NinjaSealed Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 No longer have the 7.5. You'll be the first one if I decide....because you almost pried it off my hands years ago Maybe...another one will show up.. I was considering asking you to trade your SC22 8.5 for my SC4 5.5 OW, but you have a SC4 7.5 already.... Thanks for thinking of me. There hasn't been any new SC22 in 8.5+ in the CGC census for about five years. The last 8.0 sold in Heritage in 2013...it tells me SC22 is very rare in 8.5+....anything 7.0+ plus is tough. It has always been very interesting just how tough this book is in grade. Only 15 copies on the census in 8.0 or better making it actually a tougher books than SC4 in high grade(16 8.0 or better SC4.) SC22 in 7.0-7.5 one day when the right copy comes along I won't be denied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.tor Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 the only way a definitive conclusion can be drawn, is for the variables to be consistent, and there be some control, correct? I've given multiple examples of where near identical books visually, with differing PQ, have sold at the same time (practically) , at the same venue, by the same vendor (me)... most recently, flash 105 (both cgc 5.5)...a cr/ow for 1995 and an ow for 2095. the ow sold for more, first, the cr/ow sold for less , second, all within the "same" venue, etc, with virtually all variables consistent... another example was a Strange tales 110, cgc 5.0 ...one with white pages, one with OW...both sold at same venue, the W page first and for $200 more...the ow second, for $200 less... in SDCC in 2010 I believe (before the GL movie), I did this with SC 22 about 5 times the same weekend....I would put 2 copies out, at the same time, same grade, differing pq being the only real diff...and in all 5 instances, the higher pq sold first, and for more... the GPA quoted data by Jaydog comes with unknown variables and no control, and thus, can't be truly "comparable" as evidenced by the lack of support to a consistent statement of preference by the majority of folks discussing... seems reasonable to me ..... many GPA examples are auction oriented. This makes it hard to determine what a winning bidder would have been willing to pay.... so this would make that type of data difficult to link to an individual's preference. GOD BLESS... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u exactly...unknown variables... what data can't and doesn't tell you is what one gains from "experience"...selling books to folks in person, year after year, you tend to learn what does affect buying decisions...and PQ absolutely does (not to all, but to the majority)... one doesn't have to quantify that...hearing it from folks in person, and seeing it play out time and time again, is diligence enough to draw a conclusion The "unknown variables" that you speak of are the very things that prevent the so-called "PQ" on the label from being any consistent or quantifiable determining factor on price. Hence why no "premium" can be proven with any statistical data whatsoever. Word of mouth and "in the trenches" experience is great and has its place. But if it isn't supported (and is in fact utterly contradicted, as I have quite clearly demonstrated yet again) by actual real and hard data, then it is nothing more than "anecdote". It is simply unreasonable for one to choose to ignore real and hard data and facts simply because it does not jibe with their own personal opinions, biases, preferences and pre-conceived notions. -J. unfortunately J, your data is not valid or applicable because you don't have any (scientific) control... you can't say what caused the price variance for this reason...and therefor your data says nothing specific in regards to how pq may or may not affect price... in my data, I have controls in place (same venue, same time frame, same sales person/tactic, same potential pool of buyers), and so I can monitor the effect one variable has on a buyers purchasing decision (PQ in my examples)... so there is nothing anecdotal about my results....they prove my hypothesis (thumbs u Clink auctions used to run auctions with books in the exact same grade, but there would be a White page example and a non-White page example in the same auction finishing at the same time. More often than not the White page copy finished with a higher price. The entire reason they ran them together is because they knew specific buyers would target White pagers. They did this for years. Don't know if they still do. they don't any more because the inferior pq copy consignors complained, because their copies weren't realizing the same prices the better pq copies were Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman399 Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 the only way a definitive conclusion can be drawn, is for the variables to be consistent, and there be some control, correct? I've given multiple examples of where near identical books visually, with differing PQ, have sold at the same time (practically) , at the same venue, by the same vendor (me)... most recently, flash 105 (both cgc 5.5)...a cr/ow for 1995 and an ow for 2095. the ow sold for more, first, the cr/ow sold for less , second, all within the "same" venue, etc, with virtually all variables consistent... another example was a Strange tales 110, cgc 5.0 ...one with white pages, one with OW...both sold at same venue, the W page first and for $200 more...the ow second, for $200 less... in SDCC in 2010 I believe (before the GL movie), I did this with SC 22 about 5 times the same weekend....I would put 2 copies out, at the same time, same grade, differing pq being the only real diff...and in all 5 instances, the higher pq sold first, and for more... the GPA quoted data by Jaydog comes with unknown variables and no control, and thus, can't be truly "comparable" as evidenced by the lack of support to a consistent statement of preference by the majority of folks discussing... seems reasonable to me ..... many GPA examples are auction oriented. This makes it hard to determine what a winning bidder would have been willing to pay.... so this would make that type of data difficult to link to an individual's preference. GOD BLESS... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u exactly...unknown variables... what data can't and doesn't tell you is what one gains from "experience"...selling books to folks in person, year after year, you tend to learn what does affect buying decisions...and PQ absolutely does (not to all, but to the majority)... one doesn't have to quantify that...hearing it from folks in person, and seeing it play out time and time again, is diligence enough to draw a conclusion The "unknown variables" that you speak of are the very things that prevent the so-called "PQ" on the label from being any consistent or quantifiable determining factor on price. Hence why no "premium" can be proven with any statistical data whatsoever. Word of mouth and "in the trenches" experience is great and has its place. But if it isn't supported (and is in fact utterly contradicted, as I have quite clearly demonstrated yet again) by actual real and hard data, then it is nothing more than "anecdote". It is simply unreasonable for one to choose to ignore real and hard data and facts simply because it does not jibe with their own personal opinions, biases, preferences and pre-conceived notions. -J. unfortunately J, your data is not valid or applicable because you don't have any (scientific) control... you can't say what caused the price variance for this reason...and therefor your data says nothing specific in regards to how pq may or may not affect price... in my data, I have controls in place (same venue, same time frame, same sales person/tactic, same potential pool of buyers), and so I can monitor the effect one variable has on a buyers purchasing decision (PQ in my examples)... so there is nothing anecdotal about my results....they prove my hypothesis (thumbs u Clink auctions used to run auctions with books in the exact same grade, but there would be a White page example and a non-White page example in the same auction finishing at the same time. More often than not the White page copy finished with a higher price. The entire reason they ran them together is because they knew specific buyers would target White pagers. They did this for years. Don't know if they still do. they don't any more because the inferior pq copy consignors complained, because their copies weren't realizing the same prices the better pq copies were love how you mentioned the scientific method btw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accessndx Posted May 28, 2015 Author Share Posted May 28, 2015 We've gone round and round this PQ issue and the only thing I can conclude is that: there's definitely at least 1 person out there that is willing to pay a premium for PQ. There's also at least 1 person out there that couldn't give a flying mess Then of course there's everyone else... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VintageComics Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 the only way a definitive conclusion can be drawn, is for the variables to be consistent, and there be some control, correct? I've given multiple examples of where near identical books visually, with differing PQ, have sold at the same time (practically) , at the same venue, by the same vendor (me)... most recently, flash 105 (both cgc 5.5)...a cr/ow for 1995 and an ow for 2095. the ow sold for more, first, the cr/ow sold for less , second, all within the "same" venue, etc, with virtually all variables consistent... another example was a Strange tales 110, cgc 5.0 ...one with white pages, one with OW...both sold at same venue, the W page first and for $200 more...the ow second, for $200 less... in SDCC in 2010 I believe (before the GL movie), I did this with SC 22 about 5 times the same weekend....I would put 2 copies out, at the same time, same grade, differing pq being the only real diff...and in all 5 instances, the higher pq sold first, and for more... the GPA quoted data by Jaydog comes with unknown variables and no control, and thus, can't be truly "comparable" as evidenced by the lack of support to a consistent statement of preference by the majority of folks discussing... seems reasonable to me ..... many GPA examples are auction oriented. This makes it hard to determine what a winning bidder would have been willing to pay.... so this would make that type of data difficult to link to an individual's preference. GOD BLESS... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u exactly...unknown variables... what data can't and doesn't tell you is what one gains from "experience"...selling books to folks in person, year after year, you tend to learn what does affect buying decisions...and PQ absolutely does (not to all, but to the majority)... one doesn't have to quantify that...hearing it from folks in person, and seeing it play out time and time again, is diligence enough to draw a conclusion The "unknown variables" that you speak of are the very things that prevent the so-called "PQ" on the label from being any consistent or quantifiable determining factor on price. Hence why no "premium" can be proven with any statistical data whatsoever. Word of mouth and "in the trenches" experience is great and has its place. But if it isn't supported (and is in fact utterly contradicted, as I have quite clearly demonstrated yet again) by actual real and hard data, then it is nothing more than "anecdote". It is simply unreasonable for one to choose to ignore real and hard data and facts simply because it does not jibe with their own personal opinions, biases, preferences and pre-conceived notions. -J. unfortunately J, your data is not valid or applicable because you don't have any (scientific) control... you can't say what caused the price variance for this reason...and therefor your data says nothing specific in regards to how pq may or may not affect price... in my data, I have controls in place (same venue, same time frame, same sales person/tactic, same potential pool of buyers), and so I can monitor the effect one variable has on a buyers purchasing decision (PQ in my examples)... so there is nothing anecdotal about my results....they prove my hypothesis (thumbs u Clink auctions used to run auctions with books in the exact same grade, but there would be a White page example and a non-White page example in the same auction finishing at the same time. More often than not the White page copy finished with a higher price. The entire reason they ran them together is because they knew specific buyers would target White pagers. They did this for years. Don't know if they still do. they don't any more because the inferior pq copy consignors complained, because their copies weren't realizing the same prices the better pq copies were Game, set, match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 the only way a definitive conclusion can be drawn, is for the variables to be consistent, and there be some control, correct? I've given multiple examples of where near identical books visually, with differing PQ, have sold at the same time (practically) , at the same venue, by the same vendor (me)... most recently, flash 105 (both cgc 5.5)...a cr/ow for 1995 and an ow for 2095. the ow sold for more, first, the cr/ow sold for less , second, all within the "same" venue, etc, with virtually all variables consistent... another example was a Strange tales 110, cgc 5.0 ...one with white pages, one with OW...both sold at same venue, the W page first and for $200 more...the ow second, for $200 less... in SDCC in 2010 I believe (before the GL movie), I did this with SC 22 about 5 times the same weekend....I would put 2 copies out, at the same time, same grade, differing pq being the only real diff...and in all 5 instances, the higher pq sold first, and for more... the GPA quoted data by Jaydog comes with unknown variables and no control, and thus, can't be truly "comparable" as evidenced by the lack of support to a consistent statement of preference by the majority of folks discussing... seems reasonable to me ..... many GPA examples are auction oriented. This makes it hard to determine what a winning bidder would have been willing to pay.... so this would make that type of data difficult to link to an individual's preference. GOD BLESS... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u exactly...unknown variables... what data can't and doesn't tell you is what one gains from "experience"...selling books to folks in person, year after year, you tend to learn what does affect buying decisions...and PQ absolutely does (not to all, but to the majority)... one doesn't have to quantify that...hearing it from folks in person, and seeing it play out time and time again, is diligence enough to draw a conclusion The "unknown variables" that you speak of are the very things that prevent the so-called "PQ" on the label from being any consistent or quantifiable determining factor on price. Hence why no "premium" can be proven with any statistical data whatsoever. Word of mouth and "in the trenches" experience is great and has its place. But if it isn't supported (and is in fact utterly contradicted, as I have quite clearly demonstrated yet again) by actual real and hard data, then it is nothing more than "anecdote". It is simply unreasonable for one to choose to ignore real and hard data and facts simply because it does not jibe with their own personal opinions, biases, preferences and pre-conceived notions. -J. unfortunately J, your data is not valid or applicable because you don't have any (scientific) control... you can't say what caused the price variance for this reason...and therefor your data says nothing specific in regards to how pq may or may not affect price... in my data, I have controls in place (same venue, same time frame, same sales person/tactic, same potential pool of buyers), and so I can monitor the effect one variable has on a buyers purchasing decision (PQ in my examples)... so there is nothing anecdotal about my results, I have provided hard , real data....they prove my hypothesis (thumbs u Actually the cited data is vastly superior to yours because it pulls from multiple sources and is entirely neutral and free from any biases and pre-conceived notions of any single individual. Oh yes, and it is also documented, cataloged and easily accessed by the general public. (thumbs u -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
showcase22gr1959 Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 No longer have the 7.5. You'll be the first one if I decide....because you almost pried it off my hands years ago Maybe...another one will show up.. I was considering asking you to trade your SC22 8.5 for my SC4 5.5 OW, but you have a SC4 7.5 already.... Thanks for thinking of me. There hasn't been any new SC22 in 8.5+ in the CGC census for about five years. The last 8.0 sold in Heritage in 2013...it tells me SC22 is very rare in 8.5+....anything 7.0+ plus is tough. It has always been very interesting just how tough this book is in grade. Only 15 copies on the census in 8.0 or better making it actually a tougher books than SC4 in high grade(16 8.0 or better SC4.) SC22 in 7.0-7.5 one day when the right copy comes along I won't be denied. Bound to be a SC22 7.0+ up for auction soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 I'm not the guy to ask, I wouldn't buy any of them (too high grade). But the point being made was there are other things that could influence what price was realized - someone doesn't like writing, someone doesn't like the corners on the new one you posted, someone just had to have that book, there were TWO people who just had to have the book so the auction went higher than expected, someone thinks the PQ rating is wildly arbitrary and puts no stock in it, etc. Yes, if two identical books except for PQ went up for sale on the same website in auctions that ended at the exact same time (since someone who lost the first might bid on the second), it seems highly likely that the better PQ book would (almost certainly) sell for more. But there never ARE two identical books, much less the other requirements. So, yeah, in theory a better PQ will fetch a better price, but from what I've seen here, it doesn't seem like in practice you can really say that. Yet they continue to try to do so, without a lick of any supporting hard data to back it up. Old, stale, debunked ideas die hard indeed. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman399 Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=8634900#Post8634900 Please move this to here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarryAllen Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 GAtor - any movement on your BB 28 copies lately? What is highest grade you are holding these days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.tor Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 It might be more diverse data, but it is, as you know, not applicable to the discussion. But you do bring up an interesting point. Sometimes I am asked "why" is copy a (better pq copy) Priced higher than copy b (lower pq). My response pointing out the pq diff is always met with "that makes sense" response from buyer followed by a purchase of higher priced, better pq. In every instance. So I'm sure Ive influenced some decisions but since I am a consistent control still supports my hypothesis And while I probably only have a few dozen truly applicable data points to support my claim (combine that with what I believe every other private seller/dealer and boardie have also stated to be valid) and I believe only one conclusion can be drawn with any validity And while I made light of the clink data, call josh or Douglas and I believe they will absolutely confirm why they no longer offer same grade but differing pq books in same auction. And I believe that data also supports he pq validity effect on pricing Nighty nite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.tor Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 GAtor - any movement on your BB 28 copies lately? What is highest grade you are holding these days? Ive pulled my copies from the market for the time being. 5.5 is highest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VintageComics Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Yet they continue to try to do so, without a lick of any supporting hard data to back it up. Old, stale, debunked ideas die hard indeed. The Clink auctions I referenced are a perfect example of how wrong you are. Clink would regularly have dozens or even hundreds of duplicate grades with the only difference being White and non-White page books, within the same auction. The White page books regularly sold for more than the non-White page books and apparently Clink killed the practice because non-White page consignors were upset that their books didn't sell for as much as the White page copies. It doesn't get more conclusive than that. As far as I'm concerned the conversation is over but you keep beating your drum to try and make yourself look right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 It might be more diverse data, but it is, as you know, not applicable to the discussion. But you do bring up an interesting point. Sometimes I am asked "why" is copy a (better pq copy) Priced higher than copy b (lower pq). My response pointing out the pq diff is always met with "that makes sense" response from buyer followed by a purchase of higher priced, better pq. In every instance. So I'm sure I e influenced some decisions but since I am a consistent control still supports my hypothesis And while I probably only have a few dozen truly applicable data points to support my claim (combine that with what I believe every other private seller/dealer and boardie have also stated to be valid) and I believe only one conclusion can be drawn with any validity And while I made light of the clink data, call josh or Douglas and I believe they will absolutely confirm why hey no longer offer same grade but differing pq books in same auction. And I believe that data also supports he pq validity effect on pricing Nighty nite That's why Gators are such good salesmen. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.tor Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 It might be more diverse data, but it is, as you know, not applicable to the discussion. But you do bring up an interesting point. Sometimes I am asked "why" is copy a (better pq copy) Priced higher than copy b (lower pq). My response pointing out the pq diff is always met with "that makes sense" response from buyer followed by a purchase of higher priced, better pq. In every instance. So I'm sure I e influenced some decisions but since I am a consistent control still supports my hypothesis And while I probably only have a few dozen truly applicable data points to support my claim (combine that with what I believe every other private seller/dealer and boardie have also stated to be valid) and I believe only one conclusion can be drawn with any validity And while I made light of the clink data, call josh or Douglas and I believe they will absolutely confirm why hey no longer offer same grade but differing pq books in same auction. And I believe that data also supports he pq validity effect on pricing Nighty nite That's why Gators are such good salesmen. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Yet they continue to try to do so, without a lick of any supporting hard data to back it up. Old, stale, debunked ideas die hard indeed. The Clink auctions I referenced are a perfect example of how wrong you are. Clink would regularly have dozens or even hundreds of duplicate grades with the only difference being White and non-White page books, within the same auction. The White page books regularly sold for more than the non-White page books and apparently Clink killed the practice because non-White page consignors were upset that their books didn't sell for as much as the White page copies. It doesn't get more conclusive than that. As far as I'm concerned the conversation is over but you keep beating your drum to try and make yourself look right. It's just plain silly that you are attempting to use one of the few auction houses that "doesn't" report to GPA, and has no readily accessible archived results, in lieu of the litany of data from basically every other vendor that does in order to "prove" a point that is easily (and has been) disproved. Silly, indeed. I don't need to make myself "look right". The hard data and actual facts already do that. Deal with it. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 It might be more diverse data, but it is, as you know, not applicable to the discussion. But you do bring up an interesting point. Sometimes I am asked "why" is copy a (better pq copy) Priced higher than copy b (lower pq). My response pointing out the pq diff is always met with "that makes sense" response from buyer followed by a purchase of higher priced, better pq. In every instance. So I'm sure I e influenced some decisions but since I am a consistent control still supports my hypothesis And while I probably only have a few dozen truly applicable data points to support my claim (combine that with what I believe every other private seller/dealer and boardie have also stated to be valid) and I believe only one conclusion can be drawn with any validity And while I made light of the clink data, call josh or Douglas and I believe they will absolutely confirm why hey no longer offer same grade but differing pq books in same auction. And I believe that data also supports he pq validity effect on pricing Nighty nite That's why Gators are such good salesmen. -J. I must say that I have always appreciated and respected your even-kieled and balanced debating style. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.tor Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Yet they continue to try to do so, without a lick of any supporting hard data to back it up. Old, stale, debunked ideas die hard indeed. The Clink auctions I referenced are a perfect example of how wrong you are. Clink would regularly have dozens or even hundreds of duplicate grades with the only difference being White and non-White page books, within the same auction. The White page books regularly sold for more than the non-White page books and apparently Clink killed the practice because non-White page consignors were upset that their books didn't sell for as much as the White page copies. It doesn't get more conclusive than that. As far as I'm concerned the conversation is over but you keep beating your drum to try and make yourself look right. It's just plain silly that you are attempting to use one of the few auction houses that "doesn't" report to GPA, and has no readily accessible archived results, in lieu of the litany of data from basically every other vendor that does in order to "prove" a point that is easily (and has been) disproved. Silly, indeed. I don't need to make myself "look right". The hard data and actual facts already does that. Deal with it. -J. J , you haven't provided any hard or valid data that was achieved under a set of controls. Not one data point you are relying on is applicable and thus you have failed to prove anything. I on the other hand have provided multiple hard (and if pressed to prove or make verifiable to public could) data points that support virtually everyone's position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.tor Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 It might be more diverse data, but it is, as you know, not applicable to the discussion. But you do bring up an interesting point. Sometimes I am asked "why" is copy a (better pq copy) Priced higher than copy b (lower pq). My response pointing out the pq diff is always met with "that makes sense" response from buyer followed by a purchase of higher priced, better pq. In every instance. So I'm sure I e influenced some decisions but since I am a consistent control still supports my hypothesis And while I probably only have a few dozen truly applicable data points to support my claim (combine that with what I believe every other private seller/dealer and boardie have also stated to be valid) and I believe only one conclusion can be drawn with any validity And while I made light of the clink data, call josh or Douglas and I believe they will absolutely confirm why hey no longer offer same grade but differing pq books in same auction. And I believe that data also supports he pq validity effect on pricing Nighty nite That's why Gators are such good salesmen. -J. I must say that I have always appreciated and respected your even-kieled and balanced debating style. -J. i hope everyone knows J and I are just having fun going round in circles. Gets a little dizzy at times, but life's too short not to have a good time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iceman399 Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=8634900#Post8634900 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
