Jump to content

Incorrectly priced item - Collector's Pith


Autumn Bomb

Recommended Posts

Hello, my collector's pith helmet was recently priced at 646 keys, although there were two suggestions for the price, the other at 777 keys. The lower suggestion used quicksell prices, which to me the buyer is incredibly unfair to devalue the hats I traded to such a large degree. The second used more accurate prices, and had over double the percentage of votes for the suggestion. 

 

The lower suggestion had 39.13% with 46 votes, whereas the higher suggestion had 88.71% with 62 votes.

 

To me this shows the backpack admin who accepted the suggestion and declined the other used their own personal biases while not providing reasoning as to why. This seems incredibly wrong to me, and I'd like to know why this has happened as more people agree the higher price better reflects the item's value.

 

https://backpack.tf/vote?quality=14&item=Lord+Cockswain%27s+Pith+Helmet&priceindex=0&state=0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pure buyout was set at 1000 keys. The seller and I never discussed a pure value and him quickselling the hats wasn't discussed, nor was it a reflection upon what I was paying. What he chose to do with the hats is entirely up to him, but those hats are valued a lot higher than quicksell prices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Autumn Bomb said:

The pure buyout was set at 1000 keys. The seller and I never discussed a pure value and him quickselling the hats wasn't discussed, nor was it a reflection upon what I was paying. What he chose to do with the hats is entirely up to him, but those hats are valued a lot higher than quicksell prices.

If you have a screenshot of the pure b/o before that, then you may be able to ask for a reversal of the decision. But usually mods check the b/o beforehand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The seller even stated he was personally valuing the #2 Pith Helmet at around 70 keys. I’m not being biased because the 777 key suggestion was mine, but I still don’t understand how its fair to the buyer that the seller quicksold all the hats and it gets priced at the quicksell value.

 

He would have “accepted” 650 pure, but that was not his buyout and he valued the craft hat at 70 keys alone. The buyer paid ~777 keys with proper minis on hats. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accepting the lower sugg was ridiculous and I don't know how the admin responsible could possibly justify accepting it, they either used their own personal reasons for doing so which is akin to price manipulation imho, or they didn't bother to check either of the suggs properly before accepting them.

Either way this needs fixing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Offline said:

The seller even stated he was personally valuing the #2 Pith Helmet at around 70 keys. I’m not being biased because the 777 key suggestion was mine, but I still don’t understand how its fair to the buyer that the seller quicksold all the hats and it gets priced at the quicksell value.

 

He would have “accepted” 650 pure, but that was not his buyout and he valued the craft hat at 70 keys alone. The buyer paid ~777 keys with proper minis on hats. 

 

YjcXZ6r.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Offline said:

The seller even stated he was personally valuing the #2 Pith Helmet at around 70 keys. I’m not being biased because the 777 key suggestion was mine, but I still don’t understand how its fair to the buyer that the seller quicksold all the hats and it gets priced at the quicksell value.

 

He would have “accepted” 650 pure, but that was not his buyout and he valued the craft hat at 70 keys alone. The buyer paid ~777 keys with proper minis on hats. 

That sounds like a buyout to me though. Any admin wish to revisit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't understand why there's any confusion at all here. The SELLER of the hat is the one who made the suggestion at 646. He quicksold the items to get pure. Obviously, it means he would have taken that amount of pure to begin with, so he can't have valued the hat any more than that. 

 

Very confused about the comments here. The true b/o on a hat is what the person is willing to take in pure for the hat, not some number they list in classifieds. Most sellers would take a pure value less than their listed b/o. In this case, the seller made it explicitly clear what the real b/o was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RED265 said:

Uh, most sellers’s Stated b/o is usually the b/o in pure

 

Yes, but that does not mean that they would not take a pure value less than that. What is a buyout? It is the pure value that a seller is willing to sell a hat for. You can list a hat at 1000 keys. That does not mean that you wouldn't be willing to sell it for less. Most of the time, we don't know what the real b/o is and we have to go with a listed b/o. However, the seller of the hat showed that his actual b/o was 650 pure because that is what he quicksold all the items for to get pure. It clearly means that he would have taken 650 pure if it was offered to begin with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welp, at least the guy didn't say he acktchually could have taken three fiddy and got the collectors priced for that. You can't fight rules even if they're practically faulty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, polar said:

 

Yes, but that does not mean that they would not take a pure value less than that. What is a buyout? It is the pure value that a seller is willing to sell a hat for. You can list a hat at 1000 keys. That does not mean that you wouldn't be willing to sell it for less. Most of the time, we don't know what the real b/o is and we have to go with a listed b/o. However, the seller of the hat showed that his actual b/o was 650 pure because that is what he quicksold all the items for to get pure. It clearly means that he would have taken 650 pure if it was offered to begin with. 

650 was not the pure buyout of the Pith since it was listed at 1000 or so (if I recall). He accepted 700+ in items which the price should have been based off of. The fact that he quicksold all the hats afterwards makes them unusuable as a sale in a mini (when there are other sales). There are more sales that support a higher price than 650 on the items he received. An example similar to this is how marketplace sales are priced. They are priced at the cash value the buyer paid, not the 90% the seller receives. Even the later suggestion by Offline was praised to be more accurate by the buyer and seller. The reason why Fire used buyorder prices is likely due to it being his first suggestion since he never directly stated his buyout was 650 keys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even as someone that's definitely no stranger to bullshit surrounding my Collector's suggestions, the price of this item was handled fairly. See my comment on the suggestion for the rest of my thoughts.

 

-HarryG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, HarryG said:

Even as someone that's definitely no stranger to bullshit surrounding my Collector's suggestions, the price of this item was handled fairly. See my comment on the suggestion for the rest of my thoughts.

 

-HarryG

Based on your comment. The majority of the items weren't low tier and miscs are generally easier to sell. The listing was at like 1000 keys, so no buyout cap based off of list price. There are many more sales to the items in this trade that should have been used to get a more accurate value with proper minis. Heck, the PE stash is still in date yet the quicksell price was used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Apoq said:

Based on your comment. The majority of the items weren't low tier and miscs are generally easier to sell. The listing was at like 1000 keys, so no buyout cap based off of list price. There are many more sales to the items in this trade that should have been used to get a more accurate value with proper minis. Heck, the PE stash is still in date yet the quicksell price was used.

I won't even argue the point that almost nobody on the current staff team at the site knows much about pricing Collector's items, least of all Collector's cosmetics. As the leading authority on pricing Collector's cosmetics I would say in my opinion that the most recently accepted price reflects the value of the item much better than the other suggestion, which was poorly formatted and didn't really accurately represent the values of some of the items within it. It was an overall poor suggestion. Additionally, the community votes aren't a good way to gauge whether or not a suggestion should be accepted; many of my Collector's cosmetic suggestions in the past (including some at a higher value than this item) were accepted with poor vote ratios. I've become fairly disliked amongst some of the staff for my vocal protest against poor handling of suggestions in the past; I honestly wouldn't recommend it considering the fact that it just leads to a downward spiral of dislike and biases all around -HG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HarryG said:

I won't even argue the point that almost nobody on the current staff team at the site knows much about pricing Collector's items, least of all Collector's cosmetics. As the leading authority on pricing Collector's cosmetics I would say in my opinion that the most recently accepted price reflects the value of the item much better than the other suggestion, which was poorly formatted and didn't really accurately represent the values of some of the items within it. It was an overall poor suggestion. Additionally, the community votes aren't a good way to gauge whether or not a suggestion should be accepted; many of my Collector's cosmetic suggestions in the past (including some at a higher value than this item) were accepted with poor vote ratios. I've become fairly disliked amongst some of the staff for my vocal protest against poor handling of suggestions in the past; I honestly wouldn't recommend it considering the fact that it just leads to a downward spiral of dislike and biases all around -HG

Yeah community votes don't mean anythin. I personally don't know the differences between pricing items like unusuals compared to collector cosmetics. I am just lookin at the price of the hats offered since it seems like the buyer of the Pith was unaware that his backpack would be devalued in a suggestion off of his own purchase. Doesn't quite make sense to me personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why are the prices of the items even questionable? If a quicksale was used as a mini on an already indate hat wouldn't that invalidate the whole sug? weird situation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im gonna pop in with my own point. Just imagine if this is how unusuals could also be priced. As a price suggester myself, this could be taken as a double standard if this does not get used within unusual suggestions. If collectors items can get capped at a value of items quick sold in value, then I dont see why unusuals shouldn't. You might say "It does not represent the real value of the item", but if this works on a collectors item then I dont see a reason of it not to work on unusuals as well.

Imo, this whole situation is dumb in the end and I dont see a *real* reason for the incorrect suggestion being accepted.

 

- Vincentius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RED265 said:

that ain't a B/O......an actual listing is then the B/O

I asked about the 1000keys being his b/o in pure because that's what he listed it at hence the previous sentence "I see you finally listed the pith"

It was listed for 1000keys

 

Edit: Unfortunately backpack doesn't store snapshots off listings when using compare links so unless there's a screenshot of it somewhere or Fire himself is willing to confrim his original listing was for 1000keys there's no real way to prove it indefinitely. 

Doesn't alter the fact that an incorrect suggestion that isn't in line with how all other suggestions are accepted and priced got accepted wrongly and should be fixed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...