I know people who like to buy multiple packs of Yu-Gi-Oh or Magic cards, open them right at the counter, and trade back any rares they get. One of my friends who does this also likes to claim he has no interest in gambling, but it seems rather hypocritical to me. Is opening blind card packs to hopefully cash in on rares really that much different from dumping money down a slot machine or playing the horses?
What you’re describing is similar to buying unopened packs of, say, vintage baseball cards and hoping to find a valuable one.
As long as “worthless” cards are being kept rather than going straight into the trash, as with scratch-off lottery games that don’t win anything, IMO it’s not gambling.
It’s more like pay to win. However, the limited number of cards available means that when competition gets to the point that money can be won or lost, access to even the most rare cars won’t affect who wins.
It is basically gambling but it skirts the law very closely. That is why companies like Wizards of the Coast always talk about “trading” and almost never about the secondary market. It’s also one one of the reasons the booster packs for Magic have odds for foils printed on them.
Many aspects of life are gambles, playing with odds, hoping for better outcomes. Every pedestrian crosswalk stroll is a gamble. Any casserole I bake is a gamble. Buying a used book… hay, it may be infested with disease microbes! Buying mystery bags like these card decks or those collections of jumbled electronic components are gambles.
What gambles are subject to regulation? Anything at a casino, sure. Office pools. Back-alley crap shoots. And?
Buying “trading” cards in hope of finding one that others may value looks to me more like “Is there a bad egg in the carton?” than “Can I throw snake-eyes?” or “Will the ball land on black?” Just an ordinary risk. Besides, the cards are cute.
It’s more speculation than gambling. If the seller had a sign saying, “We will pay (insert amount here) for (insert a specific card here),” then it might be considered gambling, but as long as there is no guarantee that the card will be bought back, it’s not gambling.
I can see how it can be compared to buying lottery tickets. But I can also see how it can be compared to buying stocks. The line between gambling and investing can be very thin.
Related side-note:
When Magic: the Gathering (the first collectible card game) was first introduced, in the early '90s, one of the aspects of the game was the “ante.” At the start of a game, each player was to shuffle their deck, then flip over the top card of their deck – that card was the player’s ante (or stakes) for the game, and the winner of the game would receive the loser’s ante card.
The ante rule was fairly quickly removed from the game, in part because some cards quickly gained value on the secondary market (and, thus, many players didn’t like the prospect of potentially losing a valuable card to another player through the ante), but also in part because of concerns that the ante did represent actual gambling, and would potentially put players in violation of local gambling laws.
Magic: The Gathering has a very robust and well-developed secondary market, with standard price lists for every card. There basically isn’t any hobby shop that won’t buy back rares. Even if, for some weird reason, your local shop won’t buy your rares, you can easily sell them online. Effectively, there is a guarantee that someone will pay (insert amount here) for (insert a specific card here).
Still, I’m with Skywatcher on this. It isn’t really gambling, if the buyer is actually keeping the other cards in the pack. I have friends who do exactly this. They love MtG, and love playing it as a casual game, but hate competitive tournament play. So, they don’t really care that much about rares. They’ll buy packs, sell back any particularly valuable cards, and keep the rest to build their decks for casual play. They don’t buy the packs to gamble on the rare cars, but they get enough rares to sell back that the hobby effectively pays for itself.
Although, right from the start, ante was considered an optional rule, and most players opted not to use it (in all of my time playing, I only played for ante twice). Though it seems to have been treated as the default, since the cards that interact with the ante rule all say “Remove this card from your deck if you are not playing for ante”, not “you may add this card to your deck if you are playing for ante”.
They do still have tournaments with entry fees and prizes for the winners, though. If ante games are gambling, it’s hard to see how those aren’t (both being based on the outcome of a game of skill).
Definitely seems like a form of gambling to me. It is clearly a “roll of the dice”. You pay money and you may end up with something worthless or a potential windfall. The plausible deniability is that the seller can say that whatever happens you do end up with a material item in your hand.
Just like the “loot boxes” in some games. If you don’t know what you are going to get for your cash, and if you can’t even calculate the odds of a potential outcome then it seems like an even more opaque propostion than a roulette wheel.
My experience with CCGs like Magic is that, once the list of cards and their rarities is known, it’d be pretty straightforward to calculate the odds of getting a particular card in a particular pack, since each pack has a set number of cards of the various rarity levels.
Are the sellers in any way obligated to engage in these trade backs? If that’s gambling it’s the worst casino on earth. I tend to stay away from casinos that only pay out on wins if they feel like it.
I do not believe so. Though, if one decides that one wants to trade / sell back some rare cards immediately upon opening packs (as per the OP), one would likely be choosing to buy packs at a store which deals in “singles,” and is willing to buy back at least certain (i.e., more popular/valuable) rare cards.
I think the fact that the pedestrian can strongly influence the odds (by looking for traffic) argues against this.
Yes, the chance of a favorable outcome is never 100%. But the fact that with the right approach you can expect to go through your whole life without a single “loss” means it’s probably outside the realm of gambling.
I would tend to disagree. I think these things are better described as risks rather than gambles.
If I am crossing the street or baking a casserole or buying a book, I have a reasonable expectation that I will achieve the goal I am striving for. I acknowledge there is some chance of failure but it’s generally negligible. And I really don’t expect to achieve more than I set out to do by these actions.
A gamble is when I recognize I have a good chance of failing. But I also have some chance of coming out ahead of where I started from. So I am willing to accept the chance of failing in order to have the chance of gaining.
More importantly, gambling has a winner and a loser, somebody comes out ahead according to an agreed upon rule. If you get hit by a car crossing the street nobody comes out ahead, nothing is agreed upon before hand.
In some circumstance ‘gamble’ and ‘risk’ are used synonymously but that’s obviously not what the OP is talking about.
Sure, if the rarity is published and the odds can be calculated then it is a straighforward gamble. My question would be, are the rarities known and published? or are they just assumed? Can the manufacturers alter that rarity at will?
The rarities of the individual cards are not only known, they’re marked directly on the cards themselves in color-coded symbols. And the packs are advertised as containing certain numbers of common, uncommon, and rare cards (with a chance that the rare card might instead be an even rarer “mythic rare”). The fact that all cards of a given rarity are equally likely, and the odds of a rare being instead a mythic rare, might take a little more searching, but neither is exactly a secret.
A card might be reprinted in a later set with a different rarity, but in that case, the new rarity will likewise be known, and any given pack will only contain cards from one known set.
“A person engages in gambling if he stakes or risks something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance or a future contingent event not under his control or influence, upon an agreement or understanding that he or someone else will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome. Gambling does not include bona fide business transactions valid under the law of contracts, such as the purchase or sale at a future date of securities or commodities, contracts of indemnity or guaranty and life, health or accident insurance.”
Buying Magic cards seems to fall under the umbrella of “bona fide business transactions valid under the law of contracts“. Legally speaking it doesn’t resemble gambling.