General discussion thread - keep the other threads clean 29 29

[vaillant]

If you are quoting GPA and saying that prices are going up then yes you should include it, since you know that they are not ALL going up, as you know of the percentage sale.

 

Why do you assume Roy knew there were copies which sold for less? He did not say it.

[jaybuck43]

In my first post on the subject, I said I assumed Roy did not. But Roy did say sales prices just keep going up, and so Peter challenged that.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

If you are quoting GPA and saying that prices are going up then yes you should include it, since you know that they are not ALL going up, as you know of the percentage sale.

 

Why do you assume Roy knew there were copies which sold for less? He did not say it.

He was replying to Roy's example

 

 

If I know that a copy of Brand X # 1 CGC 9.7sold for a percentage of GPA at a dealer's website or another auction house,and I have a copy for sale should that be included?

 

[VintageComics]

If you are quoting GPA and saying that prices are going up then yes you should include it, since you know that they are not ALL going up, as you know of the percentage sale.

 

Personally, had you just thrown up GPA data and a price I would have considered Peter's post threadkrapping. But the inclusion of the statement that prices keep going up, then yea I consider Peter's thread more of a disprovement of that point.

 

Just my

 

When I stated what I did about the book increasing value, it was because I was pleasantly surprised that prices had increased for the book on GPA since my sale of the book fell through. There was no intention of misleading anyone.

 

And my inclusion was GPA data was me just trying to be helpful as many people don't subscribe to GPA.

 

And since PiP has twice done something questionable in a sales thread of mine, I don't know what his intentions were but I don't think anybody else would have handled it that way. If it's not a threadcrap is certainly is borderline threadcrap.

 

Anyhow, for future sales I'll be sure to choose my words more carefully. As they say, you can never please everyone.

[cujobyte]

In my opinion, I felt the comment was a bit intrusive. How about we add: most everything on comiclink sold for 20% off gpa due to the fact that: they ended it the same night as comic connect's auctions and great raw books from sparklecity's auctions on ebay, oh and it's 3 weeks before Christmas and despite a couple thinking it's a great time to sell, gpa doesn't suggest this in past years except ultra hot books like FF 45 and the like.

 

 

[EC ed]

I certainly don't think Roy did anything wrong here, but man...this discussion is taking me further down the path of thinking that the "best" approach in selling a book is just to list the book and the asking price, with no reference whatsoever to any market data, price guide values, etc...

 

In the comic collectibles market, there will always be information asymmetry that cannot be fully resolved. If you don't want to pay my asking price, give me your offer and the data/rationale that support your offer, and I'll tell you what data I think support my asking price. It's just basic communication/negotiation (which should be done via PM, of course)...if we think our data are too disparate, we won't do the transaction

 

 

So, wait a sec...what's the real issue here that we're concerned about? Suppose a hypothetical seller (not Roy) posts a book for sale, and cherry picks some GPA data that supports his/her asking price. Is it just irritating to us on general principle, or are we truly concerned that a naive, uninformed comic collector is going to come along in here and pay "too much" for the book? Is that why we feel the need to post up data counter-examples in peoples' sales threads? Do we have "protection of the uninformed comic collector" in mind? If so, that's a tall order.

[Hado]

In my first post on the subject, I said I assumed Roy did not. But Roy did say sales prices just keep going up, and so Peter challenged that.

But is Peter allowed to challenge anything in another persons active sales thread?

[EC ed]

I think I'm getting to the point where I think the only thing that should be challenged in sales threads are factually inaccurate statements.

 

For example, if someone says that "GPA prices are on the rise" and the sales prices recorded in GPA are actually rising, that statement is a true statement. The fact that sales prices "off GPA" may be declining doesn't make the statement "GPA prices are on the rise" inaccurate. So, I wouldn't challenge that statement, even though the supplied statement is not the full picture. As others have stated, there will always be incomplete information.

 

As another example, if someone says that "the most recent sale in GPA for this grade was $X" and it's not $X, that should be corrected. If someone says something like "there was a GPA sale in this grade a couple months ago for $Y", as long as that's true, it doesn't matter if there was a more recent sale for $Z...the statement about $Y is incomplete in the big picture, but that supplied statement is not itself inaccurate.

 

That is...challenge/correct inaccurate information, but not incomplete accurate information

[jaybuck43]

Given the way we have lots of n00bs run here and buy books, my concern is price manipulation/erroneous justification and protecting the uninformed. Not everyone knows that CLINK exists. They also don't know that GPA is incomplete, especially given how many of us (myself included) treat it as the bible.

 

Roy did not do that here, I cannot say that enough. But yes my concern is the person who cherry picks a random crazy sale and says "X book is selling at this number per GPA". You'll recall I've run down a few sellers on here who manipulated GPA.

 

If I threw up an AF 15 CGC 4.0 Cr/OW for $11,000 and said "12 month GPA is $10,319 and a 3.5 just sold for $10,000" wouldn't you want to at least let people who don't have GPA know that the last 4.0 sale was a Cr/OW back in October for $8,899, given the selective nature of excluding it. As Edowens said, I think the way to go from now on is to post book and price and that's it. If people want to pay it, let them, if not I can use GPA as a private negotiating tool over PM.

 

This would also prevent a lot of threadcrapping, and I'm not sure how George feels about GPA data (which is charged for) being posted free of charge.

[EC ed]

I think the way to go from now on is to post book and price and that's it. If people want to pay it, let them, if not I can use GPA as a private negotiating tool over PM.

 

This would also prevent a lot of threadcrapping, and I'm not sure how George feels about GPA data (which is charged for) being posted free of charge.

 

Both of these ^ (thumbs u

[thunsicker]

I'm with all of y'all. I personally would prefer if everyone just put pictures, rules, and price. As for questioning statements made in threads always do it in pm. The only question is what to do if someone refuses to make a change when a mistake is pointed out to them via PM? Is it okay, then, to correct them in the thread? I'm not sure.

Edited December 16, 2014 by thunsicker

[vaillant]

Given the way we have lots of n00bs run here and buy books, my concern is price manipulation/erroneous justification and protecting the uninformed. Not everyone knows that CLINK exists. They also don't know that GPA is incomplete, especially given how many of us (myself included) treat it as the bible.

 

I have doubts on whether a person set out to buy a $2000 or so book, could be so uninformed. And I do think GPA is even a more specialized tool than auction houses (or eBay) past sales data.

 

But since the discussion started as a question whether PiP intervention could be threadcrapping, I say "yes", as Roy wasn’t trying to fool any unexperienced collector.

[revat]

I think I'm getting to the point where I think the only thing that should be challenged in sales threads are factually inaccurate statements.

 

For example, if someone says that "GPA prices are on the rise" and the sales prices recorded in GPA are actually rising, that statement is a true statement. The fact that sales prices "off GPA" may be declining doesn't make the statement "GPA prices are on the rise" inaccurate. So, I wouldn't challenge that statement, even though the supplied statement is not the full picture. As others have stated, there will always be incomplete information.

 

As another example, if someone says that "the most recent sale in GPA for this grade was $X" and it's not $X, that should be corrected. If someone says something like "there was a GPA sale in this grade a couple months ago for $Y", as long as that's true, it doesn't matter if there was a more recent sale for $Z...the statement about $Y is incomplete in the big picture, but that supplied statement is not itself inaccurate.

 

That is...challenge/correct inaccurate information, but not incomplete accurate information

 

well said +1

 

Seller's, please don't lie (or be wrong).

 

Everyone else, do your own research and let seller's use whatever methods they choose (other than lying), and they're following the rules.

 

But if someone is factually wrong (and that's provable), they should be called on it.

 

 

[vaillant]

I think I'm getting to the point where I think the only thing that should be challenged in sales threads are factually inaccurate statements.

 

For example, if someone says that "GPA prices are on the rise" and the sales prices recorded in GPA are actually rising, that statement is a true statement. The fact that sales prices "off GPA" may be declining doesn't make the statement "GPA prices are on the rise" inaccurate. So, I wouldn't challenge that statement, even though the supplied statement is not the full picture. As others have stated, there will always be incomplete information.

 

As another example, if someone says that "the most recent sale in GPA for this grade was $X" and it's not $X, that should be corrected. If someone says something like "there was a GPA sale in this grade a couple months ago for $Y", as long as that's true, it doesn't matter if there was a more recent sale for $Z...the statement about $Y is incomplete in the big picture, but that supplied statement is not itself inaccurate.

 

That is...challenge/correct inaccurate information, but not incomplete accurate information

 

well said +1

 

Seller's, please don't lie (or be wrong).

 

Everyone else, do your own research and let seller's use whatever methods they choose (other than lying), and they're following the rules.

 

But if someone is factually wrong (and that's provable), they should be called on it.

 

 

Yes, Ed summarized it very well, but I still think PiP could have simply PMd him and Roy would have added the information / modified the data.

[thunsicker]

I think I'm getting to the point where I think the only thing that should be challenged in sales threads are factually inaccurate statements.

 

For example, if someone says that "GPA prices are on the rise" and the sales prices recorded in GPA are actually rising, that statement is a true statement. The fact that sales prices "off GPA" may be declining doesn't make the statement "GPA prices are on the rise" inaccurate. So, I wouldn't challenge that statement, even though the supplied statement is not the full picture. As others have stated, there will always be incomplete information.

 

As another example, if someone says that "the most recent sale in GPA for this grade was $X" and it's not $X, that should be corrected. If someone says something like "there was a GPA sale in this grade a couple months ago for $Y", as long as that's true, it doesn't matter if there was a more recent sale for $Z...the statement about $Y is incomplete in the big picture, but that supplied statement is not itself inaccurate.

 

That is...challenge/correct inaccurate information, but not incomplete accurate information

 

well said +1

 

Seller's, please don't lie (or be wrong).

 

Everyone else, do your own research and let seller's use whatever methods they choose (other than lying), and they're following the rules.

 

But if someone is factually wrong (and that's provable), they should be called on it.

 

 

Yes, Ed summarized it very well, but I still think PiP could have simply PMd him and Roy would have added the information / modified the data.

 

And on that point as a seller it's something I would want to know. The last thing I would want is to seem like someone who intentionally twisted information to try to maximize profit. There are people who cherry pick information and I never say anything in their threads, but I do remember it and avoid their sales threads going forward.

[HarveySwick]

If you are quoting GPA and saying that prices are going up then yes you should include it, since you know that they are not ALL going up, as you know of the percentage sale.

 

Personally, had you just thrown up GPA data and a price I would have considered Peter's post threadkrapping. But the inclusion of the statement that prices keep going up, then yea I consider Peter's thread more of a disprovement of that point.

 

Just my

 

If Roy had simply quoted GPA figures and left it at that, I'd think Peter's comment would be threadkrapping. But the addition of "the book keeps going up" opens the door for Peter's comment.

[jaybuck43]

Given the way we have lots of n00bs run here and buy books, my concern is price manipulation/erroneous justification and protecting the uninformed. Not everyone knows that CLINK exists. They also don't know that GPA is incomplete, especially given how many of us (myself included) treat it as the bible.

 

I have doubts on whether a person set out to buy a $2000 or so book, could be so uninformed. And I do think GPA is even a more specialized tool than auction houses (or eBay) past sales data.

 

But since the discussion started as a question whether PiP intervention could be threadcrapping, I say "yes", as Roy wasn’t trying to fool any unexperienced collector.

 

Yes yes they can be so uninformed. That's the whole issue right now with all of the speculation. Marvel announces Ms. Marvel movie and boom, a $600 book in 2013 becomes a $1700 book today. Will it maintain that value? Probably not.

 

Those uninformed people are part of the reason we are seeing such high prices. I personally wouldn't touch a NM 98 9.8 for more than $350. Why? because I know that there was a print run of over 100,000. I also know about the census and how many 9.8 copies exist, plus the probability of how many others exist out there ungraded. So to me, anything over $350 is overpriced. n00bs don't know this but want to get involved and here all about the book and seeing it jump up and up, they assume there is no ceiling and thus jump on board at high asking prices. Then those high asking price justifies an even higher ask. and on and on up it goes, until you have a price correction.

[vaillant]

If you are quoting GPA and saying that prices are going up then yes you should include it, since you know that they are not ALL going up, as you know of the percentage sale.

 

Personally, had you just thrown up GPA data and a price I would have considered Peter's post threadkrapping. But the inclusion of the statement that prices keep going up, then yea I consider Peter's thread more of a disprovement of that point.

 

Just my

 

If Roy had simply quoted GPA figures and left it at that, I'd think Peter's comment would be threadkrapping. But the addition of "the book keeps going up" opens the door for Peter's comment.

 

It’s clear that it opens a door, but it remains to see which is the appropriate way to pass through it, that’s where the discussion arised.

[HarveySwick]

(thumbs u

[vaillant]

Yes yes they can be so uninformed. That's the whole issue right now with all of the speculation. Marvel announces Ms. Marvel movie and boom, a $600 book in 2013 becomes a $1700 book today. Will it maintain that value? Probably not.

 

Those uninformed people are part of the reason we are seeing such high prices. I personally wouldn't touch a NM 98 9.8 for more than $350. Why? because I know that there was a print run of over 100,000. I also know about the census and how many 9.8 copies exist, plus the probability of how many others exist out there ungraded. So to me, anything over $350 is overpriced. n00bs don't know this but want to get involved and here all about the book and seeing it jump up and up, they assume there is no ceiling and thus jump on board at high asking prices. Then those high asking price justifies an even higher ask. and on and on up it goes, until you have a price correction.

 

I wasn’t thinking about such kind of speculation. It is clear that most collectors should know how to properly value a New Mutants #98. Roy generally sells Silver Age keys, or Golden Age books, so what I was saying is who buys a Green Lantern first appearance is not the same kind of people dropping from nowhere and buying a NM #98 for $800, that’s all.