- 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
Resuggesting , since the actual proof was completely ignored in the last suggestion, there was no solid proof for a sale at 15 keys . Added more proof following a recent sale.
Sale 1 : 25 keys pure
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24607223#latest
Sale 2 : Sold for a Sulphurous Berliner’s Bucket Helm and a Pool Party
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24605802
2.9 * 0.9 = 2.6 buds ~ 31.25 keys
Sale #3: Sold for a Miami Nights Salty Dog
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24461570
1.8 * 0.9 = 1.6 buds ~ 20 keys
Miami Nights Salty Dog Mini: 1.8 buds
http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/24437891
Sold for a Blizzardy Storm Master’s Yellow Belt
2 * 0.9 = 1.8 buds ~ 22.5 keys
did you take into account that at the time of sale #2, pool party was 3.75 keys?
It's the same calculation as the previous suggestion, so I assume so.
Also at the time of the sale, sulph berliner was outdated
Even if you keep the current price of the berliner, you did some weird math (2.2 + 0.27) * 0.9 = 2.2
Note: buds were 14 keys at the time
The Berliner was outdated but got a mini.
You're correct, however, that it's since been updated and that value should be used.
This was not checked. Thanks for pointing that out . I'll make a new suggestion with the new range.
That was already taken into account by the previous suggestion so yes I assume so!
>no solid proof
Prove it didn't sell for 15 keys then.
Edit: what are you talking about "completely ignored proof"
That's not how the burden of proof works.
It'd be an outlier anyway, considering how easily 25 keys pure sold.
Don't get antsy just because it's your suggestion he's fixing.
The way he says how the proof was "completely ignored" is what bothers me
No one even checked at all to see if the range was correct. The fact that it sold for ~2.6 was ignored in your range, and instead you put the range lower than it should be. I altered that in this suggestion.
How was it lower then it should have been with one sale at 1.2 and one at 1.6?
I'm not saying your proof was wrong , im just saying noone actually commented on it , just as Numinex commented on this. I'm sorry if this had made you upset.
Based on the evidence he had 2.6 was an outlier.
The previous suggester is not at fault, and you would be at fault to imply he was.