MOST VALUABLE MODERN VARIANTS - THE RANKINGS 17 17

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, fastballspecial said:

You are making a large assumption here.

No assumption is being made. "1:X" is an ordering number, has nothing to do how many of these incentives are made, and cannot be shoehorned into the sales numbers reported by Diamond to come up with anything even resembling an "educated" guess regarding how many were made or exist.

If people want to play around with made up numbers and pretend they are "reasonable estimates" or "educated guesses", no one...obviously...is stopping them.

There is no way to "ballpark" these numbers in the way you and others are trying to. Again: I can estimate the number of hot dogs sold at the County Fair by using the number of buns ordered by Wienerschnitzel, but those numbers don't have anything to do with each other, and my "estimation" would be meaningless.

Frankly, I don't understand why this is an issue for you. Do you not understand that there are people misusing this "information" to fool people into thinking what they have to sell might be a lot rarer than it actually is...? That people are profiting off of deliberate misinformation? You know people are doing that, right...? What do you think all the "1:100 NEWSSTAND ULTRA RARE OMG!!!!" listings are doing...? They're banking...literally...on the ignorance of buyers.

And we should be tolerating this, much less encouraging it...? 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

16 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

Opinions, opinions, opinions.  

You've made yours very clear at this point.  

Time to move on.

-J.

I completely agree. Ready when you are.

[fastballspecial]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

No assumption is being made. "1:X" is an ordering number, has nothing to do how many of these incentives are made, and cannot be shoehorned into the sales numbers reported by Diamond to come up with anything even resembling an "educated" guess regarding how many were made or exist.

If people want to play around with made up numbers and pretend they are "reasonable estimates" or "educated guesses", no one...obviously...is stopping them.

There is no way to "ballpark" these numbers in the way you and others are trying to. Again: I can estimate the number of hot dogs sold at the County Fair by using the number of buns ordered by Wienerschnitzel, but those numbers don't have anything to do with each other, and my "estimation" would be meaningless.

Frankly, I don't understand why this is an issue for you. Do you not understand that there are people misusing this "information" to fool people into thinking what they have to sell might be a lot rarer than it actually is...? That people are profiting off of deliberate misinformation? You know people are doing that, right...? What do you think all the "1:100 NEWSSTAND ULTRA RARE OMG!!!!" listings are doing...? They're banking...literally...on the ignorance of buyers.

And we should be tolerating this, much less encouraging it...? 

 

You take one sentence of my post and turn into something it isn't. I am a rational person you want to turn this into something its not. If
someone presents a fairly rational discussion point without any of the hyperbole that is in above paragraph I am fine with it. We can give
them a different viewpoint and usually they will take it.

As long as we tell them our view of why we feel this isn't correct its an impass until the poster stays here awhile and begins to understand
why we feel this way. I don't see the need to beat them over the head with every time someone new comes in. 

My point to the poster was for them to understand our viewpoint of why we have to be careful when trying to guess at the ratio numbers for thingslike newsstands and such. The educated guess part doesn't bother me its an honest attempt by many here. I can understand how they arrive at it.  I am not going to beat a poster to death till until they start using stuff like 1/100 newsstand and such. Id like to at least extend that courtesy to them and allow them to learn. You beat them to death first and then ask questions.

I am not going to let you drag me into going from Point A to Point B here. Most don't have a problem with this. They have a problem when 
they use the information to make references such as 1/100 they cant prove. There in lies the difference for me. I am quite sure you don't agree with that and that again is fine with me. I am not looking to change you mind. I am just a little more lenient with new posters. Eventually they get the point except for a rare few. 

 

Edited October 20, 2019 by fastballspecial

[RockMyAmadeus]

46 minutes ago, fastballspecial said:

You take one sentence of my post and turn into something it isn't. I am a rational person you want to turn this into something its not. If
someone presents a fairly rational discussion point without any of the hyperbole that is in above paragraph I am fine with it. We can give
them a different viewpoint and usually they will take it.

As long as we tell them our view of why we feel this isn't correct its an impass until the poster stays here awhile and begins to understand
why we feel this way. I don't see the need to beat them over the head with every time someone new comes in. 

My point to the poster was for them to understand our viewpoint of why we have to be careful when trying to guess at the ratio numbers for thingslike newsstands and such. The educated guess part doesn't bother me its an honest attempt by many here. I can understand how they arrive at it.  I am not going to beat a poster to death till until they start using stuff like 1/100 newsstand and such. Id like to at least extend that courtesy to them and allow them to learn. You beat them to death first and then ask questions.

I am not going to let you drag me into going from Point A to Point B here. Most don't have a problem with this. They have a problem when 
they use the information to make references such as 1/100 they cant prove. There in lies the difference for me. I am quite sure you don't agree with that and that again is fine with me. I am not looking to change you mind. I am just a little more lenient with new posters. Eventually they get the point except for a rare few. 

 

I had typed out a response, to try to reason with you, but I don't see anything positive coming out of this, do you? I disagree with most of what you've said here, both in character and in motivation. You don't hear me, and I'm sure you feel the same way, so trying to work out the disagreement would result in the same. We speak entirely different languages. Good luck.

[paul747]

On 10/20/2019 at 12:49 AM, fastballspecial said:

You take one sentence of my post and turn into something it isn't. I am a rational person you want to turn this into something its not. If
someone presents a fairly rational discussion point without any of the hyperbole that is in above paragraph I am fine with it. We can give
them a different viewpoint and usually they will take it.

As long as we tell them our view of why we feel this isn't correct its an impass until the poster stays here awhile and begins to understand
why we feel this way. I don't see the need to beat them over the head with every time someone new comes in. 

My point to the poster was for them to understand our viewpoint of why we have to be careful when trying to guess at the ratio numbers for thingslike newsstands and such. The educated guess part doesn't bother me its an honest attempt by many here. I can understand how they arrive at it.  I am not going to beat a poster to death till until they start using stuff like 1/100 newsstand and such. Id like to at least extend that courtesy to them and allow them to learn. You beat them to death first and then ask questions.

I am not going to let you drag me into going from Point A to Point B here. Most don't have a problem with this. They have a problem when 
they use the information to make references such as 1/100 they cant prove. There in lies the difference for me. I am quite sure you don't agree with that and that again is fine with me. I am not looking to change you mind. I am just a little more lenient with new posters. Eventually they get the point except for a rare few. 

 

This. (something it isn't)

xxxx

 

It is possible to think that publishers do not try to loose money , keeping that in mind you can estimate.

Edited October 23, 2019 by paul747
positive tone

[RockMyAmadeus]

22 minutes ago, paul747 said:

This.

Its argumentative, dismissive , controlling , and as a matter of fact.  Everyone is beneath me !   good luck

Bring something good to the table but the same old ridicule and  criticisms. Take your ball and go home!

Hi Paul747. These personal comments are inappropriate and have no place here. I am not allowed to respond as I would like, so that will have to suffice.

Edited October 20, 2019 by RockMyAmadeus

[paul747]

50 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Hi Paul747. These personal comments are inappropriate and have no place here. I am not allowed to respond as I would like, so that will have to suffice.

I am not allowed either,I don't see personal attacts but will ad patronizing to my random list.

Edited October 20, 2019 by paul747

[FlyingDonut]

On 10/19/2019 at 9:31 PM, paqart said:

What you can determine from the approximate print runs published on ComiChron is the approximate maximum number of variants. The variants can't be the full print run, so we know that the variants are less than that. The question is, how much less? If the total run is 100,000, and this represents the total number printed, then the maximum number of 1:1,000 variants would be 1,000, assuming 100 stores ordered 1,000 copies, and no other stores ordered anything. If you add in the artists special run of variants, you might get to 150 copies. that tells you the minimum rarity is around 150 copies out of a 100,000 copy print run. It is likely rarer than that because it is unlikely that 100 stores could hog the print run like that. It is after this that knowing the ordering patterns becomes meaningful but one can get some idea of rarity based on easily available information.

It is possible that a 1:50 variant is less rare than a 1:10 variant based on ordering patterns, but a 1:1000 variant can't be much less rare than 1:667 copies. That is useful information even if it isn't exact.

I've seen a number of posters on this board criticize all attempts at estimating rarity based on known data. The basis for the criticism is that there is unknown data that affects the calculation. While true, the unknown data can be looked at as enabling a more refined estimate but it does not negate the value of a coarse estimate. Put into the form of a real world example, I may not know for certain that risky action #1 is better than risky action #2 but if I have some evidence that suggests #2 is better, it may make sense to take that risk even if the evidence is not conclusive.

Your post here, and others like it, come across to me as eschewing all information that isn't 100% accurate. Many real world decisions are made with less than 100% certainty, so why it is such a hot topic in the hobby of comic book collecting puzzles me. There is no way to know for certain that any given film will fail or succeed at the box office, but billions are spent on them regardless. I don't know that ebay sellers will send me what I paid for but I do know that usually they do. When they don't, it hasn't been anything that mattered much, so I consider it a nuisance rather than a deal-breaker. With comic book rarity, while I would love to know the absolute, or even totally accurate relative figures, rough estimates are enough to guide buying decisions. I'm pretty sure I've made a couple mistakes along the way but that isn't going to stop me from doing my best to figure out which issues appear to be easier or harder to find than others, and buy accordingly.

Your recommendation seems to be to stop trying to understand this issue because it can't ever be known absolutely. Frankly, that seems fine if you never want to engage in a task that happens to be a lot of fun (estimating rarity and then betting on the results of your research) but don't see the value in discouraging others from looking into this. The fact is, it is fun to do. For my part, if it wasn't for that, I wouldn't be collecting comics right now. I don't care who drew them, what the story is, who the publisher is, or anything else. I buy for rarity because it is a fun challenge to find them.

That's not my recommendation at all, nor is it eschewing information. In fact, my recommendation is exactly not that. I want MORE information, and I want to be able to have a much more informed decision.

What I - and others - object to is people using at best incomplete data to extrapolate concrete conclusions. You cannot say with certainty that a 1:1000 comic is 1000 times rarer than a regular one - because you do not have all the data. In fact, I would argue that a 1:1000 ratio comic has a much smaller number than that ratio, based on ordering patterns.

Many posters here take this data as gospel. All I - and others - are saying is don't do that.

[RockMyAmadeus]

14 minutes ago, FlyingDonut said:

That's not my recommendation at all, nor is it eschewing information. In fact, my recommendation is exactly not that. I want MORE information, and I want to be able to have a much more informed decision.

What I - and others - object to is people using at best incomplete data to extrapolate concrete conclusions. You cannot say with certainty that a 1:1000 comic is 1000 times rarer than a regular one - because you do not have all the data. In fact, I would argue that a 1:1000 ratio comic has a much smaller number than that ratio, based on ordering patterns.

Many posters here take this data as gospel. All I - and others - are saying is don't do that.

[Jaydogrules]

10 hours ago, FlyingDonut said:

That's not my recommendation at all, nor is it eschewing information. In fact, my recommendation is exactly not that. I want MORE information, and I want to be able to have a much more informed decision.

What I - and others - object to is people using at best incomplete data to extrapolate concrete conclusions. You cannot say with certainty that a 1:1000 comic is 1000 times rarer than a regular one - because you do not have all the data. In fact, I would argue that a 1:1000 ratio comic has a much smaller number than that ratio, based on ordering patterns.

Many posters here take this data as gospel. All I - and others - are saying is don't do that.

You're still making arguments against things that no one has said. 

-J.

[Lazyboy]

On 10/19/2019 at 8:31 PM, paqart said:

What you can't determine from the approximate print runs estimated North American orders through Diamond published on ComiChron is the approximate maximum number of variants.

...

If the total run is orders are 100,0100, and this represents the total number printed, (irrelevant because it does not, ever) then the maximum number of 1:1,000 variants distributed to North American stores during the release week would be 1,000, assuming 100 stores ordered 1,000 copies of the regular edition and there were no other variants, and no other stores ordered anything and all ratio variants were sent out properly and precisely based on orders.

Fixed.

If you know the actual print run(s), then you don't need to assume and guess so many things. But that's the whole point: WE DON'T!

On 10/19/2019 at 8:31 PM, paqart said:

Many real world decisions are made with less than 100% certainty, so why it is such a hot topic in the hobby of comic book collecting puzzles me.

Yes, people are often forced to make decisions without having perfect information. However, nobody is forcing anybody to post their estimated wild guess print numbers for comics.

 

[paqart]

2 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

Yes, people are often forced to make decisions without having perfect information. However, nobody is forcing anybody to post their estimated wild guess print numbers for comics.

And yet some people are trying to prevent best guess estimates from being posted, with the justification that they can't possibly be accurate. That kind of goes along with the word "estimate".

[paul747]

On 10/21/2019 at 11:10 AM, Jaydogrules said:

You're still making arguments against things that no one has said. 

-J.

THIS ! NO ONE IS SAYING ANY OF IT as a concrete conclusion ! These guys are the invisible police. Justice for the did not happen. Its like they are making up their own problem!

Edited October 26, 2019 by paul747

[paul747]

19 hours ago, FlyingDonut said:

That's not my recommendation at all, nor is it eschewing information. In fact, my recommendation is exactly not that. I want MORE information, and I want to be able to have a much more informed decision.

What I - and others - object to is people using at best incomplete data to extrapolate concrete conclusions. You cannot say with certainty that a 1:1000 comic is 1000 times rarer than a regular one- - because you do not have all the data. In fact, I would argue that a 1:1000 ratio comic has a much smaller number than that ratio, based on ordering patterns.-------I WOULD 100 PERCENT AGREE... I think MANY HAVE SAID THIS !

Many posters here take this data as gospel. All I - and others - are saying is don't do that.

You're actually saying what many have said and its common sense.  By you saying That the print would be much smaller you are estimating using your knowledge and that is fine !

[Lazyboy]

On 10/21/2019 at 2:20 PM, paqart said:

And yet some people are trying to prevent best guess estimates from being posted, with the justification that they can't possibly be accurate. That kind of goes along with the word "estimate".

Estimates are based on relevant information. I have no interest in reading or having other people read the wild guesses that people feel the need to post.

Do you ever interact with collectors in the real world, like at comic shops or shows? Do you have any idea how sick I am of hearing bull that some ignoramus got from some worthless online source while I am out trying to enjoy my hobby? Just a few weeks ago at the last local show, I was looking through some boxes when somebody beside me started spouting garbage that he got from Nobel's site. The spread of misinformation does not benefit collectors.

[Jaydogrules]

2 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

Estimates are based on relevant information. I have no interest in reading or having other people read the wild guesses that people feel the need to post.

Do you ever interact with collectors in the real world, like at comic shops or shows? Do you have any idea how sick I am of hearing bull that some ignoramus got from some worthless online source while I am out trying to enjoy my hobby? Just a few weeks ago at the last local show, I was looking through some boxes when somebody beside me started spouting garbage that he got from Nobel's site. The spread of misinformation does not benefit collectors.

What is "relevant" is your opinion. 

What is "misinformation" is your opinion. 

Opinion, opinion, opinion.  

You and your other sock puppet handles on these boards are not the "print run police".

You are not the "variant police".

You are not the "thought police".

And you are certainly not the "language police".

You've made your OPINIONS more than clear at this point, ad nauseam.  

Lord knows you of all people should know by now that exactly this is the kind of thing that repeatedly gets threads locked around here.  

Peace. 

-J.

[paul747]

2 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

Estimates are based on relevant information. I have no interest in reading or having other people read the wild guesses that people feel the need to post.

Do you ever interact with collectors in the real world, like at comic shops or shows? Do you have any idea how sick I am of hearing bull that some ignoramus got from some worthless online source while I am out trying to enjoy my hobby? Just a few weeks ago at the last local show, I was looking through some boxes when somebody beside me started spouting garbage that he got from Nobel's site. The spread of misinformation does not benefit collectors.

Well to some extent I see your point. But Being a store owner and partner owner for 15 years and  knowing many insiders , attending many shows and asking tons of questions, I can tell you theories on print runs partially come from pretty good base sources. Follow the money! These arguments are missing the point. Some people are trying to control what people say and how they estimate , that is not cool, I have not seen anyone in these arguments claiming facts, admitted speculation, yes.

"When you know you stop learning"

Edited October 23, 2019 by paul747

[Lazyboy]

1 hour ago, Jaydogrules said:

What is "relevant" is your opinion. 

What is "misinformation" is your opinion. 

Opinion, opinion, opinion.

Your dislike of objective reality that doesn't suit your agenda does not turn facts into opinions.

[Jaydogrules]

17 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

Your dislike of objective reality that doesn't suit your agenda does not turn facts into opinions.

 There is absolutely nothing "real" about anything you've said or this sock puppet account you are posting under right now.

-J.

[paul747]

1 minute ago, Jaydogrules said:

 There is absolutely nothing "real" about anything you've said or this sock puppet account you are posting under right now.

-J.

Who is it? my buddy? style is familiar.

Edited October 23, 2019 by paul747