Firstly, this is purely an observation and definitely not levelled at anybody in particular - genuinely.
We've all seen prices for vintage rise and reach some crazy (in historical terms) heights. It's a separate discussion as to whether this is an unsustainable bubble or the effect of one of the greatest icons of pop culture coinciding with it's generation coming of age financially, but I have noticed that 'collecting' seems to be changing.
Collecting seems to have become transient and almost a temporary store of wealth, like a savings account, rather than a 'collection'. Of course we've all sold things to make way (or pay for) another purchase, but the high prices paid lately seem to have made this even more commonplace, with items changing hands quickly as the owner (who paid a small fortune) appears to have been forced to move the item on in order to buy something else. And it then moves to another temporary custodian, who does the same thing in a few months time - each time perpetuating the high prices, but being unable to afford to keep the item because of them.
Someone on facebook summed this up when talking about a run of unreleased Droids/Ewoks protos. A buyer had paid a small fortune and destroyed a carded sample to achieve the run. Now the owner has 100k (or more) invested, it became too expensive to keep for any length of time, and the run was broken up. This has happened many times in many areas of collecting and is understandable. That proof run, or palitoy set, prototype example or whatever is now worth more than many people's cars - it is understandable that they aren't locked up forever and the money effectively 'spent' as most people simply can't look at an expenditure in that way.
There can't be that many people who can afford to 'spend' multiple thousands on toys. However, many more people do have the ability to raise that money for a temporary period (maybe from debt, taking it from the mortgage, or maybe just not saving) to own something temporarily - even if they aren't admitting it to themselves.
So, are we guilty of perpetuating our own problems here by being sucked into spending more than 'disposable' money on our collections? I think the answer is probably 'yes', although the alternative is to not own anything new and effectively stop collecting! It's a funny old world.
We've all seen prices for vintage rise and reach some crazy (in historical terms) heights. It's a separate discussion as to whether this is an unsustainable bubble or the effect of one of the greatest icons of pop culture coinciding with it's generation coming of age financially, but I have noticed that 'collecting' seems to be changing.
Collecting seems to have become transient and almost a temporary store of wealth, like a savings account, rather than a 'collection'. Of course we've all sold things to make way (or pay for) another purchase, but the high prices paid lately seem to have made this even more commonplace, with items changing hands quickly as the owner (who paid a small fortune) appears to have been forced to move the item on in order to buy something else. And it then moves to another temporary custodian, who does the same thing in a few months time - each time perpetuating the high prices, but being unable to afford to keep the item because of them.
Someone on facebook summed this up when talking about a run of unreleased Droids/Ewoks protos. A buyer had paid a small fortune and destroyed a carded sample to achieve the run. Now the owner has 100k (or more) invested, it became too expensive to keep for any length of time, and the run was broken up. This has happened many times in many areas of collecting and is understandable. That proof run, or palitoy set, prototype example or whatever is now worth more than many people's cars - it is understandable that they aren't locked up forever and the money effectively 'spent' as most people simply can't look at an expenditure in that way.
There can't be that many people who can afford to 'spend' multiple thousands on toys. However, many more people do have the ability to raise that money for a temporary period (maybe from debt, taking it from the mortgage, or maybe just not saving) to own something temporarily - even if they aren't admitting it to themselves.
So, are we guilty of perpetuating our own problems here by being sucked into spending more than 'disposable' money on our collections? I think the answer is probably 'yes', although the alternative is to not own anything new and effectively stop collecting! It's a funny old world.