Why buy order sale invalidations don't make sense

[LaughingLollipop]

So lately, particularly in the low to mid tier unusual market its become insanely common to discount sales that fall below buy orders, and/or sales to buy orders as 'unusuable'

 

I see two primary factors at play here

 

1) Algorithmically generated orders based on bp.tf price (or prior cash sales) are placed on a VERY large quantity of items.

2) A wide array of sales methods and various currency conversions/key factors associated to each

 

In regards to point 1) I don't see how you can reasonably say that a bot that will literally drop its order the moment a suggestion is processed is 'buying' at that price; the bot is trying to game the valuation for a quick buck; not assessing value.

In regards to point 2) its become rather annoying/difficult for a seller, buyer or suggester to filter through sites, listings and compare. Individual seller preference regarding currency (money, steam wallet, keys or items) also has a large bearing on the actual sale

 

Particularly on lower sales volume items this becomes very problematic. If you start saying half the actual sales of an item are outliers, you're missing what 'outlier' means.

 

There are instances in which items bounce around to various bots (or multiple SCM/MP.tf sales to buy orders) and then one sale is 'real'. Why does the fool who paid the most at the end of the chain set the value?

 

I fail to see why sales to 'buy orders' or under buy orders are not considered holistically along with the other sales points.

If the majority of sales points are at/below buy orders, the only logical conclusion is that a well researched buyer will pay buy order price for the item.

 

Particularly egregious offenders are hats that have sales looking something like this buy order, $20 under buy order, buy order +$2, buy order + $50 and buy order +$45

Now in this instance I think a logical individual would say the value is far less than buy order +$45, yet that is where the  current system will price the low end (+$2, +$45, +$50; $2 is an outlier, buy orders discounted: +$45 to +$50).

 

Is it not more fair, and accurate to say... sales are... limited low to buy order, limited low to buy order, buy order +$2, buy order +$45, buy order +$50

In this instance I'd expect the finalized price to equate to buy order to +$50; there are clear and obvious groupings of sales at each end, and it may be a large range but the approximated cost is far more accurate based on the sales at hand.

 

In the case that you see a distribution of say... limited low to buy order, +$45, +$50 the outcome is completely unchanged; buy order was an outlier range is buy order +$45 to buy order +$50

 

What is there to lose by considering buy orders to be a limiting value on a sale rather than a get out of jail free card to ignore the sale happening?

If most sales of an item are to buy orders... then that should be factored into what its 'worth'.

[soz]

Because then hats would be worth 1 key

[rndmchrs]

4 hours ago, LaughingLollipop said:

If most sales of an item are to buy orders... then that should be factored into what its 'worth'.

That's literally a thing already but ok