Small Traditions LLC/SCANDAL UPDATE

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I was talking about why PWCC listings sold for more than their competition on average. My comment didn't have anything to do with members of any specific forums. And I'm not sure how that would be relevant.

Maybe because you are posting all this on what is specifically a, wait a second......pre-war card forum?

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by packs

It's relevant because you keep talking about followers, like Twitter or Instagram means anything to a pre-war focused audience (which, by the way, is what this page is dedicated to). These are not explanations for why one card sells for multiples of another by virtue of who's selling it. There are much more plausible explanations, none of which you will accept. This phenomenon is not new nor is it the product of some new marketing blitz or the pandemic. The same two sellers have had thread after thread posted about them for years, all which share a common theme: why did this card sell for this much? These questions date back to a time before your Twitter follower explanation. So it cannot be that and it must be something else.

The earliest threads relating to the same tired topic on this board date to 2013. I'd love to see a screenshot of the Twitter numbers then.

I was not talking about Twitter. I am talking about the number of followers that these sellers have on eBay (see screenshot below) and how that has a positive effect on the hammer prices of their auctions. Whether or not members of this board are interested in Twitter or Instagram has absolutely nothing at all to do with the fact that the more eBay followers a seller has, the more views their listings will receive. Perhaps you were unaware that you can "follow" a seller on eBay? I don't know, but I assure you, this is a thing, and it's far more important than you apparently realize. This isn't rocket science. The more views a listing gets, the more money it will sell for. It's pretty simple. If you disagree with that fact, then I don't know what else to tell you. And if this point hasn't been made before in prior discussions about why PWCC listings sell for more than their competition, then those discussions were lacking one of the most important factors in that conversation, if not THE most important factor.

Originally Posted by BobC

Maybe because you are posting all this on what is specifically a, wait a second......pre-war card forum?

This is still completely irrelevant to the question of "why do PWCC listings sell for more than their competition?" This is the question I am addressing. I don't understand why anyone would think the fact that we are debating this question on a pre-war card forum has anything at all to do with what I'm saying. And even if I were talking about Twitter followers, as opposed to eBay followers, it still wouldn't negate the fact that having more eyes on your listings equates to higher prices. Whether those eyes come from members of this forum or from Twitter followers or Instagram followers or anywhere else.

I can't believe we're arguing about this. More eyes on your listings equate to higher auction prices. Please tell me you agree with this simple fact.

[packs]

Your explanation holds water only in a world where the sale prices have grown over time. The same questions have been asked for at least 8 years. All you have to do is search the acronym and hit Last. The number of followers have not created the marketplace. The marketplace created itself out of thin air, which has always been the impression the board has had, even as far back as 2013.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by packs

Your explanation holds water only in a world where the sale prices have grown over time. The same questions have been asked for at least 8 years. All you have to do is search the acronym and hit Last. The number of followers have not created the marketplace. The marketplace created itself out of thin air, which has always been the impression the board has had, even as far back as 2013.

I don't understand what you're saying when you write "The number of followers have not created the marketplace." Who said anything about creating a marketplace? We're talking about why PWCC cards sold for more than their competition.

If you're talking about overall market prices increasing across the hobby over the past 8 years, then that's an entirely different topic. But the answer to that question is surely not that it "created itself out of thin air". New buyers and new money entered the hobby. It's pretty simple. It isn't some artificial price inflation that came from thin air. It was also predictable.

[packs]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't understand what you're saying when you write "The number of followers have not created the marketplace." Who said anything about creating a marketplace? We're talking about why PWCC cards sold for more than their competition.

If you're talking about overall market prices increasing across the hobby over the past 8 years, then that's an entirely different topic. But the answer to that question is surely not that it "created itself out of thin air". New buyers and new money entered the hobby. It's pretty simple. It isn't some artificial price inflation that came from thin air. It was also predictable.

No, I'm still talking about prices increasing for a select few sellers in an otherwise common world. When I say that followers didn't create the marketplace, it's in response to you saying a seller is able to make more money selling the same cards because of their followers. But for that to be true, there would have had to have been a time when they weren't.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I was not talking about Twitter. I am talking about the number of followers that these sellers have on eBay (see screenshot below) and how that has a positive effect on the hammer prices of their auctions. Whether or not members of this board are interested in Twitter or Instagram has absolutely nothing at all to do with the fact that the more eBay followers a seller has, the more views their listings will receive. Perhaps you were unaware that you can "follow" a seller on eBay? I don't know, but I assure you, this is a thing, and it's far more important than you apparently realize. This isn't rocket science. The more views a listing gets, the more money it will sell for. It's pretty simple. If you disagree with that fact, then I don't know what else to tell you. And if this point hasn't been made before in prior discussions about why PWCC listings sell for more than their competition, then those discussions were lacking one of the most important factors in that conversation, if not THE most important factor.



This is still completely irrelevant to the question of "why do PWCC listings sell for more than their competition?" This is the question I am addressing. I don't understand why anyone would think the fact that we are debating this question on a pre-war card forum has anything at all to do with what I'm saying. And even if I were talking about Twitter followers, as opposed to eBay followers, it still wouldn't negate the fact that having more eyes on your listings equates to higher prices. Whether those eyes come from members of this forum or from Twitter followers or Instagram followers or anywhere else.

I can't believe we're arguing about this. More eyes on your listings equate to higher auction prices. Please tell me you agree with this simple fact.

I'm not arguing that point all. You came on here and are directing your commentary to mostly pre-war collectors on a pre-war card forum, and that audience is typically older collectors who don't really care all the much about social media and this other garbage you keep spewing out as a contrarian and opposite of everything else that anybody seems to say or think. It's like you take no position or truly give any positive information about anything, just start posting everywhere in your contrarian manner. And it seems like all you ever post are things to go against what someone was saying, yet when they call you out or try to provide evidence to the contrary, you almost always come back saying you didn't say this or that, or that you actually don't believe what most normal people feel you are touting in all your posts. I grant you this, you are very good at the way you word what you say so that after the fact you can deny things that people initially are taking from your posts. Apparently others are aware of you and your antics as well. Thought I saw somewhere about you having a meltdown and getting kicked off BODA, or something like that. And if I'm mistaking you for someone else, I apologize in advance. But if I'm not mistaken, I guess the question is, do you do what you do intentionally to irk as many people as you possibly can, or do you truly not have a clue?

And by the way, what are you exactly, a data scientist and/or some kind of programmer, right? So exactly how does that make you an expert on the effects of social media and attracting customers and the business and other aspects of having followers equate to higher sales? Have you ever actually run a business or done marketing or the like? Your statements that PWCC always seems to get higher prices is because they have more followers can't be proven, any more or less than you can actually prove (or disprove) the reason they get higher prices is due to shill bidding. For all anyone knows, it could be (and very possibly is) a mix or combination of factors and not just the one main factor you are pushing, but you certainly don't know yourself more than anyone else. The more you go on and on, the more you start sounding like that other recent poster, Directly, who's main argument over and over again was that he was right and everyone else was always wrong. You're just able to use prettier words than he is.

And by the way, your own argument about more eyes equating to higher prices has a big glitch in it. Per your own post, you showed that Probstein actually had significantly more positive feedback and followers than PWCC, yet all everyone seems to talk about (on here at least) is how PWCC always seems to get the highest prices. So please explain this for everyone how Probstein isn't getting higher prices than PWCC then.

There are a lot of factors influencing all that is happening and still evolving around us in regards to things like this, and will we ever finally get all the answers, who knows? As I've often said, only time will tell!

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by BobC

I'm not arguing that point all. You came on here and are directing your commentary to mostly pre-war collectors on a pre-war card forum, and that audience is typically older collectors who don't really care all the much about social media and this other garbage you keep spewing out as a contrarian and opposite of everything else that anybody seems to say or think.

I told myself this thread had gotten to the teaching a pig to sing mile marker and was done with it. So, it pains me to do this, but he is not making a point about social media. His claim is that there is a correlation between higher card prices realized and higher eBay follower counts. In other words, the more followers an eBay auction house has, the higher prices they will achieve, all other things remaining the same.

That is his claim, anyways, as he hasn't actually presented any proof that would substantiate it. Nor has he addressed what they teach you on the first day of Data Analysis 101: correlation is not necessarily causation.

And by the way, what are you exactly, a data scientist and/or some kind of programmer, right? So exactly how does that make you an expert on the effects of social media and attracting customers and the business and other aspects of having followers equate to higher sales? Have you ever actually run a business or done marketing or the like?

I spent the first two decades of my professional career in electronics manufacturing and the most recent decade in oil and gas. Both are industries dominated by engineers. Indeed, my background is engineering. It is my observation that folks with technological backgrounds often assume that, because they have mastered one (or several) difficult subject matters, that they can reason their way to correct answers beyond those areas. So, go easy on him because he is a victim of his programming.

On a lighter note, I thought I'd share with Snowman how us grayheads used to bid on card auctions outside our hometown back in the day,

[Peter_Spaeth]

It's interesting that when Snow has a point to make, it's OK to use a very simple correlation -- more eyes equals higher prices. But when someone else has a point, such as that examination of a reasonable sampling of high dollar auctions could be indicative of hanky panky, HIS anaylsis is way too simplistic to prove anything and is meaningless buffoonery absent a full deep data dive. Hmmmm.

Let me guess, Snow will say apples to oranges.

Or maybe he'll say that since he alone understands data, he alone can determine how much is needed for any given question.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It's interesting that when Snow has a point to make, it's OK to use a very simple correlation -- more eyes equals higher prices. But when someone else has a point, such as that examination of a reasonable sampling of high dollar auctions could be indicative of hanky panky, HIS anaylsis is way too simplistic to prove anything and is meaningless buffoonery absent a full deep data dive. Hmmmm.

Let me guess, Snow will say apples to oranges.

Or maybe he'll say that since he alone understands data, he alone can determine how much is needed for any given question.

Same thing I'm seeing in many of his posts. He does know how to use prettier words, and puts them together very well. You really have to read, pay attention, and comprehend to get the gist of what he's saying, and figure out if it is meaningful or just empty words. He does make many good points, and brings up logical and thought provoking counter ideas, but forgets that at the end of the day a lot of it is nothing more than unsupported opinion. And there's nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is. And in commenting here on a pre-war forum, that is relevant and has to be taken into consideration. You always have to consider the audience you are talking to if you are looking to prove your point, especially in a back and forth type situation he often gets into.

Now based on how he typically responds, I'd expect him to answer back that he doesn't really care if others believe him and his points or not. Or that he's not really trying to change anyone's mind, but will respond in some manner usually that makes people feel he still questions why they don't just automatically acquiesce and accept his point of view on different topics like this one because of his logic and thinking. Which is why I asked the question of him if he knowingly continues on with this contrarian banter because he enjoys irking people, or if truly doesn't have a clue how he comes across.

[Peter_Spaeth]

He does have a bit of a theory of mind issue but that's not uncommon or a fault, just an observation.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by BobC

Same thing I'm seeing in many of his posts. He does know how to use prettier words, and puts them together very well. You really have to read, pay attention, and comprehend to get the gist of what he's saying, and figure out if it is meaningful or just empty words. He does make many good points, and brings up logical and thought provoking counter ideas, but forgets that at the end of the day a lot of it is nothing more than unsupported opinion. And there's nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is. And in commenting here on a pre-war forum, that is relevant and has to be taken into consideration. You always have to consider the audience you are talking to if you are looking to prove your point, especially in a back and forth type situation he often gets into.

Now based on how he typically responds, I'd expect him to answer back that he doesn't really care if others believe him and his points or not. Or that he's not really trying to change anyone's mind, but will respond in some manner usually that makes people feel he still questions why they don't just automatically acquiesce and accept his point of view on different topics like this one because of his logic and thinking. Which is why I asked the question of him if he knowingly continues on with this contrarian banter because he enjoys irking people, or if truly doesn't have a clue how he comes across.

I think it's more than I'm struggling with whether or not people are being disingenuous and just trying to get under my skin, or if they honestly believe what they're saying sometimes. My above claim that more eyes on a listing leads to higher prices is a prime example. I don't know if people are just messing with me when they challenge that claim or if they honestly believe that it's not true.

I care more about whether or not I'm making my points clearly than I do about whether or not they are understood clearly. But I do at least attempt to speak with intention and I try not to mince words so that there is no confusion about what I'm trying to say. I do get frustrated, however, when someone takes something I've said and completely twists it around and then puts their own words back into my mouth which I then have to spit back out because they want to manipulate my viewpoint.

I will try to be more clear about why I believe something is true in the future rather than just claiming it's true and expecting everyone to believe me.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

I told myself this thread had gotten to the teaching a pig to sing mile marker and was done with it. So, it pains me to do this, but he is not making a point about social media. His claim is that there is a correlation between higher card prices realized and higher eBay follower counts. In other words, the more followers an eBay auction house has, the higher prices they will achieve, all other things remaining the same.

That is his claim, anyways, as he hasn't actually presented any proof that would substantiate it. Nor has he addressed what they teach you on the first day of Data Analysis 101: correlation is not necessarily causation.



I spent the first two decades of my professional career in electronics manufacturing and the most recent decade in oil and gas. Both are industries dominated by engineers. Indeed, my background is engineering. It is my observation that folks with technological backgrounds often assume that, because they have mastered one (or several) difficult subject matters, that they can reason their way to correct answers beyond those areas. So, go easy on him because he is a victim of his programming.

On a lighter note, I thought I'd share with Snowman how us grayheads used to bid on card auctions outside our hometown back in the day,

I know what you are saying and understand exactly what he does. I did point out his own posted figures and asked why his own evidence doesn't support his statement that PWCC has the highest prices because Probstein actually has more followers. And there is no reason to go easy on him as he is obviously knowledgable, just doesn' t really say anything that basically ends up as anything other than he's right and you're wrong. Same thing you're pointing out. And just because he's an engineer he gets no pass from me. I've worked with many engineers and architects in the past, and engineers are typically very knowledgable and pay attention to details and facts. And my daughter is an engineer as well. Feel I'd be letting them all down if I didn't call him out.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It's interesting that when Snow has a point to make, it's OK to use a very simple correlation -- more eyes equals higher prices. But when someone else has a point, such as that examination of a reasonable sampling of high dollar auctions could be indicative of hanky panky, HIS anaylsis is way too simplistic to prove anything and is meaningless buffoonery absent a full deep data dive. Hmmmm.

Let me guess, Snow will say apples to oranges.

Or maybe he'll say that since he alone understands data, he alone can determine how much is needed for any given question.

Yes, I see this as being an apples to oranges comparison. I don't believe that anyone here would honestly argue that having more eyes on an auction would not bring about higher prices. I think anyone arguing to the contrary is simply being disingenuous. I don't believe for one second that you don't accept that premise as true. Surely, the relationship is not linear though, as there would be an element of diminishing returns (i.e., having 40 million eyes on an auction is effectively equivalent to having 5 million eyes on that auction, but having 40,000 is still significantly better than having 5,000).

I shouldn't need to provide data to support that claim. It is obvious. However, I could certainly prove that it's true if I cared to mine the data. Maybe I'll do that for fun in my spare time. It could be an interesting project to understand and measure the impact that it actually has. It would probably only take a few hours to do. The most difficult and time-consuming part would be building the dataset. Doing the math from there is the easy part.

Originally Posted by BobC

I know what you are saying and understand exactly what he does. I did point out his own posted figures and asked why his own evidence doesn't support his statement that PWCC has the highest prices because Probstein actually has more followers. And there is no reason to go easy on him as he is obviously knowledgable, just doesn' t really say anything that basically ends up as anything other than he's right and you're wrong. Same thing you're pointing out. And just because he's an engineer he gets no pass from me. I've worked with many engineers and architects in the past, and engineers are typically very knowledgable and pay attention to details and facts. And my daughter is an engineer as well. Feel I'd be letting them all down if I didn't call him out.

For the record, I have always claimed that Probstein auction also outsell the competition. I don't know about PWCC vs Probstein though, but from my readings of the various forums and other online communities, most people share this belief that both Probstein and PWCC sell for more than the others. Many of the data tools out there even have options to exclude PWCC and Probstein listings from their comps because of it.

I'm not an engineer. I'm also not a data analyst or a computer programmer or a developer. There is a bit of overlap with my field to each of those skills, but a data scientist, in general, is someone with multiple degrees in either mathematics, statistics, computer science, or physics. Typically, they will have majored in at least one of those 4 disciplines in undergrad and then will have a graduate degree in at least one or more of these fields as well. There are many sub-specialties within the data science space, but my primary area of expertise is in building predictive models. I basically use complex mathematics to teach a computer to learn how to solve specific problems.

When I get the time, I will explain in more detail why this skill set is relevant to the problem of identifying shill bidders, and why I claim it would yield a far superior solution to that problem than hiring a team of data analysts or accountants to do it manually.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Here's a free piece of advice. Repeatedly saying that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid or uninformed or unqualified or disingenuous is not an effective means of debate or discussion.

And here's a counterpoint. If a card is common enough and has an established recent value range, it shouldn't matter if an extra 10,000 people or however many view auction 2 instead of auction 1. None of those extra eyes should be willing to pay more than the card is worth/available elsewhere readily. By your theory, almost every PWCC card would sell higher, since it has more eyes on it, and it's just empirically not true.

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I shouldn't need to provide data to support that claim. It is obvious.

There are a lot of attorneys on this board. I wonder if they've ever tried the "Duh!" defense in court?

[drcy]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

I told myself this thread had gotten to the teaching a pig to sing mile marker and was done with it. So, it pains me to do this, but he is not making a point about social media. His claim is that there is a correlation between higher card prices realized and higher eBay follower counts. In other words, the more followers an eBay auction house has, the higher prices they will achieve, all other things remaining the same.

That is his claim, anyways, as he hasn't actually presented any proof that would substantiate it. Nor has he addressed what they teach you on the first day of Data Analysis 101: correlation is not necessarily causation.



I spent the first two decades of my professional career in electronics manufacturing and the most recent decade in oil and gas. Both are industries dominated by engineers. Indeed, my background is engineering. It is my observation that folks with technological backgrounds often assume that, because they have mastered one (or several) difficult subject matters, that they can reason their way to correct answers beyond those areas. So, go easy on him because he is a victim of his programming.

On a lighter note, I thought I'd share with Snowman how us grayheads used to bid on card auctions outside our hometown back in the day,

Learned specialists are aware how ignorant they are in areas outside of their expertise and tread lightly.