n/a
0 sold recently
- 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
30 Days:
https://gyazo.com/440068640b2a15af63cb7e10b56ce579
https://bot.tf/stats/item?def=30258&q=6&ef=&craft=1&aus=0&ks=0
Sold:
None
Bought:
1 @ 23.44 ref
1 @ 22.33 ref
Sellers: 22.44 ref
Buyers: 22.44 ref(1) | 22.33 ref
I noticed a 22.44 bid on (one) bot. Maybe a 22.33-22.44?
btw, earlier response (maybe I should just send PM, but..) re;
https://backpack.tf/suggestion/5f012f7b217d0a750a42bb82#comment-5f01467a45bea5380b08aa24
"You can't put 0.9 keys in the range if there's no sales for it"
Maybe this is me misunderstanding what range is defined as? Basically, the bot sales in that case were somewhere from 8-30 days old. The classified bids were all 51.66 refined & most of the 'turning' seemed to be taking place at 1 key. Is it not safe to assume that they are acquired at the 51.66 refined value (esp. considering the # of bots that are using that value), and then they 'rake' in this difference? It is the only suggestion of yours I actually voted no on (even though I was 99% sure it'd be approved, but I don't really care about this accuracy metric, eg voting no on https://backpack.tf/suggestion/5ec6358c6bd37962a9710739 since I can get these for literally $0.000158 to $0.0003 per if bought with ₩, and there are hundreds available)
Well, the mods are waiting if someone will sold it for 22.44 or not. If it did, i'd had to resuggest the range into 22.33-22.44.
Range in suggestion would mean that it values an item at the common trading point. Someone has successfully bought or sold something for the asking price is also a common trading point. You can only use buyers asking price if you intend to raise the said item or using sellers asking price to drop an item price (Note: Use this only if there's no usable sales). You can't really assume that someone has sold or bought something for the price they're asking without evidence, in this case i don't know if the bots has actually bought it for 51.66 ref or more. Looking at that Mayflower Case suggestion, sometimes moderator only focused on the sales that sold for $USD. Why? Because they agree that "steam marketplace is poorly design".
Thanks for response, it clears some things up. (yes, marketplace is awful design with local currencies. i have advocated for 'steambucks' (with better name of course) for some time now. people seem to think this would somehow not allow regional pricing anymore (for games), but this isn't the case.
it would greatly help the marketplace issue with currency valuations. it isn't just 'wealthy' vs 'poorer' countries, either. eg japan and south korea have low value currency.
many people argue w/ me on this due to 'regional pricing', but it would not impact that at all. maybe english as second language? i don't really understand why people would think it would make regional pricing impossible.
Valve could also help itself by taxing incoming gift cards & wallet deposits (this would remove problematic things, like having to tax their income from marketplace transactions -- would then be a double tax). ed: The only issue here would be if someone changes their country, and then purchases a game in a different country -- otherwise games bought with EXISTING wallet balance would also not have to be taxed. I think this would impact very few people and just some minor inconvenience (people that change country, with wallet balance, and then have to pay tax twice. it is unfortunate, but I think overall this method would be better)