SCG increases the price of FoW

[bruizar]

text

You can disagree with my hypothesis and that's fine. The examples I stated (Thoughtseize, Tarmogoyf and Jace the Mind Sculptor) were chosen because they are cards that broke the price-ceiling for what a standard staple could cost in their time. Even though Tarmogoyf came before Thoughtseize and reached a higher price, I do think that Thoughtseize belongs to the group of cards that set a precedent for what a standard-staple was allowed to cost.

Your argument about price memory is not well laid out at all. Since you didn't bother to explain what you mean by price memory, no one can assess your argument.

[Julian23]

From what i remember, Throughtseize used to be 16-18€ when it was Standard legal, then soon dropped down to below 10€. I picked up a playset at magiccardsmarket back in late 2008 for less than 40€ (excluding shipping) and that was just a regular offer. Also Tarmogoyf was on his way down to about 35€ when Modern came around. Afterwards both cards spiked real hard and actually maintained their level of inaccessibility for younger/poorer players.

[menace13]

You can disagree with my hypothesis and that's fine. The examples I stated (Thoughtseize, Tarmogoyf and Jace the Mind Sculptor) were chosen because they are cards that broke the price-ceiling for what a standard staple could cost in their time. Even though Tarmogoyf came before Thoughtseize and reached a higher price, I do think that Thoughtseize belongs to the group of cards that set a precedent for what a standard-staple was allowed to cost.

Your argument about price memory is not well laid out at all. Since you didn't bother to explain what you mean by price memory, no one can assess your argument.
I'm not sure you understand what I said. Jace, Seize, Goyf are the only examples. You chose the only cards that have ever breached the type 2 price barrier. You're saying that those 3 cards caused an eternal spike.

Price memory is one of the factors in the argument not the total argument....

Once the price of an eternal card reaches a high number, that number will always be its approximate price base barring reprints. It is Inconsequential if that card is not seeing the same amount of demand it did previously.

[kiblast]

First off LOL.
Second MTG is called cardboard crack because it is addictive not because it is expensive.
Third crack is cheap as shit that's why it's only a problem in poor areas, rich people do coke.

Your friend sounds like a cool dude though *eyeroll.gif*

ehehe I know that mtg is called cardboard crack because it's as addictive as crack... with crack the first hit you take from the bottle you're already addicted to it... same thing as soon as you rip a booster or tap a permanent... :) I was just making a comparison for fun.
Crack may be cheap, it's the freebase form of cocaine obtained by cooking coka, it's not that it's cheap, the thing is that you need much less quantity. And normally if you don't cook it by yourself it's going t be cut with the worst things ever, so if you buy it it's cheap, if you cook it by yourself it's not ;)

Now back to mtg!

[Julian23]

Just when I was about to crack another "Your Source for..." joke :rolleyes:

What I'd love to see is an adaption of the reserved list for tournament support. Give us guranteed GP-Level tournament support for Legacy with at least 1 GP each year in America+Europe. That would make a lot of people feel much better about investing / staying invested real deep into the format. At least do it for 5 years or something like that. I mean the freaking reserved list was created FOR LIFE, wtf?

[nedleeds]

But the reserved list isn't a contract. WotC can alter it, dispose of it or burn it at their whim.

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/337/139/fc1.jpg

[bruizar]

I'm not sure you understand what I said. Jace, Seize, Goyf are the only examples. You chose the only cards that have ever breached the type 2 price barrier. You're saying that those 3 cards caused an eternal spike.

Price memory is one of the factors in the argument not the total argument....

Once the price of an eternal card reaches a high number, that number will always be its approximate price base barring reprints. It is Inconsequential if that card is not seeing the same amount of demand it did previously.

I remember Bonfire of the Damned, Cavern of Souls and Snapcaster Mage breaching that 20 euro ceiling as well; at least in Europe. This is all for non-foils of course, if you include foil cards, every set has ridiculous prices. Also, almost every Planeswalker starts out either at, or higher than 20 euros.

Price memory has to do with historical tournament performance + age + reserved list + foil + colour + rarity + 1st, 2nd or 3rd set in block + set sales amount + # of format it is played in (EDH/Cube/vintage/legacy/modern/standard) + uniqueness of card effect + # & tier of decks it is played in (i.e. current tournament performance) + # of times reprinted in sets, and probably a bunch of other factors that I forgot.

[sdematt]

@ Nedleeds

YES. Perfect.

@ Ben

Thanks for showing us data. That actually helps show us what the sweet hell is going on, and most importantly, WHY.

-Matt

[Arsenal]

Sales in 2013 (Compared to 2012)

Savannah: -40%

Average selling price (compiled for NM/Sp/MP) - 2012 first, 2013 second

Savannah: $67.16 versus $94.66 (+$27.50)

I'm curious why the average selling price of Savannah went from $67.16 in 2012 to $94.66 in 2013 if you were -40% for Savannah for Sales in 2013 compared to Sales in 2012.

[Koby]

I'm curious why the average selling price of Savannah went from $67.16 in 2012 to $94.66 in 2013 if you were -40% for Savannah for Sales in 2013 compared to Sales in 2012.

<----- this guy is why.

You're looking at the net change, and the resultant volume drop.
In 2012, Savannah was underpriced compared to its tournament performance. The dual was in high demand and used in Maverick to good results.
In 2013, that was not the case, and the existing price has not changed to account for it. Demand has tapered off and atophied.

[Arsenal]

<----- this guy is why.

You're looking at the net change, and the resultant volume drop.
In 2012, Savannah was underpriced compared to its tournament performance. The dual was in high demand and used in Maverick to good results.
In 2013, that was not the case, and the existing price has not changed to account for it. Demand has tapered off and atophied.

Then how does that explain Badlands? Badlands had a +59% Sales increase compared to Savannah's -40%, but Savannah's priced increased by $27.50 compared to Badlands $22.08. And Jund has been crushing Maverick in terms of placings according to tcdecks.net for 2013. I'm just curious as to why this is.

[Koby]

Then how does that explain Badlands? Badlands had a +59% Sales increase compared to Savannah's -40%, but Savannah's priced increased by $27.50 compared to Badlands $22.08. And Jund has been crushing Maverick in terms of placings according to tcdecks.net for 2013. I'm just curious as to why this is.

"And Jund has been crushing Maverick in terms of placings according to tcdecks.net for 2013."

In Sept 2012, Abrupt Decay and Deathrite Shaman became printed. This opened up the door for Jund to become a competitive deck. Badlands is an integral part of that deck, while Savannah is not.

Ergo,
Badlands becomes high demand, price gets bumped.
Savannah deman drops, volume is reduced.

Have you studied economics before?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_economics#Aggregate_Demand-Aggregate_Supply

[Arsenal]

"And Jund has been crushing Maverick in terms of placings according to tcdecks.net for 2013."

In Sept 2012, Abrupt Decay and Deathrite Shaman became printed. This opened up the door for Jund to become a competitive deck. Badlands is an integral part of that deck, while Savannah is not.

Ergo,
Badlands becomes high demand, price gets bumped.
Savannah deman drops, volume is reduced.

Have you studied economics before?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_economics#Aggregate_Demand-Aggregate_Supply

I get that, but why is Savannah still nearly a $100? Shouldn't the price go back down now that demand isn't high and Maverick's tourney performance is declining?

[Koby]

I get that, but why is Savannah still nearly a $100? Shouldn't the price go back down now that demand isn't high and Maverick's tourney performance is declining?

The same reason why all Reserve List cards only move in one direction. (hint: it's not south)

[PirateKing]

The same reason why all Reserve List cards only move in one direction. (hint: it's not south)

What was the story with Aluren then?

[Arsenal]

The same reason why all Reserve List cards only move in one direction. (hint: it's not south)

But with Badlands, you said:


Ergo,
Badlands becomes high demand, price gets bumped.
Savannah deman drops, volume is reduced.

I'm curious as to why the bolded part wouldn't read "price is reduced". If Supply & Demand (Ben's Sales data) was the driver for Badlands price increase, then why isn't Supply & Demand also the driver for Savannah's theoretical price decrease? If your answer is "The Reserved List", then couldn't you also make the argument then that Badlands price increase had nothing to do with Supply & Demand and it was simply due to the Reserved List?

[sdematt]

It's because of price memory. No one wants to drop the price because since it's a dual, no one's in a rush to sell. Aluren was a hype card that never saw play, so people wanted to cash out, then the price drops.

-Matt

[Ayotte]

It's because of price memory. No one wants to drop the price because since it's a dual, no one's in a rush to sell. Aluren was a hype card that never saw play, so people wanted to cash out, then the price drops.

-Matt

Yes, there are sticky prices, but I still don't think that explains an increase in price.

[Koby]

Yes, there are sticky prices, but I still don't think that explains an increase in price.

Magic Macro-Economics explained:

(1)
Is card in high demand?
Y: Price increase.
N: Sticky price

(2)
Is card in a popular deck?
Y: Price increase.
N: Sticky price.

(3)
Is the card Reserve List?
Y: Sticky price.
N: Demand pricing.

(4)
Has the card been outdated by newer printing?
Y: A) Is the card Reserve List? Go to (3).
N: Go to (2).

etc

[Koby]

But with Badlands, you said:



I'm curious as to why the bolded part wouldn't read "price is reduced". If Supply & Demand (Ben's Sales data) was the driver for Badlands price increase, then why isn't Supply & Demand also the driver for Savannah's theoretical price decrease? If your answer is "The Reserved List", then couldn't you also make the argument then that Badlands price increase had nothing to do with Supply & Demand and it was simply due to the Reserved List?

That's because the two metrics are not looking at the same phenomenon.

Price is a factor of supply and demand. Price went from ~$60 to ~$90 because of higher and higher demand.

Volume is a factor of demand only. If the card is not good in the current meta, volume will reflect that change.

Ben presented two metrics - price, and volume.
Price increased on the duals as a natural function of the collectability of the cards.
Volume changed as a function of the playability of the cards.

Volume drives prices if and only if it increases. Decreased volume does not correspond to a decrease in Reserve List cards.
Example: Shallow Grave.

Key point - MTG does not follow strict AS/AD macro-economic theories. Ideas can be applied to the trends, but this game's secondary market has a life of its own.

[menace13]

I remember Bonfire of the Damned, Cavern of Souls and Snapcaster Mage breaching that 20 euro ceiling as well; at least in Europe. This is all for non-foils of course, if you include foil cards, every set has ridiculous prices. Also, almost every Planeswalker starts out either at, or higher than 20 euros.

Price memory has to do with historical tournament performance + age + reserved list + foil + colour + rarity + 1st, 2nd or 3rd set in block + set sales amount + # of format it is played in (EDH/Cube/vintage/legacy/modern/standard) + uniqueness of card effect + # & tier of decks it is played in (i.e. current tournament performance) + # of times reprinted in sets, and probably a bunch of other factors that I forgot.
There were many cards since the Mythic rarity debut to start above the barrier, but only goyf and jace, either held it or kept increasing for the duration of their time in Std. They were exceptions, not the norm.

The other cards all went down to normal 20-30 levels. Same with every other Std legal staple.

Not including foils, cos that market is driven by pimpness and anyone willing to pimp is willing to splurge more than the next pimp. As per the pimp code.

Safe to say FoW will never go down again without a reprint as It will not wax and wane in the metagame as Badlands, or Aluren do.

Savannah is a good example of price memory not allowing the card to fall too far despite -40% in sales.

[cdr]

But the reserved list isn't a contract. WotC can alter it, dispose of it or burn it at their whim.


A high level corporate decision was made at WotC to keep the reserved list, permanently.

WotC came to the brink of getting rid of it a few years ago, then after a hush-hush meeting suddenly reversed course and declared that the reserved list was here to stay - and not even gray-area things like the judge foils being printed at the time would be allowed, strict letter of the law. Everything I have read from WotC people or heard from them in person says the reserved list is not ever changing.

Old card prices are going to keep going to go up and up until it prices out enough people that legacy deflates. I quite suspect WotC has a plan to phase legacy support out once the popularity declines enough.

[twndomn]

Hence your conspiracy is the following:

1. Reserve List drives the entree barrier of new players higher
2. lack of new Legacy players limits growth
3. Legacy eventually die due to lack of participation

Hence, to show the importance of a non-standard format, they've decided to print Modern Master. But Modern seems like the format WotC intends to support in the future, not Legacy. However, by doing so, re-printing cards like Goyf, actually encourages new players to try Legacy.

[Mewens]

I'm actually kind of interested in how EDH complicates Wizards' worldview.

I get the feeling that Wizards wants an eternal format because it supports player retention. Unless my memory's playing tricks on me, Modern was unleashed just as EDH was starting to blow up; with the company's long lead times, I can't help but wonder if we'd have a Modern at all if EDH had charged in a year or two earlier.

I know that'd still leave room for a sanctioned eternal format – can't blame Wizards for basically ignoring Legacy, given the difficulties of supporting a format with unprintable mana bases – but I'm of the opinion that Modern (or any sanctioned eternal format) mostly exists to create a sense that good cards can have long-term value. It's a player retention tool that costs Wizards nothing (or very little, at least), but could lengthen the years an average player sinks into the game.

Re: Savannah and Badlands prices: Keep in mind that those changes in demand are relative; we don't know how many Savannahs are still being bought vs. how many Badlands are being picked up. Even at 60% of last year's demand, Savannahs could well be outselling Badlands today. I mean, at the very least, Savannah has more latent demand than Badlands; it shows up in Enchantress, while Badlands is in ... Meathooks? There's a lot of good reason other than "corporate greed" and "sticky prices" that it could be staying at a relatively high price.

[Megadeus]

To be fair theres always RB Goblins ;)

But yeah Savanahs are also used in various Junk decks. It is a playable land.

[dontbiteitholmes]

I'm actually kind of interested in how EDH complicates Wizards' worldview.

I get the feeling that Wizards wants an eternal format because it supports player retention. Unless my memory's playing tricks on me, Modern was unleashed just as EDH was starting to blow up; with the company's long lead times, I can't help but wonder if we'd have a Modern at all if EDH had charged in a year or two earlier.

I know that'd still leave room for a sanctioned eternal format – can't blame Wizards for basically ignoring Legacy, given the difficulties of supporting a format with unprintable mana bases – but I'm of the opinion that Modern (or any sanctioned eternal format) mostly exists to create a sense that good cards can have long-term value. It's a player retention tool that costs Wizards nothing (or very little, at least), but could lengthen the years an average player sinks into the game.

Re: Savannah and Badlands prices: Keep in mind that those changes in demand are relative; we don't know how many Savannahs are still being bought vs. how many Badlands are being picked up. Even at 60% of last year's demand, Savannahs could well be outselling Badlands today. I mean, at the very least, Savannah has more latent demand than Badlands; it shows up in Enchantress, while Badlands is in ... Meathooks? There's a lot of good reason other than "corporate greed" and "sticky prices" that it could be staying at a relatively high price.

Badlands no doubt is going up in demand because of Jund. I played it at my last SCG Open and it's lots of fun. It's also the first time I've sleeved up my Badlands since I bought them.

[BenBleiweiss]

Savannah was as high at $110 each (NM) and are now down to $90 each. Sales are at the level we want to see at $90 right now, so $110 and $100 were not the right price after Maverick fell out of favor - but I wouldn't say "cards never go down" - there are plenty of legacy staples that have (Wasteland is another example of a staple that ebbs/flows in price).

[menace13]

Savannah was as high at $110 each (NM) and are now down to $90 each. Sales are at the level we want to see at $90 right now, so $110 and $100 were not the right price after Maverick fell out of favor - but I wouldn't say "cards never go down" - there are plenty of legacy staples that have (Wasteland is another example of a staple that ebbs/flows in price).
Thank you for posting here. Hope everyone can keep it civil enough for you to continue publishing numbers for us.

I wouldn't say all cards, but Wasteland should not be dropping too much any longer. It is and has been a top ten most payed legacy/vintage card and many of the top deck slot 4 of them. Barring a reprint there is not much reason it can't hit dual land prices, it's at 60 now. 90 is not unreasonable for it to get to.

[goblinsplayer]

To be fair theres always RB Goblins ;)

But yeah Savanahs are also used in various Junk decks. It is a playable land.

R/b gobos are bad. Its kinda outdated and vernurable to wasteland. I think savannah should drop down to a 70 dollar dual. Doesnt see much play in a tier one deck

[nedleeds]

A high level corporate decision was made at WotC to keep the reserved list, permanently.

WotC came to the brink of getting rid of it a few years ago, then after a hush-hush meeting suddenly reversed course and declared that the reserved list was here to stay - and not even gray-area things like the judge foils being printed at the time would be allowed, strict letter of the law. Everything I have read from WotC people or heard from them in person says the reserved list is not ever changing.

Old card prices are going to keep going to go up and up until it prices out enough people that legacy deflates. I quite suspect WotC has a plan to phase legacy support out once the popularity declines enough.

Ergo the reserved list is a tool for WotC, along with control of organized play to kill a format if it so chooses.

[_Fortune_]

Channelfireball is now selling foil Jace, TMS for $999, while the non-foils are still sub-$200. Pimpers gonna pimp.

[ankharlyn]

A high level corporate decision was made at WotC to keep the reserved list, permanently.

WotC came to the brink of getting rid of it a few years ago, then after a hush-hush meeting suddenly reversed course and declared that the reserved list was here to stay - and not even gray-area things like the judge foils being printed at the time would be allowed, strict letter of the law. Everything I have read from WotC people or heard from them in person says the reserved list is not ever changing.

Old card prices are going to keep going to go up and up until it prices out enough people that legacy deflates. I quite suspect WotC has a plan to phase legacy support out once the popularity declines enough.

I think this is definitely their plan, it seems like they're doing everything they can to kill Legacy off. Heck, I doubt we'll ever see reprints of FoW despite it not even being on the reserved list.

WotC/Hasbo's legal team seem to want to screw over players in favor of speculators whereever possible.

[phonics]

Channelfireball is now selling foil Jace, TMS for $999, while the non-foils are still sub-$200. Pimpers gonna pimp.

To be fair, I feel like the price of foils compared to their non foil counterpart usually doesnt fully reflect how much rarer they are.

[FieryBalrog]

To be fair, I feel like the price of foils compared to their non foil counterpart usually doesnt fully reflect how much rarer they are.

Of course not; price is a function of supply and demand.

[dontbiteitholmes]

This thread
http://i.imgur.com/yLyhsEZ.jpg

[TarmoX]

this thread
http://i.imgur.com/ylyhsez.jpg?1?9972


ahahahahahahahaha +1!!!!!!

[Ayotte]

Channelfireball is now selling foil Jace, TMS for $999, while the non-foils are still sub-$200. Pimpers gonna pimp.

It makes sense that the price is so high. There's almost zero supply. Anyone who owns a foil Jace at this point doesn't want to sell it.

[rnightingale]

OT: i'm just wondering why is there no more SCG Legacy Opens for the past few weeks?

[Basaka]

Because previous turnouts for those areas weren't good at all, so makes business sense.

We're getting one tomorrow so, tune in.

[FieryBalrog]

NM Forces are regularly going for ~$65 BIN on Ebay. Just picked up 2 from sellers who each had 3-4 available to replace two that I traded for $100 each last week.

Don't think this price will hold, just as it failed to hold before.

[Chimera87]

Maybe a little bit off-topic, but I feel that this deserves a post. People tend to complain that SCG is greedy with their prices, but they do have some of the best service I know of. I contacted them a while back to see if I could obtain some of their custom Tom Martell Spirit tokens since I cannot obtain them via the normal means of attending an SCG event. They replied that it was not possible due to the rules they had for the token distribution.
This evening I received the following envelope contents:

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d180/xtremewinner/b3707ab4-9190-4ff4-b3fa-40aa3bcd9218_zps45400e74.jpg

Pretty damn awesome! So they're not all evil and stuff. I'll be buying from SCG soon again.

[SpikeyMikey]

Savannah was as high at $110 each (NM) and are now down to $90 each. Sales are at the level we want to see at $90 right now, so $110 and $100 were not the right price after Maverick fell out of favor - but I wouldn't say "cards never go down" - there are plenty of legacy staples that have (Wasteland is another example of a staple that ebbs/flows in price).

That's not a drop that makes a difference to the average player, however. It makes a difference to you. It makes a difference to the people who fancy themselves as traders. But to someone like me, who looks back at where Savannah was when it was floating around with Plateau and Taiga as "Zoo playable only"...

Savannah's rise was entirely tied to Maverick. Maverick is dead. Thus, on a pure S/D axis, it should be back where it was prior to Maverick's rise. But it's still up 2-3 times that price because the simplified notion of "supply and demand" is useless. And if another deck comes along that utilizes Savannah and sees vast amounts of play, that price will rise again.

Supply and demand have absolutely nothing to do with the pricing of Magic cards. Perceived value is everything. It's what people think the card is worth. That may be based on their perception of the supply or their perception of the demand, but the true supply and the true demand are independent of pricing. Rest in Peace has a pretty solid demand across all the formats. The price is rock bottom. In fact, that's always the case with sideboard cards. Cyclonic Rift, Lotleth Troll, Detention Sphere, freaking Desecration Demon are all worth more than Rest in Peace. All of those cards see less play than RiP does.

Or look at Tropical Island. Even with Esper Stoneblade being the biggest single presence in the metagame, Underground Sea sees less play than Tropical Island. It's been that way continuously since 2008 and the utter dominance of Countertop strategies. But Sea is $200 @ SCG while Trop is $120. Supply for duals is pretty close to even. But Savannah doesn't see 3/4 of the play Trop does and Sea certainly doesn't see 60% MORE play.

EDH's impact on duals is fairly minimal; while it's popular, at 1 of each copy of a card it would take a lot of UB decks to skew the total usage of Sea vs. Trop. Vintage is the same; nobody plays Vintage anymore. So that pricing is almost 100% reliant on Legacy players. But it has nothing to do with the supply of Seas vs. the supply of Trops. It has nothing to do with the demand for these cards. It has EVERYTHING to do with perceived value. And Sea has been the most valuable dual since I started playing competitively in 2000. It has stayed the most valuable.

So let's stop pretending that supply and demand have any effect anywhere outside of pure theory. Because in practice, prices are set by perception and the perception is that duals are going to go up. Even if there's a slight dip, sticky prices will keep things from ever going back to where they were after a major spike.

Edit: to clarify, that whole thing wasn't directed at Ben. Just the first paragraph. The rest is directed at everyone else in the thread.

[Mr Miagi]

That's not a drop that makes a difference to the average player, however. It makes a difference to you. It makes a difference to the people who fancy themselves as traders. But to someone like me, who looks back at where Savannah was when it was floating around with Plateau and Taiga as "Zoo playable only"...

Savannah's rise was entirely tied to Maverick. Maverick is dead. Thus, on a pure S/D axis, it should be back where it was prior to Maverick's rise. But it's still up 2-3 times that price because the simplified notion of "supply and demand" is useless. And if another deck comes along that utilizes Savannah and sees vast amounts of play, that price will rise again.

Supply and demand have absolutely nothing to do with the pricing of Magic cards. Perceived value is everything. It's what people think the card is worth. That may be based on their perception of the supply or their perception of the demand, but the true supply and the true demand are independent of pricing. Rest in Peace has a pretty solid demand across all the formats. The price is rock bottom. In fact, that's always the case with sideboard cards. Cyclonic Rift, Lotleth Troll, Detention Sphere, freaking Desecration Demon are all worth more than Rest in Peace. All of those cards see less play than RiP does.

Or look at Tropical Island. Even with Esper Stoneblade being the biggest single presence in the metagame, Underground Sea sees less play than Tropical Island. It's been that way continuously since 2008 and the utter dominance of Countertop strategies. But Sea is $200 @ SCG while Trop is $120. Supply for duals is pretty close to even. But Savannah doesn't see 3/4 of the play Trop does and Sea certainly doesn't see 60% MORE play.

EDH's impact on duals is fairly minimal; while it's popular, at 1 of each copy of a card it would take a lot of UB decks to skew the total usage of Sea vs. Trop. Vintage is the same; nobody plays Vintage anymore. So that pricing is almost 100% reliant on Legacy players. But it has nothing to do with the supply of Seas vs. the supply of Trops. It has nothing to do with the demand for these cards. It has EVERYTHING to do with perceived value. And Sea has been the most valuable dual since I started playing competitively in 2000. It has stayed the most valuable.

So let's stop pretending that supply and demand have any effect anywhere outside of pure theory. Because in practice, prices are set by perception and the perception is that duals are going to go up. Even if there's a slight dip, sticky prices will keep things from ever going back to where they were after a major spike.

Edit: to clarify, that whole thing wasn't directed at Ben. Just the first paragraph. The rest is directed at everyone else in the thread.

Damn, this forum definetly needs a like button.. or I'll just have to quote this as say: You Sir, nailed it! :cool:

[FieryBalrog]

So let's stop pretending that supply and demand have any effect anywhere outside of pure theory. Because in practice, prices are set by perception and the perception is that duals are going to go up. Even if there's a slight dip, sticky prices will keep things from ever going back to where they were after a major spike.

Wrong. Quite a few duals have been flat or falling over the past year and a half. You could easily find SP Taigas for $35-40 on ebay last year, and that was signficantly below their peak (don't know what it's at now). You can easily find Savannahs right now for below their peak. A lot of Legacy staples have flatlined; the price jumps these days go more towards niche, obscure cards with tiny supply that become in-demand (like Transmute Artifact). The price of staples kept jumping because new players wanted in to the format and had to pay more to dislodge the cards from old players. What these trends suggest to me is that new players aren't coming in at nearly the same rate- which was completely inevitable, there is no way growth could continue given the astronomical prices that governed entry into the format, and prices, being a means of regulating scarcity, were of course a result of the very limited supply of staples. Instead, established players are chasing the rare, niche cards they don't have (Abyss, Tabernacle, so on) which enable them to add new deck archetypes to their porfolio. But they don't chase the staples because they largely already have enough of them.

NM Wasteland is BIN for $45 easy on Ebay, go look (http://www.ebay.com/itm/WASTELAND-x1-mtg-Tempest-x1-WASTELAND-x1-/221234568323?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item33829b9c83). That's definitely below its peak; in fact it's not any higher than it was 3 years ago, in the early days of the Legacy price jump.

[Lord Seth]

Rest in Peace has a pretty solid demand across all the formats. The price is rock bottom. In fact, that's always the case with sideboard cards. Cyclonic Rift, Lotleth Troll, Detention Sphere, freaking Desecration Demon are all worth more than Rest in Peace. All of those cards see less play than RiP does.I actually wonder how much of that may be simply the casual market. If you're playing casual, you're likely not playing with a sideboard, so Rest In Peace is generally useless to you. But all the other cards have easy maindeck applications, so you're going to be way more attracted to them.

[DLifshitz]

Supply and demand have absolutely nothing to do with the pricing of Magic cards. Perceived value is everything. It's what people think the card is worth. [...] in practice, prices are set by perception and the perception is that duals are going to go up.

What you've described is demand. As in: there's high demand for Underground Sea, more than for any other dual, despite it not being the most widely played dual. There's high demand for Underground Sea, because the price is expected to keep going up, so it's better to buy it as soon as possible. And so on. I presume your intention was to say that demand is not simply proportional to playability and tournament success, and that's true, of course. But statements like "Supply and demand have absolutely nothing to do with the pricing of Magic cards" are not merely wrong, they're laughable.

FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand#Factors_affecting_demand

[Megadeus]

USea is more played than Trops... UB Land is played in Esperstoneblade, Deathblade, most storm combo variants, and all forms of BUG decks. Trop is in, RUG which isnt as highly played as it used to be, Bant which I never see outside of some locals, and then as like a 1-2 of in BUG decks? The same BUG decks where USea is a 4 of almost every time.

[luckme10]

USea is not more played than Trops... UB Land is played in Esperstoneblade, Deathblade, most storm combo variants, and all forms of BUG decks. Trop is in, RUG which isnt as highly played as it used to be, Bant which I never see outside of some locals, and then as like a 1-2 of in BUG decks? The same BUG decks where USea is a 4 of almost every time.

Seas have always been more expensive. There is still this format called vintage, you know?


What I find to be really disturbing is that people are willing to spend $350 on foil jace proxy cards. It seems I need to get into the counterfeiting business.

[thefringthing]

Seas have always been more expensive. There is still this format called vintage, you know?I doubt Vintage contributes much to demand relative to Legacy. The real lesson here is that prices of old cards are driven in part by "price memory". Middle-aged slobs with a bunch of disposable income remember Djuzam Djinn being good, so he's $150, despite being unplayable in every format. On the other hand, Underground Sea is seeing more play than it used to, given the rise of BUG strategies.

[menace13]

USea is not more played than Trops... UB Land is played in Esperstoneblade, Deathblade, most storm combo variants, and all forms of BUG decks. Trop is in, RUG which isnt as highly played as it used to be, Bant which I never see outside of some locals, and then as like a 1-2 of in BUG decks? The same BUG decks where USea is a 4 of almost every time.
Trops were much more heavily played than U Seas from NO-RUG, to Delver all the way up until this past October-November(DRS). So were Volcs and Tundras for that matter.

[Megadeus]

Seas have always been more expensive. There is still this format called vintage, you know?


What I find to be really disturbing is that people are willing to spend $350 on foil jace proxy cards. It seems I need to get into the counterfeiting business.

Lol I meant the other way around... USEA IS MORE PLAYED. Whoops editing my comment now...

[Jamaican Zombie Legend]

Wrong. Quite a few duals have been flat or falling over the past year and a half. You could easily find SP Taigas for $35-40 on ebay last year, and that was signficantly below their peak (don't know what it's at now). You can easily find Savannahs right now for below their peak. A lot of Legacy staples have flatlined; the price jumps these days go more towards niche, obscure cards with tiny supply that become in-demand (like Transmute Artifact)

But his point about sticky pricing still stands. Pre-Maverick, Savannah was a ~$30 dual by retail pricing. Maverick drove it up to around 70-80 dollars when it became a serious DTB. But even though Maverick has seen a relatively large downturn in play, there hasn't really been a proportional decrease in price; it's still around 65 dollars on eBay. And I think it's safe to say that Savannahs will never fall to their pre-Maverick price even if they showed up in hardly any top 8 lists for a six-month period. That's just the power of sticky prices and how much perceived value drives the Magic market.

[FieryBalrog]

But his point about sticky pricing still stands. Pre-Maverick, Savannah was a ~$30 dual by retail pricing. Maverick drove it up to around 70-80 dollars when it became a serious DTB. But even though Maverick has seen a relatively large downturn in play, there hasn't really been a proportional decrease in price; it's still around 65 dollars on eBay. And I think it's safe to say that Savannahs will never fall to their pre-Maverick price even if they showed up in hardly any top 8 lists for a six-month period. That's just the power of sticky prices and how much perceived value drives the Magic market.

Savannah was $30 retail in the days when Tundra was $50 retail. I bought Savannahs at that price back in early 2009 in the early days of the Legacy price jump. They wouldn't be $30 today whether Maverick ever existed or not; not even Plateau is $30 at retail- it's $45 despite being played nowhere at all, and never really has been outside of a little play in Zoo. That's not sticky prices; that's just all the duals going up over time because of general growth in demand for the game and in demand for key old staples.

There are two separate trends being conflated here; the price increase for all duals (from early 2009 - mid 2012), and the specific price jump for Savannah due to Maverick. The latter is why it jumped way higher than it's rough counterpart Taiga. Prior to Maverick, both of them saw play in Zoo as well as some niche decks like Aggro Loam for Taiga or Enchantress for Savannah.

The general price increase for all duals has largely flatlined for over a year. It won't ever go back to it's 2009 prices barring a weird shift in the MTG market (game becomes completely unpopular, etc.) However the specific price increase for Savannah due to Maverick's popularity has almost completely reversed itself.

[Julian23]

"Plateau is $30 at retail- it's $45 despite being played nowhere at all, and never really has been outside of a little play in Zoo. That's not sticky prices; that's just all the duals going up over time because of general growth in demand for the game and in demand for key old staples."

This is the kind of ex-post reasoning why I consider all supply/demand reasoning pretty much exagerated. "General growth in demand" bears little to no scientific value and that's why most of us disregard such an argument whenever we encounter it. Show us SCG sales figures for Plateau between 2008 and 2013 and I will gladly accept your explanation. Otherwise, you have to accept other people arguing that Plateau is a prime example of prices not being completly dominated by supply/demand.

[Erdvermampfa]

Count me in to those deeming the gradually soaring prices to perceived value of cards and surmises about alleged 'increase of demand' and upcoming 'price raises'... These notions have been the best tools for hoarders and other abusive 'businessmen' in Magic ever since Legacy had been discovered as a lucrative market.

Besides, do you think that it's time to sell out yet? Currently, I'm still in possession of a legacy pool, even though I lack opportunitues to actually play the game since everyone around my area has quit...Yet until now I have kept possession of my collection since I thought I might fret later on if I get to know other people playing magic. My primary concern is that prospectively one will have a struggle to sell cards due to the high prices and a decline in popularity of the format so that'll remain sitting on my cards worth a lot of money...

[catmint]

I think Balrog makes a lot of sense. Demand is not just "demand for current good legacy decks", but also just generic demand because it is a dual and thus the rarity itself provides enough "demand" aka people are willing to pay 40$ or a dual they don't play right now. If no one would buy these duals for 40$ the demand would go down and card sellers could speculate for that to change again and keep the prices or lower the prices.

But Savannah and also Bayou or Badlands are a very good example of how "playability demand" affects the prices of dual lands.

[Dan Turner]

The largest part of Magic Prices is supply and demand and that drives the price up.

When demand falls for a commodity then price should fall.

This is not true in with Magic cards, here we hit something called price memory.

Price Memory is where players would rather sit on a card instead of selling it when demand drops. Now we have a lack of supply for what little demand that is there so it cause the prices to hold steady at a higher price then the pre-demand. The only way to decrease the price is to increase the supply.

[FieryBalrog]

This is the kind of ex-post reasoning why I consider all supply/demand reasoning pretty much exagerated. "General growth in demand" bears little to no scientific value

Actually, it does; it's simply the demand curve moving right due to more players entering the game, meaning more people are willing to pay at any given price. This is basic micro 101 (and I did major in the subject all those years ago, for whatever it's worth). Given an almost completely immobile supply curve for out of print cards, the major result of such a shift is just general across-the-board price increase, and maybe we talk about a rise in counterfeiting to "introduce fresh supply".


Demand is not just "demand for current good legacy decks", but also just generic demand because it is a dual

Yeah, exactly. Without generic demand for duals, Plateau could easily be a $10 card based on how absurdly little play it sees in Legacy. It's not "demand for Legacy staples" that keeps Plateau afloat. Claiming that Maverick is responsible for the entirety of Savannah's price increase to date is completely absurd for this reason.

[[SLAYER]chaos]

I was at a modern masters draft last weekend and the store had 3 Underground Seas for sale. One was bought by a girl that wanted it for her EDH deck, another by a guy that just wanted it for his collection, and I got the last one to actually play with in Legacy. There was a 4th guy that also wanted it for EDH that got there too late. The supply was already getting strained before EDH became a popular format, there's no feasible way that we can just keep going with the current supply. Something has to be done or we're simply not going to be able to play in a few years.

[Megadeus]

Actually, it does; it's simply the demand curve moving right due to more players entering the game, meaning more people are willing to pay at any given price. This is basic micro 101 (and I did major in the subject all those years ago, for whatever it's worth). Given an almost completely immobile supply curve for out of print cards, the major result of such a shift is just general across-the-board price increase, and maybe we talk about a rise in counterfeiting to "introduce fresh supply".



Yeah, exactly. Without generic demand for duals, Plateau could easily be a $10 card based on how absurdly little play it sees in Legacy. It's not "demand for Legacy staples" that keeps Plateau afloat. Claiming that Maverick is responsible for the entirety of Savannah's price increase to date is completely absurd for this reason.
I mean Savannah is played in various Junk builds, Bant and other random stuff. At least it is in a few random archetypes outside of Maverick. What is Plateau in? I havent seen anyone play Zoo at all lately, and then maybe in the rare WR Goblins deck splashing white for thalia?

[Ellomdian]

The general price increase for all duals has largely flatlined for over a year. It won't ever go back to it's 2009 prices barring a weird shift in the MTG market (game becomes completely unpopular, etc.) However the specific price increase for Savannah due to Maverick's popularity has almost completely reversed itself.

While prepping for Denver last Nov, I noticed that Bayou's could be had for $70 while SCG was completely sold out at $80. Now it's $140-150, and I happy I don't need to grab them to toss BUG around. Now, Badlands, Taigas, and Scrublands are the only Duals you can reliably find for less than $100, and while the market price has not gone up considerably, I have noticed a distinct downturn of widespread availability. This is not because SCG is hoarding them, waiting to spike the price $25 when Todd Anderson aces the next Legacy open with BWr 12Squire. It's because they are the least sought after 'competitive' legacy duals. But they are in VERY popular commander colors, and I would be surprised if they did not slowly edge up on the $100 mark over the next 12-18 mos.

Warren Buffett - 1. Find undervalued investments, 2. With strong fundamentals (generally that outperform the market), 3. That you understand. If you don't want to spend $100 on the lands you've put off buying because they are the worst of the bunch, then you should buy them now before they catch up with the leading indicators.

And back to the OP - Starcity has pegged the price of FoW up twice in the last 12 months, and indications are that their current $99 value is holding steady. The BiN price on EBay (the closest thing we have to a real market to determine the fair value price) is $70. I still value mine at $75, and would likely sell if it creeps much above $105 (I don't think that's a sustainable price.)

[Megadeus]

While prepping for Denver last Nov, I noticed that Bayou's could be had for $70 while SCG was completely sold out at $80. Now it's $140-150, and I happy I don't need to grab them to toss BUG around. Now, Badlands, Taigas, and Scrublands are the only Duals you can reliably find for less than $100, and while the market price has not gone up considerably, I have noticed a distinct downturn of widespread availability. This is not because SCG is hoarding them, waiting to spike the price $25 when Todd Anderson aces the next Legacy open with BWr 12Squire. It's because they are the least sought after 'competitive' legacy duals. But they are in VERY popular commander colors, and I would be surprised if they did not slowly edge up on the $100 mark over the next 12-18 mos.

Warren Buffett - 1. Find undervalued investments, 2. With strong fundamentals (generally that outperform the market), 3. That you understand. If you don't want to spend $100 on the lands you've put off buying because they are the worst of the bunch, then you should buy them now before they catch up with the leading indicators.

And back to the OP - Starcity has pegged the price of FoW up twice in the last 12 months, and indications are that their current $99 value is holding steady. The BiN price on EBay (the closest thing we have to a real market to determine the fair value price) is $70. I still value mine at $75, and would likely sell if it creeps much above $105 (I don't think that's a sustainable price.)

bayou is 150 for unlimited. You can get revised for 100. and other non blue duals are still around 60-70

[FieryBalrog]

While prepping for Denver last Nov, I noticed that Bayou's could be had for $70 while SCG was completely sold out at $80. Now it's $140-150, and I happy I don't need to grab them to toss BUG around.


Bayous are $140-$150? How did you find such horrible deals? Last few days:

$75 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Magic-the-Gathering-MtG-Revised-2x-Bayou-dual-land-never-played-/261228493342?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item3cd26e7a1e
$73 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bayou-X2-Revised-MTG-/151070501415?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item232c80ea27
$64 http://www.ebay.com/itm/3x-Dual-Land-Revised-Bayou-MTG-Magic-the-Gathering-Card-x3-/151065685682?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item232c376eb2
$80 BIN http://www.ebay.com/itm/Magic-The-Gathering-Revised-MTG-Bayou-Light-Play-/151046208963?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item232b0e3dc3

Some are SP and some are NM.

So Bayou has barely gone up at all, and that too because of Jund becoming popular.


Now, Badlands, Taigas, and Scrublands are the only Duals you can reliably find for less than $100

Except Plateau (obviously), and Bayou, as shown above, and Savannah too, which you can easily confirm on Ebay as well, which is every non-blue dual land in the game. So blue duals only, you say? Wait, not even that- here are good condition trops going for $93 and under- in the past week:

$93 http://www.ebay.com/itm/MTG-Magic-the-Gathering-3rd-Edition-Revised-Tropical-Island-NM-See-Scan-/261232468449?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item3cd2ab21e1
$78 http://www.ebay.com/itm/tropical-island-revised-/271225069867?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item3f2646212b
$84 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tropical-Island-Revised-3rd-Edition-Magic-the-Gathering-MTG-/300719828070?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item46044c6c66
$92 http://www.ebay.com/itm/1x-Tropical-Island-MTG-Magic-Revised-3rd-Edition-dual-land-pictures-EX-/370841238774?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item5657dc3cf6

[sdematt]

Bayous are $140-$150? How did you find such horrible deals? Last few days:

$75 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Magic-the-Gathering-MtG-Revised-2x-Bayou-dual-land-never-played-/261228493342?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item3cd26e7a1e
$73 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bayou-X2-Revised-MTG-/151070501415?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item232c80ea27
$64 http://www.ebay.com/itm/3x-Dual-Land-Revised-Bayou-MTG-Magic-the-Gathering-Card-x3-/151065685682?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item232c376eb2
$80 BIN http://www.ebay.com/itm/Magic-The-Gathering-Revised-MTG-Bayou-Light-Play-/151046208963?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item232b0e3dc3

Some are SP and some are NM.

So Bayou has barely gone up at all, and that too because of Jund becoming popular.



Except Plateau (obviously), and Bayou, as shown above, and Savannah too, which you can easily confirm on Ebay as well, which is every non-blue dual land in the game. So blue duals only, you say? Wait, not even that- here are good condition trops going for $93 and under- in the past week:

$93 http://www.ebay.com/itm/MTG-Magic-the-Gathering-3rd-Edition-Revised-Tropical-Island-NM-See-Scan-/261232468449?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item3cd2ab21e1
$78 http://www.ebay.com/itm/tropical-island-revised-/271225069867?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item3f2646212b
$84 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Tropical-Island-Revised-3rd-Edition-Magic-the-Gathering-MTG-/300719828070?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item46044c6c66
$92 http://www.ebay.com/itm/1x-Tropical-Island-MTG-Magic-Revised-3rd-Edition-dual-land-pictures-EX-/370841238774?pt=Trading_Card_Games_US&hash=item5657dc3cf6

You can still find all the duals for under $100 except Seas (which can be found for 100, but played) in decent enough condition. You can't just be thinking that store prices are the way to go.

-Matt

[FieryBalrog]

You can still find all the duals for under $100 except Seas (which can be found for 100, but played) in decent enough condition. You can't just be thinking that store prices are the way to go.

-Matt

Right, that was the point. You would be paying fairly similar prices on Ebay a year and a half ago. Prices for Legacy staples have flatlined in many cases. They were inevitably going to.

[Julian23]

Actually, it does; it's simply the demand curve moving right due to more players entering the game, meaning more people are willing to pay at any given price. This is basic micro 101 (and I did major in the subject all those years ago, for whatever it's worth). Given an almost completely immobile supply curve for out of print cards, the major result of such a shift is just general across-the-board price increase, and maybe we talk about a rise in counterfeiting to "introduce fresh supply".

Show me numbers, not assumptions. You assume there is more demand, because prices are rising. This is A+ for microeconomical thinking. The problem is, you're not adressing the actual arguement, because it challenges the validity of microeconomic approach in the first place. I say, the only way to solve this is by throwing away ideology and just look at numbers.


I also studied microecnomics for years but who cares? Mentioning this usually only weakens your position when it's brought forward as an ad hominem arguement.

[Patrunkenphat7]

In economics, demand is not the same as an increase in perceived value... I feel like a lot of people think those two concepts are interchangeable, but they are not.

[FieryBalrog]

Show me numbers, not assumptions. You assume there is more demand, because prices are rising. This is A+ for microeconomical thinking. The problem is, you're not adressing the actual arguement, because it challenges the validity of microeconomic approach in the first place. I say, the only way to solve this is by throwing away ideology and just look at numbers.
No, I assume there is more demand, because there are more players playing the game. That latter bit is a fact, not an ex-post-facto assumption. Look at Hasbro's reports. The number of players was estimated to increase by 85% or so between 2008 and 2011. (something close to that, I might be slightly off on the numbers). More players across the board means a "general growth in demand". In fact this is exactly what I said in my post, which leads me to believe you aren't comprehending what's being said if you think I'm simply looking at the effect and assuming what the cause is because of theory.

[dontbiteitholmes]

I can almost guarantee that all of those $300-400 Tabernacles on ebay were posted before SCG raised their price to $500.00. I'd wager that if the ebay sellers were to pull their auction off, then re-list, they'd re-list at a selling price much closer to SCG's selling price.

My teammate looking to unload his extra playset of FoW was the happiest dude ever when his buyer failed to pay him as SCG increased FoW to $100 during that time, so now my friend can re-list and get closer to $80ea instead of the $65ea he had them originally listed at. I'd imagine other sellers are of a similar mindset.

3 Months later...

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=tabernacle+pendrell&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&rt=nc

90+% of Tabernacles are still in the $300-400 range

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=force+of+will&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&rt=nc

The Force of Will is still about $65 average

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg263/Crabstuffed/Avatars/colbert_called.gif


I agree that the more the card's condition degrades, the larger the margin for potential savings, but as you pointed out, that margin widely varies and for the sake of the argument, I wanted to compare cards with the least amount of variance; NM pricing gives me that. I 100% agree that you get better deals on an open marketplace (like ebay) rather than going to a store-front (like SCG) directly, but that wasn't the point of contention.

This quote is what I took exception to:

1.) The ebay prices he quoted were from before SCG raised their price to $500. He misrepresented facts in order to have a stronger argument.


How's that argument looking now?

[Arsenal]

Lol, you waited 3 months for this. I was wrong about Tabernacle. About Force though, SCG currently has Force at $80 NM, not $100, so the difference between ebay and Force seems to be about where it was before SCG raised FoW to $100, no?

[dontbiteitholmes]

Lol, you waited 3 months for this. I was wrong about Tabernacle. About Force though, SCG currently has Force at $80 NM, not $100, so the difference between ebay and Force seems to be about where it was before SCG raised FoW to $100, no?

I didn't wait 3 months for this, the thread was bumped and I looked back and see what happened since the prices changed. I mean fundamentally you were saying SCG (and other large retailers) set prices and the market follows and I was saying the market sets prices, it's an interesting argument and also the source of roughly 90% of bitching about prices on these forums so I figured it was worth looking back into. The fact that SCG had to back down pricing on FoW shows that DON'T set the value of cards right? I mean even at $80 they seem to be pretty flush with Forces right now. FoW was roughly $65 on Ebay when this thread started, so it hasn't really moved (I mean it may have creeped up a % or 2 average, but so did every staple card in 3 months time regardless of retailer pricing).