Is buyers enough as a proof?

[Duablo]

I do assume that mr.  d0 ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)  do know what he is doing. Can anybody explain how buyers can be enough as a proof to choose range? Should we not require actual sales? He also had 1 link to support high end range. I wouldn't call some of these links as "fresh". I am quite confused on this one... It got approved instantly.

 

Link to poll: http://backpack.tf/vote/id/545bc03ab88d884a6d8b494c

 

 

Can someone clarify this? I had used buyers for my key suggestions and got mixed reviews...

[Gent♥]

d0 logic.

 

It wouldn't work on a key suggestion with just buyers because of the pure volume of evidence you need for a key suggestion.

[Duablo]

It still seems rather "light" proof there. I doubt that old threads can properly  replicate  changes happening in the market. As this in similar manner got pointed against me on my suggestions.

 

There is no actual sales, that was my question, so we don't need sales?

[Cottonbonbon]

I think I see why it was accepted; I just did a quick search on outpost and hoooollly shit there are like only 2 pages worth of genuine angers that aren't either painted, strange, or both, and even then 1 of those 2 pages still included either strange versions of that hat or ones where the trader is looking for either item offers, offers in general, or looking for above d0's suggested range.

[Duablo]

It might be true that price is outdated. But is the proof there is sufficient to make that change? I do believe I won't get accepted with proof like that. I do see that he has enormous experience in doing he's thing.

 

My only question was and still are - is sales actual matters and should be a core of the proof? In this case it appears as not.

[Cottonbonbon]

It depends on the item in question; Like gent mentioned already, what d0 did would never work in a key suggestion, because keys need those solds along with seller and buyers. The genuine Anger on the other hand is not a currency and, like I already mentioned, has the special circumstance of having most of its listings on the market be for either strange, painted, or combined versions of both, which cannot be used to support a suggestion, since we price everything on their base properties. 

[Duablo]

How may we use buyers as proof if we can't determine properly how much (if any) transaction has occurred? Can we trust just by the fact of their presence? Do the old threads and their listed prices properly replicates buyer intentions to buy at listed price?

I just can't  see how we can properly use these as a core proof.

 

Not saying that it's by any means wrong, I am far less experienced in suggestions. If there is something that I don't know that do answer my questions, I would be glad to hear these answers (Just need for myself to know for further review of suggestions / suggesting). 

[Draco Blaze]

This is a rarer case as almost all of the Genuine Angers being sold are painted. Solds are nice, but in this case buyers alone are enough. The fact that people are willing to pay the current price and even higher displays that the current price is due for a raise, but since other proof is invalid for various reasons, the buyer proof is sufficient.

 

 

All-in-all, buyers only is a situational thing.

[Duablo]

This is a rarer case as almost all of the Genuine Angers being sold are painted. Solds are nice, but in this case buyers alone are enough. The fact that people are willing to pay the current price and even higher displays that the current price is due for a raise, but since other proof is invalid for various reasons, the buyer proof is sufficient.

 

 

All-in-all, buyers only is a situational thing.

 

I guess if the same policy is applied for every user, we should be fine. 

 

I would like to highlight that proof for actual change (4.66ref) is 1 hyperlink. I don't know if in any circumstances this is not "at least" disctuable suggestion that requires some  discussion to happen instead of instant approval by the moderator. I still believe that suggestion like that would not get approved by an user within it's first suggestion. I would keep in mind that 1 link combined with an argument that there are bunch of high-ballers, which has not actually sold a thing, acording to this, is sufficient to change range. 

 

For me personally, I don't see it as urgent if we don't have sufficient proof whatsoever for particular range. 

[Gent♥]

I guess if the same policy is applied for every user, we should be fine. 

 

>disctuable suggestion 

 

Wat

 

Anyway, no, it's not gonna get applied to every user. Because like it or lump it, a black belt suggester knows a damn sight more about the tf2 economy than a white belt.

 

d0's recent suggestion was a special case. D'you know how many unpainted genuine angers there are on outpost? The number usually varies between 0 and 1. Ergo, buyers were the only valid evidence. This does not apply to almost every other item ever.

Alright? It was a special case, that we shouldn't be discussing as if it's groundbreaking.

[♠Derpeh♤]

It wouldn't work on a key suggestion with just buyers because of the pure volume of evidence you need for a key suggestion.

Actually many many currency suggestions in the past have been accepted with the core proof being buyers. 

 

It might be true that price is outdated. But is the proof there is sufficient to make that change? I do believe I won't get accepted with proof like that. I do see that he has enormous experience in doing he's thing.

 

My only question was and still are - is sales actual matters and should be a core of the proof? In this case it appears as not.

It isnt required as part of proof but you should always have some solds.

 

When lowering an item just sellers below the range and unsolds at current range is fine (Shows many people selling for less and unsuccessful at current range) solds can be used but it isnt as important compared to increasing the price. Increasing price is practically always through solds as it is the only reliable way to prove that price should go up, when people are successful in selling for higher...etc

 

However with that said everything is evaluated on a case by case basis you shouldnt blindly upvote/downvote just because it "doesnt follow rules" rules are guidelines and isnt an excuse to ignore logic. Seen some people downvoting key suggestions saying the price of the key shouldnt go higher because there are no solds when there are walls and walls of buyers all buying for above the current price.

[Duablo]

I am fine with this. I agree that by proof, maybe, lower range is justified enough (although disputable, due some of their age). High end range, in contrast, had only one buyer which backed it up. If there is additional proof, it should be bought into the table for consideration I guess..

 

All I said was that better thing, in my opinion, was to get more convenient proof. 1 buyer seems quite low to change price. Everything else in his suggestion just points out that 4.33 might have some demand from buyer perspective (it was priced as 4.33 before this suggestion).

 

Here is some examples of recent market (Guess, how many of those were considered?)

4.22

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23580547

 

3.66

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23552861

 

bf.tf price (before update)

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23545383

 

However, not much sales above to not say least.

[Gent♥]

Here is some examples of recent market (Guess, how many of those were considered?)

4.22

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23580547

 

3.66

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23552861

 

bf.tf price (before update)

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/23545383

 

However, not much sales above to not say least.

'bp.tf' price 'pre-update' is meaningless because 4.33 is still in the range.

The other two both quick-sold in less than an hour, they were most likely considered and disregarded.

 

How many suggestions have you actually made, duablo? Your knowledge of them seems... shaky.

[Duablo]

'bp.tf' price 'pre-update' is meaningless because 4.33 is still in the range.

The other two both quick-sold in less than an hour, they were most likely considered and disregarded.

 

How many suggestions have you actually made, duablo? Your knowledge of them seems... shaky.

 

It justifies 4.33. All sales in more or less sense justifies previous flat 4.33 rate as keeping it won't require proof. There is no sales indications to rise price whatsoever except that one buyer. By my links, it appears that 4.33 replicates more as trading point as 4.66 do.

 

Only intention of this was to stress that sales do happen below it and kinda not happen above. And there is quite poor indications that higher range should be chosen. (I won't support quicksells to set lower price). It might mean that we should keep price as close as possible to actual sales. All my point was that change was unnecessary.

 

By taking actual sales in mind (if suggester / manager was aware of their presence) I do think that discarding this change due the fact that there is slight indications of sales clearly below high end range would be quite right, by taking in account that there is only 1 buyer provided for support of 4.66.

 

Not changing the price does not require proof, if we do change it, we should not ignore part's of it.

 

 

Please tell me, If I Am wrong. I just think it's too contradictory to make such a change w/o sales and strip all sales as they're irrelevant.