"The" Rares List Guide - Do not ask about new UR's!

[huskynerd]

Key words: some people.

Yes, exactly. I personally prefer rereleases to true dates, because they sit at the front of my groups so I can always see them first.

The reality is, users DON'T pay exorbitant amounts for original date pets. People who have pets to spare might pay extra to get what they want, but by and large most wouldn't. Auctioneers put "true date" in their thread titles to make the pet sound valuable or have it stand out, and newer users may be mistaking that for meaning the pet is actually worth more.

[Jackdaw Lord]

I never said that there was a huge difference between both. It's not like one is the ubber common pet everyone has and the other is super rare. Just that there IS a difference between the too. xD

I didn't realize I'd been rude either? Was just pointing it out.

[Samurai!]

But twins are born around the same time, not by years. o-o Unless you're talking bout two sets of twins? D8

What I meant by 'twins' was 'identical siblings.' Not twin twins, just people who look exactly alike by some miraculous feat. I'd explained that when I first typed the explanation, but I guess it got left out when I reworded everything. >_<; My bad.

My point was that the dogs, though 'born' on different years, are the same darn thing and should be valued as such.

[brian emo]

But twins are born around the same time, not by years. o-o Unless you're talking bout two sets of twins? D8

What I meant by 'twins' was 'identical siblings.' Not twin twins, just people who look exactly alike by some miraculous feat. I'd explained that when I first typed the explanation, but I guess it got left out when I reworded everything. >_<; My bad.

My point was that the dogs, though 'born' on different years, are the same darn thing and should be valued as such.

Agreed- I know a lot of people here are very concerned about dates and such, but they need to mellow down a bit.
Seriously, I'd seem a bit off my rocker if I offered to trade my original [2007] date-published copy of Harry Potter 7 for a re-release 2008-published copy and also wanted a free copy of The Cat in the Hat. o_e

[Jackdaw Lord]

But twins are born around the same time, not by years. o-o Unless you're talking bout two sets of twins? D8

What I meant by 'twins' was 'identical siblings.' Not twin twins, just people who look exactly alike by some miraculous feat. I'd explained that when I first typed the explanation, but I guess it got left out when I reworded everything. >_<; My bad.

My point was that the dogs, though 'born' on different years, are the same darn thing and should be valued as such.

Agreed- I know a lot of people here are very concerned about dates and such, but they need to mellow down a bit.
Seriously, I'd seem a bit off my rocker if I offered to trade my original [2007] date-published copy of Harry Potter 7 for a re-release 2008-published copy and also wanted a free copy of The Cat in the Hat. o_e

I'm pretty sure someone would buy it. Depending on how many were published by the 'first edition', of course, if it was a very large edition, chances is that it's not worth much, but still more than a second or 3rd prints. I do however, know that, for example:

"An unsigned first edition copy of "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) Stone" may be worth between £3,000 and £4,000. A signed copy may be as much as £10,000. One of the first edition "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) Stone" hardbacks was sold for £10,575 at a Sotheby's auction in early 2002" - http://www.catchthesnitch.com/books/first_editions/

That was in 2002, imagine today. They're worth even more. And considering the book itself originally costed £10-20, that's over 1000% its originally price.

[brian emo]

I'm pretty sure someone would buy it. Depending on how many were published by the 'first edition', of course, if it was a very large edition, chances is that it's not worth much, but still more than a second or 3rd prints. I do however, know that, for example:

"An unsigned first edition copy of "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) Stone" may be worth between £3,000 and £4,000. A signed copy may be as much as £10,000. One of the first edition "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) Stone" hardbacks was sold for £10,575 at a Sotheby's auction in early 2002" - http://www.catchthesnitch.com/books/first_editions/

That was in 2002, imagine today. They're worth even more. And considering the book itself originally costed £10-20, that's over 1000% its originally price.

Lol I think that backfired on me xD
I'm not part of this anyway, so I'll just keep quiet about it. :3

[Jackdaw Lord]

Yes, we have that information but no, we have no plans to share it. Sorry..

Maybe it's stupid to ask, but why didn't he want to share the statistics?

Because the rarities wouldn't be fun and speculation and demand anymore >w>
And then nobody would ever trade, since we would know exactly how many of each pet there is.
"There's 100 more non-swirls than non-coons, that makes it unfair! D8<"

That's because it DOES make it unfair Personally I'd rather have exact values for pets than speculations, that always makes it easier for someone to rip you off.

[star;]

That's because it DOES make it unfair Personally I'd rather have exact values for pets than speculations, that always makes it easier for someone to rip you off.

Well, to me, the game wouldn't REALLY be that fun anymore if we had the exact numbers. c: We already have a pretty good idea of rarities, why would we need the EXACT numbers? Anyway, that's just my opinion. =3

[Tesalong]

That's because it DOES make it unfair Personally I'd rather have exact values for pets than speculations, that always makes it easier for someone to rip you off.

Well, to me, the game wouldn't REALLY be that fun anymore if we had the exact numbers. c: We already have a pretty good idea of rarities, why would we need the EXACT numbers? Anyway, that's just my opinion. =3

I say its better the way it is at the moment, besides we're way too far into our speculations to have numbers X3

[Defying Gravity]

Question, does the Nick Unicorn need to be moved since it's now OMG so rare!