Before we get this started, I’d like to extend my gratitude to Treek/Indusse for accepting my (impromptu) offer to speak as well as to the TNP staff more broadly for hosting the first instance of the Symposium after three years! Furthermore, it's an honour to be here and to be trusted to share what I've learned with fellow NSers, whether you're an experienced trader or someone who's never touched the market.

For those that don’t know me, I am Arlizplot and I’ve been involved with NS cards for almost four years at this point, although I took a break for a while before I returned a couple of months ago, this time taking cards considerably more seriously.

I started NS as a fairly standard nation answering issues, writing dispatches and getting packs, and only really took the market seriously when I packed my first legendary (Dutchyland S2). After that, I began to create accounts based on my own roleplay and used them to slowly manually answer issues and scaled up slightly by the beginning of S3 to something like 100 nations (before I even knew what scripts were!). Of course, I never got very far at that time and I eventually let cards fall by the wayside once I lost interest, leaving my account to CTE for months before I returned at the beginning of this year.

Since then, I’ve been putting considerably more attention to cards, managing to complete two full seasons of legendary cards (S4 and S2) and whittling down the remaining few I have left, giving me quite a bit of experience trading for these cards, particularly with some of the less obvious aspects of card trading.
That’s what I really want to focus on today, the ‘Unwritten Rules of NationStates Card Trading’. I’m not here to give an explanation of farming, or to tell you what your cards are worth. Today, I want to talk about the social and psychological side of trading, both in public and private markets. We'll look at information asymmetry, reputation, mental traps, reading other traders, and a few tips and tricks that can make a surprisingly large difference.

I'll also be treating this as a fairly open-ended Q&A. So if there's something you've always wondered about cards, some trading situation you weren't sure how to handle, or even just a completely stupid question you've been too afraid to ask someone else, this is probably the place to ask it. I'll share what I've learned from my own experience, and hopefully we can have a discussion about the less obvious side of cards.

Before we get started, though, I'll briefly open the floor for any immediate questions for anything you'd like to urgently ask me ^^

[1]: I have a question
How long did it take to get to 1500 puppets?

A: I came back with 100 puppets and whenever I wanted to increment (farm more cards), I would add another 100 per session using Hare's Creator script, so it would have taken me a couple of months to get to that point I reckon

[2]: My really serious question
How do I bribe the moderators?

A: I hear that singing prayers to our lord and saviour Koem Kab helps, especially across several languages :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

[3]: Incredibly serious question here. Can I have an S3 AoCI :nothoughts:

A: I don't yet own one, you're asking the wrong person for that :sob:

[3]: oh lol

[4]: Whose your favourite collections focused player begging with n?

A: Narlizplot
/s
I hear that there's a very obscure NS player by the name of 'Novaya Zemlya Archipelago', I gifted them a lot of cards for their collections but I think they're not that well known
Despite that I still believe that they are very esteemed

[4]: It's nice to see you helping out new players!
Could you help me out and give me a leg :nothoughts:

A: Ok we're doing this now :PandaHappy:

[3] (Replying to Arlizplot): I hear they are especially fond of some random nation named Jordan Hugill. Not sure what's up with that.

A: (Sends [4] a legendary)
Easiest legendary of your life

[4] (Replying to [3]): Hugoat

A: Anyhow does anyone have any further questions before we actually get to the content of this talk?

[3]: Uh sure, actually a serious one now. How low do you foresee S4 legendaries falling (since they seem to overall be getting cheaper)

[2]: Can't fall below 1 mv
So 1 mv

A: That's an interesting question. I believe that there is a community minded 'floor' of legendary prices at somewhere around 10 bank (as I do believe that we're averse to having single digit legendary mvs unless they're deserving of such a price).

Of course this is due to people aggressively selling S4 legendaries for well below their MV prices causing the MV of certain unbacked cards to fall significantly, and also the decreased demand due to many people already finishing S4 legs and not having an immediate need to purchase more S4 legendaries for their collections.
Alright then without further ado let's get to the first section, 'the open market'

A: The Open Market

To begin, let’s start with the most visible part of card trading, the auctions which occur on the market.

When I say the open market, I'm primarily referring to live auctions which comprises the standard bid and ask auctions on the market. Compared to private negotiations, public trading is very transparent. Everyone can see what card is being offered, who is interested, and, most importantly, how much people are willing to pay. All prices of current and previous trades are public knowledge, through either the graphs on the cards themselves, the public trades page or a trader’s individual buys and sales.

This is where I think one of the first unwritten rules of card trading comes in. The public market isn't just a place where prices are discovered and cards are sold, but a place where people's behaviour and trade styles are displayed.

In an auction, you're dealing with everyone watching the auction, even if they're not actively participating. Every bid communicates something. Every decision to stop bidding communicates something. Even the timing of a bid can tell you something about the people involved.

This makes auctions particularly interesting from a psychological perspective.

One of the more obvious examples is bid escalation and incrementation. You might enter an auction thinking, ‘I’d be willing to pay 100.00 for this card.’ Someone else bids 110.00, so you respond by bidding 120.00. They bid 130.00, and suddenly the question you're asking yourself isn't necessarily ‘Is this card worth 130?’

Instead, it becomes, ‘Am I really going to let them have it for 130?’
It's incredibly easy for an auction to stop being about the value of the card and start being about the competition itself. You become invested in winning because you've already invested time, money, or attention into the auction. You might experience FOMO (fear of missing out) because the card is rare and you don't know when another opportunity will appear. You might become reluctant to stop because you've already bid so much.

This is where concepts like the sunk-cost fallacy and loss aversion become relevant. The money you've already spent shouldn't affect what you're willing to spend next, because it's already gone. But psychologically, it absolutely can.

One of the simplest pieces of advice I can give for auctions is therefore to know your maximum before you start bidding.

If you've decided that you’re willing to pay 500 for a card, decide that before you're sitting there watching somebody else bid 490. Because once you're at 490, the temptation to think, ‘It's only another 10’ is considerably stronger than it was when you started.

However, psychology goes both ways, because while you're participating in an auction, you're also observing everyone else.
You can start paying attention to how people bid.

Does someone immediately jump into an auction? Do they make tiny increments? Do they suddenly make a much larger bid? Do they wait until the auction is already competitive before entering? Do they repeatedly bid and then disappear? Do they seem particularly determined to obtain this specific card?

None of these things are definitive evidence of what someone is thinking. You obviously can't read someone's mind from their bidding pattern. But they can provide information.
If someone immediately makes a huge bid, for example, they may be signalling that they're highly interested in the card. Typically, this can have the intention of acting as a deterrent to any other spectators to participate in the auction. Someone who repeatedly makes the smallest possible increase (pennybidding) may have a very different strategy. Someone who enters an auction late may have been watching the entire time and simply waiting to see where the price settled before committing, or attempting to take the auction at the last minute (sniping)

The important thing is that you're not just watching the price. You're watching the people producing the price.

If you're simply watching an auction, you can still learn who is willing to pay large amounts, who consistently bids on certain cards, what prices particular cards are actually clearing at, which traders are currently active, and even what someone's collection goals might be based on the cards they're repeatedly pursuing. In other words, spectating is itself a form of market participation, where you as the player are gathering information about the market and about cards without spending anything.

I think it's also important to distinguish between ‘price’ and ‘value’

The price a card sells for isn't necessarily the same as what that card is worth to every individual trader. A card might have a market price of 500, but that doesn't mean everyone values it at 500. Someone might be willing to pay considerably more because it's the final card they need for a collection, because they need it immediately, or because they simply personally value it more highly
.
Likewise, someone might refuse to buy a card at 500 despite the fact that everyone else considers that a reasonable price, because they don't personally value it that highly. Someone might be willing to sell for considerably less if they need immediate liquidity (bank) or expect the value to fall over time.

So when you're looking at the open market, you shouldn't just ask, ‘What is this card worth?’, or even worse, ‘What is this card’s listed market value?’
You should also ask, ‘What is this card worth to this particular person?’

That distinction becomes increasingly important once we move away from the open market and into direct negotiations.

There is another mechanic of the public market that I think is particularly important to understand when discussing auction psychology, the concept of the match price.
For anyone unfamiliar with how it works, the final price of a matched transaction isn't necessarily the same as the highest bid. Instead, the transaction settles at the midpoint between the highest bid and the lowest ask available when the auction concludes.

This makes public auctions more psychologically interesting, because the number you're willing to pay or sell isn't necessarily the final amount by auction’s end.

In other words, the bid and ask prices aren't necessarily telling you what people expect to pay. They're telling you what people are willing to accept or offer as their limit, and that distinction matters when you're watching an auction.

It also creates an incentive structure. Because buyers know they likely pay less than their maximum bid, there can be less reason to hold back a high bid. If I think a card is worth up to 1000, bidding 1000 doesn't necessarily mean I have committed myself to spending 1000. I may simply be establishing my maximum willingness to pay.
And from the seller's perspective, the reverse is true. If I'm willing to accept 1000, I don't necessarily have to list at the exact price I hope to receive. The market can find a point between the two sides.

This is another example of why I think it's important to distinguish between what a trader does and what that action actually communicates.

For example, if the highest bid is 1000 and the lowest ask is 250, the eventual match price would be 625. The buyer's 1000 bid therefore doesn't necessarily mean ‘I will pay 1000 for this card.’ It can simply mean ‘I am willing to pay up to 1000, knowing that the eventual match price may be considerably lower.

That difference becomes extremely important once we start looking at how traders use information against each other. And, of course, this also gives us another psychological trap to watch out for. Just because you're unlikely to pay your maximum bid doesn't mean you should set an unnecessarily high maximum. The match-price mechanic can make large numbers feel safer than they actually are, and you still need to establish what you're genuinely comfortable paying before the competitive side of an auction takes over.

Importantly, there is the ever-present risk of a ‘drop’, where a trader with the copy of the card in question matches a higher ask and sets two concurrent auctions, one for a higher price and one for a lower price.

A sudden drop can cause people to panic, attempt to undercut each other, or become reluctant or even disappointed to accept what would previously have been considered a reasonable price. Just because the market has suddenly moved doesn't necessarily mean that the underlying value of the card has changed by the same amount.

There is also a distinction I'd like to make here between what is strategically effective and what is socially accepted.

Some behaviour can be perfectly valid according to the mechanics of the game while still being frowned upon by the community.

As an example, bidding when you see your friend on an auction might appear superfluous. Incrementing the bid in 0.01 increments instead of 1.00 might appear like it doesn't make a difference. The game mechanics might not care.
However, the community will.

As auctions are public, your behaviour can and will be remembered by others. If you're consistently a reasonable bidder, people may be more willing to deal with you in private. If you're constantly provoking bidding wars, pennybidding others, or engaging in other frowned-upon tactics, people can start to associate you with that behaviour.

And thus concludes my section on the open market, I'll give everyone following along some time to digest the textwall before I introduce some interactives!
Ok, I've just given you all a stack of theory, so let's see what you all would actually do in a few situations

A: Q1: The Friend’s Auction:

You see your good friend Schleswig-Holstein bidding on a card you really want for your own collection, the highly sought-after S1 Autonomous Star Systems. You’re willing to pay significantly more than the current match price, and there have been no signals that anyone else is considering entering the auction.

What would you do?

A. Bid normally. It’s a public auction and everyone has the right to participate.
B. Bid the lowest amount (pennybidding). You’ll be ahead and win the auction with the least amount of committed bank.
C. Message them first and ask if it would be ok for you to bid on top.
D. Don’t bid, because they’re your friend.
E. Bid against them, but only to where you think the card is objectively worth.

(React Results: A - 2, B - 0, C - 2, D - 2, E - 0)

[4]: D. Of course I would let my friend Schleswig-Holstein buy such a valuable card dear to their heart

[5]: Penny-bid with 10 seconds to go, then call them up on Discord so they are distracted and don't see the outbid - friends are temporary, cards are forever /jk

[2]: What are you- a teacher? :WhenPandaRunsOutOfCards:

A: (to [1] as well, I completely forgot you could react with the letters I'll do that in my next ones so you don't need to sacrifice your vote)

[1]: based on history I'd go C, i messaged upc before overbidding and gifted a leg, either that or d if i didn't overly care for the card

[6]: Kinda depends on the friend, really. Is it someone I met in RL, who invites me over for dinner? Or someone I have occasionally chatted with online?

[4]: When arliz was in a Sunto auction that I wanted for my Ukraine collection i left the auction to them so I would be d

A (Replying to [2]): A guy trying to explain how to think about trading cards, not just how to trade cards would be my answer^^
The how-to guide I've left for Arty in a couple of days

A (Replying to [6]): It's your pick to interpret the question how you see fit!

[2]: If it were someone like @“new GOATles” -I would just try to ragebait
Orelse maybe C or D

A (Replying to [4]): (I will get you a Sunto for that collection eventually I promise you)

[4] (Replying to [2]): New Charles would be able to outbid you with the wealth from those puppets of his

[6]: F. The most harsh option: Pennybid, then kill their NS session and block them for a minute from logging in again. (:P joke, of course)

A: G. Go on their laptop and cut their internet/remove their tab so that they can't see the site auction
(this is a true story and I won an auction against Eugeniee once by doing such a thing, let's not talk about that here :joy:)

[2]: H. Just kill them

[4] (Replying to Arlizplot): Can I walk from the UK to Australia inside the one hour auction time

A (Replying to [4]): You don't know where I live >:(

[4]: :EvilPanda:

[1]: there's a limit, you can only walk 500 miles

[4]: But I would walk 500 more!

[1]: ok let's set the limit at 1500 miles

A: ok I'll hold this question open for a couple more minutes before we jump to the next one
(and of course I give a short explainer)

[2] (Replying to [4]): That's only allowed for Vaneesa Carlton

A: Alright, I'd argue that there is definitely not a universal answer to this question, and it perfectly illustrates the different paths you can take while on the open market.

A and B are completely legitimate from a mechanical perspective.

D might be good friendship etiquette, but you're voluntarily giving up a market opportunity.

C introduces communication and may be the most socially considerate option.

E sounds reasonable, but the phrase ‘objectively worth’ is itself questionable, as we've already established that market price and personal value aren't necessarily identical.
(before anyone asks I did choose A in this exact situation, as one of the people following this talk will know all too well, and I later regretted it as it contradicted so much about what I preach in leaving other people's auctions alone)
(one more for this section)

A: Q2: The Misclick

You’re watching an auction for the rare S1 Suffolk, but someone has accidentally bid 1000 instead of 100! You know they don’t understand the market very well and you have a copy of the card.

What do you do?
A. Drop at 1000. It’s fair game and free bank, taking advantage of their mistake.
B. Drop at 1000 and bid on the cheaper copy, it’s free bank without giving up a copy of the card!
C. Say nothing and don’t participate, watching to see if the market value increases.
D. Send a message or telegram of condolences on the misclick and offer to help ‘save’ the auction.

(React Results: A - 0, B - 2, C - 2, D - 4, :PandaEvil: - 1)

[1]: i've done all 4
depending on the bidder

A: let's make this more interesting

[2]: Someone should ask this question to Jared

[4]: They would drop and then outbid the 1000 bid for some reason

A: the bidder in question is none other than your friend Schleswig-Holstein
how will you choose to respond to such a bid?

[4]: Oh I would save the auction for Schleswig any day
My goat

A: this is going to become your new puppet I can feel it

[4]: I would drop and return the bank

[1]: for friends or similar: D

[2]: E. Do A because you needed bank, then gift them legs for compensation

[4]: :WhenPandaRunsOutOfCards:

A: A and B could potentially be very profitable and mechanically, there may be nothing wrong with either.

But if you choose D, you've potentially sacrificed an immediate opportunity to build trust with someone.

If you choose A or B, you've gained from someone else's mistake.

(in this situation I chose D and helped to return their bank through transfers, said person has subsequently helped me a decent bunch in my own collecting)
once again there is no absolute 'clear' answer, the important thing is to recognise that the market isn't a one-time interaction
In a community as small as ours, the people you wage war in auctions with may well be the person holding the final legendary card for your collection!

[7]: Good morning! I missed the two first questions :WhenPandaRunsOutOfCards:

A: Good morning [7], you're late to class! /s
Welcome to my section on cards: The Unwritten Rules of NationStates Cards

[7]: I would also save my friend Schleswig-Holstein though

[4]: That name feels familiar :Pika:

A: I think both of these questions ultimately point towards the same idea, and it's probably the central theme I want you to take away from this lecture:

What goes around, comes around.

You can absolutely make a profitable trade by taking advantage of someone's desperation. You can drive up someone's auction. You can pennybid them. You can exploit an information gap. And in that individual transaction, you might come out ahead. But the transaction doesn't necessarily end when the auction timer finishes.

The other trader remembers what happened. The spectators remember what happened. Your reputation changes. And that can affect the next trade, and the trade after that.

The reverse is true as well. If you're fair with someone, if you honour your agreements, if you help someone out when you could have taken advantage of them, or if you simply make yourself pleasant to trade with, those things can come back to you too.

Your reputation is effectively another asset in the market.

So when I talk about the ‘unwritten rules’ of Cards, I'm not necessarily talking about what's objectively right or wrong. I'm talking about the understanding that your actions have consequences beyond the transaction in front of you.

And that's what I mean by ‘what goes around, comes around.’
Does anyone have any questions for this section before we go and tackle the public trading environment?
this is probably a good time for me to run finder as well I'll get to doing that in the meantime

[4]: :flag_gl:
Maybe you'll pull an autonomous star systems!

[7]: Good luck, I hope you pull that S1 Autonomous Star System that you let your Schleswig friend have earlier

A: ooh I wonder what that could possibly be a reference to :Pika:

[4]: I think I prefer the independent planets abbreviation to that ones though :nothoughts:

[7]: Dammit, late to the answer lol

A: I chose that for a reason :P

[8]: artificial solar system

[4]: Dependant stars

A: regional cards would be kind of dope though
S4 The North Pacific (Legendary)
HOLY CRAP

[4]: S4 Swabia (legendary)

A: WANFN
I SHOUILDNT BE POSTING THAT HERE

[8]: :ThinkPika:

[4]: :s1:

A: [image containing S1 Escalan-Corps Star Island, pulled during the lecture]
sorry SORRY I can't help myself WTF
live symposium pull

[4]: Why didn't I run finder during my lecture :WhenPandaRunsOutOfCards:

[9]: You should gift it to me

A: S1 for S3 legendary trust :pray: /s

[7]: reports the teacher for wasting class time

[4] (Replying to Arlizplot): Heh, room for one more?

[9]: Depends which S3 leg :melting_face:

[2]: Flexing in front of the students :EvilPanda:

[4]: Is card board broken again?

A: (cardboard is always broken)

[4]: I should have at least 2 posts there from yesterday
As wekl

A: yes yes class, we'll be getting to the next section shortly

[9]: Getting legendary Chicken Overlords 🫠

[4]: Legendary chicken :pandacookie:

[9]: Regional cards would be very cool though, yeah

[4]: throws paper aeroplane

A: let's get back on topic, does anyone have any actual questions regarding the open market?
don't ask me to put up a bid or an ask btw it's class time not recess

[7]: Too late, the principal already knows about this and will demand that leg you found as tax

A: :joy:

[7]: (I'm the principal)

A: The Public Market
Now that we've covered the open market, let's move into what I would call the public market, direct trades that are negotiated openly in a public channel, where everyone else can watch the conversation.

This is the middle ground between the open and private markets.

You're no longer dealing with the formal structure of an auction. There isn't necessarily a predetermined bid, ask or match price. Instead, two traders are directly negotiating what they think a card is worth.

But unlike a private trade, you're still being watched, and that changes things.

In a private negotiation, you can make an offer, receive a counteroffer, change your mind, ask questions, or reveal information without anyone else necessarily knowing about it.

In a public negotiation, every one of those actions becomes information for everyone else.

If I publicly say ‘Looking for S1 EVANGELION, willing to pay 2000.’

I've just told the entire market something.

I've told any person who owns EVANGELION that I'm interested.

I've told everyone else that I'm willing to spend up to 2000.

And I've potentially told other collectors that there is someone willing to pay that much for the card.

That means that public negotiation is not just a transaction. It's also a performance.

You're negotiating with the person you're talking to, but you're also communicating with everyone watching.

One of the first psychological concepts that becomes important here is anchoring. The basic idea is that the first number introduced into a negotiation can influence how subsequent numbers are perceived.

Imagine someone publicly asks:
‘Selling S3 Pirate Cove, looking for around 5000.’

Even if you originally thought Pirate Cove was worth 3000, you've now been given a reference point of 5000. You might respond with 4000 rather than 3000, because 4000 suddenly feels like a reasonable compromise.
But reverse the situation and imagine the seller doesn’t publicly post a price.

If you respond ‘I'll offer 3000,’ you've established a completely different starting point.

Now the seller is potentially thinking about whether 5000 is actually unreasonable compared to your 3000 offer.

This is why the first number in a negotiation can matter considerably.

However, anchoring isn't magic. If you throw out an absurd number, people aren't necessarily going to accept it simply because you said it first. A good anchor needs some degree of plausibility, particularly in a market where everyone can immediately look at previous trades and current listings.

And this is another reason why knowing the market matters. You can only anchor effectively if you understand what you're anchoring against.

The other major difference is the presence of spectators.

Let's say I'm negotiating with someone publicly and they make me an offer of 800.

I might privately think, ‘I'd actually accept 700.’

But if I immediately respond, ‘Sure, 700 works.’

I've revealed something.

Everyone watching now knows that I was willing to accept at least 700, and the other trader knows that their initial offer was probably too high. They might start wondering whether they could have gotten it for 600.

In a private negotiation, that information might disappear once the trade is completed, however, in a public negotiation, the audience gets to learn from your negotiation, and this creates an incentive to sometimes negotiate differently in public than you would in private.

You might make a slightly stronger counteroffer because you don't want to publicly establish a low valuation. You might take longer to respond because you don't want to appear desperate. You might deliberately make a concession publicly because you want to establish yourself as a reasonable trader.

Or, you might refuse an offer that you would have accepted privately because you don't want to establish that price as a precedent.

This brings us to another feature of the public market, precedent.

If I publicly sell a card for 500, that transaction can become a reference point for the next person selling the same card. Even if there was a very specific reason I accepted 500 that context may disappear.

Someone else now sees ‘This card sold for 500.’

They may not see ‘This card sold for 500 because Arlizplot desperately needed bank at that exact moment’.

Suddenly a single transaction can influence the perceived market value of an entire card.

TLDR, when you're trading publicly, you're not only dealing with your price. You're potentially helping establish everyone else's price.

We must also consider the concept of information leakage, probably the biggest danger of public trading.

Remember what I said earlier about watching auctions?

In the open market, spectators can observe your bidding behaviour.
In the public market, they can observe your negotiation behaviour.

Suppose you're looking for a particular legendary, let's call this one Insensible Hatred.

Someone publicly offers you one for 800.

You respond, ‘I'd really like this, but 800 is too high.’

They come down to 750.

You say, ‘I'm very interested, but I still can't do 750.’

They offer 700.

You accept immediately.
You've just told everyone watching that your reservation price was somewhere between 700 and 750, and you’ve done it for free. You've also potentially told the seller that they probably could have gotten more. This is why you need to be conscious of what your negotiation reveals, not just what it accomplishes. Sometimes the information you reveal can be more valuable than the money you gain from the individual trade.

This leads into the simplest piece of advice I can give for public negotiations, Don't negotiate against yourself.

If someone asks, ‘Would you pay 800?’

And you respond, ‘No, I'd pay 700.’

They haven't actually given you a counteroffer yet.

You've just volunteered information.

You could instead say, ‘What's the lowest you're willing to take?’

Now you've made them reveal information before you reveal your own limit.

This is particularly important when someone asks an open-ended question such as:

‘What's your offer?’

If you immediately give them your maximum, you've potentially done half of their negotiation for them.

And this is where the distinction between price and value from the previous section becomes important again. Knowing that a card generally sells for 700 is useful. Knowing that this particular person desperately wants 700 right now is much more useful.
There's another psychological effect which I think is easy to overlook: people don't like looking unreasonable in public.

If someone makes you an obviously lowball offer privately, you can simply reject it. If someone makes that same offer publicly, you now have an audience. That can influence both sides.

A seller might be more willing to compromise because they don't want to look greedy. A buyer might accept a slightly worse price because they don't want to drag out an argument in front of everyone. Someone might even make a concession simply because they don't want other traders to think they're difficult to deal with, and this can influence the negotiation.

But, again, there's a difference between understanding a psychological incentive and abusing it.

If you consistently use public pressure to force people into deals they wouldn't otherwise accept, people are eventually going to notice, which points right back to the same principle from the open market:
what goes around, comes around.
And thus concludes my section on public market trading, as before I'll wait a bit before I introduce some more interactives
(aka time for me to check my finder)

[4]: More interactives :PandaHappy:

A: bro is here only for the interactives and not the theory :sob:
taking the tests without taking the lessons

[4]: Button yes must press must press button

[2]: Starboard didn't actually had permission to this channel lol.
Added that post

A: zero stars 😭
alright let's go to some questions :P

A: Q3: #legendary
You're watching a public trade:
Player A: Selling S3 Defeated Pirate Cove, looking for 9000.
Player B: 7000?
Player A: 8888.88.
Player B: 7500?
Player A: I’ll do it for 8500.00

You own a spare copy of Defeated Pirate Cove. You would happily sell it for 7500, but you'd obviously prefer to get more.
What do you do?

A. Jump in publicly: ‘I'll do 7500.’
B. Jump in publicly: ‘I'll do 8000.’
C. DM Player B privately and offer them your copy for 7500/800.
D. Do nothing. You’re not in a hurry to sell.

(React Results: A - 1, B - 1, C - 0, D - 4)

A: I wonder what this card could possibly be

[4]: What about saying you'll sell it for 8499.99

[1]: D - I'm a hoarder

[2]: Offer them for 7500/800 ?

A: [image of a calculator app, 7500/800]
damn that's a bloody good deal

[7]: Obvious answer, I love selling legs

A: I'd take S3 Defeated Pirate Cove for 9.38

A (Replying to [7]): 'I'll do 10000.00' - [7] 2026

[2]: E. Buy the card for 8000 and sell it for 8200 privately

A: What would you do with TWO copies of S3 Defeated Pirate Cove?
seems like a pretty good card to have spares of

[4]: Junk them both

[2]: 404 packs to open :PandaHappy:
arlizplot [CARD], — 8/28/26, 9:19 PM
I should probably explain the idea behind this question, it depends on what you're trying to optimise. If I want to Giomax (bank now) I might choose options A or B. If I'm thinking of my reputation with the two people involved, I would probably choose D as it did not directly involve me.
The thing about public trading is that it's
well
'public'

[4]: One has to own a valuable card to be put in this situation :WhenPandaRunsOutOfCards:

A: next question!

[1]: yes mr plot

A: Q4: Old Habits Die Hard.

You are Arlizplot.

You have spent months building your collection. You've bought, traded, farmed, negotiated and probably made several financially questionable decisions along the way.

But you've finally done it.

You are one card away from completing Season One Legendaries.
You post publicly:

Arlizplot: ‘Looking for S1 Soups. Paying 2000.’

And after a few minutes, someone responds.

[7] (Replying to Arlizplot): If it's my dear friend Schleswig-Holstein seeking to buy however, I'd offer C (private trade with discount) :PandaHappy:

A: Schleswig-Holstein: ‘I've got one.’

Nobody else appears to own a copy, or at least is interested in trading with you

You know this is your final card. Schleswig-Holstein knows it's your final card.

[4] (Replying to [7]): Like that one time!

A: What do you do?
oh god

A. Offer 2000 immediately. You don't want to risk losing the card.
B. Ask Schleswig-Holstein what they want for it and negotiate normally.
C. Ask them to give you a reasonable price.
D. Try to negotiate aggressively anyway. You might be desperate, but you don't have to show it.
E. Remind them that you're friends and ask whether they'd be willing to prioritise you over another buyer.
Now, here's the important part
I want you to answer this based on what you chose for Question One

(React Results: A - 5, B - 1, C - 0, D - 0, E - 1, F - 1)

[4]: Hello I am arlizplot. I would message Schleswig "PLEASE PLEASE I NEEEEED THIS CARD PLEASE I LOVE YOUR COLLECTIONS WE ARE FRIENDS RIGHT I GIFT CARD PLEASE HELP ME WE ARE FRIENDS PLEASE PLEASE"

A: F. Message Schleswig "PLEASE PLEASE I NEEEEED THIS CARD PLEASE I LOVE YOUR COLLECTIONS WE ARE FRIENDS RIGHT I GIFT CARD PLEASE HELP ME WE ARE FRIENDS PLEASE PLEASE"

[2]: G. Babe I'll do anything for that card. Please give it to me 🥺

[4]: Sure

[1]: If I said i'd pay 2k, i'd pay the 2k

[7]: H. I'm not Arlizplot, but rather [7] and as such, I am not seeking to buy such a trivial card

A (Replying to [4]): ayo I thought you were leaving your S1 Soups for me

A (Replying to [7]): above the social class of NS cards I see :Pika:

[2]: Love beats money

A: /s

[4]: Anyway seriously I would choose A because I would want my friend to be properly compensated for his card
But Im sure Schleswig would gift it if it's your last card :nothoughts:

A: This is where ‘what goes around, comes around’ stops being an abstract principle.

In Q1, you had an opportunity to make a decision that benefited you immediately.

Now, several questions later, you are the person who needs something from the same trader. Schleswig-Holstein hasn't forgotten what happened. Suddenly the decision that looked like a 50 bank profit might have consequences worth considerably more than 50.
BUT
Plot twist
There's one more piece of information.

[7]: You missed the chance to make a pun
Arlizplot twist

A: Instead of replying to you publicly, Schleswig-Holstein privately messages you:

‘I'll sell it to you for 1,500.’

That's 500 below your publicly stated offer.

What do you do?

A (Replying to [7]): be back I have to junk a leg for this missed opportunity now
[CARD],

A: don't wait for me to give A, B, C, D, E this time, I want to hear your actual thoughts! :Pika:
(this is one of two questions I have chosen to omit the answers, the other one will be coming up soon enough)

[4]: I didn't realise you had enough transfer cards to move 1500 bank Schleswig

[1]: private transfer to save bank, gift a leg at the end

[4]: Anyway I would ask if they are sure and I would try repay the favour later on

[2]: This could have been a good question in Schleswig-Holstein perspective?
Whether you'll gift that card, give him for less, give him for 2000, or demand more like 3000-4000 when you're the only one who can give it?

[7]:If I were a trader short on bank, I take the offer
But that is not the case, I'm a very rich trader and I'd pay them the 2000 anyways!

A (Replying to [2]): I was debating flipping the question while I was drafting actually but I decided against it

[4]: Gift it!

A: Clearly though, you take the offer
That's an excellent deal.

[4]: No I would gift it

A: But now think about why you're getting that deal.

Is Schleswig-Holstein being generous because you're friends?

Are they rewarding you for the way you treated them earlier?

Are they simply trying to help you finish your collection?

Or have you accidentally created a situation where your previous behaviour has become part of the price?

[4]: Mm remember to treat me right guys

A: This is the part of card trading that doesn't show up on the IA table. There is no statistic for: 'Schleswig-Holstein was willing to sell this card to Arlizplot for 500 less than they would have sold it to someone else.'
That difference isn't some theoretical, it's very much real, and that's your reputation at work.

[7]: Schleswig-Holstein is being generous because I gifted them a Season 3 Natiwahin Con, an inflated card with a Tuvalu flag, when they were just starting out
Nooo I was changing it lmao

[4]: Oh wait nvm I'm dumb
Yea I realised after

[7]: Like Arliz did with the names

[4]: :WhenPandaRunsOutOfCards:

A: these nations are absolutely becoming puppets later

[4]: I thought it was a Bangladesh flag 🇧🇩 with a circle

A: I should probably make a statement about why I decided to remix the names, I want to draw attention not to the actual cards but to the process behind them

[1]: 2000 is a fair price for s1 legendary merethin

[4]: Why would I buy soups for 2000 when I can get it at a supermarket for cheaper

A: Live arlizplot laptop crash
fortunately I have a spare, we're using my junkdajunk laptop in the meantime

A (Replying to [1]): very high demand legendary, I hear it's as expensive as S1 legendary Prlizalot
ok does anyone have any more questions regarding public trading?
we're going to be heading into the section I spent by far the most time drafting, which is the 'private' market

[4]: Are Schleswig-Holstein and prlizalot friends?

A: they're not friends, Schleswig-Holstein doesn't know a 'Prizalot' but they do know a 'Prlizalot' and they're pretty cool
yeah ok you edited it 👍 I can confirm this to be true

[4]: :PE_PandaSleepy:
Can't spell lol

[1]: thoughts on mentioning people in public exchanges like, "@arlizplot would you sell your copy of s1 gio for 2000?"
compared to an open ended ask

A: Yes if you're intending on pinging somebody and reaching out to a particular person otherwise it's anyone's game

[7]: I heard Schleswig-Holstein and Prlizalot both trade often with Giuseppeland

A: If you're leaving it open to the general public the general public will respond
Of course if you're planning on reaching out to someone directly then it's probably best to directly message/telegram them
What I did say still applies though, you have more attention if you put the trade offer up through #legendary rather than DMs and this could be either a positive or negative depending on the trade

[4]: Ah Giuseppeland has that Nepal and Bangladesh collection!

[7]: Yes, and you can't forget their two crown jewels, the Argentina collection and the Flowers collection!

A: The Private Market

[4]: The sun and moon and the crimson circle

A: We’re now at the set of negotiations which can make or break a collection, the trades made privately. By private market, I’m referring to direct negotiations conducted through Telegrams, Discord messages, or other private communications, where the negotiation itself isn't visible to the wider market.

This is where all of the concepts we've already discussed become especially important.

In the open market, you have prices.

In the public market, you have prices and an audience

In the private market, you have people, information, and uncertainty. That makes private trading considerably less transparent.

If someone posts an S1 Examlandia for 1000 publicly, I can look at previous sales, current auctions, and other people's reactions before deciding whether that's reasonable.

If someone privately messages me saying, ‘I've got an Examlandia. What would you offer?’, there are many things I don't know.

I don't know why they're selling.

I don't know whether they've already contacted other people.

I don't know their reserve price.

I don't know whether they're testing the market.

And they don't know what I'm willing to pay.

That is information asymmetry.

Both sides have information the other side doesn't have, and private trading is largely a game of deciding how much of that information you want to reveal, when you want to reveal it, and what you can get in return for revealing it.

One of the biggest mistakes I see in private negotiations is revealing too much information too early.

Suppose someone messages you, ‘Are you interested in buying S2 Autonomous Star Systems?’

And you respond, ‘Yes! I've been looking for one for ages. What's your price?’

You've just revealed quite a lot. You've told them that you actively want the card, that you've been looking for it, and that you may be willing to pay a premium, and you haven't received anything in return.
A much more neutral response might be, ‘Possibly. What are you looking for?’

Now you've put the next decision back onto them.

Maybe they say 1000, maybe they say 700, maybe they tell you they desperately need bank. , maybe they reveal that they've already had another offer.

Every one of those answers gives you information, but you haven't committed yourself to anything.
This leads into one of the two important principles of private trading, Information is a currency.

You shouldn't necessarily be secretive or deceptive. You simply shouldn't volunteer information that the other trader hasn't earned through the negotiation. One of the most valuable pieces of information you can discover is urgency.

Imagine two people selling the exact same card.

Seller A says ‘I'm selling because I have a spare’.
Seller B says ‘I really need 500 bank today. Can you buy this?’

Those are completely different negotiations.

The card is exactly the same

The market hasn't necessarily changed.

The person's circumstances have changed.

Seller A has very little reason to compromise.

Seller B has a reason to prioritise liquidity over price.
The reverse can happen with buyers as well. Someone might desperately need the final card for a collection, while another buyer might simply think it would be nice to have, or to acquire their 18th copy. This is why I've repeatedly come back to the distinction between price and value.

And this is where I want to introduce another concept which may be new to some of you, but which I believe is the single most important principle of trading:
INITIATIVE
Initiative is the ability to make the other trader respond to your decision rather than you responding to theirs.
Think about a simple situation.
Someone messages you ‘Selling S2 Examlandia. What would you offer?’

They've effectively handed you the initiative as they’re asking you to establish the first number in the negotiation. You can now anchor the negotiation.

However, imagine the same person subsequently says, ‘I'm looking for around 800.’

Now they've already established an anchor, and you're responding to theirs, and the initiative has shifted.

This matters because the person with initiative generally has more control over the direction of the negotiation. They can decide whether to make the first offer. They can decide whether to wait. They can decide whether to reveal information. They can decide whether to accept, counteroffer, or simply walk away.

And importantly, initiative doesn't necessarily belong to the person with more bank or the more valuable card. It belongs to whoever currently has the ability to force the next meaningful decision onto the other person. This creates what I call the initiative gap.

At one extreme, you have a situation where one trader has almost complete initiative.
For example, ‘I need this card for my collection. You're the only person who has one. What do you want?’

That's an enormous initiative advantage for the seller.
At the other extreme, the seller might approach you saying ‘I desperately need bank today. Would you take 500?’

If you know the card is normally worth 700, you now have the initiative. They're effectively asking you to decide whether to accept, negotiate, or take advantage of their urgency.

However, initiative can shift back and forth throughout a negotiation.

You make an offer.

They counter.

You ask why they're selling.

They reveal they're in a hurry.

You now have more initiative.

They mention they've received another offer.

Initiative shifts back towards them.

You say you can pay immediately.

It shifts again.

This is why private negotiation is so much more than just the numbers being thrown around, it’s about who is making whom react to the negotiation.
That brings me to the opposite condition, zugzwang. I'm borrowing the term from chess because I think it describes this situation particularly well. In chess, zugzwang is the situation where you are forced to make a move as it is your turn, even though making a move is disadvantageous.

In card trading, I would use it slightly more loosely. Zugzwang is when circumstances have removed your good options, forcing you to negotiate from a disadvantageous position.

You're the buyer who has spent six months looking for the final card. You're the seller who needs bank before a deadline. You're the person who has publicly announced that you're desperate. You're the only person who needs the card.

Or perhaps you've simply allowed the negotiation to reach a point where doing nothing is no longer a viable position.

That's zugzwang. Initiative and zugzwang are two sides of the same coin.

Initiative is about who controls the next move.

Zugzwang is about what happens when you don't have a good next move.

You can therefore think about a private negotiation on a rough five-point scale.

[1]: ah the legendary card zugzwang

[2]: Packs opened.
Finder time :PandaHappy:

A: +2 — Strong initiative:
You have significant control over the negotiation. The other trader is responding to your terms, and you have several viable alternatives.

+1 — Slight initiative:
You have a modest informational or situational advantage, but the other trader still has meaningful options.

0 — Neutral:
Neither side has a clear advantage. Both have reasonable alternatives and the negotiation can move in either direction.

−1 — Slight zugzwang:
The other trader has more initiative. Your options are becoming narrower, and you are increasingly reacting to their decisions.

−2 — Strong zugzwang:
You have effectively lost control of the negotiation. You need the transaction, have few alternatives, and the other trader can dictate the terms.
This scale can change during the same negotiation.

A (Replying to [2]): good luck!

[4]: I hate when the other trader has zugzwang

A: (this means that you hate being in an advantageous position, interesting)

[1]: masochism

[4]: Yes I am consumed with kindness

[7]: What if the other trader has a Zwangzug (and your need it for your chess collection?)

[4]: Idk zwangzug just zugzwang

[2]: [Image of Zigzagoon]

A: You might begin at −2 because you desperately need a card. Then you discover the seller desperately needs bank.

Suddenly you're at +2.

Then they reveal that they've already received an offer from someone else.

Perhaps you're back at 0.

Then you realise that seller doesn't actually need the card, while you need it to finish your collection.

Back to −1.

The numbers haven't necessarily changed, but the information has.
It also explains why the first offer can be disproportionately valuable.

For example, imagine that someone DMs you:

‘Would you sell your S3 Sevastopol?’

You say, ‘Sure. I'd want 800.’

Now 800 is the anchor.

But suppose they instead say ‘I'd offer 1,000. I need it now’ The buyer has moved first, but the seller has the initiative as they know what the buyer is willing to pay, as well as the circumstances for this purchase.

Therefore the first offer does not always increase initiative. A terrible first offer can obviously damage your position. For the seller, however, when the first offer is genuinely a steal the initiative can be worth considerably more than the small amount of information you had to reveal to make it.
Sometimes the best way to gain initiative is simply to recognise that you already have it.

If someone offers 700 for a card that normally trades for 500, you don't necessarily need to immediately negotiate them up to 750. You already have the advantageous position.

Trying to squeeze another 50 out of the transaction might gain you 50 bank while damaging a relationship worth considerably more.

Initiative is different from simply “getting the best price.” Initiative is about controlling the negotiation. The final price is only one consequence of that control.
Anchoring, as before, is another important component.

If someone messages ‘Would you take 400 for this?” and you were considering selling at 500, 500 suddenly feels quite reasonable.

But if they say, ‘I’d pay 600.’ then 500 suddenly feels like a bargain. Nothing at all about the card changed, but your psychological reference point did.
This is why you should ideally establish your own valuation before entering a negotiation. Otherwise, you risk letting the other person establish your expectations for you.

The same principle applies to concessions, as people like feeling that they've won a negotiation.
If I offer you a card for 1,000 and you negotiate me down to 900, you feel as though you've accomplished something. If I simply offer it to you for 900, you might still think it's a good deal, but you don't have that same sense of achievement.

This is why controlled concessions can be useful. You might say ‘I could do 950,’ and then ‘I'd be willing to go to 925,’ and then ‘900 would be my absolute minimum.’

Those concessions need to actually mean something. If you immediately go from 1000 to 800, the buyer learns that your first number wasn't very meaningful.

They'll probably ask, ‘What about 700?’ and now you’ve lost initiative.

Initiative should not and must not be confused with manipulation.

You don't need to invent fake buyers. You don't need to lie about competing offers. You don't need to deliberately misrepresent market prices. Most importantly, you don’t need to treat every single trade and interaction with fellow traders as a chance to optimise for +2 initiative.

There is a difference between being strategically aware and being dishonest. In fact, this is where reputation becomes particularly important.
Private trading might appear to make reputation less relevant because nobody else can see what happened. Private trading actually makes existing reputation much more important than in public or in open trading.
If I have a reputation for being reliable, reasonable and pleasant to trade with, someone might message me privately before they even consider putting a card on the public market.

They might say, ‘I've got this card. Interested?’
Nobody else even knew the card was available. That’s an incredible advantage and it all came down to reputation.

The reverse is true as well.

If you're known for wasting people's time, reneging on agreements, exploiting mistakes, or being impossible to negotiate with, people don't necessarily need to publicly condemn you, but they can simply stop messaging you.

Someone else gets the card, opportunity, or the first offer, and you might never know that your reputation caused it.

That is one of the most important things about private trading, you often don't see the consequences of your reputation.

This brings us back to information asymmetry. Sometimes this gap is unintentional, but other times, just because you have more information, you may choose not to exploit this position.

An experienced trader might know that a particular collector has been searching for a card for months. They might know that a card is unusually scarce. They might know that someone is about to complete a collection. They might know that a price which looks normal to the other person is actually an incredible deal.

The less experienced trader might know none of that.

If you're the person with more information, you have a choice.

You can maximise the immediate profit, or you can use that information to help someone understand the market.
I'm not going to argue that every good trader needs to be altruistic, that's @Novaya Zemlya's job. If someone offers you a genuinely good deal, you're allowed to take it. Nobody should feel like they’re obliged to leave money on the table to act according to their morals. At the same time, there is a difference between benefiting from a favourable market situation and deliberately exploiting someone's ignorance.

The first is reputable trading. The second is trading your reputation.

Therefore, that is why I think the private market is where all of the concepts we've discussed finally come together.

Information determines what you know.

Initiative determines who gets to act on that information.

Zugzwang determines who is forced to react.

Reputation determines what opportunities you may be given in the future.

The strongest traders are not always the ones with the most bank, the most DV, or the highest
intellect. They're the people who understand which of those factors actually matters in the negotiation they're currently having.
I'll leave this up for a little bit longer before we go to the final section of interactives
Any question as well? I know I just introduced a completely new set of terms :P

[4] (Replying to Arlizplot): What's with the /s
It is true!

[7] (Replying to Arlizplot): The strongest traders are not always the ones with the most bank, the most DV [...]
Disagree :p
Where's the pandarich when I need it

A (Replying to [4]): edited!

[4]: Idk pandarich

A (Replying to [7]): not always but often

[4]: :pandagio1: :pandagio2: - I know these though

A: I think having a lot of bank is definitely a contributing factor in being a strong trader :P

[7]: :PandaHappy:

[1]: :PandaPoor:

[4]: :pandalaud:

[7]: Nah I get your point, just playing around lol

A: alright, it's schleswig-holstein's favourite section now
the final section of interactives
Q5. The Balance

You have been searching for S2 Autonomous Star Systems for six months.

Only one person has contacted you:

Seller: ‘I've got one. What would you pay?’

You know the normal market price is approximately 1000. This is your final card for a collection.
What is your position?

A. +2 strong initiative
B. +1 slight initiative
C. 0 neutral
D. −1 slight zugzwang
E. −2 strong zugzwang

(React Results: A - 0, B - 0, C - 0, D - 4, E - 0)

[4]: I seem to remember some evil behaviour on s2 Autonomous star systems
[2]: No legs today :WhenPandaRunsOutOfCards:

[1]: you've been searching, but they've come to you

[7]: D because it's been 6 months and only they have contacted you, so one could think they are perhaps the only person that want to trade it, at the same time the initiative is now yours to make a good offer

A: Precisely, [7] got it
You're at -1 because while it appears like you're screwed, you have no idea what their circumstances are in order to be willing to trade such a card

[4]: I wonder what circumstances you'd go to for a S2 autonomous star systems arliz

A: If they're desperate for something, say bank or another season completion, quoting [7], 'the initiative is now yours'

A: Q6. The Swing of Initiative
You're negotiating privately for a legendary.

You start with ‘I'd pay 800.’

Seller, ‘No, I need at least 1000.’

You ask, ‘Are you in a hurry to sell?’

They respond ‘Not particularly.’

Where are you on the scale?
A. +2
B. +1
C. 0
D. −1
E. −2

(React Results: A - 1, B - 0, C - 1, D - 1, E - 5)

A: Ok so yes, you're at -2 because the seller has all the initiative in this situation, not needing to sell the card at all and being largely disinterested in negotiating the price down .
I would argue that depending on scarcity of owner it could be on a scale from -1 to -2 but you're definitely not neutral
HOWEVER
Then you discover:

‘Actually, I need bank tonight. I've got another purchase coming up.’
Where are you now?
A. +2
B. +1
C. 0
D. −1
E. −2

(React Results: A - 4, B - 0, C - 0, D - 0, E - 0)

A; Yup, you're at +2 because your bank is relatively more valuable to the seller than the card is to you, so you hold relatively more initiative and this is a connection for 'instant' bank, making said trader more likely to accept a worse trade

Now, I would like to introduce one final question

A: Q7. The Last Stand.
You are looking at an ask for an exceptionally rare card. It is currently at 7500.00.

There are fewer than 50 copies of this card in existence.

The card normally trades in the same tier as the other expensive legendary, which I will not be mentioning here.

You have no copies, and this card is important to you. You need it for your collection desperately. You check the owners list and discover that almost nobody has a spare. The card rarely reaches auction at all, as it is almost always traded privately. The last sale was over a year ago.

This may be your only opportunity to obtain it.

So you grind, farm, sell and transfer until you finally have 7500.00 bank in your balance.

One morning, you place the bid.

Minutes go by without much happening.

Then somebody else places a bid on top of you.

You look at who you're bidding against.

They're a top 10 card trader.

You know they have considerably more bank than you. In fact, they have close to 50000 bank.

You know they understand the market extremely well.

You also know that the auction has a maximum potential bid of 10000.00.

You, however, don't have 10000.

You have enough bank to match the current ask, and that's essentially it.

You cannot realistically win a bidding war against this person.

They can push the auction all the way to 10000 and still have an enormous amount of bank left over.

And, importantly, they already own a copy of this card.
So here's the question
What do you do?
and there will be no options given this time.

[4]: DDOS

[10]: ramp up the clock and sell anything witha bid

A: honestly valid but then you'd be risking said trader dumping a 10k bid anyway

[8]: based on a true story

A: you may know where I'm going with this one...

[1]: go in debt and ask giuseppeland to bid 10k

A: maybe I should have put in multiple choice answers

[4]: Oh yea I didn't think of that
I'm sure Giuseppeland would help me

[8]: this is how i got s1 last utopia actually
nicky bid for me when i ran out of bank

[10]: wait let me rephrase. you let them say above for a bit and sell sell sell, once its close bid maybe 10 times, chances are they wont jump to 10k first. also if you're desprte you can junk your whole deck and puppets gift you all their epics and you junk them or somthing

[2]: Giuseppeland did not attend your first lecture :WhenPandaRunsOutOfCards:

A: Alright, I'll finally reveal what happened
This wasn't hypothetical. This was my auction.

[11]: gasp

A: I was the person with no copy.

I had spent the time grinding the bank, this was one of the major cards I needed for my all-legendaries collection, and I knew how exceptionally difficult another opportunity would be.

And looking back at everything we've discussed today, my position was about as close to −2 zugzwang as you can realistically get.
I had almost no alternatives. I needed the card. There were almost no spare copies. The card rarely appeared on auction. I had only enough bank to match the ask.

If the person I was bidding against decided they wanted the card, I simply couldn't stop them.

I couldn't outbid them indefinitely.

I couldn't credibly threaten them with a higher bid.

I couldn't rely on having another opportunity tomorrow.

I couldn't even rely on being able to find another copy privately.

If they wanted to exercise their advantage, they could have simply forced the price upwards, or even immediately bid 10000.00, and I would be done.
But then something happened that none of the numbers could ever predict.

They pinged me in the cards server and told me to just “bid over them.”

Think about what that means.

This was the person who had essentially every material advantage in the situation. And yet, instead of using that advantage, they explicitly gave me permission to take the position back.

I still had very few alternatives.

But the person who had the ability to maintain the zugzwang had voluntarily chosen not to.

They had the initiative, but they gave it away.
I bid 7,600.00.

The auction matched, and S3 Morover sold for 7550.00 on the 29th of June, 2026.

[4]: :PandaPartyCelebrate:

A: And I think that's probably the best place I could end this talk, because it demonstrates something that all of our frameworks struggle to account for:

the player
We've talked about price and value.

We've talked about information asymmetry.

We've talked about reputation.

We've talked about initiative and zugzwang.

We've talked about incentives, psychology and opportunity cost.

All of these are incredibly useful ways of understanding the market.

But they're not laws of nature.

They're frameworks for understanding people.
Initiative tells you who has the ability to control the next move.

Zugzwang tells you who has been forced into an unfavourable position.

But neither tells you what someone will actually choose to do with that advantage.

They could have exploited the fact that I desperately wanted it. Instead, they chose not to.

And that's something you simply cannot see on the public trades.

You can see that the card sold for 7550.

You can see its previous sales.

You can see who owned it.

You can see the rarity.

You can see the bids.

But you can't see why someone decided to let another person have it.
So if there's one thing I'd like you to take away from everything I've talked about today, it's not that you should always have the initiative, never reveal information, or maximise every trade.

It's this:
Learn the market. Understand the psychology. Know the incentives. But never forget that you're trading with people.
Because ultimately, the most important unwritten rule of Cards isn't about the cards at all.
It's about the people behind them.
Because what goes around, comes back around.
Thank you EVERYBODY SO MUCH FOR COMING AND PARTICIPATING IN MY 2026 SYMPOSIUM TALK

[2]: Emotional story

[4]: And they all lived happily ever after?:nothoughts:

[11]: [GIF of applause]

[7]: :PandaHappy:

[2]: They loved each other

[7]: I love loaning bank to others

[4]: Very fun lecture arliz:PandaHappy: worth staying up for I enjoyed it a lot :PandaPartyCelebrate:

[2]: We are all here for love not for friendship

[4]: :PandaHappy:

[1] private market: [GIF of ‘private conversations’]

A: This was a truly insane talk to write and prepare, I'm glad you thoroughly enjoyed it

[2]: Great lecture @arlizplot
Can I get a leg for this anyhow

A: and that is the first thing that somebody asks xD

[4]: Can I get one?

A: done

[7]: as the famous rich trader Giuseppeland, I'd always help my friend Schleswig-Holstein in such a sticky situation
(Sorry that I missed the tail end, had to go do something IRL)

A: I'll be opening this channel up for general q&a for the remainder of the symposium, where you're free to ask me about any of the concepts I've gone over today, but also anything you've always wanted to know about me, Arliz, the actual player behind the screen

[2] (Replying to Arlizplot): Thank you :PandaHappy:

[4]: Anyone see the powerx ranking posted this week?
Gold Giuseppeland, cracktearrow
Silver - 9004, Michaelswill, Svalbard Archipelago
Bronze - prlizalot, loudeasier, capitalist-sweden, philtown2, southlands

[12]: That was a really really long read. Arliz I would like to have the transcript please lol
Also wonderful lecture, never expected this to be so interactive! Well done!

A: I'm working on transcription of all the lectures, I'll have them all up on dispatches for everyone to read so that they don't get lost after the symposium ends!
I did my best to change it up and make it as engaging as I possibly could

[12]: ooh! Initiative! I like it.
I was supposed to do it, but works lol
Loved it!

A: I'm heading to sleep now absolutely exhaused by this, I'll get around to any and all questions in the morning!

[12]: G'Night!

[7]: :rofl: :rofl:
I think you made some mistakes though, it's

Gold - Giuseppeland, Cracktearrow

Silver - 5009, Tomswill, Svalbard Archipelago (aka Schleswig-Holstein)

Bronze - Prlizalot, Nicola Laudisio, Capitalist-Sweden, Billtown3, Southlands

[13]: I will read this tomorrow

[4]: Players named after both Norway (Svalbard) and Sweden in the top 10! If only Denmark had a good NS player!

[12]: Haaland but from Denmark

[14]: I never think about any of that when trading. I just go based on how much I like the person wanting the card for how agreeable I am.
I do put some thought in when I make the offer. When asking TalAkMaChen for their spare Moreover I did offer ex-nation cards in addition to the MV.
Would you like me to negotiate more if you ask for cards in the future?

A: Of course this was all just my own ramblings, everyone is going to have their own opinion/style on trading, and I dont expect this to be some magic all encompassing compendium for trading at all.
(when I was trading with you for cards before I made sure to put my offers well above what I'd usually propose, fwiw. Each to their own.)

[14]: What's the best Owl House fanfic you've read while farming?

A: Excellent question! My personal favourite, although it doesn't solely belong to that fandom is 'A Lost Owl' which in my opinion ticks all the boxes as to what I'm looking for in a crossover
The plot is fantastic, OCs are very natural and they manage to fit Luz very naturally in the new setting

[14]: Cool. I haven't read that one. Adds to long list of things to read

[15]: Far out that was a long read
Very worth it though thanks for sharing @arlizplot :PandaHappy:
Interesting, informative, reasonable, engaging, fun, and honestly just a vibe
(If only my irl lessons were like this)

A: hours of my life spent writing/editing this talk, I'm glad you enjoyed it^^

[15]: How could I not :PandaHappy:
Needed the advice too because I have been dropped a once or twice on legs recently
Question that is about as unrelated as possible, any advice for my S3 collection? 218/223 of course because Psy/Heavens Reach/The Big 3 are not feasible for my royal smediumness

Very public so dangerous move I know lol

A: you're requesting public advice from the symposium, this means that you have an audience!
season three it's possible to find someone with a lot of spares, ideally someone who has not yet completed S4 to swap. most people with S3 spares are generally willing to trade them at or close to MV so you won't need to be concerned with that

[15]: Indeed it does, as well as putting it out there that this is my plan so if anyone has anything available (cards, knowledge, or advice) they know I am interested!

A: off the top of my head Dabarastan and Sunto might cause some strife but you have Sunto, Dabarastan is the other mid tier cte

[4]: Thinking of zwugzwang

A: yes
think of zugzwang
make sure that you're not putting yourself in -2 or -1 when negotiating

[4]: Before every auction/trade I will read the Arlizplot lecture first

A: don't be like 'I NEEEEEDD DEFEATED PIRATE COVE RAHHHH ILL PAY ANYTHING'
the other person suddenly knows that you're desperate and probably willing to pay a premium
[15]: Lucky for me I don't need Defeated Pirate Cove
In fact I don't need it that much I will not pay anything

[4]: Did you see I won another giveaway?
This is an important question

[15]: If you're asking me then yes :PandaHappy: Very nice job

[4]: Both of you

A: after I transcribe this one I'll have it up on dispatches so that anyone can see it and benefit from it in the future

[15]: Oh yeah I forgot about Dabarastan

A: forgettable yes, Sasten is another one but you have it

[4] (Replying to Arlizplot): Aren't you going to post them all?

A: I'll do my one and your one as my priority, might run out of time to do the others

[15] (Replying to Arlizplot): Very good point

[1] (Replying to Arlizplot): zugzwang -1

A: I've got a lot to run, currently I'm on my national server for a game (where I'm the server owner for Australia and New Zealand) and we're negotiating a Pacific coalition with 7 other servers
that's been a lot of fun talking with all the staff/owners

[4]: I wrote 1500 words of sweet sweet lore today

A: typically, the seller has a slight advantage and the buyer is at a slight disadvantage under normal market conditions
I say this because cards are more specific than bank, anyone can have 10k bank but only so many people can have Defeated Pirate Cove, as an example

[16]: The seller has the advantage because they hold all the cards

A: true but not always, under conditions where the seller desperately needs bank then it can flip the other way
and I think it's neutral when both people are swapping stuff for mutual collection completion

[15]: Naturally

[1]: reflecting on the content here, while i've had a lot of fun adopting the concept of zugzwang to point out some public "deals", I think you've put together an interesting analysis of social behaviour in nscards to sort of formalise an abstraction of what is often intuitive for established traders.
I found it interesting how at some points the text did resemble ai patterns, but i think that is really just modern communication

A: I wanted to basically put together my thoughts and also the thoughts of others as to what we actually go through when we process trades, since it's easy to tell someone to 'get better' but that to mean nothing if said person is unable to understand the process as to how to 'get better'

re. AI, I wrote this in the style of an actual speech, like if I were to hop into a VC and actually deliver this by me talking, so some of the patterns I used fit more with what I would say rather than what many people are used to seeing me write.

no generative AI was used in the production of this section