SMR prices vs. your experiences

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by smtjoy

I find VCP the only way to go, its not perfect but nothing else is close.

I also must say posting on the boards about openly ripping off VCP is pretty stupid, also im pretty sure they can track ip address of those who log in per account so it would not last long and rightly so as its stealing.

For good measure you could all go together and pay with Paypal Gift.

VCP is a great "Tool/Guide" to use, but you still have to follow your cards in order to get accurate pricing. VCP does not record all the closed auctions from ebay or anywhere else. This leaves me sometimes frustrated but I also learned to keep records of recent sales to better understand what I should pay for my cards. I find it better used for other sets I may buy cards from as a reference for pricing if it has the info

[brob28]

Thanks for the inupt guys, sounds like VCP is the way to go and at $12.00 or so a month very reasonable.

[vintagetoppsguy]

I disagree that spliting a VCP membership is dishonest. What's the difference in me purchasing a PSA membership and other non-PSA members piggy backing off my subs because they don't want to purchase their own membership?

[HRBAKER]

There is at least some difference in the fact that with the PSA example the "piggy-backers" still have to pay to get their cards slabbed I assume. If you give multiple people access with your membership they are not charged each time they use the service.

[vintagetoppsguy]

I see your point, PSA is still getting paid for each card they grade. However, is it really fair to the other members who paid for their membership? The piggy backers are getting the same benefits of a member w/o having to pay a membership fee.

[ls7plus]

The accuracy of SMR is going to vary with the set in question, its rarity, and the volatility of the demand for the set. Where a set or card is quite rare, the SMR value oftentimes simply reflects a best guess scenario.

I'd like to try Vintage Card Prices.com, and find the refenences to its value in this thread quite interesting. Thanks for your imput, guys.

Larry

[Northviewcats]

I really don't know the formula PSA uses to create the SMR, but I suspect that its creation is as much about marketing their grading services as reality.

Other price guides like Beckett have long been used by kids to determine a value for their collection. I remember my sons being more interested in getting the latest Beckett Price Guide, to track the latest fluctuation in price in their Michael Jordan card, than in buying new cards. Every childhood trader worth his salt had to have the latest Beckett. The guide helped determine whether it was a "good deal" trading an Isaiah Thomas rookie for two Dennis Rodmans. The guide also enhanced the experience of opening a new pack and comparing the value of their new treasures. The Beckett was a good marketing tool to promote the sale of cards.

Well, SMR does the same thing for PSA graded cards. PSA of course is promoting the sale of their grading services. Someone at PSA might be calling around to various retail sellers to get their latest retail prices on a particular card, but I doubt it. It makes more sense to create a formula that would promote their objective. A possible pricing formula PSA might use might be VR+GC+20%=SMR.

This would be the value of the card in its ungraded state, plus the cost to grade it, plus 20% profit if you have it graded.

The idea is that a card is always worth more if you send it in to get graded. What PSA is hoping for is that you look at your raw cards and send in the cards that you believe will be worth more if you have them graded. The SMR is a marketing nudge that will help you do this. (Note that the SMR does not assign values for lower condition cards when they drop below the cost of having them graded. That would defeat the marketing purpose of the guide.)

Of course the problem is SMR cannot really determine the value of a card in a raw state, nor the the cards value to someone who really wants the card in their collection. Thus, it never can be an accurate price guide of a particular cards worth.

I really don't have a problem with the SMR. I look at it all the time when I get in a new lot of 60-70s cards that I'm going to flip. I tend to think of it as a guide to help me determine if I should get a card graded or sell it raw. It also has helped me to look at a cards attributes and flaws more closely before submitting a card for grading. Best of all, it reminds me of my children sitting on the floor in the family room, thumbing through a Beckett magazine before pulling the trigger on a big trade.

Best regards,

Joe

[Delray Vintage]

I subscribe to smr and vcp. Smr not bad for most issues, especially for frequent selling cards like mantles, koufaxes, williams, etc. But they should be embarrassed at their 19th century prices, way too low on almost all higher grade Old Judge, not even close. They have their grid of values but then list many recent actual sales all well above their smr. So what then is Smr price supposed to be? Prices for 1991? I use only Vcp and auction prices realized since some auction houses do not send prices to Vcp.

ebay completed sales is a good source for frequent selling cards but since most 19th. Century listings never sell, not good for that. I use smr for a general guide, then look at actual auction sales to see what I will bid.

[Delray Vintage]

Please give the owner of VCP a break. His site is excellent and he deserves the monthly fee. Unless we support his operating costs he cannot stay in business and we are left with smr, ebay realized prices, and scouring each auction site ourselves. At 12 a month it is very reasonable. He also offers for 4 dollars a 24 hour access pass.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Again, couldn't the same thing be said about not purchasing a PSA membership and piggy backing off others submissions? If only 100 people do it, that's $10K in lost revenue by PSA. If a 1000 people do it, that's $100K in lost revenue. And so forth. I'm still asking somebody to explain why it's okay to take advantage of somebody else's PSA membership, but not a VCP membership? Nobody can give a valid explanation.

And that's just one example of splitting a membership. I can give several others that most of us have done.

[scooter729]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Again, couldn't the same thing be said about not purchasing a PSA membership and piggy backing off others submissions? If only 100 people do it, that's $10K in lost revenue by PSA. If a 1000 people do it, that's $100K in lost revenue. And so forth. I'm still asking somebody to explain why it's okay to take advantage of somebody else's PSA membership, but not a VCP membership? Nobody can give a valid explanation.

And that's just one example of splitting a membership. I can give several others that most of us have done.

How about this - When you pay your $100 for a PSA membership, you also get 6 free submissions plus some other gift (hardcover book, etc). That pretty much covers your membership fee. If someone else wants to submit cards via my membership, they are not getting the 6 free subs, book, etc - they are only getting a paid service. I think the freebies with PSA is the main thing separating this from the VCP question, since VCP is only a service with no other services or tangible goods offered at time of membership payment.

[jg8422]

Originally Posted by scooter729

How about this - When you pay your $100 for a PSA membership, you also get 6 free submissions plus some other gift (hardcover book, etc). That pretty much covers your membership fee. If someone else wants to submit cards via my membership, they are not getting the 6 free subs, book, etc - they are only getting a paid service. I think the freebies with PSA is the main thing separating this from the VCP question, since VCP is only a service with no other services or tangible goods offered at time of membership payment.

No way does a book and 6 submissions cost PSA the price of an individual joining. Bottom line is if you have to try and "justify it" then it is most likely considered by the moral police to be "wrong."

[scooter729]

Originally Posted by jg8422

No way does a book and 6 submissions cost PSA the price of an individual joining. Bottom line is if you have to try and "justify it" then it is most likely considered by the moral police to be "wrong."

Actually, you are incorrect - the 6 submissions are $15 each, the book would be $20 at least, and I didn't even mention the 12 issues of the SMR magazine (I know, might not be worth much, but let's not go there). So I think the person paying the $100 gets plenty that a piggybacker does not get.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by scooter729

Actually, you are incorrect - the 6 submissions are $15 each, the book would be $20 at least, and I didn't even mention the 12 issues of the SMR magazine (I know, might not be worth much, but let's not go there). So I think the person paying the $100 gets plenty that a piggybacker does not get.

Scott,

You are correct, but you're still not getting it. Basically you get 6 free submissions for your membership fee. You and I both know that most people could care less about the book or subscription to SMR. The fact is that most people who buy a PSA membership are doing so in order to be able to take advantage of the monthly specials. I say again, "it's just not fair for someone to pay for a membership so they can take advantage of the monthly specials, when somebody else gets to take advantage of those same monthly specials without paying the membership fee."

[jg8422]

Originally Posted by scooter729

Actually, you are incorrect - the 6 submissions are $15 each, the book would be $20 at least, and I didn't even mention the 12 issues of the SMR magazine (I know, might not be worth much, but let's not go there). So I think the person paying the $100 gets plenty that a piggybacker does not get.

I am talking about what the actual cost is to PSA for the free subs, book, etc. You have to look at the $100 PSA is not getting from the piggybacker and what the actual costs are to PSA for the subs, book, SMR, etc.

[jg8422]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Again, couldn't the same thing be said about not purchasing a PSA membership and piggy backing off others submissions? If only 100 people do it, that's $10K in lost revenue by PSA. If a 1000 people do it, that's $100K in lost revenue. And so forth. I'm still asking somebody to explain why it's okay to take advantage of somebody else's PSA membership, but not a VCP membership? Nobody can give a valid explanation.

And that's just one example of splitting a membership. I can give several others that most of us have done.

David,

You will be waiting a long time b/c you are absolutely correct! I know the moral police don't like the idea and that is fine. But, if you take the viewpoint that it is wrong, then just make sure you are consistent and NEVER do anythng that could be considered "wrong." I would say that would even include paying someone a good deal less than fair market value for a card b/c he just needed some quick cash. Would the "moral police" say to the person "I know you only want $100 for the card, but I am going to give you $300 b/c that would only be fair and the right thing to do?" I doubt it! What say you moral police???

I do acknowledge that it isn't "the right thing to do," but to be completely honest, I would still sleep fine at night if I used someone else's login to access the VCP site. In this hobby/industry, there are much bigger fish to fry in terms of dishonesty.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Scott,

I understand you get perks (freebies) with your PSA membership. That's not the point. The point is that it's just not fair for someone to pay for a membership so they can take advantage of the monthly specials, when somebody else gets to take advantage of those same monthly specials without paying the membership fee.

********************

Jeff,

You are exactly right and that is my point. I read some of the posts on this board and they are quite funny in that their moral compass is all over the place. I've heard people say it's cheating PayPal out of their fees to use PayPal gift, but these same people have no problem working a deal outside of eBay for a card they saw advertised on eBay. In other words, it's not okay to screw PayPal out of their fees, but its okay to screw eBay out of theirs.

I'm disgusted with the "moral police" around here and their lack of moral consistency.

[rdixon1208]

Look, I'm not trying to be the moral police. I've looked up cards on VCP for a friend. I've used Paypal gift. I've bought cards on the side that were for sale on ebay.

In each instance, I felt like what I was doing wasn't "too bad." Maybe it's because each of those companies make money off of me. At times quite a bit. So working the system to get a better deal doesn't keep me up at night.

In this case, we're talking about not paying for the service at all. It's all kind of like stealing, but this just seems worse to me. Maybe it's because I know that VCP is a small company, where ebay/paypal are huge.

I mean, why don't we all get one membership and share the password? If enough of us do it, we may be able to put VCP out of business.

You have a point in saying (or insinuating) that if you ever do anything wrong on any level, you should never say that what someone else is doing is wrong. Does that mean that if I buy a card off ebay that's listed in the wrong section for a steal of a price without telling the seller, I should never be able to call someone out for shill bidding? There are different levels of wrong.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by rdixon1208

Look, I'm not trying to be the moral police. I've looked up cards on VCP for a friend. I've used Paypal gift. I've bought cards on the side that were for sale on ebay.

In each instance, I felt like what I was doing wasn't "too bad." Maybe it's because each of those companies make money off of me. At times quite a bit. So working the system to get a better deal doesn't keep me up at night.

In this case, we're talking about not paying for the service at all. It's all kind of like stealing, but this just seems worse to me. Maybe it's because I know that VCP is a small company, where ebay/paypal are huge.

I mean, why don't we all get one membership and share the password? If enough of us do it, we may be able to put VCP out of business.

You have a point in saying (or insinuating) that if you ever do anything wrong on any level, you should never say that what someone else is doing is wrong. Does that mean that if I buy a card off ebay that's listed in the wrong section for a steal of a price without telling the seller, I should never be able to call someone out for shill bidding? There are different levels of wrong.

Robert,

The bottom line is that we're talking lost revenue - whether it's using PayPal gift, working a deal outside of eBay, piggy backing off someone else's PSA submission or going in together to purchase a VCP membership.

It's either right or wrong. There's no gray area here. You can't have it both ways. You can't say it's okay to do it sometimes (because that company already made quite a bit of money off you), but not other times (because it's a small company). At least that's what I'm hearing here.

I do all the things you mentioned. I use PayPal gift (as a buyer and seller). I work deals outside of eBay. I look up VCP for others who didn't pay for a membership. I've piggy backed on others subs w/o purchasing a PSA membership. Etc. Here's the difference. I am consistent. Yes, there are different levels of wrong. However, wrong is still WRONG. I'm just tired of all the people here saying what is wrong and what is right and hearing their moral point of view when they do wrong things themselves.

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Scott,

I understand you get perks (freebies) with your PSA membership. That's not the point. The point is that it's just not fair for someone to pay for a membership so they can take advantage of the monthly specials, when somebody else gets to take advantage of those same monthly specials without paying the membership fee.

********************

Jeff,

You are exactly right and that is my point. I read some of the posts on this board and they are quite funny in that their moral compass is all over the place. I've heard people say it's cheating PayPal out of their fees to use PayPal gift, but these same people have no problem working a deal outside of eBay for a card they saw advertised on eBay. In other words, it's not okay to screw PayPal out of their fees, but its okay to screw eBay out of theirs.

I'm disgusted with the "moral police" around here and their lack of moral consistency.

Good point!

It may not be the most honest thing to do, but let's face it...none of us are perfect and this is a VERY minor issue if any at all. I believe if you wanted to split it and could, go for it...if you feel like you are cheating them, then don't do it. Like someone stated before, no one is losing sleep over this and I'm sure, if you can, people are already doing this and they are still in business and doing fine.