zannabianca: Examples of stagnant titles that would benefit from a price increase?
Examples of stagnant titles that would benefit from a price increase?
Here are some underpriced titles that are actually on my request list, and all have been sitting for quite some time (many since I joined).
This is a Japanese title and almost impossible to find. You can't find it anywhere, so nobody would part with it for $15.
This is the PSN DLC and actually costs $6. It will never move at 100 points. The seller will probably need to send a $10 PSN card for this, which is only really worthwhile to do at 300 points or up. There is no profitable way to sell it for 100 points.
DVD box sets are hard to get on Goozex because their point values are generally far too low. This is just one example but there are many many more underpriced DVD box sets on Goozex.
This is a rare Japanese release. It goes for about $30 on eBay.
This goes for about $40 used up to $100 or more new. It was underproduced I guess. I've watched it fluctuate between 300 and 400 since I've joined, but nobody will sell it. I'm always shocked when it goes down for no reason.
A Blu-ray of a good movie for 100 points? Just a WTF.
cheeznrice: SuperRick: 2. ONLY people buying the game can raise the price. They're choosing to pay more because they want it bad enough. 3. ONLY people selling the game can lower the price. They're choosing to get LESS points because they want to get rid of thier game bad enough. What's to stop sellers and buyers from making additional accounts to circumvent those restrictions? This already happens with queue spot jumping.
SuperRick: 2. ONLY people buying the game can raise the price. They're choosing to pay more because they want it bad enough. 3. ONLY people selling the game can lower the price. They're choosing to get LESS points because they want to get rid of thier game bad enough.
2. ONLY people buying the game can raise the price. They're choosing to pay more because they want it bad enough.
3. ONLY people selling the game can lower the price. They're choosing to get LESS points because they want to get rid of thier game bad enough.
What's to stop sellers and buyers from making additional accounts to circumvent those restrictions? This already happens with queue spot jumping.
No system is perfect, and the Goozex current system isn't perfect either. This argument is mute because no matter what the system is there will always be some amount of abuse. Unless you're talking about our government of course.
SuperRick: I think there's something to this. And, to reiterate what many of you just blindly ignored, the OP said there would be some restrictions to this: 1. Game must be stagnant. 2. ONLY people buying the game can raise the price. They're choosing to pay more because they want it bad enough. 3. ONLY people selling the game can lower the price. They're choosing to get LESS points because they want to get rid of thier game bad enough. With a fair amount of ristrictions, a system on the side like this could help. There would need to a be hefty amount of stagnation, and there would have to be good majority of people willing to change the price.
I think there's something to this. And, to reiterate what many of you just blindly ignored, the OP said there would be some restrictions to this:
1. Game must be stagnant.
With a fair amount of ristrictions, a system on the side like this could help. There would need to a be hefty amount of stagnation, and there would have to be good majority of people willing to change the price.
Yeah, I can't believe how many people were willing to post and vote who obviously only read the title. I didn't say "we should be able to set our own prices." This is just a mechanism for combatting stagnation, which clearly does happen today for lots of titles that COULD trade if their values were right.
taintedzodiac: I think that a simple, easy to understand fix that would solve all of the 100 point games that aren't moving would be to simply raise the minimum price cap to 200 points.
I think that a simple, easy to understand fix that would solve all of the 100 point games that aren't moving would be to simply raise the minimum price cap to 200 points.
I have traded out plenty of unpopular PS2 games and DVDs for 100 points. It's a valid price point. It's just too low for most recent titles (unless they're truly awful).
SuperRick:No system is perfect, and the Goozex current system isn't perfect either. This argument is mute because no matter what the system is there will always be some amount of abuse. Unless you're talking about our government of course.
Kind of hard to abuse the current point system no? My point is why complicate things more. Keep things simple...that is what Goozex used to be about...
Forum Moderator
cheeznrice: SuperRick:No system is perfect, and the Goozex current system isn't perfect either. This argument is mute because no matter what the system is there will always be some amount of abuse. Unless you're talking about our government of course. Kind of hard to abuse the current point system no? My point is why complicate things more. Keep things simple...that is what Goozex used to be about...
As Goozex continues to grow in both size and offered features, simplicity may have to give way for increased functionality; users that ignore the FAQ be damned....lol.
Join the Goozex Pokerstars Club!
GreenManGaming
Kenny007:As Goozex continues to grow in both size and offered features, simplicity may have to give way for increased functionality; users that ignore the FAQ be damned....lol.
I don't see the addition of users impacting the price points of games being a positive one. Goozex already does a good job of giving users FMV. It'll be more of a debacle than instant match.
cheeznrice: Kenny007:As Goozex continues to grow in both size and offered features, simplicity may have to give way for increased functionality; users that ignore the FAQ be damned....lol. I don't see the addition of users impacting the price points of games being a positive one. Goozex already does a good job of giving users FMV. It'll be more of a debacle than instant match.
Oh, I concur, which is why I've stated a few times I'd like this 'bump' of pricing to be automated rather than voter oriented. As it stands though, many titles just get hung out to dry, never moving in a positive way towards increased trading.
I haven't heard enough about this voting measure to actually support it yet. Currently it sounds like more of a hassle, but it doesn't negate the fact that some titles need help in some way, shape or form.
cheeznrice:It'll be more of a debacle than instant match.
Kenny007:it doesn't negate the fact that some titles need help in some way, shape or form.
IMO this is more of an algorithm issue.
Wii Play (disc only) : it is listed at only 100 points here and as a result I went to eBay to get rid of my copy, where I got $25 (which I used to fund a 1000 point giftcard ). 71 offers on hold, but it does look like it gets traded out somewhat.
Kenny007: cheeznrice: SuperRick:No system is perfect, and the Goozex current system isn't perfect either. This argument is mute because no matter what the system is there will always be some amount of abuse. Unless you're talking about our government of course. Kind of hard to abuse the current point system no? My point is why complicate things more. Keep things simple...that is what Goozex used to be about... As Goozex continues to grow in both size and offered features, simplicity may have to give way for increased functionality; users that ignore the FAQ be damned....lol.
This isn't a valid argument in this situation. Price points that need adjusting are not correlated to an increase in the size of the user base. It could be stretched to say that there would be more people complaining about it, but that's about it.
Goozex Forum Moderator
taintedzodiac: Kenny007: cheeznrice: SuperRick:No system is perfect, and the Goozex current system isn't perfect either. This argument is mute because no matter what the system is there will always be some amount of abuse. Unless you're talking about our government of course. Kind of hard to abuse the current point system no? My point is why complicate things more. Keep things simple...that is what Goozex used to be about... As Goozex continues to grow in both size and offered features, simplicity may have to give way for increased functionality; users that ignore the FAQ be damned....lol. This isn't a valid argument in this situation. Price points that need adjusting are not correlated to an increase in the size of the user base. It could be stretched to say that there would be more people complaining about it, but that's about it.
He was stating that Goozex used to strive to be simple, but from what I have gathered, old Goozex didn't have this many members (suggesting those involved where a bit more knowledgable, making the whole process seem simpler), the feedback and conditions facets not as robust, and didn't offer movies either.
The addition of more users just compounds things as Goozex continues to grow, and as a result, become a bit more complex.
people are far to selfish and greedy for that to benefit the community.
slacker4life: people are far to selfish and greedy for that to benefit the community.
Note that, as presented, the only available options would be for a buyer to pay more or for a seller to receive less from the trade. As designed, there are purposefully no options which would allow for greed.
As for the idea of making an alt account to vote on the line, that actually wouldn't work either, with the rules presented as-is. The voting would only take effect for existing, stagnant lines. So imagine you're a buyer in a stagnant line, and you wanted the price to go down (which already doesn't make sense, but bear with me). To vote the price down, you'd need to log in with an alt, and attempt to sell the item--but since there's a line of buyers waiting for the product, you can't get in line as a seller! You'd be initiating a trade instead, which would actually have the opposite effect of getting the line moving again (if you could sell it, but you can't, since you don't own it yet).
The only potential for fraud would be if multiple alts got into line for one product--e.g. you could get a bunch of buyers all lined up for a stagnant product, and then you could multiply your vote for a price adjustment. This could be mitigated by having votes be worth more if you're closer to the front of the line, or something like that, but it's not a big problem AFAICS. If you want a product so bad you're willing to make alts to vote the price up, then probably the price should go up. Or if you want to sell a product so bad that you're willing to make alts to vote the price down, again, the price probably needs to go down.
TLDR: greed-based votes don't work. read the rules again. you can't game the system to get unfair prices.
