The big difference is that those toys were being bought by parents for their kids to play with, which is an entirely different context from an adult buying toys for themselves and then never taking them out the box. I'm sure people like that existed at the time, by the mid-90s it was at least well-known enough for the bad guy in Toy Story 2 to be one (which is a good indication of how such people were seen by the regular public).
As others have pointed out, though, those adults who buy those toys for their collections take good care of them. That, or those who don't take them out of the box are probably looking to sell them one day, because mint figures sell for more than regular figures that you've taken out of the box and played with.
They're either scalping, or creating their own museums, far different from CONSOOMERS who buy stuff because of the hype then throw most of the stuff in the trash when the hype dies down.
I think it mostly boils down to your reasons for acquiring these items. Perhaps a better way to word that would be "justifications". Can you state an actual reason related to investment or productivity? Can you state how this helps your life? Or are you just buying them because everyone else bought them?
If you ask a lot of people why they're choosing to see a new movie, they will unironically tell you "because everyone else is seeing it". They're buying Funko Pops because "everyone else is buying it". THAT is a consoomer.
It's also possible to have phases of consooming for various reasons. During the middle of lockdowns I started getting obsessed with mechanical keyboard autism, making the "perfect home office" and spending way, way more than I should. I've been miserly for my entirely life, and this was the first time I just didn't give a shit that I was shelling out so much. I had the money and didn't hurt from spending it, but there was absolutely no justifiable reason to spend that much (especially on a fucking keyboard).
As time went on though I realized I was falling deeper into pretty severe anxiety and eventually actual depression. My brain was desperately searching for something to keep it busy beyond just working. As soon as I realized that's what was happening, I promptly snapped out of it.
Do you invest yourself into the community, go to conventions, or have an in-depth idea of what you like? Are you willing to explore what makes the medium interesting;talk to others about it?
I think it mostly boils down to your reasons for acquiring these items. Perhaps a better way to word that would be "justifications". Can you state an actual reason related to investment or productivity? Can you state how this helps your life? Or are you just buying them because everyone else bought them?
If you ask a lot of people why they're choosing to see a new movie, they will unironically tell you "because everyone else is seeing it". They're buying Funko Pops because "everyone else is buying it". THAT is a consoomer.
It's also possible to have phases of consooming for various reasons. During the middle of lockdowns I started getting obsessed with mechanical keyboard autism, making the "perfect home office" and spending way, way more than I should. I've been miserly for my entirely life, and this was the first time I just didn't give a shit that I was shelling out so much. I had the money and didn't hurt from spending it, but there was absolutely no justifiable reason to spend that much (especially on a fucking keyboard).
As time went on though I realized I was falling deeper into pretty severe anxiety and eventually actual depression. My brain was desperately searching for something to keep it busy beyond just working. As soon as I realized that's what was happening, I promptly snapped out of it.
To just be upfront and say what we all really mean, a consoomer is someone who buys worthless mass produced junk that was created purely for profit / has no artistic value.
You can start the argument over subjectivity but c’mon. A dude who spends 20k on funko pops is not the same as someone who buys 19th century automata.
A collector would be into something even if it wasn't popular, a consoomer only cares if it's "hip" and will make them look good.
Collectors tend to be more interested in esoteric stuff, like weird video game peripherals, a consoomer mostly only cares about readily available things like Funko pops.
Most collectors aren't scraping by. Most, if not all, have a ton of disposable income. Hence why they became collectors in the first place, instead of spending all their money on water and cup noodles.
Most collectors aren't scraping by. Most, if not all, have a ton of disposable income. Hence why they became collectors in the first place, instead of spending all their money on water and cup noodles.
No, they’re just something I watched a documentary on. I mention them because they are both incredibly expensive and more historically significant to preserve than funko pops.
If you like a certain hobby enough, then I'm sure you're going to spend some money on it. Likewise if you have a genuine interest in a topic, then of course you're going to do some level of collection because you like it. Also just having a collection doesn't necessarily mean it's endless. IMO, a true collector is satisfied with what they have. They have a limit.
Consoomers seem like the type of people who love buying merchandise, memorabilia, and souvenirs impulsively. They buy for the thrill of owning them and they maybe have a cursory interest in a given topic at best. That's the impression I have. Unlike the collector, they like something because it's popular and it's fun to buy products related to it. There's no limits to what they buy and how much of it.
I used to think that for actual collectors, there's some kind of "method to the madness." A consoomer on the other hand is just buy buy buy. But now, I'm not so sure.
How much of a difference is there between these two?
"They released a perfect grade banshee unicorn, I'll add that to my collection next month, it would look good next to my PG Unicorn as a sort of high contrast focal point to my toy shelf"
"OMG! Banshee Unicronz 1/60 Must have latest GuNdUmb."
That's a good question. I like to think that a collector is possibly sensible and sets limits, but then again I have no way of backing that up. I guess it really varies based on each person.
Consooming seems to me to be associated with buying anything with a pop culture reference on it, regardless of quality. It appears to have a mindless element to the acquisition with no consideration as to whether or not they actually want or need it or whether the item is worth the cost. Nor do they research much.
They do not buy with an understanding of the market or appreciation value in mind. They just assume the value of their collection will hold or go up, or won't lose much, and they base this on the assumption that everyone thinks like they do and treats their own items like they do. They're generally wrong.
They may still buy valuable things of quality but this will be by accident.
Consoomers tend to spend a lot of money but in little bits and pieces over time. They will never know off-hand how much they have spent in total on their collection, nor how much it is worth. Of they want to increase their value the instinct is to buy more, not conserve the value of the things they have.
A certain brand of self-aware consoomer may even refuse to buy over a certain cost/quality threshold because they see it's a lot of money to spend in one go and they know they don't care enough about keeping the items in meticulous condition in order to hold or increase their max value. If their items go up in value over time this is generally a complete accident. Consooming is mindless, focuses on fixing the present state of "not having something", and is highly impulse-driven.
Collecting has the flavour of discernment and restraint. There is at least an attempt at mindful research, curation and acquisition. Collectors either collect with an eye to their items appreciating in value or for purely sentimental items that they know hold no value at all except personal value to themselves only. (Consoomers like to think of themselves as cleverly doing both at the same time, when in fact they are doing neither.)
Collectors often spend a lot of money on one item. They may dabble in cheaper mass-market items but they treat the money spent on those as a significant risk. They can probably tell you not only a decent estimate of their collection's market value but also how much they paid for every single item and what they expect it to be worth in future. They may occasionally buy things that drop in value but this is generally by accident. Every purchase they have made either has a solid justification behind it or an embarrassed grin because "I didn't know any better at the time".
Main difference: Consoomers buy because everyone else has X so they do too; they are targeted by mass production models. Collectors buy because nobody else has X so their collection will be more unique. If everyone else has it it drops in value to a collector, but rises in perceived value to the consoomer (due to FOMO).
Collecting is a hobby that brings pleasure. Consooming is a lifestyle that frantically tries to fill a hole so the consoomer can feel "normal". I.e. an addiction.
Deep thots:
Make no mistake, collecting can still definitely become an addiction or a hoarding problem, and wreak devastation on a person's life. It can induce gambling, hoarding, narrowness of mind, and terrible financial decisions.
We talk a lot here on Kiwifarms about consooming vs collecting in a way that implies collectors are automatically better people.
But you have to remember what we are comparing collecting to.
Being "better" than consooming is a really really [/i]really[/i] low bar. Collecting still means you are living a life in which the amassing of physical things plays a very large role in your life.
I would argue that collecting is not morally superior, it's just ground zero. It has the potential to go either way. Meanwhile, consooming starts off as an addiction. It can't ever develop into a good thing; it is always a symptom of much deeper problems.
Consooming seems to happen because a person with an empty life or underdeveloped mental and emotional independence continuously mistakes brand recognition and nostalgia for actual sentimental value and emotional enrichment (something we have all experienced before at least onve).
The media they experienced was a substitute for developing their own emotional life. Experiencing actual emotional connection or fulfilment without running away from it (it is a scary intense thing when you're not used to it, and even if you are!) tends to throw the hollow consumption into sharp relief.
Attachment to physical items that represent this media literally and completely, which is an immature way to hold onto the feelings they had as a result of the media, instead of transforming their impressions of the media into fully-fledged memories in their own right. They take what the content says about itself as the real lesson, when they should have been asking "but what did I think about what I just saw". Something about "transitional objects" might make sense here, idk.
I think this is why people tend to assume consoomers are also the type to believe what the media tells us uncritically.
Source: Kevin Gibes a bit, but I mostly just pulled this entire thing out of my ass.
Make no mistake, collecting can still definitely become an addiction or a hoarding problem, and wreak devastation on a person's life. It can induce gambling, hoarding, narrowness of mind, and terrible financial decisions.
We talk a lot here on Kiwifarms about consooming vs collecting in a way that implies collectors are automatically better people.
But you have to remember what we are comparing collecting to.
That's fair and makes sense. Is it possible for there to be good collections even if the collectors themselves aren't exactly stable, healthy people? For example: collecting objects with historical and cultural values must be better than Funko Pops, right?
That's fair and makes sense. Is it possible for there to be good collections even if the collectors themselves aren't exactly stable, healthy people? For example: collecting objects with historical and cultural values must be better than Funko Pop, right?
Just to clarify, I'm not saying collectors are by default unstable and unhealthy, either. This isn't a right or wrong, pick one of two options situation. This is a 'step back and look at it' situation.
I said collecting is NEUTRAL. It can be amazing. It can be destructive. It's just about the energy you bring to it and what you expect it to do for yourself and others.
Collections aren't bad just because their owners were destroyed by them, they're not good because their owners were enriched by them.
There can be collections of great value to humanity, collected by people who gave everything up in their desire to perfect their collection, and turned into obsessed zombies who spent the last dime they didn't have on finishing the collection and beggared their families as a result.
There can be collections of great importance to humanity that were lovingly assembled by a person who involved their whole family and neighbourhood in the process, and the process of taking care of this collection brought everyone in the town closer together like a sappy Hallmark movie.
And all kinds of other combinations.
Use your imagination and you'll find that although the collector caused the collection, they are not necessarily going to mirror one another in a moral sense.
Nothing is black and white and when you notice you're starting to pigeon-hole things this way without considering anything else could exist, that's your clue something is wrong.
I'm trying not to do that, so if you think I'm making good sense, that's why.
I'm getting a bit high falutin here but that's only because this kind of thinking is so important to coping with society and most people don't do it. I didn't have it myself til someone else came along and told me roughly what I'm saying now. Repeatedly.
Just to clarify, I'm not saying collectors are by default unstable and unhealthy, either. This isn't a right or wrong, pick one of two options situation. This is a 'step back and look at it' situation.
I said collecting is NEUTRAL. It can be amazing. It can be destructive. It's just about the energy you bring to it and what you expect it to do for yourself and others.
Collections aren't bad just because their owners were destroyed by them, they're not good because their owners were enriched by them.
There can be collections of great value to humanity, collected by people who gave everything up in their desire to perfect their collection, and turned into obsessed zombies who spent the last dime they didn't have on finishing the collection and beggared their families as a result.
There can be collections of great importance to humanity that were lovingly assembled by a person who involved their whole family and neighbourhood in the process, and the process of taking care of this collection brought everyone in the town closer together like a sappy Hallmark movie.
And all kinds of other combinations.
Use your imagination and you'll find that although the collector caused the collection, they are not necessarily going to mirror one another in a moral sense.
Nothing is black and white and when you notice you're starting to pigeon-hole things this way without considering anything else could exist, that's your clue something is wrong.
I'm trying not to do that, so if you think I'm making good sense, that's why.
I'm getting a bit high falutin here but that's only because this kind of thinking is so important to coping with society and most people don't do it. I didn't have it myself til someone else came along and told me roughly what I'm saying now. Repeatedly.
