Suggestion: Morning Glory Ground Control at 110–146 keys

Price Suggestion

~175 keys

morning

15 votes up

69 votes down

Related Suggestions

This suggestion was closed Thu, 21 Apr 16 03:06:38 +0000 by the submitter.

Comments can no longer be left on this suggestion.

Comments

This needs a raise in value.

The last suggestion was based on one seller, Julia, who sold it at a B/O of 80 keys. One seller that usually sells unusuals at a lower price does not define the price of a high tier unusual. All previous sellers priced the unusual at 115+ according to: http://backpack.tf/vote/id/55d87375ba8d8839458b4621

Also, why must the counterpart effect to Morning Glory be more than 50 keys less than the Death at Dusk Ground Control? The prices of the similar effects must be more realistic and closer.

Now the value of this unusual increases for 2 reasons:

1. Sold for a Professional Killstreak Australium Rocket Launcher priced at 80 keys and a clean non-duped Max Head priced at 30. This adds up to a total of 110 keys. (Accepted today)

Proof: http://imgur.com/a/9DN0Z

2. Offered by the reputable ♥Chara♥ a strange unusual FT Pro KS Brain Candy Rocket with a B/O at 130-156 Keys in contention if 10 keys are added with the unusual ground control. This, using the low end of ♥Chara♥'s price, would be 120 keys. Using the high end of ♥Chara♥'s price is 146 keys. (Offered today)

Proof: http://imgur.com/0cfvMl9

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/28089756

http://imgur.com/X3NHWLo

Not sure the second proof is usable unless you can provide what Chara bought it for, however the rocket launcher considering how recent it was should be enough, correct me if I'm wrong suggesting experts :P

I mean if you want real proof you or I can add ♥Chara♥ and he can confirm the offer.

confirming the offer won't help your suggestion. you can't base your high end on an offer, and you didn't prove a value for the pro ks brain candy rocket launcher

My proof for the value of the brain candy rocket launcher is the price that ♥Chara♥ is selling it at. He even claims that he received two offers on it in one day and 2 bookmarks on his outpost trade in less than 24 hours.

receiving unspecified offers and random bookmarks aren't proof of an item's value. YOU CAN"T base your high end on an offer

The two offers on his brain bucket were from adds, but the offers were: http://imgur.com/GuONXKO

still doesn't matter, can't base your high end on offers... also no proof of values for the offers, so doubly pointless

So I have to get Chara to spend 30 minutes to take screenshots? Some people have things to do you know, and considering his reputation, he is trusted by many.

you don't have to get screenshots of the offers... you can prove the value of the offers yourself. I have no idea why you'd try and make chara do it for you. and regardless it's pointless, I don't understand what's so hard to understand here. YOU CANNOT BASE YOUR HIGH END ON AN OFFER. also I don't care about some random person's reputation, that doesn't give them the say so to arbitarily decide an item's value

Now you are just manipulating my words. I said his B/O was 130-156. One person said that the true value should be the middle, so I calculated the middle value and subtracted to 10 keys because the he wanted 10 keys with the ground control to get 146. Now to show what he paid for the rocket as proof: http://imgur.com/vzCkxJe

my comment's was edited a few minutes ago, I misread that bit. also no need to double reply. it's also not a tiny fallacy, you're basing your high end on an offer and that kills the entire suggestion

http://forums.backpack.tf/index.php?/topic/6033-guide-for-unusual-price-suggestions/ read the guide and close this

I was basing my suggestion from the high and low and of the offer by Chara. That is the point of a high and low end of a price...

"Sales need to be provided to support your suggested range." -> from the section in the guide about offers

My support is from the accepted offer of the aussie rocket and max head for the low end of 110 keys. The high end comes from the high end of the offer made by Chara because the low end is greater than 110 keys. I have explained my position multiple times already. Come to realization about my evidence already. Even more, I already shown that Chara was offered a "silver cycone flip and SBCTW Das. and GC with the kety" from the screenshot

Now I feel like you are just exaggerating every tiny fallacy in a trade suggestion. Don't abuse your reputation.

Vrakos is right. You need sales, not offers.

In that case, I would you my 1st reason of the sale of an Professional Killstreak Australium Rocket Launcher and a Max Head to price the item at 110 keys.

" I would you my 1st reason "

I'm confused now..

Ah sorry, my mistake, my typing was slower than my thought process. What I meant to say is would an accurate price suggestion of this unusual be at 110 keys?

Yes, I would do 110, if your minis are correct (for max and RL)

So for future improvements, should I just create price suggestions that have not too large of a price range? Would that decrease conflict and confusion? Also to get an accurate price on backpack.tf, should I create a new price suggestion with the price at 110 keys?

No, that's not it. You just don't create ranges with no support :P

I thought offers counted, but I guess not. xD

Thanks for the constructive criticism.

Use the snip tool on windows instead of taking a photo with your phone.

Also mini for aussie rocket and mini for Brain Candy Rocket?

If the price of the brain candy was 130 - 156 you would take the middle value, not the highest or lowest.

Downvote.

Yea sorry about that, the previous owner of the ground control took those.

I know, I was showing the range value of the unusual. If I were to find the middle value, I would price the ground control at 133 keys considering the middle value of the brain bucket is 143 and subtracting 10 keys.

Can't use offers, especially just using the buyout. But Sale 1 should most likely be fine.

Here I am getting confirmation from Chara

well sale 1 is invalid because of rule (1) Trades with scammers are not valid proof

The Milkman is banned on this site and on outpost for paypal scamming

http://backpack.tf/item/4325749538

Here I can explain for him, or you can talk with him yourself. He was incorrectly reported and actually refunded the burning dappers. He is still waiting for the appeal to go through. Just posted the confirmation.

well the negative trust for that scam is still present, so i assume that isn't resolved, even steamrep report is still pending

also the scammed guy doesn't respond to my add

So just because the steamrep report is pending even after he refunded the burning dappers means he is still a scammer? After correcting his error and repaying what he scammed, he justifies himself by undoing the damage that he created.

can you link his appeal

It turns out the accuser repealed the accusation leaving the report unconfirmed on the "scammers" profile.http://steamrep.com/search?q=http%3A%2F%2Fsteamcommunity.com%2Fprofiles%2F76561198094737736%2F

http://imgur.com/d21NACD

But lets not stray from the point here. So just because I traded with an incorrectly marked "scammer" who isn't even a scammer, the value of the unusual decreases? I do not see the logic in your accusation.

I never said anything about trading with scammers decreasing hats' values... and what accusation? I was just asking to see the appeal because you said he was appealing the scammer tag... where are you reading these things

By me saying "decreasing the value" I mean hindering my price suggesstion of an increase in value. Just by you saying he is marked a scammer, but not proven on steamrep, does not make him a scammer. Even more, if the accusation was made 7 months ago, steamrep would have marked him a scammer by then.

I never said he's a marked scammer... and doubtful, steamrep can be REALLY slow. and by accusation, I was referring to you talking about my supposed "accusation" (here: "I do not see the logic in your accusation" )

I am sorry, I confused you and rafiozol who said:

"well sale 1 is invalid because of rule (1) Trades with scammers are not valid proof"