Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Woifi The Viking

New Rule - Use original suggested values of Unusuals

Recommended Posts

PotVsKtl

So what happens when the price isn't decoupled from buds and buds rise again? This does nothing but exacerbate the problem. You're making the reliability of your prices worse, not better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polar

So what happens when the price isn't decoupled from buds and buds rise again? This does nothing but exacerbate the problem. You're making the reliability of your prices worse, not better.

 

The reality is that even though buds have gone down in value compared to keys, unusuals are generally selling for the same amount in buds. Buds depreciation seems to be a reflection of the health (or lack there of) of the unusual market. And the current system of pricing in USD which causes the inflated prices makes no sense. That is why we have made the rule to price new suggestions based on the actual suggestion value of the previous suggestion instead of the listed inflated value.

 

For example, the planets lucha was originally 1.8-2. It makes no sense to use the inflated price when the actual sales on the market are still at 1.8-2. There are countless examples of this. Take the the listed burning tc, take the beams crown. The same trend is seen generally across all unusuals regardless of hat / tier / class. Exceptions to this include some 1st gen hats / effects such as fetti / logos which are actually rising in value. But in establishing this rule, we are catering to the unusual market as a whole.

 

As always, pure sales carry the most weight, and if there are errors in the way a suggestion is made (relative to pure sales), a suggestion can always be re-made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jester

So this got closed due to these rules:

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/526b4c814dd7b813258b456b

 

I don't understand your logic, it's better to leave the overpriced value on the site than update it to the current lower value? I really don't understand that, now you are purposefully keeping out of date prices. lol, gg.  If ppl are asking 3 buds for a hat why are you keeping the price inflated to 3.5 buds?

 

The tiny bit of motivation i had to help on PCs for this site just evaporated.  Post an annoucement when BP.tf gets it's [email protected]#$ together. I'd love to come back to help PC stuff, but incredibly, it's even more pointless now.  This website has soooo much potential and it's just being wasted. Makes me sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polar

So this got closed due to these rules:

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/526b4c814dd7b813258b456b

 

The tiny bit of motivation i had to help on PCs for this site just evaporated.  Post an annoucement when BP.tf gets it's [email protected]#$ together. I'd love to come back to help PC stuff, but incredibly, it's even more pointless now.  This website has soooo much potential and it's just being wasted. Makes me sad.

 

Here's the problem. 

(1) There was no proof for the low end provided in the suggestion. You can't say b/o's are 3, so range should be 2.7-2.9. You still need proof for your range. 

(2) The price is 1 year old. Any one who looks at how old the price is will ignore the bp.tf price. If your suggestion passed, people will assume that 2.7-2.9 is somewhat accurate when there is really no basis for that besides b/o's. 

(3) If someone was using this hat to price another, it would not be valid proof since the price is 1 year old. Passing the suggestion at 2.7-2.9 would imply that this hat can be used as proof ~2.6 after overpay for another hat. Again, completely based on b/o's. 

 

We are all tired of people putting in 0 effort and quoting b/o's on the market to make ranges that are still too high. Put in a bit of effort showing at least one sale at 2.7-2.9 and there wouldn't be an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AwesomeMcCoolName

So this got closed due to these rules:

http://backpack.tf/vote/id/526b4c814dd7b813258b456b

 

I don't understand your logic, it's better to leave the overpriced value on the site than update it to the current lower value? I really don't understand that, now you are purposefully keeping out of date prices. lol, gg.  If ppl are asking 3 buds for a hat why are you keeping the price inflated to 3.5 buds?

 

The tiny bit of motivation i had to help on PCs for this site just evaporated.  Post an annoucement when BP.tf gets it's [email protected]#$ together. I'd love to come back to help PC stuff, but incredibly, it's even more pointless now.  This website has soooo much potential and it's just being wasted. Makes me sad.

 

 

Here's the problem. 

(1) There was no proof for the low end provided in the suggestion. You can't say b/o's are 3, so range should be 2.7-2.9. You still need proof for your range. 

(2) The price is 1 year old. Any one who looks at how old the price is will ignore the bp.tf price. If your suggestion passed, people will assume that 2.7-2.9 is somewhat accurate when there is really no basis for that besides b/o's. 

(3) If someone was using this hat to price another, it would not be valid proof since the price is 1 year old. Passing the suggestion at 2.7-2.9 would imply that this hat can be used as proof ~2.6 after overpay for another hat. Again, completely based on b/o's. 

 

We are all tired of people putting in 0 effort and quoting b/o's on the market to make ranges that are still too high. Put in a bit of effort showing at least one sale at 2.7-2.9 and there wouldn't be an issue.

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/14187986 Sold for around 2.5 

http://www.tf2outpost.com/trade/13956730 Sold for around 3 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AwesomeMcCoolName

Exactly. See, that wasn't too hard. And that makes the range much more reasonable. It's not like we are asking much. Find 1-2 sales and make a proper range instead of basing it off b/o's. 

edited another sale at around 3~, 2.7 w/ overpay (Vivid hwah + s machina)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polar

edited another sale at around 3~, 2.7 w/ overpay (Vivid hwah + s machina)

 

Please make the suggestion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your Karma

Alright, i'm probably going to look really butthurt because my unu suggestion got closed because of that, but still, i needed to make my point clear.

 

How does that rule make any sense?

 

I'm going to take basis in a very simple market visualisation. Basically, the problem which caused the rules is that buds went down.

I'm going to call buds "Currency B", Currency B is convertible in Keys, which i will call "Currency K".

 

What happenned is that B is worth less K. This is most likely due to the value of K rising, and the demand of B going down. This is perfectly normal market behavior.

Most unusuals are priced using Currency B.

 

The rule specified here states that, when pricing items using the price of other unusuals, previous prices must be used, instead of the current one. THIS PRESENTS CRITICAL FLAWS.

 

Flaw I

Most unusual prices aren't updated. This can be from as few as 1 week, to several months. Why use even older prices? One of the unusuals i used in my suggestion had a  four months old price. How can an older price reflect the current market any better?

 

Flaw II

This rule follows the idea that "Previous prices are often worth less because Currency B was worth more, therefore, since Currency B is falling, older prices should be used, as otherwise they'd be priced too high."

 

THIS IS FALSE. As any person with basic knowledge of the monetary market would know, what is happening is:

 

Currency K is going up.

Currency B is worth less, therefore, its convertability in K is less important as before. (It is not truly deflating yet, however.)

 

From what i can read, you're saying that if the price of the unus are using the higher, current prices, they're being priced too high. However, this is incorrect, they're being priced too low!

 

Since currency B is going down, items priced in B dont change their current value, as any good in absolutely any free market would behave. If the value of the currency goes down, PRICES GO UP, NOT DOWN.

 

Therefore, i believe that while a rule to limit brutal price changes is desirable due to the large fluctuation of Currency K and B, the current rule specified in this thread does not allow to prevent these modifications in a way that makes any kind of sense.

 

tl;dr inflation happens and you're trying to lower prices even though that's illogical

 

One last question, is why  are 1 of 1, unpriced unusuals suggestions affected by that rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Woifi The Viking
-snip-

Did you see my example with the beams crown? It's priced at 9.3-9.9 buds now even if there are still two at outpost at 8 and 8.5 buds (last price was 8-8.5). Please tell me how 9.3-9.9 is more accurate than 8-8.5 buds.

And you are not really using older prices, but the original suggested ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your Karma

Did you see my example with the beams crown?

Yes i did. One unusual does not make the market. If people are selling it at 8-8.5 even though inflation would make it otherwise, then the price for that hat should be resuggested to be lower.

 

 

And you are not really using older prices, but the original suggested ones.

Which happen not to be as recent as the current ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baloo

Yes i did. One unusual does not make the market.

Actually I'm fairly certain that's the definition of a market. All Unusuals of the same hat/effect combonation would constitute the market for that single hat/effect combination. I believe you were trying to say that a single example does is not enough to set a precedent for a new rule, and while that may be true, if you'd actually take the time to look around, then you'd notice that a lot of prices are higher than their outpost buyout equivalents. The only rare examples is when there's only 1 or 2 on the market and the seller tries to claim its rare and mark up his price (that no one buys for because its a dumb price). Come back with actual facts instead of saying you just think the rule is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Woifi The Viking

Like 80+% of all prices on the site are too high if you use the current value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AwesomeMcCoolName

Yes i did. One unusual does not make the market. If people are selling it at 8-8.5 even though inflation would make it otherwise, then the price for that hat should be resuggested to be lower.

Yes, it should, HOWEVER there just aren't enough suggesters to keep every item up to date. Keep in mind there are like 250 hats and like 50 effects now, totaling to 12,500 hat/effect combinations, and only a handful of suggesters who suggest regularly. There are 15 unusual suggestions per page, and 4 pages of pending suggestions a day. So if every one gets accepted, then thats only 60 suggestions a day (and not all are going to be accepted). So by the time a suggestion has been made for every hat/effect 210 days have passed. During which time more effects and more hats will be released. 

 

So yes, those unusuals should be updated, however there just isn't enough time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your Karma

 I believe you were trying to say that a single example does is not enough to set a precedent for a new rule

What i meant was "What's happening for one unusual shouldn't define the line of conduct for all of them." and more examples of unusuals that DO behave like that would be nice.

Additionally i still don't see how that justifies the fact that you should use the "original suggestions."

 

As well, it seems that people only care about that point, and absolutely no one answered my question or minded the inflation bit. So telling me to do more research when people don't even read what i said..

 

As for awesome's remark, that was implicitely what i meant with my first remark, it's not possible to actuate them all fast enough, which is why i find it doubly wrong to use "original prices".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Slocumruls

Your point about when a currency goes down the value of items priced in that currency do not go down is INCORRECT.

In Real Life goods sold in Dollars go down in price in foreign countries when the Dollar loses value. People don't just suddenly start charging more Dollars for the same item when the Dollar loses value against the Euro and therefor the price in Euros will go down. Manufacturing industries prefer a weaker dollar because it makes their goods more competitively priced overseas.

 

In this example let the value of the Dollar represent Buds and the Euro be either keys/paypal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AwesomeMcCoolName

As for awesome's remark, that was implicitely what i meant with my first remark, it's not possible to actuate them all fast enough, which is why i find it doubly wrong to use "original prices".

Except the original prices are far closer to the actual price then the over inflated prices now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
polar

What i meant was "What's happening for one unusual shouldn't define the line of conduct for all of them." and more examples of unusuals that

 

Sigh... Everyone keeps complaining. Okay here are examples. How am I picking these -- these are all suggestions in the last day. Random sampling, no cherry picking.

 

http://backpack.tf/stats/451/5/33 - OF bonk boy.      Last (buds): 3.5-4 --- Listed: 4.3-4.9 --- New (buds): 3.3-4.2

http://backpack.tf/stats/219/5/9 - GE milkman           Last (buds): 4.3-4.5 - Listed: 6.2-6.5 --- New (buds): 4.1-4.7

http://backpack.tf/stats/628/5/47 - 13th hour vrh      Last (buds): 4.8-5.7 - Listed: 6.2-7.4 --- New (buds): 5-6

http://backpack.tf/stats/920/5/36 - steaming crones Last (buds): 4.5-5 ---  Listed: 5.7-6.4 --- New (buds): 4.5-5

http://backpack.tf/stats/603/5/29 - stormy outdoors  Last (buds): 0.9-1 --- Listed: 1.3-1.4 --- New (buds): 1-1.1

http://backpack.tf/stats/633/5/34 - bubbling hermes Last (buds): 0.9-1 --- Listed: 1.2-1.4 --- New (buds): 1-1.1

http://backpack.tf/stats/101/5/16 - vivid tyro             Last (buds): 3-3.3 --- Listed: 4.5-5 ------ New (buds): 3.5-3.7

http://backpack.tf/stats/259/5/9 - GE capotain          Last (buds): 1.9-2 --- Listed: 2.9-3 ------ New (buds): 2.1

http://backpack.tf/stats/247/5/8 - ghosts guad         Last (buds): 2.3-2.7-- Listed: 3-3.5 ----- New (buds): 2-3

 

http://backpack.tf/stats/30013/5/57 - TW gridiron    Last (buds): 2.1-2.6 --Listed: 2.6-3 ----- New (buds): 1.4-1.7

 

I'll organize this a bit later and add some more relevant examples. As it is I tried to give a smattering of hats - 1st gen effects, weather effects, halloween effects, new effects, different classes, hat vs misc, etc. Trend is about the same. As you can see, new suggestion values almost always match last suggestion values in buds and not the USD values (listed price). Unusuals are trending with buds. Old effects tend to retain USD values a bit better. Rare hats, misc (noh mercy, high end team captain, coffin kit) tend to trend up in value as they become more rare (collectors hoarding) while hats that become more common (new effects) tend to trend down in value even compared to buds alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Slocumruls

You've pretty much demonstrated what I believed to be true: The price in buds doesn't really change as the value of buds fluctuates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AwesomeMcCoolName

You've pretty much demonstrated what I believed to be true: The price in buds doesn't really change as the value of buds fluctuates.

This isn't really new news..... 

 

Although, very expensive unusuals tend to stick closer to their USD price then they do their bud price. But 90% of unusuals stick with their bud price. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Woifi The Viking

Cleaing up this forum part2.

 

Linked this thread to the unusual suggestion guide. Unpinning this to reduce the number of pinned threads (10).

 

The rule still applies of couse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...