Suggestion: Phosphorous Conquistador at 56.55 keys

Price Suggestion

~89.5 keys

phosphorous

167 votes up

8 votes down

Related Suggestions

This suggestion was accepted Thu, 10 Apr 14 15:26:16 +0000 by polar.

Comments can no longer be left on this suggestion.

Comments

Proof below. 10 month-old price.

Sales:

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/18303255

-wanted 4 buds, duped

-bought aces crasher: http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/18300886 (overpaid both b/os) - counting this as 4 flat, outlier and don't see how the crasher is supposed to fetch so much

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/18253548

-wanted 5 buds, duped

-bought miami scopers: http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/18164741

-most accurate price then would be 2.9 seeing as his price was 3

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/17856748

-wanted ~4.3 buds

-sold for aces stahl+steaming cosa=~2.9 buds

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/18345281

-was 'quickselling' for 4 buds

-conq+1 bud sold for terror phantom (unpriced, looks very tough to price with few recent sales), sale looks around 3 though and maybe even less

Current trades:

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/19030504

-wants 4.8 buds

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/18431347

-quickselling for 3 buds, 1 month

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/19021750

-wants ~4.5 buds

Sales: 2.9, 2.9, 4

Sale at 4 really looks like an outlier, and one guy has been quickselling for 3 for quite a while now. Without that I have sales at 2.9 and one more likely below 3. 2.9 is probably suitable. Also, hardly anyone offers on this.

Which price did you use for the Slope Scoper there were about 5 suggestion passed within 2 months it would help if you posted the price you used before overpay. Is it possible that the first link was a quicksell?

I explained in the same line, using the 2.8-3. No overpay as offered on scopers.

2.8 - 3 buds where did you get that from?

The current price is 2 - 2.3 buds.

http://backpack.tf/stats/Unusual/Soldier's%20Slope%20Scopers/Tradable/Craftable/61

The time of the trade was March 1st, 2014.

The price at that time was : 3.5 - 4.2 buds

http://backpack.tf/vote/980/5/61

The price you are using ( 2.8 - 3) was not the price until March 8th, 2014

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/531ab6804dd7b8d52c8b4568

Going to counter everything you've said. Now, 2 prices: 3.5-4.2 before, 2.8-3 after the sale. Yes I was clearly aware of that. Even if the price was 3.8-4.2 like you want it to be, the guy's b/o was 3 buds. This can't be valued 1 bud above what he would have accepted. There are no exactly straight rules to go by for unusuals. This was based on my judgment. It would be incorrect to value it at the current price, so I went with the next.

You also made this suggestion 2 hours ago

The price at that time was 2 - 2.3

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/533b9a074dd7b855378b48e5

This suggestion was accepted over 6 days ago.

So

You either chose to use 2.8 - 3 because you were not aware of the current price

Or

You chose to use 2.8 - 3 because you thought it was the price at the time of the trade

Or

You just want this lowered badly

You can see where I am getting my suspicions from

Time of my suggestion made has nothing to do with anything. Yes, I was aware of the current price, but it evidently couldn't be applied here. No, I didn't think it was the price at the time. You probably don't have much experience pricing unusuals, if you consider the current price at the time outdated and can give valid proof to show that, you can use choose not to use it. Something less than 2 months old certainly can be outdated and not reflect its true value, especially for new effect unusuals, like the case here. Ultimately it's the suggester's call. There is no way the scopers was still 3.5-4.2 when he had a pure b/o of 3 buds, considerably lower. I want this lowered so that unaware traders don't trade for this thinking they can get even 4 for this, and also to refresh the price for another unusual which requires this.

I also saw neither of the users offer their hats for one anothers hats. There is no proof one offered this hat and no proof that the miami scoper was offered so we do calculate over pay because it is unclear which hat was offered.

"If unclear which hat was offered, DO calculate overpay." - blindpolarbear

http://forums.backpack.tf/index.php?/topic/6033-new-unusual-price-suggestion-guide-the-cheat-sheet/

So the correct price for that trade is 1.935 buds because 2.15 buds is the average of the range. So ---- 2.15 x 90% = 1.935 buds (Round this to 1.94 or 1.9)

If you took the value at the time and calculated overpay it would be 3.465 buds. If you take the average of the range of the value at the time and multiplied it by 90% you get 3.465. So 3.85 x 90% = 3.465 buds (Round it to 3.5a)

[b]~~gg no re~~

Great to see that you know the rule. FYI I am aware of that. 'no proof one offered' - I have provided the trade for which the miami scopers was being sold, where it was offered the c9 dappers, signalling his interest in the hat. If you dig into it further, the c9 dappers (outdated) bought the phos conq and I safely assumed he offered the conq next. So that's where I got my value. Now, let's say by some chance it was sold for the scopers. So 2.9*0.9 which is 2.6. So I could also have used that to form 2.6-2.9 which is even lower. Of course, I have chosen to go with the assumption the conq was offered based on that offer.

No idea why you're still going on about the price right now, you and I already know that has no relation to the sale then. For the 'current' value, I have already put my reasoning for my value used above in my posts.

indeed, gg no re

Preety good proofs and details, voted-up.