Suggestion: Vintage Bill's Hat at 21.7–23.25 keys

Price Suggestion

~34.5 keys

338 votes up

144 votes down

Related Suggestions

This suggestion was accepted Sun, 16 Nov 14 17:44:44 +0000 by A Delicious Cashew™.

Comments can no longer be left on this suggestion.

Comments

Hello, unique bill's are going down, this might go down too :3

Classifieds at the time of making http://backpack.tf/classifieds/?item=Bill%27s%20Hat&quality=3&tradable=1&craftable=1

20 keys (x1)

22 keys (x1)

23 keys (x3)

Sellers below 23 keys/1.5 buds

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23561218 (20)

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23593299 (21)

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23520534 (22 + 8 ref)

Unsolds at 23 keys/1.5 buds/backpack.tf price

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23346833

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/22062490

Many sellers of vintage bills on outpost are looking for more than 23 keys, so I didn't include them in the range

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23561218 - gifted

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23593299 - young

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23520534 - painted and with spell

Painted w/ spell is fine as an unsold if it's below current price.

And we'll see where the young one goes. I think that's the clincher here.

wouldn't that count as 1.5 buds though?

so he doesn't really have any valid proof for 1.4 buds

Hmm. You're kinda right.

Does depend where that young seller goes, but even then, one seller is iffy.

1.45-1.5 could be doable, but that seems arbitrary.

Sale closed after four days, not reposted.

Should not go down , it should go up since not a lot of people have it. Should be like 2 ~ 3.33 buds due to the number of people who has a Vintage Bill's Hat

Proof > logic > opinion

Coincidence [Y.A] Ñø† √îkks†år_123? You have one -_-

I just sold my Black Painted Bill's Hat for 219 ref pure

You're pretty much right, I always see prices. UNDER 1.5 buds on tf2 outpost or bazaar.tf

there are only 1700 of these in tf2. these should be going up if anything

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/54685266b98d88172c8b484a additional proof here