[CS Items Popular Values Guide]

[tony stark]

the bunny suits are way too high, at least for the 2016/2015 ones. where did you get these values? even when i looked on the item trade thread i found no evidence of this:
Forum/search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=bunny&t=4153787&sf=msgonly&ch=0

please lmk if im missing something! thank you for any response

Those are actually very rare, due to them being token trade-ins, and also since many users do not trade their tokens for items during the easter event.

[Wookieinmashoo]

the bunny suits are way too high, at least for the 2016/2015 ones. where did you get these values? even when i looked on the item trade thread i found no evidence of this:
Forum/search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=bunny&t=4153787&sf=msgonly&ch=0

please lmk if im missing something! thank you for any response

Those are actually very rare, due to them being token trade-ins, and also since many users do not trade their tokens for items during the easter event.

I would also like to know where the information is coming from. I looked through the link and the only thing I was was the two white bunny suits for "0.5 MA". It's also not them being token items that make them rare, it's them being costumes and costumes only able to fit one species.

[tony stark]

the bunny suits are way too high, at least for the 2016/2015 ones. where did you get these values? even when i looked on the item trade thread i found no evidence of this:
Forum/search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&keywords=bunny&t=4153787&sf=msgonly&ch=0

please lmk if im missing something! thank you for any response

Those are actually very rare, due to them being token trade-ins, and also since many users do not trade their tokens for items during the easter event.

I would also like to know where the information is coming from. I looked through the link and the only thing I was was the two white bunny suits for "0.5 MA". It's also not them being token items that make them rare, it's them being costumes and costumes only able to fit one species.

There’s many examples of costumes being quite common, and this is usually only because they aren’t token trade-ins. Using this logic, the token trade-ins should be worth more, not because they’re costumes, though item demand is a factor. For example, there are no medieval costume tokens but the tokens are still extremely rare. They are specifically listed under “no data” because I don’t have data, only the vague sense that they should be rare. If you don’t want to use values from the “no data” category that’s perfectly understandable but I do not believe I always need data to place an items worth when there are no rarity bars and no real way to know what an item is worth.

[Zeena]

a general question, how do people expect clear values to be established for items? we cant even do that for pets, and those have rarities. items have nothing.

matter of factly i can count on my hands the amount of people who cared about item rarity at ALL until like. last year lmao. when item collectors and enthusiasts decided that hey. hey maybe an item that was released at the same time as a store pet that is now omgsr and worth 3+ nons shouldnt be valued at "an uncommon-rare of its year". its why this guide was born in the first place.

no one traded for items, no one traded fairly for items because there was no measurement for fair. its all just based on collective experience of a bunch of people. guess what - trading data cannot be provided for most of these because item trades cannot be tracked. that is why the "no data" category exists.

[latias.]

a general question, how do people expect clear values to be established for items? we cant even do that for pets, and those have rarities. items have nothing.

matter of factly i can count on my hands the amount of people who cared about item rarity at ALL until like. last year lmao. when item collectors and enthusiasts decided that hey. hey maybe an item that was released at the same time as a store pet that is now omgsr and worth 3+ nons shouldnt be valued at "an uncommon-rare of its year". its why this guide was born in the first place.

no one traded for items, no one traded fairly for items because there was no measurement for fair. its all just based on collective experience of a bunch of people. guess what - trading data cannot be provided for most of these because item trades cannot be tracked. that is why the "no data" category exists.

No, but expecting a non+ for a bunny suit is ALSO unrealistic. If you “feel something should be rarer”, maybe look at all of the facts you can establish as to why people don’t think the same way and adjust accordingly? Sure, we may not have all of the information, but there’s a good reason I’m not going to trade a raven perch order for a non and vice versa. It’s because that value doesn’t seem realistic.

[tony stark]

I’m not sure where you’re getting this information from. No bunny suit is listed at a non, and neither is any raven perch order. Don’t make up values to try and make me look bad. And please try being respectful.

[nicole]

when u think abt it list pet values are also made up from nowhere or from demand like a bmd isn't really worth .75-1n but ppl still pay for that because it's been pushed that far however with items, you need to understand something:


- there is no way to track items. no id #'s, no click on them to see who has them now, and etc.
- staff won't leak item numbers so the most we can rely on are the users who have experienced item trades and have had difficulty getting a full item collection.
- this guide wasn't just made by gay. it was with a group of experienced item traders who shared their values and how hard it was to obtain certain items.


there's a bunch of proof that bmds, bas, ravens and other highly unrealistic demand worthy pets that you might have and have overpaid for, are actually not worth that much? This guide is purely factual based on the personal experiences gay, and other experienced item traders have had whilst completing their item collection. Feel free to post trade proof of you + others getting the item for lower or like have a bunch of a certain rare item to show that maybe it's not worth that much but at the end of the day, CS isn't going to drop the item count so this is the best thing we got bestie

[houndoom]

to add on to this demand =/= value =/= rarity? i dont know why some people just flat out dont understand this? if i randomly trade away 10 bmds it WILL affect their demand and consequently trading value but it wont affect their rarity. the exact same concept can be applied to items. just because an item does not have demand it doesnt mean its worthless?

i was literally here for the dream event, i KNOW how scarce some tokens were compared to others because i was an autistic kid with a lot of time on their hands who had sheets marked down of how many raven perches i could find for trade post-event. can that be used as evidence of its rarity? no! can it be used as evidence for scarcity? id wager so lmao, especially after recounting this event with other item collectors and finding out that surprise surprise! they also had trouble finding the item! i dont think that is circumstantial evidence anymore in that situation.

i gave the raven perch as an example because i saw it used here, but this applies to a lot more items.

with this in mind - if you speak to multiple people who have the same experience and then you turn around and go specifically seek out a certain hard-to-obtain item, and get it at less than a quarter of what it should LOGICALLY be worth, then im sorry but im very tempted to not take that "trading evidence" into account.

[Wookieinmashoo]

There’s many examples of costumes being quite common, and this is usually only because they aren’t token trade-ins. Using this logic, the token trade-ins should be worth more, not because they’re costumes, though item demand is a factor. For example, there are no medieval costume tokens but the tokens are still extremely rare. They are specifically listed under “no data” because I don’t have data, only the vague sense that they should be rare. If you don’t want to use values from the “no data” category that’s perfectly understandable but I do not believe I always need data to place an items worth when there are no rarity bars and no real way to know what an item is worth.

I wasn't talking about free costumes though. It's obvious free costumes would be more common because they're free. My point was that people do not often adopt, I forgot to specify, token costumes. People are likely to spend tokens on plushies though. It's them being costumes, and ones that fit one species or unpopular species, that cause them to not be adopted as much. I'm sorry if there was a misunderstanding.

Was there a discussion on the bunny suits? I'd really like to be able to see it if possible?

matter of factly i can count on my hands the amount of people who cared about item rarity at ALL until like. last year lmao. when item collectors and enthusiasts decided that hey. hey maybe an item that was released at the same time as a store pet that is now omgsr and worth 3+ nons shouldnt be valued at "an uncommon-rare of its year". its why this guide was born in the first place.

Could you use a different example? This seems a bit disingenuous because you are comparing things bought with C$ with items given away. I think the only examples you could potentially use for this is the tree store ornaments and the reindeer/sugarplum outfit. I think they had similar values to a store pet. Then you run into the problem of the ornaments only being tree decorations and a free set being given out, which would cause them to be adopted less. Heck, the store pony outfit was available for almost 3 years, but because of the price and only fitting ponies, I feel it would be worth more than the latest store pet that was available before it was retired and it cost less than a store pet. There's a lot more going on than just if the item was available during a certain time, then it's worth that pet. I would be happy to discuss items in public on the forums and I actually used to, but people have become hostile about it anymore for some reason.

[tony stark]

I wasn't talking about free costumes though. It's obvious free costumes would be more common because they're free. My point was that people do not often adopt, I forgot to specify, token costumes. People are likely to spend tokens on plushies though. It's them being costumes, and ones that fit one species or unpopular species, that cause them to not be adopted as much. I'm sorry if there was a misunderstanding.

Was there a discussion on the bunny suits? I'd really like to be able to see it if possible?

I see, I understand your point now. There was discussion on the older suits, but since the more recent ones were placed much lower, I didn't see the point in having a discussion when I wouldn't even be giving it a solid value and would be tacking it onto the "no data" list. The people who I usually discuss things over with before assigning values have all retroactively agreed with me, however, though in the future I'd understand if you'd like us to be more transparent about things.