The sooner people realize that Eternal staples, especially Legacy staples, aren't that expensive the better off they will be. Heck, half the people who come on here and complain about the reserve list have links to $300-$400 standard decks or their all foil EDH decks. Skip one standard season, save some money, and get some staples. ABUR duals and Force of Will's don't have shelf lives. They are not going to go bad on you.
The other half of people complain that they don't have anyone to play with because their friends or play group can't afford staples. Here is an option, and I know this might blow your mind... use proxies. My brother is 16, I don't reasonably expect him to spend hundreds of dollars on cardboard. So when he plops down a gold border Wasteland or plays a gate and says it is a Bayou I don't flip the table in disgust. I play the game.
Another thing that I see from people who are complaining about prices is that they NEVER mentioned the benefits that they get from rising card values, or due to Modern format creation.
Second Sunrise/Reshape is bulk before it won the PT.
Blackcleave Cliff went back up after rotation and is the best Scars lands due to Jund. Without Modern, it would have been only slightly more than $1.
There are A TON of old cards who do not see the light of day in Standard, but are worth something due to EDH. You can trade these to dealers for staples.
Cards in decks are seeing play, I consider that in circulation.
Does demand from players and collectors drive prices up? Yes. I just consider it ok when a card is expensive because it is highly desired by players and not because a bunch of the are rotting in binders of collectors. People who have collections that they use are fine with me.
I know collectors enjoy their cards in a way I may not really get (Hey I collect Black Cats though!), fair enough.
When all Bishops cost $400/each and Wizards of the Chess promises never, ever, ever to make more Bishops I have a problem with that. When preserving collectibility starts to hurt the game I have a problem. Ever notice how WoTC streams GPs and PTs and not artist conventions where collectors go and get their full beta sets signed? Yeah, that is cause Magic is a game 1st and a collectable hobby 2nd.
I see no difference between cards in a deck or in a binder. They are being used for a personal reason. I would only consider cards in circulation, ones that are for trade or sale.
And while your chess analogy makes good sense, it doesnt fit well with magic. If you dont have Bishops to use, you cant play chess. But if you dont have a Mox Jet you can still play magic.
I find this thread troll-like, and hostile. There are valid reasons why hoarders/collectors are disliked and it is fact, that they are bad for the game. If collectors were really focused on collectability then black lotus would be worth the same as chaos orb to them. Tarmogoyf would be worth the same as nix to the collector. Implied rarity? Artwork? What are you collecting? Don't BS the people on this forum that you conveniently "collect" cards that just happen to be player staples. Your collections are only underwritten by wotc holding back on printing functional reprints or better cards. Look at serendib efreets.
I'm split - part of me wants to see that, part of me sees this as a valid attempt at a rebuttal.
I see the problem not with people who collect - but those who treat the game as an investment like with stocks, or things like that, and hoarders.
IMO instead of a single post in 'official topics' we should have a subforum for discussions about the reserve list, etc, since it'd logistically not only be easier to keep track of many discussions at once, but it wouldn't restrict us to one insanely-long-and-getting-longer thread on the matter.
I find this thread troll-like, and hostile. There are valid reasons why hoarders/collectors are disliked and it is fact, that they are bad for the game. If collectors were really focused on collectability then black lotus would be worth the same as chaos orb to them. Tarmogoyf would be worth the same as nix to the collector. Implied rarity? Artwork? What are you collecting? Don't BS the people on this forum that you conveniently "collect" cards that just happen to be player staples. Your collections are only underwritten by wotc holding back on printing functional reprints or better cards. Look at serendib efreets.
I think there are two main problems with this view.
1) You're generalizing the goals of collectors. Not all collectors are after the highest priced cards, or even rares in general. Some just want foreign versions of their favorite cards, or want to collect all the cards by a particular artist and get them signed, or whatever.
2) Whether collectors want to go based solely on pure rarity or not is irrelevant, or nearly so. The fact that Tarmogoyf is more expensive than Nix has little to do with which cards appeal to collectors and a lot to do with players each needing 4 of an already rare card. I'm not even sure why you would bring that up as an example.
@Sophomoros
Why am I bringing it up? Have you been following the thread? It is the so called collectors that are complaining about reprints of staple cards. But you are correct, collectors can be genuine and my points were directed at hoarders and"collectors" that dont collect anything, but try to tie up supply of playable cards.
I find the statement below, troll-like and hostile.
Wow thanks for the useless comments. It is a fact as even Mark Rosewater has stated that collectors are the problem with reprinting cards.
How is my comment troll like or hostile in any way?
Collecting cards is in most cases stopping those cards being played and so is bad from purely game playing prospective.
Wow mmm I think we can tone down the hostility a bit eh? The thread title is on topic with the OP post and I'm certainly not trolling. If there can be a thread dedicated to taking shots at collectors, there certainly can be one discussing some of the less-discussed benefits. It is NOT a FACT that hoarders/collectors are "bad for the game", this is why we are having this discussion.
Generalized statements such as "if collectors were really focused on collectability then black lotus would be worth the same as chaos orb" are logically flawed and problematic because it could be said that "if players were really focused on the game then card prices are irrelevant" using the same logic. Does that make sense to anybody? Quite obviously, reality is not the black and white, binary situation that you and another poster have attempted to paint it. There are various types of collectors and for some of us, prices of cards are relevant to our collecting considerations, just as it is obvious that prices of cards are actually relevant for some players
Everybody please read #7, it's towards the bottom and of course also: "We want to be able to repeat cards without taking away the value from the original cards. In addition, this is why we have the Reserved List. Wizards wanted to stress to the public that there are a healthy amount of valuable cards that we will never reprint.
Every time I talk about the Reserve List, I get a flurry of letters begging me to scrap it and start reprinting some of the early powerful cards. Some of these letters are from players who even own these cards that claim they are willing to take the financial hit for “the good of the game” to allow newer players access to those older cards. What you don't know is that I always get an equal number of letters from the opposite side thanking me for Wizards' dedication to preserving the Reserve List.
This is a no-win situation as two different groups want opposite things. Wizards had to make a choice of where to come down on the issue. In the end, we picked a compromise, promising something to each group. For the gatherers, we promised to restrict promotional cards to cards that are not mechanically unique. No more Mana Crypt. For the completists, we made the Reserved List to promise to keep the value of their collection they worked so hard to collect. No more Ancestral Recall.
On one end, we restrict how far we can go to make the hard-core collectors happy. On the other end, we restrict how far we can go to make them upset." - M.R.
So it's a balance issue and like I said, I'm comfortable with the way wotc has implemented their solution in the creation of the modern format, the MM series of reprints and of course admire their financial savvy
I find this thread troll-like, and hostile. There are valid reasons why hoarders/collectors are disliked and it is fact, that they are bad for the game. If collectors were really focused on collectability then black lotus would be worth the same as chaos orb to them. Tarmogoyf would be worth the same as nix to the collector. Implied rarity? Artwork? What are you collecting? Don't BS the people on this forum that you conveniently "collect" cards that just happen to be player staples. Your collections are only underwritten by wotc holding back on printing functional reprints or better cards. Look at serendib efreets.
Well thanks for steamrolling, ignoring logic, and having a go at me all in one post.
MR is wrong in part of what he says.
I will put it in black and white for you.
FACT: no matter how many black lotus are ever reprinted, there will NEVER be an increase in the number of beta edition black lotus.
If you collect black lotus, your copy is still as rare/unique/old as it was yesterday.
As a collector, the reprint has 99.9% no relevance to you!
As a non-collector who is preventing the card from being played it would be a massive blow
That is what I am saying. That is what the majority seem to understand.
PS my argument is not flawed as no matter what price is charged supply shortages would still exist. Happy to debate basic logic with you if you still dont understand.
I agree with the fact that there will not be an increase in the number of black lotus. So? What relevance does this fact have to do with your supposition that collectors are bad for the game? You're the one ignoring logic by positing that "as a collector, the reprint has 99.9% no relevance". I could easily say, using the exact same logic, say that "as a player, the price of cards have 99.9% no relevance...". In addition, we already went over this here: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=9302040&postcount=30
Quite obviously this line of thinking is unrealistic and flawed, not sure what you hope to accomplish with it. It might be more clear rephrased as "I wish mtg collectors are financial idiots who don't care about prices". That is a perfectly valid wish to have and a man is free to dream. But that's not the reality I see (if you're surrounded by such characters, I heartily congratulate you and am not sure why you're complaining about card prices in this thread when you can be selling cards at infinity to such price-insensitive individuals). As a collector, I can tell you with 100% certainty that a reprint of a black lotus has 100% relevance to me Why? Because I'm not the idiotic, la-la-land mythical idiotic-about-finances collector you would like all collectors to be. Just like you're not the mythical don't-care-about-card-prices-because-i-love-the-game player I posited in response. We're all not idiots, so let's drop this line of logic eh? The vast majority of us in the mtg world are not 'pure' players nor pure collectors so the price of cards is always an issue. Feel free to start up a thread complaining about the lack of 'pure' collectors in mtg.
In regards to supply shortages, that is a completely separate argument from the one you started out with. It also probably belongs in the reserved list discussion thread and I would be happy to clarify my stance on this issue there.
P.S. It's a bit awkward seeing you utilize M.R. as an appeal to authority in your argument and when I post a link to the full article, your saying he's wrong a post later. Just saying
Well thanks for steamrolling, ignoring logic, and having a go at me all in one post.
MR is wrong in part of what he says.
I will but it in black and white for you.
FACT: no matter how many black lotus are ever reprinted, there will NEVER be an increase in the number of beta edition black lotus.
If you collect black lotus, your copy is still as rare/unique/old as it was yesterday.
As a collector, the reprint has 99.9% no relevance to you!
As a non-collector who is preventing the card from being played it would be a massive blow
That is what I am saying. That is what the majority seem to understand.
PS my argument is not flawed as no matter what price is charged supply shortages would still exist. Happy to debate basic logic with you if you still dont understand.
I feel like you're not really addressing the central point of PosterX's argument, which while clumsily stated, is that there is a noted difference between a collector, and a, shall we call them investor in the game. And in my opinion there absolutely is an issue with the company catering to people who decided the best place for their retirement fund was a piece of cardboard from a children's card game, especially when older formats are dying(at least locally) as a result of it.
I've rarely met any people who just collect the card anymore. I've talk to people who collected in the mid-90s and they always said, "I liked the artwork," if they did collect.
Many collectors I've talk to now, also play the game. Some of them only play casual and EDH, but they still play. Therefore, valuing tarmogoyf at the same price as nix doesn't make sense. The cards hav a collectable value and a playable value to them.
Collectors support magic. Speculators and investors also support magic, but are trying to turn a buck on you. Often they work for it though. They read speculation and financial articles. They watch trends and try to predict the next big thing.
I don't think the reserve list is perfect. I like the split stock idea that's been floating around the reserve list form. I think split stock for certain cards, like dual lands, could help. Collectors could keep the old ones that are more rares. Other players could get new cards to play with, so older formats don't die.
Plains - John Avon - 230
Island - Jung Park - 235
Island - Vincent Proce - 237
Swamp - John Avon - 238
Mountain - John Avon - 242
Forest - John Avon - 246
is that there is a noted difference between a collector, and a, shall we call them investor in the game.
Well, there is a difference, in some circumstances. Take me, for example. I'm a collector AND a player. What do I collect? I collect foil dragons, foil wolves and I grab up foil versions of cards in my EDH deck when I can. So how am I different from an investor? Well, let's go back to what I said I collect, which is dragons. Kokusho, the Evening Star was recently unbanned in EDH. When that happened, his price doubled. If I were an investor, I would have bought up every copy of Kokusho that I could find in anticipation of it being unbanned, based on a few articles/threads I saw where people had been extensively testing Kokusho and deciding that it wasn't that broken and could probably be unbanned. I would now be reselling those Kokushos at double what I paid for them and making a nice huge profit.
But that's not the case. I managed to get my hands on two FTV Kokushos and a playset of normal ones for a casual deck, and that was enough for me (Ok, I'd still like to have a foil CHK version too...). I don't have page after page of it in my binder. Could I, if I wanted to? I guess. It is a free country after all.
There's a fine line between collecting and hoarding. If you decide to have 100 copies of Steamflogger Boss, you're not hurting anyone. If you decide you're going to buy up 60 copies of Supreme Verdict because you think it's going to be the next Thragtusk, well, I don't agree with those kinds of tactics, but you're probably not really hurting the supply. When you "collect" 30 copies of a card that has a finite (and very small) supply, which Wizards has promised to never reprint and which is also a card that is in demand for deck use, then you're just being greedy. But in the end, who's fault is it, really? Is it the greedy 'collector' who is sitting on 20 copies of every ABUR Dual land as a retirement fund and doesn't even play the game, or is it Wizard's fault for catering to said greedy collectors and players? Honestly, I put most of the blame on Wizards for artificially restricting the supply. It just blows my mind that they actually do this.
And in my opinion there absolutely is an issue with the company catering to people who decided the best place for their retirement fund was a piece of cardboard from a children's card game, especially when older formats are dying(at least locally) as a result of it.
Absolutely agree.
Also Dresden, I don't buy your argument about devaluation and how players shouldn't care about card prices if collectors shouldn't. First of all, on the subject of devaluation: We both know that collectors and even players always want the most "pimp" version of a card. So often, reprints don't affect the value of the original much at all. I mean, let's look at a few examples:
Why is the P3k version $20 more? It's white bordered, which everyone hates, and it's non-foil, and we know that EDH players (which is the only place this card even sees play) are suckers for foils, so why is the FTV version worth a mere $2? Because the P3K is rarer and by default, more "pimp".
Again, shouldn't the price on the original have crashed? I mean, who wants that boring old, ugly white border one when you can have the cool, shiny, black border version now??
"But that's not a fair example!" you'll say. "Commander's Arsenal and FTV are low-print products so they don't affect the supply much!". Ok, ok, fine.
So, how can a card that has been reprinted sixteen times still have a version that sells for hundreds of dollars? Rarity. As we can see, reprinting doesn't always hurt the values of the originals because there are collectors (and players) who still want the originals and there is a finite number of how many Alpha/Beta/Unlimited Moxes, Duals, Lotus, etc there are in existence, and there will always be those who prefer the original art/card frame over anything new. I would bet that if we ever got the original Duals reprinted, they wouldn't have the cool funky alternating color text boxes, and it's guaranteed that they wouldn't have the same artwork, so that fact alone would make the originals retain value.
As for your other point about how players shouldn't care about card prices: All I can say is we have no choice. If we want to play competitive, we have to have the staples, whether they cost a hundred pennies or a hundred dollars. Having to pay $200 for an Alpha Birds of Paradise because you're a collector and the $4 M12 version just won't do is your choice. But having to pay $200 for an Alpha Birds of Paradise because you absolutely need it for your deck to be good enough to win and the Alpha version is the only version in existence, or just not play at all, isn't really much of a choice.
The point is, there SHOULD be reprints. That way the people who want the card just to be able to play the game can have it at a reasonable price and the people who just want to collect/pimp can still have the valuable, rare, original version. It's the one thing I missed the most about Yu-Gi-Oh! They didn't cater to speculators, hoarders and collectors the way Magic does. If a staple card reached insane prices (and they always did), Konami would actually reprint the damn card in an easy to obtain form so that the people who want to play with it could actually get their hands on it. And guess what? The original still retained value! I have a Tournament Pack 2 Morphing Jar that was worth $200-$250 when I first got it because it was the first time the card had ever been printed. Since then, the card has been reprinted countless times, in common, rare, and foil. Guess what? My TP2 version is still worth $150+ even though you can buy a common one for like a dollar. Why? Rarity/collectors/pimpers.
Finally, on the topic of the thread itself: Are collectors good for the game? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. They're bad for the game when Wizards caters to them with utterly stupid products like Commander's Arsenal and FTV and when they turn from collector to hoarder/speculator. But I'm sure we help out players from time to time, like I do when I trade Modern/Eternal/Standard staples for junk foils like Utvara Hellkite that are only worth as much as a Modern staple because of collectors like me who are stupid enough to place that much value on what would otherwise be a $1 junk bin foil.
^ That is true. Definitely in some cases collectors can help out the players by trading playables for collectibles. I just traded a Sword of Fire and Ice for a foil Trostani and a foil Niv Dracogenius on this site. Those cards would be worth very little if it wasn't for collectors wanting them. I've done the reverse too in the past, trading judge Vindicates for regular ones + other playable staples. It's not the collectors holding the game back, it's the "investors".
I think out of interest of fairness for both sides(collectors and players) the players aren't totally hostile to all collectors, just the ones who post videos on youtube shoing binders with 50+ FoWs and dozens of each duel and then gloat in the video like "haha losers these will never see the inside of a playing sleeve"
So this guy's telling you that his family is going to be tossed out on the street penniless and starving and his dog is going to be kicked repeatedly if you don't give him a positive feedback...and he still won't honor the original deal?
Collectors support magic. Speculators and investors also support magic, but are trying to turn a buck on you. Often they work for it though. They read speculation and financial articles. They watch trends and try to predict the next big thing.
No, speculators and investors do the opposite of supporting magic. By hoarding cards they prevent people from playing what is at heart a game. They support themselves in a way that kills the game.
^ That is true. Definitely in some cases collectors can help out the players by trading playables for collectibles. I just traded a Sword of Fire and Ice for a foil Trostani and a foil Niv Dracogenius on this site. Those cards would be worth very little if it wasn't for collectors wanting them. I've done the reverse too in the past, trading judge Vindicates for regular ones + other playable staples. It's not the collectors holding the game back, it's the "investors".
i like this post. elaborate on the fine line between collectors and investors. and then i think we can end this thread.
everyone is mad at investors.
most people are okay with collectors.
now where is the line between the guy who likes counterspells and the guy who likes dual lands.
i like this post. elaborate on the fine line between collectors and investors. and then i think we can end this thread.
everyone is mad at investors.
most people are okay with collectors.
now where is the line between the guy who likes counterspells and the guy who likes dual lands.
The line stops at the point where they're hoarding duals to hopefully sell for 1000% of their price now to retire... but the fact is, if they wait too long, the Eternal formats will Implode and the Value of their duals will plummet at the same time. The guy collecting Counterspells isn't hurting anybody because, there are infinitely MORE counterspells in circulation than dual lands. and, are thus, Less valuable, and less rare.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
No, speculators and investors do the opposite of supporting magic. By hoarding cards they prevent people from playing what is at heart a game. They support themselves in a way that kills the game.
They buy cards. That's one way of supporting the game. Every speculator I know is also a player.
You are right, magic is a game, but that does not mean it's not a serious hobby for people. People spend lots of money on it. It's different that candyland or even a more comparable game like Ascension (Deck Building Game). Those are just games with no major financial component.
I bought snapcaster mages for cheap when they came out, I took the gamble and I resold some. I got my snapcasters for free then. I still play these cards. Doing this helped me pay for cards. It just happened that I paid less at one point and someone else paid the market price later on.
I very well could have lost money. I could have bought a booster, opened the snapcaster up, and sold it as well. It does not make me a bad person that I took a chance and it went well. No one is forcing people to pay that price. People want to play the best decks and it costs more. I have a budget standard humans deck that is tons of fun and plays fine but it 1/3 the price of other standard decks I play against. You don't need the best cards to play and enjoy game. You don't have to past the prices.
Honestly, one of the biggest problems with MTG, to me, is the growing size of the player base.
Again, I'm in favor for all types of people, players and collectors, being part of the game.
Plains - John Avon - 230
Island - Jung Park - 235
Island - Vincent Proce - 237
Swamp - John Avon - 238
Mountain - John Avon - 242
Forest - John Avon - 246
A comparison I just thought about regarding people on opposite ends of a similar pricing dilemma is the housing market. If you saved for many years to buy a house, let's say this was in pre-bust 2008 and then you had the choice of having the bubble burst like it did so that many more people could afford homes or keeping home prices the same, which would you choose? Remember, having the housing bubble burst allows for many many more people to have access to a home and grow the communities so let's not all be selfish now, it's fine if your house value decreases by 50%, after all you're in it for the stability and comfort of a home and not to speculate on the housing market, right? Think about it a bit and you may find that your answer greatly hinges upon whether or not you did buy that house and instantly lose value. So it is perhaps a bit more of a 'what's right for you' question as opposed to 'what's right for everybody' ^^
This would be an excellent example if it was remotely applicable. What you are leaving out of the equation is that the housing bubble was directly tied to the world economy and has had far reaching circumstances that goes well beyond how much a house is worth.
Second, you are comparing what is statistically likely to be the largest single purchase a person will ever make to a hobby, even if that collection can value in the tens of thousands of dollars or more.
Third, I have yet to meet the magic player/collector/speculator who has taken out a loan - generally over $1000 a month, for 30 years - to invest in magic cards. The volatility of much of the magic card market would render such a decision completely foolish, not to mention the lack of ease of liquidity.
And regarding your housing analogy, the home I purchased has inherent value to me as a dwelling, I didn't purchase it as an investment, I purchased it as a place to live. If others can now purchase and own a place to live, that's amazing. Same thing with cards, they have an inherent value as a playing piece for a game we all play. If others can now have the pieces too, that's amazing.
What if your home decreased in value by 50% and then you lost your job. The market is now depressed because it is unheard of for a single house in a neighborhood/town/city to lose that much value (short of a destructive force, i.e. fire) on its own. Now you can't make payments on your mortgage and you can't sell your house for anything near what you purchased it for/what you still owe. You will be foreclosed on, your credit will take a bare minimum of a 7 year hit - assuming you can avoid any other credit issues in that time - and you will have to liquidate much of the rest of your valuables.
Still thrilled that other people can purchase a home at the sake of your house's value?
Moral of the story. Don't compare apples to horses. It won't get you anywhere. The housing market and its individual repercussions have little to nothing to do with collecting magic cards - even if you have a massive collection worth tens of thousands of dollars or more.
No, speculators and investors do the opposite of supporting magic. By hoarding cards they prevent people from playing what is at heart a game. They support themselves in a way that kills the game.
I'd disagree.
While there certainly is a class of speculators and investors that do some harm to the game, there are also a good number of collectors and investors that support the game almost more than anyone else.
What is a store owner if not an investor?
While store owners will vary a great deal on how speculative they would be in much of their investment, and how much of their inventory's value and worth are tied up in the singles market, it is a significant portion of what the average player and collector is going to expect from a store, and a well stocked store that has most of what a player needs at a reasonable price is going to be looked upon with higher esteem than the same space with almost nothing in the way of a collection of singles.
Internet Websites are investors.
Mtgotraders and all of the big bot-chains on MTGO are investors. All of these people that have invested significant sums into the game have done a great deal in increasing the access and availablity of specific cards to players. Yes, all of these things do come at a cost, but most players will happily accept it because there's a lot of added value.
Collectors are not a problem at all. They have a way that they enjoy the game, and it's just as valid as anyone else's. Any complaints to the contrary are just a bunch of sour grapes from a number of entitled whiners who are angry because someone else has a shiny toy that they want.
Investors and spectulators aren't all that problematic either... unless they provide no value. That's the area that's giving them the black eye, as well as the group that's somewhat swelling along with the growth of the playerbase.
This group of people want to "get rich quick" and do so on the backs of others. It's the same group of people who read pack to power articles and now want to ALWAYS be trading up and aggressively trading for value, while providing absolutely none.
Now, this isn't even all the players that don't fit in the aforementioned catagories... I know lots of heavily invested players that are great boons and cornerstones of their various communities, maintain HUGE collections that they're typically happy to share out among their trusted friends... while they may have the general look of providing no value, they're actually bouying a large network of players who may not have been able to play/compete if not for the loans of cards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The other half of people complain that they don't have anyone to play with because their friends or play group can't afford staples. Here is an option, and I know this might blow your mind... use proxies. My brother is 16, I don't reasonably expect him to spend hundreds of dollars on cardboard. So when he plops down a gold border Wasteland or plays a gate and says it is a Bayou I don't flip the table in disgust. I play the game.
Second Sunrise/Reshape is bulk before it won the PT.
Blackcleave Cliff went back up after rotation and is the best Scars lands due to Jund. Without Modern, it would have been only slightly more than $1.
There are A TON of old cards who do not see the light of day in Standard, but are worth something due to EDH. You can trade these to dealers for staples.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=487991
My Sell List:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10893911#post10893911
I see no difference between cards in a deck or in a binder. They are being used for a personal reason. I would only consider cards in circulation, ones that are for trade or sale.
And while your chess analogy makes good sense, it doesnt fit well with magic. If you dont have Bishops to use, you cant play chess. But if you dont have a Mox Jet you can still play magic.
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
I'm split - part of me wants to see that, part of me sees this as a valid attempt at a rebuttal.
I see the problem not with people who collect - but those who treat the game as an investment like with stocks, or things like that, and hoarders.
IMO instead of a single post in 'official topics' we should have a subforum for discussions about the reserve list, etc, since it'd logistically not only be easier to keep track of many discussions at once, but it wouldn't restrict us to one insanely-long-and-getting-longer thread on the matter.
I find the statement below, troll-like and hostile.
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
I think there are two main problems with this view.
1) You're generalizing the goals of collectors. Not all collectors are after the highest priced cards, or even rares in general. Some just want foreign versions of their favorite cards, or want to collect all the cards by a particular artist and get them signed, or whatever.
2) Whether collectors want to go based solely on pure rarity or not is irrelevant, or nearly so. The fact that Tarmogoyf is more expensive than Nix has little to do with which cards appeal to collectors and a lot to do with players each needing 4 of an already rare card. I'm not even sure why you would bring that up as an example.
Why am I bringing it up? Have you been following the thread? It is the so called collectors that are complaining about reprints of staple cards. But you are correct, collectors can be genuine and my points were directed at hoarders and"collectors" that dont collect anything, but try to tie up supply of playable cards.
Wow thanks for the useless comments. It is a fact as even Mark Rosewater has stated that collectors are the problem with reprinting cards.
How is my comment troll like or hostile in any way?
Collecting cards is in most cases stopping those cards being played and so is bad from purely game playing prospective.
Generalized statements such as "if collectors were really focused on collectability then black lotus would be worth the same as chaos orb" are logically flawed and problematic because it could be said that "if players were really focused on the game then card prices are irrelevant" using the same logic. Does that make sense to anybody? Quite obviously, reality is not the black and white, binary situation that you and another poster have attempted to paint it. There are various types of collectors and for some of us, prices of cards are relevant to our collecting considerations, just as it is obvious that prices of cards are actually relevant for some players
P.S. Mark Rosewater on collectors and mtg collecting:
http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr121
Everybody please read #7, it's towards the bottom and of course also:
"We want to be able to repeat cards without taking away the value from the original cards. In addition, this is why we have the Reserved List. Wizards wanted to stress to the public that there are a healthy amount of valuable cards that we will never reprint.
Every time I talk about the Reserve List, I get a flurry of letters begging me to scrap it and start reprinting some of the early powerful cards. Some of these letters are from players who even own these cards that claim they are willing to take the financial hit for “the good of the game” to allow newer players access to those older cards. What you don't know is that I always get an equal number of letters from the opposite side thanking me for Wizards' dedication to preserving the Reserve List.
This is a no-win situation as two different groups want opposite things. Wizards had to make a choice of where to come down on the issue. In the end, we picked a compromise, promising something to each group. For the gatherers, we promised to restrict promotional cards to cards that are not mechanically unique. No more Mana Crypt. For the completists, we made the Reserved List to promise to keep the value of their collection they worked so hard to collect. No more Ancestral Recall.
On one end, we restrict how far we can go to make the hard-core collectors happy. On the other end, we restrict how far we can go to make them upset." - M.R.
So it's a balance issue and like I said, I'm comfortable with the way wotc has implemented their solution in the creation of the modern format, the MM series of reprints and of course admire their financial savvy
MR is wrong in part of what he says.
I will put it in black and white for you.
FACT: no matter how many black lotus are ever reprinted, there will NEVER be an increase in the number of beta edition black lotus.
If you collect black lotus, your copy is still as rare/unique/old as it was yesterday.
As a collector, the reprint has 99.9% no relevance to you!
As a non-collector who is preventing the card from being played it would be a massive blow
That is what I am saying. That is what the majority seem to understand.
PS my argument is not flawed as no matter what price is charged supply shortages would still exist. Happy to debate basic logic with you if you still dont understand.
Quite obviously this line of thinking is unrealistic and flawed, not sure what you hope to accomplish with it. It might be more clear rephrased as "I wish mtg collectors are financial idiots who don't care about prices". That is a perfectly valid wish to have and a man is free to dream. But that's not the reality I see (if you're surrounded by such characters, I heartily congratulate you and am not sure why you're complaining about card prices in this thread when you can be selling cards at infinity to such price-insensitive individuals). As a collector, I can tell you with 100% certainty that a reprint of a black lotus has 100% relevance to me Why? Because I'm not the idiotic, la-la-land mythical idiotic-about-finances collector you would like all collectors to be. Just like you're not the mythical don't-care-about-card-prices-because-i-love-the-game player I posited in response. We're all not idiots, so let's drop this line of logic eh? The vast majority of us in the mtg world are not 'pure' players nor pure collectors so the price of cards is always an issue. Feel free to start up a thread complaining about the lack of 'pure' collectors in mtg.
In regards to supply shortages, that is a completely separate argument from the one you started out with. It also probably belongs in the reserved list discussion thread and I would be happy to clarify my stance on this issue there.
P.S. It's a bit awkward seeing you utilize M.R. as an appeal to authority in your argument and when I post a link to the full article, your saying he's wrong a post later. Just saying
I feel like you're not really addressing the central point of PosterX's argument, which while clumsily stated, is that there is a noted difference between a collector, and a, shall we call them investor in the game. And in my opinion there absolutely is an issue with the company catering to people who decided the best place for their retirement fund was a piece of cardboard from a children's card game, especially when older formats are dying(at least locally) as a result of it.
Many collectors I've talk to now, also play the game. Some of them only play casual and EDH, but they still play. Therefore, valuing tarmogoyf at the same price as nix doesn't make sense. The cards hav a collectable value and a playable value to them.
Collectors support magic. Speculators and investors also support magic, but are trying to turn a buck on you. Often they work for it though. They read speculation and financial articles. They watch trends and try to predict the next big thing.
I don't think the reserve list is perfect. I like the split stock idea that's been floating around the reserve list form. I think split stock for certain cards, like dual lands, could help. Collectors could keep the old ones that are more rares. Other players could get new cards to play with, so older formats don't die.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=4832736
Trading 10 full art zen basics for 8 of yours!
I want
Plains - John Avon - 230
Island - Jung Park - 235
Island - Vincent Proce - 237
Swamp - John Avon - 238
Mountain - John Avon - 242
Forest - John Avon - 246
Well, there is a difference, in some circumstances. Take me, for example. I'm a collector AND a player. What do I collect? I collect foil dragons, foil wolves and I grab up foil versions of cards in my EDH deck when I can. So how am I different from an investor? Well, let's go back to what I said I collect, which is dragons. Kokusho, the Evening Star was recently unbanned in EDH. When that happened, his price doubled. If I were an investor, I would have bought up every copy of Kokusho that I could find in anticipation of it being unbanned, based on a few articles/threads I saw where people had been extensively testing Kokusho and deciding that it wasn't that broken and could probably be unbanned. I would now be reselling those Kokushos at double what I paid for them and making a nice huge profit.
But that's not the case. I managed to get my hands on two FTV Kokushos and a playset of normal ones for a casual deck, and that was enough for me (Ok, I'd still like to have a foil CHK version too...). I don't have page after page of it in my binder. Could I, if I wanted to? I guess. It is a free country after all.
There's a fine line between collecting and hoarding. If you decide to have 100 copies of Steamflogger Boss, you're not hurting anyone. If you decide you're going to buy up 60 copies of Supreme Verdict because you think it's going to be the next Thragtusk, well, I don't agree with those kinds of tactics, but you're probably not really hurting the supply. When you "collect" 30 copies of a card that has a finite (and very small) supply, which Wizards has promised to never reprint and which is also a card that is in demand for deck use, then you're just being greedy. But in the end, who's fault is it, really? Is it the greedy 'collector' who is sitting on 20 copies of every ABUR Dual land as a retirement fund and doesn't even play the game, or is it Wizard's fault for catering to said greedy collectors and players? Honestly, I put most of the blame on Wizards for artificially restricting the supply. It just blows my mind that they actually do this.
Absolutely agree.
Also Dresden, I don't buy your argument about devaluation and how players shouldn't care about card prices if collectors shouldn't. First of all, on the subject of devaluation: We both know that collectors and even players always want the most "pimp" version of a card. So often, reprints don't affect the value of the original much at all. I mean, let's look at a few examples:
FTV Sun Quan, Lord of Wu $2
P3K Sun Quan, Lord of Wu $22
Why is the P3k version $20 more? It's white bordered, which everyone hates, and it's non-foil, and we know that EDH players (which is the only place this card even sees play) are suckers for foils, so why is the FTV version worth a mere $2? Because the P3K is rarer and by default, more "pimp".
And using more P3K cards as an example:
CA Loyal Retainers $50
P3K Loyal Retainers $150
Again, shouldn't the price on the original have crashed? I mean, who wants that boring old, ugly white border one when you can have the cool, shiny, black border version now??
"But that's not a fair example!" you'll say. "Commander's Arsenal and FTV are low-print products so they don't affect the supply much!". Ok, ok, fine.
RtR Hallowed Fountain $14
DIS Hallowed Fountain $24
COM Sol Ring $5
UNL Sol Ring $18
Beta Sol Ring $119
Alpha Sol Ring $179
M12 Birds of Paradise $4
UNL Birds of Paradise $40
Beta Birds of Paradise $180++
Alpha Birds of Paradise (Can't even find a price!)
So, how can a card that has been reprinted sixteen times still have a version that sells for hundreds of dollars? Rarity. As we can see, reprinting doesn't always hurt the values of the originals because there are collectors (and players) who still want the originals and there is a finite number of how many Alpha/Beta/Unlimited Moxes, Duals, Lotus, etc there are in existence, and there will always be those who prefer the original art/card frame over anything new. I would bet that if we ever got the original Duals reprinted, they wouldn't have the cool funky alternating color text boxes, and it's guaranteed that they wouldn't have the same artwork, so that fact alone would make the originals retain value.
As for your other point about how players shouldn't care about card prices: All I can say is we have no choice. If we want to play competitive, we have to have the staples, whether they cost a hundred pennies or a hundred dollars. Having to pay $200 for an Alpha Birds of Paradise because you're a collector and the $4 M12 version just won't do is your choice. But having to pay $200 for an Alpha Birds of Paradise because you absolutely need it for your deck to be good enough to win and the Alpha version is the only version in existence, or just not play at all, isn't really much of a choice.
The point is, there SHOULD be reprints. That way the people who want the card just to be able to play the game can have it at a reasonable price and the people who just want to collect/pimp can still have the valuable, rare, original version. It's the one thing I missed the most about Yu-Gi-Oh! They didn't cater to speculators, hoarders and collectors the way Magic does. If a staple card reached insane prices (and they always did), Konami would actually reprint the damn card in an easy to obtain form so that the people who want to play with it could actually get their hands on it. And guess what? The original still retained value! I have a Tournament Pack 2 Morphing Jar that was worth $200-$250 when I first got it because it was the first time the card had ever been printed. Since then, the card has been reprinted countless times, in common, rare, and foil. Guess what? My TP2 version is still worth $150+ even though you can buy a common one for like a dollar. Why? Rarity/collectors/pimpers.
Finally, on the topic of the thread itself: Are collectors good for the game? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. They're bad for the game when Wizards caters to them with utterly stupid products like Commander's Arsenal and FTV and when they turn from collector to hoarder/speculator. But I'm sure we help out players from time to time, like I do when I trade Modern/Eternal/Standard staples for junk foils like Utvara Hellkite that are only worth as much as a Modern staple because of collectors like me who are stupid enough to place that much value on what would otherwise be a $1 junk bin foil.
Trades
Pucatrade with me!
(Signature courtesy of Argetlam of Hakai Studios
0 Karn
W Darien
U Arcanis
B Geth
R Norin
G Yeva
UW Hanna
RB Olivia
WB Obzedat
UR Melek
BG Glissa
WR Aurelia
GU Kraj
BRU Nicol Bolas
RGB Prossh
BGW Ghave
GUB Mimeoplasm
WUBRG Sliver Overlord
GWU Treva, the Renewer
EDH Spike:
U Azami, Lady of Scrolls
Trades
No, speculators and investors do the opposite of supporting magic. By hoarding cards they prevent people from playing what is at heart a game. They support themselves in a way that kills the game.
Prophet
i like this post. elaborate on the fine line between collectors and investors. and then i think we can end this thread.
everyone is mad at investors.
most people are okay with collectors.
now where is the line between the guy who likes counterspells and the guy who likes dual lands.
Kirin's Skyfire Help Desk
Trading Post
The line stops at the point where they're hoarding duals to hopefully sell for 1000% of their price now to retire... but the fact is, if they wait too long, the Eternal formats will Implode and the Value of their duals will plummet at the same time. The guy collecting Counterspells isn't hurting anybody because, there are infinitely MORE counterspells in circulation than dual lands. and, are thus, Less valuable, and less rare.
[W]FREE STONEFORGE MYSTIC and JACE THE MINDSCULPTOR[/W]
Please Visit my Alterations Page!
My Alters Sales Thread
Want a FREE Playset of Foil Baneslayer Angels?!?:
They buy cards. That's one way of supporting the game. Every speculator I know is also a player.
You are right, magic is a game, but that does not mean it's not a serious hobby for people. People spend lots of money on it. It's different that candyland or even a more comparable game like Ascension (Deck Building Game). Those are just games with no major financial component.
I bought snapcaster mages for cheap when they came out, I took the gamble and I resold some. I got my snapcasters for free then. I still play these cards. Doing this helped me pay for cards. It just happened that I paid less at one point and someone else paid the market price later on.
I very well could have lost money. I could have bought a booster, opened the snapcaster up, and sold it as well. It does not make me a bad person that I took a chance and it went well. No one is forcing people to pay that price. People want to play the best decks and it costs more. I have a budget standard humans deck that is tons of fun and plays fine but it 1/3 the price of other standard decks I play against. You don't need the best cards to play and enjoy game. You don't have to past the prices.
Honestly, one of the biggest problems with MTG, to me, is the growing size of the player base.
Again, I'm in favor for all types of people, players and collectors, being part of the game.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=4832736
Trading 10 full art zen basics for 8 of yours!
I want
Plains - John Avon - 230
Island - Jung Park - 235
Island - Vincent Proce - 237
Swamp - John Avon - 238
Mountain - John Avon - 242
Forest - John Avon - 246
This would be an excellent example if it was remotely applicable. What you are leaving out of the equation is that the housing bubble was directly tied to the world economy and has had far reaching circumstances that goes well beyond how much a house is worth.
Second, you are comparing what is statistically likely to be the largest single purchase a person will ever make to a hobby, even if that collection can value in the tens of thousands of dollars or more.
Third, I have yet to meet the magic player/collector/speculator who has taken out a loan - generally over $1000 a month, for 30 years - to invest in magic cards. The volatility of much of the magic card market would render such a decision completely foolish, not to mention the lack of ease of liquidity.
What if your home decreased in value by 50% and then you lost your job. The market is now depressed because it is unheard of for a single house in a neighborhood/town/city to lose that much value (short of a destructive force, i.e. fire) on its own. Now you can't make payments on your mortgage and you can't sell your house for anything near what you purchased it for/what you still owe. You will be foreclosed on, your credit will take a bare minimum of a 7 year hit - assuming you can avoid any other credit issues in that time - and you will have to liquidate much of the rest of your valuables.
Still thrilled that other people can purchase a home at the sake of your house's value?
Moral of the story. Don't compare apples to horses. It won't get you anywhere. The housing market and its individual repercussions have little to nothing to do with collecting magic cards - even if you have a massive collection worth tens of thousands of dollars or more.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=10498534#post10498534
I'd disagree.
While there certainly is a class of speculators and investors that do some harm to the game, there are also a good number of collectors and investors that support the game almost more than anyone else.
What is a store owner if not an investor?
While store owners will vary a great deal on how speculative they would be in much of their investment, and how much of their inventory's value and worth are tied up in the singles market, it is a significant portion of what the average player and collector is going to expect from a store, and a well stocked store that has most of what a player needs at a reasonable price is going to be looked upon with higher esteem than the same space with almost nothing in the way of a collection of singles.
Internet Websites are investors.
Mtgotraders and all of the big bot-chains on MTGO are investors. All of these people that have invested significant sums into the game have done a great deal in increasing the access and availablity of specific cards to players. Yes, all of these things do come at a cost, but most players will happily accept it because there's a lot of added value.
Collectors are not a problem at all. They have a way that they enjoy the game, and it's just as valid as anyone else's. Any complaints to the contrary are just a bunch of sour grapes from a number of entitled whiners who are angry because someone else has a shiny toy that they want.
Investors and spectulators aren't all that problematic either... unless they provide no value. That's the area that's giving them the black eye, as well as the group that's somewhat swelling along with the growth of the playerbase.
This group of people want to "get rich quick" and do so on the backs of others. It's the same group of people who read pack to power articles and now want to ALWAYS be trading up and aggressively trading for value, while providing absolutely none.
Now, this isn't even all the players that don't fit in the aforementioned catagories... I know lots of heavily invested players that are great boons and cornerstones of their various communities, maintain HUGE collections that they're typically happy to share out among their trusted friends... while they may have the general look of providing no value, they're actually bouying a large network of players who may not have been able to play/compete if not for the loans of cards.