Do you have a degree in Philosophy Charlie?
Just a couple.
1 Like
We have a lot of smart cookies here commenting above. Both sides of each argument are well stated. So just to be thought of as someone who belongs with these elite “thoughtists”, I’ll opine.
Nobody, unless under duress, is going to walk up to you and put cold hard cash into your pocket with no benefit to themselves.
Is there even one person here on e4 who will participate in the money side of this now…or this month? Not putting up their cards but putting up their $$$. I’m assuming there’s an avenue in place to do so.
I think this business’ official instagram account speaks for itself.
One example of this super premium service’s insight into the world of mtg collecting is the following:
Cringe
I find the concept of owning a share of a collectable I will never hold or see unappealing.
I’m a collector, this isn’t collecting. This is funding someone else’s collection.
7 Likes
Yeah, I guess when you buy stock in coke you can at least buy a coke and drink it😏
1 Like
TL:DR. The business will rely on getting expensive cards for well below market value constantly. This is because of their fee structure and expenses don’t make it viable to do so on less valuable collector’s items.
When I look at it from a numbers point of view I am concerned.
I doubt their ability to do so. Even if they are buying off friends/contacts.
Black lotus example.
Purchased for $44k
11k fees to purchase (finders fee or as I see it a 11k loss from the start)
~2-3k in ongoing fees (storage, insurance, legality etc)
Listed at $125k.
They compared their asset (a black lotus BGS 9) to a black lotus (BGS 9.5) that sold for $166k which is why they put a $125k value on their Black Lotus. How many times will they be able to find a card and purchase it at 50% or less of market value?
There is no manufactured growth possible(grading the card, outside of market manipulation ( YouTube/Instagram hype videos? ) Not to mention the scarcity of high-end buyers looking to purchase the card.
The only monetization I see possible is if they lease the cards for conventions for an exhibition.
The thoughts of “shares” in an asset aren’t new. I can go buy some “bricks” in a house for some micro-investing, it offers an entry point into a market otherwise out of their reach. But the fees and share structure erode the margins. Which is one of the main reason people go for a more expensive asset; higher % returns and/or “guaranteed” growth.
I have no issues with by outs or market manipulation. Unless buyouts are so commonplace to the extent that it affects people playing the TCG because a card is literally unobtainable (not just too expensive). But that is just addressing a Red Herring that came into the thread.
Shit, if I could constantly get cards for 50% off market then I’d just do that… Anyone selling a 1st edition shadow Charizard PSA 10 for 20k? 
1 Like
I don’t think you’re the target demographic.
5 Likes
@atlas,
If you could condense what you said above into two sentences, what would they be;)
1 Like
@garyis2000, It is there, I edited so the TL:DR is in bold for you.
@atlas can you clarify some of the number-crunching in terms of why they need such large margins to exist as a company? I was under the impression that the overhead costs weren’t that high, but for no other reason than I haven’t dealt with these kinds of high net worth cards (i.e. I just keep the cards in my room). My thought was that they’d buy later cards at market price and then list them for a bit higher (since they’re selling individual stocks at a cheaper price, like buy the card @ 100k and then issue shares worth $110k) and then rinse and repeat.
Some really good side points that I wanted to clarify/address:
The crux of this is that the TCG market continues to outperform most indices to provide returns higher than usual. It’s been doing that for the past few years, and hopefully it continues to do this, but I’m more on the cautious side in saying that this growth we’re seeing isn’t forever.
The main concern here is volatility - real estate is volatile, yes, but is much less volatile than collectibles, which is the biggest concern I have with such a platform being able to draw enough investors to sustain itself (i.e. all it takes is one sharp decline in the future to scare people away).
I second this 
@budget people without money are 100% the target demographic. They say stuff about $1M net worth. $200k annual income. That is all to make it sound fancier and more ethical. Those people would and could just buy cards maybe not fully at this caliber, but near this caliber for sure if they prioritized it.
This concept, if it happens will just be another way those with lesser financial knowledge and lesser financial resources get separated from their money.
3 Likes
@gottaketchumall, absolutely agree.
If the target demographic where high income people they wouldn’t be doing $62.5 shares.
Coincidentally, low income earners tend to be financially illiterate enough to ignore fees and taxes not realising that for a net profit of 20% to be atained the item needs to see a price increase of at least 35%, which doesn’t usually happen overnight on high value collectibles.
Add into the equation that low income earners can’t usually afford to keep their money in the same place for more than 6 months without getting that ‘unexpected bill’ and cashing out at a loss, and these guys will be churning fees at an insane rate.
The most surprising thing for me is that they are endorsed by Channel Fireball, one of the largest MTG stores in the US.
Why is that surprising? I’m assuming the real target demographics of those two companies overlap.
What big business wouldn’t want to quickly sell their high end cards for over market to an “investment group?” Haha
1 Like
This is essentially what wotc box breaks for packs on fb/insta are.
Not even close. Unless Mythic Markets is chopping the singles into pieces. Then I’m suddenly interested.
I wonder how big a piece you can get with a 1/2000 share lol
yikes