Suggestion: Purple Energy Bombing Run at 44.98–49.48 keys

Price Suggestion

~52 keys

p.nrg

31 votes up

16 votes down

Related Suggestions

This suggestion was accepted Tue, 19 Feb 13 05:14:10 +0000 by A Distinctive Lack of Vincent.

Comments can no longer be left on this suggestion.

Comments

I recently had an unpleasant experience with some guy who kept citing this site as proof for his 1 bud offer on my Bombing Run. So I guess it's time to update the price or something.

Proof: my trade(s) on outpost http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/7587204 and http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/8663924

Offers within the past week:

Max Head and Smoking Slouch for my hat + "a little bit" in sweets: [url]http://i.imgur.com/12pYoQo.png[/url] (>2.5 buds)

Purple Energy Carouser's Capotain: [url]http://i.imgur.com/Qh0CoCF.png[/url] (~2 buds)

Planets Tosslecap: [url]http://i.imgur.com/v9kqlnQ.png[/url] (~2 buds)

SF Rocket Launcher + Bills Hat: [url]http://i.imgur.com/RERG8ft.png[/url] (~2 buds)

Green Energy Slouch: [url]http://i.imgur.com/aqiHfe5.png[/url] (>2 buds)

Bubbling Fed Fightin' Fedora + Vintage Luger + Bills Hat: [url]http://i.imgur.com/cLgePVc.png[/url] (>2 buds)

I put the lower bound at 2 because I'm consistently getting 2 bud offers. As in "green energy slouch is sellable at 2.5 buds, but I'm considering it really damn easy to sell at 2 buds in a couple of days."

I put the upper bound at 2.2 buds because I sometimes get offers like the Max Head + Smoking Slouch (>2.5 buds), but I'm in class all day and when I see the offer, he's offline. Rinse, repeat, and two days later he buys some other guy's hat.

A couple things.

#1, just for your on sanity, you dont need to show proof of the offer as long as someone can go to the trade and find it themselves.

#2, More exact figures would be helpful since >2/~2 could mean anything between 1.7-2.3

#3, You also have to factor an overpay in crap--Generally 90% of the average is a pretty good rule of thumb.

#4, the max+smoking slouch-something appears to be a pretty big outlier (also, a little bit is kinda subjective)

Edit:

The offers are as follows:

Max +slouch 2.5~,

capotain 2,

tossle 2.2,

SF RL 2,

Slouch 2.2,

Bubbling fed 1.8

So, 2-2.2 does look fine.

the amount downvoters posting their flawed reasoning scares me. At least Awesome McCoolSuggestor says something right.

People complained to me before because my trade is really long and most of the offers are hidden. They just want to push a button and increase their e-peen, not crawl through my post.

I don't trust the unusual prices here (look at the change I'm proposing), so I trust what I see on outpost. And there's only one purple energy capotain on outpost right now. And it has an offer of 1 bud, 22 keys, and another offer of a Bubbling Crown + 12 keys + a bills hat. I'm not going to say 1.9-2.3 because you can look that up yourself, either on backpack.tf or via outpost. I'm just giving a ballpark estimate.

Except bp.tf averages are pretty accurate for the most part, and unless you show proof to the contrary you should be using bp.tf prices, just stating random prices kinda invalidates it as proof. (and most voters will assume you're using prices which have proof behind them)

Yeah, but for the most part (1/2 of the unusuals I've owned), the prices are off, either by a little bit or by a lot. In fact, I bumped the price of the scorching sola topi from the 1 bud range to the 3 buds range.

It's a work in progress. But it turns out that backpack.tf does match all my price estimates, though. So I don't know what the problem is. Should I be including links to the prices of the individual unusuals on backpack.tf? I think that's too much of a pain.

No, just use more specific prices. 2~ and >2 are very subjective (and could mean anything between 1.8-2.9, which is particularly good for pricing purposes.

And the problem is this, when u list an unusuals value (as an offer) voters will assume their is proof behind that price. So estimating kinda makes proof pointless since its not actually proof but rather an opinion, and Secondly, its kinda like lying since voters will assume the prices are based on facts.

mu my bru, The new range looks accurate, good job having suggested it with reliable proof.

+Up

My personal rule when referencing unusuals in a suggestion. If backpack.tf has recently updated the price (within the past 1-2 months), it should be a reliably usable price. Most of the bad pricings are from old, unupdated prices and prices that were put in before evidence became a requirement. Recent prices should be at least close to accurate.

If it hasn't been updated in several months or, worse yet, has a set price without having ever received a suggestion, ballpark estimates are more than welcome, but explain where you're coming from on your estimate (as you just did in this comment for the P.E. Capotain). You can give ballpark estimates for all referenced unusuals if you prefer, nothing says you have to use bp.tf prices, just be sure to give a little to back them up.

How is it that people are allowed to suggest a price increase for an unusual that they own? Totally not for person gain. Really.

if they find their own reliable proof such as links, and or screenshots, then it doesn't matter if they own one

What Snow said. In-fact, its the owners of the hats that should be making the suggestions since they have the experience with selling the hats (less speculation involved, and more hands on experience).

If I own the only purple energy bombing run on outpost, who is going to crawl through my deleted trades to find actual evidence? Certainly not you.

Me or long or balloo or woifi or jon or one of the other larger unusual suggesters.

Then I applaud your hard work.

Honestly voting is getting to the point where if someone owns the hat and is suggesting a price raise, people automatically downvote without further investigation. But this seems rather reasonable