Wata NES pop report now available

[inasuma | 1,214]

1 minute ago, GPX said:

That’s interesting to me. Why would he not give WATA a try? Something he has against Deniz?

because wata bad!!

[ExplodedHamster | 404]

2 minutes ago, GPX said:

That’s interesting to me. Why would he not give WATA a try? Something he has against Deniz?

He’s old guard VGA. I am a big fan of RareBucky, he’s a cool guy and keeps things interesting. He knows his shit about video games, too. 

[Seth | 172]

Just now, GPX said:

I think your heart is in the right place advocating against “predators”. I tend to call them market manipulators, personally. Though I stress to you again, your data research is heavily biased against the lower-end of the collecting pool. The rarest and most holy grails of graded games, in the recent years, are more likely sold via private sales, and not through Ebay. This is a concept you need to grasp, otherwise, no serious or long-term sealed collectors will take you seriously in conversations.

The games you are researching on are not the same high-end items that are going crazy bonkers in the current auction houses 2021 via WATA grading. How much is it organic growth? Well I definitely agree with you that some of it is likely 100% bulldust. But also likely there is some truth in the rising of graded games prices.

I hear you, GPX. But I need to make some clarifications. First, I think you mean the data is biased toward the lower-end of the collecting pool—which it is, and intentionally. The main thing I take high-end resellers to task for is that they do nothing to welcome newer people into the hobby by making the hobby more affordable and maintaining a robust three-figure market (instead, they have done all they can to destroy that market). My data is geared toward the 90% of a healthy and stable collectibles market that is not high-end. By design. I will never seek to cater to high-end resellers.

It's for this reason that I don't need high-end sellers to "take me seriously"—I don't really care if they do, as I don't believe their conduct can be amended. Why? Because it's born of what I deem to be a deficient value system, not a lack of data.

I agree wholeheartedly that the highest end of the market comes largely in private sales, where everyone is getting gouged because everyone is a sucker eventually. I don't want or need this to stop because the fact that it isn't and won't means I am getting games quite easily for a tenth of what people "in the know" are paying. They are punking themselves, and I'm happy to have them keep doing it if that's what they want. In this view, the fact—and yes, I agree, it's a fact—that the highest-end sales are just going higher and higher means that the high-end resellers are just punking themselves worse and worse and more and more over time, as everything they want gets more expensive even though none of it is rare and much won't appeal to the market this collectible will ultimately have (gamers who actually love the game library of what they're buying and know it well, and therefore aim to move way, way beyond just SMB3).

It is important to say that I don't need or seek the respect of people whose conduct I don't respect or want to encourage. Could they save tens of thousands of dollars by listening to me? Sure—I know this because I know what games are in my collection and what I paid for them, and I know the research that led me to those buys, and I knew what the pop reports would say before they came out. But do I care if the high-enders listen to me? Not really. My ethos requires that I try to provide them with data, but not that I care if my words are heeded. I did enough—by publicly saying things that would have been to my detriment financially—to execute my sense of what is moral.

Please don't misunderstand: there is absolutely price growth (not buyer-base growth) in the high-end market, all of it absolutely terrible for those who operate in that market because they ultimately will neither be able to buy or sell games (i.e., they are squeezing their buyer base while pricing themselves out of their own market). I am embarrassed for the market manipulators as well as angry at them; I don't need their approval.

[Gulag Joe | 584]

[ApebitMusic | 130]

I actually thought low pop numbers would actually convince some people that maybe, just maybe, this price increase isn't just smoke and mirrors. But what do you know, somehow it seems to be just the opposite. It somehow PROVES their point even further. 

It's like conspiracy theorists who disregard 99% of science and experts and focus on the other 1%. 

I'm not saying there isn't market manipulation, but to act like that's all that is going on here discredits the cultural phenomenon that video games are and the huge following they have. 

[Gulag Joe | 584]

2 minutes ago, ApebitMusic said:

I actually thought low pop numbers would actually convince some people that maybe, just maybe, this price increase isn't just smoke and mirrors. But what do you know, somehow it seems to be just the opposite. It somehow PROVES their point even further. 

It's like conspiracy theorists who disregard 99% of science and experts and focus on the other 1%. 

I'm not saying there isn't market manipulation, but to act like that's all that is going on here discredits the cultural phenomenon that video games are and the huge following they have. 

My favorite part is people accusing others of destroying the hobby simply for getting their games graded and selling them.

[Seth | 172]

13 minutes ago, AdamW said:

@RETROthat was a lot of words that didn't answer the questions I asked you, though...

Dude, it was 100% the answer to your question. But I'll try again: the buyer class in this market, long term, comprises not investors but collectors. Investors move on to other asset classes, collectors who are also gamers stay. So Dragon Warrior will be preferred over other games, long term, only to the extent a buyer likes the game more—as a game—than other games, and they will make that assessment with a much more robust knowledge of the NES game library than any investor has. That brings the relative value of DW1 and Arkista's Ring much closer than you think.

Even if you like DW1 more than Arkista's Ring (which I don't), you don't need a 9.6 or 9.8 copy to either display or collect or (for that matter) resell. So the demand for DW1 is lower than you think, and higher for the games gamers love that you consider obscure than you think. And the need for high-grade DW1s is lower than you think.

So there is no reason to expect a grade or "historical significance" premium for DW1 over the long run, while getting the highest-ever WATA-graded Low G Man for just $240 is smart because the gamers and collectors who will stay in the market long-term will want that game in higher numbers than you seem to understand.

Those five categories were not intended to encapsulate every imaginable possibility and I think you know that. This is a discussion board and we are aware of the little, unmentioned infelicities all conversation is heir to.

[Seth | 172]

12 minutes ago, Gulag Joe said:

Is this just a list of things no one here ever said? I'm confused.

Edited November 30, 2021 by RETRO

[Seth | 172]

4 minutes ago, Gulag Joe said:

My favorite part is people accusing others of destroying the hobby simply for getting their games graded and selling them.

Your "favorite part" is a conversation that happened entirely in your head... so that's concerning.

[Seth | 172]

10 minutes ago, ApebitMusic said:

I'm not saying there isn't market manipulation, but to act like that's all that is going on here discredits the cultural phenomenon that video games are and the huge following they have. 

It's so exhausting. No matter what anyone says to you folks, you just keep playing out a straw-man conversation that's happening only in your head. Like I said: cult behavior.

[GPX | 1,376]

7 minutes ago, RETRO said:

I hear you, GPX. But I need to make some clarifications. First, I think you mean the data is biased toward the lower-end of the collecting pool—which it is, and intentionally. The main thing I take high-end resellers to task for is that they do nothing to welcome newer people into the hobby by making the hobby more affordable and maintaining a robust three-figure market (instead, they have done all they can to destroy that market). My data is geared toward the 90% of a healthy and stable collectibles market that is not high-end. By design. I will never seek to cater to high-end resellers.

It's for this reason that I don't need high-end sellers to "take me seriously"—I don't really care if they do, as I don't believe their conduct can be amended. Why? Because it's born of what I deem to be a deficient value system, not a lack of data.

I agree wholeheartedly that the highest end of the market comes largely in private sales, where everyone is getting gouged because everyone is a sucker eventually. I don't want or need this to stop because the fact that it isn't and won't means I am getting games quite easily for a tenth of what people "in the know" are paying. They are punking themselves, and I'm happy to have them keep doing it if that's what they want. In this view, the fact—and yes, I agree, it's a fact—that the highest-end sales are just going higher and higher means that the high-end resellers are just punking themselves worse and worse and more and more over time, as everything they want gets more expensive even though none of it is rare and much won't appeal to the market this collectible will ultimately have (gamers who actually love the game library of what they're buying and know it well, and therefore aim to move way, way beyond just SMB3).

It is important to say that I don't need or seek the respect of people whose conduct I don't respect or want to encourage. Could they save tens of thousands of dollars by listening to me? Sure—I know this because I know what games are in my collection and what I paid for them, and I know the research that led me to those buys, and I knew what the pop reports would say before they came out. But do I care if the high-enders listen to me? Not really. My ethos requires that I try to provide them with data, but not that I care if my words are heeded. I did enough—by publicly saying things that would have been to my detriment financially—to execute my sense of what is moral.

Please don't misunderstand: there is absolutely price growth (not buyer-base growth) in the high-end market, all of it absolutely terrible for those who operate in that market because they ultimately will neither be able to buy or sell games (i.e., they are squeezing their buyer base while pricing themselves out of their own market). I am embarrassed for the market manipulators as well as angry at them; I don't need their approval.

You are making a false assumption and broad-categorizing that all high-end sealed collectors are in it purely for the financial gain. A genuine collector (CIB/sealed/graded) doesn’t have much to gain if prices suddenly increase at a rate of knots. It is the resellers who are market manipulators that are both our common enemies. Whereas I feel you think there are simply 2 groups: “sensible 3-figure collectors” and “predators”. There are plenty of those that lie in between.

[AdamW | 713]

5 minutes ago, RETRO said:

Dude, it was 100% the answer to your question.

The questions were:

"You brought this auction up like it's going to be super indicative of...something. What result are you expecting? What do you think that result would show? What result would surprise you?"

I'm sorry if I'm being thick, but I still don't see the answers.

[Seth | 172]

Just now, GPX said:

You are making a false assumption and broad-categorizing that all high-end sealed collectors are in it purely for the financial gain. A genuine collector (CIB/sealed/graded) doesn’t have much to gain if prices suddenly increase at a rate of knots. It is the resellers who are market manipulators that are both our common enemies. Whereas I feel you think there are simply 2 groups: “sensible 3-figure collectors” and “predators”. There are plenty of those that lie in between.

C'mon, man—no one does anything "purely" for one reason, so no, I'm not saying high-end collectors are motivated exclusively by money. But being a reseller is a choice; being a high-end reseller is a choice; and the choice is to drown yourself in transactions that must be routinized for you to continue in the hobby, and those transactions are money-driven. And one can't continue as a high-end reseller unless the market rises—not excessively fast, but yes, very fast—or else it all falls apart. Again, that's why Dave Robbins has to cut videos begging people to buy his NES games at insane prices, like Renegade for $22,000 or even Bard's Tale for $4,750. The kind of buyer base he wants doesn't exist, and he's doing nothing to create it. I agree with you that "genuine collectors" don't want the market to rise too quickly; they're buyers first, and no buyer wants the things they want to buy to get more expensive. The very fact that someone does want that marks them as a seller (investor) first and buyer (collector) second, which means—yes—they are motivated by money more than collecting.

I don't know why you think I see only two groups when I just posted a gross-over-simplication summary to Adam that had five groups listed, and a follow-up that acknowledged it didn't capture any nuances. But that said, yes, market manipulators and collectors who believe in the long-term health of the hobby are at odds.

[Seth | 172]

12 minutes ago, AdamW said:

The questions were:

"You brought this auction up like it's going to be super indicative of...something. What result are you expecting? What do you think that result would show? What result would surprise you?"

I'm sorry if I'm being thick, but I still don't see the answers.

Nope. Your first question, which you spilled the most words on, was to ask me why I seem to be "taking a weirdly narrow view of things and saying that only how common a game is should be factored into the 'right' price for it." I answered that question at length, and you ignored the answers. I didn't answer your second, tossed-in question—which was one question repeated multiple times—because I had no idea what you were referring to.

ON EDIT: Oh, you mean the DW1 auction? Well, I think I was pretty clear that it's simply the first auction of a highly common NES game since the pop reports dropped last night. And I was pretty clear that $500 is now the maximum value for that game, but it's starting at $500 rather than ending there. I also was pretty clear that I thought the market predators would avoid this auction. So with all that in view, sure, if it goes for $850+ I think it is a sign that people either haven't seen the pop reports yet or haven't learned the lesson of those reports. If it goes for $500 or doesn't sell at all, it means the market is responding in a healthy way to the pop reports.

Edited November 30, 2021 by RETRO

[Gulag Joe | 584]

12 minutes ago, RETRO said:

Your "favorite part" is a conversation that happened entirely in your head... so that's concerning.

"pRiCe GoUgInG bILkErS"

Lololololololol

[Seth | 172]

3 minutes ago, Gulag Joe said:

"pRiCe GoUgInG bILkErS"

Lololololololol

Yeah, so... I didn't see that comment anywhere in your MS Paint meme?

Look, uh... so... I don't know how to say this. I just don't think you're very sophisticated, and I think talking to you is a waste of my time, so I'm going to stop. No offense.

[DefaultGen | 5,506]

15 minutes ago, ApebitMusic said:

I actually thought low pop numbers would actually convince some people that maybe, just maybe, this price increase isn't just smoke and mirrors. But what do you know, somehow it seems to be just the opposite. It somehow PROVES their point even further. 

It's like conspiracy theorists who disregard 99% of science and experts and focus on the other 1%. 

I'm not saying there isn't market manipulation, but to act like that's all that is going on here discredits the cultural phenomenon that video games are and the huge following they have. 

To the bulls, collectors will only ever want sealed games and a $40 used substitute for a $20,000 new game is just unacceptable, so there are only 10 copies on Earth or whatever. That's why card people are like "Omg, this is 1000x rarer than Jordans"

To the bears, paying $20,000 for the best condition mass produced thing is crazy because it's not some 1/1 unique thing like original art. There could be 250 SMB3s or there could be 5 and the argument would be "Well there isn't ONE". Just look at the latest Reserved Investments, where he talks about there being 20 Castlevanias like it's all the copies in the world to go around. There's no substitute for OG art baby.

Both sides will repeat arguments like this forever regardless of what the pop report says. The pop report is basically meaningless, lol.

[AdamW | 713]

14 minutes ago, RETRO said:

ON EDIT: Oh, you mean the DW1 auction? Well, I think I was pretty clear that it's simply the first auction of a highly common NES game since the pop reports dropped last night. And I was pretty clear that $500 is now the maximum value for that game, but it's starting at $500 rather than ending there. I also was pretty clear that I thought the market predators would avoid this auction. So with all that in view, sure, if it goes for $850+ I think it is a sign that people either haven't seen the pop reports yet or haven't learned the lesson of those reports. If it goes for $500 or doesn't sell at all, it means the market is responding in a healthy way to the pop reports.

Yes, that's what I meant. Thanks for answering. So, no result would surprise you, and every result would mean you're right about things, it just indicates whether other people agree with you? Roger.

[Seth | 172]

2 minutes ago, DefaultGen said:

To the bulls, collectors will only ever want sealed games and a $40 used substitute for a $20,000 new game is just unacceptable, so there are only 10 copies on Earth or whatever. That's why card people are like "Omg, this is 1000x rarer than Jordans"

To the bears, paying $20,000 for the best condition mass produced thing is crazy because it's not some 1/1 unique thing like original art. There could be 250 SMB3s or there could be 5 and the argument would be "Well there isn't ONE". Just look at the latest Reserved Investments, where he talks about there being 20 Castlevanias like it's all the copies in the world to go around. There's no substitute for OG art baby.

Both sides will repeat arguments like this forever regardless of what the pop report says. The pop report is basically meaningless, lol.

I don't know. I don't see myself in either of those archetypes.

Once full pop reports are out, I think spending $20,000 or more for the highest-ever grade of an NES game—or even the second- or third-highest grade—is totally understandable, even if I wouldn't do it myself. And I think this market could really grow in a healthy way if certain habits that are becoming systemic in the sealed-and-graded collecting culture were stopped immediately.

Saying the market is unhealthy and saying it shouldn't exist, or can't grow, or has no organic elements are two totally distinct things. That said, I admit that I see nuance (or really even facts) behind the arguments made by the bulls.

[Seth | 172]

7 minutes ago, AdamW said:

Yes, that's what I meant. Thanks for answering. So, no result would surprise you, and every result would mean you're right about things, it just indicates whether other people agree with you? Roger.

No, you're confusing the conclusion you were trying to get to with the conclusion you actually got to. I (a) made no prediction as to what would happen and have no idea what will happen (so you writing that I said "no result would surprise [me]" is in bad faith, as I never said any such thing and was simply avoiding making a prediction and admitting I didn't have one rather than trying to play your silly prediction game against my will), and (b) I didn't say any result would prove me "right," as in fact it's just a question of whether an existing, proven market trend changes or not.

If the game sells for $500 or not at all, it's a change from what we've seen that could be indicative of some larger trend—we don't know, because this is the first post-report auction of its kind. If the game sells for $850 or more, it means we're not seeing, in this sale, any evidence of a shift. None of that has anything to do with me.

You're kind of being a deliberately obtuse and disingenuous asshole, Adam—and not for the first time, with me—so I'm afraid I'm going to back out of this. My time is worth more than whatever it is you want to see happen here. Not calling you stupid, just a bit of a jerk.

Edited November 30, 2021 by RETRO

[GPX | 1,376]

6 minutes ago, RETRO said:

C'mon, man—no one does anything "purely" for one reason, so no, I'm not saying high-end collectors are motivated exclusively by money. But being a reseller is a choice; being a high-end reseller is a choice; and the choice is to drown yourself in transactions that must be routinized for you to continue in the hobby, and those transactions are money-driven. And one can't continue as a high-end reseller unless the market rises—not excessively fast, but yes, very fast—or else it all falls apart. Again, that's why Dave Robbins has to cut videos begging people to buy his NES games at insane prices, like Renegade for $22,000 or even Bard's Tale for $4,750. The kind of buyer base he wants doesn't exist, and he's doing nothing to create it. I agree with you that "genuine collectors" don't want the market to rise too quickly; they're buyers first, and no buyer wants the things they want to buy to get more expensive. The very fact that someone does want that marks them as a seller (investor) first and buyer (collector) second, which means—yes—they are motivated by money more than collecting.

I don't know why you think I see only two groups when I just posted a gross-over-simplication summary to Adam that had five groups listed, and a follow-up that acknowledged it didn't capture any nuances. But that said, yes, market manipulators and collectors who believe in the long-term health of the hobby are at odds.

What I’m trying to say is that I feel you’re making generalizations which isn’t furthering discussions. With your repeated arguments regarding 3-figure games, you’re paradoxically inviting people to spend less while you say you don’t care what high-end sealed collectors think. The reality is that collectors of any collectibles who have been spending 4,5-figures are unlikely to backtrack to 3-figure spending. That being said, I am under no illusion that there needs to be caution with spending with the market currently being where it is.

[Gulag Joe | 584]

[tidaldreams | 654]

1 hour ago, Code Monkey said:

Does anyone else have any opinions on the data?

Looks pretty sketch tbh. i think @DefaultGen has already called out a couple of examples that exist but not in the data.

[tidaldreams | 654]

1 hour ago, GPX said:

Ok I think I know the secret to a VGS thread blow out..

It isn’t because of Jobst.

It isn’t because of Dain.

It’s because of this simple formula:

[WATA + pop + price discussions]

=> bickering, popcorn watchers

=> more audiences, more bickering

=> vicious cycle

 

i think it's because of Probst

[AdamW | 713]

3 minutes ago, RETRO said:

No, you're confusing the conclusion you were trying to get to with the conclusion you actually got to. I (a) made no prediction as to what would happen and have no idea what will happen (so you writing that I said "no result would surprise [me]" is in bad faith, as I never said any such thing and was simply avoiding making a prediction and admitting I didn't have one rather than trying to play your silly prediction game against my will), and (b) I didn't say any result would prove me "right," as in fact it's just a question of whether an existing, proven market trend changes or not.

I was trying to establish the point of bringing up the auction like it's a big deal. If you're not making a prediction about what's going to happen and whatever happens won't prove anything anyway...what's the point?