New retail / secondary asking market: RTX 4090 and RTX 3090 24GB (bare card bands)

SECONDARY-MARKET ASKING prices, bare consumer 24GB GeForce cards, USD, observed 2026-10-03. NOT new-retail and NOT sold prices - these are live Buy-It-Now asks on a resale marketplace. Excludes tax/shipping PERISHABLE-FIGURE STAMP (added 2026-10-04, uniform across data/supply/ so it is greppable). PRICE CLASS: ASKING price - the rate at which a seller advertises the item for sale, NOT a sold, completed or realised transaction price. OBSERVED: 2026-10-03 RE-VERIFY BY: 2027-01-04 - the repo's quarterly re-verification bar. After that date this figure is presumed drifted and must be re-checked against its source before it is quoted again. A price without its observation date is noise; this stamp exists so a reader can tell a fresh figure from a stale one without reading prose. UNIT: SECONDARY-MARKET ASKING prices, bare consumer 24GB GeForce cards, USD, observed 2026-10-03 READING RULE: No further perishable flag is published for this figure.

lead_time_weeks is null because no lead time applies: this is a secondary/auction market priced per listing. What a buyer faces is listing availability at the moment of purchase - the record's availability field is a snapshot of what a seller posted, not a schedulable delivery date - plus whatever shipping the listing states. An auction close date is not a lead time.

EAR 3A001 or EAR99 (below the 3A090.a TPP / performance-density thresholds) + EAR 744.23 (Entity List) + EAR 744.6 (Unverified / MEU lists)

MECHANISM: the part falls BELOW the ECCN 3A090.a/.b TPP and performance-density thresholds, so the advanced-computing licence regime, its case-by-case China/Macau carve-out and its D:5 screening do NOT attach. What remains is the general EAR plus destination-country import rules and screening of the consignee and its ultimate parent against the Entity, Unverified and MEU lists. NO LICENCE REQUIRED for the sale itself; the screening is a party-listing check, not a performance-threshold check. The binding ECCN determination for any specific part is the exporter's own classification, not this record.

OBSERVATION DATE 2026-10-03. Source sup-price-picclick-ebay-asking. TWO BANDS, both 2026-10-03, bare cards only: RTX 4090 24GB n=35 after title filtering, quartiles $2,693 / $3,299 / $3,600, full observed range $1,800-$5,000; RTX 3090 24GB n=72, quartiles $1,300 / $1,514 / $1,600, full observed range $899-$2,500. price_usd is the 4090 median. CONDITION IS UNKNOWABLE HERE - the central caveat. PicClick's Condition parameter returns byte-identical pages (verified 2026-10-03), so these listings mix new-in-box, open-box-return and genuinely used cards with no way to tell them apart from the page. Within the 3090 band the ambiguity is visible in the titles themselves ('New Sealed' at $2,000 and 'Excellent Condition' at $1,529 in the same distribution), which is direct evidence that condition and price are entangled. Do not read the top of this band as a new-retail price. EXCLUDED: complete systems and laptops (the RTX 4090 set included 5 Alienware/Lenovo laptops priced $1,800-$2,580, which would drag the band down ~20% if included), the $4,950-$5,555 modded-48GB RTX 4090s, FOR-PARTS units, and one QUADRO RTX 6000 mislabelled in a 3090 query. EXPORT CONTROL (2026-10-04, mechanism-level; source spl-eccn-3a090-ccl): consumer gaming cards of this generation generally do NOT meet the 3A090.a TPP/performance-density parameters and fall under ECCN 3A001 or are designated EAR99, i.e. the advanced-computing licence regime with its case-by-case and D:5 screening does not attach to them. This is exactly what makes export status a PER-PART property rather than a per-vendor one: a GeForce RTX 5090 and a datacenter/professional part from the same vendor and the same process generation can carry entirely different control status. Recorded as false for that reason, NOT because the part is unregulated - it remains subject to the EAR generally, to destination-country import rules, and to screening of the consignee and its ultimate parent against the Entity, Unverified and MEU lists (15 CFR part 744). The binding ECCN determination for any specific SKU is the exporter's own classification, which no public vendor page states. LEAD TIME: null, and deliberately so. A marketplace or big-box reseller publishes STOCK STATE, not a lead time - where this record shows in-stock that means the listing was available on the observation date, and where it shows backorder no week window is published at all. Converting one into the other would be an invention. The one exception in the whole chain is CDW, which does print windows (source spl-cdw-published-lead-times-gpu-2026-10); note that even there the scarcest SKUs - the RTX PRO 6000 96GB cards and DGX Spark - read 'Item Backordered' with NO estimate, so scarcity and lead time are inversely related in what distributors actually publish. Probe log in source spl-negative-no-oem-publishes-lead-time. | PRICE-ATTRIBUTION FIX 2026-10-12 (repo-hygiene wave, ledger D12 takeover): removed nvidia-rtx-3090 - price_usd is the 4090 band's median ($3,299), as the record's own notes state; the 3090's band here ($1,300/$1,514/$1,600 quartiles) is a different figure recorded in notes, not the price_usd. The 3090 keeps microcenter-refurb-rtx-3090 ($1,099.99) as its cheapest price. RULE A of the same gotcha.