Suggestion: The Stereoscopic Shades at 1.33–1.66 ref

Price Suggestion

~1.44 ref

86 votes up

31 votes down

Related Suggestions

This suggestion was accepted Fri, 30 Jan 15 14:17:43 +0000 by A Delicious Cashew™.

Comments can no longer be left on this suggestion.

Comments

Blue and Red.

Top Classifieds:

http://gyazo.com/d4deb22e8040b448d18fcb7f3f1e62c4

1x 1.22

2x 1.33

1x 1.44

2x 1.66

Sold at 1.33/"Backpack.tf price":

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24836931

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24831184

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24853700

Sold at 1.33/"Backpack.tf price":

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24865926 [Young]

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24865150 [Young]

Sold at 1.66:

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24695907 [Sold and was very badly bumped]

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24652847

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24848460

Notes:

Conservative rise because it seems fairer given the proof

I don't feel like that's enough proof. 1.33-1.66 ref to compensate for lack of enough evidence is understandable.

Sorry, I didn't understand that...

Are you saying:

"Not enough proof"

OR "The amount of evidence is acceptable and leaving 1.33 in the range was a good idea"?

It can go either way. I'm merely commenting as one of the many people who play tf2. My comment is not of too much significance and importance. I.O.W., expressing my view on this vote.

Right.... Okay?

So yes, I do think that it's not enough proof but leaving 1.33 ref in the range is also a good idea.

Yeah, seems to be fine.

Not many proofed links - but after a quick search for myself I am convinced.

UPVOTE