Voting options for future collection polls

[GoktimusPrime]

As was discussed on this thread (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=2652&page=2), several people feel the need for the poll options to be revised to better reflect the growing number of Transformer toys that people are owning in their collections, particularly as the number of people owning 1000 or more Transformers is becoming more commonplace, the "1000 or more" option is no longer adequate... especially when more and more people's collection will hit the 2000 mark.

So how should the new poll categories be divided? Because some message boards only allow a maximum of 10 voting options, we can't have more than 10. So should we have:

+ Multiples of 200
i.e. <=200 / 400 / 600 / 800 / 1000 / 1200 / 1400 / 1600 / 1800 / 2000+

+ Multiples of 300
i.e. <=300 / 600 / 900 / 1200 / 1500 / 1800 / 2100 / 2400 / 2700 / 3000+

+ Multiples of 400
i.e. <=400 / 800 / 1200 / 1600 / 2000 / 2400 / 2800 / 3200 / 3600 / 4000+

+ Multiples of 500
i.e. <=500 / 1000 / 1500 / 2000 / 2500 / 3000 / 3500 / 4000 / 4500 / 5000+

[liegeprime]

Voted : it says specify. have a different pie chart showing off the 1000+ collection results. Increments could be in 100s. This will mean we still keep the original demographic data for the first pie (100 increments) and just have a separate breakdown for the 1000+ in another pie chart. Coz I think making the increments higher will (say per 200 mark) will not reflect a good comparison from the previous 2 data already done ( which is the point of doing this yearly anyways) thereby amending it now to increase the increments by 200 will not jive with the first. Just add another pie chart for the breakdown of the 1000+. This would mean having a separate poll mebbe for 1000+ collectors. Also there will always be new members whose collecting habits are not as voracious as some so will prolly just pick up an item or two and not even have 100 for their collection count, increase in the increments would likely exclude them which I believe is not the point of the yearly poll. :)

[G1Optimal]

Stupid question why can't it be a doubling, tripling and so on of the previous group?:o

etc...
Doubling
<=100 / <=200 / <=400 / <=800 / <=1600 / <=3200 / <=6400

Tripling
<=100 / <=300 / <=600 / <=1200 / <=3600 / <=7200 / <=14400


Other than this multiples of between 300 and 400...
"as i kind of like the idea of not to little (200) and not to much (500) in this case ":)


Voted : it says specify. have a different pie chart showing off the 1000+ collection results. Increments could be in 100s. This will mean we still keep the original demographic data for the first pie (100 increments) and just have a separate breakdown for the 1000+ in another pie chart. Coz I think making the increments higher will (say per 200 mark) will not reflect a good comparison from the previous 2 data already done ( which is the point of doing this yearly anyways) thereby amending it now to increase the increments by 200 will not jive with the first. Just add another pie chart for the breakdown of the 1000+. This would mean having a separate poll mebbe for 1000+ collectors. Also there will always be new members whose collecting habits are not as voracious as some so will prolly just pick up an item or two and not even have 100 for their collection count, increase in the increments would likely exclude them which I believe is not the point of the yearly poll. :)

Stupid though
I wonder, if darkening the colour "based" on the percentage within the same group on the pie graph would do that.

[The_Damned]

i think increments of 200 would be good

[STL]

Gok, why not ask members to supply their collection count figures. In doing so that could allow u to select the most appropriate data range rather than having to conjecture over what options to use. It's a bit more work but I think every member would just have to nominate their number. It's also allow you to conduct more statistical analysis such as correlations between different data points, growth rates, hypothesis testing etc. You could also be able to normalise the data which would really help with providing more info.

[GoktimusPrime]

It's a bit more work
It would be a lot more work (and time!). (^_^)

[dirge]

STL, you're asking this of a guy who still uses MS Paint to create his photocomics :eek:

I voted for 200 - it'll give a good representation without the numbers clumping up at the "x00+" data range. Ideally I'd love to see 20 or 30 options, so that you get a deep data set, but yeah some boards limit the options.

[STL]

It would be a lot more work (and time!). (^_^)

I can help out. It shouldn't take too long once you have the data. Probably 20 minutes tops. But judging by (now) last year's results, I think you've got it about right. The data set seems skewed leftwards meaning that you need to construct intervals that are smaller to capture the more sensitive changes in that.

And looking at last year's data set a normal distribution would be very interesting to find out where the mean is. But anyways, if u want to, that's one way to do it next year and i'd be happy to help with the Excel side of things.

And Gok, you need to stop using MS Paint. :p

[BigTransformerTrev]

How about instead of numbers you do a poll on what kinds of figures people perfer to collect and why?

[Hursticon]

I went with increments of 200 as I feel one is able to more accurately reflect their collection count in this way without having to disclose the actual number. ;):)


How about instead of numbers you do a poll on what kinds of figures people prefer to collect and why?

I think Paulbot's annual survey sort of covers this, but I certainly wouldn't detract from the suggestion/proposal. :cool:

[BigTransformerTrev]

I think Paulbot's annual survey sort of covers this, but I certainly wouldn't detract from the suggestion/proposal. :cool:

Which one is that and when? Sounds interesting :)

[Sinnertwin]

Better start counting then... >_<

[Sharky]

Gok, why not ask members to supply their collection count figures. In doing so that could allow u to select the most appropriate data range rather than having to conjecture over what options to use. It's a bit more work but I think every member would just have to nominate their number. It's also allow you to conduct more statistical analysis such as correlations between different data points, growth rates, hypothesis testing etc. You could also be able to normalise the data which would really help with providing more info.

i couldnt give you an exact number i just ball park it......which is where goks surveys are good, i dont really care how small my collection is :p

i voted 200 increments seems resonable as there isnt usually 200 items released in a year to make massive shifts in the figures


Better start counting then... >_<

i give up after 21

[Paulbot]

Which one is that and when? Sounds interesting :)

Nearly five years between posts on this thread. Maybe a record!

Hursticon's talking about the Ozformers Awards (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=15321) which shows favourites more than particular collecting patterns.

(Working on the 2013 award form at the moment)

[griffin]

i voted 200 increments seems resonable as there isnt usually 200 items released in a year to make massive shifts in the figures

According to the 2013 checklist (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=15196) of Hasbro US, Hasbro HK and TakaraTomy toys released during this year (or expected by the end of this year), there were (about) 492 Transformers toys this year! :eek:
That does NOT count anything released in multiple markets that didn't change the packaging (like the Kreo in Japan or the Platinum toys in HK), or anything that was a multi-pack that had the focus on the combined form (eg Kreo combiners or the kreons in a build set), or any roleplay items. (so if you count any of those individual combiners or character toys in a bulk set, the number for this year will be even higher)

The number is a little higher this year, despite not being a movie year, because of all the Kreo and Botshots being released in cheap, massive numbers.
Next year should be even more, with a movie line (and all the gimmick stuff), as well as the ongoing Kreo & Botshots.

[GoktimusPrime]

Kre-Os, Kreons and Construct-Bots don't count under the UCM (Article 08) so it wouldn't affect UCM-based polling.

[Sharky]

According to the 2013 checklist (http://www.otca.com.au/boards/showthread.php?t=15196) of Hasbro US, Hasbro HK and TakaraTomy toys released during this year (or expected by the end of this year), there were (about) 492 Transformers toys this year! :eek:


wow it does not feel like that, i guess because we have such a limited release retail year and i am so behind in picking stuff up too

[DELTAprime]

How many people really have large collections in excess of 1000? I don't think many of us have collections that are that big. I only have 303 toys in my collection and I think there will be a lot more like me and far fewer with over 1000.

[GoktimusPrime]

How many people really have large collections in excess of 1000? I don't think many of us have collections that are that big. I only have 303 toys in my collection and I think there will be a lot more like me and far fewer with over 1000.
19% of collectors surveyed have collections numbering 1000 or more.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/goktimusprime/Transformers/Collection%20Poll/collection_pollresults_2007-2011_averaged.jpg

[UltraMarginal]

Honestly have no Idea what numbers I have. When I was a youngun it was around 100, I stopped collecting for a long time and started back up with Alternators/Binaltech then Generations and the Movies, animated and prime. so probably close to 1000.

perhaps increments of 150 or 200.
The problem with this is we then lose resolution in the data.
Why bother limiting ourselves to other threads, if we have 15 increments and somewhere else has 10 and we need to compare, just fit out 15 increments into their 10.

[DELTAprime]

19% of collectors surveyed have collections numbering 1000 or more.

That means that 81% have less than 1000 and looks like over 75% have 500 or less. More people have smaller collections. If you really want to increase the limit then maybe try something like.

100 / 200 / 300 / 400 / 500 / 750 / 1000 / 1250 / 1500 / 2000

[GoktimusPrime]

First of all, I've stopped doing the annual collection count survey poll since 2011. Pretty much other boards aren't interested in participating any more, unless we wanna still do it just for OTCA. <shrugs>

Secondly, even if we wanted to continue this project, changing the increments would render the results incomparable with previous years. The results that I showed you in my last posted represents the average of results gathered between the years of 2007 to 2011. If we were to conduct a poll this month for 2013 and we used the increments that you're suggesting then I would be unable to include results for anything above 500 into that of previous years.

But don't forget that from 2009 to 2011 we did have secondary polls for people with collections number 100 or less and 1000 and over - represented thusly:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/goktimusprime/Transformers/Collection%20Poll/collection_pollresults_2007-2011_averaged_100.jpg
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/goktimusprime/Transformers/Collection%20Poll/collection_pollresults_2007-2011_averaged_1000.jpg

[Sinnertwin]

5500 TF? Wow... :eek:
You'd need a hangar to store it all :p

[GoktimusPrime]

5500 TF? Wow... :eek:
You'd need a hangar to store it all :p
:) Noone voted above 3500, but I just put that option there because in the future we could very well have collections that large. In 1985 I thought owning 50 Transformers was already a big accomplishment - the idea of owning hundreds or thousands would've been inconceivable.

We're gonna need Tardises to store our collections one day. :p

[DELTAprime]

But don't forget that from 2009 to 2011 we did have secondary polls for people with collections number 100 or less and 1000 and over - represented thusly:

In that case there is no need to change the poll. Just do a secondary poll like you have done in the past for people over 1000.