| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pang Grohl
Gallente
Sudo Corp
   |
Posted - 2009.04.01 21:42:00 -
[1]
There's a couple problems with forcing goods to FMV this way.
1) There is no need for it. Traders already have the ability to move price points towards FMV as they wish.
2) Start up operations will be shut out of markets once the spread is driven to your magical tick amount. Right now bid prices are what manufacturers and arbitrage traders are willing to pay to procure goods, and ask prices are what they are willing to sell for. There are already enough issues with the difference between production value and retail value being too small as it is, and the ability to choose to not take a significant market position is all that allows small time and start up operations to move into a market.
I personally would not like to see production and trade be limited to massive operations with the volume to make 1-5% returns feasible.
***
Si non adjuvas, noces
(If you're not helping, you're hurting)
|
Pang Grohl
Gallente
Sudo Corp
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 23:21:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: LarcatOfRens
Originally by: Pang Grohl
There's a couple problems with forcing goods to FMV this way.
....... There are already enough issues with the difference between production value and retail value being too small as it is, and the ability to choose to not take a significant market position is all that allows small time and start up operations to move into a market......
Can you elaborate on this point a little bit? I am not familiar with the mechanics and ISK flow of manufacturing in EVE to understand what underlies that statement.
Thanks.
The issue is that most T1 and a number of T2 items have a large enough supply in large market hubs that price competition has pushed their ask price to the level that profit margins are only viable with high turn over rates. Small change increments allow jockeying for the best price position with out shifting the profit margin.
***
Si non adjuvas, noces
(If you're not helping, you're hurting)
|
Pang Grohl
Gallente
Sudo Corp
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 21:05:00 -
[3]
Originally by: LarcatOfRens
Edited by: LarcatOfRens on 03/04/2009 04:34:49
Originally by: Pang Grohl
Small change increments allow jockeying for the best price position with out shifting the profit margin.
That is an oxymoron, and illustrative as to why I think this should be implemented in some form.
You aren't jockying for price position. You are jockeying for position in an order queue.
Two different things.
I don't see how my statement is self-contradicting.
Regardless, forcing larger tick increments will squeeze manufacturing and arbitrage profits even more than they already are, effectively locking out small capital players once your tick is larger than the profit margin. When it comes to order queuing for matching prices you can't get more fair than FIFO, which locks out newcomers in a tight market.
***
Si non adjuvas, noces
(If you're not helping, you're hurting)
|
| |
|