|
|
Post by rkmo: Everyone Else but Me on Mar 11, 2024 8:18:13 GMT -5
This is the 15th year of the Mattel WWE line. I said 10-15 years. I’m not reading the rest of that. I’m happy for you or sorry that happened There’s a difference between “15th year” versus “15 years ago.” FYI: 2023 was 1 year ago, 2022 was 2 years ago, 2021 was 3 years ago… 2009 was 15 years ago. Mattel’s first products hit shelves in 2010… not 2009. Either way, I appreciate the disrespect of not reading the rest of what I wrote. It seems more like a cop out for not wanting to acknowledge that Mattel made solid figures in their early years that still hold up. If some people didn't have the possibility to be sticklers in their life, they'd be lost. |
|
crush
Main Eventer
WF 10+ Year Member
Yes, i know it's weird...
Joined on: Mar 8, 2012 16:07:14 GMT -5
Posts: 4,702
|
Post by crush on Mar 11, 2024 9:27:21 GMT -5
I don't mean this sarcastically, the volume and length of this debate is super interesting to me. I haven't been on really at all since Friday, and truth be told I kinda thought this thread would be dead by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fighter Hayabusa on Mar 11, 2024 10:20:19 GMT -5
I just don’t know why people are still getting upset over this as if they haven’t been re-releasing figures for several years now. Like I get the debate when they first started doing it but you think by now something like this should be expected. How has one not learned their lesson to not buy these figures as long term investments or not to put too much value on your collection monetarily?
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 14, 2024 23:33:33 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2024 11:21:49 GMT -5
I just don’t know why people are still getting upset over this as if they haven’t been re-releasing figures for several years now. Like I get the debate when they first started doing it but you think by now something like this should be expected. How has one not learned their lesson to not buy these figures as long term investments or not to put too much value on your collection monetarily? Uh oh. I sense a novel incoming your way… |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 14, 2024 23:33:33 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2024 11:24:04 GMT -5
This is the 15th year of the Mattel WWE line. I said 10-15 years. I’m not reading the rest of that. I’m happy for you or sorry that happened There’s a difference between “15th year” versus “15 years ago.” FYI: 2023 was 1 year ago, 2022 was 2 years ago, 2021 was 3 years ago… 2009 was 15 years ago. Mattel’s first products hit shelves in 2010… not 2009. Good thing he said 10–15, to cover himself on that 1 year difference. As for the rest, I’m not reading the rest of that. I’m happy for you or sorry that happened. |
|
|
|
Post by AxelSmackdown on Mar 11, 2024 11:30:16 GMT -5
I just don’t know why people are still getting upset over this as if they haven’t been re-releasing figures for several years now. Like I get the debate when they first started doing it but you think by now something like this should be expected. How has one not learned their lesson to not buy these figures as long term investments or not to put too much value on your collection monetarily? erm well actually they should just leave our precious older figures alone. those of us that have been loyal from the start and have valuable moc figures shouldn’t be punished because little johnny wants one and mommy and daddy don’t want to pony up the amount of dough I want. I’m looking to retire off of my collection at 40 while you losers are looking to retire at 65 from an actual job LMAO. get a grip we don’t need old figures re-releasing and dropping the values of our collectibles. this shouldn’t even have to be said it should be common sense that none of us want this. if you want an older figure so bad get a better job and buy them like the rest of us did. this is completely a joke, please no one get butt hurt nor report me; thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by POOR-ly Cuyler on Mar 11, 2024 12:15:45 GMT -5
|
|
voicesinmyhead
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 4, 2009 19:21:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by voicesinmyhead on Mar 11, 2024 12:55:56 GMT -5
I just don’t know why people are still getting upset over this as if they haven’t been re-releasing figures for several years now. Like I get the debate when they first started doing it but you think by now something like this should be expected. How has one not learned their lesson to not buy these figures as long term investments or not to put too much value on your collection monetarily? You’re forgetting that I bought these figures years and years ago. I’m not saying that I bought the DM Undertaker yesterday and it’s a matter of bad timing and got screwed. I bought this Taker over 5 years ago when there were no lines dedicated to rereleases and no plans whatsoever of rereleasing this same version again. If I wanted it badly enough I was going to have to pay up. I bought the Dudley’s when they were first released, and I bought the Hardcore Kane on the secondary market earlier than Taker (not at a crazy price). I’ve obviously learned my lesson now and will never buy another older figure off the secondary market, but the damage is already done. This is also why the value of the older figures will drop. Who’s going to want to buy those now knowing a rerelease is possible? But you’re having trouble understanding that I never bought these purposely to make money and that I’ve already had these figures for awhile so there was no “lesson to learn” as you’d say. It wasn’t expected at the time that something would get rereleased. It was either buy the figure at this price or never have it. I chose to pay up. Don’t see why other people cant do the same. Not necessarily pay up, but be faced with that decision. A decision collectors have to make. |
|
voicesinmyhead
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 4, 2009 19:21:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by voicesinmyhead on Mar 11, 2024 13:02:38 GMT -5
There’s a difference between “15th year” versus “15 years ago.” FYI: 2023 was 1 year ago, 2022 was 2 years ago, 2021 was 3 years ago… 2009 was 15 years ago. Mattel’s first products hit shelves in 2010… not 2009. Good thing he said 10–15, to cover himself on that 1 year difference. As for the rest, I’m not reading the rest of that. I’m happy for you or sorry that happened. What are you actually adding to this conversion? I’ll never understand someone commenting about the comments. That’s just a huge waste of time in my opinion. But, to actually respond to your comment, that’s not covering bases. That’s a wrong timeline. Should he have been allowed to say 10-20 since part of that is accurate? Not really sure that’s how it works. Either way, it’s funny to me how negative and bullyish some people are coming off on here when, in the end, you’re still getting your rereleases. It’s like I can’t have an opinion that differs from yours or we can’t have an educated debate. It always ends sour with memes, mockery, etc. I guess some of us ran out of intelligent responses. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 14, 2024 23:33:33 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2024 14:02:13 GMT -5
So much irony.
|
|
crush
Main Eventer
WF 10+ Year Member
Yes, i know it's weird...
Joined on: Mar 8, 2012 16:07:14 GMT -5
Posts: 4,702
|
Post by crush on Mar 11, 2024 14:03:57 GMT -5
I just don’t know why people are still getting upset over this as if they haven’t been re-releasing figures for several years now. Like I get the debate when they first started doing it but you think by now something like this should be expected. How has one not learned their lesson to not buy these figures as long term investments or not to put too much value on your collection monetarily? You’re forgetting that I bought these figures years and years ago. I’m not saying that I bought the DM Undertaker yesterday and it’s a matter of bad timing and got screwed. I bought this Taker over 5 years ago when there were no lines dedicated to rereleases and no plans whatsoever of rereleasing this same version again. If I wanted it badly enough I was going to have to pay up. I bought the Dudley’s when they were first released, and I bought the Hardcore Kane on the secondary market earlier than Taker (not at a crazy price). I’ve obviously learned my lesson now and will never buy another older figure off the secondary market, but the damage is already done. This is also why the value of the older figures will drop. Who’s going to want to buy those now knowing a rerelease is possible? But you’re having trouble understanding that I never bought these purposely to make money and that I’ve already had these figures for awhile so there was no “lesson to learn” as you’d say. It wasn’t expected at the time that something would get rereleased . It was either buy the figure at this price or never have it. I chose to pay up. Don’t see why other people cant do the same. Not necessarily pay up, but be faced with that decision. A decision collectors have to make. Putting aside whether I agree with that or not (because at this point, I think everyone's thoughts have been laid out clearly in that regard) in now way does that behoove the line. Mattel is in a spot where they've bene making figures for 15 years (and selling them for 14, just keep all the timeline talk in-line) with the same main form factors and on-going series, while trying to not only hold on to the collector base they have and trying cater to new collectors who come in every year (be they kids or an ever-growing base if adult collectors). They cater to the former by releasing new figures. Obviously, that also caters to the latter, but so does doing this. Keeping very popular looks behind a vault because they were made once over a decade ago doesn't behoove them in any way. |
|
voicesinmyhead
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 4, 2009 19:21:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by voicesinmyhead on Mar 11, 2024 14:12:36 GMT -5
You’re forgetting that I bought these figures years and years ago. I’m not saying that I bought the DM Undertaker yesterday and it’s a matter of bad timing and got screwed. I bought this Taker over 5 years ago when there were no lines dedicated to rereleases and no plans whatsoever of rereleasing this same version again. If I wanted it badly enough I was going to have to pay up. I bought the Dudley’s when they were first released, and I bought the Hardcore Kane on the secondary market earlier than Taker (not at a crazy price). I’ve obviously learned my lesson now and will never buy another older figure off the secondary market, but the damage is already done. This is also why the value of the older figures will drop. Who’s going to want to buy those now knowing a rerelease is possible? But you’re having trouble understanding that I never bought these purposely to make money and that I’ve already had these figures for awhile so there was no “lesson to learn” as you’d say. It wasn’t expected at the time that something would get rereleased . It was either buy the figure at this price or never have it. I chose to pay up. Don’t see why other people cant do the same. Not necessarily pay up, but be faced with that decision. A decision collectors have to make. Putting aside whether I agree with that or not (because at this point, I think everyone's thoughts have been laid out clearly in that regard) in now way does that behoove the line. Mattel is in a spot where they've bene making figures for 15 years (and selling them for 14, just keep all the timeline talk in-line) with the same main form factors and on-going series, while trying to not only hold on to the collector base they have and trying cater to new collectors who come in every year (be they kids or an ever-growing base if adult collectors). They cater to the former by releasing new figures. Obviously, that also caters to the latter, but so does doing this. Keeping very popular looks behind a vault because they were made once over a decade ago doesn't behoove them in any way. I never once said that I don’t understand the business side of it. You must not have read what I’ve said previously. I said numerous times that I don’t blame Mattel for doing it and completely understand why they would. I also understand why new collectors would want this. But this doesn’t change the fact that it devalues the originals. And as I said multiple times, I can voice how displeased I am, but at the end of the day it’s still going to happen. There’s nothing more I can do about it, and I understand why Mattel would want to do it, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. |
|
crush
Main Eventer
WF 10+ Year Member
Yes, i know it's weird...
Joined on: Mar 8, 2012 16:07:14 GMT -5
Posts: 4,702
|
Post by crush on Mar 11, 2024 14:34:02 GMT -5
Putting aside whether I agree with that or not (because at this point, I think everyone's thoughts have been laid out clearly in that regard) in now way does that behoove the line. Mattel is in a spot where they've bene making figures for 15 years (and selling them for 14, just keep all the timeline talk in-line) with the same main form factors and on-going series, while trying to not only hold on to the collector base they have and trying cater to new collectors who come in every year (be they kids or an ever-growing base if adult collectors). They cater to the former by releasing new figures. Obviously, that also caters to the latter, but so does doing this. Keeping very popular looks behind a vault because they were made once over a decade ago doesn't behoove them in any way. I never once said that I don’t understand the business side of it. You must not have read what I’ve said previously. I said numerous times that I don’t blame Mattel for doing it and completely understand why they would. I also understand why new collectors would want this. But this doesn’t change the fact that it devalues the originals. And as I said multiple times, I can voice how displeased I am, but at the end of the day it’s still going to happen. There’s nothing more I can do about it, and I understand why Mattel would want to do it, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. I've read everything you've said. You asked "Don’t see why other people cant do the same. Not necessarily pay up, but be faced with that decision." and the reason they're not faced with that decision in this case is Mattel's business. |
|
|
|
Post by WOOOOOO on Mar 11, 2024 14:36:40 GMT -5
Man the way this thread is going I still can't believe no one taking me up on my offer to buy the new black card chase version Hart Foundation figures for cost plus shipping?!? They are just chunks of plastic that should have no value beyond the immediate sale point right? Come on where are all my sellers looking to help a fellow collector??
|
|
voicesinmyhead
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 4, 2009 19:21:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by voicesinmyhead on Mar 11, 2024 14:53:31 GMT -5
I never once said that I don’t understand the business side of it. You must not have read what I’ve said previously. I said numerous times that I don’t blame Mattel for doing it and completely understand why they would. I also understand why new collectors would want this. But this doesn’t change the fact that it devalues the originals. And as I said multiple times, I can voice how displeased I am, but at the end of the day it’s still going to happen. There’s nothing more I can do about it, and I understand why Mattel would want to do it, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. I've read everything you've said. You asked "Don’t see why other people cant do the same. Not necessarily pay up, but be faced with that decision." and the reason they're not faced with that decision in this case is Mattel's business. The part you bolded and are referring to is a discussion about two mindsets of collectors. Mattel is like a third party here that is going to decide whatever is best for their business. That’s obvious. You’re looking at it in the present where the rereleases are happening, and going to continue to happen, so why wouldn’t Mattel capitalize and why would anyone pay over retail for an old figure. I’m speaking from a moment in time when rereleases weren’t a thing. I’m trying to explain why I paid the prices I paid, and am wondering why others wouldn’t, or don’t think they ever should have to. And that’s the big problem here that’s bothered me from the beginning. There are a lot of people on here that believe these figures should never appreciate, and they should never be expected to pay more than retail since these are just toys. That I simply cannot agree with. |
|
crush
Main Eventer
WF 10+ Year Member
Yes, i know it's weird...
Joined on: Mar 8, 2012 16:07:14 GMT -5
Posts: 4,702
|
Post by crush on Mar 11, 2024 15:32:00 GMT -5
I've read everything you've said. You asked "Don’t see why other people cant do the same. Not necessarily pay up, but be faced with that decision." and the reason they're not faced with that decision in this case is Mattel's business. The part you bolded and are referring to is a discussion about two mindsets of collectors. Mattel is like a third party here that is going to decide whatever is best for their business. That’s obvious. You’re looking at it in the present where the rereleases are happening, and going to continue to happen, so why wouldn’t Mattel capitalize and why would anyone pay over retail for an old figure. I’m speaking from a moment in time when rereleases weren’t a thing. I’m trying to explain why I paid the prices I paid, and am wondering why others wouldn’t, or don’t think they ever should have to. And that’s the big problem here that’s bothered me from the beginning. There are a lot of people on here that believe these figures should never appreciate, and they should never be expected to pay more than retail since these are just toys. That I simply cannot agree with. To say Mattel is "third party" is a fundamental miss on what their role here is. They create the product, they sell the product, they dictate the availability of the product. From a philosophical standpoint, I look at it as someone collects thing because I like them. A figure's perceived financial value or scarcity has little-to-no bearing on how I value it in my collection, and while I don't want to speak for everyone in this thread, I would wager many of them are the same. it's not a matter of thinking they "should never" appreciate in value, it's a matter of whether they do or don't having zero influence on whether I keep them or want them. Frankly, all due respect, I can't agree with the idea that the line should dictated by collectors who feel that the financial value of their mass-produced figures (whether because they actually plan to resell them or because they simply want to have the "clout" feeling that they have something others can't easily obtain). This is where the "just toys" things come in. Yes, toys absolutely can appreciate in value, and I'm not like morally against the concept of a secondary market or anything like that. However, they are mass-produced toys (if there were specifically numbered ones, that's arguably a difference). Collecting them with the expectation that they're going to be a rare item that others will only later be able to acquire for comparatively exorbitant prices is a fundamental difference from what they actually are. And once again, a lot of this specific argument is even more odd since thee figures are in different packaging and visibly different figures to even the naked eye. It's the equivalent of comic book collectors complaining about clearly marked reprints or trade paperbacks existing. |
|
voicesinmyhead
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 4, 2009 19:21:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by voicesinmyhead on Mar 11, 2024 15:48:18 GMT -5
The part you bolded and are referring to is a discussion about two mindsets of collectors. Mattel is like a third party here that is going to decide whatever is best for their business. That’s obvious. You’re looking at it in the present where the rereleases are happening, and going to continue to happen, so why wouldn’t Mattel capitalize and why would anyone pay over retail for an old figure. I’m speaking from a moment in time when rereleases weren’t a thing. I’m trying to explain why I paid the prices I paid, and am wondering why others wouldn’t, or don’t think they ever should have to. And that’s the big problem here that’s bothered me from the beginning. There are a lot of people on here that believe these figures should never appreciate, and they should never be expected to pay more than retail since these are just toys. That I simply cannot agree with. To say Mattel is "third party" is a fundamental miss on what their role here is. They create the product, they sell the product, they dictate the availability of the product. From a philosophical standpoint, I look at it as someone collects thing because I like them. A figure's perceived financial value or scarcity has little-to-no bearing on how I value it in my collection, and while I don't want to speak for everyone in this thread, I would wager many of them are the same. it's not a matter of thinking they "should never" appreciate in value, it's a matter of whether they do or don't having zero influence on whether I keep them or want them. Frankly, all due respect, I can't agree with the idea that the line should dictated by collectors who feel that the financial value of their mass-produced figures (whether because they actually plan to resell them or because they simply want to have the "clout" feeling that they have something others can't easily obtain). This is where the "just toys" things come in. Yes, toys absolutely can appreciate in value, and I'm not like morally against the concept of a secondary market or anything like that. However, they are mass-produced toys (if there were specifically numbered ones, that's arguably a difference). Collecting them with the expectation that they're going to be a rare item that others will only later be able to acquire for comparatively exorbitant prices is a fundamental difference from what they actually are. And once again, a lot of this specific argument is even more odd since thee figures are in different packaging and visibly different figures to even the naked eye. It's the equivalent of comic book collectors complaining about clearly marked reprints or trade paperbacks existing. Mattel is a “third party” to the debate versus the two collector mindsets. They’re obviously the ones providing the toys but they aren’t part of people who think these shouldn’t appreciate versus people that do. So you “fundamentally missed” my point there. Also, I’ve already explained why comic books and TCG are bad comparisons to this toy line even though you’ve claimed to have read everything I’ve said. There’s value in first printings. There’s value in “originals” when it comes to comic books, tradings cards, vinyl records etc. That doesn’t necessarily carry over to Mattel’s wrestling figures when a large section of the fanbase is made of loose collectors. The packaging only matters to MOC collectors and even that is a super small subset of a niche market. A loose collector would buy the cheaper, upgraded rerelease without any hesitation over an older, less articulated, higher priced version. No one grades reprints of comics. They grade originals. Charizard 2nd edition doesn’t hold a candle to the 1st edition. However, the rerelease of Bubba Dudley is going to tank the value of the original and no one will buy that anymore. It’s that simple. To argue that any further is to simply ignore reality. We are a very niche group and the way wrestling figures values are created/ perceived is not comparable to comics, trading cards, etc. And you again use the word expectation. No one ever said they expect something to be rare or make them money. But to say that it’s a fundamental difference from what they are is what I have been arguing from the start. Just because they are “toys” and “action figures” doesn’t mean they can’t be collectible and can’t increase in value. That’s like saying a stamp cannot be collectible or make money because that’s fundamentally against what they’re made for. Humans are weird in that we put value on the silliest things but just because something is a toy doesn’t mean it can’t be considered more than that to someone else. |
|
|
|
Post by AxelSmackdown on Mar 11, 2024 16:01:31 GMT -5
maybe it’s time to lock the thread
|
|
voicesinmyhead
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 4, 2009 19:21:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,592
|
Post by voicesinmyhead on Mar 11, 2024 16:17:44 GMT -5
maybe it’s time to lock the thread Why? What enjoyment do you get out of this getting locked and why do you even need to mention it. Youre adding nothing of value by saying that and are simply instigating. You’re like a high schooler that tapes a fight and posts it on X. The only thing is this isn’t a fight. I don’t get why this site is so afraid of people having different opinions and voicing them. I’m obviously not allowed to collect the way I want. There are just too many close minded people here. I’ve said numerous times the type of collector I am, but can also understand loose collectors and those that don’t look at the value. Instead of getting the same treatment back, I’m told it’s stupid to look at the hobby the way I do as if there’s one right way. You don’t have to agree, but you can’t even understand it? That’s unfortunate you live your life this way. You miss out on a lot when you don’t even consider how the other side thinks. |
|
crush
Main Eventer
WF 10+ Year Member
Yes, i know it's weird...
Joined on: Mar 8, 2012 16:07:14 GMT -5
Posts: 4,702
|
Post by crush on Mar 11, 2024 16:57:14 GMT -5
To say Mattel is "third party" is a fundamental miss on what their role here is. They create the product, they sell the product, they dictate the availability of the product. From a philosophical standpoint, I look at it as someone collects thing because I like them. A figure's perceived financial value or scarcity has little-to-no bearing on how I value it in my collection, and while I don't want to speak for everyone in this thread, I would wager many of them are the same. it's not a matter of thinking they "should never" appreciate in value, it's a matter of whether they do or don't having zero influence on whether I keep them or want them. Frankly, all due respect, I can't agree with the idea that the line should dictated by collectors who feel that the financial value of their mass-produced figures (whether because they actually plan to resell them or because they simply want to have the "clout" feeling that they have something others can't easily obtain). This is where the "just toys" things come in. Yes, toys absolutely can appreciate in value, and I'm not like morally against the concept of a secondary market or anything like that. However, they are mass-produced toys (if there were specifically numbered ones, that's arguably a difference). Collecting them with the expectation that they're going to be a rare item that others will only later be able to acquire for comparatively exorbitant prices is a fundamental difference from what they actually are. And once again, a lot of this specific argument is even more odd since thee figures are in different packaging and visibly different figures to even the naked eye. It's the equivalent of comic book collectors complaining about clearly marked reprints or trade paperbacks existing. Mattel is a “third party” to the debate versus the two collector mindsets. They’re obviously the ones providing the toys but they aren’t part of people who think these shouldn’t appreciate versus people that do. So you “fundamentally missed” my point there. Also, I’ve already explained why comic books and TCG are bad comparisons to this toy line even though you’ve claimed to have read everything I’ve said. There’s value in first printings. There’s value in “originals” when it comes to comic books, tradings cards, vinyl records etc. That doesn’t necessarily carry over to Mattel’s wrestling figures when a large section of the fanbase is made of loose collectors. The packaging only matters to MOC collectors and even that is a super small subset of a niche market. A loose collector would buy the cheaper, upgraded rerelease without any hesitation over an older, less articulated, higher priced version. No one grades reprints of comics. They grade originals. Charizard 2nd edition doesn’t hold a candle to the 1st edition. However, the rerelease of Bubba Dudley is going to tank the value of the original and no one will buy that anymore. It’s that simple. To argue that any further is to simply ignore reality. We are a very niche group and the way wrestling figures values are created/ perceived is not comparable to comics, trading cards, etc. And you again use the word expectation. No one ever said they expect something to be rare or make them money. But to say that it’s a fundamental difference from what they are is what I have been arguing from the start. Just because they are “toys” and “action figures” doesn’t mean they can’t be collectible and can’t increase in value. That’s like saying a stamp cannot be collectible or make money because that’s fundamentally against what they’re made for. Humans are weird in that we put value on the silliest things but just because something is a toy doesn’t mean it can’t be considered more than that to someone else. Mattel can't be looked at as a third party in that philosophical debate because they control the production and therefore control the debate. They could announce tomorrow they're remaking every figure they've ever made in unlimited quantitates making the whole philosophy debate completely mood. I've read what you've written about comics. A reprint of a comic and a reprint of an action figure in this case is fundamentally the same thing. Both are mass-produced items, and unless a specifically numbered as such limited variant, there's no reason to ever assume one can't be reprinted at the whim of the company that produced them. Quite frankly, you're argument about loose and MOC is a bit weak, considering that MOC figures the versions that appreciate in value. Yes, a loose collector would likely buy the new figure over paying a secondary market price, but that loose collector likely isn't going to pay an exorbitant secondary market price for a MOC figure to open. Not to mention the fact that, despite how niche wrestling collecting is, MOC packaging differences are absolutely a bigger part of the hobby than you're letting. there's a reason English language Hasbros or those without the SummersSlam ad go for more than those in other languages or without the ad. No one is saying that toys can't be "collectible" or "increase in value." Of course they can. What they are saying is that toys (and yes stamps, and comic books, and whatever other collectibles you want to bring up) are (unless noted by a specific number created) mass produced items whose value and rarity comes from what is essentially artificial scarcity. Any mass-produced item can conceivably be reproduced at any time, with earlier printings of said objects generally but-not-always raining higher value than later reprints. And trust me, I put plenty of emotional value on my collection, and consider them "more" to me than w2hat other people would consider them. However, I garner that value from what they mean to me personally, not any precarious financial value they may have or perceived "rarity" I may believe they have because I was able to acquire them before others could. |
|
