Wata - A year and a half after

[rorsch | 21]

On 10/31/2019 at 9:40 AM, jonebone said:

To be fair, Dain didn't do that.  He only collected VGA.  GoCollect bought his collection, then crossed it all over to Wata, or subbed a bunch of ungraded items himself.  GC / Wata came up with the Carolina Collection tagline, not Dain.  

Though, I do suspect he knew NA was a ticking timebomb with a server decommission date of 10/31.  

I actually saw SegaAge/PlaystationAge up after 10/31 so I think it's a conspiracy to make a disgusting, ugly dump of a site look like salvation... They probably had a price hike to keep that server alive more like it. EJH only ditched those sites after people stated you could download your collection stuff from them still. Then he went and dropped them immediately after.

[rorsch | 21]

On 10/31/2019 at 12:32 PM, Nightowljrm said:

This thread has been an interesting read. 

As for my opinion, I'm torn... I don't like seeing things as inflated as they are, but when Wata came onto the scene, I was and still am glad there's competition for VGA. Their transparency (at least at the time?) was appreciated and I felt like they were more knowledgeable than the unknown figures behind the curtain for VGA. I hate to be a fence-sitter, but I feel like both perspectives here are pretty valid.

Regarding sealed collecting in general, I don't collect sealed games, but I have a few that I happened upon throughout the years, and there's one I actually sought out, a sealed Sky Kid, just for my Sky Kid collection because I love that game. (I bought it from @Bronty, actually!) That's the only sealed collecting I'll ever do, getting sealed copies of games I really love, kind of as a "tribute" and a way to collect more for that particular game.

Kinda wish the poll had a Neutral option, as that's where I'm mostly at right now. I'll probably keep lurking in the thread, I'm sure I can be swayed. 

@Nightowljrm sway you how?  Haha!

Seriously, I just wish WATA sold empty shells so I could protect my games and not care about the grade. Make this happen and you'd have a LOT of happy people who aren't sealed collectors but would love protecting their games. Plus it's more revenue for them 

[Bronty | 187]

39 minutes ago, rorsch said:

@Nightowljrm sway you how?  Haha!

Seriously, I just wish WATA sold empty shells so I could protect my games and not care about the grade. Make this happen and you'd have a LOT of happy people who aren't sealed collectors but would love protecting their games. Plus it's more revenue for them 

if all you want is empty shells, vga sells empty acrylic shells.   They aren't quite the same as the ones used for graded games, but that's for a reason - you don't want to put spare parts out there to encourage counterfeits slabs.

 

[DefaultGen | 5,405]

4 hours ago, rorsch said:

Seriously, I just wish WATA sold empty shells so I could protect my games and not care about the grade. Make this happen and you'd have a LOT of happy people who aren't sealed collectors but would love protecting their games. Plus it's more revenue for them 

Wata's $25 grading tier was competitive with VGAs plain old $17 cases. I got a couple games graded just because I wanted a case better than a dollar box protector and it wasn't much more than a VGA case. While I'd be interested in ungraded Wata cases, with all the fires they're already putting out, and how they're focused on being a grading company, and the fact that VGA already has cases for everything, I'd just get VGA cases for now.

[ExplodedHamster | 404]

On 11/4/2019 at 5:53 PM, Link said:

‘83 Video game crash: market flooded with crap. High amount of speculation by publishers (“people will buy anything”)

90s comics crash: market flooded with crap; high amount of speculation and investing on new items by individuals (“I have to buy everything”) and publishers obliging

Current video game grading trend: high amount of speculation and investing on vintage items by individuals 

With way less stock. It’s not remotely comparable because of that major part of the equation, and the issue is more likely to be sealed games run out and people lose interest than there are too many.

Edited November 6, 2019 by ExplodedHamster

[ExplodedHamster | 404]

On 11/5/2019 at 8:05 AM, rorsch said:

I love you Mark. This was exactly my argument.

What is the argument, though? That businesses are trying to promote their own businesses and help create a market? In the end, it’s all about whether that market forms. It’s no different than any other product. 

I can own Chipotle stock, buy Chipotle products, promote it to others, and sit in on shareholders’ meetings and boards because I am invested in the company and want them to succeed. This morning I wore an officially licensed NBA team hat with a Budweiser logo on the side. Two companies with mutual interests cross marketing and promoting one another. 

So what? That’s literally what business is, and exactly what they should be doing. In the end, the risk for them is people don’t buy into what they’re selling and they close doors. Or people do and they profit. Again, that’s business.

[Mydogsrule | 87]

On 11/5/2019 at 7:28 AM, MrMark0673 said:

Umm, what?

Yeah, this is definately confusing.  I had seen the graded one and thought of yours as being done differently.  Did you contact Wata?  There is one on Heritage and I think comiclink?   Is the one on Heritage yours?

[rorsch | 21]

57 minutes ago, ExplodedHamster said:

What is the argument, though? That businesses are trying to promote their own businesses and help create a market? In the end, it’s all about whether that market forms. It’s no different than any other product. 

I can own Chipotle stock, buy Chipotle products, promote it to others, and sit in on shareholders’ meetings and boards because I am invested in the company and want them to succeed. This morning I wore an officially licensed NBA team hat with a Budweiser logo on the side. Two companies with mutual interests cross marketing and promoting one another. 

So what? That’s literally what business is, and exactly what they should be doing. In the end, the risk for them is people don’t buy into what they’re selling and they close doors. Or people do and they profit. Again, that’s business.

Right. You can. I could still think you are a shill and be turned off by that marketing style. Leaves a bad taste doing business that way.

Edited November 6, 2019 by rorsch

[Bronty | 187]

56 minutes ago, rorsch said:

Right. You can. I could still think you are a shill and be turned off by that marketing style. Leaves a bad taste doing business that way.

Mark that down for Secret Santa.   No NBA hats for Rorsch.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Bronty

[jonebone | 1,307]

Eh, with stock articles you're required to put a disclosure.  You know,  Joe Schmo writes some article on Yahoo saying how XYZ is the best company ever, they're undervalued, profits are increasing, yadda yadda yadda.  Then they end the article, "Disclosure: Joe Schmo is long XYZ" or "Disclosure: Joe Schmo does not have any position in XYZ stock and does not plan to start one in the next 30 days".  

This is more like Joe owns company X and buys game Y who is affiliated with company X and then hypes up games sold on his own website.  All of which isn't really explicitly disclosed, and only the people "in the know" can connect the dots.  It's either accidentally omitted due to ignorance or intentionally omitted to obscure things.  

Either way, obvious conflict of interest but nothing illegal in my eyes.  The fact that some people deny the conflict of interest only further exacerbates the issue.  People aren't dumb.

[BriGuy82 | 768]

15 minutes ago, jonebone said:

Either way, obvious conflict of interest but nothing illegal in my eyes.  The fact that some people deny the conflict of interest only further exacerbates the issue

Jone. I can only speak for myself, but that is the entire issue in a nutshell. Nobody is saying anything is illegal. It's just some people like myself. Who have no vested interest, no dog in the fight, find some of the actions that took place completely unethical and repulsive. When people start changing the argument to better fit their narrative, and deflect away from that point, they are exacerbating the issue. In the end they are only trying to fool themselves. Nobody else is fooled here. I know a lot of people were afraid to chime in on NA, maybe because they loved the sight and didn't want to offend the people who ran it. But I'm glad at least a few people here aren't afraid to just call it how they see it.

[Splain | 2,570]

I don't like they they're apparently ok with taking people's money and valuable games, while knowing full well that they can't deliver on their posted turnaround times. Just toss those games in the pile and watch the bottom line go up. Better hope their facility doesn't catch fire or get broken into.

[Bronty | 187]

2 hours ago, jonebone said:

Eh, with stock articles you're required to put a disclosure.  You know,  Joe Schmo writes some article on Yahoo saying how XYZ is the best company ever, they're undervalued, profits are increasing, yadda yadda yadda.  Then they end the article, "Disclosure: Joe Schmo is long XYZ" or "Disclosure: Joe Schmo does not have any position in XYZ stock and does not plan to start one in the next 30 days".  

This is more like Joe owns company X and buys game Y who is affiliated with company X and then hypes up games sold on his own website.  All of which isn't really explicitly disclosed, and only the people "in the know" can connect the dots.  It's either accidentally omitted due to ignorance or intentionally omitted to obscure things.  

Either way, obvious conflict of interest but nothing illegal in my eyes.  The fact that some people deny the conflict of interest only further exacerbates the issue.  People aren't dumb.

So Jone, how would you go about it?   How would you set up a completely conflict free environment in a grading service within a small hobby and how would you promote that small hobby to others without creating any conflicts?

If you yourself set up a grading co in this hobby tomorrow, it would be rife with conflicts.    VGA is rife with conflicts too (Bucky sends in more games than everyone else put together.   You think they don’t know which games are his?   I’m not suggest anything improper has ever happened on that account but the point is this isn’t the stock market and this isn’t the SEC and you can’t create a conflict of interest free environment in a fish bowl.

i understand people not wanting to feel like there are ‘insiders’ but there will always be insiders in a small hobby built on relationships.    There’s nothing ‘secret’ or ‘improper’ about that.   Seems like the main conflicts are conflicted feelings if you ask me.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Bronty

[buttheadrulesagain | 41]

On 10/28/2019 at 11:08 AM, B.A. said:

I don't love the influx of people buying up games purely as part of their investment portfolio, trying to get ahead of the 'next big thing'.  I don't begrudge anyone who wants to collect something because they enjoy it.  WATA grading games is providing a service, so I don't blame them.  Though they are part of the hype machine to an extent.  

Feel the same. Grading stuff like toys, comics and now video games, seems to me very snobbish, and leads to unnecessary price inflation. Just send me some good quality damn pics and save me the pain of paying bazillion dollars more for an already expensive game.

[buttheadrulesagain | 41]

On 10/31/2019 at 10:30 AM, Bronty said:

No they don’t.   The majority thinks ‘wata is not good for the hobby.’   That’s fine.   But when they find that sealed killer tomatoes or sealed Mario bros  in their closet they are mailing out a package right quick my friend.  

Those people you are telling me are so concerned with ethics were tripping all over themselves to sell their cib stickers!  At prices they would have called unethical six months previous!   

I know I'm late to the party (as always). It's great we have these debates on the direction of the hobby. I want to address this thought though. If I had a sealed Killer Tomatoes, I would keep it the way it is. If I was in financial hardship, or just getting off collecting, yes, I would send it to grade if that would guarantee me a better price. I do not think it would be unethical and/or incongruous with my dislike of grading.

What is the option? sell it at a much lower price ungraded? that would be like throwing a glass of water in the desert. Nobody would give a damn about my "moral superiority" or "statement on the foul grading business" because I chose to sell my sealed game ungraded. Doing that in a climate where everyone does it just means I am hurting myself financially on purpose. Pretty much like those guys that open sealed games because "they are meant to be played".

In a world where people will do one thing because of money, it does not pay to be altruist (see game theory). It's simply a maladaptive strategy.

That does not mean that I hate WATA, but then love WATA the moment I have a sealed Mario Bros (I agree that'd be hypocritical). I despise grading for the way it takes the hobby, but (sorry for being reiterative) if I have to sell (not speculating, but to cover a need or getting off the train), I'll be damned if I would not use them. They are not doing anything illegal, and going against the current accomplishes nothing (just to lose money to make a statement that no one cares about).

[ExplodedHamster | 404]

9 hours ago, jonebone said:

Eh, with stock articles you're required to put a disclosure.  You know,  Joe Schmo writes some article on Yahoo saying how XYZ is the best company ever, they're undervalued, profits are increasing, yadda yadda yadda.  Then they end the article, "Disclosure: Joe Schmo is long XYZ" or "Disclosure: Joe Schmo does not have any position in XYZ stock and does not plan to start one in the next 30 days".  

This is more like Joe owns company X and buys game Y who is affiliated with company X and then hypes up games sold on his own website.  All of which isn't really explicitly disclosed, and only the people "in the know" can connect the dots.  It's either accidentally omitted due to ignorance or intentionally omitted to obscure things.  

Either way, obvious conflict of interest but nothing illegal in my eyes.  The fact that some people deny the conflict of interest only further exacerbates the issue.  People aren't dumb.

If you're talking about the original SMB sale, I 100% agree there should have been full disclosure in the article.

As to the rest, however, there's really nothing that's been abnormal. People being on the board, the companies advertising one another, news articles, there's no conflict whatsoever. It's entirely normal business practice. A lot of that has been cited as conflict and it just plain is not.

10 hours ago, rorsch said:

Right. You can. I could still think you are a shill and be turned off by that marketing style. Leaves a bad taste doing business that way.

 Turned off by what? What is the alternative marketing style? Again, I understand with regards to the initial SMB sale, but aside from that. Why would someone who owns stock in a company promoting it be a shill? That's how all businesses are run, people who have a vested interest in a company want to see it succeed.

I'll put it another way: Using your standards, which businesses do you like?

Edited November 7, 2019 by ExplodedHamster

[Startyde | 175]

8 hours ago, jonebone said:

The fact that some people deny the conflict of interest only further exacerbates the issue.  People aren't dumb.

This is basically the summary. 

My objective analysis being a 20 year sealed game collector on Wata:

I love their site

I like their cases

I dislike their unprofessional unresponsiveness to paying customers.

I dislike their unprofessional non-guarenteed times without any mention on the ordering page

I hate that they don't classify drillholes on ps1 games as flaws, making grading imperfections pointless

I hate that they don't classify employee or promotional punchouts on ps1 games as flaws, making grading imperfections pointless

I hate that they don't classify giant ass non factory sticker and pricetags on games as flaws, making grading imperfections pointless

Edited November 7, 2019 by Startyde

[rorsch | 21]

2 hours ago, ExplodedHamster said:

If you're talking about the original SMB sale, I 100% agree there should have been full disclosure in the article.

As to the rest, however, there's really nothing that's been abnormal. People being on the board, the companies advertising one another, news articles, there's no conflict whatsoever. It's entirely normal business practice.

 Turned off by what? What is the alternative marketing style? Again, I understand with regards to the initial SMB sale, but aside from that. Why would someone who owns stock in a company promoting it be a shill? That's how all businesses are run, people who have a vested interest in a company want to see it succeed.

I'll put it another way: Using your standards, which businesses do you like?

Oracle, Cisco, Whirlpool, Berkshire Hathaway, Hilton Hotels, 3M, Canon - companies that focus on quality products/services versus gimmicks.

[ExplodedHamster | 404]

47 minutes ago, rorsch said:

Oracle, Cisco, Whirlpool, Berkshire Hathaway, Hilton Hotels, 3M, Canon - companies that focus on quality products/services versus gimmicks.

The Golden State Warriors played for ten years in the Oracle Arena. The Warriors and the NBA benefitted from their money and Oracle benefitted from the advertising.  Oracle’s logo was plastered everywhere in the building, alongside the NBA’s and the Warriors’s. We agree this was not a conflict of interest, correct? 

I’m sure owner of the Warriors either invests or sits on the advisory board of companies with products places all throughout the arena, as well. Hell, Mark Cuban invests and often takes advisory shares of companies he advertises and sells products for in his arena on Shark Tank every week. 

People have cited similar relationships between WATA and HA as evidence of conflict of interest in this thread. 

I mean I get not liking grading and the influx of comic people and all that, and the press release from HA following the sale of SMB was kinda gross, but let’s not go overboard and start citing everything as a conflict or untoward when it isn’t. Some of the stuff cited as “conflict” here is kinda ridiculous.

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by ExplodedHamster

[Bronty | 187]

The key distinction as I see it is that “Aligned interests” are very different than “conflicts of interest.”    As you imply almost every business has aligned  interests that they take advantage of and there’s nothing wrong with that.     Wata and heritage and whomever else may have aligned interests that make partnering up make sense.    For there to be a “conflict of interest” I would think you generally have to owe someone a fiduciary duty before you can have a conflict of interest.    In other words, you’re being paid to advise a husband and a wife that are divorcing but you can’t advise both well because they are locked in a zero sum battle and whatever you win for your first client comes at the expense of your second client.   THAT’s a conflict.    Not a press release, not shared promotions, not a 20k investment in a video game.

I understand the confusion between aligned interests and conflicts of interest but at the end of the day none of this is really even an issue.   This kind of stuff happens everywhere all day long  and it’s only because it’s a young hobby that we haven’t seen promotion of the hobby to this scale before.   

Edited November 7, 2019 by Bronty

[GPX | 1,370]

On 11/1/2019 at 11:53 PM, Bronty said:

1) you (as an established collector) are really not whom those articles are pointed at, and there's only so much you can say in one.   You have to dumb it down a bit same way if you were starting out in say coins you'd want things dumbed down a bit too.

2) Personally, I'm really skeptical about the effectiveness of 'articles' anyways.    We've all read these stories.    Cabbage patch kid sells for 1,000 or Coin sells for a million, or elvis' bellybutton hair sells for 100k.    Have ANY of those stories ever resulted in a reaction from you that beyond 'heh would you look at that'?    An article doesn't make someone want to change the entire direction of their collecting energy and use of resources.    If you read an article tomorrow about the skyrocketing prices  of vintage dolls would you really go out and spend everything you had on dolls?   Of course not.    Converting someone from one hobby to another is really difficult.    It takes one on one conversations, and repeated exposures to the material, and more than anything the 'target' has to think of all this is a good idea.   All the articles in the world aren't going to result in new collectors (or not very many).    Its the other stuff that is drawing people in.   The discussions at trade shows, the connections with other collectors, the look at the material and wondering WTF they weren't collecting this already, that kind of stuff.    Without those other more important things an article gets read for 20 seconds and then recycled and completely forgotten about by the next day.

I feel there’s 2 issues here:

- when we’re debating an incident in isolation, it’s hard to determine conclusive faults. What I think a lot of people are saying is more the “sequence of events” which makes things feel uneasy. It’s really all conjectures and opinions, but in a similar vein to the feeling of when there’s potential shill bidding going on in an eBay auction. Can’t prove conclusively, but there’s a natural feeling that can result if certain sequences come about via an eBay auction.

- “you (as a retro game collector) are not really who the article is geared towards” - well I personally think the aim of the article is to hook in as many people as possible: comic collectors, rich bums, gaming geeks and collecting freaks. For click baiting purposes and for future stability of the market values, it is in the involved parties’ interest to have the more people involved the better. 

[Bronty | 187]

The more people the better is probably true, but what’s wrong with that?   Yes, some of the people buying games now hope the value will increase.   That’s no different than it’s ever been.    The part that I think freaks people out is the new breed of buyer is more aggressive in going after it.   Fundamentally though, the behaviour isn’t that different .   It’s more aggressively aimed at items that may increase in value, but that’s the landscape the new buyer is used to.    One where you have to play aggressively to build a  meaningful collection unless already wealthy.   The current buyer is more used to letting growth happen passively.   That’s fine in a fast growing hobby, as time will reward your patience,   but in a mature hobby it doesn’t get the job done and those who get ahead do so by getting after it.  

Edited November 7, 2019 by Bronty

[GPX | 1,370]

On 11/5/2019 at 9:23 AM, Link said:

‘83 Video game crash: market flooded with crap. High amount of speculation by publishers (“people will buy anything”)

90s comics crash: market flooded with crap; high amount of speculation and investing on new items by individuals (“I have to buy everything”) and publishers obliging

Current video game grading trend: high amount of speculation and investing on vintage items by individuals 

I think it’s important to make a distinction between past speculation (in the above) and current speculation of the present video game market.

Past: collectors/speculators started to collect with origins from the same speculative market, with no structural guidelines. 

Current: speculators jumping in (from other markets) to tell longtime collectors how things should really be. 

It’s bucking the trend of how collecting things should be valued. To me it would seem just as odd if someone on here who collects retro games and going public buying up certain coins and telling coin collectors that these recently purchased coins are “worth bazillions”.

 

 

[GPX | 1,370]

23 minutes ago, Bronty said:

The more people the better is probably true, but what’s wrong with that?   Yes, some of the people buying games now hope the value will increase.   That’s no different than it’s ever been.    The part that I think freaks people out is the new breed of buyer is more aggressive in going after it.   Fundamentally though, the behaviour isn’t that different .   It’s more aggressively aimed at items that may increase in value, but that’s the landscape the new buyer is used to.    One where you have to play aggressively to build a  meaningful collection unless already wealthy.   The current buyer is more used to letting growth happen passively.   That’s fine in a fast growing hobby, as time will reward your patience,   but in a mature hobby it doesn’t get the job done and those who get ahead do so by getting after it.  

I know what you’re getting at. But I think a lot of people who are giving opinions, already know the sentiments in the above.

I guess only time will tell which way the direction of games collecting will head towards. For what it’s worth, I actually hope WATA to succeed as I have lots of CIBs which I may consider grading in the foreseeable future. In the meantime, nothing wrong with the feeling of cautiousness. The battle of ‘patience vs rush mode’ - who will come out the victor?

[jonebone | 1,307]

A couple more examples of conflict of interest:

Conflict of interest from a legality perspective.  Example, I cannot own Boeing stock and then negotiate a $500M military purchase on behalf of the US Govt.  People go to jail for that.  

Conflict of interest from an ethics / optics (appearance) perspective. If I work for the lottery, my spouse, siblings, parents and other relative cannot win the lottery.  Even though they are completely removed from the situation, the lottery shuts down any potential conflict of interest arguments (protests, lawsuits) well before they can even happen.

So, once again, I don't see anything illegal happening here.  What I do see is significant perceived conflict of interest.  This is why Deniz / Ken / etc. aren't out there selling Wata games themselves.  I don't think it would illegal for them to do so, but obviously owning the company, grading your own games and then selling them would be a huge conflict of interest and open them up to potential accusation lawsuits.  

What we do have here is people on the board either selling Wata games or buying and heavily promoting games.  I know that the board is literally nothing more than a photo on a website, not a paid position and no behind the scenes advantages, but the general public doesn't know that and thus it creates an appearance of a conflict of interest.  

You also have HA only peddling Wata games, and refusing to sell VGA.  Yet in cards, they are selling both PSA and BGS on their website.  If HA was neutral on the matter and truly only being a marketplace, they'd sell it all.  The argument once was "Well, VGA aren't tamper proof, we can't authenticate them".   Then they sold a raw Stack Up, so that arguement is no longer valid.  If they lack the knowledge or confidence to stand behind a VGA game then clearly they are incompetent to stand behind a raw game.  

Oh, and then Wata graded and certified a resealed Jaws!  That blew my mind.  I don't care if Miyamoto himself is operating the resealing machine, a reseal is a reseal.  They called it a Ljn 3rd party reseal or something.  So once again, to HA, it's perfectly fine to sell sealed "No Seal" Wata games, yet they cannot sell a VGA game.  They clearly aren't just being an unbiased auction house, they are only being a storefront for Wata games at this point.  It also creates anonymity for the seller, so you really don't know who owned the game that is appearing there....

Either way, could go on and on but people should get the point now.