Comments on: (Part 2) The Cost of Legacy – How we got here, where we’re going, and why it matters

By: @torerotutor

@torerotutor — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 09:03:56 +0000

i'm on board with all of this 100%. Looking forward to your follow up after the format changes.

By: Sean

Sean — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 08:49:21 +0000

Yes, however, it's harder to move a hundred commons or uncommons, which means that the time spend making that money is greater, so your value is–usually–lower. Best to leave the volume purchases to the big stores.

Not that small stores can't get in on stuff like that, but individual traders may find it hard to move a hundred cards that likely are role-players that will rise or fall based on geographic location and popularity of a given archetype. Additionally, those cheaper cards are more volatile when it comes to rounding off values in trades.

That's one reason why I don't mind consolidating some value in traders–trading up, essentially–and a good many players will even feel like they're getting too much even when they're trading "down." One of the interesting things mythic rarity does to the format is increase those price disparities, for better and worse.

By: Ryan Bushard

Ryan Bushard — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 07:09:41 +0000

I like it, I would also mention possible commons and uncommons that have seen price shifts remember picking up 100 copies of a card that increases 2 dollars is the same as picking up 10 copes that increase 20 dollars. Safer gambles and can honestly create larger profits since they are easier to pick up.