For pricing, I fixed various issues with overpriced cards, especially commons and some rarer older ones, should be much more reasonable now. Please do use the "Report pricing issue" button on the card page if you see egregious errors in pricing, I am keeping a closer eye on the reports now.

- fixed collector number of Viscera Seer to 801 in Secret Lair, was overlapping "legit" collector numbers
- imported Double-Faced Card Placeholder for Midnight Hunt
- started to add "notes" to many special printings, to be able to see quicker that there is something special about a printing at a glance, so you can now see the little note icon for some Showcase, Extended Art, Borderless, Retro Frame, etc cards
- imported missing Wolf // Emblem: Lolth token to AFR double sided extras

later edit: this is not actually fixed yet, will do tomorrow: "- fixed some issues with searching in rules texts of split cards, should work properly again, and the search will find the cards if they match the "back" face too"

Thanks, Sebi!

I noticed on some of my foils that they now have a 'foil etched' emblem that I can not get rid of. I noticed this on Vial Smasher, even though I have the commander copy (but think it's because it is available in a Commander Legends etched foil version). That said, glad you're refining the way that etched foils are labeled in inventories :)

Lefent wrote:Thanks, Sebi!

I noticed on some of my foils that they now have a 'foil etched' emblem that I can not get rid of. I noticed this on Vial Smasher, even though I have the commander copy (but think it's because it is available in a Commander Legends etched foil version). That said, glad you're refining the way that etched foils are labeled in inventories :)

Thanks for reporting the issue, should be fixed now.

Damn, you're quick. Looks good now; thanks!!

I admire your work Sebi. You keep on impressing us!

This is great work to have focused on! I noticed a change in collection value a week or so ago and assumed it was related to low value cards based on what i could find in my collection. Thank you for the effort! Ive seen several reports of folks being frustrated at price discrepancies on here. I am glad to see some of that being addressed, but perhaps it was never being reported to begin with. Can fix what you dont know is broken. Thanks again for all the hard work!

thanks again SABI!

- imported Double-Faced Card Placeholder for Midnight Hunt

I see only the card #1 photo marked as extra:Innistrad: midnight hunt (Card#80). Should we see the other ones?

Should the price also include as a minimum the buylist price of a bunch of places?

As an example at my lgs Distracting Geist // Clever Distraction
I can buy it between 0,25$ and 0,40$
Their buylist is at 0,03$ in cash and 0,04$ in credit

TCG market price is at 0,02$

Since I can make more money selling it for the buylist price than the market price the market price should be higher.

scramasax wrote:Should the price also include as a minimum the buylist price of a bunch of places?

As an example at my lgs Distracting Geist // Clever Distraction
I can buy it between 0,25$ and 0,40$
Their buylist is at 0,03$ in cash and 0,04$ in credit

TCG market price is at 0,02$

Since I can make more money selling it for the buylist price than the market price the market price should be higher.

I am not sure I follow you here so I might be reading this wrong, but are you suggesting that price on deckbox should be higher because your local store will buy a card for more than what deckbox has it listed as?

Not my local store but at least some big sources that have buylist.

ic0n67 wrote:

scramasax wrote:Should the price also include as a minimum the buylist price of a bunch of places?

As an example at my lgs Distracting Geist // Clever Distraction
I can buy it between 0,25$ and 0,40$
Their buylist is at 0,03$ in cash and 0,04$ in credit

TCG market price is at 0,02$

Since I can make more money selling it for the buylist price than the market price the market price should be higher.

I am not sure I follow you here so I might be reading this wrong, but are you suggesting that price on deckbox should be higher because your local store will buy a card for more than what deckbox has it listed as?

Speaking of card prices, do you have any idea about Japanese (Black border) Chronicles? They are a) a lot harder to find, b) usually hold quite some premium compared to the regular (English) Chronicles (some around 10x as much, or more).

Cheers for the efforts :)

DarkElder wrote:Speaking of card prices, do you have any idea about Japanese (Black border) Chronicles?

I feel like this is such an unknown little corner of vintage Magic! I never see this get referenced in groups, to the point that I had a hard time identifying my one black-bordered Chronicles card (Recall) before I was aware of the existence of the black-bordered Japanese printing.

Given the extremely low frequency of transactions (only 2 on TCGP in the last 3 months) and the fact that other marketplace sites don't separate BB Chronicles from WB Chronicles*, I doubt there's any meaningful way to extrapolate enough data points for any sort of accurate pricing.

____________________
* Checked TCGP, CK, CFB, SCG, CSI, ABU, Troll & Toad, and MTGGoldfish

meldon44 wrote: Given the extremely low frequency of transactions (only 2 on TCGP in the last 3 months) and the fact that other marketplace sites don't separate BB Chronicles from WB Chronicles*, I doubt there's any meaningful way to extrapolate enough data points for any sort of accurate pricing.

____________________
* Checked TCGP, CK, CFB, SCG, CSI, ABU, Troll & Toad, and MTGGoldfish

Well, include other places like eBay and cardmarket, they latter list many offers and have a "price history" plotted for sold listings.

DarkElder wrote:Well, include other places like eBay and cardmarket, they latter list many offers and have a "price history" plotted for sold listings.

eBay is one of the best places to look it up "by hand", I agree, but it's very difficult to programmatically get accurate data from there, as evidenced by MTGGoldfish's list of eBay recently sold (which have often included playsets, wrong languages, and other anomalies that are not true representations of sold listings for a given card).

I'm not at all familiar with CardMarket, so perhaps it's a very different story.

My hunch though is that, even if you could get accurate sales data from places other than TCGPlayer, the sales would likewise be so low volume as to make data derived from them unreliable and somewhat meaningless.

To be clear, I'm not at all against adding this information to Deckbox. Like I said in my first response, I'm kinda excited to find somebody else who actually knows and cares about this niche printing! I'm just warning against the likely pitfalls in trying to add pricing data for such low-transaction cards. I'd rather the data not be added at all than to have misleading data.

CardMarket has an API, I never used that but it exists so I guess one could query for data.

True, there are a lot of cards that are high end, low quantity transactions, or which aren't "publicly" traded but in private groups.

sebi wrote:For pricing, I fixed various issues with overpriced cards, especially commons and some rarer older ones, should be much more reasonable now. Please do use the "Report pricing issue" button on the card page if you see egregious errors in pricing, I am keeping a closer eye on the reports now.

Hi. Have you made another price fix this January? I experienced a huge drop in overall collection value after your fix in December and it seemed much more accurate after this fix. But I have experienced another huge drop here in January as well which seems too steep for normal price fluctuations. So, I was just wondering?

Edit: It seems this January drop is related to the price of the UNL Black Lotus which has dropped significantly in value.

Goffdahl wrote:

sebi wrote:For pricing, I fixed various issues with overpriced cards, especially commons and some rarer older ones, should be much more reasonable now. Please do use the "Report pricing issue" button on the card page if you see egregious errors in pricing, I am keeping a closer eye on the reports now.

Hi. Have you made another price fix this January? I experienced a huge drop in overall collection value after your fix in December and it seemed much more accurate after this fix. But I have experienced another huge drop here in January as well which seems too steep for normal price fluctuations. So, I was just wondering?

Edit: It seems this January drop is related to the price of the UNL Black Lotus which has dropped significantly in value.

So I am not gonna lie. I added a Lotus to my collection to see what the price is listed and then I went to go see my collection's price and I was like "what happened, how is my collection over by $12k all of a sudden?" :rolleyes:

Anywho my collection price seems accurate as it is only off by about $500 from TCG market which for 46k cards is well within fault tolerance.

The problem cards like Black Lotus is that they rarely sell so a price is extremely volatile in general. If you go to TCGplayer right now you can see there have only been 2 recent sales one for $500 ( god bless that gamble sir ... o7 ) and one for $15,399.99. That is not a lot of price points to determine a price.

Honestly the price history of an Unlimited Lotus it is weird in general. https://www.tcgplayer.com/product/8989/magic-unlimited-edition-black-lotus?xid=pi2e437def-89c5-4f9e-ada1-8bac7c8ed011&page=1&Language=English

If you look at the chart and change the time period the chart stays pretty much the same ups and down, but the numbers actually don't match up. Like if you go to 1M and mouse over from 12/22 to 1/7 you have a steady price of $9750 for each day, but if you mouse over 3M chart and mouse over from "12/19 to 12/21" the average for those days is $15,399.99 which it isn't possible if each of those days have an average of $9750 then the three day period would have the same average. That is just how math works.

Either way nothing explains the drop in market price last week. The official market price for a Unlimited edition Black Lotus on TCGPlayer was listed as $500 last Tuesday and Wednesday which is odd since the only other $500 sale was in November and the other sale was in December they both should have been effecting the market price in January. There have been no sales since then. That $500 sales should have effected the market price in November, but 3M chart shows a decline before the sale and the sale happened in the middle of a steep increase which makes no sense.

Sorry that was a tangent I didn't mean to do on, but true to my point without a lot of sales it is difficult to find a price point (and I think TCG player is being very deceptive here if I am going to be honest). If I had to take a wild speculative guess deckbox might have picked up on the price decrease last week. We don't know how deckbox gets its prices so we can't say for sure nor do we know how often things are fully updated. I guess this dip was put into whatever calculations happen and that is what you are seeing. MTGGoldfish (they use TGCMid) even has two valley in their price on 1/9 and 1/14. So something happened and it should be back soon I would guess

ic0n67 wrote:

Goffdahl wrote:

sebi wrote:For pricing, I fixed various issues with overpriced cards, especially commons and some rarer older ones, should be much more reasonable now. Please do use the "Report pricing issue" button on the card page if you see egregious errors in pricing, I am keeping a closer eye on the reports now.

Hi. Have you made another price fix this January? I experienced a huge drop in overall collection value after your fix in December and it seemed much more accurate after this fix. But I have experienced another huge drop here in January as well which seems too steep for normal price fluctuations. So, I was just wondering?

Edit: It seems this January drop is related to the price of the UNL Black Lotus which has dropped significantly in value.

So I am not gonna lie. I added a Lotus to my collection to see what the price is listed and then I went to go see my collection's price and I was like "what happened, how is my collection over by $12k all of a sudden?" :rolleyes:

Anywho my collection price seems accurate as it is only off by about $500 from TCG market which for 46k cards is well within fault tolerance.

The problem cards like Black Lotus is that they rarely sell so a price is extremely volatile in general. If you go to TCGplayer right now you can see there have only been 2 recent sales one for $500 ( god bless that gamble sir ... o7 ) and one for $15,399.99. That is not a lot of price points to determine a price.

Honestly the price history of an Unlimited Lotus it is weird in general. https://www.tcgplayer.com/product/8989/magic-unlimited-edition-black-lotus?xid=pi2e437def-89c5-4f9e-ada1-8bac7c8ed011&page=1&Language=English

If you look at the chart and change the time period the chart stays pretty much the same ups and down, but the numbers actually don't match up. Like if you go to 1M and mouse over from 12/22 to 1/7 you have a steady price of $9750 for each day, but if you mouse over 3M chart and mouse over from "12/19 to 12/21" the average for those days is $15,399.99 which it isn't possible if each of those days have an average of $9750 then the three day period would have the same average. That is just how math works.

Either way nothing explains the drop in market price last week. The official market price for a Unlimited edition Black Lotus on TCGPlayer was listed as $500 last Tuesday and Wednesday which is odd since the only other $500 sale was in November and the other sale was in December they both should have been effecting the market price in January. There have been no sales since then. That $500 sales should have effected the market price in November, but 3M chart shows a decline before the sale and the sale happened in the middle of a steep increase which makes no sense.

Sorry that was a tangent I didn't mean to do on, but true to my point without a lot of sales it is difficult to find a price point (and I think TCG player is being very deceptive here if I am going to be honest). If I had to take a wild speculative guess deckbox might have picked up on the price decrease last week. We don't know how deckbox gets its prices so we can't say for sure nor do we know how often things are fully updated. I guess this dip was put into whatever calculations happen and that is what you are seeing. MTGGoldfish (they use TGCMid) even has two valley in their price on 1/9 and 1/14. So something happened and it should be back soon I would guess

Yes, I am aware all of these high end cards lead to huge fluctuations. Usually, though, they kind of even out. But the price of the Lotus dropped from 20k to 6 k so this was a significant drop, which made a huge impact on the total inventory value, which is what I reacted on. I know the price is not accurate at all for all these cards with very few items for sale/sold.

Well ... right now the Unlimited edition Black Lotus is listed at about $12k on deckbox. If you were seeing it at $6K when you made the post it would seem that the price is already recovering. If anything the $20k you were seeing was still very high, I don't see any indication it should have been that much for that card anytime recently. Again there have been some wonky stuff going on with the price of the card over multiple platforms recently so I the fluctuation seems expected.