there are only 15 more hours left to bid on a complete set of bloodlines. go
to the link below:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1695064048&r=0&t=0&
showTutorial=0&ed=1012427425&indexURL=0&rd=1
right now it is only $100. get your fix cheap!
gym...@aol.com (GymNat1) wrote in message news:<20020130012918...@mb-fc.aol.com>...
[ quoted text not captured ]
Go away, you dirty trader.
Nothing gets my goat more than an unscrupulous eBay trader who
actually has the gall to say that a Bloodlines set for $100 is
"getting it cheap".
DH
"hamdamcwa" <dave...@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:9e10847c.02013...@posting.google.com...
snip
>
> Go away, you dirty trader.
>
> Nothing gets my goat more than an unscrupulous eBay trader who
> actually has the gall to say that a Bloodlines set for $100 is
> "getting it cheap".
>
it would say it is at least reasonably priced. you get 70 rares in the set
40 of which are R1. now think of how many boosters you'd have to buy to get
all those rares. at least 70, that's for sure. and 70 boosters cost more
than $ 100.
on average you'd have to open about 3 boxes to get a complete set. of course
this would leave you with some spare rares.
the commons and uncommons have some value. but when you buy cards in boxes
like most players and collectors do this value is neglectible.
regards
pallando
"pallando" wrote
snip
> snip
> >
> > Go away, you dirty trader.
> >
> > Nothing gets my goat more than an unscrupulous eBay trader who
> > actually has the gall to say that a Bloodlines set for $100 is
> > "getting it cheap".
It IS cheap. I spent at least double that to get a complete set (on
booster boxes that is). Card distributions in BL sucks big time and WW
had the gall to call it fair!!!
>
> it would say it is at least reasonably priced. you get 70 rares in the set
> 40 of which are R1. now think of how many boosters you'd have to buy to get
> all those rares. at least 70, that's for sure. and 70 boosters cost more
> than $ 100.
Point well made.
> on average you'd have to open about 3 boxes to get a complete set. of course
> this would leave you with some spare rares.
>
> the commons and uncommons have some value. but when you buy cards in boxes
> like most players and collectors do this value is neglectible.
>
I opened only two but I was lucky with some trading i eventually
completed the set but I'm now left with virtually no trading
material...
A friend of mine opened 4 boxes and still wasn't complete. Some rares
came up 11 times! in 4 boxes while others remained elusive.
I sincerely hope the rares in the next set will be more evenly
distributed.
On one occasion we opened some boosters from different boxes and the
were exactly the same. The 2nd booster from box A included the exact
same cards as booster nr 2 from box B, in the same order as well!!
Could be a coincidence but the 3rd and 4th boosters were the same in
both boxes too. I wouldn'y want tto call the odds on that one but
there steep indeed...
Anyone have similar experiences or are they limited to this part of
the world (the Netherlands) only?
Boatdrinks,
Martijn
In message <aeb4c2b1.02013...@posting.google.com>,
war...@houdoe.net (martijn) mumbled something about:
>A friend of mine opened 4 boxes and still wasn't complete. Some rares
>came up 11 times! in 4 boxes while others remained elusive.
>I sincerely hope the rares in the next set will be more evenly
>distributed.
That IS evenly distributed. You got exactly 1 rare per pack.
It's also randomly distributed. It should be equally as likely that you
complete a set out of 3 boxes as to getting 11 of one rare in 4 boxes.
Looks like it was also definitely random; I was only missing 3 cards
after 2 boxes.
When one has 11 of a specific rare, surely one can find the moral
strength to trade away at least one of them for a rare that one doesn't
have, if one's goal is really completing the set?
--
"There's no gray. There's just white that's got grubby." -- T.P.
> That IS evenly distributed. You got exactly 1 rare per pack.
Not if you keep getting the same rare over and over again...
> It's also randomly distributed. It should be equally as likely that you
> complete a set out of 3 boxes as to getting 11 of one rare in 4 boxes.
> Looks like it was also definitely random; I was only missing 3 cards
> after 2 boxes.
Lucky you. After 3 boxes I was still missing over 10 cards - 13 or 14,
IIRC.
I call that crappy distribution...
Sorrow
---
"I'll be watching the news. If anything is vandalized or explodes
or catches on fire, 'X' is going to equal me kicking your ass!"
- Red Forman
In message <aeb4c2b1.02013...@posting.google.com>, martijn
<war...@houdoe.net> writes:
>A friend of mine opened 4 boxes and still wasn't complete. Some rares
>came up 11 times! in 4 boxes while others remained elusive.
>I sincerely hope the rares in the next set will be more evenly
>distributed.
evenly != randomly
When something is random, these things happen.
--
James Coupe "Never give in to them," she whispered. "No matter what
PGP 0x5D623D5D EB they do or how important you feel it is to get their accep-
D690ECD7A1FB457CA21 tance. Never kill part of yourself for them. Because other
3D7E668C3695D623D5D people will notice that part is missing before you do."
>Nothing gets my goat more than an unscrupulous eBay trader who
>actually has the gall to say that a Bloodlines set for $100 is
>"getting it cheap".
It isn't? I've calculated a set as being worth about 3 boxes *if* you care
about owning a set due to the effort required after opening 3 boxes (figuring a
typical, nonperfect distribution) to get the missing cards.
Sorrow wrote:
> > It's also randomly distributed. It should be equally as likely that you
> > complete a set out of 3 boxes as to getting 11 of one rare in 4 boxes.
> > Looks like it was also definitely random; I was only missing 3 cards
> > after 2 boxes.
>
> Lucky you. After 3 boxes I was still missing over 10 cards - 13 or 14,
> IIRC.
> I call that crappy distribution...
Assuming perfectly *random* distribution (of an infinite print run), odds of
missing 14 or more Bloodlines rares after opening 108 Bloodlines packs: 81%
... missing 12 or more: 95%
... missing 10 or more: 99%
You seem to be expecting uniform distribution (rather than random
distribution). Of course, since the machines doing the packing aren't
capable of truly random distribution (nor really anything even close),
the actual results are more uniform than random. This probably
accounts for your better-than-random-would-suggest performance.
--
LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc.
Links to revised rulebook, rulings, errata, and tournament rules:
http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/
[ quoted text not captured ]
Sheesh, what do you want?!? There are 70 rares in a set. If you got perfect
distribution in 2 boxes of Bloodlines minus two packs, you'd get the 70 different
rares. At Potomac Distribution, you would $122 for two boxes of Bloodlines. Of course,
you'd get all the uncommons and commons with the rares, but still. I mean,
I'm speechless anyone would ever say $100 for a set of Bloodlines was not
astoundingly INCREDIBLY cheap!
(Too bad it's over, folks.)
Fred
> Go away, you dirty trader.
>
> Nothing gets my goat more than an unscrupulous eBay trader who
> actually has the gall to say that a Bloodlines set for $100 is
> "getting it cheap".
OK, I think I should have made myself clearer...
Yes, $100 isn't unreasonable. However, what I object to is the person
trying to get a rush of bids by saying how cheap the bid price is now.
OK, maybe the dealer overestimated the buying passions of the VTES
community (since it only went for $115 - still not a bad price), but
if he had made a similar post on the Magic group for a Magic set, no
doubt he would be a very rich man by now!
I can deal with trading offers on the group (unless someone starts
talking about how many Marianna Gilberts / Dan Murdochs they have for
trade... and are after super rares in exchange for something that they
picked up, en mass, for free, some years ago), but I just don't like
the auction ads.
I use eBay - quite a lot at the moment - and I think it can be a
valuable tool in acquiring new rares, but I don't like the ads coming
here, which is thoroughly against the constitution. Hands up who likes
telemarketers calling? Door to door insurance salesmen? Spam? It's the
same thing.
Admittedly I was in a bad mood when I first replied to the post
(hungover or something). But ironically, because everyone
misunderstood me the guy got 10 free adverts because added comments
kept his post at the top of the pile.
*mutter-rassan-fassen-dick-dasterdly-mutter*
*grrrr*
DH
hamdamcwa wrote:
> Yes, $100 isn't unreasonable. However, what I object to is the person
> trying to get a rush of bids by saying how cheap the bid price is now.
> OK, maybe the dealer overestimated the buying passions of the VTES
> community (since it only went for $115 - still not a bad price),
He just had bad timing. In December, that set would have gone for
over $200 and possibly more. $115 was an *incredible* price - for the
buyer. Those who play with Josh on a regular basis should slug him the
next time they see him. :-)
> I can deal with trading offers on the group (unless someone starts
> talking about how many Marianna Gilberts / Dan Murdochs they have for
> trade... and are after super rares in exchange for something that they
> picked up, en mass, for free, some years ago), but I just don't like
> the auction ads.
OK. That part is fair enough. People shouldn't be touting their EBAY
auctions any more than they should be offering trades. But then it's
a lot better to just say that straight out then go off on a tangent about
what the price was - danger being that many will disagree with your
opinion about pricing.
Fred