Talk:Trading Post

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

No more spammadan[edit]

Atlast! No more spammadan :D --User:Nautaut /(t) 10:41, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

They really like their out of game web browser function :P --AlbinoAce 10:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Excellent indeed. Arshay Duskbrow 11:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Is it just me or does this strongly resemble the Grand Exchange in from RuneScape? If so, GOOD! That thing was the only update in the last ten years that was an improvement for that game. Zolann The IrreverentUser Zolann The Irreverent Mysterious Summoning Stone.png 16:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
OMG that's exactly what I thought too! I know, the Grand Exchange was the most amazing update I've seen in Runescape. I loved tracking the "stock rates" more or less, checking which items are selling high and which ones are selling low. Buy low, sell high, eh? ;) --AmannelleUser Amannelle Me.jpg 16:46, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Yup.Grand exchange was too good for Runescape.--Neil2250 User Neil2250 sig icon5 Anti.png 17:42, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Sitting all day long, selling and buying and buying and selling. One way to take over the economy! Muwuhahahaha! Ge4ce 18:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Lol that's what I did on runescape, and I ended up making tons of money and getting many regular customers. xD But, there's only so much you can do in Runescape... I'm sure this tactic applied in GW2 would be incredible. :D --AmannelleUser Amannelle Me.jpg 18:49, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Never played runescape and never will, but this makes me happy. Then again, not including a marketplace/auction house again would simply have been a mistake on Anet's part :D -- NilePenguin 11:39, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, for the longest time Runescape was just this sort of low-quality f2p game that was popular mainly because it didn't require any sort of downloads. But, like I said, it was always quite low quality. But then, all of a sudden they do THIS and it's like "whoa..." with the charts showing daily percentage rates, a constantly updating header, and multiple tabs to see price progression averages over 30 days, 90 days, or 180 days. So, yeah, that's why I'm excited for The Marketplace. :D Finally a HIGH quality game doing this. --AmannelleUser Amannelle Me.jpg 20:08, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Isn't it rather normal to register bought and sold items in this time of age? See how many X's have sold and how many Y's have been made, while Z's have been transported to location A? Though we're just discussing the basics of this feature, why didn't other MMO's have this system? Was the technique outside php (or whatever they used at runescape) not possible? I guess time will tell about how this Marketplace, and it's auction, will really work. Ge4ce 12:12, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
"why didn't other MMO's have this system? " That is a really good question, and quite frankly I don't know the answer. I mean, Runescape is by no means the "leader of MMOs", which is why I was so shocked when they implemented a feature that other MMOs seemed to have overlooked for so long. Maybe other MMOs felt that this system wouldn't be accepted well or something? --AmannelleUser Amannelle Me.jpg 13:22, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
I guess more in a way of; 'In how many ways can this feature be abused?' But then again, every MMO economy is based on supply and demand. One can't avoid the fact you will have people that will take advantage of it, be it positively or negatively. This also rises my question if Karma items are character-bind, or can be sold or send to whoever (own characters included) you wish. In the end karma will have a sort of gold price included, as items can be graded depending on usage or statistics. Like I said: Time will tell! Ge4ce 17:09, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Feature looks awesome. Thank goodness they're implementing this. Shadow Runner 15:26, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Yeah the Grand Exchange in Runescape is actually pretty awesome. It is soooo much better than sitting in Spamadan for 5 hours trying to sell your useless storage clutter awesome greens and weapon mods D: ~ Bow 17:22, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
At fucking last! Q___Q --Super IgorUser- Super Igor logo.png 17:25, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I know, great feature, huh. They are only *checks watch* 5 years late to the party.--Corsair@Yarrr 17:27, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

"The marketplace is capable of displaying the history and trends of item values." This part just made my day. By looking at this you can approximately see for how much an item is going. In WoW for example, if you wanted to put in a flower and there were no flowers in the auction house already, YOU could set the price for how much they will be selling. For example, if one flower usually sells for 5g, you could put one in for 20g, then someone would put it for 19 and someone for 18 and so on. But the bad thing is, people WOULD STILL BUY the flowers, even if they are three times overpriced!!! That means that people without that much money (me as a starter player included) are VERY SCREWED with the auction house. This simple price history will banish that kind of BULLCRAP from GW2 Marketplace. HOOZAH! User MadSkillz1o1 sig2.PNG MadSkillz1o1 09:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Actually, no. Even with the knowledge of pricing. If that very same flower, that's valued at 5, is placed on a market without any other... One can still ask for that very same 20. People then decide if they actually have that much money to spend on that very overpriced item. "Is it worth it?", "Do I need it now?", "Do I care about that silly 20?", "When will there be more flowers on, so should I buy it now or wait for the next time I visit the market?", etc. You don't know what motivates players to buy it, depending on usage, resell value and other important things like how fast it drops. Also how much effort you need to put in it to let it get drop. These all are factors going through one's mind in a rapid speed. (Mostly you aren't even aware of that, as most things aren't even the case.) But you knew that! Silly you! *happy face* ge4ce 10:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Commenting on the effectiveness of an item you've never encountered is hardly scientific research :P
What does it record? The price of items when sold or the prices people asked? It could very easily end up being a completely useless feature because of blatant stupidity, and even if not, dedicated saddo players could still screw with it anyway. User A F K When Needed Signature Icon.jpg A F K When Needed 11:47, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm fairly sure the "history and trends" refers to the prices it has actually been sold for. There would be no use in knowing the prices people are asking unless you're a vendor, and even then you could just look at the current prices, since presumably you want to sell it then and there, provided you think the price is good and don't predict it rising. --Kyoshi User Kyoshi sig.png (Talk) 12:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
If it were up to me, the Marketplace would show volume sold, median sell price per day, highest & lowest sell price that went through. That way you could make a fairly informed decision on what you want to buy and/or sell something at. --SirrushUser Sirrush sig.jpg 14:53, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I quite like the system GWAuctions currently has in place, where you can see a list of all the prices that item has sold for previously, and can sort it by a number of factors (although I always use date, from most recent to oldest). It gives you the full range of prices but it's also quick and easy to see what the overall average and the current average is. 11:57, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

This is very similar to the market feature implemented in Eve online, although not quite as advanced yet. If I'm reading this correctly (hope I'm not, please correct me) you can't get sales volume data. Which is important as volume tells you how much stuff is being shifted and therefore how likely you are to be able to sell something at an inflated price. You can ask a lot, but if nobody is buying .... Whilst on the subject, are buy /sell orders time limited, and how many can each char/account have? And how will arena net address market manipulation and similar scams? In eve, orders expire after 90days max and you really have to invest a lot of skill points to have loads of them ... And all market scams are allowed so long as game mechanics are not breached. Caveat Emptor!

The Eve market is also regional, and buy/ sell orders have limited range (in terms of star jumps). Imagine if the buy/sell prices for the Asuran regions are reckoned separately from the human and Norn ... You can make money buying stuff in one region, shipping it to another then reselling it. Less interesting in GW2 where you can ship stuff via email or the bank at no risk.


Assuming the dialogue is correct, the Auctioneer refers to it as the Marketplace-- as such, I'd hold off on a move until we're certain what the name is. – Emmett 20:47, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

See Controls O - Open Commerce panel Rudhraighe 14:47, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Argument against the delete[edit]

It appears to be the official term. Would be quite silly to delete the page, only to re-add it in a few days when everyone gets a look Torrenal 03:54, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a motion to move Marketplace here for that very reason. Moving that page here would require deleting this page first which is another reason for deletion. User Mattsta Sig1.jpgUser Mattsta Sig2.jpg 04:03, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
So... The stated reason for speedy deletion is NOT the reason for the speedy deletion? Or are we not all on the same page? Torrenal 18:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
its a bit of both reasons, the trading post IS the market place and all of the writing on this page would be what would be put in the notes section Getefix 18:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Altered the tag to reflect the intention. - Infinite - talk 18:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
The contents "An area similar to a Auction House but "Better"" does not a good article make. Keeping something so asinine on a wiki is bad form/taste. Venom20 User Venom20-icon-0602-sm-black.png 19:12, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Mind, I'm not arguing against the merge (which appears to have already taken place). Just asking that you be clear in intentions when asking for the removal of a page. Being a wiki, the page could have been built up from scratch, while dropping the silly "Better" comment. Torrenal 00:40, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Actual content, perhaps?[edit]

As I understand it, information in has been released over time. Can the marketplace summary contained pulled into the wiki, or should we wait for other sources to be found. Torrenal 14:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Is this the ONLY way to securely trade?[edit]

Is the gw1 trading window gone, making it impossible to securely trade with a player you are standing next to? I know there is the mail system, but that seems to rely on honesty.  Frostty1 23:04, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Afaik, at this point it is. The good news is that if a gaming feature is asked a lot, Arenanet hears it and implements it, but they might have good reasons to not want it, like having chat channels being spammed with trade shouts. I know i won't miss it, i love playing auction houses. Anyway, i suggest to make it a topic in the beta forums this weekend, and keep your fingers crossed. --EeUser Ee sig.png 06:47, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong, the auction house will be welcomed by all. I guess I should have been more explicit in my example.
1) I know that if I want to trade an item with a 'friend' (someone I know/trust), we will just use the mail system.
2) The issue could arise when I am with someone I don't 'know'. We kill a boss and want to exchange items. ATM, the only recourse is to trust that the other player will mail you the item(s) you are trading for, after they have received the item(s) you have mailed.
>>> I'm not expecting 'scumbaggery' when dealing with other players... but there will be an influx of people who will be new to GW... who come from questionable gaming backgrounds.  Frostty1 15:18, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Direct, in-person trading, and C.O.D. mail do seem to be missing so far in the BWEs and stress tests, I can't imagine both of these will beat a dialog for log out, character select, or cancel, but I would hope both will be there soon. The direct trading would be unlikely to cause a 'spamadan' with the auction house available to sell to anywhere. I honestly hope we can drop things on the ground someday too. Very disappointed that I can't 'mail' another character of mine but it can be a semi-cheat for storage space. Oh and btw it's secure but the trade won't necessarily get to the person you want it to. --Skekzyz 04:51, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, if the forums were up then I guarantee that player to player trading would be one of the most requested features. Let's hope that they get their act together and get the forums up. Actually, let's hope they get their act together and get the trading post up! After all these Beta''m not even gonna start talking about it.... Thorentis 06:54, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Rename to Black Lion Trading[edit]

We should rename all the commerce and trading post to "Black Lion Trading" and redirect the old pages Rudhraighe 17:58, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm partly inclined to think this too, but I simply think "Trading Post" sounds better, and is what most people are going to be searching (especially Googlers etc.) Thorentis 01:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
redirects work wonders for searches. +1 for using the proper in-game name on our pages. (imagine searching for 'black lion trading', whatever that is, and finding nothing?) 17:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Don't know how to safely to do it myself, but I will definitely +1 the idea of putting this page's content over current Black Lion Trading Post page, which gives only useless information. Wonderland 22:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Search Engine Categories Subcategories and Rarity with Color chart[edit]

Item Category Subcategories and Rarity.jpg
Rudhraighe 21:05, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Market history[edit]

Main page says "The Trading Post is capable of displaying Market Data: the history and pricing trends of item values". I do not remember any feature to show market history. (I can see the history of my own trades, that's different though. Can anyone confirm market history feature? --Ras 13:50, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

just wait 21 days and find out in game.- User Zesbeer sig.png Zesbeer 17:07, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
the gem exchange already has this. I'd seen a blank space with a label for this for regular items, in, I think, BWE2. Not something my BWE3 screenshots would have captured, however. The intent for this is/was there. The reality remains to be seen. —Torrenal 17:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


The note is still wrong the trading post was working during the head start and then whent down (don't remember when).- User Zesbeer sig.png Zesbeer 23:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

The trading post went down several hours into the first day of the headstart. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).


If anyone notices any major bugs. Could be nice to read if there are any before making major purchases... So far, I *think* I've noticed one, I bought ~60s worth of copper ore and it took my money and it gave me no ore. This way a few minutes before it went down for maintenance, go figure.--Aziza 02:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if this only applies to me; because whenever I've mentioned it ingame there has been a "arglebargle TP isn't broken any more" response; but my entire post is still very broken. Items in my inventory don't show up in the "sale" tab, I can't click the buy button on any items despite having the coin for it, gotten no responses from gw2 support, ??? Picture for proof; The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) at 00:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC).

Sorry you're having problems with the trading post, but waiting for the official GW2 support is your only option at the moment. Wiki users can't help you. As the game status updates points out, they're prioritizing login issues and hacking, so you might have to wait a while for support to respond. -- User Sig.png 16:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Sure; my statement was more to just put out there if someone else is having the bug; they aren't alone. I'm frustratingly aware of the fact that there's nothing I can do.

I have bought basic crafting materials at the trading post four times. Every second time, in addition to the bought goods, there was money waiting for me at the pickup (under trade profit). I didn't sell anything at the trading post, not once. Is this a bug or am I missing something? --Amplifiction 10:11, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Did you cancel any buy order? Money you get back for that also goes to "trade profit".
No, but there might have been some connection errors. Maybe they caused a similar effect. Thanks. --Amplifiction 11:18, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

When I search for an item, it just loops the search circle and I can't buy any item I searched for. Instead I have to go through categories page by page. Is there a fix for this that I missed? DRUGSandDANCING!

selling and buying prices not adding up[edit]

when i go to the trading hall in the My Transactions window it says that i sold 3 items, one for 27 copper, one for 24 copper, and one for 1 silver. also the drop down menu is set to "items i've sold" to me this says that someone has already bought them, not that I am still trying to sell them. In the Trade Profit window it shows that my profit was 25 copper. 27 copper plus 24 copper plus one silver doesn't equal 25 copper.. now when i had put the items on the trading post i did select "match lowest selling price" but when i posted the last item it wouldn't let me post it for less then one silver, i don't see how an item that wouldn't let me post it for lower then 1 silver could sell for such a low amount that all 3 wind up selling for just 25 copper.

am i not understanding what the trading window is saying? i look at that window that says what items i sold as "copper ring" price per unit 24 copper (i read that as i sold a copper ring for 24 copper). Any ideas of what is happening? Varuuth 18:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

When you list, you pay a stated 5% listing fee.
If/When your item sells, you pay a 10% sale completion fee. This is NOT stated in the game engine.
ah ok wasn't aware of that.. so let me do the math here, I'll probably wind up with what they wound up with lol. 1 silver = 100 copper, so i have 100+27+24=151 copper is what i supposedly sold for. 151-10%= 135.9 copper is what I supposedly should have received after selling, but I thought the 2 copper (that it told me about when I posted the item was the listing fee).. but let's assume it isn't. 135.9 copper - 5% = 129.105 copper Now if we round that off we get 129 copper pieces. I only received 25 copper after having sold all 3 items. That is a difference of 104 copper. I'm not trying to be rude or mean, just trying to understand where the money is at. Varuuth 19:49, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
i think i'll add links to a couple of screen shots in case there is any confusion. just a little note here, it says items were posted seconds ago, that is wrong at the time of the screen shot it was hours since the posting.
User Varuuth Gw048.jpg
Varuuth 20:02, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
I have the same issue. I sold two items at the exact same time ("about 11 hours ago") for 8s each. In the pickup, it shows 7s. There is NO WAY i was taxed 60% on the total profit (If I was this is a travesty and I'll just have to charge more from now on...). 00:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

(Bug?) Can't buy more than 250 of an item[edit]

So here I am, trying to buy 300 wool scraps by placing a custom order, but the game won't let me even if I have waaaaaay more cash than necessary. I also tried with other items and the same thing happens. The same thing also happens when I try with instant purchase. Am I missing something, or is the game bugging out on me? --Mendar 09:01, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

well the max stack size is 250 so I am guessing but I think thats why you cant buy more then 250 of something.- User Zesbeer sig.png Zesbeer 09:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, makes sense. Still, kinda silly since items aren't stacked when listed under the pick up tab in the trading post. Cosmetic, ok, but kind of a downer for those looking to do mass volume trading... --Mendar 14:01, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Minimum asking price to avoid a loss: 15% is incorrect (20% is also, but it's a better recommendation)[edit]

The recommended minimum markup recommended by this wiki ought to be 20%:

  • 15% is incorrect (see below).
  • 17.64705 is correct, but unusable.
  • 20% is slightly incorrect and very useful.

As clarified in the current article, there are two fees per transaction totaling 15%. That means the seller gets 85% of their asking price. If they ask for 15% above vendor price, e.g. Silver coin 15 Copper coin for a Silver coin item, they will lose money on the deal. Fifteen percent of 115 is 17.25, meaning a net loss of 2.25 compared to the vendor value.

The exact amount is the inverse of 0.85, i.e. 1.1764705, i.e. 117.647%. Most people are going to have trouble using that as a rule of thumb. 20% is slightly above that and is a much easier number to multiply. In addition, using the mathematically correct value of 17.647% doesn't take into account the extra time to use the trading post over visiting the vendor (minimum two sets of mouse clicking: offer item and pick up). Sure, it's not that much trouble, but if the wiki is going to offer an approximated value, let's err on the side of making sure it's worth the player's time to use the trading post instead. 17:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

The above guidance is now moot; the game tells you what your earnings will be, and it's easy enough to compare this to the vendor price. Also, to address the person who reverted me on this issue, you also reverted material that was not related to the question of which percentage to use. I don't see any consensus here to use 20% as the guidance, and inserting HTML comments into the article is not a valid means of preserving content the way it is. You cannot merely give your version of the text rights of an incumbent when it is the nature of the text that is disputed. Hold Me Closer, Necromancer 05:59, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
The advice is not moot; the game does not tell you your earnings. The TP displays "projected profit" without regard to the listing fee, so the "potential net profit" if you sale goes through is less. Offering a rule of thumb is useful to those who don't realize that the TP interface is misleading, to those who have trouble with subtraction (of the 5% listing fee), and to those who have trouble with understanding the difference between multiplying by 15% versus dividing by 85%.
The idea of offering advice was never disputed; the only dispute was what rule of thumb to include. The reason that the advice is offered is that there continue to be frequent complaints (in /map, in the forums, on Reddit) that people don't understand that they are losing potential coin by selling on the TP for less than vendor + 17.647...%.
We should restore the advice offering a rule of thumb. 17:51, 21 November 2012 (UTC)


I just added Jaklan (found in Altar Brook Trading Post, but his dialog box does not appear for me :s 23:28, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

That happens sometimes, don't know why. Later on he will be working again. 05:48, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Is the trading fee really 15%? Predicted profit says 10%[edit]

I keep reading 5% and 10% equaling 15% on every page on the internet and even remember myself of this ingame... but! The predicted profit clearly shows a loss of 10% not a loss of 15%. Is the predicted profit ingame wrong or was the fee reduced to 5% + 5% = 10% fee?

Cleared it myself: the Projected profit does in fact not include the listing fee. Very missleading indeed.

Curious if you are charged a listing fee if you just sell to the highest buyer, technically, you aren't listing it. Will test tonight. 19:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes, you always pay the listing fee. Technically, you are listing it...for 0 seconds (depending on the definitions of "technically" and "listing."). 20:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I've had one or two cases where I attempted to sell X items to the highest buyer, only some of the buyer's orders were apparently filled between when my screen drew and when I clicked "sell", so the game sold some of them instantly and listed the remaining items for sale at the same price even though there were no more buy orders at that price. So my guess would be that the trading post doesn't even know that you were trying to "sell to the highest buyer", it just knows that you were trying to sell X items at price Y, and then afterwards notices that, gosh, now there are some buy and sell orders at overlapping prices, I should do something about that! --Felbryn 20:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Ah yes -- good point. I forgot that happened to me, too. In other words, the game always: lists the item Item A at price P and quantity Q (charging the 5% * Q * P) -> looks if there's an existing order for A at price P -> fulfills as many orders as possible, charging the 10% sales tax. In that context, items are always listed first and sold after -- there is no instantaneous transaction (and thus, the 5% is always removed from the economy). 20:45, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

wrong numbers in fee section?[edit]

In the section about fees, it says "A 5% tax on successful sales; this is deducted from the sale amount before the amount available for pickup.". Isn't this wrong, because the tax is actually 10%? Then there are examples that are wrong too, because they are calculated using 5% instead of 10%. So when you sell something on the trading post, you have to pay 5% listing fee, and 10% tax if it sells, for a total of 15%. 05:50, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Several editors have said that the trading post takes a 5% listing fee and a 10% cut of the final sale, for a total of 15%. recently edited the page to say that the trading post takes a 5% listing fee and a 5% cut, for a total of 10% (and updated a bunch of examples to match). I have not reverted the edits because I haven't personally tested how this works. --Felbryn 21:04, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
someone vandalized the fees section; I think I managed to fix it. (I also just validated the amounts -- nothing has changed in terms of fees):
  • You pay 5% to list, non-refundable.
  • An additional 10% is deducted from the amount the buyer pays.
  • The fees total 15%, but projected profit is only 10% less (it takes into account the sales tax, but not the listing fee).
Admins might want to semi-protect the page if this happens again. 21:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Looks like you introduced at least one new error in your changes, which I have fixed. I heartily recommend the use of the history tab and the "diff" and "undo" features--it's much easier and more reliable than trying to manually hunt down every number that looks wrong. --Felbryn 21:32, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
I personally think that sentence you just changed was clearer before your last edit, because it was previously written in terms of actual monetary transfers, and you've now rewritten it in terms of quantitites that are misleadingly-labeled in the UI. --Felbryn 22:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

"Trading Post" vs. "Black Lion Trading Company"[edit]

I would love to see these two articles merged. The list of NPCs is otherwise oddly placed. I fixed the lead section to better segue into the list (which is what I and others were looking for). Thanks! Idolatry 22:59, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Gem exchange rate fees[edit]

In addition, the exchange rates are not identical: the rate to buy gems is about 36% higher than for selling gems.

Is that confirmed information? Since we never know the exact exchange rate at any given time (only 5 day high, 5 day low, and average), it makes just as much sense to assume an equal fee in either direction. Going by the example, if one spends 1g and ends up with 73s26c, then the total revenue is 0.7326 of the investment, for a net loss of 0.2674. If there is an equal fee in both directions, that would work out to sqrt(0.7326) = 0.856 of the initial investment for either direction, or a 14.4% fee in either direction. That would be suspiciously close to the total 15% trading post fees, and the difference to the calculated 14.4% could be rounding errors when obtaining the 73.26% value. So again, do we know that the fee is only in one direction? User RolandOfGilead Signature.png Roland of Gilead talk 15:01, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Never mind, gw2spidy has much better numbers: 100 gems sells for 4 g 82 s. 100 gems costs 6 g 67s to buy. That works out to 0.7226, which squareroots to 0.8500, which I think confirms my theory. Changing the article accordingly. User RolandOfGilead Signature.png Roland of Gilead talk 15:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Gem exchange rate back door?[edit]

Are we convinced that ANet don't also have a role in setting gem/gold prices? The way that the gem price on my server shot up from a more-or-less stable 6g 50s to an 8g average, around midnight a couple of days ago, is strongly suggestive of someone tweaking an underlying "base value". (Yes, only circumstantial evidence. But it happened over no more than a few minutes, it's one heck of a change for only one or two players to be able to trigger, and the timing seems very suggestive. And by pushing people towards cash transactions, control of the exchange rates would give ANet a degree of control on their income, too.)--Doghouse13 (talk) 11:30, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Anet doesn't have a role in setting gem/gold prices, the only role they play is thew adding crafting stuffs and new items to the gem store. They don't directly change it just for shits and giggles.-User Zesbeer sig.png Zesbeer 11:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Well - when I hear from a dev directly and unambiguously that they can't and won't tweak prices if their business needs demand it, I'll believe that. But, on this occasion, it was people buying gems to cash in on the New Year BLTC sales.--Doghouse13 (talk) 12:33, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
"The way that the gem price on my server shot up" The gem-to-gold exchange rates are global, not per-server. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 14:58, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Check any of the tracking tools listed on the article. You'll see that rates were as high as 9g/100 shortly before Wintersday release. Prices shot down to below 6g50/100 as people started cashing in their gift cards from Christmas, Chanukah, and Kwanzaa. As soon as the gem stores sales were announced, prices started going up.
ANet doesn't have a direct role in setting prices, because they don't need to. Anytime they want the price to spike as the OP has seen, they can put in special offers on the TP, e.g. new items or discounts on existing ones. Spiking rates has two benefits to the game. First, it makes it harder for real-world money traders to profit, since they have to sell increasing amounts of gold per dollar to make it worth the risk. When the game launched, you could find black market rates from 5-10x better than the official ones. Now, it's less than 2x better. Second, the gold-to-gem exchange is a significant currency sink. Someone selling 8g would get around 100 gems, but reselling those gems would generate only around 6g. 17:38, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

List of trading posts is wrong[edit]

I've been trying to update the list of trading post locations to be correct. However, people seem to be doing mass deletes of correct information, and adding mass wrong information, and even in a different format. I went to Soren Draa, I can't see a trading post anywhere. I went to Smokestead, no trading post. Why are they on the list? They weren't there yesterday. Yesterday the list had the major cities in it. Now they are gone. Why? Are the trading posts gone from major cities?

Please don't delete correct information from the list. Please don't add wrong information to the list. If you haven't gone to a location personally to check, please don't change the information. 23:15, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the page history, it looks like Mora was working on a major rewrite of the article, and must have been doing that in an external text editor. When he posted his new version, yes, it reverted your change to the list of BLT locations, but I'm sure it wasn't intentional - Mora's been around a while and knows how things work. He probably just didn't notice. —Dr Ishmael User Dr ishmael Diablo the chicken.png 01:38, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Missing Information[edit]

The latest revision (18:40, 17 May 2015‎ Mora) seems to have deleted information that directly relates to the trading post.

  • An Trading Post Pickup.png exclamation will overlay the trading post icon when there are items or coins available for pickup.
  • You must speak to a Trading Post Representative to collect items or coins.
  • Only one method of access, (O) among many is highlighted.
  • Switching to the trading post by clicking the Black Lion Trading Company trading post icon.png icon is required except when interfacing with a trading post representative.

~ 1Maven (talk) 19:21, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

TP Fees reduced from 15% to 10% on immediate sales[edit]

ATM the 5% listing fee is NOT charged when an item is sold to meet an outstanding buy order. The 10% exchange fee is till charged. Thus the total fee is reduced by 5% from 15% to 10% in this circumstance. The questions are: is this intentional, a bug, an anomaly and should it be documented on this page? ~ 1Maven (talk) 02:00, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Feedback 2016/01/22[edit]

It seems the minimum price info is wrong. When i look at low priced items they have a higher minimum then vendorpice + 18% -- 13:14, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Feedback 2016/10/26[edit]

Anomaly section states ArenaNet had plans to do a purge, and never did so. Actually, they did. Twice. --Inculpatus cedo (talk) 10:48, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Good catch. The note was from 2014, and the two links you provided happened ~7 months ago, so I think it's fair to assume they have been purged. Thanks a bunch for your feedback! —Ventriloquist 20:49, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Feedback 2017/09/25[edit]

This doesn't apply to the page Trading Post but to the Trading Post prices are not showing on any pages. -- 14:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

The api is currently down on ArenaNet's end, so until they fix that, anything related to the api doesn't work. —Ventriloquist 14:56, 25 September 2017 (UTC)