Early Birds Suffer Most on Economy
I’m failing to see what POINT YOU’RE MAKING.
People buy stuff that is cheaper than other stuff. Part of trying to sell things on the Trading Post is being competitive. Arbitrarily imposing an “undercut” fee on things is just going to make valuable items even less valuable. It’s already irritating when someone undercuts by 10-15% on some items just to make a quick sale. If it lasts too long, then the price has just tanked for everyone else. Has to be a balance.
I AM SO CONFUSED RIGHT NOW
The best way to take care of this would be to let you change your listed price and get a refund on the sale total vs the lower price you put it – but to bill you for the highest if you take it out.
EX: I put in an item for 60s when it’s 59-60s, the item bombs to 20s. I can re-put my big at 19-21s, and if it sells, I pay the 5% on the sell price (.95s) – if I remove it, I pay it on the 60s (3s).
I have a few items I am NEVER taking out of the TP since I put them up when they were worth something, they bombed, and I’ll lose more money taking them out and selling them then just keeping them in and hoping they sell one day.
You’re both missing the point.
Selling an item for 100g and 99g 99s 99c is basically the same exact price.
Why should the person who listed their price at 100g have to wait till someone posts the same thing after them for 1c cheaper. No one is saving any money. Its just jipping the Early Bird off.
My idea is making it just as competitive as before. You can go with the current lowest for the 5% fee on the price, or start a new price at a minimum of 2.5% less of the value and still post the 5% fee of the new price.
That is the point I’m making. People shouldnt be losing money or time because they posted an item at practically the same price as other people posting it for negligible amounts less.
The people who posted the item after, for basically the same amount should be losing their time or money. -Which is exactly what this suggestion does.
Except you’re going to get people constantly undercutting each other by 2.5%. For the exact same reason they’re undercutting it by 1c. To sell it faster. You drive the value of the item down through repetitive undercutting at a mandatory 2.5% each time. At least with a 1c less buyout the value to the seller remains somewhat consistent. You just can’t expect a sale within 5 minutes on everything.
You’re taking a huge cut though if you want to undercut someone though, rather than 1 copper per each item.
Thats the point i’m trying to make. If they REALLY want that thing to sell it will. However jipping the early bird is not the answer (aka 1copper cuts rather than 2.5% cuts)
I don’t see how it’s any different. The first person posting still has to wait for the cheaper item to sell. The only difference is there’s some sort of vicarious satisfaction that someone has to eat a 2.5% loss to beat you.
Your point isn’t really that meritful though with what I suggested.
If it’s a high value/low quantity item you can just re 1-copper down at no problem to you.
If it’s a low value/high quantity item, either you massively overstated it’s price or it’ll sell shortly.
If its a lower value item of course their will be 1 copper undercuts. That is bound to happen, its a high demand market.
However its not the 2.5% EAT IT! Kind of thing I’m going for. It something that makes you think, Do I really want this to sell right now, or would I rather have that bit of extra cash and wait for this guys selling order to sell. Thats what I’m trying to establish. Don’t get how its so hard for yall to see it lol.
Even if someone lists an item at the same price as yours it sells first. So there’s that. Which makes the whole point of undercutting sort of pointless, unless the value of the item is overstated.
@GADefence, I do appreciate how you do know where I am coming from on this however. It is a rough economy right now. But having players pay out 5% of the items rapidly shifting value is not the answer.
Either A: the items value needs to shift less by some means, or B: you shouldnt have to pay 5% of the items value.
Thats how I see it. And the way I feel you can get the items value to shift less is if people have to take a bigger cut of profit less to do so. IE losing 2.5% of its value rather than 1copper (which at higher price items doesnt even matter)
@Tradewind well that is just plain stupid. and should be fixed along with rapid economy shifting / undercuts. Either semi stabilise it, or remove that fee. Because something isnt working, and you’d be a liar if you said it was.
I make my gold just fine. Again you can’t expect to sell everything within 5 minutes of putting it up. A very high value item can take a while and you need to watch it carefully. But whatever, I’m apparently a liar.
Well with my idea, the fee is only applied on the sale cost unless you remove it. That would work well with you since you can tinker with the price after it’s up – you just can’t take it back out (the item is for all intent and purposes up @ 5% listing fee)
The reason for the fee is to prevent everyone from listing everything at 10g. No fee = a flood or extremely overpriced “It’ll sell someday” items. The problem right now is unexpected drops make the system work that way towards item you put in at a point and time when the item HAD that value.
If you could tinker with the price and received credit for the % of the fee you listed that was too high or a deduction for the % of the fee that was too low, the market would be changeable without the 100g for copper lol someone will buy it issue other games have.
@Tradewind I never called you a liar, thats just immature of you to pull out of no where like that. What I’m saying is that 1copper undercuts just should not be (at higher prices). Its stupid its allowed.
Its like, Yess!! I got a dusk! I know im going to lose 15% of its value but what ever, I’m posting it for 100g.
And someone else gets a Dusk and their like, Yay!! I completely don’t care that this guy is only selling 1 at 100g and everyone else is at 110g, I’m going to ruin his day horribly! 99g 99s 99c Muahahaha.
Why should he, the second seller, get to put his item up at honestly the same price, and get it sold first? That is the question no one has yet to answer.
(Saying, Its a tough economy doesnt count. We know it is but WHY)
@Tradewind I never called you a liar, thats just immature of you to pull out of no where like that.
Because something isnt working, and you’d be a liar if you said it was.
Since I’m suggesting it works just fine, by your own submission, I’m a liar.
@GADefence I get what you’re saying and I like that. Once an item is up, it is up. You can edit the price as long as its up. I like that actually. It’l keep the economy just as intense, and if someone 1copper undercuts you you can just watch it and undercut them or even dramatically drop the price or so on. I dont even care about a refund lol, I just want my stuff to sell at a reasonable time without a bunch of “butt clowns” loading the economy with the same stuff .0001% of the value less than mine, and having their stuff sell. Its just stupid thats possible.
@Tradewind I never called you a liar, thats just immature of you to pull out of no where like that.
Because something isnt working, and you’d be a liar if you said it was.
Since I’m suggesting it works just fine, by your own submission, I’m a liar.
You obviously don’t even care about this topic any longer you’re directing the attention away from the issue and onto yourself. I’m done with you, just go. We want mature and sensible people here to focus on the topic. If you think that is you you’re welcome to stay, but please, no more flood about yourself.
Don’t kid yourself. You want people who agree with your opinion. If the idea is as strong as you’re suggesting, it can stand up to some simple scrutiny.
“Why should he, the second seller, get to put his item up at honestly the same price, and get it sold first? That is the question no one has yet to answer.”
Because the direct 2.5% change would completely kill price increases in anything other then massive bounds.
It would also be an unfair restriction to most people – overall, either there are not enough of it for it to matter or too many of an item that it would be hazardeous to implement a % increase minimum.
@Tradewind
Of course I want people to agree with my opinion. Why would I bother taking it to the forum? I know not everyone will and that is fine. But you have to at least try to see where I’m coming from.
And I feel you’re not trying to see where I’m coming from.
Why should my price of 100g sell AFTER someone elses price of 99g 99s 99c? They are practically THE SAME PRICE.
If you’re going to list an item on the TP, you should have to AT LEAST LIST it for a REASONABLE PRICE UNDER the Current Lowest Seller.
You have no many times I see an item selling for 88 silver, 85 silver, 80silver, and some desperate soul drops it down to 60silver, and then some “butthat” drops it to 59silver 99copper.
If I had the chance to I would buy the 60silver seller and ignore the 59silver 99copper seller… Unfortunately the game MAKES you buy the lowest selling price.
To me they have no right to sell that item before the 60 silver seller in my eyes. But maybe im just old fashioned.
Why would someone willingly pay more for the exact same thing though? It’s not like you’re buying RC Cola for the same price as a Coke. Again I’m suggesting that your expectations are just out of whack. It might take an item an hour, a day, a week to sell depending on it’s demand. But it does sell assuming people want it. The ones that don’t are the people who put crap up a month ago for 100x what it’s worth and haven’t done anything about it since.
“Why should he, the second seller, get to put his item up at honestly the same price, and get it sold first? That is the question no one has yet to answer.”
Because the direct 2.5% change would completely kill price increases in anything other then massive bounds.
It would also be an unfair restriction to most people – overall, either there are not enough of it for it to matter or too many of an item that it would be hazardeous to implement a % increase minimum.
I guess you’re right with that. If a pricing minimum isnt implemented I’d at least like to see the change of being able to buy an item at the price I want to buy it at. I’d pay for the early birds everytime. IDC about saving 1copper because 1 greedy person wanted to rip off an honest person.
I agree with jan