| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kharamete
   |
Posted - 2010.03.31 15:54:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: Linas IV
For all those who are interested in this, here is a comparison of
current TQ and Sisi refining-values for the Different Drone-alloys
Tri | Pyr | Mex | Iso | Nox | Zyd | Meg | Morph
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Condensed 88 | 44 | 11 | (TQ Values)
160 | 40 | 9 | (Sisi Values)
Crystal | 39 | 2 |
| 24 | 6 |
Precious | 7 | | 18 |
| 128 | 24 | 14 |
Gleaming 299 | | 5 |
638 | | 2 |
Sheen 124 | 44 | | 23 | 1 |
512 | 106 | | 8 | 2 |
Lucent | 174 | 2 | 11 | 5 |
| 192 | 48 | 13 | 2 |
Dark | 23 | 10 |
| 32 | 8 |
Motley | 28 | 13 |
| 40 | 9 |
Lustering | 88 | 32 | 35 | 2 |
| 192 | 48 | 13 | 2 |
Plush | 120 | | 20 | | 18 |
~4200 |~1000| | 64 | | 4 |
Glossy | 4 | | 6 |
| 194 | | 24 | | 1 |
Opulent | 2 |
| 2 |
Excuse if there are any minor Typos, but most of the above values should be correct.
From the GD thread. Let's bring out the tea leaves and the crystal balls...
---
|
Grozen
Caldari
Titan Core
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 16:01:00 -
[62]
I do not believe that minerals will skyrocket.Any kind of price raise will be killed swiftly by big mineral holders and we will return to where we are atm.
knowledge is power |
Capt Fossil
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 16:02:00 -
[63]
Personally, I think the speculators are in for a rude awakening, and the Mineral traders who were dumb enough to keep up.
Just the the ONE guy who WAS self-destructing 250 BS's per day. Do you realize how much Megacyte, Nocxium, Isogen and Zydrine per day that is??? Nevermind the Freighters full of Trit and Pyerite. How many haulers aren't gonna be getting courier contracts? BPC sales??? Again, that's just one guy......
I am small time, 2 man op compared to him. Do all our own hauling, avg 30 BS per day,. I WAS making over 7M per BS for the last few months...now like 4M :(
But, I am still also prolly 25% of the currrent mineral demand in my region. Worst thing that's gonna happen to me is I am stuck with a bunch of high quality BS BPC's. Now getting stuck with 100's of millions of units of high end minerals......Suicide gankers are tiny compared to the amount of minerals that were being consumed by insurance fraud.
Too bad we don't have a commodities futures market....I would be shorting the heck out of high end minerals today.
|
cosmoray
Bella Vista Holdings Corp
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 17:02:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Kharamete
Originally by: Linas IV
For all those who are interested in this, here is a comparison of
current TQ and Sisi refining-values for the Different Drone-alloys
Tri | Pyr | Mex | Iso | Nox | Zyd | Meg | Morph
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Condensed 88 | 44 | 11 | (TQ Values)
160 | 40 | 9 | (Sisi Values)
Crystal | 39 | 2 |
| 24 | 6 |
Precious | 7 | | 18 |
| 128 | 24 | 14 |
Gleaming 299 | | 5 |
638 | | 2 |
Sheen 124 | 44 | | 23 | 1 |
512 | 106 | | 8 | 2 |
Lucent | 174 | 2 | 11 | 5 |
| 192 | 48 | 13 | 2 |
Dark | 23 | 10 |
| 32 | 8 |
Motley | 28 | 13 |
| 40 | 9 |
Lustering | 88 | 32 | 35 | 2 |
| 192 | 48 | 13 | 2 |
Plush | 120 | | 20 | | 18 |
~4200 |~1000| | 64 | | 4 |
Glossy | 4 | | 6 |
| 194 | | 24 | | 1 |
Opulent | 2 |
| 2 |
Excuse if there are any minor Typos, but most of the above values should be correct.
From the GD thread. Let's bring out the tea leaves and the crystal balls...
That chart is so spectacularly wrong its not even funny.
For a start some of the TQ numbers are wrong.
|
Capt Fossil
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 17:09:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Capt Fossil on 31/03/2010 17:09:26
When I went to bed last night, Zydrine was over 1500 on buy orders in Jita. Just checked, 1132 isk.
Somebody is holding ALOT of overpriced Zydrine.
|
Chssmius
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 17:10:00 -
[66]
I think speculators are under estimating by just how much demand is currently inflated because of the IER. A demand reduction of a mere 10%* and the supply increase at the bottleneck low-end minerals (as suggested in the blog) could very well put the price of all minerals in free fall until the basket quasi-stabilizes around the new insurance values. At least, until the next insurance re-evaluation or the next major mineral change.
*I think this may be conservative as approximately 350 tier 3 battleships a day being self-destructed is equal to ~10% of the Jita Trit volume per day.
We are almost certain to experience a situation not entirely unlike that of farmers and corn in the 1930s leading to the passing of the AAA in the U.S.A. as a part of the New Deal in 1936 and again in 1938. That is, falling demand for minerals is met by rising supply from mineral producers, meaning deflation and surplus. A trend that will continue with every insurance adjustment until enough producers leave the market and pickup other professions that flood the market with isk, raising demand and inflating prices until the next time the equation changes.
Take The EvE Personality Test today! |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 17:11:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 31/03/2010 17:14:09
Quote:
Just the the ONE guy who WAS self-destructing 250 BS's per day. Do you realize how much Megacyte, Nocxium, Isogen and Zydrine per day that is??? Nevermind the Freighters full of Trit and Pyerite. How many haulers aren't gonna be getting courier contracts? BPC sales??? Again, that's just one guy......
Cosmoray just got promoted to Urban Legend status.
Quote:
Too bad we don't have a commodities futures market....I would be shorting the heck out of high end minerals today
There are cases where you are forbidden short selling (or increase short selling positions) in case of declining markets. I guess CCP would just impose such restriction exactly now, in order to prevent leveraged crashing.
This is expecially true for financial stocks.
Quote:
When I went to bed last night, Zydrine was over 1500 on buy orders in Jita. Just checked, 1132 isk.
Somebody is holding ALOT of overpriced Zydrine
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Because they are idiots and don't learn off what happens when you speculate and it goes bad.
It's a bad trader, the one who blindly goes after rumors. News trading is one of the though branches of marketing as is
Just quoting myself for the 100th time...
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
cosmoray
Bella Vista Holdings Corp
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 17:19:00 -
[68]
I don't know why people are wildly speculating, the swings yesterday were knee-jerk silly.
According to some rough calculations I made from the drone regions (could change and be +/-).
Changes to mineral supply from drone region:
Trit = +18%
Pyerite = +54%
Mexallon = +32%
Isogen = +70%
Noxcium = - 22%
Zydrine = - 40%
Megacyte = - 66%
Although drone regions will reduce the high ends, the sov bonus to mining may counteract that, along with reduced demand for insurance fraud.
Theoretically mega/zyd should go up, but have to see whole package changes.
|
Capt Fossil
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 17:33:00 -
[69]
Well not only are speculators (and CCP) underestimating the impact of Insurance fraud, but CCP is ignoring the impact of macro-miners. Out of the billions of units of low end minerals I have bought in the past few months, at least 50% of them come from the same few 23/7 folks. Fact.
We will never have any sort of real market for miners until they are gone.
|
Chssmius
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 17:42:00 -
[70]
Originally by: cosmoray
I don't know why people are wildly speculating, the swings yesterday were knee-jerk silly.
According to some rough calculations I made from the drone regions (could change and be +/-).
Changes to mineral supply from drone region:
Trit = +18%
Pyerite = +54%
Mexallon = +32%
Isogen = +70%
Noxcium = - 22%
Zydrine = - 40%
Megacyte = - 66%
Although drone regions will reduce the high ends, the sov bonus to mining may counteract that, along with reduced demand for insurance fraud.
Theoretically mega/zyd should go up, but have to see whole package changes.
What we really need to do is adjust the percentage of each mineral coming from the looting reduction. The assumption is that the "large" meta 0 modules will virtually disappear and be supplanted(mostly) with scrap metal. I feel the loot data + the drone compounds would be most telling for nox and everything below(based on historic data) and zyd, mega, and morph continue to be the primary exports from 0.0. I don't anticipate significant transformation of 0.0 mining to occur from whatever is being done to null-sec ores and belts. And whatever change there is I only see as serving to further depress the low-end minerals.
Take The EvE Personality Test today! |
Gabriel Rosencrantz
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 18:06:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Cosmoray just got promoted to Urban Legend status.
I believe Fossil is referring to Fluoro, not Cosmo.
Originally by: FluorosulfonicAcid
yesterday I made 3-4 M isk per ship on over 250 Rokhs each day...
To address Fossil's specific comment: Red Frog Freight deals with many producers engaged in IER activities. They make up a much smaller percentage of the total number of courier contracts than you might imagine. There may be some short-term change to the number of courier contracts issued, but those sorts of runs will be replaced by others. Minerals form the basis of all production; there will still be plenty of mins/ore flowing around the universe. My hope is that with the focus slowly shifting back to miners, we'll see more Miner/Traders looking to move their own mins to market by way of courier contracts.
Personally, I think there will be an uptick in the number of T2 and T3 production lines and there will be a commensurate rise in the number of courier contracts (mass produced T3 items are just too valuable to move in anything but a freighter). I think that planetary resource harvest will also increase the need for courier contracts and dedicated logistics networks. If, as has been rumored, there is a shift to player production of NPC POS fuel items, I predict a Golden Age for haulers (or at least those are the visions that dance in my head when I fall asleep each night).
Finally, they've told us what they'll be pulling out of the mineral stream, but we haven't yet heard about new sinks. So it still seems premature to speculate on the exact outcomes for the market. It seems clear they aren't looking to kill the mining profession, so I doubt they will do anything that will absolutely kill the price of minerals. Then again, who knows? |
Jason Rebourne
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 18:47:00 -
[72]
Its still all about buying low and selling high.
The only question is who will now be the alpha buyer? For the past little while it has been the IER builders. So who is going to replace them going forward?
They had a NPC supported flow of ISK that was not only steady but predetermined, that makes for a strong ability to know how to buy and at what margins. Without that the market is goign to be much less stable, the only thing effecting prices was their profit margin, and since enough of the builders were doing it they had a healthy competition for minerals. Now that is all gone.
Not saying it is good or bad, just that there will have to be a new group to replace them. And if macro miners arent squelched then this new change isnt going to work. Speculators can make up a small portion of the buying force, but even they know their limitations, what good is it to speculate perpetually and never reap the benefits (if they happen at all). So greed is a major deciding factor in an unstable market. it even outwieghs fear. because if a guy has massive holdings he will become definat if he cant make a profit and will have the attitude of "they'll fix it eventually". That is why a virtual economy can never mimic a real one. But that being said those guys who do that help in their own way, because if the markets crash and they freak out and dump everything it just makes it that much worse.
So while greed is a major factor demand is the biggest. because if a guy has a concrete profit outlet he wants to be able to take advantage of it. if he loses alittle here and there in profits he can live with it. So while he is gredy a known price point can curb that greed a little. but now there is no concrete area. Again might be good or bad dont know yet.
But I do know that somewhere some group will have to step up and be the guys that buy stuff and spend ISK to support the economy. Which might take awhile to find a steady reliable income for them.
Then you have to keep taking into account the macrominers. they dont care about competiton. To them all their ore and minerals are free. They sell for the highest price where they are regardless of how high or low it is. Something human players wont do. Not that macro miners arent human, they just dont think human. So these unthinking unsleeping entities continue to sell for or maybe post sell orders onto a market that may or may not be able to keep up with them. Therein lies the problem. Prices can drop to nothing but an unstable market makes it difficult for alpha manufactorers to set aprice for their good. Why buy minerals to support the economy when by the time you makes something it is worth less than the minerals it cost to make it, and you still cant sell it, even at a loss.
Again, that is why the IER thing worked, because it was NPC supported. I know no one wants and NPC based system, but a little support doesnt kill it.
We saw that yesterday. No real changes were made, but prices on minerals went up enough to make IER non proftable for a short time.
So ultimately it comes down to this. Who will the next alpha buyer group be? If no one steps up and real players leave and macroplayers stay how much more will that hurt the stability? If it is obvious it isnt working how long before it gets "fixed" again? And how will that effect future values of things going forward and stuff already in the game?
|
Dariah Stardweller
Gallente
Gung-Ho
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 19:55:00 -
[73]
Originally by: FunzzeR
Solo mining would never payoff given the current payoff/risk ratio.
No mate, you don't get it, with the current payoff/risk ratio no low sec mining operation would pay off really, since the hi sec ores are worth more than the low sec ores. 
|
nether void
Caldari
Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests
R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 20:24:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Capt Fossil
Edited by: Capt Fossil on 31/03/2010 17:09:26
When I went to bed last night, Zydrine was over 1500 on buy orders in Jita. Just checked, 1132 isk.
Somebody is holding ALOT of overpriced Zydrine.
Thank GOD! Zyd prices yesterday were really screwing up my 'for sales' production. Good to know for now it's back to pretty much norm.
Not saying it won't drop through the floor when the ins changes hit, which it will, but would like to get another month or two of production in before closing shop while the market goes ****ing crazy.
|
clixoras
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 22:25:00 -
[75]
Edited by: clixoras on 31/03/2010 22:25:38
Originally by: Capt Fossil
Well not only are speculators (and CCP) underestimating the impact of Insurance fraud, but CCP is ignoring the impact of macro-miners. Out of the billions of units of low end minerals I have bought in the past few months, at least 50% of them come from the same few 23/7 folks. Fact.
We will never have any sort of real market for miners until they are gone.
Finally, someone who understands. If i recall correctly, CCP didnt even MENTION macro-miners in the blog. This balancing mechanism won't work if they also don't take Macro-miners out of the equation.
|
Mahke
Aeon Of Strife
Discord.
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 22:34:00 -
[76]
Bah, I have a couple billion to unload in my smaller buys assuming those drone values are correct and will hold.
turns out nocx and mega were the right choices, oh well.
|
Mahke
Aeon Of Strife
Discord.
|
Posted - 2010.03.31 23:41:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Mahke on 31/03/2010 23:45:53
Originally by: cosmoray
I don't know why people are wildly speculating, the swings yesterday were knee-jerk silly.
According to some rough calculations I made from the drone regions (could change and be +/-).
Changes to mineral supply from drone region:
Trit = +18%
Pyerite = +54%
Mexallon = +32%
Isogen = +70%
Noxcium = - 22%
Zydrine = - 40%
Megacyte = - 66%
Although drone regions will reduce the high ends, the sov bonus to mining may counteract that, along with reduced demand for insurance fraud.
Theoretically mega/zyd should go up, but have to see whole package changes.
Assuming Cosmo's numbers are correct, that all minerals from reprocessing come from loot (which is obviously false because people use compression to move them around, especially for trit/pye/mex, but, whatever, lets run with it for now), and that the 2008 table for mineral source still holds true (see last caveat about this being clearly false but better than nothing):
total supply change, roughly:
[almost certainly overstated using this method]
trit: -41%
pyrite: -54.6%
mex: -55.5%
[/almost certainly overstated using this method]
iso: -40%
nocx: -43.2%
zyd: -34%
mega: -49%
morphite: lol
what is most noticeable in this data is the mega change (which,as its less likely to be skewed by compression than mex/trit which capital builders need moved in massive quatities, and pyrite which is the current soft bottleneck for battleship insurance fraud, puts it definitively at the top of the pack). Please note that I am not endorsing or suggesting against mega at current, post-increase prices here.
the other thing that is noticeable is that assuming these results are at all accurate, zydrine supply is going to drop significantly less than everything else (also its a relatively major component of rokhs).
edit: this suggests mega up sharply, mex possibly up due to high % and trit clearing heading for a heavy fall (mex and trit seesaw thanks to capital production, large trit drop could support mex prices), nocx probably up as the second best after mega, and everything else falling ( I know, I know, pyrite has good numbers but insurance fraud consumption is just so critical to its demand). Of course, considering the three shaky assumptions the numbers are built on I'd say the chance that these numbers are accurate is significantly less than half.
|
Taerna Kallintte
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 01:19:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Mahke
Edited by: Mahke on 31/03/2010 23:57:23
total supply change, roughly:
[almost certainly overstated using this method]
trit: -41%
pyrite: -54.6%
mex: -55.5%
[/almost certainly overstated using this method]
iso: -40%
nocx: -43.2%
zyd: -34%
mega: -49%
morphite: lol
This is fairly close to my rough estimations (I didn't assume ALL Loot would disappear.)
So, if the IED currently takes 40% of the current minerals, then prices would remain fairly stable, and miners would have a larger control of the market.
A lot of IF's in that statement.
|
Celia Therone
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 01:49:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Taerna Kallintte
This is fairly close to my rough estimations (I didn't assume ALL Loot would disappear.)
So, if the IED currently takes 40% of the current minerals, then prices would remain fairly stable, and miners would have a larger control of the market.
A lot of IF's in that statement.
Looking at this another way, wouldn't one expect that high sec mining income without insurance floor subsidy would fall to approximately that of high sec ice mining (with a small premium as mining isn't quite so afk as ice harvesting)? Which could imply a drop of 30-45% for high sec mining? Caveat, guestimating numbers.
|
Chssmius
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 03:53:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Chssmius on 01/04/2010 03:54:05
Originally by: Celia Therone
Originally by: Taerna Kallintte
This is fairly close to my rough estimations (I didn't assume ALL Loot would disappear.)
So, if the IED currently takes 40% of the current minerals, then prices would remain fairly stable, and miners would have a larger control of the market.
A lot of IF's in that statement.
Looking at this another way, wouldn't one expect that high sec mining income without insurance floor subsidy would fall to approximately that of high sec ice mining (with a small premium as mining isn't quite so afk as ice harvesting)? Which could imply a drop of 30-45% for high sec mining? Caveat, guestimating numbers.
That is in the neighborhood of what I am guessing the low-ends will drop by, but what do I know.
All of this is very speculative.
Take The EvE Personality Test today! |
Hrodgar Ortal
Minmatar
Ma'adim Logistics
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 05:04:00 -
[81]
Lots of speculation.
It all boils down to:
1. How much minerals are used in IER
2. How much minerals are produced by the loot CCP is reducing/removing.
If 1>2 => prices fall
If 2<1 => prices rise
If 1=2 => prices are stable
(the basket price that is)
I doubt the changes are anywhere near what has been posted here. Everything is just guesstimation at this point really.
|
Sturmwolke
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 05:22:00 -
[82]
One thing that bothers me is why Chronotis's blog seems to indicate or imply a mineral shortage that would drive up the price - which could either across the board or towards the high-end .... and players are talking about massive oversupply.
Think about it, for you'll need data on :
a) Total consumed in ships/modules built.
b) Total destroyed in ships/modules.
b) Refined total put into the system from NPC loot.
c) Refined total put into the system from drone loot.
d) Refined total put into the system from ores.
Yes, barring hoarding of mineral stockpile, asset stockpile, manufacturing stock, logistical delays and those destroyed in transit, the above should tell you (more or less) about the moving volume in consumption/supply situation per mineral in a particular timeframe.
Drone loot - the SISI composition changes is meaningless without volume data. You could use the Jita volume to get some figures, but the global ultimate will only come from the refinery records.
NPC loot - blog did not mention any composition changes, so quantifying the reduced frequency in which it drops is almost next to impossible. Nevertheless, you can still get Jita volume data for the top 10 or so T1 M0 favourites for melting.
So back to the topic of mineral oversupply, the final missing piece is the ore refining. Unless the fellows at CCP are total incompetent, I'd at least expect to see a global breakdown total for each ore refined and which region. That'll tell me a few things :
- which ores are being overmined
- its distribution by place and sec status
- which mineral is being oversupplied
Assuming he has all these data at his fingertips, and then some more to account for other misc factors not mentioned above ... WHY is this guy optimistic about not crippling the miner as a profession, especially in view of the insurance changes?
Conclude away! 
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 06:13:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Letrange
Originally by: Bad Bobby
Low-sec gets some love. Will it be enough to significantly encourage low-sec mining as opposed to 0.0/WH mining? Will it be a boost to piracy?
no
As usual, players will go directly to 0.0 to mine after leaving high sec (if will get any profit after the change).
With the nice industrial upgrades they will have plenty of the boosted low sec minerals to mine and less risk.
I don't see why someone would chose the "play stupid" option where you get less isk and you have more risk.
|
Umega
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 06:17:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Sturmwolke
One thing that bothers me is why Chronotis's blog seems to indicate or imply a mineral shortage that would drive up the price - which could either across the board or towards the high-end .... and players are talking about massive oversupply.
Think about it, for you'll need data on :
a) Total consumed in ships/modules built.
b) Total destroyed in ships/modules.
b) Refined total put into the system from NPC loot.
c) Refined total put into the system from drone loot.
d) Refined total put into the system from ores.
Yes, barring hoarding of mineral stockpile, asset stockpile, manufacturing stock, logistical delays and those destroyed in transit, the above should tell you (more or less) about the moving volume in consumption/supply situation per mineral in a particular timeframe.
Drone loot - the SISI composition changes is meaningless without volume data. You could use the Jita volume to get some figures, but the global ultimate will only come from the refinery records.
NPC loot - blog did not mention any composition changes, so quantifying the reduced frequency in which it drops is almost next to impossible. Nevertheless, you can still get Jita volume data for the top 10 or so T1 M0 favourites for melting.
So back to the topic of mineral oversupply, the final missing piece is the ore refining. Unless the fellows at CCP are total incompetent, I'd at least expect to see a global breakdown total for each ore refined and which region. That'll tell me a few things :
- which ores are being overmined
- its distribution by place and sec status
- which mineral is being oversupplied
Assuming he has all these data at his fingertips, and then some more to account for other misc factors not mentioned above ... WHY is this guy optimistic about not crippling the miner as a profession, especially in view of the insurance changes?
Conclude away!
Holy purple triangles fling from monkies.. it is about time someone grew up in reality and realized that CCP is the ONE with all the numbers and information, and not some ego hungry 'genius' EVE player that believes they have more knowledge and information than the EVE devs.
I too took that as the biggest thing said in the blog, how he implyed of a mineral shortage after a period of time that would cause a mineral value increase.
It'll be funny when so many T1 mods are melted and destroyed, then when loot tables drop.. the supply won't meet the demand of the T2 mod recipes for T1 modules. Both T2 and T1 mods jump in value.. minerals are then needed to supplement this 'new' increased production market for T1 modules, but where do the minerals come from if not the T1 mods anymore.. ore, miners.
Pyroxeres.. might be good to grab while dirt cheap and low man on totem pole.
----------------------------------------
-Treat the EVE Market like you're a pimp and it is your 'employee'.. freely fondle it as you wish and make it pay you for it- |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 07:46:00 -
[85]
Quote:
how he implyed of a mineral shortage after a period of time that would cause a mineral value increase
Self delusional statements...
ATM the "miners" are already working at low capacity and reduced crew. My hulks are parked since months (I mine much better in missions).
The day a vague smell of shortage comes up, the big mining ops of the past resume and then minerals will come 5 times as much till prices crash again.
It's why I suggested a nerf in mining ships yield, the potential to drive minerals in game is massively insane.
The number of minerals consumers is just too small compared to the gargantuan global mining capability.
Plus it scales like production, in case of need you can just slam more alts in the task till you fulfill ANY amount of request.
Quote:
Pyroxeres.. might be good to grab while dirt cheap and low man on totem pole
Pyroxeres yields 844 units of bad priced (and bound to fare bad) tritanium vs 11 units of Nocxium.
It'll take some very heavy overpricing of Nocx before it outweighs the "cabbage" factor.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Hrodgar Ortal
Minmatar
Ma'adim Logistics
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 08:31:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Umega
Holy purple triangles fling from monkies.. it is about time someone grew up in reality and realized that CCP is the ONE with all the numbers and information, and not some ego hungry 'genius' EVE player that believes they have more knowledge and information than the EVE devs.
I too took that as the biggest thing said in the blog, how he implyed of a mineral shortage after a period of time that would cause a mineral value increase.
It'll be funny when so many T1 mods are melted and destroyed, then when loot tables drop.. the supply won't meet the demand of the T2 mod recipes for T1 modules. Both T2 and T1 mods jump in value.. minerals are then needed to supplement this 'new' increased production market for T1 modules, but where do the minerals come from if not the T1 mods anymore.. ore, miners.
Pyroxeres.. might be good to grab while dirt cheap and low man on totem pole.
Lots of people have said that it is only CCP that actually have the numbers.
What the main difference in opinion is about if he states anything in the blog about any kind shortage or surplus.
I haven't been able to see any implications in his blog about this.
Basically people are reading way to much into his blog compared to what he has stated.
1. T1m0 loot reduction => less minerals => upwards price pressure
2. Mineral distribution changes => downwards pressure in general on the minerals they are boosting in 0.0 (mostly trit and pye I expect)
3. Insurance made dynamic => downward spiral on minerals (this effect is uncertain, it depends on IF the m0 loot reduction are larger than the usage of minerals by "insurance fraud")
4. Supercap insurance changes => supercaps being used less => reduction in supercap losses => reduction in demand for minerals => downwards pressure
Those are the effects (disregarding t2 as it really doesn't effect the mineral market that much) I've been able to identify.
Basically three downwards pressures on the market and one upwards.
The by far biggest and hardest to know anything about is 3.
It can go either way. My personal bet is that it will go down. So I would try to go "short" on minerals positions, or basically use IER to liquidate mineral assets before the change hits.
|
Xanthar Rex
Noir.
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 10:36:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal
If 1>2 => prices fall
If 2<1 => prices rise
 
|
Jagga Spikes
Minmatar
Spikes Chop Shop
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 10:58:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Xanthar Rex
Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal
...
It all boils down to:
1. How much minerals are used in IER
2. How much minerals are produced by the loot CCP is reducing/removing.
If 1>2 => prices fall
If 2<1 => prices rise
tho, tbh, it got me at first, as well.
________________________________
: Forum Bore 'Em : Foamy The Squirrel |
Hrodgar Ortal
Minmatar
Ma'adim Logistics
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 11:18:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Xanthar Rex
Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal
If 1>2 => prices fall
If 2<1 => prices rise
Yes. Point 1 and point 2 not the numbers themselves. Changed it to be more clear.
|
Xanthar Rex
Noir.
|
Posted - 2010.04.01 11:37:00 -
[90]
Edited by: Xanthar Rex on 01/04/2010 11:38:13
Edited by: Xanthar Rex on 01/04/2010 11:37:34
Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal
Edited by: Hrodgar Ortal on 01/04/2010 11:17:24
If a>b => prices fall
If b<a => prices rise
edit: changed numbers to letters since it seems it was unclear.
(a>b) = (b<a)
In words, both criteria stated are the same, yet has a different outcome?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |