SCD Auction History

[mattmueller]

Anybody have a feel for how accurate the SCD auction history listing is? I was looking at prices of Favre game jerseys, and noted that they list an AMI 7-19-07 sold for $7,632. However, AMI's website indicates that piece sold for $4,932. That is a pretty big difference. I am not sure which would be more reasonable for a jersey with the Favre authentication. Any thoughts?

[rose14]

I'll let you in on a little secret abour AMI's listed final values. AMI includes the buyers premium which is what the buyer actually pays for an auction item. Most auction houses do this so it norman but my problem with AMI is that they also include the sellers premium in their realized prices. They
add 15% to the final bid as well even though the seller and not the buyers pays that commission. I have negotiated sellers fees with AMI on some items and they still include 15% to the final value even though the commission was less.

This is blatant misrepresentation of the prices that their auction items sell for and I have told them about and they still continue to do it. AMI is so reckless about it that anybody with a little bit of intelligence can go on their website and see that it doesn't match what they give to SCD to print. I've even told them "Since the item sold for what you are saying it did shouldn't you owe me more money than what you paid me?"

[mattmueller]

In a market that is as inefficient as Favre jerseys, I would understand and willingly accept +/- 15% on pricing history. What I don't get is a $3,000 difference. Has anybody else noticed this, or is it just one significant mistake that I happened to find?

[CollectGU]

I'll let you in on a little secret abour AMI's listed final values. AMI includes the buyers premium which is what the buyer actually pays for an auction item. Most auction houses do this so it norman but my problem with AMI is that they also include the sellers premium in their realized prices. They
add 15% to the final bid as well even though the seller and not the buyers pays that commission. I have negotiated sellers fees with AMI on some items and they still include 15% to the final value even though the commission was less.

This is blatant misrepresentation of the prices that their auction items sell for and I have told them about and they still continue to do it. AMI is so reckless about it that anybody with a little bit of intelligence can go on their website and see that it doesn't match what they give to SCD to print. I've even told them "Since the item sold for what you are saying it did shouldn't you owe me more money than what you paid me?"


This is not true and a misrepresntation. They add the buyers commission to realized price and if you click on the item, they show what it sold for without the buyers premium. I know becasue I've sold many items with them and I can show my consignment invocies all match the sold price minus my sellers commission...They don't give those numbers to SCD, SCD has gotten it wrong....

Regards,
Dave

[toddhead]

Iti s a database problem with SCD. I noticed it a while back when I was looking up 49ers auction results.

[kingjammy24]

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=12975

on dec 17 2007, chris nerat indicated they were aware of the problem and were working on it. perhaps he can comment on where they are 3 months into the process.

i suppose the part that confuses me is why they went live with a bad database and why it continues to be live.

rudy.

[rose14]

How is this a database problem when SCD has been publishing AMI's prices in the weekly publication at the higher price long before their auction website started?

[mattmueller]

I guess I don't want this to turn into a discussion on the ethics of AMI including hammer premium or not, but really would like to know if on the balance the SCD list is, hammer premium issue aside, accurate or is the 50% difference on the Favre jersey an anomoly.

Thanks,
Matt