I would be happy to if I had any of the listed items.  :)

Once again, these figure are *not* a figment of anyones imagination, they are based on actual eBay sales. If someone has a system out there to give approximate values of items other than saying "Well, I know that item(s) is worth more than that", please feel free to post it. I am sure everyone on the board and Scott is going to be all ears.



<edit>



And for those not familiar with the system that we currently use, here are a couple links from the site:



Page Not Found



Page Not Found

Unless I am missing something, I haven't seen any of those in VG condition on eBay recently. Let's be realistic, a 1st print Chainmail with dog crap on it MIGHT go for only $350. I know I and most everyone else here would pay more.

Personally, I think the only real way to get accurate values for those items would be to accept submissions from Acaeum members on what they personally think they are worth, and average the totals, throwing out idiotic valuations. Then it could be voted on by the same members.

bclarkie wrote:

Deadlord36 wrote:.... throwing out idiotic valuations.

being fair tho, the line would be drawn in the fact there are how many? other members on the valuation "team" who are also placing a value on an item.



lets be very honest, the prices shown on that list, you tell me anyone on this forum who wouldnt snap at anything there for the values shown?



as deim just said, would he sell the tsoj for the value shown...er no.... so does that not make a mockery of what is stated?



anyway, i hope y'all get it sorted one way or the other



mind you if anyone has 2 or 3 tsoj's for that price, i will have the lot

Comparing values from June 2003 -> June 2005, there were 43 decreases in value vs. 41 increases, not accounting for inflation.  Total dollar value of the column went from $15,339 in 2003, "up" to $15,358, a nominal increase, while being a slight "real" decrease of about 6% if you factor in a 3% inflation.  I had expected to see more increases.  Total dollar volume has probably increased, and a few high profile auctions such as the Kuntz collection have definitely boosted spending on rare items.  Has the market for Chainmail 1sts and woodgrains been saturated and people are moving on to manuscripts and other one-offs?  ;-)

Things seem to be kicking off at the right time . . .  :D   I am just finishing up assembling (and gathering) what data there currently is and will (hopefully) send it out to Foul by the end of the weekend.

There have been many good points made and I'll go ahead and add a little to the discussion.

First off, it should be understood that tracking value "trends" over the last few years may not give very accurate info as I don't think many values were updated with any frequency (thus the Valuation Board).

On top of that, the "Beta" values that were first presented also had sketchy values as well as too many grades and a % scale for lower grades that was too low.  I spent a lot of time considering everything and prososed a "revised" system that has met with general approval (though as has been noted, things are constantly being "tinkered" with and can be altered as needed).

The current scale consists of 6 categories with higher relative values.  The 10.0 grade has been taken away from MINT and assigned to NEAR MINT.  This is one major reason some of the values may seem to have not changed from the original BETAs.  In most cases, the NM value did increase (though it was often less than the previous MINT value.

To better illustrate this, take a look at the VG grade.  It stands at 60% of the NM value.  This is not an unreasonable number . . . you may argue that it should be somewhat higher . . . or somewhat lower.  Perhaps it could be 50% for "common" items and 70% for Rarity 5's?  Sliding scales have been considered and met with some approval and some disapproval.  It is something that is always being considered . . .



As for the Chainmail 1st and 2nd edition?   We all know it was undervalued, but there was no current data (at least until Burntwire sold his which will be reflected in the current valuations).

As for the Tsojconth?  Off the top of my head, I believe the last two auctions have impacted the value to increase NM to $950 and VG to $575.  I think that is fairly representative . . . as least as far as a guide goes.

Older auctions do carry progressively less weight . . . as Deadlord mentions "don't quote me prices from five years ago".  I agree for the most part . . . it is easy with Tsojconth as there is so much data.  But for others there is very little to go by.

As for GenCon auctions:  I definitely agree that eBay is not the "be all and end all" for values.  If anyone has any hard data on GenCon auctions with approximate grades then send it to me.  I don't see why it couldn't be used.   Acaeum classifieds?  Also good in many cases though we are left with the question of "honesty".  Personally, I think it best to take people at their word.  If you run an Acaeum classifieds like Dathon for his pre-pub or Stormber for his 1st Woodie, then contact me with the results (I think confirmation from both the seller and buyer would suffice).  I'm always looking for help . . .

Deadlord echoes previous sentiments about "submitted" values.  This sounds like a good idea in principle, but has been rejected for a variety of reasons.  I won't lie . . . it's not going to happen on a large scale.  The purpose of the VB is to present values based on sales and grades.  In some minor cases, interpretation has taken a very  small role and even this will be lessened as more data comes through.

The market does tent to fluctuate quite a bit.  After all, it is a small core of collector's who spend the big bucks.  Not too long ago, Deadlord sold an Inverness for @ 1,600.  And not too long after, his other Inverness didn't meet the reserve (I could be wrong, but I think bidding fizzled out around the $800-900 mark?  Four months later, another goes for $1,500.  Where was everyone who would pay the VG price of $765 on Deadlord's second auction?

I think this post has rambled on long enough, however . . .  By the way, if there are any on these forums who don't know, I am the moderator of the Valuation Board (taking over after darkseraphim left).  Though everyone on the VB contributes, I have taken it upon myself to suggest, modify and help devise much of the system in place - building upon darkseraphim's framework and incorporating the suggestions of board members, regular forum discussions and my own ideas.  Anyone should feel free to PM, email ( [email protected] ) or post messages if they like.  

Paul

Deadlord36 wrote:I'll take a mint B2 over a VG Tsoj any day. Haven't the prices on B2's been hot at auction lately?

Come on, the valuations can easily be done with member input and common sense. Here's a demo:



Rahasia VG: $700-$800

Character Archaic VG: $200-$300

Fazzlewood VG: $800-$1,000

DG 1st VG: $500+



If anyone wants to argue my valuations, feel free, but do not quote 4 year old auction prices. Give me valid reasons why these prices are off. If anything, they are still low.

It seems a few of you missed my point completely.  The valuations are based on eBay final prices.  If we need to adjust the algorithm we use in calculating the valuations, fine.  But they are based in fact.



Q: What makes an individual Fazzle worth $800-$1,000?  



A: Nothing.  It is worth that when two individuals (buyer & seller) are willing to exchange it at that price.  Before that, it's all conjecture and wishful thinking.



The valuations are not a real-time pricing predictor!  They provide a reverse-looking view of eBay prices over time, and they will always appear low in "boom" times, and high in "bust" times.  The current algorithm allows them to remain fairly immobile, creating a stable trend line.



Consider what would happen if we took DL36's suggestion and raised Fazzle's valuation to $900.  Lots of people might agree that's "what it's worth".  There'd be an inevitable bidding war over the next few that came up, with people frantically looking up the "price" on Acaeum, and bumping up a bit to edge out the competition.  Fazzles would start selling higher.  Much higher.  Next year someone might say they're worth $1200 because a few sold for that.  Rinse and repeat.  I don't know what that's called in economics, but in anthropology we'd call it runaway evolution.  8)



Where they are useful in getting an idea of a trend over time and comparing it to the current market.  For example, I reasoned as following:



A VG Tsoj. historically sells for $400-$650, lower in the last year or so.  But the current market has been hot, so I knew to start the auction in the high end of that range.

bclarkie wrote:
Example: before he put his Tsojconth up on ebay, I think Deimos may have been a bit concerned about the hit they took in the recent valuations update, but in the end he got more for it than what it was listed at.

saying that....if i really want something, i couldnt give a rats crap what the valuation is, i want it and so will bid whatever it takes to get it. i think to a degree, it goes like that for a lot of ppl, especially among the very rare items.



Al

bclarkie wrote: The valuations are in no means a way of telling someone what they should pay or not pay, it is just a guide.

its not that i do or don't agree with you, but you try telling the vast majority out there that "its just a guide" .... aint happening chummer



Al