To me the cardboard version is far dumber. The fact that you think there’s an actual reason that it isn’t dumb is mind boggling.
And yeah honestly sorry for the amount of messages about this. Don’t think you can derail a LC thread, but it’s def spammy.
Yuv, what sort of time frame are you thinking for these things having value? That seems pretty relevant. I expect rare physical baseball cards from today will still have significant value in 100+ years. Do you expect the same for a gif with a magic ownership code?
More room for spaghettio pie is always good, that’s what I always say
I have no idea. Which is why i’m not going to invest anything into it. I find the idea interesting. And unlike ““real”” baseball cards, the entry point is much easier.
Again, Playtika is a company that makes online casino where you cannot win any real money ever but you pay real money to play. They are now worth more than any live casino in the world (even before the pandemic).
There is a huge increase in the cardboard cards market in the last year. If I had to guess which hobby will be worth 100x more in 2020, I wouldn’t have guessed collecting sports cards, which I didn’t even know still exists. I think both real and digital bubbles will burst soon.
If this is a simulation I wonder what it’s worth.
Thanks goofy.
Amateur-hour threadnaming ITT, I swear.
why am i getting notifications on every posts now?
The burden of being the OP.
But I think that’s the most important question. They clearly have ephemeral, transitory “value”. However, that is distinct from meaningful value. You’re arguing their case from the former POV, while the detractors are mostly referring to the latter.
Yuv owns the digital thing now.
thanks. it was terrifying
of course that’s the important question. I just don’t think it’s impossible that it does. Maybe not this specific company or this specific iteration of digital collectables, but it won’t surprise me if an improved version of this stay relevant in the long term.
Also look at mr smarty pants with his big words.
no
but your understanding of my arguments is the equivalent of saying that a mass produced mike trout card is the same is a Picasso.
It appears so. I’m still baffled as to what you don’t understand here.
I was explaining part of the gamification aspect of the collectables. Certain cards cannot be found in packs. You have to finish a certain set and you receive a ‘special card’ for doing so.
You were appalled and said it’s so stupid that you cannot possibly imagine the idea of completing a series to get a special reward. Which is kinda the basic of like a million successful billion dollar games.
That’s the WHAT part in my question.
I literally explained that it is part of the game I’m talking about. I explained that I sold my Tobias Harris card for $120 because it is needed to complete that series and get the Doncic card. That’s the reason that specific card was valuable.
Not searching for it. If I didn’t explain it correctly I appologize. There’s plenty of gamification in the app/site, but still lots of things that can be done. As a product manager who only worked in gaming in my life, I find the potential of this huge and very interesting.
It might burn out too quickly from overly eager crypto traders, but the principle itself is interesting imo and it was interesting to me the second I’ve heard of it. Which was quite a few million dollars ago in the old days of last week.
If people are willing to give real value to digital collectables, there is so much that can be done in this field in terms of engagement and gamification. If AIF is right and there isn’t any, it will die out.
Maybe, or maybe it will be worth 5 million dollars and you get an extra Mike Trout card if you buy one.
To me digital cards hold 100% of all the qualities of a cardboard card with an infinite amount of added possible values.
The fact that baseball cards do not have any of these features isn’t by design. It’s like admiring the lack of colors on your grandparents TV. There’s nothing “beautiful” about Mike Trout baseball card. It’s ugly as fuck. It’s cheaply and poorly made. There are 500000 versions of it. We just collectively agreed that a certain cheaply and poorly made card is worth more due to semi arbitrary reasons.
Which is whole fine and dandy. Just still not in anyway impossible to mimic in a digital version (I mean, AFI argues it is impossible to mimic, I disagree).
It shouldn’t “change a lot” for you. It’s just an upgraded version of different things you can do with collectibles. It’s amazing to me that you don’t see the parallels to low-tech things that kids have already been doing with cards since 1900s.
fwiw, 0% of Mike Trout card value comes from the fact that card is pretty, or even extremely rare. The Trout card was bought for 400k in 2018 and sold for 4m in 2020.
The only reason it is that desirable is because it’s serial 1. Exactly the same reason that Lebron James digital card went for that price. There are tens of thousands of different Mike Trout cards.
This is why all your Picasso arguments are proving my exact point. Trout cards hold absolutely no aesthetic value. Identical card with someone else’s face on cost $4 on ebay right now (https://www.ebay.com/itm/2009-Bowman-Chrome-Draft-Prospects-Autographs-Reymond-Fuentes-BDPP83-/143684556337). Only the random number and success of the player photographed dictate the price.
It’s weird to set up a collectibles where getting the “whole set” actually matters. Pokemon, Yugioh, Magic…you just want the good cards. You get no added value by having the shitty ones. Why go through that trouble?
they aren’t shitty cards in that realm. they are really good cards. there are plenty of shitty cards that you can’t sell for a $1. The only pack i bought had 1 good card (the Harris one), 1 decent card (Obi Toppin rookie card) and 3 random shitty common cards.