Suggestion: Strange Baby Face's Blaster at 0.22 ref

I think that you would need actual "SOLD" at 0.22 scrap to put that in range. (Selling =/= Sold) Also, the buyers at 0.22 looked like they just needed one quickly for them to use.

I personally am unfamiliar with the S. Baby Face Blaster, but what I do know that every good suggestion needs actual sold not just a post ^^

Staying neutral for now ^^

No you dont need actual solds for 0.22 - The only things you need is unsolds at lower price and need to prove that the high end is possible .

How is unsolds any good for raising a price? Unsolds are only good for lowering, if there are unsolds below the suggested price then it means they don't sell for cheaper and raising the price is the complete opposite to what is needed.

I meant unboughts*

They're the same thing...

Unsold - seller failed

Unbought - buyer failed

How exactly is it the same ?

For this range providing unbought's at 0.11 would prove that 0.11 is impossible

providing unsolds at 0.11 would prove that 0.22 flat is impossible.

So how is it the same smartass?

Anyway this not the place to discuss such things , so I'm gonna stop replying before more dumb people reply with more dumb stuff.

A little quick on the draw, are we? I posted nothing offensive, yet you go and call me a smartass.

And you're wrong. They're the same. Unsold means it hasn't been sold. Unbought means it hasn't been bought. Bought and sold are synonyms in this case.

Well, I may as well say it. "Dumbass".

Hue . Smart one.

http://i.imgur.com/8Zh7Ih1.png

Lol, typo. I meant to say "They are the same" in both. Editing it now, however I will admit I am absent minded. I like how you completely avoided the rest of the comment, though. Mind answering that? Also, when does your period end?

Latest suggestion was 4 months ago. I was barely skimming through the suggestion when I first saw it, now, I noticed a lot of wrong stuff both with this suggestion and the price of this item.

Being an item 4 months old, you would really need to prove both ends (if not even re-verify the price itself), also he showed a lot of unsold even at 0.22 for a long period of time (Check my newer comment below analyzing it)

Investigated your "Sellers for 0.22 ref"

1) New

2) 1 Week ago

3) 2 Weeks ago, haven't sold

4) Wanted 0.22, VERY VERY NEW! (1Hr)

5) 1 Week ago, not sold

6) 1 MONTH AGO! Not sold either

7) 3 MONTHS AGO! *Flips table* NOT SOLD

8) 5 Days ago, not sold

9) 1 day ago, new new new.

Conclusion, all of your Seller/Sold WERE NOT SOLD, they were also up for a ridiculously long amount of time! Looks like this is an item with extremely LOW demand.

Next, your "Unsuccessful buyers post"

1) Has a baby-face in his bp

2) Player was last online 40 DAYS AGO

3) Last online 16 days ago

4) Seems legit, 3 days is young tho

5) 1 wep, not in range, don't need to show, obvious lowballing quickbuyer, not good proof

6) Seems legit, 4 days is still young imo.

7) Seems legit [This is the first good proof]

8) 1 Wep, not in range, do not need to show

9) 3 Days is new

10) 1 wep, not in range

Not enough proof to eliminate range. Your proofs selling at 0.22 also told me that it is hard to sell at 0.22 even. This weapon just has too little demand. Down-voting cause of bad proof.

EDIT: Many players in the comment says that this suggestion is good, they clearly haven't even look at the link and would only like the raise to probably get rid of them baby-face they stocked up. CHECK THE DAMN PROOF PLEASE!

And you should actually present counter-proof instead of debunking the proof. The proof is there to lean you towards any of the 3 votes, but if you want other people to downvote you'll have to present counter-proof , in this case proof that 0.11 is still possible.

I am just saying that his proofs are bad/useless proofs, he didn't verify it, no actual "trades" were made, his 0.22 sellers are basically "unsolds" his buyers at 0.11 are practically new and/or offline for a long amount of time.

Downvote because his suggestion shouldn't get accepted for bad proof. That is all

Well, this is my first suggestion, so I should expect this. I would have more proof, but I don't know how to search for closed trades on Outpost.

Also, I don't have much to choose from to suggest, since my backpack is only worth about 14 keys. I had more solid proof for an unusual, but the damn "your-backpack-has-to-be-higher-than-the-price-suggestion" rule kicked in.

Well, first off, selling =/= sold, especially when yours is weeks/months old. If you put up a buy trade post for that item, you would see posts that also have those items for sale (in the matches section), even if the item in the post is sold/marked invisible but there are items that is selling in the same post and the post haven't been close, it would still show. Not recommending this method tho.

Trade.tf helps alot

You would need to bookmark trades while they're still up, wait a day or two, "best 3 days or more" for low demand items and properly analyze it. (If the item is sold and post take down, it would still show up in the bookmark section, marked 'invisible' or shown at the bottom slighty darker/transparent.

That's just the way I like suggestion to be and it is the way I make my suggestion. I hope it help, sorry if some of the explanation doesn't make sense :P

Have a great day!~

Thanks for the help.

Selling =/= sold. Downboat.

Looks good, only this that would improve this is if you posted a bit more 0.22 sales. Otherwise fantastic first suggestion.

(You can also check the item history and check if it switched owners , you'll know its sold that way aswell )

Looks great, I got a mate of mine who will like this price suggestion.

Ignore all the negative people , just post some more proof of Successful sellers @0.22 and this will get passed.

That would only do half of the job, he need legit proof of unsuccessful at buyers at 0.11 to eliminate the range.