RallyRd - that old idea about partial ownership of comics is a reality (updated July 21, 2021) 6 6

[D84]

1 minute ago, Buzzetta said:

Again, I could think of multiple ways to commit fraud under this game. 

No! This is all obviously above board.🤣🤣🤣

[Buzzetta]

21 minutes ago, D84 said:

No! This is all obviously above board.🤣🤣🤣

Of course. 

[Gatsby77]

Ain't no fraud like securities fraud!

 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Gatsby77

[Mythic Markets]

On 7/24/2020 at 10:01 PM, TheGeneral said:

Wow, I hadn't heard of Rallyrd before. Seems like this type of business model is unfortunately becoming more popular with collectibles.

A while back I was reading about another fractional share investment company called Mythic Markets (https://mythicmarkets.com/marketplace). I haven't checked their website in a while, but it looks like they are currently selling shares of an AF 15 graded at 7.0. They were doing Magic the Gathering related shares and there was a lot of discussion on Reddit about their legitimacy. Here's a link to a thread made by the co-founder: https://old.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/gx6c5f/im_the_cofounder_ceo_of_mythic_markets_ama/?sort=top

Hi, I'm Joe, the co-founder & CEO of Mythic Markets.  One of our Amazing Fantasy #15 investors referred me to this thread.

It's clear there's a lot of questions about how alternative investment platforms like ours work and, while I can only speak for Mythic Markets, I'd be happy to start a thread to answer them.

[dikran]

21 hours ago, Mythic Markets said:

Hi, I'm Joe, the co-founder & CEO of Mythic Markets.  One of our Amazing Fantasy #15 investors referred me to this thread.

It's clear there's a lot of questions about how alternative investment platforms like ours work and, while I can only speak for Mythic Markets, I'd be happy to start a thread to answer them.

[vheflin]

On 7/29/2020 at 8:43 PM, Gatsby77 said:

Ain't no fraud like securities fraud!

 

When combining the worlds of securities and comic books, are the endemic shenanigans in both worlds additive or multiplicative?

[bc]

Just now, vheflin said:

When combining the worlds of securities and comic books, are the endemic shenanigans in both worlds additive or multiplicative?

Exponential.

[vheflin]

Just now, bc said:

Exponential.

shenanigans to the power of chicanery

[GM8]

23 hours ago, Mythic Markets said:

Hi, I'm Joe, the co-founder & CEO of Mythic Markets.  One of our Amazing Fantasy #15 investors referred me to this thread.

It's clear there's a lot of questions about how alternative investment platforms like ours work and, while I can only speak for Mythic Markets, I'd be happy to start a thread to answer them.

I only see AF 15 7.0 on your site. What other books do you have?

How is ownership structured differently than RallyRd?>

[LordRahl]

On 7/25/2020 at 8:30 AM, blazingbob said:

The last 9.8 sale of a TMNT #1 9.8 is $52,800 so based on $65k you are at 20% markup.

 

Why would only the last sale matter? Do you price YOUR books solely on the last sale price achieved? Of course you don't. Just because the last sale for TMNT 1 was $52K does not mean that is the FMV of the book. Just like when it sold for $95K or whatever that crazy price was last year, that didn't mean that was its FMV either. There is no one fixed price for ANY book in any grade. So it's difficult to say that they are marking it up by 20%.

[Gatsby77]

15 hours ago, LordRahl said:

Why would only the last sale matter? Do you price YOUR books solely on the last sale price achieved? Of course you don't. Just because the last sale for TMNT 1 was $52K does not mean that is the FMV of the book. Just like when it sold for $95K or whatever that crazy price was last year, that didn't mean that was its FMV either. There is no one fixed price for ANY book in any grade. So it's difficult to say that they are marking it up by 20%.

Except:

1) Last sales indicate trends - whether the book is trending up or down. And books are obviously worth more or less immediately after outlier sales, be they positive or negative.

2) If we are trusting share prices, FMV is absolutely contingent on the last sale price. The main difference is with actual NASDAQ- or NYSE-traded shares, they're accurate to the last sales price within the last minute or so, not every 12 weeks.

The reality is, 98% of comics out there don't have the sales volume to judge a truly accurate value - so every single sale price matters. 

ASM 300 does - it's got dozens of GPA-recorded sales per month in 9.8 alone.

But what about Amazing Fantasy 15 in CGC 8.0? GPA shows just three sales in the last three years - each for less than the last. The book's arguably worth less than it was in 2018. Full stop.

Further validating that, it's also shown a downward trend in 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 6.0 and 7.5.

Not enough info for the higher grades, as there are only two recorded sales in 8.5+ over the entire last three years.

[lou_fine]

18 hours ago, LordRahl said:

On 7/25/2020 at 8:30 AM, blazingbob said:

The last 9.8 sale of a TMNT #1 9.8 is $52,800 so based on $65k you are at 20% markup.

 

Why would only the last sale matter? Do you price YOUR books solely on the last sale price achieved? Of course you don't. Just because the last sale for TMNT 1 was $52K does not mean that is the FMV of the book. Just like when it sold for $95K or whatever that crazy price was last year, that didn't mean that was its FMV either. There is no one fixed price for ANY book in any grade. So it's difficult to say that they are marking it up by 20%.

Yes, especially when the last 2 sales for this book were actually for $59K for this RallyRd copy back in March of this year while CL had their copy sell for $58K a few weeks ago.  

The $52,800 sale which Bob and most boardies seem to be referring to here actually took place back in November of 2019 in a HA Signature Auction.  

[lou_fine]

2 hours ago, Gatsby77 said:

The reality is, 98% of comics out there don't have the sales volume to judge a truly accurate value

This is especially true and most definitely the case when it comes to GA books which simply don't sell often enough in order to guage a truly accurate value with full confidence. 

Edited August 1, 2020 by lou_fine

[telerites]

22 hours ago, GM8 said:

I only see AF 15 7.0 on your site. What other books do you have?

How is ownership structured differently than RallyRd?>

You probably saw it but there were a couple of Magic: the Gathering offerings that are sold out which along with the AF 15 show under "See all offerings."   I didn't sign up to see the coming  soon offering but it has a MTG heading so assume AF 15 is all for comic books right now but @Mythic Markets can verify along with the other query.

[bb8]

I don't think people are getting the gist of what's going on here. I honestly don't think this business model is designed to sell the actual asset once obtained. The company sells fractional shares of a desirable, unobtainable otherwise asset, obtains the asset, and then sits on it and allows fractional owners to buy and sell their stake. The allure to the investor is having stake in something they could not otherwise obtain. The overall value of the comic after it's purchased doesn't really matter. What matters is how badly someone will want their little piece. And every 90 days they'll be able to trade in a certain window set by the company.

What I don't understand is how the company is going to monetize trading. Initially, sure, they take the leftover money after the book is purchased. Financial markets make money by charging a transaction fee to buyers. I'm assuming running the market would have costs associated, but RallyRd has said they don't do that. Maybe they will in the future? It's zero now but as it gets popular (they hope) they'll be able to charge?

Bottom line is that the draw is partial ownership. The asset's overall value is not important unless the comic is sold. Who gets to decide that? RallRD / Mythic Markets or some majority of shareholders? That I'm not sure.

Now, having said this I think this is a stupid investment vehicle. The asset produces nothing and has no intrinsic value. Public companies, though flawed, produce goods and/or services and provide employment for many, many people; and gold at least has intrinsic, anciently-established value. That said, the books sitting in my collection do nothing either. But at least I hold them and can make sweet, sweet love to them. More importantly, I have final say over whether I want to sell them.

[LordRahl]

16 hours ago, Gatsby77 said:

Except:

1) Last sales indicate trends - whether the book is trending up or down. And books are obviously worth more or less immediately after outlier sales, be they positive or negative.

2) If we are trusting share prices, FMV is absolutely contingent on the last sale price. The main difference is with actual NASDAQ- or NYSE-traded shares, they're accurate to the last sales price within the last minute or so, not every 12 weeks.

The reality is, 98% of comics out there don't have the sales volume to judge a truly accurate value - so every single sale price matters. 

ASM 300 does - it's got dozens of GPA-recorded sales per month in 9.8 alone.

But what about Amazing Fantasy 15 in CGC 8.0? GPA shows just three sales in the last three years - each for less than the last. The book's arguably worth less than it was in 2018. Full stop.

Further validating that, it's also shown a downward trend in 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 6.0 and 7.5.

Not enough info for the higher grades, as there are only two recorded sales in 8.5+ over the entire last three years.

I'm not sure why you are answering my post with what appears to be an argument against what I'm saying when your post completely agrees with me if you read what I wrote.

Your assertion that "The reality is, 98% of comics out there don't have the sales volume to judge a truly accurate value." = "There is no one fixed price for ANY book in any grade." (my original post)

From your post "so every single sale price matters". I agree and that is exactly what I'm saying in my post. My whole point is that using ONLY the last sale isn't an accurate depiction of FMV and the sales prior to that should figure into it as well.

Of course there are price trends with books, not sure where in my post you see anything to the contrary. The more I type this out, the more I think you didn't really read what I wrote and you were responding to what you projected as being my meaning. 

[blazingbob]

7 hours ago, LordRahl said:

I'm not sure why you are answering my post with what appears to be an argument against what I'm saying when your post completely agrees with me if you read what I wrote.

Your assertion that "The reality is, 98% of comics out there don't have the sales volume to judge a truly accurate value." = "There is no one fixed price for ANY book in any grade." (my original post)

From your post "so every single sale price matters". I agree and that is exactly what I'm saying in my post. My whole point is that using ONLY the last sale isn't an accurate depiction of FMV and the sales prior to that should figure into it as well.

Of course there are price trends with books, not sure where in my post you see anything to the contrary. The more I type this out, the more I think you didn't really read what I wrote and you were responding to what you projected as being my meaning. 

So what are you proposing be used to "Mark to Market" which is what most companies do when they have to report earnings and own other company stock?  90 day/120.  

[batman_fan]

1 hour ago, blazingbob said:

So what are you proposing be used to "Mark to Market" which is what most companies do when they have to report earnings and own other company stock?  90 day/120.  

Sure, report it the same but put confidence intervals on the numbers based on the number of transactions.  Based on the number of transactions for comics, the error bars will be quite large.

[D84]

1 minute ago, batman_fan said:

Sure, report it the same but put confidence intervals on the numbers based on the number of transactions.  Based on the number of transactions for comics, the error bars will be quite large.

Yeah, this all seems legit.🤣🤣🤣

[Kryptic1]

21 hours ago, bb8 said:

I don't think people are getting the gist of what's going on here. I honestly don't think this business model is designed to sell the actual asset once obtained. The company sells fractional shares of a desirable, unobtainable otherwise asset, obtains the asset, and then sits on it and allows fractional owners to buy and sell their stake.

This is the one of the problems with the business model.  The shareholders of the assets will want RallyRd to hold the asset forever while we buy and sell shares, but most of RallyRd’s revenue comes from the sale of the asset.  If you look at the SEC filing, their only revenue from the purchase is a sourcing fee that is usually less than 3%.  The rest of the money goes to the cost of the book and expenses related to the offering.  They make no money off the trading of the shares.  They front the money for all storage, security, insurance, and administrative costs and they only collect on that when they sell the book.  When you buy shares in a book, you are taking on a liability for an unknown amount of accrued expenses that will be paid when they choose to sell the book.  Would you buy shares at a premium to the market value of the book knowing that it can be sold at any time for market value minus expenses?

I like the idea of fractional ownership, but the goal has to be to keep the overhead as low as possible.  These aren’t income-generating assets, so every dollar of expense lowers your return.