Suggestion: Demonflame Furious Fukaamigasa at 225–280 keys

Price Suggestion

~750 keys

demonflame

51 votes up

5 votes down

Related Suggestions

This suggestion was closed Tue, 25 Aug 20 05:00:39 +0000 by the submitter.

Comments can no longer be left on this suggestion.

Comments

Pricing the unpriced!

Lets finally get this bad boy priced!

Sale 1: https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198083134207#!/compare/1590710400/1590796800

https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198144604444#!/compare/1589760000/1591488000

200 pure.

Sale 2: https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198144604444#!/compare/1592179200/1592265600

https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198139171368#!/compare/1592092800/1592179200

Seems to have resold 1:1 for that Spelled Pot, seems low, will exclude both of the sales.

Sale 3: https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198139171368#!/compare/1592697600/1592784000

https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198155066949#!/compare/1592611200/1592870400

Bulk.

Sale 4: https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198155066949#!/compare/1592870400/1592956800

https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198095022965#!/compare/1592784000/1592956800

132 pure and 27 ref, qs.

Sale 5: https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198095022965#!/compare/1596758400/1596844800

https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198252075718#!/compare/1596758400/1596844800

225 pure.

Sale 6: https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198252075718#!/compare/1597708800/1597881600

https://backpack.tf/profiles/76561198088227748#!/compare/1597795200/1597881600

280 pure.

225-280!

200-280

https://backpack.tf/suggestion/5f2ec35d3b528b7554312347#comment-5f2ecacbc4de3b5dc66d99bd

ive already explained this before

if you had sales at 10, 20, 25, and 30, and 20 resold for 10, why would you exclude both sales and take two higher data points when nothing is wrong with 20

Oh i do recall it now, but pretty sure ive already told you that there is clearly something wrong with 20, it was caused from an unreliable trader. In that case where's the line drawn? Its clear that we can't use sales from unstable traders, but we make an exception only if it lowers the hat's value as opposed to raises? Why? It does not change the fact that the trader is unstable. I can however understand that in very specific cases you gotta keep in mind that the seller was willing to accept 200, however in this case the most recent sale is 280 and i do not think a unstable 200 is any better as a low end than a firm sale at 225

If someone buys something and dumps it for much less, it signals that they regretted the purchase/paid too much. However, if the sale is lower than the rest, it doesn't make sense to exclude it because then you are making the average even higher despite evidence even 200 is high.

Nope. It signals the purchaser is an impulse buyer, unstable trader, the buyer got bored of the hat very quickly and moved on to another one.

Edit: "However, if the sale is lower than the rest, it doesn't make sense to exclude it because then you are making the average even higher despite evidence even 200 is high."

"I can however understand that in very specific cases you gotta keep in mind that the seller was willing to accept 200, however in this case the most recent sale is 280 and i do not think a unstable 200 is any better as a low end than a firm sale at 225"

If this can sell for 225 and 280, someone else would of bought for 200, and then 200 would be a perfectly fine low-end. OddFuture likely had this listed for a very long time, judging by the history https://backpack.tf/item/2078663902

I think the whole dump for less exclude both argument is very overused. Really what we are after is trying to figure out what sales are outliers, and sales where people dump for less tend to be high outliers. For example, if someone bought a hat for 200 keys that really can only sell for 100 keys, it makes sense that they will have to sell for less because nobody else is willing to pay 200 - a sign that 200 is an outlier. In the case of the fukaamigasa, dumping for less after buying makes 200 look like a high outlier, so excluding it makes zero sense to exclude 200 because now you are making the range even higher. The range is already unbalanced as it is, with sales at ~100, 132, 200, 225 and 280, 200 - 280 will be better here.

Also, you should probably get a screenshot of the 280 sale as not all 280 keys are not viable in the compares.

"In the case of the fukaamigasa, dumping for less after buying makes 200 look like a high outlier, so excluding it makes zero sense to exclude 200 because now you are making the range even higher." But in the case of the fuka we know that the buyer didnt resell for less than 200 cause 200 was high outlier, as we have 2 new full pure sales above that.

"with sales at ~100, 132, 200, 225 and 280" sure you can use the ~100 one for you point, but using my purchase makes no sense, its a quicksale.

To me it seems like mods are misusing data points a little. Going with a faulty 200 as a low end with the support of a faulty 100 sale and a unusable for suggesting (which quicksales are most of the time) 132 quicksale seems just very, very odd to me. Otherwise id not be arguing over such a small change of low end in this price range; i just feel like my proposed range would be the most accurate hence why im arguing back

1) Think about what it means to be an "unstable" trader. Do these people wait for a good deal? No, they impulse buy at whatever price is listed, which while usually ends up being really high, but it doesn't have to be. In this case he just bought the one on the market. I already addressed this, Oddfuture had been selling for AGES, most likely at 200 for a long time, that alone supports including, but bottom line is that someone else would of bought for 200 and you wouldn't think twice about including it then...

2) Just because sales are not usable doesn't mean we can ignore them. If a hat is quicksold under buyers price 9 times and then it sells for bp.tf price in pure a flat value at bp price is WRONG. I have already talked to you about this EXACT same thing in this suggestion: https://backpack.tf/suggestion/5eed071af9b9724a685db467

This is my last response, if you want another mod's input I will gladly ask someone to give a second opinion.

I mean common trade points are obvious for the 2nd point and nah dw, the first point is actually very understandable, i did overlook the fact that it is safer to include 200, if Odd was at 200 for ages. I guess he fell for the domino effect of failed offers, people being uncomforted by unpriced hats and/or whatever falls into that category; which in majority of cases is the chain of events that results to one trader having owned a hat for a long time at a certain buyout that later on gets sold for higher than it with seemingly no issue