| |
In lugnet.market.auction, Sean Harrington writes:
> [...] Based on what I saw quoted in the price guide, I overpaid, so it
> neither affected my desire for the product, nor did it hurt the seller's
> profits.
Don't feel bad.
I really question whether the prices there accurately reflect demand and
"real-life experience" market prices. I had a quick look over the Space
stuff and some of the other stuff and it seemed to me that, in my experience,
many of the prices shown there were ridiculously low. Less than $100 on a
<set:6987>? Come on. If one ever sells that low, then there's something
wrong with the set (incomplete or dirty) or the seller (unknown or bad
reputation) or the venue (poorly advertised or too-short auctioned). $70
for a <set:6980>? Where are they? I'll take 10 at that price.
On the plus side, it seems like most of the values I examined were within 2x
of a reasonable price -- so that's at least helpful in comparing the relative
values of sets. Also, the "high" column seems fairly accurate to a typical
auction price, or somewhere about 1/3 of the way between the "high" and the
"price" column. Nobody's gonna see a price like the "low" column unless
they're extremely lucky or are buying a set in really rough shape.
I thought it was nice to see prices on current sets, BTW.
--Todd
[xfut -> .market.appraisal]
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: "Buy The Brick"
|
| Agreed. I think Steve's efforts look promising, and I think he deserves any compensation he receives from it. I personally don't find the information worth the price, and I'd certainly prefer NOT to be solicited as a result of using Lugnet. The (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.market.auction)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
