- Forums
-
Pricing
- Community Pricing
- Pricegrid
- Spreadsheet
- Browse Suggestions
- Latest Changes
- Unusual Pricelist
- Browse by Item
- Browse by Effect
- Steam Community Market
- Market Pricelist
-
Trading
- Classifieds
- Classified Listings
- Utilities
- Calculator
- Premium Search
- Statistics
Only recent sale was mine at Miami Modest (14) + Clean Scorching Brigade (9.5) + Sunbeams Gonzila (second owner - 4). Prices based on current bp.tf prices.
Since this is the only recent pricing on this hat from an actual sale let's make this more accurate.
Also, there are only 2 in existence and the other is not on the market and hasn't been for a while.
Screenshots would be nice.
The previous owner has commented below stating that the trade I described is accurate. :) I don't have actual screenshots of the trade.
Brigade is 9 buds
Gonzila is 3.5 buds
So this makes 14 + 9 + 3.5 = 26.5 buds
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/15697268
If you would have provided this one link, people would only complain about the prices.
Haha. You're right. My apologies for not giving that. Also, thanks for bringing that here.
If only 1 sale then why a range?
And your prices are incorrect
Miami Modest original price is 14 - 15, ~13 after overpay
Scorching Brigade original price is 9 - 10, ~8.6 after overpay
Sunbeams Gonzila original price is 3 - 4.5, ~3.4 after overpay
Total Sale: ~25
You need to use original suggested values AND calculate overpay
You did none which is why your sale turned out to be 2.5 buds higher than the sale I got, which is the real price you should suggest
Also you should provide a screenshot to show it really happened and if it really is the only sale in a long time you should just put a flat price at the price of the sale
You could also use the low end to calculate overpay, making his sale 26.
I thought about not posting to change the price on this because it doesn't really make much difference to me but decided to anyways.
I find it interesting that prices are listed as a point of reference and are supposedly an accurate representation of the value of an item (of course this depends on date of updating, opinions, etc) and yet there are people calculating overpay on items when there is no reason to. What is the paradigm you use to calculate overpay? If there is one item in the market and it sells, how is it possible that you can calculate "overpay." If you use bp.tf prices to calculate overpay for an item like this (1:2 and only one to sell in a long time) then you are purposefully keeping the current pricing and simply saying any cost above that is "overpay." This seems quite arbitrary. I understand this if there is a precedent set for an item with multiple sales in the recent history but here there is none.
I am happy to discuss this further if you still feel like there need be more discussion on it. :)
I have also asked Quackers to come here and state for the record that the sale I listed is, indeed, accurate.
I can confirm that is what it was sold for. I was receiving some higher offers than the current price so I think this suggestion is reasonable.
Why overpay? Because most trades do expect it (and prices here should be in pure).
Quoting his notes: "B/O will be set at 30 pure 35 in unusuals" --> more in unusuals.
It's all in the unusual price suggestion guide btw.
Again, two points...
1. "Why overpay? Because most trades do expect it (and prices here should be in pure)." - This was was obviously not the case as the seller even stated he had higher offers. It's also something everyone writes in order to keep people from offering hats worth much less than their desired trade amount.
2. If prices for bp.tf prices are in pure then how do you justify devaluing the price which is listed (supposedly in pure) for items involved in the trade if this hat?
I honestly don't mind shutting this down and keeping the price listed as what it is but let's at least get some consistency in this (I don't even plan on selling this unless someone makes an insane offer...which wont happen). People bash this site because they say it is inaccurate. I imagine these inconsistencies are exactly why that is so often said. You cannot have a double standard like that and be taken seriously. It becomes a "boys club."
In short, I believe your logic for using the argument that prices should be listed in pure and that the prices I have listed (pretty much the middle of bp.tf ranges for them) are incorrect due to "overpay" is flawed. It's a double standard.
That's something you can help fix. :)
Overpay is usually the average price *0.9 (or the low end).
Because most sellers rather take 10 pure than 10.5 in unusuals etc.
Anything else you want to ask?
A little side note: As long as bp.tf highballs their hats people are happy, but if not they yell about it, old news. :)
Ok. So I see your structure for creating an overpay price. Let's say you take the three hats that sold and took their lowest bp.tf value (which is now understood to be the pure earbud value of it) and added them up. We would have (at this moment) 13.6 for the Miami Modest + 9 for the Brigade + 3.5 for the Gonzila which =26.1. Perhaps 27-28 is overshooting if I am thinking about using only the "overpay" value. I have no problem with that. If that's the case though and the hats are all valued at their lowest of the range they sit at then why does the range exist whatsoever? Like you stated, why not simply have a set value? It's not really that simple, is it?
As for the seller taking an overpay in unusuals, he didn't. He took less than he was even asking in pure because he liked the hats. Therefore it's not a fair assumption to make that the hats are sitting at their lowest values in the range presented here.
The confusion of pricing on individual hats is my fault for not putting up current offers/ recent trades of them. I'll own up to that.
The part that I think that is being missed and the most important part here (because if its being missed here then its being missed in all other trades where hats are 1:1 or 1:2) is the idea that unusuals are inherently overvalued in a trade. I keep coming back to the same points which I think are being ignored (probably not on purpose)...
1. If a hat is the only one on the market and there is no real precedent for the trading value of it (ie. it hasnt been sold in a long time) then how can you immediately undervalue hats that were traded for it. The b/o and c/o's arent what are important. A single sale in 4-6 months has to be the going rate. To immediately undervalue that trade because of a practice in trading that is based solely to scare lowballers away (or make much more profit) is simply incorrect. Again, I understand the logic behind using that when there is a precedent for the value of a hat based on multiple sales in recent history but there is none here in recent history. If anything, an overpay in unusuals should logically increase the value of the bought hat. That, however, isnt the case here because the 35 bud unusual b/o wasn't even met. The seller liked the hats and thought the value was good enough and so the trade was made.
2. If hats are listed based on the pure earbud value of them then how is it that they are undervalued (or at least put at the bottom of a spectrum of known value) when it's the buyers' hats.
I honestly don't mean to continue arguing these points in anything but a constructive way. I'm not mad. I just think that it's a major inconsistency which should be addressed.
If the combined market value (in pure) of my hats is not 27-28 then it shouldnt be upvoted. I have absolutely no problem with that.
Please don't take this as yelling. I'm actually just trying to make you see a flaw here so that you can address it and act accordingly.
If you feel like discussing this more you are welcome to add me or we can continue discussing here. Up to you.
Thanks!!! :)
"Grrrrrrrr, the Dissertationist." :D
Well this is going out of hand now. And I'm too tired to explain anything else.
Feel free to make a topic in the forum about it ( http://forums.backpack.tf/index.php?/forum/20-general-website-discussions/ ) and more people will participate in the discussion. I'm closing this suggestion for now. Feel free to resuggest at 25 buds flat to meet the site's way of handling those things.^^
No proof of sale. Price manipulation?
You're joking, right?
You didn't have a screenshot...my bad bro