PROTRADER: The Mythics of Fate Reforged

Last week, we went over the mythics of Khans of Tarkir. With depressed prices due to peak supply and fetches driving everything else in the set down, mythics are great, low-risk investments that have the potential to see exponential growth due their relatively short supply.

Although Fate Reforged and Dragons of Tarkir lack the downward pressure of fetch lands (apart from the rare FRF pack), they are both also at peak supply. Also keep in mind the huge effect that Draft has on card supply. Assuming equal number of drafts fired from last fall to now (which is almost certainly not accurate, but let’s roll with it), we have roughly this proportion of each of the sets in this block:

  • Khans of Tarkir: 55% (3x drafted in the fall, 2x drafted in the winter)
  • Fate Reforged: 22% (1x drafted in the winter, 1x drafted in the spring)
  • Dragons of Tarkir: 22% (2x drafted in the spring)

For context, that means that if one million Siege Rhinos were opened in drafts, there would only be 400,000 Tasigurs. And since Tasigur is a rare and mythics appear at a rate of one-in-eight, there would only be 50,000 mythics from FRK or DTK, compared to 125,000 of each mythics from KTK. Keep in mind that these numbers are all purely hypothetical—Wizards does not provide sales data to us plebs—but using these rough proportions can show you just how stark the difference in supply is from a fall-set rare compared to a spring-set mythic: in this case, a ration of 20 to one.

With all this in mind, let’s take a look at the mythics from Fate Reforged today. We’ll hit Dragons of Tarkir next week for you completionists out there.

The rest of this content is only visible to ProTrader members.

To learn how ProTrader can benefit YOU, click here to watch our short video.

expensive cards

ProTrader: Magic doesn’t have to be expensive.

MTGFinance: What We’re Buying & Selling This Week (Aug 24/15)

By James Chillcott (@MTGCritic)

One of the most common misconceptions about folks involved in MTGFinance is that we are constantly manipulating the market and feeding players misinformation to help fuel achievement of our personal goals.

It has occurred to us at MTGPrice that though we dole out a good deal of advice, most of you ultimately have very little insight into when and why our writing team actually puts our money where our collective mouths are pointing. As such running this weekly series breaking down what we’ve been buying and selling each week and why. These lists are meant to be both complete and transparent, leaving off only cards we bought for personal use without hope of profit. We’ll also try to provide some insight into our thinking behind the specs, and whether we are aiming for a short (<1 month), mid (1-12 month), or long (1 year+) term flip. Here’s what we we’ve been up to this week:

Buying Period: Aug 11th – Aug 20th, 2015

Note: All cards NM unless otherwise noted. All sell prices are net of fees unless noted.

James Chillcott (@MTGCritic)

Coming off of my tour of lovely Bulgaria and Turkey I haven’t been in buying mode, but I did pick up a few things here and there.

BOUGHT

  • 1x Hangarback Walker (Foil) @ $25
  • 1x Russian Magic Origins Booster Box @ $109

Hangarback Walker expanded its horizons this weekend at Eternal Weekend showing up in the finals of the Vintage Championships in a Workshop deck. The card has now demonstrated viability in almost every relevant format and I’m happy to pick up more foils anywhere under $25 since Origins will ultimately have lower sales than a major fall set and the card is often a 4-of wherever it pops up. I see this is as a mid to long term hold with a $40+ target.

The Russian Origins box is my vote of confidence that Origins may actually end up producing more than a few Modern and Eternal relevant cards (Hangarback Walker, Dark Petition, Jace, Vrynn’s Prodigy, Evolutionary Leap, etc) that may be highly desirable in Russian foil down the road. This is a long term hold, targeting $200+.

I’ll be posting my report on Magic in Bulgaria and Turkey later this week, so watch for that.

Travis Allen (@WizardBumpin)

BOUGHT

  • 35x Dragon Whisperer @ $2/per
  • 9x Shaman of the Forgotten Ways @ $2.25/per
  • 23x Tasigur, the Golden Fang (foil) @ $30/per
  • 8x Whisperwood Elemental @ $5.50/per
  • 14x Sarkhan, the Dragonspeaker @ $4/per
  • 30x Wingmate Roc @ $1.50/per
  • 8x Woodland Bellower @ $4/per

“Dragon Whisperer is an extremely cheap mythic red two-drop from a third set. Power level is high. She’s only made a splash so far, but red is saturated right now. Come rotation she could easily be the best red two in the format.”

“Shaman plays well with the coming Eldrazi, and is a third-set mythic. Could break $10.”

“Re: Tasigur, a while ago I noticed that foil Abrupt Decays were about $30. The nonfoils were around $7 – $10 at the time. My suspicion was that $30 was too cheap, especially for how much eternal play they saw. I picked up two extra playsets. Within two weeks, they had spiked to $80, and I was wishing I had bought more. With Tasigur’s ubiquity across formats, I’m not making the same mistake again. He’s possibly the best black creature in Standard, Modern, and Legacy. While a non-foil reprint would harm his price, foils are going to be quite safe. I’m looking for this one to at least double by the spring of 2016.”

“Whisperwood Elemental was $15 not that long ago, and all the cards that make him good (Den Protector, Deathmist Raptor, and Mastery of the Unseen) are all sticking around through rotation. I’d like to buy more if he ends up under $4.”

“Sarkhan is a $4 Planeswalker with a solid power level. He’s mostly been pushed out of Standard by Stormbreath Dragon, but that guy is leaving us soon.”

“Wingmate Roc used to be $15-$20. He’s at bulk mythic pricing now, and could certainly be a major Standard player again later this year.”

“Woodland Bellower demonstrated notable power during the Pro Tour. With no price movement so far, a breakout performance could send this skyrocketing.”

Jim Casale (@Phrost_)

BOUGHT

  • 4x Anafenza, the Foremost @ $3.50/per
  • 4x Tragic Arrogance (foil) @ $3.00/per
  • 4x Abrupt Decay @ $8.00/per

Jim says:

Anafenza, the Foremost is down to $3.50 from $7.00 before the release of Dragons of Tarkir. It’s also 12 tickets on MTGO which is usually a good indicator of play. There are some other factors at work (mythics command a larger portion of a set’s price due to redemption online) but I think this card is going to be one of the few cards to rebound during BFZ. 

Tragic Arrogance is the real deal in standard and it is also quite powerful in EDH. I decided to grab foil copies to play with as they will likely retain more of their value as time goes on. The spread on foil and non-foil copies is closing pretty quickly so this may even see a price correction in the near future.

Regarding Abrupt Decay, I found a player that wanted to sell some cards for quick cash. I offered him more than local buylist and he accepted. Hard to pass up this kind of deal.

BOUGHT (PucaTrade)

  • 4x Ghostfire Blade @ 175 Pucapoints/per

Jim says:

“The Eldrazi will probably all be “colorless” despite costing colored mana. Ghostfire Blade was pretty good with thopters so I can’t see it getting worse with more colorless creatures.”

SOLD

  • 3x Jace, Vryn’s Prodigy @ $30/per
  • 1x Creeping Tarpit (foil) @ $30/per

Jim says:

“Jace was sold to a local player looking to play the Majors/Cuneo mill deck this week. The price included no fees so its hard to pass up a deal this good. I think I will likely be able to buy them back in a month or two for $20 or less.”

“Creeping Tarpit was sold to a player (so no additional fees) and I’m pretty sure the manlands will be reprinted sometime in the next year or two and there is no real reason to keep this.”

SOLD (Puca)

  • 8x ghostfire blade @ 112 pucapoints/copy

Danny Brown (@dbro37)

BOUGHT

  • 20x Narset, Enlightened Tutor $1.24/per
  • 4x Sarkhan, the Dragon Speaker @ $5.40/per
  • 8x Dragon Whisperer $2.25/per
  • 1x Daretti, Scrap Savant $3.44/per
  • 1x Outpost Siege $1.08/per

Danny says:

“I discussed Narset in my article this week, and all 20 copies I requested were sent pretty quickly. I also discussed Sarkhan and wasn’t sold at that time, but I pulled the trigger on a playset and will probably try for another couple.”

Dragon Whisperer is a mythic that may be forced to step up if mono red continues to be a thing in Standard. I think this has enough casual appeal that it could be a slow gainer in the long term, as well. It reminds me of Kargan Dragonlord in many ways, which is $7, so I think the risk is low. One copy will probably go in my cube.”

Daretti is a great pick-up right now and people seem to know. I think I had 16 on my list and only one got sent.”

“The Outpost Siege is for my cube, though it’s likely starting in the on-deck binder until/if I decide to expand or switch up some strategies. Some Standard play and a spike could turn this into a (very) minor spec, though.”

 

Jared Yost

Here is my buying for this week:

  • 10x Polluted Delta @ $21.00/per
  • 10x Flooded Strand @ $15.78/per
  • 10x Bloodstained Mire @ $18.71/per

“I found some great deals through Amazon, and using some of my Amazon points that I’ve been accumulating I thought I would put them to use by picking up some much needed Fetchlands for my portfolio. I really needed Strands and Deltas, as I’ve been steadily trading for Heaths, Foothills, and Mires over the summer to build up a nice stockpile.”

So there you have it. Now what were you guys buying and selling this week and why?

James Chillcott is the CEO of ShelfLife.net, The Future of Collecting, Senior Partner at Advoca, a designer, adventurer, toy fanatic and an avid Magic player and collector since 1994.

ADVERTISEMENT: Get the Cube Starter Bundle with the 3rd Edition Grimoire Deck Box, the brand new Grimoire Deck Box designed specifically for the red mage in you.

Guest Article: Puca Mischief (by Peter Twieg)

Editor’s Note: This article doesn’t necessarily reflect the views of MTGPrice, but we feel it is a topic important enough to warrant publishing this piece to kick off discussion. 

By Peter Twieg

Since its public opening in 2013, PucaTrade has rapidly grown to become a key institution in the MTG trading community. There are many factors that have contributed to its rise, among them the establishment of a site currency called “PucaPoints.” PucaPoints have been integral to allowing PucaTrade to flourish as a trading platform. However, this flourishing may prove to be unsustainable in the future unless PucaTrade’s owners rethink some of its policies governing how PucaPoints are managed.

 

This article is an elaboration of a post I had made on PucaTrade’s subreddit over a month ago, entitled “Is PucaTrade a Pyramid Scheme?” In retrospect, this title was likely a bit too inflammatory for the sort of discussion that I was hoping to generate. Nothing in this article should be taken to imply that PucaTrade should be abandoned as a platform or that its administrators are acting in bad faith with their policies. Indeed, I love PucaTrade and will continue to use it even as the problems I’ve observed continue to manifest. Nevertheless, these issues deserve a lot more discussion than they’re currently receiving, as they will in time impact the experience of every user on the site. If you want the “short” 1000-word version of this argument, check out my post above. If you want the full 3000-word discussion, though, navigating from the principles of digital currency management to how these principles are causing issues for PucaTrade to some simple policy recommendations and advice for the users, however, read on.

Conjured Currency

Most readers will probably have some prior familiarity with virtual currencies, if not from using PucaTrade itself than from using some other website or video game that employs one. Why do these currencies exist to begin with? There are two major applicable reasons here: Firstly, by using a site currency rather than USD (as an example), PucaTrade can avoid a lot of the regulatory compliance costs that would come from serving as a real financial intermediary. They can also avoid burdening users with the costs of using a payment system such as Paypal to facilitate digital transactions. Secondly, however, by issuing its own currency the relevant monetary authority (in this case, the PucaTrade staff) can benefit from what is formally known as seigniorage. This is basically the privilege of being able to direct how currency enters the economy – if PucaTrade staff wanted to issue themselves a lot of site currency and use it to have traders send them Tarmogoyfs, then they could probably do this, although this would cause trust in the currency to collapse and kill the site. While I do not believe that the staff would do such a thing, seigniorage is an important part of PucaTrade’s functionality, as the staff use their currency-generating capabilities to institute a variety of policies that they believe will help the community. More on this later.

9k=

When an institution creates a virtual currency to be used within some economy, proper management of that currency is crucial to that institution’s success. Early online games that used virtual currencies have provided us with many salient examples of the consequences of mismanagement. Diablo II, for example, developed the infamous “Stone of Jordan economy” when its ingame currency became so devalued that ingame gold stopped being the medium of exchange in favor of the difficult-to-acquire but widely-demanded Stones of Jordan. Despite this experience, Blizzard couldn’t get things right and Diablo III ended up experiencing well-documented hyperinflation episodes as well. One of the major issues that monetary authorities must address is how to manage the money supply to avoid a devaluation of currency and the corresponding economic problems that this can create. Discussions of these topics often focus on “currency sources” and “currency sinks” – what algorithmic forces are putting currency into the virtual economy and what forces are removing it? To reference back to the Diablo examples, inflations would occur because currency would be continually generated as monsters were killed in the game, and players did not have strong incentives to do things that would remove money from the economy (such as buy items from vendors.) Inflation and devaluation will occur if the flow of money entering the economy exceeds the rate at which it’s being removed, all things being equal.

Puca goyf

How do these concerns apply to PucaTrade? Well, it’s important to understand from the start that PucaTrade relies on fixed prices for all cards. Each card’s price is pegged at roughly TCG Mid price, and this peg is maintained regardless of how many PucaPoints are in use. But although PucaTrade fixes prices on individual cards, the PucaTrade economy is not closed. One can buy and sell PucaPoints for USD, and changes in the supply and demand for PucaPoints will impact the currency’s USD price. So the worry about excess currency in the PucaTrade economy is not that Future Sight Tarmogoyfs will go from costing 20k PucaPoints to 200k PucaPoints, it’s that the supply or demand of Tarmogoyfs at the fixed price level will be so far from the actual market-clearing price that no exchanges will occur. Before discussing why this might occur, some additional basic facts about PucaPoints must be understood.

As discussed in the Diablo case, balancing algorithmic currency sources and sinks is a necessity to ensure stability on a site like PucaTrade. What, then, are the sources and sinks of PucaPoints? Well, anyone who’s used the site has noticed that you get some currency merely for signing up and completing some basic actions like filling out your profile and sending out your first card over the site. The administrators have decided to use their currency-issuing power to make sure that every new user gets a small amount of currency. I’ve seen some individuals express concern over this, but the money supply scaling with the number of users is actually a rather smart way to prevent the currency from become more valuable simply because the userbase (and hence demand for currency) is growing. It’s also a great way to incentivize new users to try the site – from the newbie’s perspective, you can get some free cards! Additionally, one can buy PucaPoints at a fixed rate of 100 points per USD – this open-ended exchange rate essentially provides a price ceiling on the value of points. Next, and veering a bit into sketchier territory, the site has issued currency for self-promotion. PucaPoint raffles were offered for backers of PucaTrade’s recent IndieGogo campaign when it appeared to be stalling out. Site users can receive PucaPoints by getting others to sign up, which I’ve seen lead to some quasi-astroturfing for the site using hidden referral links.

Shared Fate

But what’s most overlooked here, and probably more important than any of these other factors as a long-term source of PucaPoints, is what PucaTrade calls its “100% Trade Guarantee”. This trade guarantee is a major factor in PucaTrade’s utility, as it makes trading cards via mail a very safe proposition. On most trading platform if a sender sends a card and the recipient claims to not receive it, the sender simply eats a loss on the card, especially if the package was untracked. However, PucaTrade’s use of site currency has enabled it to implement a trade guarantee whereby if a package is lost, then if the sender is considered to have done due diligence in trying to deliver the package, he will be compensated for the amount of points that he would have received if the trade had been completed normally. The receiver is also refunded the points held in escrow while the trade was being executed. So, in other words, if Alice sends a Polluted Delta to Bob and PucaTrade’s price on Polluted Delta is 2000 PucaPoints, then if Alice’s package is lost then she will be given 2000 PucaPoints and the original 2000 points will also be refunded to Bob. Both traders end up satisfied, but we’ve just seen 2000 additional points enter the system! Note that this amount of 2000 points is likely much larger than the amount of points made for Alice when she generated her account, and if she continues to use the site and the occasional card is lost in transit than she’ll continue to generate more points when the 100% Trade Guarantee is invoked. This means that by virtue of using the site and having a nonzero rate of invoking the 100% Trade Guarantee, Alice will be increasing the money supply over time.

This brings us to what I feel is the first major lesson that most users don’t know about PucaTrade: The 100% Trade Guarantee does not provide a free lunch. The 100% Trade Guarantee simply “papers over” feel-bad losses by throwing currency at users. Essentially, this is a sort of insurance policy – when Alice’s package is lost she’ll be compensated, but this comes at a cost to other currency-holders whose holdings are slightly devalued. If Alice is holding currency, then the value of that currency will decline when Bob invokes the policy, or when Carla does, or anyone else. And the costs of an individual case may be diffuse, but across many users they will add up in subtle ways, and in ways that are not only relevant to those who are directly involved in buying or selling currency. To some extent I do think the PucaTrade staff are taking advantage of users here, as the 100% Trade Guarantee is wildly popular but in large part this is because its users don’t appreciate its impact on the overall value of the currency. On the other hand, I’m also not saying that the 100% Trade Guarantee is a bad policy even in light of this – perhaps some sort of sender insurance is simply the right way to go for trading platforms, and PucaTrade has implemented a relatively frictionless version of this. However, the fact that other trading platforms do *not* offer these generous policies is directly attributable to their not having their own site currencies that can be used to subtly spread losses among the userbase.

Before moving onward, an important caveat should be given: I’m not 100% sure that any of these mechanisms are actual money sources. The staff could simply be giving out PucaPoints that they’ve acquired through sending out cards or some other means, but I highly doubt that that’s the case and they’ve had multiple opportunities to say that my assumptions here are wrong in prior discussions. The PucaTrade economy has almost no real money sinks beyond when the occasional user is banned with a lot of points in their account, and I doubt this really amounts to much. I would guess that the 100% Trade Guarantee is not only responsible for the majority of PucaPoints being generated, but that its share will continue to increase over time, as it will lead to currency being generated at a roughly-constant rate relative to the size of the overall economy, whether or not the userbase is growing or not. So what does this mean for PucaTrade’s economy, exactly?

Creeping Corrosion

The reason why I made my original post on this topic on Reddit was because I had noticed that the price of PucaPoints for USD seemed to be declining over time. While one can always buy PucaPoints from the site directly, it’s perfectly okay to sell PucaPoints for USD. When I started using the site in January, informal sales of PucaPoints tended to put the price at around 85 cents per 100. When I made my post in June, that price had fallen to 75 cents. Now at the beginning of August, the market price of PucaPoints is at roughly 70 cents per 100 and threatens to fall further – as of 8/13, I just saw my first offer to sell at 68. So here’s lesson #2: The price of PucaPoints is hugely important for what can be traded via PucaTrade. Many people wrongly believe that since PucaTrade pegs its prices to TCG Mid, then changes in the currency supply won’t affect the availability of cards on the site. Those people are wrong, because changes in the currency price will affect which cards are supplied and demanded via PucaTrade.

Force of Will

As an example of why this is true, I used a thought experiment in my Reddit post: Imagine that in some horrible dystopian future Alice were willing to send Polluted Deltas on PucaTrade for 2000 PucaPoints, but also that PucaPoints could be bought at a rate of 20 cents per 100. This would imply that anyone could spend $4 to get 2000 PucaPoints, add a Polluted Delta to their “Want” list on the site, and then be eligible to receive the card from Alice. The obvious result here is that you’d have a massive excess demand for $4 Deltas on PucaTrade, and the average user would simply no longer be able to acquire Deltas – or any other staple cards for that matter – within a reasonable timeframe. As of this writing the low price of a NM Force of Will on TCGPlayer is $99.75 with shipping. On the other hand, Force of Wills can be acquired for 11202 PucaPoints. At an exchange rate of 100 points for 70 cents, this is the equivalent of $78.41. At this price, what stops everyone from just purchasing FoWs from PucaTrade? The answer is one that we see all the time in real worlds when price controls are employed: Queues develop. If you want to get a Force of Will, you will likely be waiting for weeks or months. Because of the falling price of PucaPoints and the increased demand for staples this creates, the PucaTrade dream of trading your standard chaff into Force of Wills or dual lands is quickly dying.

Ultimately, I’m very confident that the ongoing devaluation of PucaPoints is due to the monetary issues I’ve outlined above.  I’m not certain how much of the growth in the money supply is attributable to the 100% Trade Guarantee, but even if it’s small it represents a mechanism that is going to continually devalue the currency even with a constantly-sized userbase. In many cases, users have responded to this devaluation and the lengthening queues on staples by offering “bounties” on particular cards – specific offers to transfer extra points to senders when a desired card is received. This is a very clumsy and non-scalable workaround to the underlying issues, but in some sense it does keep the dream on life support. If you really want your Force of Wills, you can just offer extra points for them.

But maybe declaring the dream “dead” is too fatalistic. Lesson #3 explains why the sky isn’t falling: Because the falling PucaTrade price stimulates demand for various cards, cards where there had previously been excess supply are now becoming easier to send out via PucaTrade. The previous dream was difficult to achieve because for most cards on PucaTrade – standard cards in particular – supply exceeds demand, and users would have to use tools such as MiseBot or PucaPower to try to send out cards where sending opportunities would disappear in seconds because of massive excess supply. For this reason, one could argue that the aforementioned PucaTrade dream never really existed, as the difficulty of sending out bulk cards via the site was often downplayed. In the future, if the currency continues to fall, this will simply rebalance supply and demand on each individual card – the ones that have excess demand will continue to become harder to acquire (in recent weeks users have started complaining about the difficulty of acquiring shocklands), but the ones that have excess supply will become easier for users to trade out in order to acquire whatever cards that are still acquirable via PucaTrade. This is the core dynamic that is playing out as the currency devalues, and it’s even possible that on net the optimal price of PucaPoints for the site itself and its community is somewhere around where it is now. But even if it were, if my assumptions about how the supply of PucaPoints are managed are correct, we would end up sliding past whatever ideal point that may exist as this supply continually expands due to its governing algorithms.

 

Illusory Gains

So why hasn’t this issue received much attention already? As I alluded to earlier, I think part of the problem is that people don’t really understand the full picture of what’s going on, and the site staff have structured the site in a way that obfuscates exactly how these policies are impacting the health of the platform. People think that the 100% Trade Guarantee is a free lunch rather than a policy that compensates unfortunate (or lazy or malicious) senders by redistributing value from currency-holders to the sender. People think that the devaluation of the currency isn’t linked to the availability of cards that can be sent or received via PucaTrade. People see the outstanding and largely-deserved growth rate of the site and think that everything is great. Indeed, rapid site growth would in fact slow the phenomena I’m worried about. However, high exponential growth in the userbase will not continue forever, and when things level out we’ll still have a lot of flowing money sources in the economy without corresponding money sinks.

31SDtAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC

 

In a response to my Reddit post, site founder Eric Freytag pointed out that the velocity of PucaPoints was increasing over time, which he argued indicated that the supply of PucaPoints wasn’t keeping up with site growth. To me, this misses the point: The goal of PucaTrade’s monetary policy should not be to keep the velocity of the currency constant, but to keep its value stable at some determined optimal level. The increase in velocity, as he pointed out, is a positive indicator for the site’s health, but it’s a positive indicator that exists despite the underlying monetary issues. I waited on writing this article because I felt like rather than just arguing these points I could simply let my predictions be borne out, and I believe that this is happening. More cards are becoming difficult to acquire on the site and PucaPoints are readily available for below the 75-85 cents per hundred range that Freytag argues is the historical norm. Left unchecked, expect prices to drop below 70 cents per 100 PucaPoints by the end of summer.

Moving forward, there are many policies that PucaTrade staff could deploy to address these issues, each with their own upsides and downsides. Here are several:

  • Move away from fixed prices: There are many arguments for why PucaTrade should stop fixing the exchange values of cards regardless of its currency issues; namely, this would allow for prices to equilibrate supply and demand regardless of the value of the currency. The main drawback is that money supply growth would translate into inflation, and a high inflation rate could cause problems for the site’s usability.
  • Relax the 100% Trade Guarantee: This would be pretty unpopular, but a lot of that unpopularity would be based on people not understanding how the trade guarantee is really an insurance policy paid for by all currency-holders. It should be possible to implement a more-transparent insurance policy that doesn’t inflate the money supply. I hate to use the word “tax” here, but simply taking some small percentage of PucaPoints from all users every month to cover the costs of the Trade Guarantee (and perhaps offset other money sources) would stop ongoing devaluation.
  • Add money sinks: A tax as outlined above would essentially represent a money sink, in that it would either remove currency from the economy or offset the need to employ money sources. While I don’t expect an actual tax to be implemented, one proposed money sink has been to allow users to purchase PucaTrade’s premium membership levels using PucaPoints rather than USD. This would remove a steady flow of points from the economy, although it might be too little or too much. The main drawback here is that this would surely have a negative impact on the site’s revenues, and administrative reluctance to do this is perfectly understandable. The dream scenario would be that this pushes the price of PucaPoints so high that it hits the 100 per USD ceiling again and the site starts selling more currency, but I am not particularly confident that this would occur.
  • Do nothing: Again, the sky isn’t falling. There’s no need to sell off your PucaPoints immediately. I mean, it’ll take years for the gears to really grind to a halt on the site, and in internet terms that’s a really long time!

Enthralling Victor

 

Z-1

If you’re managed to make it this far into the article, I’ll close with some comments on how to adapt to this changing PucaTrade landscape. As I’ve mentioned, shocklands in particular are in an interesting spot on the site right now. They’re quickly becoming more difficult to acquire through the site, but I’ve still had success in getting them. I’ve noticed a few things that help in this regard, and likely would help to acquire other cards on PucaTrade where there’s a lot of excess demand. The key to all of these is having ways to make shipping to *you* more attractive than shipping to the 50 other users after the same card. Some tips include:

 

  • Buy in bulk: Having a single Breeding Pool or Steam Vents on your Wants list can lead to your waiting for weeks. However, if you have a full playset of shocks on your list, then someone who is interested in sending several at once may choose you as the recipient. Having a bunch of shocks on your Wants list for a week or two and having them all taken at once is incredibly awesome.
  • Offer bounties: Yeah, this is costly but it does work. Even a small bounty on a card will set you apart, if you’re willing to pay it.
  • Have an inviting profile: If I’m going to send out a card where there’s excess demand on PucaTrade, I always check out people’s profiles and try to find someone who appears experienced and is unlikely to hassle me over card condition peccadilloes or other possible shipping issues.
  • Buy a silver/gold membership: This is really an extension of the previous point – users with paid memberships tend to appear more trustworthy as they have some sort of investment in the site. This is hardly the only reason to buy a membership, but I think it’s a massively underappreciated one!

Conclusion

In closing, the PucaTrade system as it stands has some important cracks in its functionality, and it’s important for the community as well as the site staff to understand the nature of these issues so that good policies can be implemented without creating uninformed blowback. Importantly, I don’t claim to know what the price of PucaPoints “should” be to make the site work most efficiently for the largest number of people, but if we’re not paying attention things will slide past that point pretty quickly, if they haven’t already. Part of what I’d like to see from PucaTrade staff is more transparency concerning how much currency is being generated and how long the average wait times on various staples are changing over time. The above velocity chart is a very paltry start. I’m open to being proven wrong here if the right data can be provided. Let’s kick off a real discussion here.

 

Collector’s Corner – From the Vault: Angels

Let’s take a look at From the Vault: Angels this week to see if the average $75 price for the box is worth it for picking up what could be a gem of a collector’s item.

Past History – The first From the Vault (Dragons)

First though, I want to talk about From the Vault: Dragons for a little bit. We can all agree that this FTV is the rarest one out there – it was the first, Wizards didn’t know how the product would be received, so I imagine there was some hesitation in releasing mass quantities of this product. That being said, let’s take a look at what the sealed and single prices of the cards from the set go for in the current market.

Sealed Box – These currently go for $200 BIN on eBay.

Singles

Card Name Fair Trade Price Best Buylist Price
Nicol Bolas $56.29 $36.03
Kokusho, the Evening Star $20.99 $12.75
Form of the Dragon $13.65 $6.93
Rith, the Awakener $13.48 $13.02
Hellkite Overlord $11.49 $5.01
Draco $9.99 $4.31
Niv-Mizzet, the Firemind $7.99 $1.62
Bladewing the Risen $7.23 $5.47
Dragonstorm $5.35 $3.01
Ebon Dragon $5.10 $2.51
Two-Headed Dragon $4.99 $0.39
Bogardan Hellkite $4.64 $2.51
Thunder Dragon $4.60 $2.87
Shivan Dragon $4.55 $1.66
Dragon Whelp $0.84 $0.25

Nicol Bolas is killing it here, commanding the large majority of the value of the first FTV. Even though this form of Bolas is only a dragon creature rather than planeswalker, the iconic card still holds collector value from this set because he is Magic’s biggest baddy. Next up in value is Kokusho, the Evening Star because of how insane he is in Commander (remember, for a long time he was on the Commander banlist!) and how much players love to foil out their Commander decks. All told, the value of the singles is about $171.18 if purchased separately. That’s kind of a lot, considering the likes of Shivan Dragon and Ebon Dragon are in this package, which may have been iconic to the game but otherwise are basically unplayable cards in today’s Magic.

The reason I want to talk about FTV Dragons and its prices is because Dragons are one of Magics most popular creature types, so I’m thinking that the trajectory of FTV Angels will match that of FTV Dragons, especially considering that some of the more iconic Angels are also getting makeovers to add to the collectability. FTV Dragons was released in 2008, seven years ago at this point. Let’s keep this mind when reviewing the Angels product.

From the Vault: Angels Details

Sealed Box – These currently go for $75 BIN on eBay.

Singles

Card Price
Avacyn, Angel of Hope $29.14
Entreat the Angels $15.01
Akroma, Angel of Fury $13.55
Iona, Shield of Emeria $11.15
Baneslayer Angel $10.99
Akroma, Angel of Wrath $9.33
Aurelia, the Warleader $8.99
Platinum Angel $8.11
Tariel, Reckoner of Souls $6.60
Jenara, Asura of War $6.59
Exalted Angel $5.50
Serra Angel $3.32
Iridescent Angel $3.30
Archangel of Strife $3.24
Lightning Angel $1.25

Already, we can see that the singles prices of the angels are significantly more than sealed boxes, clocking in at $136.07 for the singles rather than $75 for a sealed box. Honestly, this price for a sealed box looks like a steal compared to buying singles, especially seeing that the sealed price of a similar product FTV Dragons has appreciated to $200 over the years. Realistically though, I would not want to be waiting around more than half a decade to get a return on this sealed box. I’m surprised that Dragons hasn’t creeped up higher, but compared to Vintage collectibles I think people would rather pick up their Lotuses, Moxes, Recalls, Timewalks, and other extremely rare Vintage staples rather than pick up the more casual FTV sets. This can clearly be seen by the trend upwards that Power and other similar Vintage staples have been experiencing over the same seven years as the FTV Dragons product.

OK, looking at the singles themselves I think it’s no surprise that Avacyn is number one on the list. Unfortunately, she did not receive alternate artwork for this set, which means that she was merely included in order to reduce the market price on other Avacyn’s. Not that this a bad thing – my own opinion is that reprints like Modern Masters should happen more often, and given a wider release so that more players have a chance to pick up pricier casual staples. However, for a special release product like this, where they had to know that Akroma already has a reprint with alternate art, that Avacyn would be the headliner angel and thus should have given her alternate art. Yes, Furious Akroma also has alternate artwork  (which is awesome) but I think from what we’ve seen from these types of products that players are looking to pick them up to collect rather than play with them. I mean, not that Nicol Bolas is trash or anything, but he certainly isn’t the strongest Dragon out there these days and definitely isn’t an auto-include in every Grixis Commander deck.

I’m really glad that Iona got the alternate art treatment, however I’m not sure that Iona needed to be included in this product since she was just reprinted in Modern Masters 2015. This reprint will further suppress Iona’s price for the time being. Yet, due to the alternate art I have a feeling that in the long run she will rebound in price as casual players start picking up foil copies in order to complete their un-fun Commander decks that cheat her out on turn two.

Other interesting includes were Aurelia and Platinum Angel. Did these cards necessarily need a reprint, with one being so close to its Standard rotation and the other having multiple previous reprints? Again, I’m not sure if this was to add value to the product or to try and reduce the price of foil copies of the cards that are already out there. However, I am glad that Tariel, Reckoner of Souls finally has a foil which great for those who have her as a Commander or want to finally foil out a Mardu Angels Commander deck.

Even though the rest of the angels are pretty cheap, I have to say that I like the new art on Exalted Angel. It’s quite a difference between the iconic Onslaught art but I think that Tyler Jacobson really knocked the art out of the park. Sure, we have a Judge Foil version of the card too, but I think Wizards was looking at reprinting popular angels without caring about which cards haven’t gotten reprints yet (like the Powerpuff Girls from Avacyn Restored).

Final Thoughts

I think FTV Angels has some really cool includes, but I think that there just isn’t enough in here to justify buying the singles. The package deal is $75, and I think that ultimately the singles will lower enough to match this package entry point. And unfortunately, if FTV Dragons has anything to tell us it’s that even seven years out this package won’t be much more expensive than it is now. That means you’ll have plenty of time to pickup these premium Angels folks, so I suggest in the meantime to start picking up things like Khans fetchlands instead because we can all agree that those are going to be getting us profits in a quicker, more efficient manner.

MAGIC: THE GATHERING FINANCE ARTICLES AND COMMUNITY