Free Updates

Let us tell you when new posts are added!

Email:

Navigation

Categories

Search

Archives

<March 2010>
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
28123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031123
45678910

More Links










# Monday, April 27, 2009
Industry Survey: Fewer Products At Lower Price Points
Posted by Tuff Stuff

The Hawaii Trade Conference (Mainland Edition held in Palm Harbor Fla.) was held last week, and among the speeches, seminars, etc., was a presentation by the University of Mississippi on the sports collecting hobby.

To no one's surprise, the survey found that collectors are spending less money on trading cards, that's in part to the current economic climate. But the study found that many collectors (60 percent in each case) didn't collect as much because of the higher costs of packs/boxes and a belief that the quality and content of the cards didn't equate to the price they were being asked to pay.
 
Again, this isn't earth-shattering, you'll find many of these same sentiments on the Tuff Stuff forums regarding box breaks, etc.

In the survey, of those who no longer collect cards, 70 percent of them said they might return to the hobby for new products if prices were lowered and there were fewer of them.

I can see manufacturers moaning about that one. You want us to produce less and lower the price? Just looking at it from a business sense, that wouldn't appease any bottom line.

This is the same thing collectors have been saying for quite some time, and manufacturers nod their head, make some tweaks, but still produce a lot of products and some real high-end ones at that. And they have to. Some collectors want that high-end product, and they will pay for that. You can't take that out of the market. But make sure a balance is attained so everyone can play in the game.

We'll have more from this survey in the weeks ahead, but I'd be interested in your comments on price points, quantity of product, etc.    



Monday, April 27, 2009 10:22:04 PM (GMT Daylight Time, UTC+01:00)  #  Comments [0]
Comments are closed.