Comments on: Insider: “Way Back” Trade Stacks #2

By: @kellyreid

@kellyreid — Sun, 12 Aug 2012 05:35:54 +0000

In reply to Paul Feudo. Pretty cool that you read 18 months of Insider in a couple of days! Glad to have you on board. You picked a good time to join up (you'll see why in a week or two.....)

By: Paul Feudo

Paul Feudo — Sun, 12 Aug 2012 00:27:05 +0000

It's never pestering, it's good you're willing to listen to your readers. I think from time to time this type of article is reasonable, although personally I would focus more on the trends represented in the price changes you examine over time more so than the specifics of the individual cases you highlight, teach a man to fish etc. One of the other problems may have been on my end as I just got insider and read something like 1.5 years worth of content in a couple of days so these articles may seem more frequent to me without that necessarily being the reality for anyone else.

By: @Chosler88

@Chosler88 — Sat, 11 Aug 2012 22:45:29 +0000

In reply to Paul Feudo. I understand. If you don't mind me still pestering you with questions, is something like this something you don't mind from time to time (considering you're paying less than .50 for it?) and can enjoy with that in mind alongside the more traditional content I put out week to week, or would you rather I just stick to that stuff? For what it's worth, I actually found the process of reviewing these trades (and then writing about them) to be well worth my time. For instance, the lesson about the Eldrazi is something that will stick out in mind the next time a similar thing comes up, and I hadn't even realized that SCG had raised the price of Birds up so high (thought it was still 4ish), nor did I realize exactly how far the non-Emrakul Eldrazi have gone up. Did you? That alone is going to make/save me money this weekend at GenCon, and it's not something I would have noticed (or brought to your attention) without going through this exercise.

By: Paul Feudo

Paul Feudo — Sat, 11 Aug 2012 22:31:22 +0000

Perhaps it doesn’t feel serious enough? Honestly I’m not sure how to make it feel ‘premium’ which means I am of little help, but my initial reaction when I finished the article was to go see what the premium article was for the day as I had assumed I clicked the free first by mistake. These types of articles have a place and a purpose certainly, but they are also something I feel like I could find for free on most major sites, I have no idea if that’s true but that’s how it feels to me. When I signed up for premium this is not the type thing I expected though it is also possible I had the wrong impression.

By: @Chosler88

@Chosler88 — Sat, 11 Aug 2012 22:20:16 +0000

In reply to Paul Feudo. It's useful but not worth paying for? I'm not sure I understand. I would consider something that has a use to have a value as well. And even gaining enjoyment from reading something makes it useful, in my opinion. Intellectual Property and all. Do you have any suggestions on how an article like this could better "feel premium?" or is the entire concept unacceptable? I appreciate the feedback, want to be able to revisit this in the future and keep it fun while still satisfying what you guys want.

By: Paul Feudo

Paul Feudo — Sat, 11 Aug 2012 21:55:28 +0000

The issue I have is not with the article itself which is useful and fun, but rather that I am paying for it. This does not feel premium at all which is part of insiders selling point.

By: @Chosler88

@Chosler88 — Sat, 11 Aug 2012 21:49:56 +0000

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I see the reactions are mixed. I see your points, and I tried to go more in-depth here than just "get rid of Standard cards," as the majority of the cards in these trades were all in Standard together, which makes for a much more interesting vantage point than "trade Primevals for Goyfs."
The reason I moved away from this type of article as a weekly thing two years back was that it can become repetitive, and I understand that. We're also in a relatively slow period of MTG finance, and this certainly isn't going to replace the in-depth traditional analysis I, and other writers here, provide. That said, a lighter article (when done sparingly), can be an enjoyable read for many, and it's not like this was totally bereft of analysis. I'm sorry if not everyone enjoyed this article, but as you can see from the comments, it's something that appeals differently to different groups.

By: Mickeal

Mickeal — Sat, 11 Aug 2012 06:04:40 +0000

My two cents: I would LOVE to see MORE articles like this, from several different writers, as long as they DO NOT replace more traditional content. it's something that is relatively easy to churn out, interesting, and moderately informative. i think it would also help fight the one major complaint i (and i assume others) have… Not enough articles/content.

By: dave wasser

dave wasser — Fri, 10 Aug 2012 23:07:56 +0000

I can link old standard cards that have dropped too anyone willing to spend 8 a month on this is well beyond this.

By: Adam Zakreski

Adam Zakreski — Thu, 09 Aug 2012 22:09:19 +0000

Sounds like good free content to tease non subscribers.

By: Logan

Logan — Thu, 09 Aug 2012 12:49:06 +0000

Have to side with Dave on this one, not insider material, especially when you give away equivalent examples on LegitMTG. I expect more from payed content.

By: Sven

Sven — Thu, 09 Aug 2012 08:19:01 +0000

More trades please! 🙂 I honestly believe this Insider worthy if we continue to revisit it from time to time. It helps to get better in trades, discover long time trends, find some logic, … But we should see it more frequently. Please? 😉

By: dave wasser

dave wasser — Thu, 09 Aug 2012 08:09:42 +0000

This is a fun article but insider worthy? 🙁