Hindsight is 20/20 2 2

[Robot Man]

I predict tech will be the future of collectibles if any one even still collects. Kids today just aren’t interested in the past. Everything revolves around their phones.

If you have the money and a warehouse consider current gas powered muscle cars. They are phasing them out even now. Mopar muscle like Challengers have already made their last gasp. Especially manual shift models. Mustangs are now electric and the list goes on. I would love a 2023 Corvette but at around 150K a little out of my budget.

Folks will always have the “need for speed”…

[Robot Man]

On 11/14/2023 at 8:29 AM, Dr. Love said:

I know a rhetorical question when I see one!

Hey, I built up interest in a niche area of comics.  But it took years.  And I did it by show and telling about things that I loved.  Not by telling people that these items were interesting and had potential.

I have always kept my mouth shut and quietly picked up everything I wanted until it finally caught up with me…

[Bookery]

As an addendum to my above comment, last week Heritage held a heavily-hyped auction of original silent film posters, all linen-backed.  Even if you didn't recognize the stars, the art on some of these is gorgeous.  I thought about bidding just to have a couple for store decoration, but ultimately didn't get around to it.  They had several hundred posters, and the highest price paid for any of them was $1400.  When was the last time you saw any Heritage auction where the high end topped out at only $1400?  Many of the posters sold for under $200, which probably wouldn't even cover the cost of linen-backing.  Factor in to all of this is a point many are missing... today's generation isn't collecting much of anything.  They download entertainment and discard it when they're finished.  This is something new we haven't seen before.  Maybe this will be temporary, maybe not... but as homes get more expensive and people move into smaller and smaller dwellings, combined with a digital world... we may ultimately see the end of collecting as a "thing" altogether.  Once upon a time everybody's home had bookshelves and a library of some sort, large or small.  Check out your real estate listings of modern million-dollar homes... look through the photos... not a bookshelf in sight.

[Robot Man]

On 11/14/2023 at 8:36 AM, Bookery said:

As an addendum to my above comment, last week Heritage held a heavily-hyped auction of original silent film posters, all linen-backed.  Even if you didn't recognize the stars, the art on some of these is gorgeous.  I thought about bidding just to have a couple for store decoration, but ultimately didn't get around to it.  They had several hundred posters, and the highest price paid for any of them was $1400.  When was the last time you saw any Heritage auction where the high end topped out at only $1400?  Many of the posters sold for under $200, which probably wouldn't even cover the cost of linen-backing.  Factor in to all of this is a point many are missing... today's generation isn't collecting much of anything.  They download entertainment and discard it when they're finished.  This is something new we haven't seen before.  Maybe this will be temporary, maybe not... but as homes get more expensive and people move into smaller and smaller dwellings, combined with a digital world... we may ultimately see the end of collecting as a "thing" altogether.  Once upon a time everybody's home had bookshelves and a library of some sort, large or small.  Check out your real estate listings of modern million-dollar homes... look through the photos... not a bookshelf in sight.

Most people don’t page turn any more. Heck, even our hobby. The most treasured books are those encased in a plastic slab. 

[Bookery]

On 11/14/2023 at 11:49 AM, Robot Man said:

Most people don’t page turn any more. Heck, even our hobby. The most treasured books are those encased in a plastic slab. 

On the plus side, science has vanquished another hideous malady from the planet.  After 500 years, mankind need no longer fear the "paper cut".

[Tri-Color Brian]

On 11/14/2023 at 9:08 AM, Robot Man said:

Got news for you Brian. These are already the new hot thing. They are being graded and the big auction houses have been getting eye popping prices. Mostly sealed horror and obscure cult films bring the most. 

Yeah, I had heard that the rarer releases were bringing big bucks, but not that they were being graded.  That seems a little weird. 

[The-Collector]

On 11/14/2023 at 4:36 PM, Bookery said:

As an addendum to my above comment, last week Heritage held a heavily-hyped auction of original silent film posters, all linen-backed.  Even if you didn't recognize the stars, the art on some of these is gorgeous.  I thought about bidding just to have a couple for store decoration, but ultimately didn't get around to it.  They had several hundred posters, and the highest price paid for any of them was $1400.  When was the last time you saw any Heritage auction where the high end topped out at only $1400?  Many of the posters sold for under $200, which probably wouldn't even cover the cost of linen-backing.  Factor in to all of this is a point many are missing... today's generation isn't collecting much of anything.  They download entertainment and discard it when they're finished.  This is something new we haven't seen before.  Maybe this will be temporary, maybe not... but as homes get more expensive and people move into smaller and smaller dwellings, combined with a digital world... we may ultimately see the end of collecting as a "thing" altogether.  Once upon a time everybody's home had bookshelves and a library of some sort, large or small.  Check out your real estate listings of modern million-dollar homes... look through the photos... not a bookshelf in sight.

I'd be surprised if physical collecting ceases to be a thing unless we cease to be physical beings. Most of those homes are staged and they remove personal items before selling. I also think Genz do collect e.g., some of the prices being paid for 2000s era digital cameras are surprising. 

I don't like to speculate on collectibles but If I had to pick I'd say tech and science will continue on an upward trend in the long term. Especially stuff related to AI or early digital art. I'd also include within that influential sci fi books e.g. Neuromancer, Snow Crash, Red Mars or anything that has captured tech bros' imaginations. D&D and videogame art also seem promising. 

In the short term vinyl is in the process of taking taking off. And as soon as HA has some signature auctions I'd expect to see prices increase substantially. 

Edited November 14, 2023 by The-Collector

[Ryan.]

My kids and their friends all collect things, including Pokémon cards, sports cards and Legos. I don't know where this idea came from that no one collects things anymore. Being into digital entertainment doesn't create an either-or decision with collecting. One can both enjoy digital media while also enjoying physical media. People of all ages have varied interests. 

[Ryan.]

On 11/14/2023 at 11:30 AM, Robot Man said:

Kids today just aren’t interested in the past. 

This has been true since kids were invented. 

[Tri-Color Brian]

OK, check this out...I discovered that I've been doing something different for a long time.  I have boxes full of burnt out light bulbs from the 80s and 90s.  The real light bulbs that were much brighter when they worked.  These must be worth a fortune now...

Edited November 14, 2023 by Tri-ColorBrian

[Tri-Color Brian]

On 11/14/2023 at 12:31 PM, Ryan. said:

This has been true since kids were invented. 

Kids don't get interested in the past until they aren't kids anymore...

[Patriot6]

On 11/14/2023 at 2:20 AM, ChillMan said:

Can these items be acquired now in MINT condition??

Like almost anything out there, yes. Fixing a non working example is also very easy. It is like any other collectible. There are rare variants and low production models. There are prototypes and failed examples. There are some with good unworn decals and some with worn decals. I suppose the difference is that there are people out there that want to collect them and there are people that want to use them for their intended purpose, there are even people who buy them for display pieces. The prices can sway accordingly. I don't collect them or resell them or anything, but I have saved a number from the scrap heap. I got them running because I enjoy tinkering and have never had an issue finding someone to take them.   

[BitterOldMan]

On 11/13/2023 at 2:15 AM, s-man said:

You could try lottery tickets, $100,000 buys a lot of 'em! 

A bunch of MIT students won $8 million dollars in the Winfall lottery using an application of statistical theory.

Spoiler

https://newsfeed.time.com/2012/08/07/how-mit-students-scammed-the-massachusetts-lottery-for-8-million/

Edited November 14, 2023 by BitterOldMan

[adamstrange]

On 11/14/2023 at 11:29 AM, Dr. Love said:

I built up interest in a niche area of comics. 

One day, you will be held accountable for your crime.

[tth2]

On 11/15/2023 at 4:39 AM, BitterOldMan said:

A bunch of MIT students won $8 million dollars in the Winfall lottery using an application of statistical theory.

  Hide contents

https://newsfeed.time.com/2012/08/07/how-mit-students-scammed-the-massachusetts-lottery-for-8-million/

Edited 5 hours ago by BitterOldMan

I always thought the main deterrent in putting huge amounts of money into lotteries, even where you had a statistical edge, was that it was always possible that one or more other people would also win, thus reducing your winnings by 50% or more.

[BitterOldMan]

On 11/14/2023 at 6:31 PM, tth2 said:

I always thought the main deterrent in putting huge amounts of money into lotteries, even where you had a statistical edge, was that it was always possible that one or more other people would also win, thus reducing your winnings by 50% or more.

I worked as a statistician for years putting in some 20,000 hours and taught the subject in college.  

The students brilliantly exploited a flaw in WinFall lottery,  where if nobody won for several weeks, the jackpot spilled onto the other lower levels.  The chance of obtaining all six numbers is about one in 14 million.  The probability of obtaining five out of six is one in 54,200.  So the spillover would cause the bet to be advantageous to the lottery player.  

If somebody bought 100,000 tickets, they had a better than 84% chance of getting five out of six and getting the jackpot.  Buy 200,000 tickets and the player has a 97.5% chance of getting five out of six numbers and getting the jackpot.

I ran the numbers as a mental exercise and was impressed with the MIT students grasp of one of the main theorems of statistics, The Law of Large Numbers.

There was a movie made about a couple who also exploited the lottery rules entitled “Jerry and Marge go Large”, starring Bryan Cranston and Annette Bening.  
 

My high school project was blackjack point counting strategies in 1973. I used statistics to retire at 55.😉

[tth2]

On 11/15/2023 at 11:25 AM, BitterOldMan said:

If somebody bought 100,000 tickets, they had a better than 84% chance of getting five out of six and getting the jackpot.  Buy 200,000 tickets and the player has a 97.5% chance of getting five out of six numbers and getting the jackpot.

Yes, but to my point, doesn't that also increase the chances that other people will also get 5 out of 6, thus reducing the payout per winner of the lower level jackpots?  In fact, wouldn't you expect to have multiple winners of the lower level jackpots, thus dividing the payouts even more? 

[Professor K]

On 11/14/2023 at 11:20 AM, Robot Man said:

Early and low distribution one day event political buttons and other campaign memorabilia have been a well kept secret for 50+ or more years. Ted Hake got his start auctioning them. And still going VERY strong. See any of their recent auctions. They don’t even have to be that old. Just unusual.

I have been picking them up when I see unusual, colorful or early ones for years.

Let me know when the apocalypse hits and I will quit…

In the 80's and 90's I used to see those pins everywhere at flea markerts in NJ  and Florida. Seemed every other vender had a glass case with election pins (that's what I called them) in them. I had an I Like Ike pin for years that I wore on my jean jacket. 

Speaking of apocalypse's, just found a show called Black Summer. Best Zombie tv show I've ever seen.

You mentioned this too but old cars, Model T to 1970's. They're already up there but I see those as always constantly going up in value. To really collect those in a high end multi vehicle way you have to be pretty wealthy, but even just having one really sweet car you can't go wrong. 

 

[BitterOldMan]

On 11/15/2023 at 7:15 AM, tth2 said:

Yes, but to my point, doesn't that also increase the chances that other people will also get 5 out of 6, thus reducing the payout per winner of the lower level jackpots?  In fact, wouldn't you expect to have multiple winners of the lower level jackpots, thus dividing the payouts even more? 

I understand your points.

The lottery is generally not an even game.  An even bet means for every dollar you bet, the payoff is $2, or you get your dollar back plus a dollar.  

If the odds are one in 14 million, the payoff needs to be 14 million plus for the bet to be even.  The spillover rule would allow the jackpot to spread to lower winners if nobody won big and the jackpot reached 5 million.  
 

The MIT students knew that picking six out of six is nearly impossible, but five out of six is possible.  The students did not win every time during the spillover, but the payoff was vastly superior to regular odds.  The only person winning all the time was Bernie Madoff.  The MIT students made millions, until the WinFall lottery was shut down.  Still tough to buy 100,000 tickets.

In other words for every dollar played, the payoff was greater than one dollar.

 

[tth2]

On 11/16/2023 at 2:38 AM, BitterOldMan said:

In other words for every dollar played, the payoff was greater than one dollar.

IF you get to keep 100% of the payoff.  But my understanding is that if there are multiple winners, the pot gets divided up between the multiple winners (i.e., if the consolation pot for people that get 5 of 6 is $150,000 and there are 2 winners, they each get only $75,000, not $150,000 each).

So if the consolation pot is $150,000, then $100,000 means you can win $150,000.  But if some other person also gets 5 of 6 (and my impression is that there are usually multiple winners of the consolation prizes), then suddenly your $100,000 investment only pays out $75,000.  And if there are two other people that also get 5 of 6, then your $100,000 investment now only nets $50,000.  

I guess with that $100,000 buy you are likely to also win some of the even lower tier consolation prizes (e.g., 4 of 6), which will help to mitigate your losses somewhat, but they'd have much lower payouts and there would be even more additional winners to divvy up the pie with.