Pedigree Auction Sales and Relistings. Legit?

[Dale Roberts]

In summary,

- Doug is cool .

- Dale and Brent are cool but maybe not with each other ().

- Blazing Bob is always cool (more PR for the Blazing One).

- GPA is skewed but the best we have.

- There are more day traders than collectors participating in auctions.

 

Dale & Brent are cool with each other, at least from my perspective. We can agree to disagree and still be friends. Sometimes disagreements are not disagreements at all, just looking at things from different perspectives.

 

 

[Dale Roberts]

Brent/Dale:

I would be stunned if Doug got on this thread and stated "I bought my own books back because they did not hit the sales number I wanted".

 

No offense Brent but frankly "ALL" privately owned auction houses are open to "shill bidding" by owners who can open another email account and buy their own books back.

 

No offense but I like my business model better. What you see is what you get.

It's so unlike you to be so... non-offensive.

 

Good Bob is dominating right now.

[Captain Tripps]

Brent,

 

1. I'm not sure what you mean in statement #1. Where does the price say $0.00 in the auction listing? I do not see this on the site, Brent. When a purchaser asks me to re-list a book he has just won in an auction, I simply change the status in the database from "auction" to "none" (which would put the book back into the live inventory on the site), change the date (to get it to the front) and add in his new list price and change the consignor's name to his.

 

2. I am going to send George a list of the sales (ones that haven't shipped yet as he already has those). The problem is I have to go through each listing and get the CGC cert. #s but I will do it. Plus, to make sure there's no double-reporting, the books that are about to be shipped won't be in there as George will get those emails.

 

3. There were 481 total books in the auction, Brent. The books that didn't meet reserve (there were many) and were re-listed on the main site will no longer appear in the auction listing plus the books that were bought and re-consigned would no longer appear in the auction listings. Unlike the regular site, those books that were paid for and shipped to the customers remain in the auction listings for reference, etc.

 

4. There are definitely a few books that had sold and then re-listed and then sold again in another auction, etc. I am grateful that these customers/consignors decide to sell again through my site than a competitor's. The problem is some of the purchasers who got them at less than current GPA value ask me not to report the sale for obvious reasons and I respect that. If you bought an ASM 14, for example, at $5,000, knowing you got it on the cheap, want that sale to be purposely made public when you are trying to sell it for $9,000?

 

Again, I am going to get George a list of these sales. I had sent the relevant sales data to Scoop and ComicsPriceGuide and will forward it to GPA. Getting him all the other sales and the cert #'s is the hard part.

[Freddie-migration]

Again, I The problem is some of the purchasers who got them at less than current GPA value ask me not to report the sale for obvious reasons and I respect that. If you bought an ASM 14, for example, at $5,000, knowing you got it on the cheap, want that sale to be purposely made public when you are trying to sell it for $9,000?

 

If this is the norm, then Grade Point Average data is not worth the paper its written on, and is about as reliable as using a thimble to hold a cup of coffee.

[Davenport]

Again, I The problem is some of the purchasers who got them at less than current GPA value ask me not to report the sale for obvious reasons and I respect that. If you bought an ASM 14, for example, at $5,000, knowing you got it on the cheap, want that sale to be purposely made public when you are trying to sell it for $9,000?

 

If this is the norm, then Grade Point Average data is not worth the paper its written on, and is about as reliable as using a thimble to hold a cup of coffee.

Good lord. "Relevant sales data" must be defined as whatever will influence consumers to send the most.

 

Okay, let's see. Someone wants to buy a certified book...

- The previous sales data might be manipulated

- The book itself might have been manipulated

- The grade might be a result of the book being manipulated

- The auction venue might be manipulated

 

Consumers win!

[blazingbob]

Hmmm, so much for the GPA pricing business model.

 

Note to George. Maybe selling venue should be noted next to the price so potential buyers can throw those venues they deem questionable out.

 

 

[jkrk]

Brent/Dale:

I would be stunned if Doug got on this thread and stated "I bought my own books back because they did not hit the sales number I wanted".

 

No offense Brent but frankly "ALL" privately owned auction houses are open to "shill bidding" by owners who can open another email account and buy their own books back.

 

No offense but I like my business model better. What you see is what you get.

 

 

 

You don't need to qualify that as to only "owners". All auction houses are open to shill bidding. It is the nature of the beast and you can't stop it. What difference does it make if it is the owner or someone else? It affects the credibility of the auction just the same.

 

I wish someone would have shill bid some of my last comiclink auctions....

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

It's the owners responsibility to shill bid their books.

[Bunky Brian]

Again, I The problem is some of the purchasers who got them at less than current GPA value ask me not to report the sale for obvious reasons and I respect that. If you bought an ASM 14, for example, at $5,000, knowing you got it on the cheap, want that sale to be purposely made public when you are trying to sell it for $9,000?

 

If this is the norm, then Grade Point Average data is not worth the paper its written on, and is about as reliable as using a thimble to hold a cup of coffee.

 

I'm with you, price manipulation, lets just report the higher verified sales, and gently leave out the "good deals" someone got, This is just krap! Misinformation, market trickery, Label chasers beware, the game you play is fixed.

 

Bunky

[goldust40]

First - Verzyl has a website?

 

2nd - I sell them to good customers.

 

Why should I pay my competitors who use my commissions to to buy books I want to purchase? Comiclink is a dealer, they own inventory that is for sale on that website. Pedigree owns inventory. I could go on and on.

 

 

Never considered doing featured auctions on your website?

[marvelcollector]

Simply because he is picking and choosing the data to be reported. I have worked with Data my entire career, and you can't just arbitrarily choose which prices to report, it manipulates the survey. IF his site is supposed to be reporting ALL sales, then it needs to report all sales. Sales from other venues wouldn't matter, since they are not part of the survey.

 

Personally, I don't collect high grade books, so I'm not really worried about how accurate GPA is, but I think George might be concerned with this information.

 

 

Every seller who reports to George other than an auction site(ebay and Heritage) CAN pick and choose which data he submits.

 

Then what is the point of GPA? It cannot be an accurate picture.

 

I agree with this.

You can't disregard a sale just because. Makes no sense to me. It's like a batter in baseball saying" forget that at bat, I wasn't focused."

A sale is a sale and should be reported. If that lowers the average, so be it.

 

It does make GPA's data less accurate and reliable.

 

 

[jkrk]

Again, I The problem is some of the purchasers who got them at less than current GPA value ask me not to report the sale for obvious reasons and I respect that. If you bought an ASM 14, for example, at $5,000, knowing you got it on the cheap, want that sale to be purposely made public when you are trying to sell it for $9,000?

 

If this is the norm, then Grade Point Average data is not worth the paper its written on, and is about as reliable as using a thimble to hold a cup of coffee.

 

I'm with you, price manipulation, lets just report the higher verified sales, and gently leave out the "good deals" someone got, This is just krap! Misinformation, market trickery, Label chasers beware, the game you play is fixed.

 

Bunky

 

I love the hobby. (thumbs u

[Nexus]

Doug,

 

Thanks for your willingness to answer the questions so far. I've got a few more:

 

1. Has Pedigree ever put up "no reserve" auctions that, in reality, had reserves? Meaning, you were authorized to bid a certain amount by the consignor to protect his/her investment? OR, have you ever done this with your own books?

 

2. Along those lines, if a bidder submits the high bid, will Pedigree close the auction at that bid and not just an increment above the second highest bid? Has that ever happened?

 

3. When was the last time you communicated with Jason Ewert? Do you believe he's still participating in the hobby?

 

Felix

[fantastic_four]

I agree with this.

You can't disregard a sale just because. Makes no sense to me. It's like a batter in baseball saying" forget that at bat, I wasn't focused."

A sale is a sale and should be reported. If that lowers the average, so be it.

 

It does make GPA's data less accurate and reliable.

 

YES YES YES YES YOU'RE RIGHT. But you're complaining about the sky being blue when you with it were red--there's nothing anyone can do about this. Like pressing, this issue has no good resolution...move it along, nothing to see here! No need to derail the thread on an issue that could go for another 100 pages itself.

[Bunky Brian]

Every seller who reports to George other than an auction site(ebay and Heritage) CAN pick and choose which data he submits.

 

Then what is the point of GPA? It cannot be an accurate picture.

 

I agree with this.

You can't disregard a sale just because. Makes no sense to me. It's like a batter in baseball saying" forget that at bat, I wasn't focused."

A sale is a sale and should be reported. If that lowers the average, so be it.

 

It does make GPA's data less accurate and reliable.

 

Amen brother, report the facts,let the market decide what to do with it, " We can't do that, must only report sales that validate my phoney baloney asking price"

 

You people know who you are, and you suck it !

B

[comicwiz]

I agree with this.

You can't disregard a sale just because. Makes no sense to me. It's like a batter in baseball saying" forget that at bat, I wasn't focused."

A sale is a sale and should be reported. If that lowers the average, so be it.

 

It does make GPA's data less accurate and reliable.

 

YES YES YES YES YOU'RE RIGHT. But you're complaining about the sky being blue when you with it were red--there's nothing anyone can do about this. Like pressing, this issue has no good resolution...move it along, nothing to see here! No need to derail the thread on an issue that could go for another 100 pages itself.

 

This does have some validity in my mind. I've always explained to people (a few who have tried on these boards could reference by PM) that GPA is a data point, and as such, a seller should reserve the right to use various data points to arrive at a price.

 

The point about GPA blind spots like date stamps, miswraps or PQ are just some of the ways auction results can explain lows, and books with higher production/page quality achieving highs.

 

However, such blind spots (at least not until now) haven't accounted for any arbitrary decision to opt-out of the need for double-reporting. In the example used, $5,000 is the price realized and paid for (reportable), while the $9,000 is the hypothetical, pie-in-the-sky (which should also be reported should it realize that sale price). I'm not sure this double-standard jives in the same way as resub/pressed books because that discrepancy still has a way of averaging itself out. A distant comparable to what you're suggesting, is when auction results for the same book are accounted for by two different grade assignments (i.e. pressed) and prices.

[cheetah]

GPA is, at best, a tool to be used to help you determine what you think is an appropriate price. The fact that it doesn't include CLink renders it faulty. If you think that it is supposed to be a perfect tool then you haven't been paying much attention.

 

And CLink deletes a significant number of auctions very quickly. From what I can tell, it deletes the ones that don't sell for what the seller wanted. If you are going to hammer one site, you need to hammer the site that controls the market for doing the same thing.

[qualitycomix]

The books that were just re-listed were either legitimately purchased from my site or didn't meet reserve and were re-listed (most were books that didn't meet the reserves and the consignors asked me to put them in the regular inventory). I did buy some of these books from Bob Storms at the NYC show back in October (Avengers 4 9.4 which actually came from Gary Platt and ASM 6 9.4) but I sold them in the November Grand Auction to 2 different buyers. Both consigned them back to me for the January auction, Both books (and a few others) were bought by the same dealer/investor who asked me to list them for him at 8%, which I did. He bought both books at very reasonable prices and is obviously looking to make a profit.

 

Avengers 4 9.4 sale was not reported to GPA in 2009 or 2010. Serial number: 0994473001.

 

You said the book was sold in November 2009 Auction. Yet no GPA reporting.

 

Amazing Spider-Man #6 CGC 9.4 serial Number: 0952657001 was not reported as a sale to GPA in 2009 or 2010.

 

Yet you said the book sold in November 2009 Auction. Yet no GPA reporting.

 

Im calling the shill police.

[Domo Arigato]

I agree with this.

You can't disregard a sale just because. Makes no sense to me. It's like a batter in baseball saying" forget that at bat, I wasn't focused."

A sale is a sale and should be reported. If that lowers the average, so be it.

 

It does make GPA's data less accurate and reliable.

 

YES YES YES YES YOU'RE RIGHT. But you're complaining about the sky being blue when you with it were red--there's nothing anyone can do about this. Like pressing, this issue has no good resolution...move it along, nothing to see here! No need to derail the thread on an issue that could go for another 100 pages itself.

Sorry, FF...but that is complete and total defeatist horse mess.

 

I will be contacting George about this...and if this is what's going on, I will be cancelling my subscription to GPA. I like George and the idea of GPA. But if dealers are openly allowed to manipulate the sales data...then what the hell is the point?

 

I swear...the more I learn about this hobby, the more disgusted I get with it.

[EastEnd]

Again, I The problem is some of the purchasers who got them at less than current GPA value ask me not to report the sale for obvious reasons and I respect that. If you bought an ASM 14, for example, at $5,000, knowing you got it on the cheap, want that sale to be purposely made public when you are trying to sell it for $9,000?

 

If this is the norm, then Grade Point Average data is not worth the paper its written on, and is about as reliable as using a thimble to hold a cup of coffee.

 

I'm with you, price manipulation, lets just report the higher verified sales, and gently leave out the "good deals" someone got, This is just krap! Misinformation, market trickery, Label chasers beware, the game you play is fixed.

 

Bunky

 

Agreed, this is beyond pathetic. Once again, the mantra seems to be to make a quick buck by screwing the collector. GPA should stop accepting data from Pedigree immediately... if incomplete data was reason enough to exclude Comiclink then it's good enough here.

[G.A.tor]

I think we should set up a big mud pit at MegaCon and let all you dealer guys sling it out there.

 

Will you by my tag team partner? Mr NOD & Capn Trips vs Doc Watson and Stone Cold Dale Roberts

that almost has a "ring" to it