Informal poll
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 3 of 41, 2, 3, 4
Author

User avatar

Prolific Collector

Posts: 851
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Last Visit: Dec 29, 2020

Post Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 7:45 pm 
 

bclarkie wrote:I think one point being missed here in this discussion is the fact are we talking about the "value" of something or are we talking about "how much someone is willing to pay". Both I think are totally different amounts and I think there is some confusion to that point. Fact of the matter is just because some JACKASS is willing to pay $450.00 for a Warriors of Mars, does not mean that it has that "value" :?. I mean using that logic, I could say well sh*t, "I'd pay $20,000 for a second print B2!!!", but as everyone clearly knows, that sure in hell does not mean that it has that "value". That is were I think the valuation board comes in, and establishing figures on what items actual values seem to be based on previous sales history. I know this has been beat to death, but a price guide is simply a GUIDE. The guide itself is supposed to be just to establish the relative particular "value" of an item and it is not set up to say that is what you have to pay. It is also not to determine "How much is somebody willing to pay". As stated before, I know we don't live in a vacuum, and I know instinctually a lot of people view price guides as saying that is what you have to pay, but in order to have an effective price guide you have to do it based on the averages. Just another of my .02(I am going to have to start selling off my collection if this keeps up :wink: )


A price guide is supposed to represent the value of an item in various conditions, not the price someone is willing to pay for it.  I believe that the confusion over value and the price someone paid is the source of so many disagreements.  But so as not to derail the thread any further, I won't give specifics, because there's no need to pollute two threads with what has been referred to as my "irrational" thoughts.:roll:



Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered replying to this thread, as I seem to be as welcome as Maxwell right about now.



  


Sage Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 2884
Joined: Nov 04, 2004
Last Visit: May 09, 2020

Post Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:41 pm 
 

Traveller wrote:Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered replying to this thread, as I seem to be as welcome as Maxwell right about now.




Keep posting, Trav. I might not have been in agreement with everything you've written, but I do appreciate that you're attempting to approach the subject with logical arguments and great passion.



I've learned a lot, both from your posts and from those of some who have fired back at you. I hope everyone keeps bringing forth suggestions, and I further hope we all try to dial down the snide remarks and witty comebacks ... no matter where one stands in the Great Valuation Debates of 2005, it's important to remember that there's a difference between criticism and constructive criticism, not to mention a difference between defending yourself and being too defensive.



End of sermon. :)

 WWW  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector

Posts: 5613
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2021
Location: New Hampsha

Post Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:54 pm 
 

Ethesis, I see your point, but like I said, Huckie would not be the only one to pay $1,500. Someone was willing to pay $1,495. And someone was probably willing to pay $1,100. And so on.


If you hit a Rowsdower, you get to keep it.

 WWW  


Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6463
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Dec 25, 2019

Post Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 10:01 pm 
 

Xaxaxe wrote:Keep posting, Trav. I might not have been in agreement with everything you've written, but I do appreciate that you're attempting to approach the subject with logical arguments and great passion.



I've learned a lot, both from your posts and from those of some who have fired back at you. I hope everyone keeps bringing forth suggestions, and I further hope we all try to dial down the snide remarks and witty comebacks ... no matter where one stands in the Great Valuation Debates of 2005, it's important to remember that there's a difference between criticism and constructive criticism, not to mention a difference between defending yourself and being too defensive.



End of sermon. :)




I agree. I think there is definitely room for everyone's opinion, especially well thought out and well meaning ones. I think that we All need to do less attacking and more discussing.



Traveller wrote:Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered replying to this thread, as I seem to be as welcome as Maxwell right about now.




Besides Trav, you write and spell a hell of a lot better than maxwell ever did. The only word that maxwell ever spelled right on a consistant basis was f*ck. :wink: Go figure. :roll:


"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1709
Joined: Feb 04, 2004
Last Visit: Aug 23, 2016
Location: Chandler, AZ

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 3:25 am 
 

Various statements from the previous posts.




Traveller, just to throw in my own opinion . . . of course, you are welcome to continue to post . . . in fact, I hope you do. But you must admit, you got downright rude and insulting with your replies . . . if you don't believe me, just put yourself in my shoes and go back and read them. . .



That is often the curse of the internet sometimes. It is easy to get carried away when we are typing things out to people whom we identify with mainly as "screen names'.





Hell, I bet if Deadlord and Maxwell could have met at the local tavern a few months ago, they would have drained a few beers and left on friendly terms! :D


"Gleemonex makes it feel like it's seventy-two degrees in your head... all... the... time! "

  

User avatar

Prolific Collector

Posts: 851
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Last Visit: Dec 29, 2020

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 3:25 am 
 

JFDL @ bclarkie



Thanks.  I really did need that laugh.



  

User avatar

Prolific Collector

Posts: 851
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Last Visit: Dec 29, 2020

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 3:41 am 
 

beyondthebreach wrote:Traveller, just to throw in my own opinion . . . of course, you are welcome to continue to post . . . in fact, I hope you do. But you must admit, you got downright rude and insulting with your replies . . . if you don't believe me, just put yourself in my shoes and go back and read them. . .



That is often the curse of the internet sometimes. It is easy to get carried away when we are typing things out to people whom we identify with mainly as "screen names'.


I only get rude when I'm treated rudely.  And I was treated rudely.  I do apologize if you believed I was somehow insulting you, but I simply state facts, and refuse to sugar coat my words simply to make people feel better.  That's not how I work.  That has NEVER been how I work.



  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1709
Joined: Feb 04, 2004
Last Visit: Aug 23, 2016
Location: Chandler, AZ

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 3:53 am 
 

traveller wrote: and refuse to sugar coat my words simply to make people feel better. That's not how I work. That has NEVER been how I work.




I am very sorry for you then. I apologize for speaking up at all just now.





Good luck out there!



. . . it's a wild world . . .



it's hard to get by, just upon a smile . . .



8)


"Gleemonex makes it feel like it's seventy-two degrees in your head... all... the... time! "

  

User avatar

Prolific Collector

Posts: 851
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Last Visit: Dec 29, 2020

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:13 am 
 

:roll:



Getting a bit melodramatic are we?



  


Sage Collector

Posts: 2639
Joined: Jan 23, 2003
Last Visit: Jan 11, 2006

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 2:33 pm 
 

Traveller wrote::roll:



Getting a bit melodramatic are we?


If that's all it is, I love a decent melodrama to chill out...



Still seems like "ivory tower" syndrome, though; can read claims to be "listening", but little or no evidence to back such claims.

(Easy to see where the frustration comes from in such circumstances).

  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1709
Joined: Feb 04, 2004
Last Visit: Aug 23, 2016
Location: Chandler, AZ

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 3:16 pm 
 

harami2000 wrote:
Traveller wrote::roll:



Getting a bit melodramatic are we?


If that's all it is, I love a decent melodrama to chill out...



Still seems like "ivory tower" syndrome, though; can read claims to be "listening", but little or no evidence to back such claims.

(Easy to see where the frustration comes from in such circumstances).




Hey, nothing too serious going on here.  :)



 By the way, I did give a detailed and considerate response to travellers concerns back in the vaulation thread. . .  Why say I have the "ivory tower" syndome anyway?  For my part, I believe I have been trying to answer many of the concerns and questions raised with well thought out answers.  



I have listened to everything being said.



I am attempting to help devise a system that everyone will be content with.





How about starting a concern with a:



"that looks good, but have you ever considered. . . "



or



"one thing that occurs to me as a possible flaw is that . . ."



or



"maybe it might be beneficial to. . ."





:wink:


"Gleemonex makes it feel like it's seventy-two degrees in your head... all... the... time! "

  


Prolific Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 905
Joined: Apr 09, 2003
Last Visit: Nov 09, 2015
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 5:12 pm 
 

harami2000 wrote:
Traveller wrote::roll:



Getting a bit melodramatic are we?


If that's all it is, I love a decent melodrama to chill out...



Still seems like "ivory tower" syndrome, though; can read claims to be "listening", but little or no evidence to back such claims.

(Easy to see where the frustration comes from in such circumstances).




And my frustration is the direct result of sarcastic smart asses who contribute NOTHING but keep on criticising and bashing. Go post a proposal for an improvement to the valuation system before you reply to my comment. Traveller did that. You never did.


- "When the going gets weird, the Weird turn pro."

Hunter S. Thompson (July 18, 1937 - Feb 20, 2005)



  


Sage Collector

Posts: 2639
Joined: Jan 23, 2003
Last Visit: Jan 11, 2006

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 5:20 pm 
 

Ralf Toth wrote:
harami2000 wrote:
If that's all it is, I love a decent melodrama to chill out...



Still seems like "ivory tower" syndrome, though; can read claims to be "listening", but little or no evidence to back such claims.

(Easy to see where the frustration comes from in such circumstances).




And my frustration is the direct result of sarcastic smart asses who contribute NOTHING but keep on criticising and bashing. Go post a proposal for an improvement to the valuation system before you reply to my comment. Traveller did that. You never did.


You obviously NEVER BOTHERED READING MY WORDS, but just chose to take personal offense (or take personal offense on behalf of others) wherever you damn-well could, Ralf....

Thank you for confirming MY suspicions about you, as you would say...



If y'all are claiming to be "listening"; please show some evidence of doing so, otherwise it's absolutely pointless anyone providing feedback.

Even a list of "these are the points we're considering applying"...



And I would apologise for the swearing there, but you seem to feel perfectly free to throw words like "smart ass" around.



Sorry, but "ivory tower" describes you perfectly, even though I never applied that to a single individual, merely a repeated-a-hundred-times feeling that various issues were NOT being listened to, merely slammed as "not relevant" by the "powers that be".

  


Sage Collector

Posts: 2639
Joined: Jan 23, 2003
Last Visit: Jan 11, 2006

Post Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 5:29 pm 
 

beyondthebreach wrote:How about starting a concern with a:



"that looks good, but have you ever considered. . . "



or



"one thing that occurs to me as a possible flaw is that . . ."



or



"maybe it might be beneficial to. . ."





:wink:


Was that a wink or a melodramatic wink?



Sorry; but since when were only concerns written in exactly the form you require "listened to", oh teacher? (that was sarcastic, but your comments could easily be interpreted as such, too)

To "soft talk" would be to give the impression that things are generally "OK" with me, and that only some "fine tuning" would be required.



=



How about asking people's opinions before foisting a system on them in the first place without any advance notice?

*

Have already mentioned that it would be easy enough to run the two in parallel.

Similarly, you could revert to the old valuations for the time being; take the critique, both positive and negative, do some brainstorming, and come back with a "gamma", rather than a faulty "beta".



Leaving the current "valuations" in the public domain will be taken "as gospel" by passers-by.

(Just like no-one has yet corrected the "Dungeon Masters Guide (2nd Alpha): NM: $562 (9/04)" line, which I pointed out, in passing).



Thanks again for all the hard work. :)

  

User avatar

Prolific Collector

Posts: 851
Joined: Jun 12, 2004
Last Visit: Dec 29, 2020

Post Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:28 am 
 

harami2000 wrote:How about asking people's opinions before foisting a system on them in the first place without any advance notice?



Have already mentioned that it would be easy enough to run the two in parallel. Similarly, you could revert to the old valuations for the time being; take the critique, both positive and negative, do some brainstorming, and come back with a "gamma", rather than a faulty "beta".



Leaving the current "valuations" in the public domain will be taken "as gospel" by passers-by. (Just like no-one has yet corrected the "Dungeon Masters Guide (2nd Alpha): NM: $562 (9/04)" line, which I pointed out, in passing).



Thanks again for all the hard work. :)


I have to agree here.  Price guides are not taken as guides by the general public, and never have been.  That's the reality of the situation, although most collectible markets, if they publish a price guide, they still call it a guide and make mention that these are suggested values simply to cover their own asses.



The current page is not ready for public consumption, and you will have people who frequent this site to check on prices taking those prices and applying them to their auctions or other sales.  What happens when you finally get the page fine tuned only to see values of items, versus what they've paid for the item drop?



You're going to have a great number of VERY upset people.



You of the valuation board do yourselves a favor.  For less headaches until you get the valuation system worked out, take down the new page and put back the old one.  Once the kinks are worked out, then you put the new page up.  Of course, you have a LOT of kinks to work out, so it may be a while.



  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6169
Joined: Jan 03, 2005
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2021
Location: UK

Post Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 11:06 am 
 

Traveller wrote:
harami2000 wrote:How about asking people's opinions before foisting a system on them in the first place without any advance notice?



Have already mentioned that it would be easy enough to run the two in parallel. Similarly, you could revert to the old valuations for the time being; take the critique, both positive and negative, do some brainstorming, and come back with a "gamma", rather than a faulty "beta".



Leaving the current "valuations" in the public domain will be taken "as gospel" by passers-by. (Just like no-one has yet corrected the "Dungeon Masters Guide (2nd Alpha): NM: $562 (9/04)" line, which I pointed out, in passing).



Thanks again for all the hard work. :)


I have to agree here. Price guides are not taken as guides by the general public, and never have been. That's the reality of the situation, although most collectible markets, if they publish a price guide, they still call it a guide and make mention that these are suggested values simply to cover their own asses.



The current page is not ready for public consumption, and you will have people who frequent this site to check on prices taking those prices and applying them to their auctions or other sales. What happens when you finally get the page fine tuned only to see values of items, versus what they've paid for the item drop?



You're going to have a great number of VERY upset people.



You of the valuation board do yourselves a favor. For less headaches until you get the valuation system worked out, take down the new page and put back the old one. Once the kinks are worked out, then you put the new page up. Of course, you have a LOT of kinks to work out, so it may be a while.




By the same token, I'd be very pleased if some seller's would visit the site and set their BIN prices accordingly.  :D


This week I've been mostly eating . . . chicken and wild rice soup.

 WWW  


Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6463
Joined: Dec 13, 2004
Last Visit: Dec 25, 2019

Post Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 11:19 am 
 

harami2000 wrote:How about asking people's opinions before foisting a system on them in the first place without any advance notice?



Have already mentioned that it would be easy enough to run the two in parallel. Similarly, you could revert to the old valuations for the time being; take the critique, both positive and negative, do some brainstorming, and come back with a "gamma", rather than a faulty "beta".



Leaving the current "valuations" in the public domain will be taken "as gospel" by passers-by. (Just like no-one has yet corrected the "Dungeon Masters Guide (2nd Alpha): NM: $562 (9/04)" line, which I pointed out, in passing).



Thanks again for all the hard work. :)


Traveller wrote:I have to agree here. Price guides are not taken as guides by the general public, and never have been. That's the reality of the situation, although most collectible markets, if they publish a price guide, they still call it a guide and make mention that these are suggested values simply to cover their own asses.



The current page is not ready for public consumption, and you will have people who frequent this site to check on prices taking those prices and applying them to their auctions or other sales. What happens when you finally get the page fine tuned only to see values of items, versus what they've paid for the item drop?



You're going to have a great number of VERY upset people.



You of the valuation board do yourselves a favor. For less headaches until you get the valuation system worked out, take down the new page and put back the old one. Once the kinks are worked out, then you put the new page up. Of course, you have a LOT of kinks to work out, so it may be a while.




Hey folks, just trying to be the voice of reason here, but in all fairness here, I think that this is what is causing tension around here. I agree that there are definitely some things that are not correct with the current valuations, but I think the way everyone is going about it is wrong. I think part of it stems from hard feelings about who is and who is not currently on the valuation board. I am sure that the kinks on these valuations for the most part Will be fixed, but there is no Perfect system. Traveller and Harami, I am not trying to pick on you guys or single you guys out specifically, but the 2 comments listed below just happened to be the first couple that I was able to find relatively quickly because they were posted very early in the discussions about the valuations. Believe me, there have been many others by several people on both sides:



harami2000 wrote:Good God, that's a horrendous mess! :( :( :(



Page Not Found



Make mine a SW'd Blackmoor in Poor condition. (*g*)

Plus a 1st Greyhawk in VG.

And a Fair 4th print OD&D box. (Maybe even a 2nd, too...)



No idea why the T1st DMG prices were "updated" after Paul's research...



*blinks eyes*



<...>



Could you please re-post the old valuations so I can save them for reference (flawed though they were).









p.s. Am with you on the NM/M distinction, but if appealing to comic grading & pricing a truly Mint (10.0) copy should cost 5 or more times a NM (9.4) one, not virtually the same... (*lol*)

*points to the CGC debacle...*. And even they don't go as hyper over trashing the lower grades.


Traveller wrote:I think part of the problem that has some objecting is this: the members of the valuation board are not being impartial in their grading. Some of them are resellers themselves while others are collectors. All of them though have a vested interest to maintain the highest prices possible. For the resellers, to maximize their profit. For the collectors, to say "my book is valued at X" and to maximize their profit if they sell.




Now at this point, I agree that so far the folks of the valuation board have met some of the suggestions with resistance, and have been relatively defensive about the current valuations, but if I was a member of the current board, I would probably be feeling a little bit defensive myself. Being a member of the board, I think you have to expect a certain amount of criticism with the figures no matter how good they are, but when the new valuations were first posted, people just came out FIRING with accusations and about how everything was screwed up and it was just SO wrong. At this point, I still see a lot of attacking and defending going on and it is preventing the process from progressing. Remember NOBODY is perfect. Currently, it is currenly one side against the other and it is clearly not working that way. I think everyone needs to take a step back and reassess the situation. If this is going to work, everyone has to work together. I don't think(I could be wrong on this of course, I have been many times in the past :oops: ) that it is feasable for Foul to just put up the old figures, so for right now we have to deal with the figures that are currently up. I think at this point we should start everything anew and try to work together fresh from step 1. Remember Everyone's opinion matters in this discussion, but try also to remember to respect other positions as well, as they may differ from your own. We can make this work, but only if we do it together. :D

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***** now ducking, as I am sure a volley of attacks is sure to follow up this post.**** :wink:


"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." -Neitzche

  


Long-Winded Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 3066
Joined: Jul 09, 2004
Last Visit: Apr 30, 2015

Post Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 11:51 am 
 

harami2000 wrote:Similarly, you could revert to the old valuations for the time being; take the critique, both positive and negative, do some brainstorming, and come back with a "gamma", rather than a faulty "beta".


Warning: This post is a complete sidebar.



From a software development viewpoint, the term "beta" refers to software in the process of "beta testing".  



It's not really a qualitative term, all betas are "faulty" until they complete this testing.  



A "gamma" is a feature-complete version of a beta, but not less faulty.  Yes, I'm a pedant.



From http://www.answers.com/topic/software-testing

Alpha testing

In software development, testing is usually required before release to the general public. In-house developers often test the software in what is known as 'alpha' testing which is often performed under a debugger or with hardware-assisted debugging to catch bugs quickly. This technique is known as white box or glass box testing.



It can then be handed over to testing staff for additional inspection in an environment similar to how it was intended to be used. This technique is known as black box testing. This is often known as the second stage of alpha testing.





Beta testing

Following that, limited public tests known as beta-versions are often released to groups of people so that further testing can ensure the product has few faults or bugs. Sometimes, beta-versions are made available to the open public to increase the feedback field to a maximal number of future users.





Gamma testing

There are companies that introduced the so-called gamma tests, which means feature-completed, but the software did not run through all the in-house quality checks. Some cynics refer to software release as "gamma testing".




 YIM  

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6169
Joined: Jan 03, 2005
Last Visit: Jan 23, 2021
Location: UK

Post Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 12:53 pm 
 

In defence of the present listed valuations, I would say there is a difference between the inherent underlying value of a product, and it's present value in the market place. The fact that I can get £110K for my house in the present economic climate does not detract from the fact that it is a £80K property. I may choose to sell it when the market is up, but I would be very stupid to mortgage it for more than £80K unless I was planning to be in it for the long haul.



If you consider the valuations offered as an inherent underlying value, and not a value that goes up and down at the whim of the eBay market, you should not go far wrong.



I know I paid $879 for a PoVQ without folder, but that was a desicion based in part on the US vs. UK exchange rate. If I had known there was a black folder version coming up the following week I'd have bid differently.



Personally, I don't think Acaeums values for products affect their sale price one bit. Far less so that their descriptions and print sequence do.



Just my 2...


This week I've been mostly eating . . . chicken and wild rice soup.

 WWW  


Active Collector

Posts: 41
Joined: Feb 21, 2005
Last Visit: Apr 23, 2005
Location: Portland, OR

Post Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2005 1:17 pm 
 

"By the same token, I'd be very pleased if some seller's would visit the site and set their BIN prices accordingly."







Exactly why I was one of the many who joined this site in Feb. While I admit that most of this valuation discussion is WAY over my head, even as a 'newbie seller' I can appreciate EVERY side and consider myself fortunate to be learning so much from so many different viewpoints. Granted there are no 'barbs' being slung my way (since I am too ignorant of the process to contribute to the discussion) I prefer to consider passion as the reason for the heat in the discussion rather than animosity towards anyone. From a very new persons standpoint, I have found this site to be EXTREMELY useful (and entertaining). My hat is off to ALL OF YOU for breaking new ground in trying to merge two seemingly incongruent systems into a new one for a relatively new market. (although I still have yet to figure out why two OCE sets in about the same condition went for $51 and $110 but I am still learning)



Just my .02 (OK, maybe it's only worth .01)


Scouts out!

  
PreviousNext
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 3 of 41, 2, 3, 4