I'll be replying to another post in this string, but Bruce is right.
the costs of shipping have approximately doubled from A-Z
cardboard is almost double what it was 2 years ago
plastic bags are almost double
plastic tape (the 2 inch tape) is more than double (in 2007 a 6 pack
was $5.99 , yesterday it was $14.99)
Avery labels are more than double
(for those wanting the math: 2 12x14 sheets of cardbaord = 56c,
labels are $40 per 200, 11x14 bags are $175 per 1000 shipped)
(so 1 package has approx 94 cents in supplies alone not including
tape, flyers. If I have to use my own box instead of a Priority box, add $1.50)
and those are costs before we even ship it out
the biggest increases are (for me) shipping East of the Mississippi.
as a matter of fact, I need to create a new shipping schedule as it
costs me way less to ship to California and Arizona than it does to
West Virginia
Non-US shipping went up last year and this year and and it is at
least double what it was in 2007
the bottom line? for Non-US customers, bidding has dropped
precipitously which reduces competition!
One new buyer in January in a "lobby card sets" auction bought 14 lbs
of lobby cards.
shipping to Australia was $90. the material cost $360 and many were
bargains as always, but the buyer - who fully understood that the
shipping costs were real - has never come back.
Even worse, any package 4lbs or over going overseas must ship by
Priority Mail, which makes it incredibly costly
I sold a copy of the Reynold Brown book to a customer in the UK. the
book was $40. shipping of this heavy 4lb'er ws $35
shipping used to actually work in this formula: $7.00 fee to buyers
(domestic shipping). Cost used to leave maybe $1-2 that went toward
paying help to make packages. Now with my basic $9.00 cost, we only
have a $1-2 surplus for customers in a few western states near me in
Nevada and when shipping to NYC for instance, we lose money
(actually, any state west of Kansas is a loser for us)
so now, the costs of the employee, tape, cardboard etc are fully
borne by my bottom line and when you sell stuff under $5-10, it is an
economic loser if the orders don't get above $40-50 or so
I've been doing mail order business for 30+ years and honestly, the
climbing costs are absolutely taking money out of my personal income,
which should never be happening.
but it's going to get worse! a new increase in already in the
pipeline and to make things even worse than that, in my case, the
business post office near the Strip (which is 1 block away) is slated
to be closed in the massive postal closures planned to save money and
now we'll have to drive 15-20 minutes just to drop off packages and
to stand in line for Non-US shipping there, and my advertised mailing
address of the last 17 years is going to disappear (my POBox is at
that post office)
so I'll have no choice but to raise my shipping rates to "get back to
even" and to pay for more gasoline and the 30 minutes or more for
Anna to drive there & back.
if only the Starship Enterprise had left their transporter units in
my warehouse.....
Rich
At 09:07 AM 8/23/2009, Bruce Hershenson wrote:
Great analysis, Evan. I completely agree that the "cost of selling"
is an important consideration in looking at results. If you consign
an item and it "sells" for $15, but you received 85 cents for it,
then did you sell it for $15, or for 85 cents?
One factor not mentioned to this point is the HUGE postal price
increases the past few years, especially on international shipments.
There are many items that auction for $2 because the shipping cost
to the person who loves it is $20 or $30 or $40, so they can't
justify bidding $3, even though they would gladly pay $10 for the
item, but they can't because of the cost of shipping to them.
Bruce
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 10:50 AM,
<<mailto:evanzwei...@comcast.net>evanzwei...@comcast.net> wrote:
I think that if anyone had a database of posters and what they sold
for over the last 15 years, someone could write some sort of
analysis program that answered this question! Ok, so that was a
smart ass answer. Sorry.
I use your sales results database all of the time -- it kicks
ass. And its very obvious that the posters that I personally have
been looking at are down (way down). However that doesn't really mean that:
1) all posters in a particular price range are down (it may be
just low end crappy 1940s and 1950s posters I tend to buy)
2) the prices are depressed because of the economy (as there
seems to be a huge supply of posters being auctioned every week,
perhaps way more than the market can sustain)
3) the pieces which are currently down are ever coming back up
(I love the movie "Father Goose", but I don't expect it to sell for
$100 again in my lifetime).
The problem with using anecdotal evidence is that people only point
to specific posters which support their claim. And, if you make a
claim, people will point to some outlier which contridicts (the
Librianna effect).
The first challenge is to find a meaningful partitioning of the data
which shows some meaningful demonstratable trend. For example, I
would believe the statement "Non spectacular 1950s 1-sheets for A
movies with top stars who were in their primes in the 1940s are down
50%". I would believe the statement that "Ugly posters from bad
movies in the 1970s are worthless and should be
discarded". However, I would not believe the statuement that "All
1970s posters are down 25%". Finding such a partition would have to
be difficult (not to mention difficult to code).
The second challenge is to find a way to analyze so little data. If
all posters were in the same condition, and offered regularly the
analysis would be easy. However, how do you compare sales of a G-
poster (with free book) to a NM copy? I don't believe that there is
a standard formula to predict the sale price based on condition
(although Jon Warren thought there was one in 1986!). Even if there
was some magic formula (e.g., VG = 75% NM), I doubt that it works
across all decades.
The third challenge is to agree on some reasonable definition of
'Value' so that we can compare results across different
venues. Value has to be defined as what the seller will receive for
the peice (not what the buyer will pay), as all of the venues charge
differently for their services. For example if eMovieposter sells a
poster for $15 (the seller get 40% or $6) and if HA.com sells it for
$15 (a $1 bid plus $14 BP, the seller get $0.85) on eBay the number
is somewhere in the middle. As a result, it makes little sense to
use data from one of these sites which is outside that sites sweet
spot! For eMovieposter its atlesast $50, for HA its at least $75.
The issue here is that the overhead dominates the cost of the
transaction and the value will not be correct.
Let me know what you find!
Evan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Hershenson"
<<mailto:brucehershen...@gmail.com>brucehershen...@gmail.com>
To: <mailto:MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU>MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 7:44:24 AM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
Subject: [MOPO] Are poster prices depressed?
I was talking to one of my consignors on the phone a couple of days
ago, and he mentioned that he thought many prices were down in recent months.
Of course, much of this can be attributed to the overall economy.
Clearly some people are short on money, and others are just being
cautious with their money. Also eBay has made such a mess of their
listings that they are likely bringing far fewer new collectors into
the hobby than they did in years past.
I have been buying and selling collectibles for 44 years now, and
EVERY time overall prices have been depressed (due to external
reasons, like a poor economy, or a massive collection coming on the
market), it has proven to be an excellent buying opportunity.
I have been looking at WHO is buying the better quality items in my
auctions, and who are the underbidders, and it seems like a lot of
the most savvy and longest time collectors are doing a lot of buying
(or trying to do a lot, but are getting outbid), and that would seem
to say that they agree with me and are trying to find bargains while
prices are somewhat depressed.
I also notice that the prices of much lesser items (those that
auction for $1 to $20) are mostly extremely depressed. I attribute
this to people being far more selective in what they buy, choosing
to pass up items that are in lesser condition or of low
desireability, even if they are dirt cheap (and they may be getting
to spend the money they would have spent on better items instead).
Anyway, I am betting that one more time this will prove to be a time
when people look back and think "Why didn't I buy more when many
decent items sold for reasonable prices".
What do YOU think?
Bruce Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at
<http://www.filmfan.com/>www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message
addressed to:
<mailto:lists...@listserv.american.edu>lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of
this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: lists...@listserv.american.edu
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
