enjoy! I will post it in a separate thread, just for the naysayers who keep doubting my views...

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

 

PS You get a gold star. Did you take my subtle 'hints' or do you actually use worth point?

 

 

I did a little bit of research and I found this to be a well written and informative article from someone who knows the collectibles market. Just am interesting point of view..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing