bclarkie wrote:So in other words you are saying you are only purchasing them for finacial investment and no other reason. That goes to the root of the concerns relayed then. Being that there only 26 of them, if limiting the amount of copies of the Runic ones to one(or perhaps two) per person should not limit the investment you are putting into it, unless the product itself is already very deep in trouble.
mbassoc2003 wrote:I am an investor. I would not dream of playing with my Runic copy. I have bought a numberred copy which I can open and read. That makes perfect sence, and I imagine everyone who has bought a Runic copy has done the same thing.
mbassoc2003 wrote:I can see that it is a right place right time system, and that is annoying if you aren't there. But who knows where we will all be the next time.
bclarkie wrote:BTW Ian, I just sent you an email with a pic that I promised you awhile ago. Let me know if its okay.
Gradek wrote:What really matters for future value is going to be the quality of the product.
Gradek wrote:What really matters for future value is going to be the quality of the product. If this recreates 1st edition adventuring to its pure form, it will be valuable and sell other modules. If it is crap, no one will buy the others and this will fall into obscurity. My belief is that Rob in fact can recapture 1982, but I only bought one copy, as I am more of a gamer than collector.
mbassoc2003 wrote:That is not proven out. Many of the rare and valuable D&D products are rare and valuable because they are crap. No-one bought them at the time.
killjoy32 wrote:absolutely correct. some of the biggest rares are a little pile of sh*te. i have runic copies and for me, i couldnt care less if they have future value or not. i bought them because i support the effort.to me, they will have more meaning than just potential value.Al
mbassoc2003 wrote:That's just 'cos you earn so much doing our regular job.