How about a new "Overstreet"?

[Racer-X]

Here's what I'd like: a "new" Overstreet-type price guide, that compiles as many verifiable sales as possible. GPA-style, but with more info. Some boardies have taken GPA sales and compiled them with Heritage, Clink, etc. auctions on a few key books. Can it be done with a more comprehensive list of books, and packaged in a pamphlet/booklet type way once a year?

 

[youfoundjake]

and put it online..

[bug33fouf]

and put it online..

 

 

I'll take one.

[VintageComics]

I had that idea a few years ago and tried to pursue it in the real world. We discussed it here in detail and I got a butt hurt like I've never gotten before.

 

 

Did a few preliminary interviews with dealers around the country, came up with a few interface ideas for downloading sales data live (from shows and stores as well as online sales of raw and CGC graded books) to compile into a common database, thought about mixing that info with already culled GPA values and offering it as a subscription through GPA (George of GPA was keen on the project) and then it got shot down in flames.

 

The primary complaint was selective data submission to the "database".

 

I still think it's a great idea. I think if anyone has the time and wherewithal to pursue it, they should.

 

 

 

 

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

I had that idea a few years ago and tried to pursue it in the real world. We discussed it here in detail and I got a butt hurt like I've never gotten before.

 

 

I don't know, I think you've gotten butt hurt ala "first night in prison" quite a few times around here.

[Racer-X]

The primary complaint was selective data submission to the "database".

 

But many boardies use GPA, and it's even more selective...

[The Amazing Chump]

It's really the only good idea left. Overstreet, GPA, Ebay search, Heritage search, Clink search and dealer sites aggregated into a professional database of sales data. Unfortunately, it's too subject to manipulation and subjective. You have raw vs. CGC grading. If you can crawl those sales, you have sites like this and dealer sites that don't report, so if you try to gather that information, you're boned (just think of how many "sold through PM" transactions you don't have full visibility on). And then there are dealer sites that don't have the time or inclination to report (and clink, which is a major transaction hub that doesn't even report to GPA).

 

What a real online/data revolution would take (OSPG has the network, I just don't know if they have the inclination, the infrastructure or the vision to overcome the barriers) true buy-in from a majority of the industry-meaning all of us here, and everyone we know. Anyone like to start herding kittens?

[VintageComics]

The primary complaint was selective data submission to the "database".

 

But many boardies use GPA, and it's even more selective...

 

That was part of my argument. Everything is selective, really.

 

I believed that more info was better than less info but many people, whose opinions i respect, believed that statistically it would have been innaccurate.

 

When looking at Overstreet or GPA, it is a select group of people that submit data. There is no way getting around that.

 

I still believe that more is better in this case.

 

Eventually, it would round itself out.

 

 

 

 

[roulette44]

I'm 100% behind ya, Roy. For what little that's worth@!

[Trev]

Based on what i'm seeing in my first 3rd party auction (mycomicshop), it has to be a combination of all the data sources available. The only problem with ebay I think is trying to get the grading correct.

 

For my first MCS auction I created a spreadsheet with guide values, gpa values and final values. The auction isn't over yet, but both guide and gpa seem to be significantly off, even as a decent point of reference. Stats are ranging from 25% or so of guide to 6x OSPG and 14% and 6x GPA.

 

The sample is 13 books, most of which are some kind of key and only one is CGC graded. Ironicially, it is currently the worst performer in the group -- which is making me think it is simply with the wrong dealer/audience.

 

Though I'm very happy with the bulk of the results so far, it does cause some concern as I gear up for SDCC because neither one of the guides seem to be accurate in trying to understand pricing for a book.

 

I'll probably still rely on guide, GPA, and ebay for buying rather than just guide which is what I've done in the past.

[mycomicshop]

Trevor, I wouldn't do too much analysis until the auctions end. A lot of auctions move quite a bit on the last day. Also, 5 of your 13 auction items are books that we would retail under $40--a little below the range where GPA is most effective. In my experience GPA is the best predictor of price--but only for books that have a decent amount of recent data (say at least 2-3 sales over the past 3 years) and where the prices are high enough for there to be some separation between the grades, rather than having prices for several grades all muddled up together and overlapping between $15 and $35.

 

Here are some stats from our previous auction in March: median price achieved as a percentage of GPA, for books where there was usable GPA data (ie, if a 5.5 book sold, but no GPA average was listed for 5.5 of that issue, it wouldn't figure into these results):

 

Pre-1960 comics: median % of GPA was 79%.

1960s comics: median % of GPA was 100%.

1970s comics: median % of GPA was 96%.

1980s to current comics: median % of GPA was 103%.

 

If you're trying to show what an average seller can expect, median is more useful than a plain average because it's not dominated by the performance of the most expensive books in the group. The 100% of GPA median for 1960s books means that of the 1960s books in our March auction for which we had usable GPA data, half did better than 100% of the GPA average and half did worse. There can still be wide swings above and below that center point due to bidder activity on any given item--but at least the median is pretty much right on target.

 

To me, looking at those numbers, I think that's a pretty good case for GPA--on average, over a large enough sample, and for books where GPA data is available. The pre-1960s group lags the others somewhat, but I think a plausible explanation for that is that for Golden Age books, a higher percentage of sales take place as fixed price sales rather than riskier auction sales. Those fixed price Golden Age books don't turn over as often, but when they do the seller gets the higher asking price they're looking for. If you opt for the convenience of an immediate auction sale, on average you're not going to get as much as if you were willing to wait for a buyer to meet your price.

 

Note that these percentages include the 3% buyer's premium reflecting the total amount the buyer paid, since the final bid + 3% BP is what we report to GPA. So the % seen by sellers would be 3% less than that.

[VintageComics]

Based on what i'm seeing in my first 3rd party auction (mycomicshop), it has to be a combination of all the data sources available. The only problem with ebay I think is trying to get the grading correct.

 

The grading scenario was discussed at length by many people. Ultimately, if you are taking data from a reputable dealer with a decent reputation as a grader then the only two factors that matter are

 

1) that the buyer and seller agree on grade

2) that the price is recorded

 

For my first MCS auction I created a spreadsheet with guide values, gpa values and final values. The auction isn't over yet, but both guide and gpa seem to be significantly off, even as a decent point of reference. Stats are ranging from 25% or so of guide to 6x OSPG and 14% and 6x GPA.

 

The sample is 13 books, most of which are some kind of key and only one is CGC graded. Ironicially, it is currently the worst performer in the group -- which is making me think it is simply with the wrong dealer/audience.

 

Though I'm very happy with the bulk of the results so far, it does cause some concern as I gear up for SDCC because neither one of the guides seem to be accurate in trying to understand pricing for a book.

 

I'll probably still rely on guide, GPA, and ebay for buying rather than just guide which is what I've done in the past.

 

You can't analyze auction prices until the auction is over.

 

As far as analyzing GPA, eBay and Overstreet, I can foresee someone building an algorithm that takes all 3 into account to find a decent middle ground for evaluating books.

 

The information age is well entrenched. It's just a matter of time before someone harnesses it for comics.

 

 

[Trev]

 

You can't analyze auction prices until the auction is over.

 

As far as analyzing GPA, eBay and Overstreet, I can foresee someone building an algorithm that takes all 3 into account to find a decent middle ground for evaluating books.

 

The information age is well entrenched. It's just a matter of time before someone harnesses it for comics.

 

 

Agree -- and I will do that analysis afterward but felt where the discussion was that I should share. I am very happy with some of the results, but those many x multiples on some of the books that I can't easily explain are what shake my confidence in the tools currently available. Since these are raw books, they won't make it to GPA, and at this point the sales wouldn't factor into OSPG until at least July 2013.

 

I've got a few keys for characters in the Avengers movie up, so that is probably playing a factor and I guess it was smart of me to let the market drive the price, but it also points out to me that I should stay out of pricing for a large segment of books and defer to the market and reputable graders and dealers like MCS and Heritage.

 

Would be cool if there were a way for dealers with consistent and published grading standards to report raw results to a service like GPA. Heritage does a decent job of making their prior results available, but there is nothing that aggregates and presents the data as well as GPA right now. And as Conan pointed out and we all understand GPA only represents a portion of the market.

 

I guess I'd like to see the market represented by GPA grow. OTOH, getting the results too real time may end up with a bubble and prices that escalate too quickly.

[Dr. Balls]

It should also have articles, editorials and some irreverent musings by industry insiders to round it out and make it an entertaining read.

[VintageComics]

It should also have articles, editorials and some irreverent musings by industry insiders to round it out and make it an entertaining read.

 

A link to the General forum should be sufficient.

 

 

[Wally's Comics]

They should make an app.

 

 

 

 

[Trev]

It should also have articles, editorials and some irreverent musings by industry insiders to round it out and make it an entertaining read.

 

Man, how I would love to revive something like CBM combined with a service like this in a single site.

[MCMiles]

I had that idea a few years ago and tried to pursue it in the real world. We discussed it here in detail and I got a butt hurt like I've never gotten before.

 

 

Did a few preliminary interviews with dealers around the country, came up with a few interface ideas for downloading sales data live (from shows and stores as well as online sales of raw and CGC graded books) to compile into a common database, thought about mixing that info with already culled GPA values and offering it as a subscription through GPA (George of GPA was keen on the project) and then it got shot down in flames.

 

The primary complaint was selective data submission to the "database".

 

I still think it's a great idea. I think if anyone has the time and wherewithal to pursue it, they should.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, that was a great fun.

 

If I remember right, the biggest issues were "Selective reporting" and the possibility of market manipulation due to selective reporting, and inflated or deflated numbers.

 

Obviously there are ways to prevent that. The most obvious would be to use sales recorded on-line exclusively. To expand beyond that, sellers, and consequently the buyers, would have to provide non-edited transaction history. I just don't think that is going to happen.

 

I was against it quite a bit when it was discussed before, but I think I now have to agree that "more information" is better... At least better than what's offered in the current annual "price guide" which is based entirely on selective, bias, ancient, or non existent information.

[VintageComics]

I had that idea a few years ago and tried to pursue it in the real world. We discussed it here in detail and I got a butt hurt like I've never gotten before.

 

 

Did a few preliminary interviews with dealers around the country, came up with a few interface ideas for downloading sales data live (from shows and stores as well as online sales of raw and CGC graded books) to compile into a common database, thought about mixing that info with already culled GPA values and offering it as a subscription through GPA (George of GPA was keen on the project) and then it got shot down in flames.

 

The primary complaint was selective data submission to the "database".

 

I still think it's a great idea. I think if anyone has the time and wherewithal to pursue it, they should.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, that was a great fun.

 

If I remember right, the biggest issues were "Selective reporting" and the possibility of market manipulation due to selective reporting, and inflated or deflated numbers.

 

Obviously there are ways to prevent that. The most obvious would be to use sales recorded on-line exclusively. To expand beyond that, sellers, and consequently the buyers, would have to provide non-edited transaction history. I just don't think that is going to happen.

 

I was against it quite a bit when it was discussed before, but I think I now have to agree that "more information" is better... At least better than what's offered in the current annual "price guide" which is based entirely on selective, bias, ancient, or non existent information.

 

Yeah, great fun.

 

It was a good in depth discussion though, and there were some great points made.

 

Relatively speaking, I think all reporting is selective as we will always only see a small pie slice of the entire hobby reported but I do agree that if someone wanted to be an adviser or a submitter of sales prices then that dealer should submit all their retail sales prices.

 

The bigger the over all pie slice, the more useful the data would be.

 

Where we went off the rails in the original discussion was when we discussed adding forum sales, and collector to collector sales and that created a heated discussion with a lot of division. While I do agree that it would be great to have more info (and those sales offer a great wealth of sales data especially for tougher to find books which often change hands in private), I also have to concede that it might be difficult to maintain credibility of the data set when allowing data without a professional with a vested interest in keeping the data (and their rep) credible.

 

It also brought up the issue of people who want their sales to remain private (and there are plenty of people that do).

 

I no longer have a vested personal interest in getting the idea done but still think it's a good one.

 

Anyhow, just a few things to toss around.

[Trev]

I had that idea a few years ago and tried to pursue it in the real world. We discussed it here in detail and I got a butt hurt like I've never gotten before.

 

 

Did a few preliminary interviews with dealers around the country, came up with a few interface ideas for downloading sales data live (from shows and stores as well as online sales of raw and CGC graded books) to compile into a common database, thought about mixing that info with already culled GPA values and offering it as a subscription through GPA (George of GPA was keen on the project) and then it got shot down in flames.

 

The primary complaint was selective data submission to the "database".

 

I still think it's a great idea. I think if anyone has the time and wherewithal to pursue it, they should.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, that was a great fun.

 

If I remember right, the biggest issues were "Selective reporting" and the possibility of market manipulation due to selective reporting, and inflated or deflated numbers.

 

Obviously there are ways to prevent that. The most obvious would be to use sales recorded on-line exclusively. To expand beyond that, sellers, and consequently the buyers, would have to provide non-edited transaction history. I just don't think that is going to happen.

 

I was against it quite a bit when it was discussed before, but I think I now have to agree that "more information" is better... At least better than what's offered in the current annual "price guide" which is based entirely on selective, bias, ancient, or non existent information.

 

Yeah, great fun.

 

It was a good in depth discussion though, and there were some great points made.

 

Relatively speaking, I think all reporting is selective as we will always only see a small pie slice of the entire hobby reported but I do agree that if someone wanted to be an adviser or a submitter of sales prices then that dealer should submit all their retail sales prices.

 

The bigger the over all pie slice, the more useful the data would be.

 

Where we went off the rails in the original discussion was when we discussed adding forum sales, and collector to collector sales and that created a heated discussion with a lot of division. While I do agree that it would be great to have more info (and those sales offer a great wealth of sales data especially for tougher to find books which often change hands in private), I also have to concede that it might be difficult to maintain credibility of the data set when allowing data without a professional with a vested interest in keeping the data (and their rep) credible.

 

It also brought up the issue of people who want their sales to remain private (and there are plenty of people that do).

 

I no longer have a vested personal interest in getting the idea done but still think it's a good one.

 

Anyhow, just a few things to toss around.

 

I think if such a service only reflects the 'public' market, then the private market will manage itself based on the public market. Without a notion of 'retail value' it is harder to negotiate a private deal between collectors. And if the values include private sales, then it would place downward pressure on prices. Maybe that's a good thing . . .