IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v219y2024icp318-339.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market value of rarity: A theory of fair value and evidence from rare baseball cards

Author

Listed:
  • Ghazi, Soroush
  • Schneider, Mark

Abstract

We investigate the market value of rarity theoretically and empirically. Prior studies find that the market value of rarity follows a power law, but this finding lacks a theoretical foundation. We provide a micro-foundation for this finding, demonstrating that the observed power law emerges in a competitive market where agents have rank-dependent utility preferences. The model leads to two new theoretical insights: (i) the rank of an item within a set of close substitutes and the quantity of that item known to exist are both natural measures of rarity, but rank is predicted to perform better; (ii) there is a systematic relationship between the estimated slope and intercept from a regression of log price on log rank. When we test the model on data from over 4000 auction records of rare baseball cards, we find that a regression with only log rank and grading company explains 60% of the variation in log price.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghazi, Soroush & Schneider, Mark, 2024. "Market value of rarity: A theory of fair value and evidence from rare baseball cards," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 318-339.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:219:y:2024:i:c:p:318-339
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2024.01.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268124000222
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2024.01.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Diecidue, Enrico & Wakker, Peter P, 2001. "On the Intuition of Rank-Dependent Utility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 281-298, November.
    2. Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
    3. Mohammed Abdellaoui, 2002. "A Genuine Rank-Dependent Generalization of the Von Neumann-Morgenstern Expected Utility Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 717-736, March.
    4. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    5. Malcolm Baker & Jeffrey Wurgler, 2006. "Investor Sentiment and the Cross‐Section of Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1645-1680, August.
    6. Moldovanu, Benny & Sela, Aner & Shi, Xianwen, 2008. "Competing auctions with endogenous quantities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 1-27, July.
    7. Amin Mekacher & Alberto Bracci & Matthieu Nadini & Mauro Martino & Laura Alessandretti & Luca Maria Aiello & Andrea Baronchelli, 2022. "Heterogeneous rarity patterns drive price dynamics in NFT collections," Papers 2204.10243, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    8. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    9. Xavier Gabaix, 2009. "Power Laws in Economics and Finance," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 255-294, May.
    10. Bernheim, B Douglas, 1994. "A Theory of Conformity," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(5), pages 841-877, October.
    11. Julien Pénasse & Luc Renneboog, 2022. "Speculative Trading and Bubbles: Evidence from the Art Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 4939-4963, July.
    12. Erik Eyster & Kristóf Madarász & Pascal Michaillat, 2021. "Pricing Under Fairness Concerns," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(3), pages 1853-1898.
    13. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard, 1986. "Fairness as a Constraint on Profit Seeking: Entitlements in the Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 728-741, September.
    14. Segal, Uzi, 1988. "Does the Preference Reversal Phenomenon Necessarily Contradict the Independence Axiom?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(1), pages 233-236, March.
    15. Yeonjoon Lee, 2022. "Measuring the impact of rarity on price: evidence from NBA Top Shot," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 485-498, September.
    16. Stefano Lovo & Christophe Spaenjers, 2018. "A Model of Trading in the Art Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(3), pages 744-774, March.
    17. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, 2005. "Back to the St. Petersburg Paradox?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(4), pages 677-678, April.
    18. Jianan Liu & Tobias J. Moskowitz & Robert F. Stambaugh, 2021. "Pricing Without Mispricing," NBER Working Papers 29016, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Olivier L’Haridon & Horst Zank, 2010. "Separating curvature and elevation: A parametric probability weighting function," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 39-65, August.
    20. Samuel Cameron & Hendrik Sonnabend, 2020. "Pricing the Groove: hedonic equation estimates for rare vinyl records," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(50), pages 5516-5530, October.
    21. Koford, Kenneth & Tschoegl, Adrian E., 1998. "The market value of rarity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 445-457, March.
    22. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Olivier l’Haridon & Horst Zank, 2009. "Separating Curvature and Elevation: A Parametric Weighting Function," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0901, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthew D. Rablen, 2023. "Loss Aversion, Risk Aversion, and the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function," Working Papers 2023013, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.
    2. Dean, Mark & Ortoleva, Pietro, 2017. "Allais, Ellsberg, and preferences for hedging," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), January.
    3. Epper, Thomas & Fehr-Duda, Helga, 2017. "A Tale of Two Tails: On the Coexistence of Overweighting and Underweighting of Rare Extreme Events," Economics Working Paper Series 1705, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    4. Aluma Dembo & Shachar Kariv & Matthew Polisson & John Quah, 2021. "Ever since Allais," IFS Working Papers W21/15, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    5. Wakker, Peter P. & Zank, Horst, 2002. "A simple preference foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1253-1271, July.
    6. Rablen, Matthew D., 2019. "Foundations of the Rank-Dependent Probability Weighting Function," IZA Discussion Papers 12701, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Martina Nardon & Paolo Pianca, 2019. "Behavioral premium principles," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 42(1), pages 229-257, June.
    8. Thomas Epper & Helga Fehr-Duda, 2012. "The missing link: unifying risk taking and time discounting," ECON - Working Papers 096, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Oct 2018.
    9. Dennery, Charles & Direr, Alexis, 2014. "Optimal lottery," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 15-23.
    10. Katarzyna M. Werner & Horst Zank, 2019. "A revealed reference point for prospect theory," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(4), pages 731-773, June.
    11. Martina Nardon & Paolo Pianca, 2019. "European option pricing under cumulative prospect theory with constant relative sensitivity probability weighting functions," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 249-274, February.
    12. Francesco Cesarone & Massimiliano Corradini & Lorenzo Lampariello & Jessica Riccioni, 2023. "A new behavioral model for portfolio selection using the Half-Full/Half-Empty approach," Papers 2312.10749, arXiv.org.
    13. Webb, Craig S. & Zank, Horst, 2011. "Accounting for optimism and pessimism in expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 706-717.
    14. Meng, Jingyi & Webb, Craig S. & Zank, Horst, 2024. "Mixture independence foundations for expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    15. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Olivier L’Haridon & Horst Zank, 2010. "Separating curvature and elevation: A parametric probability weighting function," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 39-65, August.
    16. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Horst Zank, 2023. "Source and rank-dependent utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 949-981, May.
    17. Michal Skořepa, 2007. "Zpochybnění deskriptivnosti teorie očekávaného užitku [Doubts about the descriptive validity of the expected utility theory]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2007(1), pages 106-120.
    18. Peter Brooks & Simon Peters & Horst Zank, 2014. "Risk behavior for gain, loss, and mixed prospects," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 153-182, August.
    19. Li, Baibing & Hensher, David A., 2017. "Risky weighting in discrete choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1-21.
    20. Bahaji, Hamza & Casta, Jean-François, 2016. "Employee stock option-implied risk attitude under Rank-Dependent Expected Utility," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 144-154.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Rarity; Rank dependent utility; Baseball cards; Power laws; Zipf's law;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D00 - Microeconomics - - General - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:219:y:2024:i:c:p:318-339. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jebo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.