Re: EA COLLEGE FOOTBALL 25 AUCTION HOUSE

Hi LovelJamesIrving,

Hope you're having a great day 🙂

This response shoul dnot be taken personally, rather as a counter to what has been posted. This about EA and not any single CFB 25 user/ "Answers HQ English" participant.

I'd like to counter some of your points in your response. 

1. "The only time cards sale for max value is when someone has bought currency from a third party website and is selling a card at max value to redeem the purchased currency." 
   1. Response: This statement states that the "only time a car sells for Max value is when someone has bought currency from a third party, which assumes that one cannot sell a card within EA's own Auction house infrastructure without a third party transaction. This is a false statement of fact. While it is possible for this to occur, it can not and is not the "only" way a card can sell for max value. To apply that to every max vlaue sale would result in any user that has made a max sale being a TOS abuser... which is ridiculous on its face.
   2. Auction house cards sell based off a multitude of factors such as: timing of posting to Auction house, search filters or lack thereof, supply/demand, perceived subjective value, youtube/forum discussions regarding must have cards, and aesthetic of actionable card art that would trigger a user to desire that card regardless of its actuall abilities or in game effect, to name a few.
      1. If pricing cards within EA's own Max value limitations is against EA policy than EA should not have a Auction house for any users or lower the max value for all users to whatever they deem should be the max.
      2. To arbitrarily apply a blanket procedure that flags ALL card sellers that have made a max value card sale (and not just tos abusers like currency sellers) as a TOS sanctionable or banable offenses is bad business practice that unnecessarily punishes players who use the EA's own in-game infrastructure to advance within a game that is otherwise heavily promoting and encouraging micro transaction as the quick, easy, and rewarding method to improve ones team through RNG based gambling pack acquisition.
         1. A thorough review of both the seller of a max value card and purchaser should take place immediately subsequent to any alleged violation in order to determine if there was actually an offense or if it was just normal use of the Auction house. EA cannot label proficient Auctioneers as TOS abusers. No one wants actual TOS abusers in games as it ruins the overall product for everyone else. But again, without proof evidencing currency resale in exchange for IRL-currency EA is making baseless and fruitless sanctions and bans. Users who invest their time and energy into stocking up in game currency that i slater seized erroneously is akin to theft. 
      3. Furthermore, once honest tos abiding users are erroneously banned from use of the Auction House EA is provided with a higher likelihood that the user will fork over real life currency in order to interact with the game at or near the same level of competition. 
2. To be clear, EA should ban all third-party currency resellers. EA should NOT and cannot erroneously and without actual evidence ban players like those within tis "Answers HQ"  that have invested time and energy into understanding and selling cards within the auction house simply because their proficiency in doing so results in the user not needing to make micro transactions. Funny how after a ban users can only interact with newly added cards is through micro transactions or gambling based packs, as opposed to saving up your in game currency for that card you really want. Simply, EA appears based off of these facts to squash any user who is good at listing cards and making profits within EA's own infrastructure.