Just curious

DavidD

Is this accurate?

andyfarrimond

Yep, from what I can tell.  The last couple of sold for well over 2k.

andrew68

yep

tempo_n_groove

Didn't a raffle for one just fill at $2691?

andyfarrimond

tempo_n_groove said:

Didn't a raffle for one just fill at $2691?

Yes, and pretty quickly

DavidD

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

pjl44

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

PB11041

pjl44 said:

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

it is a good benchmark, but it is not plenty accurate.  It is only as good as what gets self reported or posters that people are particularly keeping tabs on.   So yeah, sure the 2013 variant on Wrigley is getting updated but that doesn't speak for the rest of the data.  If users do not self report their sales or even input the price properly on ebay sales they are tracking it gets wrong pretty quick, and the ebay data goes away after a few months so it becomes unverifiable.  

It is the best guide for really wildly different and subjective data sets.  

cp3iverson

pjl44 said:

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

Guess im shady lol.  Ebay sales not showing up is the most obvious problem.  i dont expect a lot of Lost Dogs sales to get reported.  Even EB sales arent getting reported for most PJ posters ive searched for. Their six month average that sellers/buyers like to use is a bad tool.  A $600 poster will have data saying its a $150 poster. Your best pricing info will always be ebay’s sold filter and then watching Lost Dogs/collectionzzz/etc every week.  

HollisBrown

The six month average price has been irrelevant over on EB for awhile now. It’s bwoken. Just look at the price history to get a ballpark figure on value. 

pjl44

cp3iverson said:

pjl44 said:

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

Guess im shady lol.  Ebay sales not showing up is the most obvious problem.  i dont expect a lot of Lost Dogs sales to get reported.  Even EB sales arent getting reported for most PJ posters ive searched for. Their six month average that sellers/buyers like to use is a bad tool.  A $600 poster will have data saying its a $150 poster. Your best pricing info will always be ebay’s sold filter and then watching Lost Dogs/collectionzzz/etc every week.  

I asked on the other thread and the "incorrect" examples provided were totally correct. I'd certainly be interested to see actual incorrect examples.

I can see where 6mo avg isn't useful, especially if there aren't many recent sales. If someone isn't using it properly it's not the tool's fault. You look at the trend and take your best stab.

The thing is there's literally nothing else. Maybe if you comb eBay completed listings looking for something missed? If collectionzz winds up with something more sophisticated, awesome. What I do know - and that Dublin thread is a perfect example - is that taking people at their word is WAY less reliable. Several posts in there illustrate the need for objective data, even if it's incomplete. 

Weston1283

Yeah this print is sitting at the 2400-2600 range currently, and climbing 

PB11041

pjl44 said:

cp3iverson said:

pjl44 said:

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

Guess im shady lol.  Ebay sales not showing up is the most obvious problem.  i dont expect a lot of Lost Dogs sales to get reported.  Even EB sales arent getting reported for most PJ posters ive searched for. Their six month average that sellers/buyers like to use is a bad tool.  A $600 poster will have data saying its a $150 poster. Your best pricing info will always be ebay’s sold filter and then watching Lost Dogs/collectionzzz/etc every week.  

I asked on the other thread and the "incorrect" examples provided were totally correct. I'd certainly be interested to see actual incorrect examples.

I can see where 6mo avg isn't useful, especially if there aren't many recent sales. If someone isn't using it properly it's not the tool's fault. You look at the trend and take your best stab.

The thing is there's literally nothing else. Maybe if you comb eBay completed listings looking for something missed? If collectionzz winds up with something more sophisticated, awesome. What I do know - and that Dublin thread is a perfect example - is that taking people at their word is WAY less reliable. Several posts in there illustrate the need for objective data, even if it's incomplete. 

Data is not objective if it is freaking wrong.  And woefully incomplete is wrong.

One tangible example of wrong data is Ward Sutton Randall's Island 1996 print.  The data on EB shows one of the more recent instances of a sale as $700, the ebay link that corresponds clearly shows it sold for $899.   That is nearly 25% off the mark. 

It was a nice concept to gauge history, but it doesn't provide an accurate picture currently.  Frankly the commentary on the Dublin thread is more useful because that shows tangible examples of a few recent sales, and whether people like it or not, once a few people are willing to drop $2,500+ on a poster, that is your new price.  

pjl44

PB11041 said:

pjl44 said:

cp3iverson said:

pjl44 said:

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

Guess im shady lol.  Ebay sales not showing up is the most obvious problem.  i dont expect a lot of Lost Dogs sales to get reported.  Even EB sales arent getting reported for most PJ posters ive searched for. Their six month average that sellers/buyers like to use is a bad tool.  A $600 poster will have data saying its a $150 poster. Your best pricing info will always be ebay’s sold filter and then watching Lost Dogs/collectionzzz/etc every week.  

I asked on the other thread and the "incorrect" examples provided were totally correct. I'd certainly be interested to see actual incorrect examples.

I can see where 6mo avg isn't useful, especially if there aren't many recent sales. If someone isn't using it properly it's not the tool's fault. You look at the trend and take your best stab.

The thing is there's literally nothing else. Maybe if you comb eBay completed listings looking for something missed? If collectionzz winds up with something more sophisticated, awesome. What I do know - and that Dublin thread is a perfect example - is that taking people at their word is WAY less reliable. Several posts in there illustrate the need for objective data, even if it's incomplete. 

Data is not objective if it is freaking wrong.  And woefully incomplete is wrong.

One tangible example of wrong data is Ward Sutton Randall's Island 1996 print.  The data on EB shows one of the more recent instances of a sale as $700, the ebay link that corresponds clearly shows it sold for $899.   That is nearly 25% off the mark. 

It was a nice concept to gauge history, but it doesn't provide an accurate picture currently.  Frankly the commentary on the Dublin thread is more useful because that shows tangible examples of a few recent sales, and whether people like it or not, once a few people are willing to drop $2,500+ on a poster, that is your new price.  

$895 was the asking price, not the sale price. A best offer of $700 was accepted on 10/24. You guys either don't know how to read completed sale listings on ebay or you're purposefully misleading people.

Also, exactly 0 people have paid $2,500 for Dublin. The OP "guessed" someone paid $2,300 and then - whaddya know - actually $500 less. It's posts like this that led me to my "shady as hell" comment earlier.

pjl44

Folks, if you're not already, familiarize yourself with the watchcount website. You can take an ebay item number from a completed sale and it shows you the best offer price accepted. If it's too old you can't see the price, but you can click through and still see the full offer history with usernames and timestamps. I buy/sell baseball cards and it is 100% accurate.

Ebeans does a great job of cataloguing those old prices and you should trust what you see there. These jackals are putting a lot of misinformation out there. It's clear you should never take these guys at their word and only accept what you can objectively verify.

PB11041

pjl44 said:

PB11041 said:

pjl44 said:

cp3iverson said:

pjl44 said:

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

Guess im shady lol.  Ebay sales not showing up is the most obvious problem.  i dont expect a lot of Lost Dogs sales to get reported.  Even EB sales arent getting reported for most PJ posters ive searched for. Their six month average that sellers/buyers like to use is a bad tool.  A $600 poster will have data saying its a $150 poster. Your best pricing info will always be ebay’s sold filter and then watching Lost Dogs/collectionzzz/etc every week.  

I asked on the other thread and the "incorrect" examples provided were totally correct. I'd certainly be interested to see actual incorrect examples.

I can see where 6mo avg isn't useful, especially if there aren't many recent sales. If someone isn't using it properly it's not the tool's fault. You look at the trend and take your best stab.

The thing is there's literally nothing else. Maybe if you comb eBay completed listings looking for something missed? If collectionzz winds up with something more sophisticated, awesome. What I do know - and that Dublin thread is a perfect example - is that taking people at their word is WAY less reliable. Several posts in there illustrate the need for objective data, even if it's incomplete. 

Data is not objective if it is freaking wrong.  And woefully incomplete is wrong.

One tangible example of wrong data is Ward Sutton Randall's Island 1996 print.  The data on EB shows one of the more recent instances of a sale as $700, the ebay link that corresponds clearly shows it sold for $899.   That is nearly 25% off the mark. 

It was a nice concept to gauge history, but it doesn't provide an accurate picture currently.  Frankly the commentary on the Dublin thread is more useful because that shows tangible examples of a few recent sales, and whether people like it or not, once a few people are willing to drop $2,500+ on a poster, that is your new price.  

$895 was the asking price, not the sale price. A best offer of $700 was accepted on 10/24. You guys either don't know how to read completed sale listings on ebay or you're purposefully misleading people.

Also, exactly 0 people have paid $2,500 for Dublin. The OP "guessed" someone paid $2,300 and then - whaddya know - actually $500 less. It's posts like this that led me to my "shady as hell" comment earlier.

I am not sure exactly how many hoops one is expected to jump through to verify a price of a goddamn poster, but more than one click clearly shows that eBay categorizes it as SOLD for $895.00.   I realize full well that offers can be accepted but whereas digging down that path for other items shows that a best offer at a different price, such as for Merriweather, it does not for the Ward Randall's Island.  

And perhaps people would be less adamant that ebeans is no longer a valid be all end resource if you were not accusing them of things such as "purposefully misleading people" "shady as hell" "don't say its not all about the money"

I didn't say anyone paid $2,500 for Dublin, I said that the information on that thread is more useful because it puts more recent pricing from other arenas into the conversation, my point with saying once someone pay $2,500+ for a poster that is the price, was that ebeans doesn't mean a hill of beans if a poster sells for a price somewhere they don't follow or track.  

pjl44

PB11041 said:

pjl44 said:

PB11041 said:

pjl44 said:

cp3iverson said:

pjl44 said:

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

Guess im shady lol.  Ebay sales not showing up is the most obvious problem.  i dont expect a lot of Lost Dogs sales to get reported.  Even EB sales arent getting reported for most PJ posters ive searched for. Their six month average that sellers/buyers like to use is a bad tool.  A $600 poster will have data saying its a $150 poster. Your best pricing info will always be ebay’s sold filter and then watching Lost Dogs/collectionzzz/etc every week.  

I asked on the other thread and the "incorrect" examples provided were totally correct. I'd certainly be interested to see actual incorrect examples.

I can see where 6mo avg isn't useful, especially if there aren't many recent sales. If someone isn't using it properly it's not the tool's fault. You look at the trend and take your best stab.

The thing is there's literally nothing else. Maybe if you comb eBay completed listings looking for something missed? If collectionzz winds up with something more sophisticated, awesome. What I do know - and that Dublin thread is a perfect example - is that taking people at their word is WAY less reliable. Several posts in there illustrate the need for objective data, even if it's incomplete. 

Data is not objective if it is freaking wrong.  And woefully incomplete is wrong.

One tangible example of wrong data is Ward Sutton Randall's Island 1996 print.  The data on EB shows one of the more recent instances of a sale as $700, the ebay link that corresponds clearly shows it sold for $899.   That is nearly 25% off the mark. 

It was a nice concept to gauge history, but it doesn't provide an accurate picture currently.  Frankly the commentary on the Dublin thread is more useful because that shows tangible examples of a few recent sales, and whether people like it or not, once a few people are willing to drop $2,500+ on a poster, that is your new price.  

$895 was the asking price, not the sale price. A best offer of $700 was accepted on 10/24. You guys either don't know how to read completed sale listings on ebay or you're purposefully misleading people.

Also, exactly 0 people have paid $2,500 for Dublin. The OP "guessed" someone paid $2,300 and then - whaddya know - actually $500 less. It's posts like this that led me to my "shady as hell" comment earlier.

I am not sure exactly how many hoops one is expected to jump through to verify a price of a goddamn poster, but more than one click clearly shows that eBay categorizes it as SOLD for $895.00.   I realize full well that offers can be accepted but whereas digging down that path for other items shows that a best offer at a different price, such as for Merriweather, it does not for the Ward Randall's Island.  

And perhaps people would be less adamant that ebeans is no longer a valid be all end resource if you were not accusing them of things such as "purposefully misleading people" "shady as hell" "don't say its not all about the money"

I didn't say anyone paid $2,500 for Dublin, I said that the information on that thread is more useful because it puts more recent pricing from other arenas into the conversation, my point with saying once someone pay $2,500+ for a poster that is the price, was that ebeans doesn't mean a hill of beans if a poster sells for a price somewhere they don't follow or track.  

You're not reading that right. The price is missing because it's old. If you look up the Columbia mentioned in the other thread you see what that looks like. The beauty of ebeans is it stores the accurate prices that eventually time out on ebay/watchcount.

The "information" in the Dublin thread is worthless. A guy who overstated two different actual sale prices by $500 and a handful of dudes who rushed to his defense. Anyone who buys into any of that is a sucker.

pjl44

on2legs

PB11041 said:

pjl44 said:

PB11041 said:

pjl44 said:

cp3iverson said:

pjl44 said:

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

Guess im shady lol.  Ebay sales not showing up is the most obvious problem.  i dont expect a lot of Lost Dogs sales to get reported.  Even EB sales arent getting reported for most PJ posters ive searched for. Their six month average that sellers/buyers like to use is a bad tool.  A $600 poster will have data saying its a $150 poster. Your best pricing info will always be ebay’s sold filter and then watching Lost Dogs/collectionzzz/etc every week.  

I asked on the other thread and the "incorrect" examples provided were totally correct. I'd certainly be interested to see actual incorrect examples.

I can see where 6mo avg isn't useful, especially if there aren't many recent sales. If someone isn't using it properly it's not the tool's fault. You look at the trend and take your best stab.

The thing is there's literally nothing else. Maybe if you comb eBay completed listings looking for something missed? If collectionzz winds up with something more sophisticated, awesome. What I do know - and that Dublin thread is a perfect example - is that taking people at their word is WAY less reliable. Several posts in there illustrate the need for objective data, even if it's incomplete. 

Data is not objective if it is freaking wrong.  And woefully incomplete is wrong.

One tangible example of wrong data is Ward Sutton Randall's Island 1996 print.  The data on EB shows one of the more recent instances of a sale as $700, the ebay link that corresponds clearly shows it sold for $899.   That is nearly 25% off the mark. 

It was a nice concept to gauge history, but it doesn't provide an accurate picture currently.  Frankly the commentary on the Dublin thread is more useful because that shows tangible examples of a few recent sales, and whether people like it or not, once a few people are willing to drop $2,500+ on a poster, that is your new price.  

$895 was the asking price, not the sale price. A best offer of $700 was accepted on 10/24. You guys either don't know how to read completed sale listings on ebay or you're purposefully misleading people.

Also, exactly 0 people have paid $2,500 for Dublin. The OP "guessed" someone paid $2,300 and then - whaddya know - actually $500 less. It's posts like this that led me to my "shady as hell" comment earlier.

I am not sure exactly how many hoops one is expected to jump through to verify a price of a goddamn poster, but more than one click clearly shows that eBay categorizes it as SOLD for $895.00.   I realize full well that offers can be accepted but whereas digging down that path for other items shows that a best offer at a different price, such as for Merriweather, it does not for the Ward Randall's Island.  

And perhaps people would be less adamant that ebeans is no longer a valid be all end resource if you were not accusing them of things such as "purposefully misleading people" "shady as hell" "don't say its not all about the money"

I didn't say anyone paid $2,500 for Dublin, I said that the information on that thread is more useful because it puts more recent pricing from other arenas into the conversation, my point with saying once someone pay $2,500+ for a poster that is the price, was that ebeans doesn't mean a hill of beans if a poster sells for a price somewhere they don't follow or track.  

It’s really not that hard.  

PB11041

on2legs said:

PB11041 said:

pjl44 said:

PB11041 said:

pjl44 said:

cp3iverson said:

pjl44 said:

DavidD said:

Appreciate it guys. with all the talk about EB’s not being accurate wasn’t sure what it was worth. 

EB has its limitations, but its plenty accurate. Dudes trying to convince people otherwise are shady as hell. Until something better comes along, it's still the best (only?) source for completed sale data.

Guess im shady lol.  Ebay sales not showing up is the most obvious problem.  i dont expect a lot of Lost Dogs sales to get reported.  Even EB sales arent getting reported for most PJ posters ive searched for. Their six month average that sellers/buyers like to use is a bad tool.  A $600 poster will have data saying its a $150 poster. Your best pricing info will always be ebay’s sold filter and then watching Lost Dogs/collectionzzz/etc every week.  

I asked on the other thread and the "incorrect" examples provided were totally correct. I'd certainly be interested to see actual incorrect examples.

I can see where 6mo avg isn't useful, especially if there aren't many recent sales. If someone isn't using it properly it's not the tool's fault. You look at the trend and take your best stab.

The thing is there's literally nothing else. Maybe if you comb eBay completed listings looking for something missed? If collectionzz winds up with something more sophisticated, awesome. What I do know - and that Dublin thread is a perfect example - is that taking people at their word is WAY less reliable. Several posts in there illustrate the need for objective data, even if it's incomplete. 

Data is not objective if it is freaking wrong.  And woefully incomplete is wrong.

One tangible example of wrong data is Ward Sutton Randall's Island 1996 print.  The data on EB shows one of the more recent instances of a sale as $700, the ebay link that corresponds clearly shows it sold for $899.   That is nearly 25% off the mark. 

It was a nice concept to gauge history, but it doesn't provide an accurate picture currently.  Frankly the commentary on the Dublin thread is more useful because that shows tangible examples of a few recent sales, and whether people like it or not, once a few people are willing to drop $2,500+ on a poster, that is your new price.  

$895 was the asking price, not the sale price. A best offer of $700 was accepted on 10/24. You guys either don't know how to read completed sale listings on ebay or you're purposefully misleading people.

Also, exactly 0 people have paid $2,500 for Dublin. The OP "guessed" someone paid $2,300 and then - whaddya know - actually $500 less. It's posts like this that led me to my "shady as hell" comment earlier.

I am not sure exactly how many hoops one is expected to jump through to verify a price of a goddamn poster, but more than one click clearly shows that eBay categorizes it as SOLD for $895.00.   I realize full well that offers can be accepted but whereas digging down that path for other items shows that a best offer at a different price, such as for Merriweather, it does not for the Ward Randall's Island.  

And perhaps people would be less adamant that ebeans is no longer a valid be all end resource if you were not accusing them of things such as "purposefully misleading people" "shady as hell" "don't say its not all about the money"

I didn't say anyone paid $2,500 for Dublin, I said that the information on that thread is more useful because it puts more recent pricing from other arenas into the conversation, my point with saying once someone pay $2,500+ for a poster that is the price, was that ebeans doesn't mean a hill of beans if a poster sells for a price somewhere they don't follow or track.  

It’s really not that hard.  

I guess, but if someplace is claiming to be a database it seems like maybe go out of the way to avoid very visible gaps in information.  Simplest solution would be to include the data vs having urls that fade away into obscure information that can only be found if you jump to another site and cut and paste id numbers to try and find another number that is going to eventually fade away too.  It is a failed effort to attempt to be transparent.