Non-subjective valuing

• US 20050060271A1
• Filed: 09/23/2004
• Published: 03/17/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 09/19/1995
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Tommy Vig
• Original Assignee: Tommy Vig
• Inventors: Vig, Tommy
• Application Number:
  US10/946,826
• Publication Number:
  US 20050060271A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/400
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0875 Itemisation or classification of parts, supplies or services, e.g. bill of materials
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/201 Price look-up processing, e.g. updating
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/02 Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0278 Product appraisal
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0283 Price estimation or determination
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0601 Electronic shopping [e-shopping]

Abstract

Non-Subjective Valuing is a valuing system that unearths both an entity'"'"'s actual current societal monetary value and/or price, and/or its contemporary monetary worth and/or price, specifically to an exploring individual person, group, family, vendor or corporation; by unearthing society'"'"'s and/or said explorer'"'"'s Worth Importance Point (WIP) preference chart, allocating observer'"'"'s expressed preferences as percentages of the 100% total constitution/worth of a probed entity, determining the deductive market price of the average entity in any group, and by comparing a test entity with the average entity, in terms of the WIP chart of society and/or any explorer, calculating the target entity'"'"'s monetary value, or rank. Society'"'"'s said WIP application yields “True Value,” while applying the exploring individual'"'"'s or company'"'"'s said WIP, produces “Your Value.”

Claims

1. A method and procedure for providing the true relative value of an entity, comprising the following steps:

determining qualities of said entity and the relative importance of each said quality of said entity to an observer;

calculating the deductive price of said entity, wherein said entity is noted average in its said qualities (at least one quality selected) in its group, said group identified by the fact that members of said group could have the qualities of those of the other members of said group, this assumed (or real) average unit called the average entity;

comparing the actual said quality or qualities of any existent test entity to said average entity on a percentage or other graduated basis, and so discovering the monetary value or comparative ranking of any said test entity to said observer by weighing the difference between any said test entity and said Average entity on said noted parallel quality or qualities;

translating said difference between any said test entity and said Average entity on said noted parallel quality or qualities into monetary or other value or ranking so as to provide the true relative value for said test entity; and

providing said true relative value for said test entity to said observer.

4. A method and procedure according to claim 1, further comprising the steps of;

matching buyers and sellers based on the actual value of an entity as calculated by this method, by searching for sellers who sell product or service at a price at, below or near said entity'"'"'s calculated said true relative value.

9. A method and procedure according to claim 1, wherein the step of noting qualities of an entity and the relative importance of each said quality of said entity to a observer further comprises the steps of:

providing an explanation of what a relevant quality of a probed entity is, has and/or does, whether or not there is a question if a technical expression or other obstacle might hinder said observer'"'"'s ability to appropriately assess the importance to said observer of said quality; and

automatically calculating said attribute'"'"'s relative importance to said observer based on said observer'"'"'s input.

10. A method according to claim 1, further comprising the steps of:

accepting and storing value assessment and value-importance proportionating information, from observers, using it to determine the average value system of society;

11. A method according to claim 1, further comprising the following steps:

providing a buyer and seller, wherein said buyer and said seller come to a mutually satisfactory agreement regarding the mutually acceptable sale price of an entity, facilitated by negotiations, the starting point for such bargaining being the true relative value of an entity, and/or the highest monetary number the buyer is willing to pay and the lowest monetary number at which the seller is willing to sell said entity, following said buyer and said seller learning the true societal value of said entity, or the value judgment of the optimally informed society, and/or said entity'"'"'s relative values to the now well-informed buyer and seller.

12. A method according to claim 1, wherein all observers'"'"' input, choices, selections and personal Worth Importance charts are recorded, stored and remembered, and by continually averaging these pieces of information, Non-Subjective Valuing is able to know and display the preferences of the average observer for the individual observer to be able to compare his own choices and value system with those of his community.

13. A method and procedure according to claim 1, further comprising the steps of:

determining by survey or other method a price point value reflecting the judgment of a unique observer or the common assessment of many observers, considering members of a certain test group, regarding such members of such group being generally overpriced or under priced; and

utilizing said price point value to adjust the value of said Average entity in said group, conclusively to reflect said perception of said observers'"'"' conception in reference to said test entities being so overpriced or under priced, as well as using such information to create an additional, new desirability scale.

14. A method and procedure according to claim 1, further comprising the step of:

determining a specific quality for a given entity from said observer.

2. A method and procedure comprising the following steps;

creating a observer'"'"'s Worth Importance Point Pie or Bar Chart, by assigning relative weights of qualities of an entity by rating one, more or all said qualities of said entity on a scale of 0-10, 10 being most important, or other representative scale;

adding said ratings; and

dividing each said rating by one hundredth of the total number of said qualities, thereby attaining the matching slice sizes of said Worth Importance Point pie (or other proportionate representation) for each of said qualities by the respective relevant percentages of the 100% pie, or other assumed total constitution of said entity.

3. A method and procedure according to claim 2, that uses said method to calculate the relative importance to a observer of saving money versus getting higher quality so that at the end, the method can sort out which computer or used car or vacation is the better buy for said observer, one that is 25% better than the average on quality and costs 50% more than the average in price, or one that rates 15% better on quality than the average and costs 3% less in price than the average, and so on.

7. A method and procedure according to claim 2, wherein the step of creating a observer'"'"'s Worth Importance Point Pie or other similar graphic or mathematical representation of allocating proportionate importance-variations, is further comprised of the following steps:

determining how relatively important certain qualities are to said observer who provides responses;

converting those said responses by said observer to appropriate-size pie slices, or other depiction accounting for commensurate relative weights, learning for instance how much more or less important said qualities might be to said observer; and

calculating how much savings for how much less quality is appropriate for said explorer, or

by measuring the buyer'"'"'s attractiveness scale, which scale accounts for the explorer'"'"'s budget and his or her or its level of reluctance to overpay for what the observer really wants.

5. A method and procedure for providing the true relative value of an entity, comprising the following steps:

determining qualities of an entity and the relative importance of said qualities (at least one) of said entity to a observer;

calculating the deductive price of a real or fictitious entity which said entity is average in its one or more qualities, called the average entity;

comparing the actual quality or qualities of any existent or assumed test entity with the quality or qualities of said average entity to discover and measure the difference between said test entity and said average entity;

determining the value or ranking of said test entity by the weighted relationship between the quality or qualities of said test entity and the quality or qualities of said average entity so as to provide a true relative value for said test entity; and

comparing the values of said entities, whether or not they are similar in nature, for instance if a vacation is discovered to be worth $1,000 and a computer is discovered to have a value of $800, the vacation is approximately 20% more valuable.

6. A method and procedure for providing the true relative value of an entity, comprising the following steps;

determining qualities of a test entity and the relative importance of each said quality of said test entity;

calculating the deductive price of a real or fictitious entity which entity is average in its qualities, called the average entity;

comparing the actual qualities of said test entity to the qualities of said average entity to measure the difference between aid test entity and said average entity;

determining the value or ranking of said test entity by the weighted relationship between said test entity'"'"'s qualities and those of said average entity;

comparing the values of at least two test entities whether or not they are similar in nature, for instance if a vacation is discovered to be worth $1,000 and a computer is discovered to have a value of $800, the vacation is then approximately 20% more valuable; and

comparing existent prices with the actual values of said test entities, and sorting for the observer the best deal in said observer'"'"'s terms, for instance if a vacation worth $1,000 is for sale for $500, and a computer worth $800 is for sale for $700, the vacation is the better deal, but if the difference reaches a certain point, then it might be the other way around, and so on.

8. A method and procedure for providing the true relative value of an entity, comprising the following steps;

determining qualities of a test entity and the relative importance of each said quality of said test entity to a observer;

calculating the deductive price of at least one real or fictitious entity which entity is average in its qualities in its group, said group identified by the fact that members of said group could have the qualities of those of the other members of said group, this assumed (or real) average unit called the Average entity;

comparing the qualities of said test entity to the qualities of said Average entity on a weighted percentage or other basis, and so discovering the true relative value of said test entity to said observer by calculating the difference between said test entity and said Average entity;

collecting the consensus of the experts and laymen concerning said true relative value of said qualities; and

determining the weighted percentage or other biases the experts think the lay-persons'"'"' opinions should weigh, and discovering the weighted percentage or other bases the amateurs think the experts'"'"' opinion should be considered, then splitting both numbers to use for calculation.

15. A method and procedure for providing the true relative value of an entity, comprising the following steps;

determining at least one quality for at least one entity, the relative importance of said quality to an observer and a value for each said at least one quality;

providing an average entity, wherein said average entity is average in its group, based upon said at least one quality and has an average price and an average value for said at least one quality;

determining the value difference between said value for each said at least one quality and said average value for said at least one quality;

ranking at least two entities of said group according said value difference to provide a ranked list of said at least two entities; and

providing ranked list to said observer.

16. A method of evaluating a member or members of a group, comprising:

a. providing a group;

b. providing an assumed unit in said group wherein said assumed unit has at least one average characteristic;

c. retrieving in a marketplace an average price corresponding to said assumed average unit; and

d. quantifying the relative importance of said at least one average characteristic of said assumed average unit whereby

e. the actual monetary value of any existent test unit in said group can be discovered by comparing said test unit'"'"'s unique quantified or unquantified characteristic or characteristics with that or those of said assumed average unit and providing a sort list of said units, according to the one or more of their said values, or sorting and listing them by one, many, or all of their quanitfied or unquantified attributes.

17. A method of evaluation, comprising:

a. providing a group;

b. wherein said group is identified by the fact that the members of said group could have the qualities of those of the other members;

c. providing an average assumed unit in said group, which said average assumed unit is calculated average as to at least one characteristic said members of said group can possess, as well as said average assumed unit'"'"'s assumed value as to provide a quantified quality for said average assumed unit;

d. noting at least one of the characteristics of members in said group to a observer and noting the relative importance of each selected at least one characteristic of said members of said group to said individual or collective to provide a quantified quality for said observer; and

e. comparing said quantified quality for said observer to said average quantified quality of said assumed unit in said group on a percentage basis whereby the monetary or other value or comparative ranking of any member of said group is discovered by weighing the difference between at least one quantified parallel qualities of any said member of said group against said quantified parallel quality of qualities of the said assumed unit in said group, translating such divergence into monetary or other value or ranking, and sorting by said attributes'"'"' values of said entities for comparison purposes.

18. The method according to claim 17, further comprising:

a. displaying said members of said group according to their compared value or ranking.

19. A method of valuing, comprising:

a. providing entities;

b. providing attributes for said entities;

c. providing an average entity which is average according to said attirbutes;

d. comparing said entities to said average entity according to said attributes to provide a set of compared attributes;

e. organizing said entities by said attributes to form organized entities;

f. ranking said organized entities to form ranked entities; and

g. displaying said ranked entities to form valued entities.

20. A method according to claim 19, wherein said attributes include any single characteristic or combination of qualities.

21. A method according to claim 19, wherein said attributes may include price or popularity.

22. A method according to claim 19, wherein said attributes are chosen from the group consisting of true relative value, desirability, savings in percentage terms, savings in monetary terms, speed, height, size, power, any other quantifiable attribute and any combination thereof.

23. A method according to claim 19, further comprising the step of displaying said entities in ascending value order of said valued entries according to their total respective values or per one or any number of their attributes.

24. A method according to claim 19, further comprising the step of displaying said entities in descending value order of said valued entries.

25. A method according to claim 19, wherein said step of ranking occurs in the specific terms of a observer'"'"'s value system, wherein said observer may be an individual observer, society, a specific group, collective or family.

26. A method and procedure where the correct market price of a specific used automobile may be determined by comparing its selected, quantified characteristics to those of the average used automobile on a percentage or other basis, said method comprising the following steps:

a. through market survey or other method, noting the assumed current sale price of an average used automobile, wherein said average used automobile is a deductive specific used make/year/model automobile, which said average used automobile is average according to a selected unlimited number of characteristics;

b. selecting at least one characteristic (such as “

popularity,”

or “

design,”

), all considered said at least one characteristic adding up to 100% of said average automobile'"'"'s value, such as “

customer satisfaction,” and

/or “

prestige,” and

/or “

reliability” and

/or “

location,” and

so on, for example a 1998 Mercedes C 230 which is average on all its said qualities, should have a market price of $20,000, on a specific date in a specific city;

c. through survey or other method note how relatively important each said at least one characteristic of said vehicle is, such as for instance “

engine condition 55%,”

“

interior condition 20%,”

“

extra equipment 22%,”

“

location 3%,” and

so on, in the case of this particular example the retail monetary standard would then be $11,000 for said quality of “

engine condition,”

(that is 55% of $20,000);

$4,000 for said quality of “

interior condition;

”

$4,400 for said attribute of “

extra equipment” and

$600 for where said average automobile is located, and so on;

d. rate an existing test vehicle, for example said test vehicle may be a unique test 1998 Mercedes C 230, on each of selected parallel said at least one characteristics on a scale of 0-10, 10 being best or 1-5, 5 being best, or some other consistent way, and suppose for example that due to said ratings, our said test 1998 Mercedes 230 rates 8% better than said deductive average vehicle on its quality of “

engine condition,”

5% worse than the said average vehicle as to its “

interior condition,”

10% worse than the said average vehicle as to its “

extra equipment,” and

2% better than said average vehicle as to its “

location,” and

e. calculating the value of said test vehicle, this particular said test vehicle on its “

engine condition”

attribute is to be worth $11,000 plus $880=$11,880, or to put it another way, the importance of “

engine condition”

comprises 55% of the total value, which in our example, is worth. $11,000 if engine condition were average, therefore since our test vehicle is 8% better than the average vehicle on this quality, we add 8% of $11,000 for said test automobile'"'"'s value;

our test 1998 Mercedes C 230 interior condition is determined to be 5% worse than that of the average 1998 Mercedes C 230, which means that we must deduct 5% of $4,000 from $4,000, or $4,000-$200=$3,800, making the value of our test vehicle $3,800 on this quality;

then since our test automobile has 10% less extra equipment than the average one, we must deduct 10% of $4,400, or $440 from $4,400=$3,969; and

lastly, in this illustration, being that our test vehicle is located in an area which is better than average by 2%, we add 2% of $600 to our test car'"'"'s value for this fact, which means that is this respect, it is worth $612. Adding up $11,880+$3,800+$3,959+$612=$20,251. This $20,251 is then the value of our test vehicle, or it is about 1% more valuable than the average 1998 Mercedes C 230. This example is only to illustrate the workings of the present claim, not to limit it in any way.

27. A method and procedure where the current correct market price or ranking of an existent test entity may be obtained by;

a. noting for how much money an entity in its group would currently sell at the marketplace if said entity were average according to at least one selected qualities, said entity with said at least one selected quality being average called the Average entity;

b. observing, on a percentage or other basis, how relatively important each said at least one selected quality is; and

c. comparing said at least one selected quality of said existent said test entity with parallel quantified qualities of said Average entity, on a percentage or other equitable basis, then calculating the resulting difference, and express it in monetary or ranking terms.

28. A method and procedure where the current correct market price or ranking of an existent test entity may be obtained by:

a. noting for how much money a deductive entity in a provided group would currently sell at the marketplace if at least one quality of said deductive entity were average to provide at least one average quality;

b. noting how relatively important each said at least one quality is;

c. comparing parallel quantified unique qualities of an existent test entity with said at least one average quality of said deductive average entity on a percentage or other just basis; and

d. calculating and expressing the difference in monetary or ranking terms.

29. A method and procedure for providing the true price of a specific used automobile, said method comprising the following steps:

noting the assumed current sale price of an average used automobile;

selecting a few, many, all, or at least one characteristic;

assigning an importance rating to each said at least one characteristic;

rating an existing test vehicle according to said at least one characteristic;

calculating the value of said test vehicle by multiplying said at least one characteristic by its corresponding said importance rating to provide a value for said test vehicle;

rating said average used automobile according to said at least one characteristics;

calculating the value of said average used automobile by multiplying said at least one characteristic by its corresponding said importance rating to provide a value for said average used automobile; and

comparing said value for said test vehicle with said value for said average used automobile,

listing test automobiles in order of their value per the calculation method set forth above;

sort them by one, more, or all of their qualities.

30. A method and procedure for providing the true relative value of an entity, comprising the following steps:

determining a set of qualities of said entity, wherein said set of qualities consists of at least one quality;

determining the relative importance of each said quality within said set of qualities to a observer, vendor or consumer;

calculating a rating for an average entity according to said relative importance of said set of qualities and the rating of said quality for said average entity;

calculating a rating for a test entity according to said relative importance of said set of qualities and the rating of said quality for said test entity;

comparing said rating for an average entity to said rating for a test entity or test entities, to provide a comparison basis;

interpreting said comparison basis between any said test entity or entities and said average entity, into monetary or other value, or ranking, so as to provide a value scale for said test entity or entities; and

after sorting them by total respective values or by any one or more valued qualities, providing said respective values of said entity or entities to said observer, in a sorted-by-attributes way.

31. A method and procedure of determining the value of an entity to a observer comprising the following steps:

determining an appropriate set of qualities for said item;

rating the importance of each quality within said set of qualities to said observer on a scale of 0 to 10, 10 being best, or 1-5, 5 being best, to provide a set of importance ratings comprised of individual importance ratings;

adding said individual importance ratings to provide a total rating;

dividing each said individual importance rating by said total rating to provide the relative weight for each quality within said set of qualities;

determining a quality rating according to said set of qualities for at least one quality;

multiplying each said quality rating by said relative weights for at least one item to provide at least one weighted value; and

adding each said at least one weighted value to provide said entity'"'"'s value.

32. A method as in claim 31, further comprising the step of comparing said value of at least one item to said true relative value of at least one other item.

33. A method and procedure for providing the value of an entity, comprising the following steps:

determining qualities of said entity and the relative importance of each said quality of said entity;

calculating the deductive price of the average entity, wherein said entity is noted average in its said quantified qualities (at least one selected) in its group, said group identified by the fact that members of said group could have the qualities of those of the other members of said group;

comparing the actual said quantified quality or qualities of any existent test entity to parallel quantified quality or qualities of said average entity, on a percentage or other calibrated basis, and so discovering the monetary value or comparative ranking of any said test entity, by weighing the difference between any said test entity and said average entity on said noted parallel quantified quality or qualities;

translating said difference between any said test entity and said average entity on said noted parallel quantified or unquantified quality or qualities into monetary or other value or ranking so as to provide the value for said test entity; and

providing said quantified value of said test entity or said quantified values of said test entities, in order of their total respective quantified values, or according to their one or more said quantified values, in ascending or descending order.

34. A method and procedure for providing the a sorted by attributes list of entities, comprising the following steps:

a/ provide a group of entities

b/ determine the qualities of said entities

c/ determine the relative value of attributes of said entities

d/ determine the total value of said entities

e/ set forth and display in ascending or descending order the sorted entities, such sorting based on the respective values of said entities'"'"' quantified or unquantified values, at least one attribute selected.