Brave & Bold #28: Speculation on future pricing 4 4

[mysterio]

Heh.

 

'The doorstep to the temple of wisdom is knowledge of our own ignorance.'

- Benjamin Franklin.

 

What am I "ignorant" of?

 

It's not my fault that the publicly available sales data does not reflect the results that you want them to. You may say that there are "reasons" for that. We can only speculate on what those may be. But it does not alter the data.

 

-J.

 

You both argue that there are "reasons" for that. He just doesn't claim to know what they are, and you do.

[Jaydogrules]

Heh.

 

'The doorstep to the temple of wisdom is knowledge of our own ignorance.'

- Benjamin Franklin.

 

What am I "ignorant" of?

 

It's not my fault that the publicly available sales data does not reflect the results that you want them to. You may say that there are "reasons" for that. We can only speculate on what those may be. But it does not alter the data.

 

-J.

 

You both argue that there are "reasons" for that. He just doesn't claim to know what they are, and you do.

 

I don't claim to "know" anything". Again, we can only speculate on the "reasons", but that does not change the data that we do see.

 

-J.

[Jaydogrules]

I've seen some cogent data presented that demonstrate the validity of both claims.

 

Clearly there's no scenario that dictates "there's always a premium paid" for PQ, since J has shown examples of it numerous times.

 

There's also ample evidence to suggest that "some folks pay a premium" for PQ, since it's also evident on the GPA and has been anecdotally reported by dealers here......AND if you peruse the sales forum you'll see examples as well.

 

Nobody can be entirely correct because the statistics indicate both trends occur. The real question involves WHY? and WHO? and WHERE?

 

Who sold what where and why did it demand such and such a price. This is where the multitude of different factors create the inherent unpredictability.

 

The examples where PQ did demonstrate a premium price was paid, the difference IMHO was negligible, but I'm sure enough digging will expose outliers that deviate markedly.

 

I've said before that PQ doesn't really influence my decision entirely. But I don't ignore it either. Given two RELATIVELY identical comics in grade and presentation that differ only in PQ, I'd have to opt for the "higher" one. If the PQ is extraordinarily diverse.....like WHITE vs TAN...that's a difference...

But if it comes down to CR/OW or OW/W I don't really put much stock in differentiating.

 

 

actually, not a single data point J has listed demonstrates or supports that PQ is indifferent in the realized price when comparing like copies... I looked at the data and in not one instance was there available/sold a comparably graded copy that sold in same venue or even at same time, with differing pq , where an analysis could be drawn...in other words, there was no alternate copy that could have been purchased, so that gpa data is just a single data point independent of every other data point...

 

for example, if a cr/ow copy of a 4.0 sold on 4/12 at $2500, and an ow/w copy of a 4.0 sold at $2400 on 4/12 in the same venue, THEN a statement could be made that PQ likely played no bearing on the price...

 

however, as mentioned, there is not a SINGLE example J provided that demonstrates this...not one...he has listed random data points that represent single sales independent of any other comparable copy being available at a diff price with a diff pq, that a conclusion could be drawn...therefore, he has not supported his position at all, imo ...

 

 

Gator, I vociferously (though respectfully) disagree with your application of sales comps. Be the conversation about comics, houses, works of art, antiques, etc, your statements go against all well-settled use of such, while simultaneously debunking your own bases for stating that there "is" a "premium".

 

Again, just because the publicly available sales data doesn't support your own personal experiences or opinions does not make it "not credible".

 

-J.

random sales points don't support anyone's opinion...

 

only sales done in a controlled environment can be used to make a comparison statement.....and that's what we are attempting to do right....when one "compares" like copies with diff pq's..

 

also keep in mind, I am generally speaking about pq on all comics, not just BB...I haven't seen any examples were like copies of BB 28 have sold with diff pq, so there is no data to support this particular book, but plenty of data to support the statement in general

 

comps are a great place to start, and sometimes they are valid...just not in this instance...

 

a copy selling in Feb with pq=x cannot be said to have any bearing on what a copy in march with pq=x selling for...nothing...

 

and I'm not using any of this data to support my position because I know the data is not valid for anyone's position...only data I am using is real world examples where I have had comparable copies and the high pq has sold first and at a higher price....

 

Since these (dozens) of comps (across a multitude of grades and over a two year period, and) are what we do have, again I must strongly disagree with this assertion. Further, the vast majority of comps that I did use and are reported, are, more often than not, a matter of weeks apart and sometimes just days.

 

Comps do not need to happen within minutes of each other or be sold within the same venue to be valid. Every appraiser in the world will disagree with you on that one.

 

-J.

[G.A.tor]

for this argument, comps do need to happen in a controlled environment...we are not discussing avg prices for grades (grades that encompass all variables that make up said grade) , we are discussing a specific variable that can only be "compared" in a controlled environment to truly see an effect...

[ttfitz]

Back to B&B 28 however, as ttfitz I believe noted, there are far fewer opportunities to own the book in any grade, let alone mint grade (where the "PQ" on the label, regardless of the book, tends to be "better" anyway), thus creating much greater urgency among buyers who "just want to own the book", and will pay what it takes to own the book regardless of the "PQ" on the label because, let's face it, there are only so many "perfect" books for only so many choosy people to pay a "premium" for out there. Inevitably, as we have seen, books with other "PQ" labels will sell, and, as we have seen, the weighted effect of the market activity is that the alleged "premium" evaporates and/or is rendered meaningless by the sheer inconsistency of the data of what people have been shown to be willing to pay for all those other copies. (thumbs u (thumbs u (thumbs u (thumbs u

 

-J.

 

 

Just for the record, I don't think I was the one to say that, at least not directly - my only note on availability of this book is that for ME there are few opportunities to buy this book, because THE RENT IS TOO DAMN HIGH!

 

Also for the record, if I thought your argument was that PQ never matters in regard to price, I'd find that ridiculous and pick up my pitchfork to join the mob. Some folks here want to frame it that way, but I don't think that is your argument.

[Hulksdaddy1]

Thought the ebay Avengers 57 comparo was a good example of controlled environment.

[Jaydogrules]

Back to B&B 28 however, as ttfitz I believe noted, there are far fewer opportunities to own the book in any grade, let alone mint grade (where the "PQ" on the label, regardless of the book, tends to be "better" anyway), thus creating much greater urgency among buyers who "just want to own the book", and will pay what it takes to own the book regardless of the "PQ" on the label because, let's face it, there are only so many "perfect" books for only so many choosy people to pay a "premium" for out there. Inevitably, as we have seen, books with other "PQ" labels will sell, and, as we have seen, the weighted effect of the market activity is that the alleged "premium" evaporates and/or is rendered meaningless by the sheer inconsistency of the data of what people have been shown to be willing to pay for all those other copies. (thumbs u (thumbs u (thumbs u (thumbs u

 

-J.

 

 

Just for the record, I don't think I was the one to say that, at least not directly - my only note on availability of this book is that for ME there are few opportunities to buy this book, because THE RENT IS TOO DAMN HIGH!

 

Also for the record, if I thought your argument was that PQ never matters in regard to price, I'd find that ridiculous and pick up my pitchfork to join the mob. Some folks here want to frame it that way, but I don't think that is your argument.

 

It isn't, you are correct.

 

-J.

[namisgr]

for this argument, comps do need to happen in a controlled environment...we are not discussing avg prices for grades (grades that encompass all variables that make up said grade) , we are discussing a specific variable that can only be "compared" in a controlled environment to truly see an effect...

 

Not always. There are many population-based human, animal, and plant-based research studies, also referred to as cross-sectional studies. Using large sample sizes to compare two or more groups that differ in some variable, influences of that variable may be determined. The large sample sizes eliminate any potential influences of non-controlled factors, which in the absence of any selection bias wind up being equally distributed between the groups being compared.

 

With a large enough sample size, a population of comics of one page quality can be compared with validity to a population of another page quality. The Hulk 181 datamining is an example. If, however, the sample size is too small, as is the case with the paucity of sales data for BB28, then no valid comparison can be made. In this latter case, a well-controlled comparison (referred to as a paired analysis) is necessary, such as provided by back-to-back sales on Comiclink, E-Bay, or through a dealer such as yourself.

[NinjaSealed]

for this argument, comps do need to happen in a controlled environment...we are not discussing avg prices for grades (grades that encompass all variables that make up said grade) , we are discussing a specific variable that can only be "compared" in a controlled environment to truly see an effect...

 

Not always. There are many population-based human, animal, and plant-based research studies, also referred to as cross-sectional studies. Using large sample sizes to compare two or more groups that differ in some variable, influences of that variable may be determined. The large sample sizes eliminate any potential influences of non-controlled factors, which in the absence of any selection bias wind up being equally distributed across the groups being compared.

 

With a large enough sample size, a population of comics of one page quality can be compared with validity to a population of another page quality. The Hulk 181 datamining is an example. If, however, the sample size is too small, as is the case with the paucity of sales data for BB28, then no valid comparison can be made. In this latter case, a well-controlled comparison is necessary, such as provided by back-to-back sales on Comiclink, E-Bay, or through a dealer such as yourself.

 

Great post (thumbs u Pretty much a first week topic in stats 101. Not enough data for a statistical inference is the same(or potentially worse) as no data for a statistical inference.

[G.A.tor]

for this argument, comps do need to happen in a controlled environment...we are not discussing avg prices for grades (grades that encompass all variables that make up said grade) , we are discussing a specific variable that can only be "compared" in a controlled environment to truly see an effect...

 

Not always. There are many population-based human, animal, and plant-based research studies, also referred to as cross-sectional studies. Using large sample sizes to compare two or more groups that differ in some variable, influences of that variable may be determined. The large sample sizes eliminate any potential influences of non-controlled factors, which in the absence of any selection bias wind up being equally distributed between the groups being compared.

 

With a large enough sample size, a population of comics of one page quality can be compared with validity to a population of another page quality. The Hulk 181 datamining is an example. If, however, the sample size is too small, as is the case with the paucity of sales data for BB28, then no valid comparison can be made. In this latter case, a well-controlled comparison is necessary, such as provided by back-to-back sales on Comiclink, E-Bay, or through a dealer such as yourself.

 

agreed, that's why I said for "this" argument (specific to bb28)....

 

we all know (well most all know) that pq absolutely commands, in general, a premium... it would with bb 28 too if we could get some controlled comp sales...problem is, as stated, there just aren't enough sales to establish that, so one must use logic and apply.... since it is obvious to most all that pq affects price, it is "reasonable" to assign same to bb 28, even though there is no corroborating data (either way)

 

and with that, I will return to silence on this matter...done all I can

[Jaydogrules]

for this argument, comps do need to happen in a controlled environment...we are not discussing avg prices for grades (grades that encompass all variables that make up said grade) , we are discussing a specific variable that can only be "compared" in a controlled environment to truly see an effect...

 

I can understand you saying this, since this approach has evidently produced the results that support your opinion on the matter.

 

But we are not discussing "average" prices (at least I am not). I surveyed individual transactions across multiple grades and did a unique comparison of each. This encompassed dozens of reporting agencies, and sales and it is certainly a large enough of a sample as a percentage of public transactions of this scarce SA book. Hulk 181 is a spurious example and sheds no light on this conversation or this book whatsoever.

 

Doing so revealed that not only do books with (allegedly, since we don't actually know unless we crack the slabs) "better 'PQ'" on the label not "always" sell for more, but they also, just as often sell for less.

 

Regardless of the reasons that it happened, it still happened.

 

If you want to say, "it happened because the other book sold on a different week/day/minute than the other."

 

So what? It still happened.

 

If you want to say, "well the other book was in an old label slab and had upgrade potential".

 

So what? It still happened.

 

If you want to say, "the one book didn't have marvel chipping and the other one did."

 

So what? It still happened.

 

If you want to say, "one was on ebay and the other was on a small Pedigree Comics auction".

 

So what? It still happened.

 

If you want to say "one had better eye appeal, no tape, better centering/wrap/registration" or whatever, it literally does not matter.

 

Why?

 

Because it still happened. The sales still happened and you cannot ignore/discount/minimize them just because they don't fit the narrative that you choose to believe in.

 

Understand that when all of these qualifications are overlaid on your statements, what you are essentially saying is that the "'Books with 'better 'PQ' on the label always sell for more....except when they don't." Which is what I also have been saying all along. Ironic, isn't it?

 

-J.

[G.A.tor]

I never said books with better pq always sell for more.... I am saying that a buyer given a choice at time of purchase, and all things/variables else being largely equal, a copy with better pages will sell first and will most likely sell for more (again, not always , but most always in my experience a premium is realized)...

 

your data does NOT provide or prove the buyer had an alternative copy to purchase (at time the book was sold).... that was the crux of my debate.... that's why your comps don't work for this debate....imo

 

that's all (thumbs u

[Jaydogrules]

I never said books with better pq always sell for more.... I am saying that a buyer given a choice at time of purchase, and all things/variables else being largely equal, a copy with better pages will sell first and will most likely sell for more (again, not always , but most always in my experience a premium is realized)...

 

your data does NOT provide or prove the buyer had an alternative copy to purchase (at time the book was sold).... that was the crux of my debate.... that's why your comps don't work for this debate....imo

 

that's all (thumbs u

 

You are correct, the comps do not say that. And I am not saying that either.

 

My point is (and has always been) that there is a buyer for every book, and the next guy in line to buy your book may not (probably not) care about the "PQ" on the label, and be willing (eager) to pay the same ask (or more, depending on how many other copies are available at the convention) than the first book irrespective of the "PQ" on the label. I believe that this phenomenon is what's responsible for the erratic results on the subject that we see on GPA (but that is just my personal opinion).

 

I'm just asking that you at least leave open the possibility that you may be needlessly under-pricing your non "white/ow/w/ow" etc. books. Hey if I might actually be onto something, it's a win-win since you make a little more money on them.

 

-J.

[G.A.tor]

I never said books with better pq always sell for more.... I am saying that a buyer given a choice at time of purchase, and all things/variables else being largely equal, a copy with better pages will sell first and will most likely sell for more (again, not always , but most always in my experience a premium is realized)...

 

your data does NOT provide or prove the buyer had an alternative copy to purchase (at time the book was sold).... that was the crux of my debate.... that's why your comps don't work for this debate....imo

 

that's all (thumbs u

 

You are correct, the comps do not say that. And I am not saying that either.

 

My point is (and has always been) that there is a buyer for every book, and the next guy in line to buy your book may not (probably not) care about the "PQ" on the label, and be willing (eager) to pay the same ask (or more, depending on how many other copies are available at the convention) than the first book irrespective of the "PQ" on the label. I believe that this phenomenon is what's responsible for the erratic results on the subject that we see on GPA (but that is just my personal opinion).

 

I'm just asking that you at least leave open the possibility that you may be needlessly under-pricing your non "white page" books. Hey if I might actually be onto something, it's a win-win since you make a little more money on them.

 

-J.

sounds like we have been debating different premises

[Jaydogrules]

I never said books with better pq always sell for more.... I am saying that a buyer given a choice at time of purchase, and all things/variables else being largely equal, a copy with better pages will sell first and will most likely sell for more (again, not always , but most always in my experience a premium is realized)...

 

your data does NOT provide or prove the buyer had an alternative copy to purchase (at time the book was sold).... that was the crux of my debate.... that's why your comps don't work for this debate....imo

 

that's all (thumbs u

 

You are correct, the comps do not say that. And I am not saying that either.

 

My point is (and has always been) that there is a buyer for every book, and the next guy in line to buy your book may not (probably not) care about the "PQ" on the label, and be willing (eager) to pay the same ask (or more, depending on how many other copies are available at the convention) than the first book irrespective of the "PQ" on the label. I believe that this phenomenon is what's responsible for the erratic results on the subject that we see on GPA (but that is just my personal opinion).

 

I'm just asking that you at least leave open the possibility that you may be needlessly under-pricing your non "white page" books. Hey if I might actually be onto something, it's a win-win since you make a little more money on them.

 

-J.

sounds like we have been debating different premises

 

Oops.

 

-J.

[G.A.tor]

no wonder you were wrong

[Jaydogrules]

no wonder you were wrong

 

Indeed, I do not necessarily disagree with that scenario you present, but I do believe it's simply the beginning of an analysis and not the entirety of one. I hope the counterpoints presented demonstrate that, if nothing else.

 

-J.

[Hulksdaddy1]

no wonder you were wrong

 

Indeed, I do not necessarily disagree with that scenario you present, but I do believe it's simply the beginning of an analysis and not the entirety of one. I hope the counterpoints presented demonstrate that, if nothing else.

 

-J.

 

[Hulksdaddy1]

[Dark Knight]