Suggestion: Non-Craftable Concheror at 0.66–1 ref

Price Suggestion

Non-Craftable Concheror

Submitted Sat, 31 Jan 15 01:39:42 +0000 by ★ Curly

77.63%

1 ref

0.66–1 ref

~0.22 ref

1083 votes up

312 votes down

Related Suggestions

This suggestion was accepted Wed, 11 Feb 15 19:23:32 +0000 by polar.

Comments can no longer be left on this suggestion.

Comments

I am the market for these. I go to work for a few hours and a suggestion without full proof goes through.

Sale at .66, was later sold to me for 1. http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24777670

Another sale was at .33 in classifieds, but can't prove it. Same guy bought it and resold to me for 1 ref.

Sales at 1 ref from the reseller http://puu.sh/fg52p.png

My trade buying for 1 ref. http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24204922

Bought for .66 http://puu.sh/fg4yr.png + http://puu.sh/fg4FF.png

Bought at 1 ref http://puu.sh/fg4Sv.png

How can 0.66 be in the range if there's a buyer (you) paying more? All the counterproof I need.

Bang. Counterproofed yourself. Close it.

Because there are people still selling these for .66 despite me buying for 1 ref. I'm buying for a collection, and there are sales at both ends of the range. It's representing the market, not what one person is willing to pay. As soon as prices rise, I raise my own price to drag in more buyers so I can get this done faster. If all the proof given is just me buying, then it leads to an unstable and invalid price.

If you continuously buy these things at 1 refined, and it seems you've been rather successful since you own 36 of them, .66 obviously doesn't need to be in the range. You cannot justify this range whatsoever.

I've bought most of these at .66 over a long time. If you insist I dig up sales over the past 5 months, then I'd be more than welcome to post invalid proof. http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/22273467 http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23953781

http://puu.sh/fg8ZF.png

http://puu.sh/fg93l.png

http://puu.sh/fg98X.png

http://puu.sh/fg9e3.png

I could go on and on with old .66 sales. Very few of the ones I own now were bought with 1 ref.

Again, your quickbuying trade is more than enough to determind .66 an outlier. I don't care how many you've bought for .66, nobody does infact. What you're trying to do is lower a price of a cosmetic with sales. GL with that mate.

It isn't lowering the price of the item. It's correcting a suggestion that was passed earlier today as there was plenty of proof left out of it since I was not available to post it when it was suggested and passed. I'm proving why the old .66 value is still in range as there have been other people who willingly put it up for .66 as of recent.

Also, it isn't a quickbuying trade, that would imply I'm buying for lower than what the actual value is

The word you're looking for is determined

You obviously cared how many I've bought for .66 as you called me out on how many I've bought total

This isn't even a cosmetic, it's a weapon.

I recently learned that quickbuying can refer to paying more to buy an item quickly or buying quicksells and therefore paying less. Having a term with two opposite definitions seems very unhelpful, but this situation exists nevertheless.

"Again, your quickbuying trade is more than enough to determind .66 an outlier. I don't care how many you've bought for .66, nobody does infact."

Holy contradiction, Batman!

If people are selling theirs for .66, and many have, then it's not a fucking outlier! You're just being oblivious to the proof being put in front of your face because you're so bent on this staying the same price.

Ok, you wanna be a prick about it? Go find 0.66 sellers, then come back to me. To lower a price you need sellers, not solds as solds below the price can't lower the price.

3 hours later...

0 response from Memexplosion

There will never be .66 sellers until my collection is complete, but there are still .66 sales. There are still people out there that are willing to sell for lower on their own despite me buying for higher, as I proved in the original suggestion above.

The issue here is that these suggestions have been passed just using me as proof for a collection. I'm not sure why there's no rule about not using collectors for proof here when suggesting higher prices.

And I've told you multiple times, I'm not lowering the price, I'm adjusting since the previously passed suggestion did not include all of the proof that could have possibly been put into it. If this price were being suggested when it was still .66 on here, you'd have absolutely no issue with the suggested range now since it would have been current price, and it is just now including 1 ref into the range.

I'm in no way defending what he said above, he was an ass about it. I was also an ass with one of my posts above, and I'd like to apologize for what I said at the time.

You may not see it as lowering the price, but the suggestion is to decrease the price to a number not being sold. If people are selling it for .66 than please, show me where they are selling them for .66 as you need to supply unsolds at .66 if you are trying to lower it.

You need sellers at 0.66, all you have are your quickbuys.

Please look at the market for these. They hardly come up, and when they do, they more than likely are sold directly to me.

Last suggestion changed the price just using me as proof, I'm adjusting the range to include other sales that have occurred.

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24902432

Sold for 1 refined

It was sold to Curly.

Again, showing why .66 shouldn't be in the range.

I'm confused,why would ppl pay more than a scrap for an uncraftable weapon of all things?

The same reason people pay more for vintages and collector's.

It's a different quality.