Mr._Spike 4 years{"ops":[{"insert":"It appears a a 450 usd card in Archidekt but in CK it's 10 bucks\n"}]}
0
Jeremy(Archidekt Moderator)
4 years{"ops":[{"insert":"So I'm seeing the MagicFest promo Lightning Bolt as having the correct pricing. What I'm assuming you're referring to is "},{"attributes":{"link":"https://www.cardkingdom.com/mtg/promotional/lightning-bolt-textless-foil"},"insert":"this one"},{"insert":" on CardKingdom, which is appearing for $450 on here? If so, the issue appears to be that CK doesn't have a specific set classification for it besides \"Promotional\" (which they have for multiple printings, actually) while for us, its edition is is the more accurate \"Magic Player Rewards 2010\" (which is information we get via Scryfall). Its this discrepancy that's causing the mispricing-- essentially, we're asking CK for the price on Lightning Bolt: Magic Player Rewards 2010 which they don't have a record of in their system, so we're getting the price for a different bolt (presumably "},{"attributes":{"link":"https://www.cardkingdom.com/mtg/beta/lightning-bolt"},"insert":"the Beta one"},{"insert":" for whatever reason). \n\nThis is all a very longwinded way of saying that unlessScryfall and the various retailers we partner with start using an identical naming schema for their editions, mispricing like this is going to happen. We're exploring other workarounds, but there's not a great solution on our end besides manually updating the links for individual cards which is quite the undertaking but something we may ultimately need to do. Regardless, I appreciate you reaching out with the heads up! \n"}]}
1
Mr._Spike 4 years{"ops":[{"insert":"Thanks for your answer, and yeah that's an understandable hassle.\nA workaround would be to allow users to set a custom price or ignore the price of certain cards to avoid the bloating of the cost of the deck.\n"}]}
0