Vendor Malls 2.0

[+Requiem]

So, a player emailed me their ideas for vendor changes, and I thought I would share my newest thoughts with you all, and give you one more chance to comment, and have your ideas heard. I won't name the player, unless they choose to identify themselves. It might read strange, since I am also replying to their email at the same time.

No problem, details are good. I agree with you on some points. These are my newest/current thoughts.

1) remove daily fees from all vendors (vendors need to be competitive - or they become not worth having)
2) normalize the price of a stool, and a world teleporter shop (based on the number of vendors in the vendor mall)
for example: TC seat = 10,000 gold per week. Mall A stool costs 10,000 gold per week - but vendor mall is
charged (10,000 * #stools). for world teleporter (smaller shops pay less than larger shops)
3) vendor "remember's" price of original listing.
3a) if item is removed from vendor, we charge x% of initial fee (listing fee)
3b) if item is sold, we charge y% sales tax + x% (listing fee - gotta pay the vendor his/her cut for the job he did)
3c) if after z days item is not sold, or removed, it gets sent back to players bank
4) Make a new Vendor Mall Management System
5) Give vendor malls perks based on weekly sales
5a) Figure out a fair way to re-allocate some of the gold sunk, or a new sink into purchasable perks, without allowing
withdrawal
5b) Could apply 1/2 sales tax here, to a managerial fund, then make perks cost something without more gold sunk or
could apply a small 1-2% fee to all vendor sales within the mall to go to managerial fund (TC would not have this, but
also get's none of the managed "perks" available to vendor malls. - TC needs own perks to remain competitive)
5c) certain sales volumes need to be met to continue/purchase perks, so mall management becomes important
6) Town Center needs uniqueness to remain popular

By having these unavoidable fees, i think people would remain competitive, and we can avoid the situation of just "waiting" it out. I want to remove daily fees to create opportunities to be competitive. It's harder to be competitive if your cost is higher than the next persons, unless you are getting something extra for that additional cost.

RE: MZ - I'd personally like to move more content into player hands. I'm not sure what to do about it.

I want to keep alternate currencies unique to TC, except perhaps in the case of the most successful vendor malls (by sales volume). We would like to keep TC full, and it needs uniqueness.

That's something I haven't thought of yet... To reinstate daily fee's on all vendors, except in the case of ED sales. It's a possibility, probably with a minimum value, so people didn't just list everything in ED to avoid the daily fees. Will mull this over.


(I'm not sure if there are limits to purchasing new item counts, or weight limits on vendors)
(I think we could remove the weight limit, and just have an item limit.
125 items (comes with normal vendor)
upgrade 25 items for (upgrade# * 25,000) gold

upgrade 1 would be total 150 items, and cost 25,000 gold
upgrade 2 would be total 175 items, and cost 50,000 gold
upgrade 3 would be a total of 200 items, and cost 75,000 gold

maxes out at 300 items, which i think is ridiculously cluttered, but some people seem to manage ok.


I do have one issue, which I cannot seem to resolve.

How should we handle people who drop vendors intentionally (or let them drop), to avoid the listing fee?

30 day vendor cooldown? Maybe only a cooldown if the vendor has items on it at the time it's dropped - since if it doesn't
we can assume it either sold out, or players removed all items fairly by paying their listing fees, in order to move
the vendor.

Vendor Mall Ideas and Perks
Not really all too certain of these. I was brainstorming, and I think I fried the motherboard.

Perks
1) Search functionality for all vendors inside the vendor mall
2) Sales log for individual vendors in the mall (not sure if this is (easily)possible - but it's been requested a few times)
3) We could make the world teleporter a perk (to keep it competitive)
4) possibility of additional currencies
5) free listing for all vendors in the mall on vendors.uoex.net
6) option to "rent" an auction stone
7) option to "rent" a raffle table
Help me out please??
9)
10)

New Functionality
1) Vendor Mall Management Gump
Should display vendor name, last restocked date, and total weekly sales. (Ideally a running history), and the amount of
gold in the Vendor Mall Management Fund (see below). This allows the mall manager to keep track of which vendors are
doing well, and which ones might need to be replaced/removed.
2) The Vendor Mall Perks Gump - just displays the perks with a toggle for on/off and minimum requirements to turn on, and
their cost
3) I think 10,000 gold * number of vendors is a good / fair number to use for pricing. We can also limit the availability of it by
minimum weekly sales, to prevent 100s of small shops springing up and filling the cheap teleporter spots available.

More Ideas?

Keep it civil and constructive, and don't bash anyone's idea(s).

[Stephen]

Charge 3 percent fee on sale to buyer and 3 percent to seller, evens out with the 6 percent.

If you wanna stop the over abundance of people removing items to avoid tax, if they take it off they cant trade it for 30 days.

Heck even 15 days could curb the "pm offers" since who says "pm me offer and ill sell you in 15 days"

Simple fix.


Mall perks will only make a few shops become "Look how great my guild and shop is because I got all the perks"


Bad idea.

[Devlin]

It was meeeee!!!! <3

I'll just go by point:

1) Could work, in theory, if some of the below points are added (such as a flat percentage listing fee combined with sales tax) along with tiered sales tax rates ( TC < MZ < Player Malls).

2) I like the idea of world tele shops costing 10k x the number of vendors in the shop, or something similar. However, should be a base rate of 100k or so, then introduce the # of vendors * 10k, so there aren't people with "vendor malls" which are really just one dude with one vendor paying 10k a week. So at a minimum, malls are 110k a week, assuming a vendor is placed. When malls pass 20 vendors, remove the 100k base fee so it's only the number of vendors * 10k (keeps vendor mall prices low and gives incentive to malls to get more vendors. Maybe create a minimum item/require vendors aren't placed by one account to prevent people from just dropping 20 vendors to get a lower fee). Also, vendor malls that don't contain any vendors should be removed (at least once the system is in place/spots become desired more).

3a) Might prevent intentionally stocking at item at an absurd price with no repercussion (aside from waiting/not selling the item) with the possibility of selling it. There could be some backlash for those that end up negotiating a lower price with someone and manually trade (and then eating more losses with the listing fee). Also creates a problem for people reorganizing their vendor(s), or changing items from one vendor to another. Items will still be stocked on the vendor, but fees would be paid to keep them up essentially. I get the idea on this one, I just see a few issues that would need to be ironed out.
3b) Are the fees mentioned in 3a and 3b the same? Or is 3a only a percentage of the listing fee (so the 3b fee is 1%, and the 3a fee is 10% of the 3b fee, so basically 3a = .1% of the items value).
3c) I'm not a big fan of this one. I get that it could prevent high-ticket items being sold for stupid rates and would punish those attempting to play the long game, but it could also affect some of the less popular items and end up creating a headache for vendor owners. Pet leashes, mage books, runebooks, regs, arrows, repair deeds and the like are all much needed items that people tend to mass stock. Pushing those into peoples banks would just make them angry and people would reconsider on crafting staple items like these.

4) Yes

5) Yes
5a) So essentially, give vendor malls rewards for sticking around? And the longer/more successful a vendor mall stays around, the more perks they can afford? If so, yes.
5b) Have a percentage of the sales tax/daily fee go into the managerial fund. Don't charge an additional fee/tax that the vendors pay, but take it out of the sales tax that is already paid. Essentially, the sales taxes paid at vendor malls get put back into the vendor mall to make it better (like real taxes!)
5c) Could work, would need to set a realistic tiered total sales amount to reach/maintain for perk levels, whatever the perks end up being.

6) If sales tax goes server wide, keep TC as the lowest sales tax rate. Also, keep TC as the only location to allow for alternative payments (or make this the highest level of perks for player malls or something).

Other notes:
- Yes, abolish the weight cap for vendors. Kegs, mules and a bunch of items are super heavy and mean limited stock. I can put 125 repair deeds on a vendor, or 4 kegs.
- Create a 24-48 hour restriction on deleting a vendor, so people cannot simply create a new vendor each day to avoid fees. Or charge more for vendor deeds. Or both.
- Hi =)


I'm definitely a fan of the world tele shop ideas. However, I'm still wary of abolishing the regular daily fees, even with some of the checks above in place. The daily fees promote competitive pricing; if you sell for 50% more than everyone else, you'll never sell anything and any potential profits will be eaten by fees. Therefore, it's in vendor owners best interest to keep prices in check and not sell at absurd rates. If you don't have to worry about daily fees eating into profits, and instead pay a flat fee (whether it be a sales tax, listing fee, etc.) you can stock an item at 200% the normal price and pray it sells within a month or two and still make out ahead. I would like to see sales tax become the norm, but we'd need to figure out some way to keep the same competitive/need to sell mentality that comes with the daily fees.

[+Requiem]

I'll respond in kind.

2) I like the idea of world tele shops costing 10k x the number of vendors in the shop, or something similar. However, should be a base rate of 100k or so, then introduce the # of vendors * 10k, so there aren't people with "vendor malls" which are really just one dude with one vendor paying 10k a week. So at a minimum, malls are 110k a week, assuming a vendor is placed. When malls pass 20 vendors, remove the 100k base fee so it's only the number of vendors * 10k (keeps vendor mall prices low and gives incentive to malls to get more vendors. Maybe create a minimum item/require vendors aren't placed by one account to prevent people from just dropping 20 vendors to get a lower fee). Also, vendor malls that don't contain any vendors should be removed (at least once the system is in place/spots become desired more).

I think this gets solved by requiring a minimum sales volume before you can get the teleporter. It also makes it so vendor malls need to keep an eye on things, and active, or they could lose this perk. With the way I am envisioning perks, they also address the incentive to get more vendors.

3a) Might prevent intentionally stocking at item at an absurd price with no repercussion (aside from waiting/not selling the item) with the possibility of selling it. There could be some backlash for those that end up negotiating a lower price with someone and manually trade (and then eating more losses with the listing fee). Also creates a problem for people reorganizing their vendor(s), or changing items from one vendor to another. Items will still be stocked on the vendor, but fees would be paid to keep them up essentially. I get the idea on this one, I just see a few issues that would need to be ironed out.

In my opinion, an item placed on a vendor should be "priced to sell". There are other options available for "negotiations". Re-organizing shouldn't be too much of a hassle, unless you're actually removing the item from the vendor, and not just moving it around. Ironing it out, is why I am soliciting your ideas
Maybe just a way to move a vendor's location without destroying it?

What are some circumstances where you would want to move items from one vendor to another?

3b) Are the fees mentioned in 3a and 3b the same? Or is 3a only a percentage of the listing fee (so the 3b fee is 1%, and the 3a fee is 10% of the 3b fee, so basically 3a = .1% of the items value).

They are 2 seperate fees, and obviously percentages are to be determined (and can be tweaked).
The listing fee basically guarantees a gold sink, and that in real world terms, the vendor gets paid for his/her time.
The sales fee is everything else. Combined should be less than 10-12%, or 2 days of listing an item normally.

Without knowing actual numbers, I think most items placed on vendors are there for more than 1 day. If the current 'fee' is 6% per day, a flat fee actually benefits you the longer your item sits there. So, with that in mind, I think the fee should be more than 6%, but not more than 12%. so basically, anything more than 2 days is 'no charge'.

These numbers will likely be lower, I am just using these for my examples. My goal is to lower overall costs, and encourage people selling on vendors more, including high value items.

3c) I'm not a big fan of this one. I get that it could prevent high-ticket items being sold for stupid rates and would punish those attempting to play the long game, but it could also affect some of the less popular items and end up creating a headache for vendor owners. Pet leashes, mage books, runebooks, regs, arrows, repair deeds and the like are all much needed items that people tend to mass stock. Pushing those into peoples banks would just make them angry and people would reconsider on crafting staple items like these.

I agree it could be an issue for pet leashes, mage books, runebooks, and maybe repair deeds. While you could stock less of these, perhaps a better question is: What's a better solution? The idea behind removing the item after a while is as you guessed it, to prevent someone from overpricing intentionally with the idea 'it will eventually sell'.

Perhaps just charging the "listing fee" every 2 months would solve it? Even if we do something like this, it's still costing way less than it would to list these items in the current system for the same period of time.

10,000 gold per day is: 600 gold per day. 600 * 60 = 36000 in fees under the current system. Under my proposed system, even at 10% it would only be 2000 gold. (Well, technically 1000, since the first month isn't charged until the end, with another 1000 being due when removed, or month 4 rolls around).

5a) So essentially, give vendor malls rewards for sticking around? And the longer/more successful a vendor mall stays around, the more perks they can afford? If so, yes.

Kind of. While the gold might be in an unaccessible location, the mall would need to continuously provide sales numbers to be able to keep those perks. Then if the mall isn't maintained, it won't have access to those perks anymore (even if it could afford them). Perhaps a rolling system where the gold gets permanently sunk, used or not after 3 months. Since it's not really a new tax, and is just coming out of normal fees, it shouldn't upset people too much. Also, the rolling average allows malls to have bad months, and keep those perks.

5b) Have a percentage of the sales tax/daily fee go into the managerial fund. Don't charge an additional fee/tax that the vendors pay, but take it out of the sales tax that is already paid. Essentially, the sales taxes paid at vendor malls get put back into the vendor mall to make it better (like real taxes!)

That's pretty much what I had in mind. I was thinking the extra 1-2% to provide that 'higher tax tier' you were talking about, without changing the actual tax tiers

5c) Could work, would need to set a realistic tiered total sales amount to reach/maintain for perk levels, whatever the perks end up being.

Right. The system of perks probably wouldn't go live immediately, so that we could do some analysis and see what a reasonsable weekly sales amount actually is.

6) If sales tax goes server wide, keep TC as the lowest sales tax rate. Also, keep TC as the only location to allow for alternative payments (or make this the highest level of perks for player malls or something).

Agree - kind of. I don't necessarily want seperate tax rates, but TC does need some kind of advantage. If they don't have to pay an extra 1-2% "managerial fund" that the mall's have to pay, that might be enough. If not, numbers can be tweaked.

I'm definitely a fan of the world tele shop ideas. However, I'm still wary of abolishing the regular daily fees, even with some of the checks above in place. The daily fees promote competitive pricing; if you sell for 50% more than everyone else, you'll never sell anything and any potential profits will be eaten by fees. Therefore, it's in vendor owners best interest to keep prices in check and not sell at absurd rates. If you don't have to worry about daily fees eating into profits, and instead pay a flat fee (whether it be a sales tax, listing fee, etc.) you can stock an item at 200% the normal price and pray it sells within a month or two and still make out ahead. I would like to see sales tax become the norm, but we'd need to figure out some way to keep the same competitive/need to sell mentality that comes with the daily fees.

You bring up a valid point. While we could bring back daily fees everywhere (it's on the table), it doesn't solve the problem for which I originally wanted the change to vendors. I wanted an outlet, for people to sell high-value items, the same as they could low value items.

It hasn't worked out as intended, and maybe I am just asking for something that can't be done fairly.

[Wil]

The more I think about it, the more I hate the idea of an "unconsignment fee."

If you wanna stop the over abundance of people removing items to avoid tax, if they take it off they cant trade it for 30 days. Heck even 15 days could curb the "pm offers" since who says "pm me offer and ill sell you in 15 days"

Simple fix.

This is a far, far better idea IMHO. No charge for repricing but make removed items account bound for 15 days.

Regards,
Wil

[+Requiem]

The more I think about it, the more I hate the idea of an "unconsignment fee."

If you wanna stop the over abundance of people removing items to avoid tax, if they take it off they cant trade it for 30 days. Heck even 15 days could curb the "pm offers" since who says "pm me offer and ill sell you in 15 days"

Simple fix.

This is a far, far better idea IMHO. No charge for repricing but make removed items account bound for 15 days.

Regards,
Wil

So, you shouldn't have to pay the vendor anything for listing your item for 60 days?

[Alamiester]

ok i didnt read everythin but im gonna but in my two cents. first off, tc vendors shouldnt have a weekly free rate. mz cant compete with the traffic goin there, which makes prices alot lower, which is fine because thats where the prices should be. level the market vendors, wether its free or for charge, all your doing is inflating based on location. ive had good luck selling one or two items in mz, its just not a shoppers market when it cost so much for the poor \or the newer people to try an sell there goods and compete with tc. and they have no consiquences for marking those prices that shouldnt be that high to begain with. even with a surcharge of whatever your charging on my vendor, ive made gold. i only started it a few months ago, but i sank a bunch into item limit and others, so i dont know the exact amount, but id like to say afte i added a few hundred k it took care of itself, as long as i added stuff to sell. so for the most part it sounds like you(whoever) are trying to reinvent the wheel. i think you need to go back to the basics. re-evaluate the wheel, i think you are makin this alot more complicated than it needs to be.

[Wil]

So, you shouldn't have to pay the vendor anything for listing your item for 60 days?

Hard to get the right answer by asking the wrong questions. The right questions are:

1. Is it desirable for low-demand items to also circulate within the economy?

2. What vendor architectures will increase or reduce the availability of low-demand items via vendors?

It's not about whether someone should or shouldn't have to pay this or that. It's about what choices increase the circulation of goods and money in the economy, a process also known as a healthy economy.

[Alamiester]

i dont think time should be factor, at all. period. i realize +c is lookin at it as a gold sink but if thats the case then its gonna effect the 'economy'. you cant use the economy as a gold sink. that needs to be seperate, like the raffles....which i think sinks alot, lol. i dunno i only buy one an i never win.

[Alamiester]

oki just backed up and read a bunch of stuff i didnt before, lol. but i think i hit it on several points, before i read it. but no one is mentioning exex.? that is a whole nother market. mind me it is limited compared to vendors, but ive had alot of luck selling really small items on a mz vendor compared to exex items listed. i dont sell anything not listed on exex on my vendor, but maybe a few random mules for cheap, and my vendor is empty of my wares within a week, because i price them accordingly. i think it has alot to do with what people are willing to buy also.

[+Requiem]

So, you shouldn't have to pay the vendor anything for listing your item for 60 days?

Hard to get the right answer by asking the wrong questions. The right questions are:

1. Is it desirable for low-demand items to also circulate within the economy?

2. What vendor architectures will increase or reduce the availability of low-demand items via vendors?

It's not about whether someone should or shouldn't have to pay this or that. It's about what choices increase the circulation of goods and money in the economy, a process also known as a healthy economy.

First, I'd like to apologize - my math was off. It's 6000 gold per day to list an item for 1,000.000 on your vendor, not 60,000. Not sure where my math was off, but I double checked in game, and 6000 is the correct number. And a 50,000,000 item accrues 300,000 a day in fees. Ironically, 300k per day isn't horrible. Still a bit much, but not as bad as 3 mil a day Small errors can mean big differences!

I'm trying to get IDEAS for how to resolve this. If I'm asking the wrong questions, help me ask the correct ones, and answer them.

So, what are your answers to those questions?

Should we have an option for high-value items on vendors?
Is it desirable for low-demand items to be on vendors?
What vendor architectures will increase or reduce the availability of low-demand items via vendors?

What system can we implement, that incorporates a fair fee structure for all of the following?
1) quick selling items
2) slow selling items
3) item's that don't sell (should we kick them back to the bank after a *reasonable time as in above idea?)
4) low value items
5) high value items
6) ?????????

With the changes to town center, I noticed a few things. These are the things I want to address:
Obviously, we're losing out on quite a bit of gold sunk on any items sold there in TC.
People are overpricing items, because they no longer have to pay attention to a daily fee.
People are "taking offers" which isn't (in my opinion) what a vendor is for. (There's other options if you want to do this).
People can list an item indefinitely, with as many price changes as they want, and remove the item to sell it for "no fee" altogether which, shouldn't be a thing (in my opinion)

It isn't about "whether someone should or shouldn't have to pay this or that.", but that is a part of it.

Being able to sell pretty much indiscriminately has had a negative affect. So, I think there needs to be a fee attached in some way. The fairest way I can think of, is a couple flat fees, tacked on, that are less than a few days of the old daily fee, applied evenly to all items.

Someone pointed out to me that this hurts newbies more than vets. This is true. There's ways around it, and those could also be discussed. We could base the % on weekly sales. This changes it to more of an income tax, than a sales tax, and the more you sell the more you pay.

I suggested the vendor mall thing, because I felt it would be something "cool, and fun", without too much of an additional fee - I suggest 1-2%, maybe .5-1%, or maybe even no additional fee).

I think this creates content for you to enjoy, for those that want the role of managing a vendor mall. Am I wrong? Is this just going to become a popularity contest as Stephen suggests? Is this something you are interested in? Could it be better?

We're making this shard for you guys, and if there's stuff you dislike, you need to let us know. Get your friends involved. Speak up! If we think everything's fine - then we continue on this path. If there's issues, lets address them. That's what I'm trying to do here. I think there's a problem with vendors, and I'm soliciting your input on how to address them.

i dont think time should be factor, at all. period. i realize +c is lookin at it as a gold sink but if thats the case then its gonna effect the 'economy'. you cant use the economy as a gold sink. that needs to be seperate, like the raffles....which i think sinks alot, lol. i dunno i only buy one an i never win.

Vendors have always traditionally been a gold sink. They charge you a daily fee. With the previous "update", we removed that fee in town center, so now those vendors have what I feel is an unfair advantage vs other vendors who are paying the normal daily fee. You can see my other issues above.

oki just backed up and read a bunch of stuff i didn't before, lol. but i think i hit it on several points, before i read it. but no one is mentioning exex.? that is a whole nother market. mind me it is limited compared to vendors, but ive had alot of luck selling really small items on a mz vendor compared to exex items listed. i don't sell anything not listed on exex on my vendor, but maybe a few random mules for cheap, and my vendor is empty of my wares within a week, because i price them accordingly. i think it has alot to do with what people are willing to buy also.

Exex is... complicated. I personally think it should be re-purposed to either 1) only trade currencies, or 2) Currencies and non-stackable items (like power-scrolls). I think vendors could get a lot more love if the other stackables on exex were moved to regular vendors, and commodity deeds. That being said, exex also offers the best price, with ZERO work. Literally, you either receive the most money, or spend the least for everything on there. No searching for a good deal, or runebooks of your favorite vendor spots. I think it takes away a lot of the fun of classic UO. Also, a straight flat fee tax on exex beats the daily fee on a vendor almost all the time. The only time it doesn't, is maybe in the first day, before you pay that daily fee.

[Alamiester]

So, you shouldn't have to pay the vendor anything for listing your item for 60 days?

Hard to get the right answer by asking the wrong questions. The right questions are:

1. Is it desirable for low-demand items to also circulate within the economy?

2. What vendor architectures will increase or reduce the availability of low-demand items via vendors?

It's not about whether someone should or shouldn't have to pay this or that. It's about what choices increase the circulation of goods and money in the economy, a process also known as a healthy economy.

this is the the right question.



only one will have the answer.

[+Requiem]

The more I think about it, the more I hate the idea of an "unconsignment fee."

If you wanna stop the over abundance of people removing items to avoid tax, if they take it off they cant trade it for 30 days. Heck even 15 days could curb the "pm offers" since who says "pm me offer and ill sell you in 15 days"

Simple fix.

This is a far, far better idea IMHO. No charge for repricing but make removed items account bound for 15 days.

Regards,
Wil

Also, I'm not talking about a stupid ridiculous fee here...

At 1,000,000 gold listing fee, and 6,000 gold per day daily vendor fee - after 2 months (60 days) that's: 360,000.

So, if you paid a 1% 1 time fee - that's only 10,000 for the same 2 months period. Even at 10%, it's 100,000 which is considerably less than the old daily fee.

I do understand, if it's a quick selling item, 10% is high. I guess it would depend on the average length an item sat on a vendor.

[Alamiester]

The more I think about it, the more I hate the idea of an "unconsignment fee."

If you wanna stop the over abundance of people removing items to avoid tax, if they take it off they cant trade it for 30 days. Heck even 15 days could curb the "pm offers" since who says "pm me offer and ill sell you in 15 days"

Simple fix.

This is a far, far better idea IMHO. No charge for repricing but make removed items account bound for 15 days.

Regards,
Wil

Also, I'm not talking about a stupid ridiculous fee here...

At 1,000,000 gold listing fee, and 6,000 gold per day daily vendor fee - after 2 months (60 days) that's: 360,000.

So, if you paid a 1% 1 time fee - that's only 10,000 for the same 2 months period. Even at 10%, it's 100,000 which is considerably less than the old daily fee.

I do understand, if it's a quick selling item, 10% is high. I guess it would depend on the average length an item sat on a vendor.

well if yer talking taxes on said items then make it a flat tax 10% over 100k and 3% on less than 100k. would get rid of the vendor problems for lower items not worth much that no one wants to sell. forget the time limit, if it doesnt sell then they are stuck with it, to reduce the price.

[+Requiem]

well if yer talking taxes on said items then make it a flat tax 10% over 100k and 3% on less than 100k. would get rid of the vendor problems for lower items not worth much that no one wants to sell. forget the time limit, if it doesnt sell then they are stuck with it, to reduce the price.

the best part about a percentage is it scales with the items. If you have a 1k runebook, 1% is 10 gold, 10% is 100 gold.

Also, the reason behind the time limit, is so people don't just overprice something to "wait it out". With no daily fee, there is no consequence to just waiting it out. This way there's a consequence for overpricing, which hopefully encourages competitive pricing.