@DeplorableDan said:
What the heck happened? The release date said it was tomorrow, 1/25 at 9am PST? I had even "subscribed" my email for updates and received no type of notification that there would be pre sales? I was planning on buying one just to review for the forum but I guess were SOL now.....
Website still says "Series 1" will be released tomorrow. @DCW even posted a screenshot of it above.
The "Out of Stock" flag is likely just a placeholder for the upcoming "Add to Bag" button.
@WQuarterFreddie said:
I got this email but thought it was for today so I checked website at 12:02 and it said out of stock BUT upon reflection I want to point out it doesn't say SOLD OUT so maybe it will be available tomorrow. My apologies if my post turns out to be a false alarm!
oh ok I see what you guys are saying, but why not choose better words to be the "placeholder". "Out of stock" is the most creative thing they could use? I feel like confusion could be avoided if they had used something like, say, "currently unavailable"?
@WQuarterFreddie said:
I got this email but thought it was for today so I checked website at 12:02 and it said out of stock BUT upon reflection I want to point out it doesn't say SOLD OUT so maybe it will be available tomorrow. My apologies if my post turns out to be a false alarm!
Are “sold out” and “out of stock” not synonymous?
Agreed but I think my "senior moment " is an error. Sorry for raising everyone's blood pressure today,😂🤣
FWIW, "Series 1" appears to be, or was, available for pre-sale at PWCC Marketplace. Link
That said, the linked reference explicitly states that:
"VaultBox will provide additional purchasing opportunities at the official release on Jan. 25 via its website."
@MetroD said:
FWIW, "Series 1" appears to be, or was, available for pre-sale at PWCC Marketplace. Link
That said, the linked reference explicitly states that:
"VaultBox will provide additional purchasing opportunities at the official release on Jan. 25 via its website."
So what does that mean? If there are only X number of sets available and they all sell at the PWCC marketplace, then how can they have more to sell tomorrow?
I sense a large cluster (problem) tomorrow and the accompanying threads-from folks whining about getting aced out of their opportunity-arriving here on the forums shortly thereafter. Good luck with that.
@telephoto1 said: So what does that mean? If there are only X number of sets available and they all sell at the PWCC marketplace, then how can they have more to sell tomorrow?
I sense a large cluster (problem) tomorrow and the accompanying threads-from folks whining about getting aced out of their opportunity-arriving here on the forums shortly thereafter. Good luck with that.
My take - some of the 'S1' boxes 'are/were' available on a pre-sale basis through PWCC. The balance, presumably the "lion's share", will be available directly from VB on 01/25/23.
@david3142 said:
You don’t need to do anything involving all combinations of coins. If there is no correlation between the groups the expectation of the sum is the sum of the expectations.
Something similar was my first run on it. However each of the groups’ values were severely skewed and the imprecise aspect of that didn’t set well with me. It actually bugged me half the weekend, as I have plans for doing more with it than the simplistic ROI cut-off. Plus it was an opportunity to generate a massive data set for another purpose.
That and the cut-over under-over proportion of every combination seemed easier to explain/argue.
Edited…
@david3142 said:
You mentioned that the expected value of the box is actually $850 based on NGC’s guide? I assume that’s the sum of all 2400 coins / 800?
I must have overlooked this part. Not following here. What’s the $850? I think the raw mean value per box was something like $725. But the substantial skew really influences that mean to the point of silliness.
Thanks very much for your response (and your initial work!)
You wrote that “you will win $255 with your scratch-off”. I interpreted that to mean that 595+255 was the expected value of the box. I apologize if I misinterpreted that. $725 isn’t too bad for the consumer. I would guess any piece could be resold at 60-70% of published values so that’s an EV of about $470. It would be fun to plot a histogram with both frequency of box value and contribution to EV. Only 1/800 boxes will have that $20K coin but it contributes about $25 to the EV total!
The $725 is generous, and probably fictional in the real world, if it's based on NGC values, but the skew he's talking about is the deviation between the few coins at the top and all the others. After you take them out, as you must because only 3 people out of 800 will get them, the average value for the remaining 797 boxes falls far below $595, if it ever actually was above it to begin with. Which it kind of can't be if VaultBox is going to make any money on this.
Wholesale. Retail.
????? I don't know anyone who knows what they are doing who pay NGC retail. Especially not for bullion. EBay prices are good proxy for actual retail, as is hammer price at an auction house. I wouldn't value anything I pulled out of one of these boxes at the prices they are using. Neither would you. And neither would they, if their Instant Offer is not at that level.
So, if you want to play games, and say that 3 coins that they are selling to me for $595, and would buy back for $300, that I could buy on eBay for $400, are worth $750 because the NGC Guide says so, I'm not going to argue with you, but it's BS. And it's not how they are turning straw into gold, because no one would buy these coins from them at the values they are assigning. Which is why they are trying to sell them like this.
@jmlanzaf said:
All the naysayers and yet there's more interest in this than any recent Mint offerings.
Yes, there is a ton of interest, as well as an element of FOMO. Unlike the Mint, though, there won't be an canceling of orders if they turn out to be available after 20 minutes. This is not going to be a flip. It's going to be an opportunity to be disappointed for the vast majority of lucky buyers.
@jmlanzaf said:
All the naysayers and yet there's more interest in this than any recent Mint offerings.
Not only that, it looks like there'll be a lot of people who'll end up disappointed if it doesn't flop.
Not me. I'm just trying to help anyone who is interested in my opinion. I don't begrudge anyone the right to make a buck, am a great admirer of PT Barnum, and will never be accused of underestimating anyone's stupidity.
I am really, truly, very anxious to see what happens, and do not for one second doubt the bona fides of the people behind this. I have expressed my opinion, as others have observed, ad infinitum, of what I think of it as a value from the buyer's perspective. But I have never expressed an opinion regarding whether or not it will be a success.
I have no skin in the game, and no ill will towards any dealer trying to make a buck. That includes the TV guys. As @Cameonut observed, there are plenty of red flags here. For that, I applaud VaultBox for providing a TON of disclosure, which allowed the statisticians here to do their thing. I won't be disappointed if it flops, and won't be surprised, or disappointed, if it's an instant sell out.
@jmlanzaf said:
All the naysayers and yet there's more interest in this than any recent Mint offerings.
Not only that, it looks like there'll be a lot of people who'll end up disappointed if it doesn't flop.
Are you guys interpreting comments in this thread as “interest”? Or is there another indicator of demand that I’m not taking into consideration? Yes, @johnny010 and myself said we would purchase for experimental purposes, but I don’t recall many other posters indicating genuine interest and intent to purchase one of these. At a quantity of 800, I wouldn’t consider that to be a triumphant accomplishment if they were to sell out on the first day, that much is to be expected from a very limited product with an aggressive marketing campaign.
The reading comprehension sucks. Nobody doubts they will sell for the quick buck.
What is the damage to perceived value of moderns in the marketplace, that is the issue.
Also are more sellers encouraged by large stakeholders to grab interest by utilizing a sweepstakes. Will that affect the values down the road. Is the reward of a quick buck worth the disappointment of the prospective potential collector?
Joe Newb takes his $600 of moderns to the LCS and gets obliterated. Oh well the seller sold out! Cool!
@david3142 said:
You don’t need to do anything involving all combinations of coins. If there is no correlation between the groups the expectation of the sum is the sum of the expectations.
Something similar was my first run on it. However each of the groups’ values were severely skewed and the imprecise aspect of that didn’t set well with me. It actually bugged me half the weekend, as I have plans for doing more with it than the simplistic ROI cut-off. Plus it was an opportunity to generate a massive data set for another purpose.
That and the cut-over under-over proportion of every combination seemed easier to explain/argue.
Edited…
@david3142 said:
You mentioned that the expected value of the box is actually $850 based on NGC’s guide? I assume that’s the sum of all 2400 coins / 800?
I must have overlooked this part. Not following here. What’s the $850? I think the raw mean value per box was something like $725. But the substantial skew really influences that mean to the point of silliness.
Thanks very much for your response (and your initial work!)
You wrote that “you will win $255 with your scratch-off”. I interpreted that to mean that 595+255 was the expected value of the box. I apologize if I misinterpreted that. $725 isn’t too bad for the consumer. I would guess any piece could be resold at 60-70% of published values so that’s an EV of about $470. It would be fun to plot a histogram with both frequency of box value and contribution to EV. Only 1/800 boxes will have that $20K coin but it contributes about $25 to the EV total!
The $725 is generous, and probably fictional in the real world, if it's based on NGC values, but the skew he's talking about is the deviation between the few coins at the top and all the others. After you take them out, as you must because only 3 people out of 800 will get them, the average value for the remaining 797 boxes falls far below $595, if it ever actually was above it to begin with. Which it kind of can't be if VaultBox is going to make any money on this.
Wholesale. Retail.
????? I don't know anyone who knows what they are doing who pay NGC retail. Especially not for bullion. EBay prices are good proxy for actual retail, as is hammer price at an auction house. I wouldn't value anything I pulled out of one of these boxes at the prices they are using. Neither would you. And neither would they, if their Instant Offer is not at that level.
So, if you want to play games, and say that 3 coins that they are selling to me for $595, and would buy back for $300, that I could buy on eBay for $400, are worth $750 because the NGC Guide says so, I'm not going to argue with you, but it's BS. And it's not how they are turning straw into gold, because no one would buy these coins from them at the values they are assigning. Which is why they are trying to sell them like this.
Not what I said. So many wasted words.
You said that the average price could not be $595 or how would they make money. Business 101. You buy a $1 cup of coffee. It can't be worth $1 or how do they make any money?
By the extension of your logic, you overpay every time you buy something.
Wholesale. Retail.
No. I'd be overpaying if I paid $2 for the same cup of coffee. If $1 is the going price for a cup of coffee, it is what it is. I don't expect anyone to work for free. That includes the coffee company.
Based on the inventory they published, no one who knows what they are doing would pay anywhere near $595 for these boxes, unless they knew ahead of time they were going to receive one of the 150 top boxes. People will be overpaying for all 800 boxes for the chance to receive one of the 20% of boxes where they won't get hurt. They are selling $1 cups of coffee for $1.20+.
Devil's advocacy aside, you know where I stand. Are you are buyer, or just someone who enjoys engaging with me?
@david3142 said:
You don’t need to do anything involving all combinations of coins. If there is no correlation between the groups the expectation of the sum is the sum of the expectations.
Something similar was my first run on it. However each of the groups’ values were severely skewed and the imprecise aspect of that didn’t set well with me. It actually bugged me half the weekend, as I have plans for doing more with it than the simplistic ROI cut-off. Plus it was an opportunity to generate a massive data set for another purpose.
That and the cut-over under-over proportion of every combination seemed easier to explain/argue.
Edited…
@david3142 said:
You mentioned that the expected value of the box is actually $850 based on NGC’s guide? I assume that’s the sum of all 2400 coins / 800?
I must have overlooked this part. Not following here. What’s the $850? I think the raw mean value per box was something like $725. But the substantial skew really influences that mean to the point of silliness.
Thanks very much for your response (and your initial work!)
You wrote that “you will win $255 with your scratch-off”. I interpreted that to mean that 595+255 was the expected value of the box. I apologize if I misinterpreted that. $725 isn’t too bad for the consumer. I would guess any piece could be resold at 60-70% of published values so that’s an EV of about $470. It would be fun to plot a histogram with both frequency of box value and contribution to EV. Only 1/800 boxes will have that $20K coin but it contributes about $25 to the EV total!
The $725 is generous, and probably fictional in the real world, if it's based on NGC values, but the skew he's talking about is the deviation between the few coins at the top and all the others. After you take them out, as you must because only 3 people out of 800 will get them, the average value for the remaining 797 boxes falls far below $595, if it ever actually was above it to begin with. Which it kind of can't be if VaultBox is going to make any money on this.
Wholesale. Retail.
????? I don't know anyone who knows what they are doing who pay NGC retail. Especially not for bullion. EBay prices are good proxy for actual retail, as is hammer price at an auction house. I wouldn't value anything I pulled out of one of these boxes at the prices they are using. Neither would you. And neither would they, if their Instant Offer is not at that level.
So, if you want to play games, and say that 3 coins that they are selling to me for $595, and would buy back for $300, that I could buy on eBay for $400, are worth $750 because the NGC Guide says so, I'm not going to argue with you, but it's BS. And it's not how they are turning straw into gold, because no one would buy these coins from them at the values they are assigning. Which is why they are trying to sell them like this.
Not what I said. So many wasted words.
You said that the average price could not be $595 or how would they make money. Business 101. You buy a $1 cup of coffee. It can't be worth $1 or how do they make any money?
By the extension of your logic, you overpay every time you buy something.
Wholesale. Retail.
No. I'd be overpaying if I paid $2 for the same cup of coffee. If $1 is the going price for a cup of coffee, it is what it is. I don't expect anyone to work for free. That includes the coffee company.
Based on the inventory they published, no one who knows what they are doing would pay anywhere near $595 for these boxes, unless they knew ahead of time they were going to receive one of the 150 top boxes. People will be overpaying for all 800 boxes for the chance to receive one of the 20% of boxes where they won't get hurt. They are selling $1 cups of coffee for $1.20+.
Devil's advocacy aside, you know where I stand. Are you are buyer, or just someone who enjoys engaging with me?
In my opinion, you two are a match made infinitum🤣😂
Another potential factor is what the market will pay for coins with this "new" grading system. The assumption is that everyone will understand that a NGCX 10 = 70, NGCX 9.9 = 69, etc. That might be a challenge, I know the idea is that the NGCX grading scale is more aligned with sports cards and comics. I wonder if these NGCX graded coins might end up being sold alongside those items and not as accepted in the traditional coin venues.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
@david3142 said:
You don’t need to do anything involving all combinations of coins. If there is no correlation between the groups the expectation of the sum is the sum of the expectations.
Something similar was my first run on it. However each of the groups’ values were severely skewed and the imprecise aspect of that didn’t set well with me. It actually bugged me half the weekend, as I have plans for doing more with it than the simplistic ROI cut-off. Plus it was an opportunity to generate a massive data set for another purpose.
That and the cut-over under-over proportion of every combination seemed easier to explain/argue.
Edited…
@david3142 said:
You mentioned that the expected value of the box is actually $850 based on NGC’s guide? I assume that’s the sum of all 2400 coins / 800?
I must have overlooked this part. Not following here. What’s the $850? I think the raw mean value per box was something like $725. But the substantial skew really influences that mean to the point of silliness.
Thanks very much for your response (and your initial work!)
You wrote that “you will win $255 with your scratch-off”. I interpreted that to mean that 595+255 was the expected value of the box. I apologize if I misinterpreted that. $725 isn’t too bad for the consumer. I would guess any piece could be resold at 60-70% of published values so that’s an EV of about $470. It would be fun to plot a histogram with both frequency of box value and contribution to EV. Only 1/800 boxes will have that $20K coin but it contributes about $25 to the EV total!
The $725 is generous, and probably fictional in the real world, if it's based on NGC values, but the skew he's talking about is the deviation between the few coins at the top and all the others. After you take them out, as you must because only 3 people out of 800 will get them, the average value for the remaining 797 boxes falls far below $595, if it ever actually was above it to begin with. Which it kind of can't be if VaultBox is going to make any money on this.
Wholesale. Retail.
????? I don't know anyone who knows what they are doing who pay NGC retail. Especially not for bullion. EBay prices are good proxy for actual retail, as is hammer price at an auction house. I wouldn't value anything I pulled out of one of these boxes at the prices they are using. Neither would you. And neither would they, if their Instant Offer is not at that level.
So, if you want to play games, and say that 3 coins that they are selling to me for $595, and would buy back for $300, that I could buy on eBay for $400, are worth $750 because the NGC Guide says so, I'm not going to argue with you, but it's BS. And it's not how they are turning straw into gold, because no one would buy these coins from them at the values they are assigning. Which is why they are trying to sell them like this.
Not what I said. So many wasted words.
You said that the average price could not be $595 or how would they make money. Business 101. You buy a $1 cup of coffee. It can't be worth $1 or how do they make any money?
By the extension of your logic, you overpay every time you buy something.
Wholesale. Retail.
No. I'd be overpaying if I paid $2 for the same cup of coffee. If $1 is the going price for a cup of coffee, it is what it is. I don't expect anyone to work for free. That includes the coffee company.
Based on the inventory they published, no one who knows what they are doing would pay anywhere near $595 for these boxes, unless they knew ahead of time they were going to receive one of the 150 top boxes. People will be overpaying for all 800 boxes for the chance to receive one of the 20% of boxes where they won't get hurt. They are selling $1 cups of coffee for $1.20+.
Devil's advocacy aside, you know where I stand. Are you are buyer, or just someone who enjoys engaging with me?
Oh. I don't enjoy this nonsense. Just correcting fallacies.
What fallacy? Are you a buyer? The fact that retailers make a markup over wholesale does not render excessive markups any less excessive. This is clearly not bullion being sold at an ordinary markup, with an at cost lottery ticket kicker.
The TV guys also invariably point to a third party inflated value to show what a bargain their prices are. Yet TV is the most expensive way to sell, and EVERYTHING they sell is overpriced, even when it is objectively nice, like some of Rick Tomaska's stuff.
Just because they point to something even more overpriced to try to induce people to "buy now, before they are gone, the phones are ringing off the hook" doesn't make what I'm saying any less true. Nor does the fact that literally thousands of people buy at those inflated prices make that the market, as evidenced by the fact that you and I cannot sell at those prices.
Now tell me, how many graded bullion do you sell at NGC Guide, if any? If that's the retail market, why do you sell hundreds of slabbed bullion items on eBay for less? You're not correcting any fallacies, and, by your silence, I'm pretty sure you're not a buyer. For some reason, you just feel a need to pimp for this.
It's not necessary. Those suffering from FOMO will be in regardless. Others, apparently including you, will be taking a hard pass.
@kranky said:
Another potential factor is what the market will pay for coins with this "new" grading system. The assumption is that everyone will understand that a NGCX 10 = 70, NGCX 9.9 = 69, etc. That might be a challenge, I know the idea is that the NGCX grading scale is more aligned with sports cards and comics. I wonder if these NGCX graded coins might end up being sold alongside those items and not as accepted in the traditional coin venues.
I don't think this will really be an issue. If these aren't accepted, you'll always be able to cross them back to NGC.
It's a gimmick to try to draw in the card crowd. If it works, great, we have a new potential market. If not, nothing lost. It's not like 9.9s will sell at a discount to 69s, because dealers will just arbitrage between the two and keep the values in line.
If a substantial new market does not develop, this will just fizzle and die, like so many other ideas that failed to catch on.
Catching up with the hype. In the spirit of my posts that should make Series 2 a better deal... here's my recommendation for them to update the "out of stock" message for next time. I'm probably going to be watching the buy-page just to see if/when it sells out... or if the page crashes. (most of that is sarcasm, by the way)
@Arkie said:
Catching up with the hype. In the spirit of my posts that should make Series 2 a better deal... here's my recommendation for them to update the "out of stock" message for next time. I'm probably going to be watching the buy-page just to see if/when it sells out... or if the page crashes. (most of that is sarcasm, by the way)
It could very well happen, depending on the capacity of their server, and just how many people hit it right at 9:00. Beyond that, 800 is a tiny number, given the hype and exposure, so it could very easily sell out, very early. Totally depends on the relationship between rationality and FOMO.
If I had to guess, I'd say FOMO is going to win, at least for the first round. If this develops new collectors who want to keep what they buy, this could have legs, even at inflated prices. I'm sure that's the hope and the goal. But, if it attracts a bunch of gambling card collectors, they will likely be disappointed in the resale value of bullion they have no interest in keeping, and that could very well dampen enthusiasm for subsequent series.
P.S. No way Series 2 will be a better deal, in spite of your analysis. They said in the interview that the plan is to expand their margins over time, not contract them.
If this is successful, the message will be that they could get away with making futures series worse deals, not better. After all, this will be pointless for them if they can't use it to sell to new collectors at better prices than they can currently get.
If people are unhappy with the product, then there won't be future series. They claim to be working on very thin margins now. Whether or not that is true, no way they are going to bother launching future series at even lower margins, if that would be necessary to sell them.
@NJCoin said:
P.S. No way Series 2 will be a better deal, in spite of your analysis.
Yeah that was one of the sarcasm parts lol. I can’t see the odds getting any better. The only thing I think could change it is if they want to expand to say 1500 boxes in a series, they would need to do some sweetening I think to test how far over 800 they could go.
@NJCoin said:
P.S. No way Series 2 will be a better deal, in spite of your analysis.
Yeah that was one of the sarcasm parts lol. I can’t see the odds getting any better. The only thing I think could change it is if they want to expand to say 1500 boxes in a series, they would need to do some sweetening I think to test how far over 800 they could go.
Agreed. But they already claimed that they are practically giving away this one, and that their plan is to ramp up margins over time. No idea whether or not this one will be successful, but, if it is, they are going to want to make what they can on each unit, rather than making them great deals for the buyers, and making it up on volume.
Which, honestly, is smart. Why push to double the volume at half the margin if they can just keep cranking out 800 at ever increasing margins, until buyers finally resist?
At which point they'll know what the market will bear. For you and me, we are already well past that point. For others, we'll see tomorrow.
@spacehayduke said:
Now that the cat is out of the bag, here is my data, assuming NGC retail for each coin. I did not want to present this until after the offering closed but now I feel forced to. The post above should have been kept quiet in order to not bias decisions on whether to be in or not in the offering IMO.
Why? Why not bias decisions if a numerical analysis shows that it's a bad deal? What is your interest in not dissuading people from participating, after you did the work to see what a bad deal it is? Or to provide the benefit of your work to the community in case anyone wants to take the plunge in spite of the bad economics?
I could see not wanting to share work if it would lead to increased competition, but are you honestly a buyer based on the analysis you performed? If not, why not let others benefit from your work?
Do you have an interest in the success or failure of VaultBox? Is there any reason you would want it to succeed, at the expense of less sophisticated people on this forum, if you did "valuable" work and determined, objectively, that it's a bad deal?
Sheesh.
Sheesh, My only interest in this is to to understand what is going on and how the seller is going to play this out. But these kinds of quantitative analyses are based on assumptions and the assumptions provide bias that can lead folks with potential interests in this to make a decision that will be not necessarily the ones they would have made without it. So these types of quantitative analyses should never have been released until the sell was over and everyone should do their own analysis. Sheesh.
We both assume this is going to be completely random for example. What if randomness is only part of the approach? What if they have decided to pair coins of different value from the 3 groups such that most will lose a small amount and a certain fraction will make out fine based on the value of the 'rare' example in their trio? Neither my analysis, nor the one from the other poster on their first post, accounted for that. Such a model could be constructed and it is very well possible the seller did. It could have been worked that way - balance the coins from the 3 categories so no one gets slammed and some make out great. But now with this bias in the models presented here, it will affect some potential participants. It was the wrong thing to do IMO and these findings by me or the other poster should be largely ignored until the sell is over.................. Sheesh.
@spacehayduke said:
Now that the cat is out of the bag, here is my data, assuming NGC retail for each coin. I did not want to present this until after the offering closed but now I feel forced to. The post above should have been kept quiet in order to not bias decisions on whether to be in or not in the offering IMO.
Why? Why not bias decisions if a numerical analysis shows that it's a bad deal? What is your interest in not dissuading people from participating, after you did the work to see what a bad deal it is? Or to provide the benefit of your work to the community in case anyone wants to take the plunge in spite of the bad economics?
I could see not wanting to share work if it would lead to increased competition, but are you honestly a buyer based on the analysis you performed? If not, why not let others benefit from your work?
Do you have an interest in the success or failure of VaultBox? Is there any reason you would want it to succeed, at the expense of less sophisticated people on this forum, if you did "valuable" work and determined, objectively, that it's a bad deal?
Sheesh.
Sheesh, My only interest in this is to to understand what is going on and how the seller is going to play this out. But these kinds of quantitative analyses are based on assumptions and the assumptions provide bias that can lead folks with potential interests in this to make a decision that will be not necessarily the ones they would have made without it. So it should never has been released until the sell was over and everyone should do their own analysis. Sheesh.
We both assume this is going to be completely random for example. What if randomness is only part of the approach? What if they have decided to pair coins of different value from the 3 groups such that most will lose a small amount and a certain fraction will make out fine based on the value of the 'rare' example in their trio? Neither my analysis, nor the one from the other poster on their first post, accounted for that. Such a model could be constructed and it is very well possible the seller did. It could have been worked that way - balance the coins from the 3 categories so no one gets slammed and some make out great. But now with this bias in the models presented here, it will affect some potential participants. It was the wrong thing to do IMO and these findings by me or the other poster should be largely ignored until the sell is over.................. Sheesh.
Very fair points. But, we really have no choice but to take them at their word. And they claim the 3 groups are fully randomized. So that's what you went with. I'm pretty sure you are correct.
As I said before, I could see not sharing if you planned on participating and didn't want to encourage competition. I don't get the opposite, but I respect your point.
@spacehayduke said:
So, I am curious, suddenly you post about 100 posts to this thread, yet in 12 years here on the boards (you started here in 2011), you posted 150 posts. Do you have some bone to pick with Minshull? It sure seems that way given your posts on this thread that has prolonged with with lots of negative vitriol. Explain?
Best, SH.
Not at all. Don't know him from a hole in the wall. If you went back and looked at all my posts, you'd notice that they come in spurts when something catches my attention, like this. Also, I'm sure a disproportionate amount of my current posts are just back and forth with @jmlanzaf.
No bone to pick, and I wish them well. I'm sure their market isn't the old farts here, so I doubt what I'm saying is going to have any impact at all. Just sharing opinion and engaging in spirited debate.
If I save someone a few hundred bucks who was tempted because they didn't think things through, I'll consider that my good deed for the year. But I'm under no illusion that my posts are going to impact the success of this one way or the other, nor do I intend them to.
I really don't have an issue with the TV guys either, although I know many on here do. There is a place for everyone, and everyone is entitled to make a living.
Very fair points. But, we really have no choice but to take them at their word. And they claim the 3 groups are fully randomized. So that's what you went with. I'm pretty sure you are correct.
As I said before, I could see not sharing if you planned on participating and didn't want to encourage competition. I don't get the opposite, but I respect your point.
I may or may not participate. I certainly don't want to lose $300 on coins I have no interest in (even if it is not that much money), but at the same time, that is a 1% chance assuming complete randomness which equals the 1% chance of making a big win. If I am correct in my concern that there is some non-random selecting they are doing, then 70% or so will lose a little and the others will make out fine based on the value of the single rare coin in their box. So it might not be such a bad thing to play. But honestly, I has zero interest in these coins so probably won't play...............
Very fair points. But, we really have no choice but to take them at their word. And they claim the 3 groups are fully randomized. So that's what you went with. I'm pretty sure you are correct.
As I said before, I could see not sharing if you planned on participating and didn't want to encourage competition. I don't get the opposite, but I respect your point.
I may or may not participate. I certainly don't want to lose $300 on coins I have no interest in (even if it is not that much money), but at the same time, that is a 1% chance assuming complete randomness which equals the 1% chance of making a big win. If I am correct in my concern that there is some non-random selecting they are doing, then 70% or so will lose a little and the others will make out fine based on the value of the single rare coin in their box. So it might not be such a bad thing to play. But honestly, I has zero interest in these coins so probably won't play...............
I totally agree, except I think that their values are inflated and that it will be totally random. As a result, my disagreement with you is slight, and only around the edges. My sense is that the odds of losing will be closer to 80%, and far more than 1% will lose a lot, as measured by more than $200 out of the $600.
I think around 20% will be worth at least $600, but very few by a lot, since the upside is $20K. To account for that, and the other mid four figure coins, very few boxes will even be worth a few hundred more than the $600. So, due to the poor odds and the fact that the only coin I am REALLY interested in is the single biggie, this just has no attraction to me.
Don't get me wrong. I enjoy a gamble as much as the next guy. If the odds were better and the values weren't as inflated, I'd play just for the thrill and the shot at a nice score. But, I'm just not there, and the marketing, such as the "fake" PWCC unboxing, just gave me a bad vibe.
The fact that there is no regulation around this also makes me nervous, since they literally could do anything they want, with no oversight. The PWCC unboxing was just one very public, ill conceived example. Now it turns out they also ran a limited pre-sale through PWCC, the same folks who unboxed a $3K coin, and then claimed it was a mock-up when questioned.
What's the value of a fictional unboxing to anyone watching it? And why wasn't it disclosed as such when it was posted? Because this is unregulated, and they didn't have to. That's why. And that will apply to anything else they do with this that anyone doesn't like.
Red flags to me. Not to someone less skeptical. And that's perfectly fine. I might be worried about nothing. Or not.
Lots of folks, including some very sharp ones, thought earning 18% lending crypto was a legit, risk free thing. I don't judge. I just point out things that don't feel right to me, and let people make their own decisions.
Very fair points. But, we really have no choice but to take them at their word. And they claim the 3 groups are fully randomized. So that's what you went with. I'm pretty sure you are correct.
As I said before, I could see not sharing if you planned on participating and didn't want to encourage competition. I don't get the opposite, but I respect your point.
I may or may not participate. I certainly don't want to lose $300 on coins I have no interest in (even if it is not that much money), but at the same time, that is a 1% chance assuming complete randomness which equals the 1% chance of making a big win. If I am correct in my concern that there is some non-random selecting they are doing, then 70% or so will lose a little and the others will make out fine based on the value of the single rare coin in their box. So it might not be such a bad thing to play. But honestly, I has zero interest in these coins so probably won't play...............
I totally agree, except I think that their values are inflated and that it will be totally random. As a result, my disagreement with you is slight, and only around the edges. My sense is that the odds of losing will be closer to 80%, and far more than 1% will lose a lot, as measured by more than $200 out of the $600.
I think around 20% will be worth at least $600, but very few by a lot, since the upside is $20K. To account for that, and the other mid four figure coins, very few boxes will even be worth a few hundred more than the $600. So, due to the poor odds and the fact that the only coin I am REALLY interested in is the single biggie, this just has no attraction to me.
Don't get me wrong. I enjoy a gamble as much as the next guy. If the odds were better and the values weren't as inflated, I'd play just for the thrill and the shot at a nice score. But, I'm just not there, and the marketing, such as the "fake" PWCC unboxing, just gave me a bad vibe.
The fact that there is no regulation around this also makes me nervous, since they literally could do anything they want, with no oversight. The PWCC unboxing was just one very public, ill conceived example. Now it turns out they also ran a limited pre-sale through PWCC, the same folks who unboxed a $3K coin, and then claimed it was a mock-up when questioned.
What's the value of a fictional unboxing to anyone watching it? And why wasn't it disclosed as such when it was posted? Because this is unregulated, and they didn't have to. That's why. And that will apply to anything else they do with this that anyone doesn't like.
Red flags to me. Not to someone less skeptical. And that's perfectly fine. I might be worried about nothing. Or not.
Lots of folks, including some very sharp ones, thought earning 18% lending crypto was a legit, risk free thing. I don't judge. I just point out things that don't feel right to me, and let people make their own decisions.
So for the TLDR crowd like me please explain how do you know the unboxing was fictional? Your posts have become so frequent and soooo long that I skip over many of them to save time.😂🤣
Also there are a couple of other guys I have blocked so I don't read their posts.🙄
Hey, my friend!
Big topic, huh?
Well, for any unquestionable answers in all this mess.
My good friend, Shaun.
"Blueridgesilverhound" from YouTube.
He will probably solve all these crazy questions. He's the one that's really up on this topic.
He's the one that actually interviewed the co- owner of this product a couple of weeks ago.
Stay tuned with him and his say.
He'll have 90% of the answers to all our questions.
I hope anyway?
Thanks.
Take care and keep on hunting for the "W".
"Jesus died for you and for me, Thank you,Jesus"!!!
--- If it should happen I die and leave this world and you want to remember me. Please only remember my opening Sig Line.
@WQuarterFreddie said:
So for the TLDR crowd like me please explain how do you know the unboxing was fictional? Your posts have become so frequent and soooo long that I skip over many of them to save time.😂🤣
Also there are a couple of other guys I have blocked so I don't read their posts.🙄
@WQuarterFreddie said:
So for the TLDR crowd like me please explain how do you know the unboxing was fictional? Your posts have become so frequent and soooo long that I skip over many of them to save time.😂🤣
Also there are a couple of other guys I have blocked so I don't read their posts.🙄
Comments
68
Website still says "Series 1" will be released tomorrow. @DCW even posted a screenshot of it above.
The "Out of Stock" flag is likely just a placeholder for the upcoming "Add to Bag" button.
Are “sold out” and “out of stock” not synonymous?
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
oh ok I see what you guys are saying, but why not choose better words to be the "placeholder". "Out of stock" is the most creative thing they could use? I feel like confusion could be avoided if they had used something like, say, "currently unavailable"?
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Agreed but I think my "senior moment " is an error. Sorry for raising everyone's blood pressure today,😂🤣
69
FWIW, "Series 1" appears to be, or was, available for pre-sale at PWCC Marketplace.
Link
That said, the linked reference explicitly states that:
"VaultBox will provide additional purchasing opportunities at the official release on Jan. 25 via its website."
So what does that mean? If there are only X number of sets available and they all sell at the PWCC marketplace, then how can they have more to sell tomorrow?
I sense a large cluster (problem) tomorrow and the accompanying threads-from folks whining about getting aced out of their opportunity-arriving here on the forums shortly thereafter. Good luck with that.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
Yes, a quick sellout!
"Jesus died for you and for me, Thank you,Jesus"!!!
--- If it should happen I die and leave this world and you want to remember me. Please only remember my opening Sig Line.My take - some of the 'S1' boxes 'are/were' available on a pre-sale basis through PWCC. The balance, presumably the "lion's share", will be available directly from VB on 01/25/23.
Oh boy! here we go.....
Hey... it's all part of the hype!! FOMO! Everyone will be at the keyboard.... breathlessly waiting... just like the US Mint offerings!
70
"Ladies and Gentlemen, Start your Engines!"
Let's GO...
💥💥💥
"Jesus died for you and for me, Thank you,Jesus"!!!
--- If it should happen I die and leave this world and you want to remember me. Please only remember my opening Sig Line.So many red flags. There are no free lunches.
????? I don't know anyone who knows what they are doing who pay NGC retail. Especially not for bullion. EBay prices are good proxy for actual retail, as is hammer price at an auction house. I wouldn't value anything I pulled out of one of these boxes at the prices they are using. Neither would you. And neither would they, if their Instant Offer is not at that level.
So, if you want to play games, and say that 3 coins that they are selling to me for $595, and would buy back for $300, that I could buy on eBay for $400, are worth $750 because the NGC Guide says so, I'm not going to argue with you, but it's BS. And it's not how they are turning straw into gold, because no one would buy these coins from them at the values they are assigning. Which is why they are trying to sell them like this.
Yes, there is a ton of interest, as well as an element of FOMO. Unlike the Mint, though, there won't be an canceling of orders if they turn out to be available after 20 minutes. This is not going to be a flip. It's going to be an opportunity to be disappointed for the vast majority of lucky buyers.
People need to keep learning. Over and over and over and over and over.
Regardless of what anyone says - whoever did the marketing for this did a fantastic job.
Coin Photographer.
Not only that, it looks like there'll be a lot of people who'll end up disappointed if it doesn't flop.
Not me. I'm just trying to help anyone who is interested in my opinion. I don't begrudge anyone the right to make a buck, am a great admirer of PT Barnum, and will never be accused of underestimating anyone's stupidity.
I am really, truly, very anxious to see what happens, and do not for one second doubt the bona fides of the people behind this. I have expressed my opinion, as others have observed, ad infinitum, of what I think of it as a value from the buyer's perspective. But I have never expressed an opinion regarding whether or not it will be a success.
I have no skin in the game, and no ill will towards any dealer trying to make a buck. That includes the TV guys. As @Cameonut observed, there are plenty of red flags here. For that, I applaud VaultBox for providing a TON of disclosure, which allowed the statisticians here to do their thing. I won't be disappointed if it flops, and won't be surprised, or disappointed, if it's an instant sell out.
Ok, I got registered and a payment method set-up. Now I just have to decide wether to buy or not.
Someone else raised this point but buying the 1st issue might be worth it just for that reason,,,,,,
Are you guys interpreting comments in this thread as “interest”? Or is there another indicator of demand that I’m not taking into consideration? Yes, @johnny010 and myself said we would purchase for experimental purposes, but I don’t recall many other posters indicating genuine interest and intent to purchase one of these. At a quantity of 800, I wouldn’t consider that to be a triumphant accomplishment if they were to sell out on the first day, that much is to be expected from a very limited product with an aggressive marketing campaign.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
69
The reading comprehension sucks. Nobody doubts they will sell for the quick buck.
What is the damage to perceived value of moderns in the marketplace, that is the issue.
Also are more sellers encouraged by large stakeholders to grab interest by utilizing a sweepstakes. Will that affect the values down the road. Is the reward of a quick buck worth the disappointment of the prospective potential collector?
Joe Newb takes his $600 of moderns to the LCS and gets obliterated. Oh well the seller sold out! Cool!
No. I'd be overpaying if I paid $2 for the same cup of coffee. If $1 is the going price for a cup of coffee, it is what it is. I don't expect anyone to work for free. That includes the coffee company.
Based on the inventory they published, no one who knows what they are doing would pay anywhere near $595 for these boxes, unless they knew ahead of time they were going to receive one of the 150 top boxes. People will be overpaying for all 800 boxes for the chance to receive one of the 20% of boxes where they won't get hurt. They are selling $1 cups of coffee for $1.20+.
Devil's advocacy aside, you know where I stand. Are you are buyer, or just someone who enjoys engaging with me?
In my opinion, you two are a match made infinitum🤣😂
😂🤣
68
Another potential factor is what the market will pay for coins with this "new" grading system. The assumption is that everyone will understand that a NGCX 10 = 70, NGCX 9.9 = 69, etc. That might be a challenge, I know the idea is that the NGCX grading scale is more aligned with sports cards and comics. I wonder if these NGCX graded coins might end up being sold alongside those items and not as accepted in the traditional coin venues.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
What fallacy? Are you a buyer? The fact that retailers make a markup over wholesale does not render excessive markups any less excessive. This is clearly not bullion being sold at an ordinary markup, with an at cost lottery ticket kicker.
The TV guys also invariably point to a third party inflated value to show what a bargain their prices are. Yet TV is the most expensive way to sell, and EVERYTHING they sell is overpriced, even when it is objectively nice, like some of Rick Tomaska's stuff.
Just because they point to something even more overpriced to try to induce people to "buy now, before they are gone, the phones are ringing off the hook" doesn't make what I'm saying any less true. Nor does the fact that literally thousands of people buy at those inflated prices make that the market, as evidenced by the fact that you and I cannot sell at those prices.
Now tell me, how many graded bullion do you sell at NGC Guide, if any? If that's the retail market, why do you sell hundreds of slabbed bullion items on eBay for less? You're not correcting any fallacies, and, by your silence, I'm pretty sure you're not a buyer. For some reason, you just feel a need to pimp for this.
It's not necessary. Those suffering from FOMO will be in regardless. Others, apparently including you, will be taking a hard pass.
I don't think this will really be an issue. If these aren't accepted, you'll always be able to cross them back to NGC.
It's a gimmick to try to draw in the card crowd. If it works, great, we have a new potential market. If not, nothing lost. It's not like 9.9s will sell at a discount to 69s, because dealers will just arbitrage between the two and keep the values in line.
If a substantial new market does not develop, this will just fizzle and die, like so many other ideas that failed to catch on.
Catching up with the hype. In the spirit of my posts that should make Series 2 a better deal... here's my recommendation for them to update the "out of stock" message for next time. I'm probably going to be watching the buy-page just to see if/when it sells out... or if the page crashes. (most of that is sarcasm, by the way)
It could very well happen, depending on the capacity of their server, and just how many people hit it right at 9:00. Beyond that, 800 is a tiny number, given the hype and exposure, so it could very easily sell out, very early. Totally depends on the relationship between rationality and FOMO.
If I had to guess, I'd say FOMO is going to win, at least for the first round. If this develops new collectors who want to keep what they buy, this could have legs, even at inflated prices. I'm sure that's the hope and the goal. But, if it attracts a bunch of gambling card collectors, they will likely be disappointed in the resale value of bullion they have no interest in keeping, and that could very well dampen enthusiasm for subsequent series.
P.S. No way Series 2 will be a better deal, in spite of your analysis. They said in the interview that the plan is to expand their margins over time, not contract them.
If this is successful, the message will be that they could get away with making futures series worse deals, not better. After all, this will be pointless for them if they can't use it to sell to new collectors at better prices than they can currently get.
If people are unhappy with the product, then there won't be future series. They claim to be working on very thin margins now. Whether or not that is true, no way they are going to bother launching future series at even lower margins, if that would be necessary to sell them.
Yeah that was one of the sarcasm parts lol. I can’t see the odds getting any better. The only thing I think could change it is if they want to expand to say 1500 boxes in a series, they would need to do some sweetening I think to test how far over 800 they could go.
Agreed. But they already claimed that they are practically giving away this one, and that their plan is to ramp up margins over time. No idea whether or not this one will be successful, but, if it is, they are going to want to make what they can on each unit, rather than making them great deals for the buyers, and making it up on volume.
Which, honestly, is smart. Why push to double the volume at half the margin if they can just keep cranking out 800 at ever increasing margins, until buyers finally resist?
At which point they'll know what the market will bear. For you and me, we are already well past that point. For others, we'll see tomorrow.
Sheesh, My only interest in this is to to understand what is going on and how the seller is going to play this out. But these kinds of quantitative analyses are based on assumptions and the assumptions provide bias that can lead folks with potential interests in this to make a decision that will be not necessarily the ones they would have made without it. So these types of quantitative analyses should never have been released until the sell was over and everyone should do their own analysis. Sheesh.
We both assume this is going to be completely random for example. What if randomness is only part of the approach? What if they have decided to pair coins of different value from the 3 groups such that most will lose a small amount and a certain fraction will make out fine based on the value of the 'rare' example in their trio? Neither my analysis, nor the one from the other poster on their first post, accounted for that. Such a model could be constructed and it is very well possible the seller did. It could have been worked that way - balance the coins from the 3 categories so no one gets slammed and some make out great. But now with this bias in the models presented here, it will affect some potential participants. It was the wrong thing to do IMO and these findings by me or the other poster should be largely ignored until the sell is over.................. Sheesh.
.
Very fair points. But, we really have no choice but to take them at their word. And they claim the 3 groups are fully randomized. So that's what you went with. I'm pretty sure you are correct.
As I said before, I could see not sharing if you planned on participating and didn't want to encourage competition. I don't get the opposite, but I respect your point.
Not at all. Don't know him from a hole in the wall. If you went back and looked at all my posts, you'd notice that they come in spurts when something catches my attention, like this. Also, I'm sure a disproportionate amount of my current posts are just back and forth with @jmlanzaf.
No bone to pick, and I wish them well. I'm sure their market isn't the old farts here, so I doubt what I'm saying is going to have any impact at all. Just sharing opinion and engaging in spirited debate.
If I save someone a few hundred bucks who was tempted because they didn't think things through, I'll consider that my good deed for the year. But I'm under no illusion that my posts are going to impact the success of this one way or the other, nor do I intend them to.
I really don't have an issue with the TV guys either, although I know many on here do. There is a place for everyone, and everyone is entitled to make a living.
I may or may not participate. I certainly don't want to lose $300 on coins I have no interest in (even if it is not that much money), but at the same time, that is a 1% chance assuming complete randomness which equals the 1% chance of making a big win. If I am correct in my concern that there is some non-random selecting they are doing, then 70% or so will lose a little and the others will make out fine based on the value of the single rare coin in their box. So it might not be such a bad thing to play. But honestly, I has zero interest in these coins so probably won't play...............
I totally agree, except I think that their values are inflated and that it will be totally random. As a result, my disagreement with you is slight, and only around the edges. My sense is that the odds of losing will be closer to 80%, and far more than 1% will lose a lot, as measured by more than $200 out of the $600.
I think around 20% will be worth at least $600, but very few by a lot, since the upside is $20K. To account for that, and the other mid four figure coins, very few boxes will even be worth a few hundred more than the $600. So, due to the poor odds and the fact that the only coin I am REALLY interested in is the single biggie, this just has no attraction to me.
Don't get me wrong. I enjoy a gamble as much as the next guy. If the odds were better and the values weren't as inflated, I'd play just for the thrill and the shot at a nice score. But, I'm just not there, and the marketing, such as the "fake" PWCC unboxing, just gave me a bad vibe.
The fact that there is no regulation around this also makes me nervous, since they literally could do anything they want, with no oversight. The PWCC unboxing was just one very public, ill conceived example. Now it turns out they also ran a limited pre-sale through PWCC, the same folks who unboxed a $3K coin, and then claimed it was a mock-up when questioned.
What's the value of a fictional unboxing to anyone watching it? And why wasn't it disclosed as such when it was posted? Because this is unregulated, and they didn't have to. That's why. And that will apply to anything else they do with this that anyone doesn't like.
Red flags to me. Not to someone less skeptical. And that's perfectly fine. I might be worried about nothing. Or not.
Lots of folks, including some very sharp ones, thought earning 18% lending crypto was a legit, risk free thing. I don't judge. I just point out things that don't feel right to me, and let people make their own decisions.
I'm still not on board with the NGCX system just yet (give me time).
And if I'm gonna gamble, and buy the proverbial "pig in a poke", sight-unseen, then $20-ish is my upper limit, not $595.
(Never mind the fact that it's bullion in there. Nope. I just wouldn't be a blind buyer, willing to gamble that much, is all. Just my take on it.)
Looks like I wasn't the only one confused by the Out of Stock status!! See this update on the website:
**Please note “Out of Stock” is only a placeholder and will be replaced at the scheduled release time above
$595.00
Out of stock
So for the TLDR crowd like me please explain how do you know the unboxing was fictional? Your posts have become so frequent and soooo long that I skip over many of them to save time.😂🤣
Also there are a couple of other guys I have blocked so I don't read their posts.🙄
'And/or' the VB people have been monitoring this thread.
Note the use of "placeholder", which was used earlier in this thread. Coincidence?
Hey, my friend!
Big topic, huh?
Well, for any unquestionable answers in all this mess.
My good friend, Shaun.
"Blueridgesilverhound" from YouTube.
He will probably solve all these crazy questions. He's the one that's really up on this topic.
He's the one that actually interviewed the co- owner of this product a couple of weeks ago.
Stay tuned with him and his say.
He'll have 90% of the answers to all our questions.
I hope anyway?
Thanks.
Take care and keep on hunting for the "W".
"Jesus died for you and for me, Thank you,Jesus"!!!
--- If it should happen I die and leave this world and you want to remember me. Please only remember my opening Sig Line.67
I am NOT criticizing the presented analyses.
Further, I am NOT saying that it will have a significant impact on the 'outcome/conclusion'.
However, I did find the following specific to complete randomization.
Source: https://vaultbox.com/how-vaultbox-works/
To me, this indicates that the assignment is not fully randomized.
Prior post.
Thank you! I do remember seeing this post but never enlarged the font to read the small print so I missed it. 😉
They state that the box will be resealed and put back in to the pile for distribution so I don't see why it's a big deal. 🤔
No different than most companies advertising their product in my opinion 😉