Does a BV under $1 mean anything?

We have had several sellers point out that Beckett prices for cards worth less than a dollar are not very relevant when buying cards on the web. When I was chatting with someone at Beckett about this issue, they mentioned that eBay now forces people to start listings no lower than $0.99, and Beckett Marketplace also has a minimum price of $0.50.

We are seeing that either people want the card or they don’t. Whether you charge $0.05 or $0.50 for a card with a book value of $0.25 doesn’t really matter. It generally only sells to people that are interested in that card, and those people often don’t blink at paying full book or more for these cheap cards that they want.

So… What if we simply display “Under $1″ for the book value when a card has a book value that is less than $1?

We would not display a discount percentage for these cards, and if you ask us to set your prices based on a percentage of book value we will assume that the book value is $1 for these cards. For example, if you send us a card with a book value of $0.30 and ask us to set your prices to 50% off, the card would be set to $0.50 and the discount percentage would be N/A.

Is this a good idea? Bad idea? Should we display “$1 or less” instead of “Under $1″? Should we use a number other than $1? Let us know what you think.

11 thoughts on “Does a BV under $1 mean anything?

  1. I have 2 ideas on this topic.
    #1 – Maybe create a category “BARGAIN BIN” or some such name and list all cards
    in this area. The cards could be further categorized in increments of $.25.
    #2 – List the cards as “Make An Offer” with no book value listed.
    I’m sure that what you come up with on this isssue will be acceptable.

    You’re doing a terrific job , guys! Its nice to be able to sell my duplicates instead of them sitting around “collecting dust”. You have made it all so simple and F-U-N !!

  2. I think that would be a great idea list them at a under $1.00 . Giving the people who want these cards a chance to pick them up and give the sellers another way to sell cards..

  3. I think the idea is a good one, however, I think it would still be important for COMC to provide the seller with the “book value” for cards we are listing. That would still give us guidelines for pricing the “under $1″ cards.

    But I agree with the concept. I’ve noticed that cards with a “BV” of say $0.05, are often found elsewhere on other sites for $0.25 or more. Even if the listing says “under 1″, sellers can still list cards for whatever price they like.

    It’s great that COMC is always looking and listening for ways to grow and get better.

  4. I am a fairly frequent buyer of cards that are valued less than $1. That is part of why I love COMC so much. It is much less restrictive to these buying interests than eBay, Beckett, or other sites. With that said I do not think it is necessary to create a separate category for such cards and simply list them as “Under $1″.

    I understand fully and have no problem with paying $0.30, $0.40, or more for cards with a BV as low as $0.05 because I understand there is a threshold of effort for the buyer to put that card up for sale on any website. So in effect the BV is somewhat irrelevant when buying these cards. However, I still like to know the BV when I purchase instead of it being just “Under $1″.

    My suggestion would be to display the BV for cards under $1 but suspend the discount percentage displayed for these cards. On a further note, as a seller and not a buyer, is it possible to request a fixed percentage off cards over $1 and a fixed price under $1 (i.e. 50% cards over $1 or $0.35 for all cards with a BV under $1)?

  5. Thank you for the quick feedback. This is very helpful. Kevin, that is a great question. Yes, we can set fixed prices for cards under $1 and set cards based on a percentage for the rest. In fact, we will be building these capabilities directly into the website so that each of the sellers can easily adjust prices in bulk on their own.

    It sounds like we are in agreement that we shouldn’t list the discount percentage for cards worth less than $1.

    What if we display “Under $1″ but let you hover over the text to get the Beckett value along with a disclaimer?

  6. Tim, thanks for your response to my question. I will have to employ that method on future shipments.

    As for the second part about the ability for each seller to adjust prices in bulk…that is a great idea. I have had occasion recently where that would have been very helpful but hadn’t thought to pose the question to COMC staff about such a tool.

    It also seems you have come up with a very equitable solution regarding “Under $1″ cards. Thanks again to you and the whole COMC team, you continue to make a great idea and a great site even better.

  7. I think the way COMC is now on lower priced cards is just fine. On a previous site that I had sold some cards, a buyer had contacted me buying only commons because they had a grandpa and father played in the MLB. Commons though. (LOL)And were looking for their cards. My point being, some buyers buy for a personal favorite which may not be a star, so the sale of less-valued cards is still popular. Plus buyers might be trying to complete a set with only the remaining cards being commons. Or I’ve known buyers creating favorites in personal experiences with ball players making them a new favorite to purchase merchandise. On that note, Johnny Bench was a huge asshole in St. Louis one year in a run-in on an elevator and refused to sign a ball for me while I was just barely out of diapers. Kevin Appier also an S.O.B. at a card show just North of Kansas City. Haha, I’m sure there’s lots of good stories we could hear -need a message board! :-/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s