Standardized Unusual Overpay Method

[Baloo]

After reviewing some of the words of the moderators, it came to my attention that there's not actually a set method of calculating unusual overpay. I realize its more of a "touchy-feely" sort of deal where you sort calculate it however you like and then round off to what seems more appropriate, but it'd be nice if there was a slightly more standard calculation method. I know this has been brought up in numerous threads in the past, but I've also noticed they've gotten mixed responses from moderators. Here's what I've gathered so far:

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

• ! Remember, all [unusual] prices should assume that the [unusual] hat is clean (not duped or gifted), not-glitched, and should be in PURE BUDS OR KEYS. That means that unusuals offered must be valued lower than their normal values. This is what is commonly referred to as "unusual overpay"." - Sir Jon (Source)

100% low end
90% average
I use what is higher or what looks more reasonable. - Woifi (Source)

How I calculate it is based on the middle price [...] then multiply by a number from .9 to .95, then round a little to get a decent looking number. [...] For low priced unusual trades, I tend to use a higher multiplier, since they're not worth that much to begin with. - shenanigans (Source)

I usually do 90 percent low end, though if the hat is really low tier or really high tier I may use 100 percent low end instead. - cleverpun (Source)

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Just to reiterate, what I am asking for here is a standardized form for calculating unusual overpay. This does not mean you treat unusuals worth 60 buds the same as you do the unusuals worth 6 buds or even .6 buds, but basically method of knowing how to calculate unusuals within a certain price range.

[MC22]

This^

Imo low end is best for everything.

[Woifi The Viking]

Well the problem is there is no real standard what the low end is. And some old ranges are pretty wide.

 

Imo you should value every unusual at the amount of pure it can easily get.^^

[Baloo]

-snip-

 

Imo you should value every unusual at the amount of pure it can easily get.^^

 

> easily get

 

highly subjective

[Woifi The Viking]

> easily get

 

highly subjective

And that's the problem. Maybe the low end should be such a value.~

[polar]

90% of middle or low end of a range. I think deciding on which one to use depends on the situation. Usually I will do low end of a range for high tier unusuals and 90% of middle on others (<5 buds). 

 

No matter which way you cut it, there is going to be subjectivity and artibrariness. That's just the nature of the beast. And there should be no fixed way to do it because the situation dictates the correct approach. When you start putting fixed rules on things, bullshit like the 12 keys for any unusuals happens. 

[Jack Cruise NUB]

i use the low end for 15+ unusuals

and they get passed. then 90% for <15 bud unusuals

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/51a0e672ba25368312000004 i took da lows

[PotVsKtl]

This is not how trading works. Overpay is rare, not standard. This is the exact reason nobody trusts the higher end prices of backpack.tf.

[Baloo]

This is not how trading works. Overpay is rare, not standard. This is the exact reason nobody trusts the higher end prices of backpack.tf.

 

That's quite dumb, if that were true, then you could artificially raise the price of an unusual by simply trading it for an unusual that is worth slightly more. Then you can suggest that the value should be equal. To extend this analogy you trade this new unusual for an unusual worth even slightly more and trade this third unusual back for the first one and suggest the first unusual price be equal to the third unusual, yet nothing has really changed to constitute that.

 

Also this has nothing to do with trading, this has to do with reflecting an accurate (within reason) reflection of the price of unusuals.

 

Explanation of my example using algebra:

 

(first unusual) x

(second unusual) y

(third unusual) z

 

x<y<z

 

x traded for y

 

x=y<z

 

y traded for z

 

x<y=z

 

z trade back for x

 

x=y=z

 

If you assigned prices to x, y, and z (say 4, 5, and 6), then that wouldn't mean that the first unusual went from being worth 4 buds to being worth 6 simply for the unusuals it was traded for, that's why we use unusual overpay to get rid of possible uncertainties in the values of unusuals since unusuals are also not kept as up-to-date as currency prices since there are over 300 unusual hat+effect combinations.

[Liddojunior]

I say the low end is what should be used.

When I sell I count unusuals used at their low end. Low end is easy to get and helps crate a safety zone for how much I can end selling recieved unusual and not take a loss.

Anything lower would be saying offered unusuals as quicksake which is how it shouldn't be.

[Christley </3 Peelz]

This is not how trading works. Overpay is rare, not standard. This is the exact reason nobody trusts the higher end prices of backpack.tf.

 

 

thats quite funny because in my trades they arent rare at all.

they must be rare for people having b/os at 2 when there's some coming and going selling for 1.3-1.5. because i never have that problem with getting overpay. unless you count overpay as 50% the value of the hat as some quickbuyers do.

 

on topic though: ive passed numerous suggestions counting overpay as lowest bp.tf, why?

well. if person a does a suggestion, having the range 3.5-4 buds. 3.5 is a good trade for the buyer and can be hard to get for that price, while 4 is much easier to do, and only some or one person has done in the proof, while lower end multiple people have offered or offered above.

to me that gives me an accurate picture of what the price would be if you counted overpay because i can get that amount easily

[PotVsKtl]

That's quite dumb, if that were true, then you could artificially raise the price of an unusual by simply trading it for an unusual that is worth slightly more. Then you can suggest that the value should be equal.

 

So if a person trades a "more" expensive hat for a "less" expensive one it's never proof that the less expensive one is underpriced? What kind of pricing site are you trying to run here? Do you care at all about actual trades? You guys just make up prices out of whole cloth because it's easier for you to have a formula than to attract people who actually participate in the market you're pretending to represent.

[MC22]

So if a person trades a "more" expensive hat for a "less" expensive one it's never proof that the less expensive one is underpriced? What kind of pricing site are you trying to run here? Do you care at all about actual trades? You guys just make up prices out of whole cloth because it's easier for you to have a formula than to attract people who actually participate in the market you're pretending to represent.

because the seller always has the advantage. I say if you do not like the prices, go find a better unusual guide to work off of.

[PotVsKtl]

because the seller always has the advantage. I say if you do not like the prices, go find a better unusual guide to work off of.

 

I don't like the prices, and neither does anyone who actually trades. Nobody overpays 20%, if a single person who is a "knolwedgable pricer" here was actually a trader they would know this formula is nonsense.

[∞Ramses]

Oh.

 

Example

 

When an unusual of 2.1 - 3.2 is offered, I use about 2.3 as the price. I'm usually not going below the bottom price. Because, you know, it's the bottom price, which means you could get that much easily if you sell the offered unusual. Of course, a bunch of unusuals get offered, I use the bottom price.

[Christley </3 Peelz]

I don't like the prices, and neither does anyone who actually trades. Nobody overpays 20%, if a single person who is a "knolwedgable pricer" here was actually a trader they would know this formula is nonsense.

"and neither does anyone who actually trades" i guess you've asked every single trader then.

because i work from it and havent had any problem at all, and i sell atleast 5 unusuals per month, atleast 2 are from unusual overpayment

[Liddojunior]

I don't like the prices, and neither does anyone who actually trades. Nobody overpays 20%, if a single person who is a "knolwedgable pricer" here was actually a trader they would know this formula is nonsense.

 

Everyone always overpays when offering unusuals. They know they have to.

Happens to me all the time.

 

I like bptf unusual prices at times very helpful. Right now they are getting messed up by the usd link they have.

 

I sell tons of unusuals weekly and monthly.

[polar]

Overpay is rare, not standard.

Don't know what you mean. Almost everyone factors overpay. i.e. B/O 5 in pure, 6 in unusuals.

[MC22]

no one overpays 20%

I find that a damn lot of people go by the 100% low end thing.

[BQE]

FFS NO.  

 

Last thing we need is another resource excuse for traders to demand a certain price.  "Well since I'm selling my hat for 2 buds, bp.tf says you have to pay me 2.4 in unusuals."

[BQE]

That's quite dumb, if that were true, then you could artificially raise the price of an unusual by simply trading it for an unusual that is worth slightly more. Then you can suggest that the value should be equal. To extend this analogy you trade this new unusual for an unusual worth even slightly more and trade this third unusual back for the first one and suggest the first unusual price be equal to the third unusual, yet nothing has really changed to constitute that.

 

Also this has nothing to do with trading, this has to do with reflecting an accurate (within reason) reflection of the price of unusuals.

 

Explanation of my example using algebra:

 

(first unusual) x

(second unusual) y

(third unusual) z

 

x<y<z

 

x traded for y

 

x=y<z

 

y traded for z

 

x<y=z

 

z trade back for x

 

x=y=z

 

If you assigned prices to x, y, and z (say 4, 5, and 6), then that wouldn't mean that the first unusual went from being worth 4 buds to being worth 6 simply for the unusuals it was traded for, that's why we use unusual overpay to get rid of possible uncertainties in the values of unusuals since unusuals are also not kept as up-to-date as currency prices since there are over 300 unusual hat+effect combinations.

 

Because people routinely trade 1 bud unusuals for 18 key unusuals.  And because unusual suggestions get accepted with one proof.  

[PotVsKtl]

Don't know what you mean. Almost everyone factors overpay. i.e. B/O 5 in pure, 6 in unusuals.

 

Asking for something and getting it are two different things.

[Slocumruls]

i pretty much ignore the trades where unusual overpay is >0.5 buds. Generally it means they are trying to ask too much anyway.

[ERASER BY]

A long time ago I did not use "unusual overpay" and my price suggestion were accepted ( the site is only formed ) - but I was deeply mistaken . 

 

4-6 months ago, I almost always used the formula: average price X 0.9 = pure price - it does not always work. I found exit - but that's another topic requires more detailed consideration (perhaps as something will tell) . 

 

Now I look at the larger value, or the average price X 0.9 = pure price or lower price range = pure price. My opinion works better " lower price range = pure price " , but if price normal and "beautiful".

Normal and "beautiful" price : 1-1.5  2.5-3 ..... 5-5.7  8-8.8 .... 10-11   13-14 .... 15-16.5 ....20-22  23-25-not a huge difference between the lower and upper price ranges. 

 

 

[naknak]

So if a person trades a "more" expensive hat for a "less" expensive one it's never proof that the less expensive one is underpriced?

 

The typical scenario has one person (the "buyer") choosing both hats.  He decides what hat to offer, and what hat to offer it on.   It should be obvious that getting to make this choice is valuable, which is why the other person ("seller") expects overpay. 

 

I think 20% is wrong, but 0% is too.  I look for 10% and will settle for 5%.

 

Unusual vs unusual trades where both people want the other's hat must be very rare.  And, even when they do occur, a smart trader will keep quiet about it and demand overpay anyway.

 

 

You guys just make up prices out of whole cloth because it's easier for you to have a formula than to attract people who actually participate in the market you're pretending to represent.

 

Man, don't get me started.  Come visit a key-price suggestion thread sometime.