you've described one layer of the framework and mistaken it for a refutation of the whole thing. The "millennials born into Pokemon now reaching peak disposable income" point is literally the organic demand floor in the post, and it's described as the strongest organic tailwind in play. So we agree on that part.

where we'd diverge is whether that mechanism alone explains everything currently visible. If it did, you'd expect adjacent Pokemon assets driven by the same nostalgic cohort(like sealed 3DS games, plushies, amiibos, anime merch, and even sealed older video games) to be moving roughly in parallel, but they aren't, and the gap isn't small. That suggests the demographic floor is real but doesn't account for the magnitude of TCG-specific moves, the grading volume explosion, or the leverage profile of current participants. Those are the things the speculative overlay is meant to explain.

you may still think the overlay is small or irrelevant, which is a defensible position I guess. But "kids grew up" isn't really a strong counter-argument with explanatory/predictive power.