PWCC Auction Yet Again

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

I have never understood why people today feel only an auction can determine what the true value of a card or commodity is.

The short answer is NO, at auction there needs to be TWO people that feel the card is worth a certain amount for the item to get to that level. If only one person bids to the current level and there is not a second party involved they may in fact be getting a major deal on the card considering that same person may have been willing to spend a significant amount more to aquire the same item in a retail or direct sale setting.

Retail sales haven't suddenly become meaningless. In reality all it takes is ONE PERSON to determine a market value as long as money is exchanging hands. Sellers have sold countless things over the years for a fair amount over "auction value" to someone that really wants an item that is unavailable elsewhere, especially in a thinly traded set. These sales are every bit as legitimate as any auction price.

ON a different topic: I always find it funny when people who are almost exclusively buyers just don't understand why sellers don't just start things low and let it fly, as if the seller must have gotten the item for free and there is no risk involved. It sure is easy to risk or spend other peoples money, isn't it!

+1. Beautifully stated. If multiple people think it's worth something, then that gets you your true value. If the runner up thinks it's worth squat, is it REALLY worth squat? I have had people try to get my items via Ebay's messaging system (when I have multiples of the same item, for example, unopened wax packs) for the "peanuts" price, after the auction has ended. I explain to them my disappointment with the low price, and then proceed to sell the item for "real" value, in the case 3-4 times the value of the peanuts price. Might take longer than a 7 day auction, but doesn't take years! Obviously that is on items with a small market window. That won't work on a 1965 Joe Namath rookie card! Obviously a .99 cent auction will yield the best results, no matter WHO is selling that card! LOL! Then again, PWCC might get more than me....who knows!

[glynparson]

+1

[nat]

A general point, not specific to eBay sales:

The price that you paid for something shouldn't have anything to do with what you're willing to sell it for. The money that you paid is gone, it's a sunk cost. The question is really: will you be able to sell this for more money in the future?* And if the answer is "no", it makes sense to sell it now. Sometimes selling for a loss is a good idea.


*Actually, you should also take into account the cost of maintaining an inventory, the time-value of money (if you sell it now you can put the money you get into the market, or buy t-bills, or whatever), and, of course, how much you need the money now.

[mark evans]

I'll confess to being a buyer/collector who may find it difficult to put myself in a seller's shoes. My complaint is not with BINs per se, but with the fact that they are almost invariably set significantly above VCP values.

Let me offer a suggestion: how about auctions with low starting bids and reserves set in the general vicinity (+5%?) of VCP values? This should increase the likelihood of sales while at the same time allowing sellers to take advantage of bidding wars in appropriate cases.

[Snapolit1]

Maybe an economist would disagree, but I think you need to look at more than one motivated buyer to determine the true value of something. If my house is worth $500,000, but some guy comes and offers me $1,000,000 for the house, maybe because his father grew up in the house and it's his life long dream to own it again, that doesn't make the market value $1,000,000, its a half million dollar house that some guy overpaid for.

[edhans]

Another emphatic plus one to Rhett's comments. I've been trying to make this point to customers and auction houses for years. The market is created by arms length transactions between ONE buyer and ONE seller. This is especially true for rare, but thinly traded issues.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Im not sure where you can get set breaks which are the cheapest ways to get card in 99 cent auctions so regularly anywhere else

1954 Topps PSA 8s theres about 200 cards there. I am not sure I have seen any major auction house sell card by card PSA 8 or higher from 1954 to current.

1952 and 1953 yes. But not 1954 at least for years.

[RichardSimon]

Originally Posted by mark evans

I'll confess to being a buyer/collector who may find it difficult to put myself in a seller's shoes. My complaint is not with BINs per se, but with the fact that they are almost invariably set significantly above VCP values.

Let me offer a suggestion: how about auctions with low starting bids and reserves set in the general vicinity (+5%?) of VCP values? This should increase the likelihood of sales while at the same time allowing sellers to take advantage of bidding wars in appropriate cases.

Ebay charges an exorbitant amount to set a reserve price.
If you set reserves on multiple items you would wind up losing money.

[mark evans]

Thanks, Richard. I was unaware of that fact which obviously complicates my suggestion.

Mark

[Exhibitman]

I start at my minimum acceptable price and take it from there. I don't sell as many items but I make more money in the end. I tried the $0.99 and let it rip approach and I would literally have been better off selling the items at my minimums and throwing out the unsold items, that's how badly it went.