[RESOLVED]Current value calculation question

Started by Tripredacus, October 01, 2011, 12:17:57 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Tripredacus

October 01, 2011, 12:17:57 PM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
I was looking through my collection and was looking for items that had a current value of something other than unknown. But I started seeing items that had values that seemed quite odd. So I'll ask whether this is potentially caused by tampering, miscalculation or using too general a scope for something's value.

The first is McDonald's Blackout:
http://shmax.com/product_details/8079/blackout

It has really high values for MISB and W/Bag that would only seem to make sense if this particular item was purchased in a lot of some sort. In addition, my MISB price that I have entered doesn't even show as the low value, which shows $14.99 but my price was $0.50. The Price History chart is equally confusing as it shows an "Unknown" sale at $70.

Another oddity is this RTS Prowl:
http://shmax.com/product_details/7257/prowl

The value is skewed greatly by the extremely outlandish $400 MOSC sale that appears both in the chart and the appraisal data. The chart indicates there were 4 instances of this toy selling at over $100, which includes the mystery $400 sale.

So, where do you get these values from? Are they actual ebay auction values, or do you use the completed auctions that sold value? Even the Ebay results on the Prowl page are showing 2 Kre-O items, which is why I think it might be related.

There's probably more but those are just two I noticed.

shmax

#1
October 02, 2011, 10:11:37 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
There are some quirks in the system, to be sure. Matching specific toy records in our database to the amorphous chaos that rages on eBay is a horrifically complex and tricky task, and it's sort of a miracle that it works as well as it does. That said, there are tools to fine-tune records that are having trouble resolving to auctions, and I'll do my best to adjust the two records you've mentioned. One of the many projects in the works is an overhaul of the appraisal system; my plan is to start using the "price paid" data entered by shmax.com members to supplement the auction info where needed. Hopefully that will really tighten up some of this, and everybody will be happy (ha, ha).

shmax

#2
October 02, 2011, 10:20:51 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
Ya know, now that I think about it a bit, there are a few improvements I could make to the auction matching algorithm. Innnnteresting...

shmax

#3
October 10, 2011, 07:54:26 PM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
...and I just spent the last week rewriting the algorithm that constructs the eBay searches we use. There was always something vaguely bothering me about the routine I was using, and I finally figured out what the problem was, and fixed it. The new algorithm is much less conservative about the searches it constructs, but is also more accurate. Both the records you linked to are now correct, with no false positives. Please let me know if you spot anything else weird--there will still be cases where we have to do a little fine-tuning. Thanks for the catch!

Tripredacus

#4
October 11, 2011, 10:59:16 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
Cool!

The only reason I noticed is I have been checking the toy listings for value recently, to determine what kind of prices I may want to bid on Ebay with.

shmax

#5
October 16, 2011, 05:13:56 PM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
Have you been keeping an eye on the price info? I just spent another week fine-tuning and optimizing, and it should be pretty solid, now...

Tripredacus

#6
October 17, 2011, 11:40:52 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
Quote from: "shmax"
Have you been keeping an eye on the price info? I just spent another week fine-tuning and optimizing, and it should be pretty solid, now...
Yeah some of them. Last time I checked some there wasn't any data yet. I'm going to check some today and see what I find.

tusko

#7
December 13, 2011, 08:46:59 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
I'd still like a baseline price included somewhere.

Loose - 1 cent
Open - 30% of MSRP
Sealed - 80% of MSRP

Wha' ja't'ink? maybe kinda?
A lowball estimate would be kinda nice compared to "unknown".
.

engledogg

#8
December 13, 2011, 09:08:58 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
I'm thinking that might lead to some misleading values though.  

Let's say there's no data for a rather rare G1 figure, because there are none on eBay.  The retail price on it back in 1986 was $29.99, but usually goes for hundreds of dollars on the secondary market sealed, whenever they do pop up on eBay.

And you have one sealed...so, you'd have a value of 80% of MSRP ($24.00 in this instance) assigned to this toy, even though it's worth hundreds.

That formula MAY work somewhat with recent/current stuff, but couldn't be applied to anything beyond that...although, I'm not sure why a loose figure would only be worth 1 cent...unless it's maybe Tuner Mudflap.

Just my two cents (which would buy me two Mudflaps).  :)

MIKE
engledogg
Dumba$$ that used to buy everything...not so much anymore.

Tripredacus

#9
December 13, 2011, 09:18:22 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
I know what you mean about those blank values, especially since the value reset. But for a baseline price, it may be possible to NOT use a specific toy in this example, but a range of them. For example, maybe there is no value on a G1 Brawn, a "baseline" could be determined by doing something with the values of the other G1 Brawns, or even the 1985/4 Minicars in general. However when you are talking about values, it would mean someone would have to be keeping track of the different modifiers for different years. As pointed out, you can't use a blanket value against a DoTM toy and also a G1 toy... For example a loose complete G1 toy like Prowl is going to be well over 100% on the MSRP while a loose complete Energon toy may be less than 100% of the MSRP.

That all seems like a lot of unneeded calculations for the site to be doing.

tusko

#10
December 13, 2011, 05:22:07 PM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
Then how about setting a base line for the toys for the past 5 years?

G1 has had enough time to sort out its own collectors market.
But what about my TF the movie junk?
Because of my oddball Canadian collection I may never get an evaluation!!
.

shmax

#11
December 13, 2011, 05:25:06 PM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
Trust me, if we ever hit it big, we will hire at least one egghead to work solely on this kind of thing. In the meantime, as Trip suggests, we have to limit ourselves to work that is manageable and as straightforward as possible. But I agree that we should do everything in our power to come up with SOME kind of value--anything is better than nothing, provided you are very conservative. I'll mention that I still haven't finished the appraisal work that I started more than a year ago (trickier than it sounds). The plan was to try to use member collection data to fill in gaps left by the auction matching stuff, and I still think that will close up most of the holes fairly satisfactorily. But if there are STILL holes after that, it strikes me that we could probably do worse than just using the known MSRP price if we have it, just straight, particularly if you own the toy in its sealed state. It would be laughably off-base for vintage stuff, like Ed says, but it would be better than nothing. If your toy is so obscure that we have no auction OR member data for it, then it might be fairly safe to assume that it's still worth at least what it would have cost at the store.

tusko

#12
December 14, 2011, 10:38:15 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
My point is being missed.
I'm not interested in obscure, rare or vintage toys.  That's not my collection.  Its not the bulk of my collection.

I think a reasonable pricing strategy could be devised for the most common stuff out there from over the past 5 years.

Canadian Universe Prowl is the most common toy in that grouping.  There are over 20 registered Shmax users with the toy. I think its fairly agreeable that toy is worth $10 MISB and less loose etc.

I don't want this site to be the precedent setting price guide for ALL transformers, but if an 80-20 rule can catch all the common stuff that would be nice.
.

shmax

#13
December 14, 2011, 11:08:31 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
Not to worry, Tusko, we get it--you want to see appraisal data for your Canadian toys. In my previous ramble I mentioned that we want to use member collection data to supplement the auction data; I think that will get us most of the way there. You say that there are 20 registered Shmax users with the Canadian Universe Prowl toy--that should be a good enough sample to get us some convincing data. There are a few technical difficulties preventing all this from happening quickly--namely, I don't know of a free data source to convert international currencies--but they will be surmounted in time. Hang in there, buddy, we'll get it all sorted out.

tusko

#14
December 14, 2011, 11:35:38 AM Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 04:00:00 PM by Guest
Ha!  No rush and no pressure, Max.

I just really like the sorting features you have.... to see which toys are most commonly found in a collection. I'm also surprised by what is unusual in a collection.

I think that if you have 100 members with a particular figure, its pretty decent to estimate the value based on their input, and it has a large impact on the total number of collections!
.

Go Up