Correction — 12 September 2026: We have corrected the retained-sale count from four to three and the comparison denominator from 132 to 103. The earlier “6× lift” claim is withdrawn. These groups were neither randomised nor fully matched, so the comparison does not establish a causal effect. The original URL and publication date are retained. We repriced eight listings in our own store and wanted to know whether it had helped. ...
Correction — 12 September 2026: This article now uses the saved 11 September inventory snapshot. We have withdrawn the earlier claim that buyers pay the original asking price: the calculation used current recorded asks, which cannot establish historical negotiation discounts. The original URL and publication date are retained. The oldest listings in a store are easy to notice. They are the ones you recognise every time you scroll past them, and the ones you keep meaning to clear. ...
Correction — 12 September 2026: The original article counted a cancelled order among four sales and attributed outcomes to repricing. The corrected measure is three retained-sale listings out of eight. We have removed the unsupported revenue and causal claims, and the suggestion that traffic alone identifies a price or photography fault. The original URL and publication date are retained. As a store grows, remembering which listings need another look becomes harder. An older listing can be a useful starting point, but its age does not tell you why it has not sold or whether a discount would help. ...