[🐝] Guide to Trading Every Pet on CS --- **being updated**

[♥Princess of Lions♥]

are we considering lowering the ur tree's value since the market? it seems like a ton of people have them but not many people want them

It’s going to be a temporary thing; it’s because someone traded away their hoard and released 10+ at once, which is over-saturating the market.

ah thank you i did not realize that was the reason. also, another question:

on the list here is says pink sorberts = all other sorberts in value (0.5 Non) but i consistently see people value them at 0.75 Non. is this an accurate representation of their value? is the demand any different for the pink?

Most people disagree with valuing the pink sorbet at 0.5 and put it a little higher because it’s the only sorbet that has been OMGSR at some point in the past, which tells us that the pink sorbet is more rare of an outcome than the other three.

[Pluto_eclipse]

Honestly, I don't know if this is the right thread or if it's ok to ask but can someone explain demand a little more simply for me, please? I get that it depends on the kind of animal and the kind of features but is there a general idea for how demand affects the worth? For example, event pets such as the 2023 extremely uncommon dogs are they worth just any other 2023 extremely uncommon or more? Sorry if this was already answered or if this is the wrong spot to ask.(it is also very possible I missed anything that provided information on this question)
Thank you

[reggyy]

Honestly, I don't know if this is the right thread or if it's ok to ask but can someone explain demand a little more simply for me, please? I get that it depends on the kind of animal and the kind of features but is there a general idea for how demand affects the worth? For example, event pets such as the 2023 extremely uncommon dogs are they worth just any other 2023 extremely uncommon or more? Sorry if this was already answered or if this is the wrong spot to ask.(it is also very possible I missed anything that provided information on this question)
Thank you

A good example I have recently found is the 2019 fae mischief foxes.
(this litter)


Someone in a CS server offered an 09 rare for it and the person declined, saying it was underpay - keep in mind the sources I have on it are just that it's worth another 2019 rare. I have seen these foxes go for 1MA due to the insane demand. That's the best example that I have of demand totally inflating a price.

The same goes the other way, higher tiered rats on horror's list that are valued at 1.8k-2k c$ often go for a few hundred less because of their low demand and how hard it is to trade them off.

A more recent example was the PPS hannukah horse. Before the rarity came out, the demand for it was insane. People traded store pets, old rares for it, etc.

To your original question, most pets are worth another pet in the same year with the same rarity. To find if it has any special demand it helps to check the fair trade thread, pet worth thread, and horror's / other lists :3. I hope this helped in some way?

[Pluto_eclipse]

Honestly, I don't know if this is the right thread or if it's ok to ask but can someone explain demand a little more simply for me, please? I get that it depends on the kind of animal and the kind of features but is there a general idea for how demand affects the worth? For example, event pets such as the 2023 extremely uncommon dogs are they worth just any other 2023 extremely uncommon or more? Sorry if this was already answered or if this is the wrong spot to ask.(it is also very possible I missed anything that provided information on this question)
Thank you

A good example I have recently found is the 2019 fae mischief foxes.
(this litter)


Someone in a CS server offered an 09 rare for it and the person declined, saying it was underpay - keep in mind the sources I have on it are just that it's worth another 2019 rare. I have seen these foxes go for 1MA due to the insane demand. That's the best example that I have of demand totally inflating a price.

The same goes the other way, higher tiered rats on horror's list that are valued at 1.8k-2k c$ often go for a few hundred less because of their low demand and how hard it is to trade them off.

A more recent example was the PPS hannukah horse. Before the rarity came out, the demand for it was insane. People traded store pets, old rares for it, etc.

To your original question, most pets are worth another pet in the same year with the same rarity. To find if it has any special demand it helps to check the fair trade thread, pet worth thread, and horror's / other lists :3. I hope this helped in some way?

Ok thanks a lot!

[Solloby]

ah thank you i did not realize that was the reason. also, another question:

on the list here is says pink sorberts = all other sorberts in value (0.5 Non) but i consistently see people value them at 0.75 Non. is this an accurate representation of their value? is the demand any different for the pink?

Most people disagree with valuing the pink sorbet at 0.5 and put it a little higher because it’s the only sorbet that has been OMGSR at some point in the past, which tells us that the pink sorbet is more rare of an outcome than the other three.

Sorbets are one of the only litters where it was revealed that they are all equal in rarity. One going OMGSR didn't mean it was rarer than the others, it meant that the whole litter was on the cusp, and that slight variation in rarity would have been changed by the next rerelease.

To explain the cusp for those who are unfamiliar, let's say for example that the cut off point for OMGSR was 2000 pets.
Maybe there were 1999 pink, 2001 blue, 2002 green etc. That would put pink at omgsr (above the 2000 cut off) and the others not, but functionally their supply is about the same. The next rerelease might result in about 400 new puppies, which statistically means 100 of each colour, but that's not exactly how randomisation works - maybe there were 102 pinks and 98 greens for example. Add these on to the existing counts and you end up with 2101 pink and 2100 green, and suddenly pink isn't the rarest anymore is it. This is how randomisation works - a coin has a 50/50 chance of being heads or tails, but if you flip it twice you may end up with tails twice. Over 100 flips you might end up with 49 heads, 51 tails. Randomisation.


This is why using historical rarity data is problematic. One pet being slightly rarer than another one 5 or 10 years ago means very little about the rarity of those pets in relation to each other today. Between rereleases and rarity label changes, we have very little information about the rarities of different pets now. It's interesting to think about, but makes estimating comparative rarity within the same label extremely difficult. We no longer have any evidence whatsoever that any UR pet is rarer than any other UR pet for example. Rarity data from 2-3 rarity systems ago is not useful anymore. I wish we had pet numbers, but I understand why we don't.

Might have missed it at some point (I don't really participate in these discussions), but where does the "1 MA = 10 old rares" come from? It seems arbitrarily decided for sake of simplicity (10, 15, 20, etc.).
-firefii

Still wondering how this was decided. Was there a discussion I missed?
-fireflii

I assume that someone just randomly made it up? Valuing OMGSRs in Rs while ignoring VRs and ERs makes no sense, a step up approach would've been so much easier to manage. Redefining MAs because the rarity of the pets that traded for them made no sense either. If pets that are 2011 VRs is what traded for MAs previously, why is that no longer acceptable just because they changed rarity? I don't get what the trading community is trying to do with their value guides, I really don't.

[sunka]

snip.

I assume that someone just randomly made it up? Valuing OMGSRs in Rs while ignoring VRs and ERs makes no sense, a step up approach would've been so much easier to manage. Redefining MAs because the rarity of the pets that traded for them made no sense either. If pets that are 2011 VRs is what traded for MAs previously, why is that no longer acceptable just because they changed rarity? I don't get what the trading community is trying to do with their value guides, I really don't.

i agree. honestly, instead of making it easier it makes it even harder. i just don’t understand the random rares. it would have been easier to work down, for example 1 omgsr = 2 ER = 3 VR = 4 Rare or whatever the conversion would be. it honestly confuses me that the lists completely ignore rarity. i thought the overhaul would help show which pets should actually be worth more (for example, the advent list pets that went to omgsr) but it seems like every person trading ignores rarity and goes based off of demand, which who even knows what has demand anymore because there’s so many different opinions and guides but not one truly makes full sense.

[Clayflower.]

snip.

I assume that someone just randomly made it up? Valuing OMGSRs in Rs while ignoring VRs and ERs makes no sense, a step up approach would've been so much easier to manage. Redefining MAs because the rarity of the pets that traded for them made no sense either. If pets that are 2011 VRs is what traded for MAs previously, why is that no longer acceptable just because they changed rarity? I don't get what the trading community is trying to do with their value guides, I really don't.

i agree. honestly, instead of making it easier it makes it even harder. i just don’t understand the random rares. it would have been easier to work down, for example 1 omgsr = 2 ER = 3 VR = 4 Rare or whatever the conversion would be. it honestly confuses me that the lists completely ignore rarity. i thought the overhaul would help show which pets should actually be worth more (for example, the advent list pets that went to omgsr) but it seems like every person trading ignores rarity and goes based off of demand, which who even knows what has demand anymore because there’s so many different opinions and guides but not one truly makes full sense.

recently i have seen a lot of people pushing demand to extremes. i was shocked when i came back 4 months ago to find the dragoncat pps at one non. i wish the community together would just agree like, "yeah, we aren't paying one non for that anymore".

and i am not paying 1.5 non now for a august pps - that is ridiculous haha. hoping no one keeps trading that value cause i aint!

while helpful, i think the fair trade thread and successful trade thread cause a lot of the demand issues. as mentioned above, some people just randomly put in a 1.5n outlier trade for the august pps and suddenly it has to go for that now causing MAJOR inflation. same with the fairy foxes on the ftt.

i see so many people say, "i know it's fair rarity wise, but what about demand?" i refrain from helping out with those as i would like people to try and form their own opinions about pets, but i do trade a lot so i understand where they come from sometimes.

-

i think the main reason for the change of how things worked though is because the old lists were just very outdated. just like how the economy can change - the way pets are traded overtime are going to change too. ever since this list has become more complete, i've seen it used frequently and have had success following it!

[musicgurl333]

Still wondering how this was decided. Was there a discussion I missed?
-fireflii

I assume that someone just randomly made it up? Valuing OMGSRs in Rs while ignoring VRs and ERs makes no sense, a step up approach would've been so much easier to manage. Redefining MAs because the rarity of the pets that traded for them made no sense either. If pets that are 2011 VRs is what traded for MAs previously, why is that no longer acceptable just because they changed rarity? I don't get what the trading community is trying to do with their value guides, I really don't.[/quote]

Yeah, this is something I’ve wondered about too. A lot of the current “old rares” were only uncommon before the rarity change, so it’s like cutting the rarity of MAs in half overnight. I don’t know why it’s not based on VRs, which is what a lot of the former old rares have become.

[Mejibray]

Isn't the lavender bun also a list pet? It's OMGSR and was on the last list! o:
I searched for it but maybe I overlooked it?

[Lennie]

Isn't the lavender bun also a list pet? It's OMGSR and was on the last list! o:
I searched for it but maybe I overlooked it?

In Tier 5! The outcome is listed as the "Lilac Bun" rather than the Lavender Bun ^^