Bad trade, huh?

Economics forum

Posted on April 22, 2014, 9:13 p.m. by TheGamer

So a friend of mine had a Snapcaster Mage for the longest of time and I have been trying to get a hold of it. He trades it away... for this:

Friend receives: Elspeth, Sun's Champion , Brimaz, King of Oreskos

Other guys receives: Snapcaster Mage , and other cards so it is close to value.

I get mad at friend. He got standard cards for a Snapcaster Mage . I was like "WTF!!!"

We are good friends so nothing personal. Anyway, here's my question: Who was this a good trade for? Not my friend right?

thataddkid says... #2

Depends. Both elspeth and brimaz look to control standard post-rotation, but in terms of risk snappy is garunteed to continue to rise while the standard cards are a gamble.

April 22, 2014 9:19 p.m.

EmblemMan says... #3

Brimaz is fine elspeth isnt

April 22, 2014 9:19 p.m.

Rman92011 says... #4

Assuming he trades the cards away again at equal or greater value, I don't see a problem with it. Especially considering he might be calling trends. Whether he is correct or not only time can tell.

April 22, 2014 9:20 p.m.

your friend received 45 in value, while snappy is only 34. technically, he made a good deal. I would sell those standard cards soon though. for fear of them dropping

April 22, 2014 9:25 p.m.

TheGamer says... #6

Alright, it's just that it was a 45 to 45 trade since it wasn't just snapcaster for Birmaz and elspeth.

Also the fact that those cards he got are probably gonna drop while snappy is gonna rise

April 22, 2014 9:47 p.m.

EKGwins says... #7

I think Brimaz, King of Oreskos will jump up after rotation, and I don't see Elspeth going anywhere anytime soon. I am pretty sure snappy just dropped a dollar recently so I would say its a great deal for your friend.

April 22, 2014 9:48 p.m.

Schuesseled says... #8

Elspeth might dip a little after UW control dies spectacularly. (No shpinx's rev, no shocklands, no supreme verdict, UW gonna get upset) Brimaz... who knows, but it's already pretty high.

April 23, 2014 8:16 a.m.

This discussion has been closed