nothing
the new generations aren't collectors as we were when we were their age in part because they aren't interested in history and artistic endeavor is decreasing in our population in favor of the Faux-celebrity trend that works it's way down to school age children and teens as "I have the new iPhone.. I'm the celebrity in class the next 3 days"
they buy expensive sneakers and new tablets instead of when we bought comics & posters & actual record albums.
other than these expensive toys, they want free stuff.. like all the music they don't pay royalties for
Hmm. Ok, you grabbed my attention with this comment. But not in a positive way. It does exhibit the most sweeping of misplaced generalisations.
If one accepts that a certain percentage of the population 'collects', and that the population, worldwide, increases, then that would assume the number of collectors is increasing. So, if they are understood to Not be looking at posters (in the most intra niche forms of assessment possible), then this would still suggest the collectors are collecting elsewhere.
A person who buys the latest in something (sneakers / tablets) is so totally not the same person who collects genres, sets, artefacts, history, art. He may do it as well as, but not instead of. So I think my question still stands. If not posters, then what?
My mother is hugely into antiques, but she accepts that what she bought 20 years ago will fetch only a fraction of what she bought it for. She knows and understands that there is an element of fashion, even amongst the old and used. But she notes the sway in her particular field. I am not sure that what the dealers are experiencing is anything other than an economic decline the world over for superfluous spending.
Happy to be proved wrong, but not with 'early adopters' arguments.
