TOPIC: Price Guide Confusion

Hi,<br /><br />I notice that on the front page of the Website, there is a link to V3.1 of the Price Guide, although when you click on the link the Price Guide says it is V3.0.  To add to the confusion, on the Treasure Token Page, there is a link to V2.9 of the Price Guide which has substantial value differences from V3.0.  Can someone clear it up, and make sure all the links on the website connect to the same version of the Price Guide?  That has already tripped me up, because I used the V2.9 of the Price Guide recently from the link on the Treasure Token page, not realizing it was out of date and the prices were inaccurate.  <br /><br />Also - any idea when the new version including 2007 tokens will be coming out?  It would be great if it included price columns for Platinum and Gold backed 2007 tokens, since they will have different values.  <br /><br />Thanks,<br />Mike

Mike,<br /><br />Sorry, I can't control the links but I am putting the final touches on the latest Price Guide now that includes the new chips.  Keep in mind though that the Price Guide captures the average of trades made for a particular token.  Value to each individual will vary so I encourage you to use the Guide more as a ballpark number and then adjust according to your personal preference.  And once a trade is completed, send it to me or post on the forums.  <br /><br />Next version should be out in a couple of weeks or so.<br /><br />-Douglas<br />

<br />Mike,<br /><br />Sorry, I can't control the links but I am putting the final touches on the latest Price Guide now that includes the new chips.  Keep in mind though that the Price Guide captures the average of trades made for a particular token.  Value to each individual will vary so I encourage you to use the Guide more as a ballpark number and then adjust according to your personal preference.  And once a trade is completed, send it to me or post on the forums.  <br /><br />Next version should be out in a couple of weeks or so.<br /><br />-Douglas<br /><br />

<br /><br />Douglas,<br /><br />Can do, and don't worry, I do use the Guide as a starting point and not the definitive number.  That said, it is nice to have as accurate of starting numbers as possible. Some of the numbers seem very low - both GP value and $ Value.  Virtually all of the Ultra-Rares, the ingredient tokens, and some combo tokens all seem to be extremely low.  I don't think I could find anyone selling or trading any of those for the values on the chart.  I've seen people offering much more than guide for a Masterwork Spear or Dungeon Ingredients and getting no takers.  Are some values low possibly because there's just no trade value?  <br /><br />Also, it seems that the average GP value of the Very Rares, Rares, and Commons are forced to add up to $10 per bag of tokens (the average value of one Very Rare, two Rares, and seven Commons add up exactly to $10).  Is this realistic?  It seems that the values should be allowed to land where they land, and if it doesn't add up to exactly $10 per bag then that should be OK.  After all, the early bags had 9 commons and only one Rare or Very Rare, so those would have an average value of $9.43, so we're already not at $10 per bag for all bags.  <br /><br />The average common value seems pretty high also doesn't it?  Most big token collectors would LOVE it if they could find someone to buy all of their commons for 40 cents per common. <br /><br />Finally - is it possible that the price guide could have GP & $ columns for the different years?  At the least, I'd think 2003 and 2004 would be listed separately as they are much rarer than the later years and more valuable.  2005 & 2006 could probably be listed together, and (if there isn't a big price difference between woodies and chippies) maybe 2005-on could be a consolidated column, along with a column for the PLATs.  I know that's a LOT of work, but it is data I'd love to see  <br /><br />Oh - and who does control the links on the website?  Maybe they could have all the Price Guide links going to the most recent Price Guide.  <br /><br />Thanks!<br />Mike

Mike,<br /><br />Ok, putting on my economics hat:  =)<br /><br />Before I answer your questions, it is important to keep in mind that different people place different values on each token.  And as the market becomes richer, the perceived value migrates towards the rarer tokens.  With that being said, the “token affluent” have always had a different perception of value than the average TDer.  A person like Smak, for example, who has more tokens than God, will view even Uncommons as basically worthless.  For the new player who desperately wants to be the Bard but only has GPs, the Chainmail is worth significantly more and might pay 50GPs or more for a Suit.  Assuming Smak doesn’t flood the market by liquidating his suits of chainmail, the price will be based on the balance of supply and demand.  <br /><br />Having said that, the gap is narrowing and the token supply is slowly taking over demand with certain items, especially lower end, non-consumable items.<br /><br />Ok, on to your questions…<br /><br />1) I used to track token prices per year but this became very cumbersome very quickly.  And honestly, there wasn't enough trade data for some of the older tokens to justify a price fluctuation.  If we had millions of players (like say Magic), things would be different of course and I think we could much more accurately track price fluctuations of the rarer tokens.  I don't have any plans to track Plat Backs.  I might list a general "rule of thumb" ratio depending on trades that come in.  Like Plat Backs are worth 10 times their Gold Back counter-parts.  But I just think there will be too little trade data.<br /><br />2) Second, I'll address your $10 token sum question.  Actually, this is very realistic for tokens that are currently being sold and it assumes that there is a inexhaustible number of pouches available.  It does not however, apply to older sets.  Here’s why.  From a purely economic standpoint, in a liquid market, each pouch is worth $10.  If pouches were worth $5 in terms of liquid value (i.e. what could you sell the tokens for on average if you bought pouches and sold the contents), you wouldn't buy it.  Instead you would look for someone that was selling and buy it from them.  This will stunt the supply and raise the value of the tokens.  If pouches were worth $20 but still sold for $10, like for example URs were now included in all packs, then you would buy them like crazy, sell off the tokens, and repeat until the supply of the new tokens injected into the economy drove down prices such that, there was no longer an incentive to do the buy/sell strategy.  The $10 value is a stable price point.  <br /><br />Another scenario is if True Dungeon cut costs of all pouches to $5.  People would buy them like crazy, sell of the tokens for money which should bring in $10 at first and quickly falling, but the supply would drive down the costs until the average value of the tokens per pouch was approximately $5 at which there would be no incentive and people would stop buying.  And it is this stability point for summed average of token values gives the translation ratio for GP to $.    <br /><br />But again, this ONLY applies to what is being sold now.  So older tokens indeed do fluctuate and the sum of tokens in an older pouch for example, might add up to $20 or whatever.<br /><br />3)  Also keep in mind that the guide is by nature, a little slow.  It captures trades that have occurred in the past.  At times, I do anticipate a change in value based on for example, a rule change.  Tokens like the Masterwork Spear might very well go up because there are no more being printed.  The ingredients are all over the place from what I have seen.  Some people don't want to put value on them because what they are used for is an unknown.  Coupled with the fact that, you can use alternative components for the recipes once it is revealed.  And once this happens, the value will be very clear.  But at this point its all speculation.<br /><br />4)  On the value of commons, as I mentioned, the value has been deflated and continues in that direction.  Funny thing with the commons that I found at the Con though, was that the supply wasn’t there for the simple reason that the big collectors didn’t carry their Commons with them.  It was all about the Rares and Ultra-Rares.  So strange as it sounds, I found it HARD to find certain commons, like impossible in some cases!  I heard some newer players offering more and more GPs for commons to prod collectors into possibly going back to their hotel room to get the commons.  But the prices in the price guide, as with the Ultra-Rares do reflect trades that have been sent to me as well as transactions I witnessed and feedback from a number of big traders who bought and sold in bulk.  So I think they offer a reasonable starting point for the average TDer.  <br /><br />Hope this answers some of your questions,<br />-Douglas<br />

Hi Douglas,<br /><br />I appreciate your very well-thought-out response.  I can appreciate that some of the older tokens might be hard to get trade data for, making separate price columns difficult.  Regarding PLATs, you could always try what Scry does for Magic Foil cards - state that on average the Foil cards are worth X times more than regular cards, and then list the ones that don't follow that format (always the most valuable cards - so for True Dungeon it would be Gauntlets of Ogre Might, Full Plate, etc.).  <br /><br />I don't completely agree with your theory that if a bag of tokens, in the price guide, averaged out to more valuable than $10, that people would run out and buy them, and sell them for a huge profit.  Let's say that the average bag of tokens was worth $11 on the price guide.  It is going to cost people FAR more in time and material (envelopes, stamps, etc) to resell those tokens than the $1 that they might get in profit for the tokens.  If I could easily sell every bag I bought for the $10 it cost me (as the price guide says they are worth), I'd buy 10,000 bags, keep the PURPs from the 00 bags, and sell off the rest to get my money back. <br /><br />Also, the price guide is already not accurate on the value of a $10 bag of 2007 tokens.  The average value of the Rares, Uncommons, and Commons is averaging the value of the tokens available IN PRINT and OUT OF PRINT.  If you calculated the average of just the in-print tokens (which is what might possibly be in the bag of tokens), I'm not sure if it would be higher or lower than $10, but I'm sure it wouldn't be exactly $10.  Plus 1/100 bags have a PURP that increases the average value of the bag to over $10 (probably to at least $10.50), so once again the average bag isn't worth the $10 you paid.  Also for every 25 bags you buy, you get a PURP of your choice, so you can figure an average value of $50 per PURP would raise the value of the bag further, to $12.50 per bag.  Plus, if you figure that buying 25 token bags gets you five bonus token bags, you just paid only $8.33 per token bag.  So given those factors, you are really paying $8.33 for a bag that is worth on average $12.50 per the price guide.<br /><br />It seems a price guide isn't even accurate as a beginning point, if the value is artificially tied to adding up to a certain price.  If you use Scrye again as an example, they don't price out the latest Magic set by making sure that the average price of one Rare, three Uncommons, and 11 Commons add up to $3.95 (or whatever a pack retails for these days).  They report the actual market value of the items regardless of whether they are worth more or less than the cost of a pack.  And - some packs (Homelands for instance) on average are worth less then the original retail price, while others (Urza's Saga for instance) are worth more.  I'm sure the actual value of a bag of tokens isn't exactly $10 - and as shown above the average price paid isn't $10 either.  <br /><br />Perhaps one solution would be to list what the tokens are actually worth according to the data you get on sales and trades, and just not calculate the average prices of any of the rarities, and not calculate the value per bag.  If you don't calculate it on your spreadsheet, I doubt many (if any) collectors will calculate that on their own - especially since it is not significant or meaningful unless you limit it to just the tokens in print, take into account the value of the PURPs you get as incentives and in 00 bags, take into account the reduced bag price from the incentives available, add in the cost of shipping, etc.  <br /><br />Thanks for engaging in the discussion!<br /><br />Mike

<br />I don't completely agree with your theory that if a bag of tokens, in the price guide, averaged out to more valuable than $10, that people would run out and buy them, and sell them for a huge profit.  Let's say that the average bag of tokens was worth $11 on the price guide.  It is going to cost people FAR more in time and material (envelopes, stamps, etc) to resell those tokens than the $1 that they might get in profit for the tokens.  If I could easily sell every bag I bought for the $10 it cost me (as the price guide says they are worth), I'd buy 10,000 bags, keep the PURPs from the 00 bags, and sell off the rest to get my money back. <br />

<br /><br />Yeah, I deliberately avoided examples close to $10.  The point was that $10 is a stable value to which the value of token pouches approaches.  In reality, it might be true that the value of the pouches is $9.75 but the difference is small enough, either higher or lower, that using $10 is within the accuracy that the Price Guide strives for.  See more on this later.  Again, I assume a liquid market.<br /><br />

<br />Also, the price guide is already not accurate on the value of a $10 bag of 2007 tokens.  The average value of the Rares, Uncommons, and Commons is averaging the value of the tokens available IN PRINT and OUT OF PRINT.  <br />

<br /><br />Actually, I average only the tokens that are IN PRINT to come up with an average value.<br /><br />

<br />Plus 1/100 bags have a PURP that increases the average value of the bag to over $10 (probably to at least $10.50), so once again the average bag isn't worth the $10 you paid.  Also for every 25 bags you buy, you get a PURP of your choice, so you can figure an average value of $50 per PURP would raise the value of the bag further, to $12.50 per bag.  Plus, if you figure that buying 25 token bags gets you five bonus token bags, you just paid only $8.33 per token bag.  So given those factors, you are really paying $8.33 for a bag that is worth on average $12.50 per the price guide.<br />

<br /><br />I've thought about and struggled with the things that you mention and it is a tough one to integrate but you are thinking along the right lines.  In reality, The COST per pouch isn't quite $10.  Its more like:<br /><br />(8.33(+shipping) * # of pouches purchased as part of the 10+ pouch promotion + <br />8.57(+ shipping) * # of pouches purchased with the 7 pouch offer + <br />10 * number of single pouches purchased)<br />/total number of pouches sold.  <br /><br />But even with best guess ratios based on information I have gleaned from Jeff, the average value is around $9.50.  So $10 isn't out of the realm of reality.  <br /><br />

<br />If you use Scrye again as an example, they don't price out the latest Magic set by making sure that the average price of one Rare, three Uncommons, and 11 Commons add up to $3.95 (or whatever a pack retails for these days).  They report the actual market value of the items regardless of whether they are worth more or less than the cost of a pack.  And - some packs (Homelands for instance) on average are worth less then the original retail price, while others (Urza's Saga for instance) are worth more.  I'm sure the actual value of a bag of tokens isn't exactly $10 - and as shown above the average price paid isn't $10 either.<br />

<br /><br />Right.  Like I mentioned, it is a stability point.  The true value might be higher or lower but the actual value will never get far from the cost of a pack.  I am not going to go through the numerical analysis but I would be willing to wager that if you took the average value of the commons, uncommons, and rares for a given set in Magic, that the cost per pack is very close to the average value you would get from those cards.  This is how they set the pack price after all, based on value of the cards in the set.  <br /><br /><br />

<br />Perhaps one solution would be to list what the tokens are actually worth according to the data you get on sales and trades, and just not calculate the average prices of any of the rarities, and not calculate the value per bag.  If you don't calculate it on your spreadsheet, I doubt many (if any) collectors will calculate that on their own - especially since it is not significant or meaningful unless you limit it to just the tokens in print, take into account the value of the PURPs you get as incentives and in 00 bags, take into account the reduced bag price from the incentives available, add in the cost of shipping, etc.  <br />

<br />The problem with this is that token sales are rare.  And just reporting sales would leave most of the values blank.  The values of the Purps you get per ‘00’ bag do alter the net value slightly (on the order of $0.40) and I have thought about incorporating that as well.  <br /><br />But would it be better to give people no idea as to the rough cost in dollars for each token?  I don’t think that’s wise.  And ultimately what you would run into is internal inconsistency.  Token A sold for $5, Token B sold for $4, but Token A is worth less GPs than Token B.  Which is worth more in a trade?  Who has to sweeten the pot to make the trade work?<br /><br />But really, if you look at the numbers, at worst the difference is ~10% and even then only comes into play during token sales which are rare.  Token trades use value ratios which cause the “cost per bag” number to factor out. The value in $ is just a rough conversion based on the token pouch stability point which as you point out is slightly lower.  <br /><br />In the end, there is uncertainty in any guide.  Scry is most certainly not perfect.  No price guide is.  Given the multitude of uncertainties and variations in individuals valuations, there is a reason this is a “guide” that gets people in the “ballpark”.  <br /><br />Solving simultaneous systems of linear equations for large groups of trades, has its limits.  <br /><br /><br />

<br />Thanks for engaging in the discussion!<br />

<br /><br />No prob.  Time to get some work done.  =)<br />

You all know what I have to say about this...<br /><br /><br /><br />YUP - [glow=red,2,300]MY HEAD HURTS[/glow].  I guess I should not have fallen asleep in all my MBA econ/accounting classes.

Hi Douglas,<br /><br />Your formula didn't take into account the 25, 50, and 100 bag orders for the 2007 tokens - it sounds like they will be a sizeable percentage this year of the total orders.  The shipping costs are much less significant for those, so that would lower the average token bag cost somewhere between where you calculated and the $6.66 price I was estimating.  <br /><br />Since the ratio of GP value to $ value stays constant, if a token increases in value due to recorded trades, in order to keep the average cost at $10.00, don't you have to arbitrarily lower some other token's value?  I guess we just have a disgreement on forcing the token values to certain levels in order to average $10 per bag.  I'm sure that isn't done in the price guides of any other collectible field.  But - you're putting all the work into the price guide, so it's your call how it's done  <br /><br />I'm looking forward to seeing the new version with the 2007 tokens!<br /><br />Thanks!<br />Mike<br />

I think the priceguide is flawed beyond measure when you try to compare chips to a monetary value. It's one thing for the token values to have consistancy among themselves, but linking them to cash has always been ridiculous. It also only has a tenuous connection with reality. There aren't enough trades for each item, there's self-report/selection bias, etc. At best, it's someone's guesstimate and that makes it little better than someone else's guesstimate.

I guess you are right Henwy...or maybe it was Douglas...or Mike...<br /><br />My head still hurts!

<br />I guess you are right Henwy...or maybe it was Douglas...or Mike...<br /><br />My head still hurts!<br />

<br /><br />Hey Bro,<br /><br />I guess the engineer in me was coming out - good thing I stopped before I pulled the sliderule out!<br /><br />Mike

And what do I know...I boss around engineers and vendors all day<br /><br />teee hee - sorry could not resist!<br />