Do some card dealers actually want to sell their cards?

[maxpower]

I think we're a lot closer on this issue than it would seem. Don't take my point to be that sellers set the market... what I'm saying is that NO ONE sets the market by himself, or better yet - for items like cards there is rarely a 'true' market price.

On those Bagwells or your lamp example, the seller isn't setting the market just by unilaterally naming a price. For me, it's easiest to think about a transaction as a trade rather than a purchase. The object isn't to get money - the object is to get whatever the other side has (card for the buyer, money for the seller). So being in control of the money doesn't give the buyer market setting power any more than being in control of the card gives the seller market setting power. I do think there's a range that one can use to approximate a market value on cards with multiple sales data points, but even then, it gets sticky to say what the actual sale value is. If a card has sold five times in the past two weeks for $3,$4,$2,$1, and $5, what's the 'market price'? Someone could say $2.50, but someone could just as validly argue $5. And if there are only 6 copies of the card available, a seller could legitimately say it's worth far more than 'market' since the other five have already been sold.

It's this volatility and uncertainty (that you astutely alluded to) that makes me cringe when a buyer comes to me with what he claims to be the 'market price'. Many many times, I've sold cards for far more than the claimed 'market price', even sometimes when that price is the eBay average. It doesn't mean I'm a bad seller or a mean person. It works for me, and it may be working for those dealers. They may not be selling the card that you want, but perhaps they're making a much greater profit on the cards that they do move. Sort of like Burbank on eBay... most people think his prices are ludicrous, but he does a ton of business, so maybe the concept of 'market price' isn't quite as fixed as some people make it out to be.

As for cartel pricing (like with the gas stations), you're dead on there. And you're also right about market power with regard to wants vs. needs, although some collectors might quibble with you as to whether their white whales are merely wants...

Anyhow, I appreciate the thoughtful and respectful exchange of ideas. We may not agree on everything, but at least you make it clear exactly how you get to your ideas.

That's fine. It would be weird if everyone agreed with me on everything. My point is that while you do have to have a seller to have a market at all, the people setting the price are the ones paying. Because like I said...this hobby is much too big to hold anything over one buyers head. There is a Bagwell Crusades Red up right now on ebay with a BIN/BO of $999. There is also an MLB logoman for BIN of $599. While I would never even offer a fraction of this price even though I do want those two cards...who is really setting the market? A seller holding a card ransom or a buyer who actually has money to spend? If the card can't be sold , or in some cases, isn't sold very often, for what a seller wants to sell it at, then how could we say the seller is setting the price? He may be setting his price but you can't say that is the market value because its not selling. There may be 10 other sellers actually selling the same card on a regular basis for way less. That would eb the market value.

What you are basically saying is that I could go out right now and purchase anything, from a lamp to a television, and then set my price and tell people that I set the market value on it. Its not likely. If I go buy a lamp and say "Well...I am setting the value on it at $600", yet the same lamp can be had a J.C. Penney's for a whopping $40...what is the real going rate or market value? My $600 that doesn't sell or the $40 people are scooping them up in Penney's for? Hell...lets say I do sell my lamp. Does that still mean that the $600 I sold it for is the going rate? Nope. Its why this hobby is weird too because with things like 1/1's and whatnot...the value can fluctaute like nobody's business. What one person may buy it for is fine and dandy but they can't reasonably expect to get the same back for it. they may get less or more but its hard to nail down just one price.

I just think you have a money trail and wherever that leads is who is setting the value. Now if all sellers used ebay or all sellers used BV...and stuck to it much like gas stations stick to their prices...then you are closer to setting the market value. Since every seller is different...its not likely they can do this. Yet I go to the corner and see Chevron, Mobile, Exxon, and Valero all selling the same gas for real close prices. That's setting the market value. But then again...if people refuse to buy it...then what's the market value and who has more control or leverage? The buyer or the seller? It just depends on who breaks first. But in a case like cards...the buyer always has the upper hand because there are way too many cards for one card or one seller to have all the aces up his sleeve. Just like the inverse is true for gas because gas is gas and everyone needs it. They have the leverage. Nobody needs a card. If they do...there are still many other options and places for that money to go. Its what happens when you deal with a market that is based on a want and not a need. You sacrifice leverage.

 

[predatorkj]

I think we're a lot closer on this issue than it would seem. Don't take my point to be that sellers set the market... what I'm saying is that NO ONE sets the market by himself, or better yet - for items like cards there is rarely a 'true' market price.

On those Bagwells or your lamp example, the seller isn't setting the market just by unilaterally naming a price. For me, it's easiest to think about a transaction as a trade rather than a purchase. The object isn't to get money - the object is to get whatever the other side has (card for the buyer, money for the seller). So being in control of the money doesn't give the buyer market setting power any more than being in control of the card gives the seller market setting power. I do think there's a range that one can use to approximate a market value on cards with multiple sales data points, but even then, it gets sticky to say what the actual sale value is. If a card has sold five times in the past two weeks for $3,$4,$2,$1, and $5, what's the 'market price'? Someone could say $2.50, but someone could just as validly argue $5. And if there are only 6 copies of the card available, a seller could legitimately say it's worth far more than 'market' since the other five have already been sold.

It's this volatility and uncertainty (that you astutely alluded to) that makes me cringe when a buyer comes to me with what he claims to be the 'market price'. Many many times, I've sold cards for far more than the claimed 'market price', even sometimes when that price is the eBay average. It doesn't mean I'm a bad seller or a mean person. It works for me, and it may be working for those dealers. They may not be selling the card that you want, but perhaps they're making a much greater profit on the cards that they do move. Sort of like Burbank on eBay... most people think his prices are ludicrous, but he does a ton of business, so maybe the concept of 'market price' isn't quite as fixed as some people make it out to be.

As for cartel pricing (like with the gas stations), you're dead on there. And you're also right about market power with regard to wants vs. needs, although some collectors might quibble with you as to whether their white whales are merely wants...

Anyhow, I appreciate the thoughtful and respectful exchange of ideas. We may not agree on everything, but at least you make it clear exactly how you get to your ideas.

I'll agree to a bunch of this. I just figure the buyer has more leverage. But I do like how you think when it comes to ebay sales. I too don't really think of them as anything special. Some go by ebay like it was the current beckett. I do not.