These guys are not in the hall of fame
BaltimoreYankee
Posts: 3,024 ✭✭✭✭✭
A recent post about not putting "OC" in the title of an eBay ad got me thinking of my listing pet peeve: Putting "HOF" in a title of a card of a non hall of famer. I just searched under "Munson HOF" and got 86 items (granted, a few were a lot of multiple cards with actual HOFers). Likewise, "Hodges HOF" gave me 90 results. I realize it is ignorance on the seller's part most of the time but still, if you're going to list that in the title, at least know if it's true.
Daniel
0
Comments
BIN - $150
<< <i>1976 Topps Tippy Martinez PSA 7 YANKEES HOF CY MVP
BIN - $150 >>
LMAO!
<< <i>1976 Topps Tippy Martinez PSA 7 YANKEES HOF CY MVP
BIN - $150 >>
The only thing you left out is "NOT PSA 10". That one is my particular pet peeve. I sometimes have to add - "PSA 8" and - "PSA 9" to my searches to get rid of the spam.
<< <i> I sometimes have to add - "PSA 8" and - "PSA 9" to my searches to get rid of the spam. >>
Hmmm..... I may have to change my PSA 10 auctions where I put "NOT PSA 8".
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
<< <i>People who type falsehoods on the internet should have their offending digits lopped off. >>
I read the same thing on Uthman ibn Affan's Twitter feed last week.
Not to defend all examples, but on the football side of the hobby I encounter "HOF" from time to time that refers to the Collegiate Football Hall of Fame vs. the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
Universities, states, and other entities do have Halls of Fame... so perhaps that explains away at least some usage.
Naturally there are those who just assume a guy like Thurman Munson is in Cooperstown... innocent mistake.
But I'm sure there are those who are knowingly just keyword spamming. I never understood why people do this. If I am explicitly searching eBay for a "1958 Topps Jim Brown PSA 8", a sellers deception isn't going to lead me to suddenly bid on a "NOT PSA 8", "should be a PSA 8", or "BVG 8 = PSA 8" offering.
Snorto~
I completely agree that everyone should have to disclose the presence of a qualifier on the grade in the listing title, no question.
But, I expected that almost no one included "HOF" in their search terms when looking for a card. I don't really see the point myself, since it would exclude listings that would fit my search target, and might include items that don't. Do many of you specifically search HOF on a regular basis?
To me, it is quite often a waste of character allotment when creating your title. I think it is more advantageous to include something that is more likely to be used as a search term by a potential buyer. For example, definitely means writing both "O-Pee-Chee" as well as "OPC" to get both searches. Maybe this means including both the full year and the abbreviation, such as "1968" and "68" (should not be putting years in that are spam though, such as including an additional year beyond what the real year is). If you can't come up with something like that, then next choice is adding something that might draw searchers to click on your item title. For hypothetical example, if I see something like "1968 Topps Nolan Ryan PSA 8 HOF" vs. "1968 Topps Nolan Ryan PSA 8 NQ", I feel that while the searcher likely did not include "HOF" or "NQ" in his search terms, the buyer is more likely to click the link with "NQ" in it (obviously anyone looking for a PSA 8 Ryan RC will check both of them out, but I'm just trying to illustrate a point here). I've used HOF in some of my titles on rare/infrequent occasion, but usually it takes a lot for me to be stumped as far as coming up with a better choice for those 3 letter spots.
I'm not supporting the use of HOF when the player is not HOF, but am suggesting there's better ways to write your item's title regardless.
<< <i>I completely agree that everyone should have to disclose the presence of a qualifier on the grade in the listing title, no question.
But, I expected that almost no one included "HOF" in their search terms when looking for a card. I don't really see the point myself, since it would exclude listings that would fit my search target, and might include items that don't. Do many of you specifically search HOF on a regular basis?
To me, it is quite often a waste of character allotment when creating your title. I think it is more advantageous to include something that is more likely to be used as a search term by a potential buyer. For example, definitely means writing both "O-Pee-Chee" as well as "OPC" to get both searches. Maybe this means including both the full year and the abbreviation, such as "1968" and "68" (should not be putting years in that are spam though, such as including an additional year beyond what the real year is). If you can't come up with something like that, then next choice is adding something that might draw searchers to click on your item title. For hypothetical example, if I see something like "1968 Topps Nolan Ryan PSA 8 HOF" vs. "1968 Topps Nolan Ryan PSA 8 NQ", I feel that while the searcher likely did not include "HOF" or "NQ" in his search terms, the buyer is more likely to click the link with "NQ" in it (obviously anyone looking for a PSA 8 Ryan RC will check both of them out, but I'm just trying to illustrate a point here). I've used HOF in some of my titles on rare/infrequent occasion, but usually it takes a lot for me to be stumped as far as coming up with a better choice for those 3 letter spots.
I'm not supporting the use of HOF when the player is not HOF, but am suggesting there's better ways to write your item's title regardless. >>
Some people specifically collect HOF players, so it makes sense to add it to the title provided the player is actually IN the HOF.
==> he should be in
Ebay Store:
Probstein123
phone: 973 747 6304
email: rickprobstein1@gmail.com
Probstein123 is actively accepting CONSIGNMENTS !!
<< <i>Some people specifically collect HOF players, so it makes sense to add it to the title provided the player is actually IN the HOF. >>
I agree with you. Do those collectors search for cards of the players by including HOF in their search terms though? As mentioned above, wouldn't doing so exclude items from your results that you would have been interested in? And if you are searching for a name because you are a HOF collector but not using it in your search terms, you'd already be aware that he was in the HOF anyway? Basically, wondering how the presence of HOF in the title can add to probability of a potential sale to a HOF collector.
I'm sure it is not possible, but I'd love to see analytical breakdown of secondary terms in a title of a particular item relative to how many people (a) searched those terms and (b) clicked on the listing when presented among the options. Primary terms would be the obvious: year, manufacturer, card number, player name, grading company, grade, and maybe condition.
Secondary terms, the ones I would be more interested in user data for would be things like: card, HOF, pop, baseball, name of team, abbreviation of year (w/o the preceding 18/19/20), vintage. Also would like to see differential between abbreviations vs. complete words on things like RC vs. Rookie or Rookie Card, NM vs. Near Mint (where spelling it out is truthful even though it turns up hits for those searching "mint" who did not want NM unless they include "-near" in their search), etc.
Back a few years ago when I was shopping Gretzky rookies, I had set up an excel worksheet where for a few months I took every sold Gretzky rookie listing title and put a column in for every different word within the title, and then tracked frequency of each term as well as sale price. With that info, I developed a pretty good idea of inclusion of which terms led to higher sale prices vs. exclusion of terms led to lower prices. When it came time to buy, I excluded some terms that had led to higher sales using the 'minus' in front of them, and I ended up scoring a couple really good deals. Seemed like overkill before I bought, but turns out I was happy the data led to great savings. Conversely, the information gave great basis when it came time to sell too.
<< <i>
But, I expected that almost no one included "HOF" in their search terms when looking for a card. >>
honestly i do often use hof if that fits my colletcing goals at the time. for instance i once worked on all the hall of fame cards from 1980-1983. so one search would be something like 1981 topps psa hof.
but i realize that im probablly in the minority.
I also don't think that inclusion of a term that the searcher has not used will exclude your item. For example, searching for "1951 Parkhurst PSA" will get listings that include those 3 terms PLUS any others. Adding HOF seems like a good way to draw in some eyeballs, while adding something of substance to a stock year-brand-number-name-grade listing title formula other than the mundane, overused, and unhelpful "WOW!" or "L@@K!".
I just did some comparison searching for a random card.
"1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA" gave me 31 results.
"1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA card" gave me 30 results even though almost none had the word "card" in the title.
"1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA Mets" gave me 18 results.
"1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA HOF" gave me 9 results.
"1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA Hall-of-Fame" gave me the same 9 results that HOF turned up.
"1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA Hall of Fame" gave the same results as the hyphenated version, as expected.
"1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA Hall" gave me 1 result, and I noticed it excluded some that were listed as "Hall-of-Fame".
So, with a ratio of 31:9, I think that based on this example, including HOF when you are searching for a card excludes a statistically significant volume of search hits. Including it certainly does not hinder your sales approach. I'd wonder where it would rank on inclusion for your title though compared to other potential words.
<< <i>"1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA" gave me 31 results.
"1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA HOF" gave me 9 results. >>
OK - that is true. But, you're making a mistake.
The difference is what's in the SEARCH vs what is in the TITLE.
A search that includes many terms will bring back few results - because any result must have ALL the terms in the search.
A title that has many words can be found by any search that includes all of the words in the title.
--
Let's say the title of the item is "1968 Topps Tom Seaver PSA HOF"
You'll be found if they search:
"Tom Seaver HOF"
"Tom Seaver PSA"
"PSA HOF"
"1968 HOF"
etc.
Adding terms to your title increases the total number of search combinations that will retrieve your item as a result. That, theoretically, means you'll get more views, which is good for sales.
It's a little confusing to explain - hope this makes sense.
EDIT: I am assuming we're talking about whether it's smart to include "HOF" in your listing title. When I use the term in my searches, I am doing so intentionally to try to limit my results.
Thanks Casey, I think you explained it just fine and we're still in agreement.
If you want to buy a card, refraining from including "HOF" in your search seems like the way to go.
For a sales listing, you can include "HOF" but some words turn up more hits than others. I just edited to add a couple lines. For example, "Mets" turns up twice as many cards as "HOF". This data is of course based on titles. I wish I could put together a similar type of list based on relative frequency of searched word.
<< <i>If you want to buy a card, refraining from including "HOF" in your search seems like the way to go. >>
Yep, mostly agree.
I'll just say - sometimes, with the character limit, there isn't room to include the city or team name, and "HOF" fits nicely. Better something than nothing.
As a searcher, I do sometimes use HOF because I purposely want to narrow down an otherwise large search. For example, I have a saved search for "HOF signed rookie" and "HOF rookie auto". "Rookie auto" and "signed rookie" are both such common terms that the results are hopelessly large without the inclusion of "HOF". So, it has use there.
Breaking down a listing title between the primary words that are search terms vs. the secondary half which are the ones to grab your attention within the search results enough to draw the view I suppose to figure out relative preferential weight of each secondary word, one could take a look at completed listings with comparable quantity of days on market, record the hit count for each one, and apply the quantity of page view hits to the inclusion of words within the title and look for trends from that. Somewhere, someone is probably getting paid for that type of market research.
<< <i>I completely agree that everyone should have to disclose the presence of a qualifier on the grade in the listing title, no question.
But, I expected that almost no one included "HOF" in their search terms when looking for a card. I don't really see the point myself, since it would exclude listings that would fit my search target, and might include items that don't. Do many of you specifically search HOF on a regular basis?
To me, it is quite often a waste of character allotment when creating your title. I think it is more advantageous to include something that is more likely to be used as a search term by a potential buyer. For example, definitely means writing both "O-Pee-Chee" as well as "OPC" to get both searches. Maybe this means including both the full year and the abbreviation, such as "1968" and "68" (should not be putting years in that are spam though, such as including an additional year beyond what the real year is). If you can't come up with something like that, then next choice is adding something that might draw searchers to click on your item title. For hypothetical example, if I see something like "1968 Topps Nolan Ryan PSA 8 HOF" vs. "1968 Topps Nolan Ryan PSA 8 NQ", I feel that while the searcher likely did not include "HOF" or "NQ" in his search terms, the buyer is more likely to click the link with "NQ" in it (obviously anyone looking for a PSA 8 Ryan RC will check both of them out, but I'm just trying to illustrate a point here). I've used HOF in some of my titles on rare/infrequent occasion, but usually it takes a lot for me to be stumped as far as coming up with a better choice for those 3 letter spots.
I'm not supporting the use of HOF when the player is not HOF, but am suggesting there's better ways to write your item's title regardless. >>
I search HOF RC all the time to find cards for my HOF RC set. It's actually a pretty relevant search and brings back lots of potential cards for my set.
Keyword spamming used to irritate me, but now I'm just
mildly amused.
Saw this one yesterday. Key word spammed so badly,
you can't even tell what he's selling.
1982 Topps Set (1) MLB BASEBALL UNOPENED CELLO BOX PACK HENDERSON - RIPKEN RC?
I dunno why he didn't replace MLB with PSA. I don't
know of anyone who searches eBay for MLB.
John
"America suffers today from too much pluribus and not enough unum.".....Arthur Schlesinger Jr.