Small Traditions LLC/SCANDAL UPDATE

[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.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by 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.

Fair point. It just makes me look like an ass.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

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.

Yes, as I mentioned above, the relationship is not a linear function. This is what I meant when I said, "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)." The shape of the curve and the ceiling for a maximal benefit view count and the point at which the diminishing returns "kick in" would all be a function of both supply and demand for that individual card. We should expect to have a steeper curve for something like a Ken Griffey Jr PSA 9 Upper Deck RC than we would for something like a 1933 Goudey Lou Gherig and a shallower curve for something like a 1933 Goudey common. But the relationship between view counts and sold prices should look like some version of the plots below.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

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.

It can be about getting more eyes on stuff, which is Ebays most solid contribution.

But it's more about getting the right eyes on stuff.

A friend collects 16mm films, and is I think pretty well known in that hobby.
I tried helping him sell some of the cheaper stuff.. Had a print of a pretty decent school film of a famous story. It was everything you could ask for, low fade emulsion on Mylar, and looked like it had hardly ever been used. Maybe even a couple B or C list actors too. Not super valuable, but very nice.
I listed it twice at 24.99, no bidders. Told him I couldn't see letting it go for less. He listed it higher, using my description and pictures. Sold in under a day at fill price, Maybe 40?
On the other hand, I would list stuff that was practically junk, with an accurate description of its faults, and for me that stuff sold.

[drcy]

When I used eBay way back when, I'd have my bookmarked sellers. I collected unusual and rare items (photos, autographs, memorabilia), and I bookmarked them because I knew they were experts (authenticity), would have interesting stuff and were reliable. Others used them similarly and I'm sure the sellers got healthy prices.

However, that's different than selling a readily available 1990 Leaf Frank Thomas for 2x the price.

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by drcy

When I used eBay way back when, I'd have my bookmarked sellers. I collected unusual and rare items (photos, autographs, memorabilia), and I bookmarked them because I knew they were experts (authenticity), would have interesting stuff and were reliable. Others used them similarly and I'm sure the sellers got healthy prices.

However, that's different than selling a readily available 1990 Leaf Frank Thomas for 2x the price.

I think what you are describing illustrates Snowman's theory, but also why it beggars belief for it to be accurate in describing a few dealers astonishingly higher returns on same cards.

Most people who find their way to 'major' ebay sellers do so by happenstance.
They spend ever increasing time on ebay looking at one item which leads to another, and as they build their buy knowledge and indeed add items to their collection, they are exposed more and more to better material and scarcer more desirable and price rich pieces.
The very act of going through this 'learning' process on ebay sets very quickly eBay's greatest strength for any prospective buyer: the ability to find items you want first, but even more importantly with so many contributing sellers you will find quite a number of the same item, and can compare condition and price etc before choosing your buy.

It's this very nature of comparative shopping that makes it hard to believe one eBay Seller could so massively get higher prices than the thousands of competing sellers.
Its audience has already learned how to search on eBay, how that often takes time to find the thing you want, how you can assign a price in your mind you're willing to pay and where that will meet up with how often the item shows and how much you need it...it's all part of the game on eBay.

That card collectors, who know there are other copies at same grade showing up regularly on eBay through different sellers, at prices sometimes 30-40% less, would just blythely say sure, "I'm happy to pay overs, even though I know I might someday want/or have to sell it again, and may not get my money back or make less on it that I otherwise can".....to be what? Brand or seller loyal? Where there's no incentive to be?
I just don't believe it.

More eyes giving greater opportunity to MAXIMIZE prices sure, but this collector space is sooooooo filled with assured professional sellers dispensing so much of this stuff, you'd have to be a nuffy to only buy at a mark up.
Nuffies here and there affecting some prices, sure, I could believe it.
But it's the very steady nature of PWCC and Probstein prices achieved over others that doesn't gel with the nature of the card market.

[Snowman]

If you guys were to guess what percentage above-average selling prices that PWCC and Probstein get for their auctions, what would you guess?

For example, say a card usually sells for $500 on average, does it sell for a 20% premium at PWCC at $600, or a 5% premium at $525, or does it sell for 100% premium and go for double at $1000? What do you think the "PWCC and/or Probstein effect is"?

<5%
5-10%
10-25%
25-50%
>50%

[Peter_Spaeth]

All PWCC/Probstein cards are not the same. There are at least two distinct groups, those consigned by collectors and smaller dealers, and those consigned by card doctors/larger dealers. I would bet the stats are very different for those two groups.

[aro13]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

All PWCC/Probstein cards are not the same. There are at least two distinct groups, those consigned by collectors and smaller dealers, and those consigned by card doctors/larger dealers. I would bet the stats are very different for those two groups.

This statement is very accurate in my view. PWCC cards did sell for incredibly high prices relative to other cards of the same grade. However, if you look at VCP prices, often PWCC cards go for extremely low prices. Not every card is shilled and prices were lower in some cases because people didn't bid and were afraid they might get run up.