EVE Search - The most detailed Dominion market analysis so far ( BIG ! )

All Channels

Market Discussions

The most detailed Dominion market analysis so far ( BIG ! )

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
TornSoul BIG Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.04.23 20:30:00 - [1351] Yeah - It's a nice little earner ain't it BIG Lottery
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Vahrokh Consulting	Posted - 2011.04.24 06:47:00 - [1352] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Herman Klaus It's clear that there isn't going to be any negative change from CCP. Not very soon, but give it half a year with tech reaching even more ludicrous prices (up to almost the old dyspro/prom levels) and they might just get their asses in gear... Plus, "The Mittani" seems somewhat interested in the issue regarding "nerfing" it (in spite of his acknowledged control over quite a few of them, 44 if memory serves right), and he did kinda' whip CSM6 into shape better than any other previous CSMs, so I wouldn't exclude the possibility of this issue being resolved with slightly less than the usual CCP "wait a few years more after it's bad" pace. Could someone explain me what's wrong with this market? It's nicely trending, it's showing a third Elliot Wave behavior like most realistic markets do. Why would you want to castrate it and make it just like thousand other flat and dead EvE markets? Items / ships prices too high you say? Though luck. Like in RL. Go war those who hold the "diamonds mines". Like EvE is meant to be. Auditing \| Research \| 3rd Party \| Collateral Holding \| EvE RL Charity
Dhaaran	Posted - 2011.04.24 12:29:00 - [1353] Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Herman Klaus It's clear that there isn't going to be any negative change from CCP. Not very soon, but give it half a year with tech reaching even more ludicrous prices (up to almost the old dyspro/prom levels) and they might just get their asses in gear... Plus, "The Mittani" seems somewhat interested in the issue regarding "nerfing" it (in spite of his acknowledged control over quite a few of them, 44 if memory serves right), and he did kinda' whip CSM6 into shape better than any other previous CSMs, so I wouldn't exclude the possibility of this issue being resolved with slightly less than the usual CCP "wait a few years more after it's bad" pace. Could someone explain me what's wrong with this market? It's nicely trending, it's showing a third Elliot Wave behavior like most realistic markets do. Why would you want to castrate it and make it just like thousand other flat and dead EvE markets? Items / ships prices too high you say? Though luck. Like in RL. Go war those who hold the "diamonds mines". Like EvE is meant to be. Something to keep in mind here - we ARE talking about a video game, so there is always a design perspective, not only a market perspective. Even though it is perfectly fine from a market perspective just like nocxium, it might demand change from a design perspective - which it does imho. Your current stance would also prohibit any and all balance changes as far as ships/weapons go, yet they have happened in the past. same goes for moon go obviously - there was a time when tech was not very desireable, yet here we are with tech being gold - due to design decisions. so it will happen again. the question is just: when?
Herman Klaus Caldari Touched By Klaus	Posted - 2011.04.24 14:40:00 - [1354] Originally by: Dhaaran stuff I read somewhere that after 120k Tech stops being profitable to use in reactions. I dunno if this is true or not. If it is then surely we'd need to see a bump in T2 prices before Tech can comfortably break 120k. Don't i just wish all the Tech i sold at 50k i'd of kept!
mental maverick Percussive Diplomacy	Posted - 2011.04.24 15:09:00 - [1355] Originally by: Herman Klaus I read somewhere that after 120k Tech stops being profitable to use in reactions. I dunno if this is true or not. If it is then surely we'd need to see a bump in T2 prices before Tech can comfortably break 120k. Don't i just wish all the Tech i sold at 50k i'd of kept! [:( You have to consider the timelag between buying the Tech, reacting it, making t2 components out of the reactions and finally building the t2 ship. Tech is what is setting the prices on all the steps up to the final product rather than the opposite since demand for Tech seems to be bigger than the supply atm. Hence a bump in Tech price will most likely be followed by a bump in reaction and product prices. I might be wrong here but thats the feeling i get from having traded Tech and Tech-related reactions for the past months.
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Vahrokh Consulting	Posted - 2011.04.25 00:08:00 - [1356] Originally by: Dhaaran Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Herman Klaus It's clear that there isn't going to be any negative change from CCP. Not very soon, but give it half a year with tech reaching even more ludicrous prices (up to almost the old dyspro/prom levels) and they might just get their asses in gear... Plus, "The Mittani" seems somewhat interested in the issue regarding "nerfing" it (in spite of his acknowledged control over quite a few of them, 44 if memory serves right), and he did kinda' whip CSM6 into shape better than any other previous CSMs, so I wouldn't exclude the possibility of this issue being resolved with slightly less than the usual CCP "wait a few years more after it's bad" pace. Could someone explain me what's wrong with this market? It's nicely trending, it's showing a third Elliot Wave behavior like most realistic markets do. Why would you want to castrate it and make it just like thousand other flat and dead EvE markets? Items / ships prices too high you say? Though luck. Like in RL. Go war those who hold the "diamonds mines". Like EvE is meant to be. Something to keep in mind here - we ARE talking about a video game, so there is always a design perspective, not only a market perspective. Even though it is perfectly fine from a market perspective just like nocxium, it might demand change from a design perspective - which it does imho. Your current stance would also prohibit any and all balance changes as far as ships/weapons go, yet they have happened in the past. same goes for moon go obviously - there was a time when tech was not very desireable, yet here we are with tech being gold - due to design decisions. so it will happen again. the question is just: when? Nope, a nano win ship was not a market thing, it was just ill conceived. The only real change that would have been needed for Technetium imho was to shuffle the moons around in a more equally distributed way. The bottleneck? Dr Eyjo rigthly said that once you remove one, you will find the next. It's the sort of typical never ending fight where you see CCP increasing maximum sustainable blob sizes and FCs bringing in more blob to crash the server. Fixed Technetium scarcity, the next scarce element will take its place. The current level is just fine, T1 ships have realistic prices, T2 ships look fine and mods don't seem to be overly expensive. Auditing \| Research \| 3rd Party \| Collateral Holding \| EvE RL Charity
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.25 01:46:00 - [1357] You may not be able to eliminate all bottlenecks, but you sure as hell can almost perfectly balance several smaller bottlenecks, OR you can make one of the more common minerals the main bottleneck instead. The main reason why Technetium is worse than Dyspro/Prom is the fact that the regional distribution is horribly unbalanced compared to the other two had, so a power bloc can easily dominate a very large number of them (see : the NC). In CCP's own words, they don't like PASSIVE revenue sources (that only need to be guarded as opposed to constantly exploited) because of the positive feedback effect on blobbing : the more valuable such a passively exploited resource is, the more incentive there is to blob heavily to defend it, and the fact you do get more revenue out of it makes that blobbing also increasingly easy to attain from an economic standpoint. If you get both ability and motivation, increased blobbing (EVEN IF defense of that resource is almost never necessary) is almost guaranteed, since you use blobbing in anything else (to "prove a point" or "show your power") as a deterrent against those that might even thing about taking it over. The longer such resources remain in the hands of a single power bloc (and the higher their individual value), the more likely that power bloc is to uberblob and basically dominate mostly unchallenged since, hey, who's crazy enough to fight the guys that have supercap replacement programs in place and even give out supercaps to loyal pilots like candy ? Not that the NC might already do that (I don't know, do they ? probably not yet), just saying, any hypothetical power bloc that remains in power for too long on a resource way too valuable they don't even need to work much to maintain a steady stream of revenue from will eventually end up similar to that. Your only hopes are for such a powerbloc to failcascade (why would it, though, since they would attract more talent, which combined with numbers makes it increasingly unlikely to fail hard enough to start the avalanche) or to have a big and nasty internal split (which is the much more likely scenario, but it could take a long while). _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts
Fiat Money The Privy Council Majesta Empire	Posted - 2011.04.25 17:02:00 - [1358] CCP doesn't like PASSIVE revenue sources, but on the other hand with the latest anomaly changes (see http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=883) they revealed there intention to shift null sec back into a space of conflicts. And conflicts are made by imbalances such as Tech distribution. Current DRF invasion is driven by both anomaly changes (less valuable space) and rising tech prices. As tech moons are changing hands constantly in Vale / Geminate within the conflict supply is kind of shrinked. So from my POV Tech / Nanos / Fullerides will keep their uptrend. As for the Supercap statements: Yes some NC alliances do Supercapital SRP to support their use for alliance combat purposes and to compensate bounces in private wallets. Tech helps a lot but isn't the main source for building supers. Private wallet plays a much more important role here. And the NC isn't a unbeatable god as you are highlighting, but just humans as you and me, driven by morale in combat. Current conflict situation is ofc challenging, but not severe.
Amarr Citizen 155 Nordar Innovations.	Posted - 2011.04.25 17:12:00 - [1359] Originally by: Fiat Money CCP doesn't like PASSIVE revenue sources, but on the other hand with the latest anomaly changes (see http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=883) they revealed there intention to shift null sec back into a space of conflicts. And conflicts are made by imbalances such as Tech distribution. Current DRF invasion is driven by both anomaly changes (less valuable space) and rising tech prices. As tech moons are changing hands constantly in Vale / Geminate within the conflict supply is kind of shrinked. So from my POV Tech / Nanos / Fullerides will keep their uptrend. As for the Supercap statements: Yes some NC alliances do Supercapital SRP to support their use for alliance combat purposes and to compensate bounces in private wallets. Tech helps a lot but isn't the main source for building supers. Private wallet plays a much more important role here. And the NC isn't a unbeatable god as you are highlighting, but just humans as you and me, driven by morale in combat. Current conflict situation is ofc challenging, but not severe. fixed link
Jack Coutu Gallente Percussive Diplomacy	Posted - 2011.04.27 19:03:00 - [1360] Originally by: Fiat Money And the NC isn't a unbeatable god as you are highlighting, but just humans as you and me, driven by a massive isk faucet that provides a nearly endless flow of supercaps, support caps and dreads in combat. Current conflict situation is ofc challenging, but not severe. Fixed that for you.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2011.04.28 00:46:00 - [1361] Originally by: Jack Coutu Originally by: Fiat Money And the NC isn't a unbeatable god as you are highlighting, but just humans as you and me, driven by a massive isk faucet that provides a nearly endless flow of supercaps, support caps and dreads in combat. Current conflict situation is ofc challenging, but not severe. Fixed that for you. Except that it's not an ISK faucet, it's a resource faucet, which can be exchanged for massive amounts of ISK. Not that it matters much, just correcting a slight error. _ Make ISK\|\|Build\|\|React\|\|1k papercuts
Marshiro	Posted - 2011.04.28 02:14:00 - [1362] Why can't we just have items that uses only one or a few types of moon materials? Then the markets would balance itself with some demand on everything. If we are talking about bottlenecks killing the value of some items, salvage and many T3 materials is the worst.
Elise DarkStar	Posted - 2011.04.28 15:11:00 - [1363] Well I was about to write about how voracious demand for t2 products (aren't we supposed to be in a seasonal lull right now??) has been eating through even the elevated supply of raw tech as well as advanced mats and plat tech, and how we were likely to see tech prices pushing through 120-125k within a week. However, I checked the charts just now and it seems large supplies of advanced mats have hit the market at current prices, so it seems all the recently bought tech is starting to come back in its advanced forms. I'm on vacation for a week, but I fully expect to come back to a 115-120k market, pretty much what we've seen the past week continuing for at least another one until advanced mats start to clear, if they do. If the 120k pu stable price persists for long enough, then we might see some impatient stockpilers start to cash in at 120k and keep us locked here for a while. TL;DR If we continue to lose this upward momentum, we will likely see a long term (>1month) stability point at 115-125k pu. I'll check on advanced mats in a week when I get back, and we may see another change in the medium term (1 week -> 1 month) recommendation from hold to sell. short: sell medium: hold long: buy
Hello Pretty	Posted - 2011.04.28 18:46:00 - [1364] What would happen if that 900k lump at 120k isk moved either up or down 10-30k or so?
Elise DarkStar	Posted - 2011.04.28 19:18:00 - [1365] Originally by: Hello Pretty What would happen if that 900k lump at 120k isk moved either up or down 10-30k or so? Pretty broad question...an answer to the question as a whole: nothing much really in the grand scheme of things. Moving it up would increase the chances of maintaining the current spike momentum, but not decidedly, while down it would depress the price maybe even as low as 110k for a short while, but in the end it would probably clear faster at a lower price and result in a faster price climb overall than if it had stayed blocking at 120k. The tech market is just that big. 120b worth of tech being pushed around won't have much of an impact beyond a few days.
Candy Oshea Amarr Techfree Investment Group	Posted - 2011.04.29 02:25:00 - [1366] I made a tidy 15% on this product which is pretty good for a latecomer to the moon markets. was very surprised to find my stock had been bought out in its entirety. Very very tentative to buy in again though i must say. Candy. ___ iCandy Bonds
Elise DarkStar	Posted - 2011.05.05 13:45:00 - [1367] I think fullerides might still have some upward momentum left, but everything else has ground to a halt. There are about 1.2m units of tech between the lowest sell and that 1m unit stack at 20k, and more keeps coming to market to replace that which is bought off, so we will continue in this lull for at least another 2 weeks. The big issue now is if stockpilers continue to cash-in at 115-120k pu and hold the price down for a knock-on effect for other stockpilers who in turn cash in because of the extended lull. The longer the price stops, the greater the chance we get stuck at a temporary peak where large piles are cashed-in. short: sell medium: hold long: buy
Nomad III	Posted - 2011.05.06 10:20:00 - [1368] Edited by: Nomad III on 06/05/2011 10:20:54 The DRF controlls Vale. Until they have full control over the north, they won't raise a cartell. I don't believe the DRF make a BFF v2.0, so long term: SELL
Elise DarkStar	Posted - 2011.05.06 12:48:00 - [1369] Originally by: Nomad III Edited by: Nomad III on 06/05/2011 10:20:54 The DRF controlls Vale. Until they have full control over the north, they won't raise a cartell. I don't believe the DRF make a BFF v2.0, so long term: SELL Good contribution, bro.
Tanaka Kharn	Posted - 2011.05.08 11:03:00 - [1370] 1mil units of tech at 120k pulled for long term collateral use. Yea laugh it up eve tax man. Just sayinà Speculators go go.
Tanaka Kharn	Posted - 2011.05.08 12:10:00 - [1371] Look at em go sell: 118k buy: 114k. ... I should try harder
Elise DarkStar	Posted - 2011.05.08 13:02:00 - [1372] Rofl, well that changes things a little. We were already eating through 115k pu at an accelerated clip, but losing 1m units sure makes things even faster. Buy across the board, up to at least 125k within the week. Then we'll see if someone else feels like dropping a huge stack. There's nothing stopping the price now but people cashing in as we hit each psychological barrier. While you made the right decision, as a holder I'm disappointed that we're going to see that stack again at a higher sell price.
Tanaka Kharn	Posted - 2011.05.08 14:05:00 - [1373] Stack wont hit the mkt again anytime soon (6 months min)... man ccp better not mess with tech in that time
Fiat Money The Privy Council Majesta Empire	Posted - 2011.05.08 18:55:00 - [1374] Originally by: Nomad III Edited by: Nomad III on 06/05/2011 10:20:54 The DRF controlls Vale. Until they have full control over the north, they won't raise a cartell. I don't believe the DRF make a BFF v2.0, so long term: SELL NC didn't establish a cartell either.
Kesper North Caldari Gentlemen of Means Gentlemen's Agreement	Posted - 2011.05.09 08:34:00 - [1375] Haha! How little you know. We tried, during my administration of Majesta. And you know what happened? Prices went above our target price, and we stopped bothering. -- Killed me? Read about it in my blog! Northern Lights: Solo PVP in EVE Online
Tanaka Kharn	Posted - 2011.05.09 14:37:00 - [1376] We're gona need more tinfoil now.
Fiat Money The Privy Council Majesta Empire	Posted - 2011.05.09 15:09:00 - [1377] Originally by: Kesper North Haha! How little you know. We tried, during my administration of Majesta. And you know what happened? Prices went above our target price, and we stopped bothering. Yeah, I know ... I would emphasize the word "tried". For how long was it ... 2 - 3 month? I'm becoming old...
Herman Klaus Caldari Touched By Klaus	Posted - 2011.05.10 17:02:00 - [1378] Edited by: Herman Klaus on 10/05/2011 17:02:49 Just dropped in to check how things are since i released the last of my stock. This is insane. S: 129k B: 121k. The owners of the Tech moons must be making so much ISK it's insane. WTB time machine to go back to Sept 2010 please
Elise DarkStar	Posted - 2011.05.10 18:25:00 - [1379] http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=908 Might be some action on the moon mineral rebalnce/fix front this winter. "Long term: WeÆre currently looking into a long term plan for 0.0. I say long term, not because itÆs planned for 2014, but because the work will begin this winter and hopefully go on for a while." "WeÆll have several sessions with them and hopefully they will be able to contribute to our goal. To give you a quick peek at the type of topics weÆre looking at when doing this evaluation (in no particular order): Are there enough incentives for conflict/pvp outside sov?"
Ludacrys	Posted - 2011.05.10 19:01:00 - [1380] 2014? jesus christ

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 56 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.