Site Forum

$.18 was just an example. TCDB could set whatever minimum they want. Let's say that takes care of most commons. Set another tier for HOF commons, say $.75. And so on. 

I think we could be getting somewhere. If we had a committee headed by an L8 with ADMIN in the know, we could set up a "Tier Chart" for many different examples from commons to whatever. That could at least standardize a WHOLE BUNCH of cards. ALL members must follow the chart. That leaves cards that keep moving the median, they may need to be watched. Keeping a list of members that put in "unreal" numbers can be watched closer.

Then incorporate Dan's suggestions that appear to have positive press. I also think that having an overseeyer for each major category would be very beneficial and take the burden off just a few. If in fact we are a community for the common good, more members can step up with ADMIN's approval.

Due to this very active thread, I have entered pricing areas, I never bothered consulting before. I see alot of useable good stuff and plenty of outdated, old stuff. Just 1 ex. I encountered recently. I'm sorting BB to sell/trade and have a number of Latrelle Sprewell RCs, so I checked>>> $2.50, last 5 $2.50 median from 2016. Now, Does that help me? NO. I don't collect BB, so I needed pro-reference and TCDB didn't help.

Again, throwing out a few ideas

I could live with pricing levels being a factor of some agreed upon conditions price since that seems to be about the only way to clear up an obvious issue with vintage cards. If we are saying our pricing is to be reflective of market value I disagree with assigning random values to any cards. The current system is set up to reflect the median price based on the last 5 purchases which should lessen the impact of extremely low or high values entered.  If people don’t go to eBay or elsewhere to update pricing that seems incorrect that is a problem. Also we need to have some individuals to act as a committee to remove people adding erroneous pricing without out some documentation, or at least put some people in timeout for continual abuse of this part of the database. I’d be happy to be part of a group of at least 3 people to oversee this.

No, all I did was add some cards on June 30.

Before that there were several big reductions, esp. on June 21:

Jun 21, 2019

$10,754.86

$-402.33

-3.61%

My valuable cards aren't concentrated (I don't have multiples).  So, I'm thinking somebody was making a ton of price entries that were lowering values on a ton of different cards. That's the only way a collection like mine would've seen that type of decline.

Alex, I looked at your collection and saw your Mantle (1960 topps I think it was maybe) which is currently your most valuable card was reduced by a big amount once I entered the 5 most recent sales on Ebay. Before then, it was closer to the Beckett value. Now it's at a bargain bin price. My collection took a much larger hit going from roughly 100,000 dollars to roughly 60,000 after a few days of doing this to my most valuable cards. (After being accused of price fixing where I'd report Ebay sales that reflected beckett-like values instead of cards sold at 10%-20% of that) I completely agree with those that suggested adding a condition factor that would adjust the values of vintage cards correctly,  that would return our vintage cards to their real values. So if there's a vote or petition on this matter, count me in lol.

Are we actually coming together here as a community? Can we actually fix our pricing?

I do see alot of work to be done, I for one see "alittle" light at the end of the tunnel as well.

All-in-all, our format would have to be well documented, charts etc., probably a few footnotes, asterisks and the like. TO WORK and be EFFECTIVE, everybody must follow the format. I think somebody mentioned, an access test like we have in place for scans...good idea. Keep in mind not everybody likes pricing or would use it no matter what, but those that do could have the inniative to clean up the PRICING.

I asked a research question for comparitive pricing. It led to another post and more pricing ideas.

https://www.tradingcarddb.com/Forum.cfm/Page/G/ID/0/?MODE=VIEW&ThreadID=17351&PageIndex=1

My point in ALL posts is to find some common ground for pricing onsite. IF, we agree something needs to be done  to bring card values to realistic values, then we must start implementing a COMMON FORMAT for all members to follow.. IF, each member decides independently they know what's right and just, and continue to add pricing without following an established format, ALL these discussions are for naught or at least just good reading. LOL. WE need L8s and ADMIN to come to the realization that the PRICING FORMAT needs restructuring.

I started to input some prices (what I pay for them)    One had a price and I was asked  Have you purchased this card or seen it sold recently?      How far back can I go?     I made a big purchase on COMC  during Sept of 2011.   Another one Feb of 2012.   100s of card each.

I missed the last few replies here. I was following the thread a bit to see where it went, but without a post from me here, I wasn't getting PM's about it. But I need to reply to Bob's last reply now. I can't speak for the ADMIN, but as an L8 myself, I think all L8's know the pricing system is messed up. We just weren't sure how to get it fixed and therefore nothing got done. I like the idea of an access test. But that is kind of the same thing as the Permissions tests. I think limiting Price additions to a certain level of Permissions would be VERY helpful. I think adding prices for cards should be restricted to only members with a certain amount of time and experience and/or points on this site. ADMIN would still have the option to allow certain members showing the knowledge and skill to gain the permission before they hit the minimum marks. I'd recommend no less than Level 5 Permissions.

One thing that has changed since I joined was dropping the option to mark a price as "Book Value". Since that option pretty much led to Beckett, I see why they dropped that option. NO ONE ON HERE wants Beckett to come after this site and many collectors across the world know what Beckett does to competition. We do not want that! The current options for Auction or Retail price are good, but that doesn't mean that every person adding prices know what they mean. The real limiter should be that a price can't be added without a date AND condition being set. If pricing info was limited to those 3 criteria (P-Level, Date, Condition), there's a good chance that accurate info would eventually take over everything in the pricing portion of the site. That's just my 2-cents worth of info though, plus the 30+ years of collecting and nearly 5 years on this site. I'd be happy to hear any other opinions, no matter the experience level of collecting or time on this site.

Just wanted to say that I wasn't aware of the ban on price guide prices, which tells me I need to read the admin rules a little closer and stop doing that. (The copyright infringment thing is not something I want to cause.) So, thank you for the input on that. Don't want to get in trouble on this site as it is way too valuable to the tracking of my collection. 

I think maybe some of the comments on here are right. Maybe, a way to report sales should be there, but not an open ended name your price block. (It obviously confused me.) Maybe a small commitee of trusted people to regulate pricing would be a good thing. 

I think the problem is that anyone can do it. Crowd source pricing is always going to result in a few people jacking prices up. How do we keep people honest?

Don't forget, guys, that we have over 11.2 million cards listed on this site.  And several card auctions end on Ebay every minute.  Good luck!