>>55401698>the newer card is better in every wayIf we ignore everything I said about my aesthetic preferences; the embarrassing Grimace-ification of Gengar; the scarcity that age and condition grants older cards; and so on, I guess you could make that argument.
>The new gen of card collectors don't have that sentimentality to vintage so why would they ever see those cards as better than modern ones?Because they're older, because they're the first cards and will always be the first cards, and because they'll be harder to find in decent shape than modern cards. Older items tend to increase in value more than newer items -- this seems to be a general principle in all other collectors hobbies (including your own example, baseball cards), so I don't see why this wouldn't be the case here.
>Do young baseball card collectors care about random pre-1980s baseball cards? I don't think baseball is analogous to Pokemon. There's a lot of churn in baseball that's not really present in Pokemon (and inasmuch as it exists in Pokemon, it primarily affects newer generations). There are no-name players in baseball who might be barely relevant for a single season or two, players die off, and so on. With Pokemon, if you're a fan of Porygon or Slowbro or Espeon or whatever, there's always this direct line of provenance leading back to these old, original cards.
But I can't really speak to the tendencies of young Pokémon card collectors. I don't know if, as younger generations age into the workforce and disposable income, they go back into the history of their hobby (like, do zoomers collect Base-Neo sets, or do they start at the EX era or something?). If there's some data on this, I'd like to see it.
I also have no idea if, as gen alpha ages out of Pokemon, we'll see the same massive dip in Modern prices that we saw with Vintage when it was the same age. For all I know, given the massive print volumes of these past few sets, we might be in the beginning of Pokemon's "junk wax" age
