| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Icanti
   |
Posted - 2011.06.11 18:36:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Icanti on 11/06/2011 18:38:34
Edited by: Icanti on 11/06/2011 18:35:57
Hello....
Just logged in then, and was greeted with a new advert, which said something along the lines of "plexes are rising, is this a boom for traders or a bubble waiting to burst?"
Sorry as it only displays once I didn't catch the exact wording.
Clicking on the ad goes to.... http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/30_days_Concord_Pilot_License_Extension
Whats the deal with this add? Are CCP trying to scare people into buying more plex? 
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 18:47:00 -
[2]
Theyre trying to scare people into SELLING their Plex.
They did the same last week when the price was around 410.
It doesn't only display once :)
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147mcvs
Azthais
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 18:59:00 -
[3]
Everyone sells their PLEX -> PLEX lowers -> Incarnia comes out and PLEX rises back to normal.
Smart traders hoard their PLEX's until Incarnia, when PLEX rises due to AUR being implemented.
And don't bother yelling at me for "ruining" trading stuff, any and all traders, smart or stupid, will know this already. CCP can try all they like to drop the prices, but it's not going to help much.
|
Rhivre
Caldari
TarNec
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 19:25:00 -
[4]
Unless all the people who panic bought stacks of plex the other week are also thinking "Yay! plex for aurum, we can cash in!"
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 19:34:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Tutskii
Theyre trying to scare people into SELLING their Plex.
Well, actually scare people into buying GTCs and selling PLEX. Pretty good plan too, because PLEX are probably about to take a dip so now is a good time to buy GTCs before the Incarna rush. I assure you though, CCP is not trying to scare any of us MD types into selling our PLEX.
|
Grossly Inferior Jeans
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 21:07:00 -
[6]
Though it is always fun to see weak willed weekend traders 100,000 isking eachother in stacks of 20+ in a rush to unload.
|
Brock Nelson
Caldari
T2 Technologies Unlimited
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 22:05:00 -
[7]
Plex dropped to a cool 365 in Jita 4-4
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 22:09:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Tutskii
Theyre trying to scare people into SELLING their Plex.
Well, actually scare people into buying GTCs and selling PLEX. Pretty good plan too, because PLEX are probably about to take a dip so now is a good time to buy GTCs before the Incarna rush. I assure you though, CCP is not trying to scare any of us MD types into selling our PLEX.
I assure you that more than a few MD types sold their PLEX.
Some of them, before the price dropped too much.
I think its safe to assume that they are very happy they did, what with the massive price drop and all.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147mcvs![/u |
Grossly Inferior Jeans
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 22:37:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Grossly Inferior Jeans on 11/06/2011 22:37:07
 We just saw a huge PLEX fluctuation a week or two ago. Did the prices stay at 445? Prices are only going down from today right? (sigh) I guess some people just aren't. that. smart.
|
Judicator Saturnius
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 22:52:00 -
[10]
CCP: "Problem?"
|
|
|
Tanaka Kharn
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 23:32:00 -
[11]
OK im sorry i just dont get what just happened. Did CCP just step in and mess with the mkt directly or is this really just the result of the Ad and everyone panic dumped ?
|
The Illustrious Juden
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 23:45:00 -
[12]
Maybe they are just confident that Incarna will lower PLEX prices and made a coincidental decision to sell, which happened to coincide with the measured decision of others vOv
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 23:46:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Grossly Inferior Jeans
Edited by: Grossly Inferior Jeans on 11/06/2011 22:37:07
We just saw a huge PLEX fluctuation a week or two ago. Did the prices stay at 445? Prices are only going down from today right? (sigh) I guess some people just aren't. that. smart.
Its a market cycle. You sell when it's up, you buy when its down.
At this time, its probably as low as its going to get, for instance, so you might safely buy for the next time when it is at 390+
With Incarna around the corner and Aurum, its a sure bet that itll increase again.
When it gets too high, CCP make another terrorist banner, and the cycle repeats.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147mcvs![/u |
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 23:49:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Tutskii
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Tutskii
Theyre trying to scare people into SELLING their Plex.
Well, actually scare people into buying GTCs and selling PLEX. Pretty good plan too, because PLEX are probably about to take a dip so now is a good time to buy GTCs before the Incarna rush. I assure you though, CCP is not trying to scare any of us MD types into selling our PLEX.
I assure you that more than a few MD types sold their PLEX.
Some of them, before the price dropped too much.
I think its safe to assume that they are very happy they did, what with the massive price drop and all.
Wasn't the question what was CCP's intent in running the ad?
Isn't it clear that their motive was to sell more GTC's while their isk value was still high?
Causing players to dump existing stocks of PLEX and crash the price would seem to defeat the purpose. Anyway, players dumping PLEX were probably acting on their own initiative and didn't need any prompting from CCP.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 23:52:00 -
[15]
I disagree Claire, I believe the intent was to get players to lower the price of Plex before Incarna.
Why?
Because Aurum is likely to make Plex shoot up, by building volatility into it, they make it less desirable to hoard it and may set up a price wall through entirely psychological means.
They did the same when it was at 410.
I don't think it has anything to do with GTC's.
But, if you have information that supports that, do post it. I comment solely on what I can see, which is a massive drop in price immediately following the CCP statement.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147mcvs![/u |
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 23:54:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Tutskii
At this time, its probably as low as its going to get, for instance, so you might safely buy for the next time when it is at 390+
You are entitled to your opinion, but look at the timing of previous lows relative to expansions.
|
The Illustrious Juden
|
Posted - 2011.06.11 23:59:00 -
[17]
There was also some commentary during the AT broadcast which I think contributed to it. I would say some of the people holding PLEX are/were a bit jumpy. The end result as it stands now is a price swing of just 10m for today in Jita.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 00:00:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Tutskii
At this time, its probably as low as its going to get, for instance, so you might safely buy for the next time when it is at 390+
You are entitled to your opinion, but look at the timing of previous lows relative to expansions.
I'm sorry, I haven't been playing that long, I forgot the name of that expansion where they introduced more mainstream uses for Plex, a new currency tied to Plex, goods that can be bought only with Plex (unless someone resells for isk), etc.
Please let me know the name of said expansion so that I may compare this with the historical precedent.
All little me has to go on is the prices and how they have been impacted by the recent announcements, starting with the ccp blog on Aurum that launched plex to 420 million immediately after.
Do excuse the ignorance of a new player.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147mcvs![/u |
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 00:10:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Tutskii
Because Aurum is likely to make Plex shoot up, by building volatility into it, they make it less desirable to hoard it and may set up a price wall through entirely psychological means.
I expect that they will throttle the release of aurum store items to throttle the demand for PLEX and keep the price from shooting too high. How high is too high is a debatable question, but my guess is they will err on the side of caution and we will see almost no detectable aurum bump in the PLEX price at least detectable in the middle of the usual expansion crash.
The main issue effecting PLEX prices over the next month will be whether the influx of new and returning players for Incarna buying GTCs outweighs the increased demand for PLEX from aurum.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 00:26:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Tutskii
Because Aurum is likely to make Plex shoot up, by building volatility into it, they make it less desirable to hoard it and may set up a price wall through entirely psychological means.
I expect that they will throttle the release of aurum store items to throttle the demand for PLEX and keep the price from shooting too high. How high is too high is a debatable question, but my guess is they will err on the side of caution and we will see almost no detectable aurum bump in the PLEX price at least detectable in the middle of the usual expansion crash.
The main issue effecting PLEX prices over the next month will be whether the influx of new and returning players for Incarna buying GTCs outweighs the increased demand for PLEX from aurum.
I believe you are completely wrong as far as Aurum not affecting Plex. A sometimes steady, sometimes sudden increase of price has markedly accelerated by the announcement of Aurum. The 420 million just recently, would suggest that much.
I noticed you failed to provide the name of the expansion you are using for precedent, so I went ahead and looked up the price of Plex this time last year:
Under 300 million on average.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147mcvs![/u |
|
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 00:27:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Tutskii
All little me has to go on is the prices and how they have been impacted by the recent announcements, starting with the ccp blog on Aurum that launched plex to 420 million immediately after.
Have you noticed that the price of PLEX has now dropped below the level before the aurum dev blog? Maybe you should have listened to the older players who warned you not to speculate on PLEX in response to that blog. The GTC supply glut starts before the expansion and the aurum demand can't start until after the expansion so the timing is all wrong. Aurum can only temper the PLEX crash, not prevent it.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 00:32:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Tutskii
All little me has to go on is the prices and how they have been impacted by the recent announcements, starting with the ccp blog on Aurum that launched plex to 420 million immediately after.
Have you noticed that the price of PLEX has now dropped below the level before the aurum dev blog? Maybe you should have listened to the older players who warned you not to speculate on PLEX in response to that blog. The GTC supply glut starts before the expansion and the aurum demand can't start until after the expansion so the timing is all wrong. Aurum can only temper the PLEX crash, not prevent it.
I noticed that it did so directly after the Eve Related promotion that will only display once (which has displayed more than once!).
I have also noticed that its shooting back up from a low of 365 just an hour or so ago.
As for listening to older players that warned not to speculate on PLEX?
I have made over 2 billion playing with it.
I think I did well compared to older players that didn't speculate on Plex in response to that blog.
But what do I know.
To be honest, if someone asked me for advice, I'd say the same thing. Buy, buy buy. Its not going anywhere but up.
But hey, the precedent and historical data completely back up your argument.
Oh, wait, they don't.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147mcvs![/u |
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 00:33:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Tutskii
I noticed you failed to provide the name of the expansion you are using for precedent, so I went ahead and looked up the price of Plex this time last year:
Under 300 million on average.
Now you are cooking.
|
Aroh X
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 03:57:00 -
[24]
The plex price in Jita has been hovering around 380-390 for the last week, so while it has dropped a little today, it's not by a massive amount, the 410+ prices we saw over a week ago didn't last very long... it'll probably hover around this price for the next week and a day or two out from Incarna will probably start to climb again.
It'll be interesting to see what some of the stuff you can buy with AUR will resell for in ISK, that could have a bearing on the post incarna price of plex too.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 05:45:00 -
[25]
Nothing really special going on. Some days ago the price went hyperbolical (a sign of uptrend liquidity diminishing a lot), the guys at CCP saw it and punctured the bubble while it was weak, before some too much enterprising player would try give the uptrend a new push up. They wanted to avoid a Technetium-alike laddering.
Auditing | Research | 3rd Party | Collateral Holding | EvE RL Charity |
Commander Godsmack
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 12:01:00 -
[26]
the Pr0 Tip of Plex:
Nothing is going to happen
-----
This little pony show going on right now will only go down to cement Plex trends; then after this there shouldn't be anymore speculation that plex will ever go above 420
|
Atima
Minmatar
House of Marbles
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 13:40:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Nothing really special going on. Some days ago the price went hyperbolical (a sign of uptrend liquidity diminishing a lot), the guys at CCP saw it and punctured the bubble while it was weak, before some too much enterprising player would try give the uptrend a new push up. They wanted to avoid a Technetium-alike laddering.
Big words like hyperbolical and CCP intervention sounds really special to me.
|
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 14:34:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Tutskii
Theyre trying to scare people into SELLING their Plex.
They did the same last week when the price was around 410.
It doesn't only display once :)
I doubt they're trying to scare people into selling existing plex, so much as encourage the purchase of new PLEX to be sold.
Reposted from GD ...
I doubt this banner was an attempt at moral suasion with the goal of calming PLEX markets, it was an advertisement. The result seems to be the ISK price went down.
Was the price move due to people selling ones they had sitting in a hangar due to fear? Was it new PLEX bought and then sold on the market as some attempted to get in when the ISK price was high? Could it be wise traders knew this was an advertisement and decided they better move their stock before a new supply hits the market?
CCP is a corporation who's motive is ultimately profit. Why put up a banner with the hopes that it would lower the value of a product you sell? The banner was a "get em while they're hot" advertisement.
The Real Space Initiative - V7
|
Elhazzared
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 15:05:00 -
[29]
Yeah CCP doesn't do anything to make the PLEX drop it's price. In fact CCP quite expertly manipulated the PLEX price to be as high as it was when compared to the 300 M that's been it's steady price months ago. It started lowering to 270 which is why they manipulated the market and now they don't let it go bellow 360 as far as I've seen.
|
Clair Bear
Ursine Research and Production
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 18:49:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Elhazzared
Yeah CCP doesn't do anything to make the PLEX drop it's price. In fact CCP quite expertly manipulated the PLEX price to be as high as it was when compared to the 300 M that's been it's steady price months ago. It started lowering to 270 which is why they manipulated the market and now they don't let it go bellow 360 as far as I've seen.
That is just silly. The PLEX has value to the purchaser of GTC in that it buys in-game goods and services. If the price of GTC is high, fewer of them need to bought from CCP to reach in-game ISK goals. It is counter-productive to CCP as a company to do things which result in fewer GTC being bought.
As a thought experiment, consider GTC being worth 1,337 trillion ISK. Only one GTC would ever need to be bought by anyone, ever. That would result in less income to CCP.
On the other hand, if GTCs were about 10 million isk people would decide it's not worth their RL money and grind for ISK instead. That's not good for CCP either. A very complex model would be needed to estimate the optimal ISK price of GTC that results in maximum CCP revenue.
Here's my take on it. Having seen Dr.E's market analysis in the past, I'm confident beyond the smallest shadow of a doubt he's incapable of coming up with an ideal ISK price that optimizes CCP's income. Definitely not within 60M ISK or so. Possibly not within 200M isk. And he's alleged eve economy expert on staff!
In conclusion, application of Occam's Razor demands I point and laugh at you for thinking CCP is the entity manipulating PLEX price with such precision.
And in summary, bigger blobs are the answer. Now what was the question? |
|
|
Michelle Vega
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 20:52:00 -
[31]
Theoretically Plex is the only real form of tradable currency in the game - which makes PLEX the only ingame item worth "playing" stock market with.
With AUR coming it is a little confusing and scary to invest in PLEX or sell PLEX.
When the prices drop anywhere below 350m we buy them up. When they hit 400+ we sell. With the "scare" of the bubble we have been trying to sell them at least from some kind of profit, but now we are going to hold on to them since we have no clue as what is going to happen.
Worst case scenario a loss of 20-25 bil, best case huge profits.
Time will tell. Not player guesses.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2011.06.12 21:24:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Michelle Vega
Theoretically Plex is the only real form of tradable currency in the game - which makes PLEX the only ingame item worth "playing" stock market with.
No that is wrong.
This modified stament however could be made as a fair argument.
Originally by: Michelle Vega
Theoretically Plex is the only real form of tradable currency in the game - which makes PLEX the only ingame item worth "playing" stock market FOR.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Clair Bear
Ursine Research and Production
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 03:33:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Clair Bear on 14/06/2011 03:34:43
Originally by: Michelle Vega
Worst case scenario a loss of 20-25 bil, best case huge profits.
Time will tell. Not player guesses.
\
Ever hear of "buy on rumor, sell on fact?" Everyone knows AUR is coming, it's already been priced into the currency. Keep in mind you're not the only one hoarding PLEX -- people have done analysis and come to the conclusion that they're being produced faster than they're being consumed, only hoarding is keeping the value high.
It's not in CCP's interest to have a massive liability in terms of unused game time on their financial books. They will try to soak up the supply by marketing fluff which at first may not have in-game impact, but eventually will. If that doesn't work the next obvious step is reducing the ISK price of PLEX so more people resub or reactivate their alts.
Yeah, time will tell -- but some bets are clearly and obviously worse than others.
p.s. does that 20-25B include opportunity costs? If not, you may wish to re-evaluate.
And in summary, bigger blobs are the answer. Now what was the question? |
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 04:21:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Clair Bear
It's not in CCP's interest to have a massive liability in terms of unused game time on their financial books. They will try to soak up the supply by marketing fluff which at first may not have in-game impact, but eventually will. If that doesn't work the next obvious step is reducing the ISK price of PLEX so more people resub or reactivate their alts.
In this case, it doesn't hurt CCP to have this 'liability'. If someone purchases a GTC for PLEX and sells it into the game, and someone holds on to it and doesn't cash it in. Then what has this done for CCP?
It has given them $15 or whatever it is at the value of $15 at that time. If it takes a year for that PLEX to be redeemed, then the $15 in lost subscription revenue is still $15. However, during that year, that $15 has lost purchasing power due to inflation. So in effect, CCP received a $15 bond with an interest rate equal to the rate of inflation, and on top of that, was able to charge the GTC buyer a surcharge.
PLEX hoarding does not hurt CCP one bit, unless their CFO is a complete whack job and has a jar of cash sitting around to 'cover' PLEX redemptions or invested it in some 1930s Florida Swamp Land. Considering Iceland's recent financial situation, that is a possibility I suppose.
The Real Space Initiative - V7
|
Clair Bear
Ursine Research and Production
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 04:51:00 -
[35]
Ok, I'll spell this out for you. While Crowd Control is majority owned by the founders, they still have to report to their other investors.
PLEX purchased go into the liability column, simply because they are game time owed. The income for them has already been reported in previous quarters. You don't have to be an auditor to grasp this concept.
Since no company is desirous of a gigantic number in the liability column (and I assure you, the unredeemed PLEX are absolutely reported there) the problem becomes how to reduce that liability with the smallest expenditure or impact on current or future revenue.
And in summary, bigger blobs are the answer. Now what was the question? |
Companion Qube
Minmatar
Electron Conservation Inc
SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 05:00:00 -
[36]
I'm more than a little doubtful that in-game items are counted as a liability on CCP's balance sheet. I think the more important thing to consider is the monthly rate of plex generation, aka, how the $17.50/plex affects CCP's monthly revenue.
...they see me trollin', they hatin' ♥
|
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 05:36:00 -
[37]
The longer the duration of time is in between purchase of a GTC and the redemption of the PLEX, the more CCP makes from that $15 intrest free loan. It doesn't matter how it is recorded in the books.
The Real Space Initiative - V7
|
Mu-Shi Ai
The Chrysalis Group
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 06:41:00 -
[38]
That's the biggest myth about GTC/PLEX, that CCP is somehow "on the hook," and that it's a financial liability for them. The GTC/PLEX have already been purchased. CCP has got the money. It would only be a liability if CCP were obligated to refund the money paid in the case that a player in possession of GTC/PLEX decided not to cash them in for game time. They are not, as I understand it, under any such obligation. In relation to subscriptions, a GTC/PLEX is merely deferred game time, bought on sight by players, who can then trade the game time for ISK (or soon cash it in, partially, for Aurum, etc).
There is absolutely no liability on CCP's part.
|
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 11:50:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Adunh Slavy on 14/06/2011 11:56:16
Originally by: Mu-Shi Ai
Quote:
The longer the duration of time is in between purchase of a GTC and the redemption of the PLEX, the more CCP makes from that $15 interest free loan.
Under what circumstances could the price paid for GTC/PLEX be classed a "loan"? I've often seen that idea thrown around, but it doesn't really hold up. CCP isn't under obligation to pay it back if it's not turned in for game time. All game time in EVE is paid for by somebody at some point. If you pay a subscription by credit card, CCP's got your money. If you use ISK to buy PLEX, CCP's got somebody else's money (the person who paid for the GTC and broke it up into PLEX). In no way could this be considered a "loan."
When someone buys GTC/PLEX, they are purchasing a future service, game time, for money now. So a PLEX is a promissory note, a promise to pay 30 days game time to the holder, the one who redeems the note.
CCP at the time of the purchase of the GTC/PLEX holds the cash, the PLEX holder holds a promise of future game time. During that lag period between purchase and redemption someone owes someone something.
If I borrow your toolbox, you have loaned it to me. I have traded my future goodwill for your tools, when I return your tools, I will reclaim my goodwill. If I purchase your toolbox from you, and we agree that you will buy it back, then I have traded my cash for your tools, but it is still a loan. So long as the promise for a future action is part of the trade arrangement, then a loan is implied, regardless of the terms.
As it applies to this argument of "loaning" CCP $15. Someone gives them money now for an exchange of product later - a loan.
Agreeably it is a somewhat vulgar use of the word, but the context is understood by most.
The Real Space Initiative - V7
|
Florestan Bronstein
draketrain
Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 11:55:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Adunh Slavy
As it applies to this argument of "loaning" CCP $15. Someone gives them money now for an exchange of product later - a loan.
question is if CCP is under any obligation to provide you gametime in exchange for the PLEX item.
My understanding is that while you can convert PLEX to gametime right now you have no guarantee that you will be able to do so in the future.
|
|
|
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:00:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Florestan Bronstein
Originally by: Adunh Slavy
As it applies to this argument of "loaning" CCP $15. Someone gives them money now for an exchange of product later - a loan.
question is if CCP is under any obligation to provide you gametime in exchange for the PLEX item.
My understanding is that while you can convert PLEX to gametime right now you have no guarantee that you will be able to do so in the future.
To be honest, I do not know if that is the case or not. I am very sure that the bank who lent me money to purchase my house may at any time call in their loan with 90 days notice. I suspect your mortgage is the same or has some similar clause.
The Real Space Initiative - V7
|
Mu-Shi Ai
The Chrysalis Group
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:10:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Mu-Shi Ai on 14/06/2011 12:10:55
Originally by: Adunh Slavy
Edited by: Adunh Slavy on 14/06/2011 11:56:16
Originally by: Mu-Shi Ai
Quote:
The longer the duration of time is in between purchase of a GTC and the redemption of the PLEX, the more CCP makes from that $15 interest free loan.
Under what circumstances could the price paid for GTC/PLEX be classed a "loan"? I've often seen that idea thrown around, but it doesn't really hold up. CCP isn't under obligation to pay it back if it's not turned in for game time. All game time in EVE is paid for by somebody at some point. If you pay a subscription by credit card, CCP's got your money. If you use ISK to buy PLEX, CCP's got somebody else's money (the person who paid for the GTC and broke it up into PLEX). In no way could this be considered a "loan."
When someone buys GTC/PLEX, they are purchasing a future service, game time, for money now. So a PLEX is a promissory note, a promise to pay 30 days game time to the holder, the one who redeems the note.
CCP at the time of the purchase of the GTC/PLEX holds the cash, the PLEX holder holds a promise of future game time. During that lag period between purchase and redemption someone owes someone something.
If I borrow your toolbox, you have loaned it to me. I have traded my future goodwill for your tools, when I return your tools, I will reclaim my goodwill. If I purchase your toolbox from you, and we agree that you will buy it back, then I have traded my cash for your tools, but it is still a loan. So long as the promise for a future action is part of the trade arrangement, then a loan is implied, regardless of the terms.
As it applies to this argument of "loaning" CCP $15. Someone gives them money now for an exchange of product later - a loan.
Agreeably it is a somewhat vulgar use of the word, but the context is understood by most.
Okay, but it's not a liability to CCP at all. CCP is obligated to let players cash PLEX in for game time (EDIT: right now, anyway), but it's not obligated to buy the PLEX back if the people decide they'd rather not use the PLEX. It's not as though CCP needs to keep that ~$15 set aside. There is essentially no difference, where CCP is concerned, between whether you settle your account with a PLEX or with a credit card charge. The only potential difference is who paid CCP the cash for your game time.
|
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 12:48:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Mu-Shi Ai
Okay, but it's not a liability to CCP at all.
Yep, I agree with ya. No arguments there.
The Real Space Initiative - V7
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 13:06:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Companion Qube
I'm more than a little doubtful that in-game items are counted as a liability on CCP's balance sheet. I think the more important thing to consider is the monthly rate of plex generation, aka, how the $17.50/plex affects CCP's monthly revenue.
When EA sells a console game that has a "free" online multi-player component, they carry a portion of the sale on their books as a liability for 12 months. They are a public company and you can verify this by looking at their financial statements.
Of course CCP carries unused PLEX on their books as a liability. They also treat prepaid subsciptions, unused GTCs, and PLEX that have been redeemed for future gametime as a liability. The real question is, does it matter?
Here is one way to think about it. When PLEX was introducted it was seen as a way to increase GTC sales, which is good because GTCs net $17.50 per month versus $11 per month for 12-month subscriptions. It is also a way to combat RMT, which really means it is a way they can get some of the revenue stream that was going to RMTers.
A side benefit of PLEX was that it made it easier for players to stockpile gametime. When you buy GTCs on the timecode bazaar the time is credited to a specific account. There was not much motivation to buy extended periods of time because you would be tying up isk for little apparent benefit. The ability to trade PLEX now means players no longer see gametime as a sink but as an investment.
The growing inventory of PLEX was sen as a cash-flow bonanza for CCP. They could focus on promoting the GTC sale side without worrying too much on the PLEX demand side which would tend to take care of itself. One memorable promotion was the guy that had his account banned for RMT when he should have bought GTCs. People sometimes see the PLEX for Fanfest or PLEX for Good promotions as demand side, but from an CCP accounting perspective they are really ways to increase fanfast sales or allow CCP to make charitable contributions (and get some publicity) without having it come off the bottom line.
The aurum store is really the first time CCP has tried to directly promote the demand for PLEX and you could argue that this is something of a change in direction but it has been coming down the road for a long time. Part of it is that this is just the way the world of on-line gaming is moving. Microtransactions will be an important component of Dust and most likely World of Darkness. There is less resistance to microtransactions if they are in the game from the beginning instead of being introduced later. CCP could just be testing out the concept and/or smoothing the way for combining the Dust and Eve currencies and economies.
[wall of text continues below]
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 13:34:00 -
[45]
Yet there is no avoiding the fact that aurum sales (or conversions? see below) are primarily aimed at taking PLEX off the books. Trading a liability for a virtual good is pure profit from CCPs perspective. It effects cash flow down the line as higher demand for PLEX will eventually boost GTC sales, but it may also be a sign that someone has been looking at CCPs balance sheet and saying we need to do something.
There are different kinds of liabilities. Taxes you owe the governmant are one extreme. Prepaid game time subscriptions are another. PLEX are somewhere in the middle. CCP will probably never have to pay out of pocket to redeem those PLEX but they also don't have a limited life-time like a 12-month subscription. At first, PLEX were probably lumped in with all other forms of pre-paid game time, but as the inventory grew they probably needed to separate it out on the balance sheet or at least on a separate table.
Think of their prepaid game-time liability as a proportion of their monthly revenue. If everyone paid with 12-month subscriptions and the subscription cycles were evenly distributed the liability would be six times the monlthy revenue. (Well maybe 5.5 because you can book the revenue at the beginning of the subscription month, but you get the point.) A mix of 1, 3, 6, and 12 month subscriptions probably resulted in a liability of 2-3 times the monthly revenue. You can make your own estimates of the unsold PLEX inventory and the impact it has on ratio of liabilities to revenue, but I think there is no doubting the fact that this is something that has been noticed at the highest levels at CCP.
Whether they are thinking about going public or getting more investors and need to fix up their balance sheet or they are simply following through on a long-term strategy is pure speculation. But there can be no doubt that the PLEX you hold in your grubby little hands is counted each month and reported to the CCP bigwigs. And if the bigwigs say that those liabilities need to be "managed" expect more pretty things to be offered at the aurum store.
P.S. An interesting question is are aurum (aurums, auri?) a liability also. They are presumably no longer convertible into game time and if players have no reason to keep more than one PLEX worth of aurum in their wallets you could argue that they are not financially significant to CCP. But if aurum became a full fledged second currency with the introduction of Dust the inventory of aurum could conceivably approach or surpass the equivalent inventory of PLEX. Think of aurum as pre-paid microtranactions and maybe you can see a case for treating them as a liability also.
[tl;dr Of course PLEX are liabilities. The real issue is whether the aurum store is an attempt to addres the growing PLEX liability or is it just part of CCPs long-term strategy.]
|
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 14:09:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
stuff
I think perhaps we have two discussions going on in this thread as well separated by a razor thin way of thinking and perhaps leading a few of us to bump into one another. One discussion related to accounting, and another related to finance.
The Real Space Initiative - V7
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 14:22:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Claire Voyant on 14/06/2011 14:24:40
Originally by: Adunh Slavy
I think perhaps we have two discussions going on in this thread as well separated by a razor thin way of thinking and perhaps leading a few of us to bump into one another. One discussion related to accounting, and another related to finance.
Possibly. Note that I was quoting to CQ's reference to CCPs balance sheet, not any of the discussion that followed.
Edit: Maybe some confusion can be avoided by the use of the term "balance sheet liability" where appropriate, as in "There can be no question that PLEX is a balance sheet liability for CCP."
|
Jenny Beta
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 14:43:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Mu-Shi Ai
Okay, but it's not a liability to CCP at all. CCP is obligated to let players cash PLEX in for game time (EDIT: right now, anyway), but it's not obligated to buy the PLEX back if the people decide they'd rather not use the PLEX. It's not as though CCP needs to keep that ~$15 set aside. There is essentially no difference, where CCP is concerned, between whether you settle your account with a PLEX or with a credit card charge. The only potential difference is who paid CCP the cash for your game time.
I agree that there is essentially no difference financially for CCP, but it is a liability.
For example I pay for my gametime with a CC every month, suddenly PLEX prices fall to the point I easily have the isk to buy one. The PLEX I buy was bought two years ago. While this is no net loss to CCP, they experienced an increase in cashflow two years ago and a decrease now. For these two years the PLEX was a liability.
This all averages out so is not a big problem, but big swings in the price of PLEX could upset CCP's cashflow in a noticeable way.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 16:34:00 -
[49]
Posting to confirm that I now have reliable empirical proof that Claire indeed is an expert on this and knows what he is talking about.
As early as yesterday, PLEX reached 3397 million isk, at which time a savvy investor that had bought a supply at 365 just days earlier would have made.. a lot of money.
It also evidences that it is always good practice to listen to vets for they know everything.
It is at this time that I must announce that the Tutskii household goat entrails reader, Ms. Callista Paoppaloopalus, has thus been thanked for her contributions and released to search for better employment opportunities.
Her former obligations will be fulfilled by a crack team of cryptographers that assure me that with sufficient training and a special decrypter box, the future can indeed be discerned from Claire's post in these matters.
--
On a serious note, everything said here is opinions and theorycrafting as there is no, and there will be no confirmation either way. What we have, is, however facts.
It is a fact that whenever that promotion appears, Plex goes down by as much as 10%
It is a fact that CCP put that banner there, in so much that its pixels did not randomly constitute themselves in that spot.
It is a fact, that CCP is manned by human beings, of similar capabilities to any other human beings, but with more information. Human beings that can, for instance, link cause and effect and correlation. For instance, even if it was argued that the banner had a different goal (really?), its effects as empirically proven can not be argued against.
Beyond that, we enter the realm of mental ************.
Does CCP want cheap Plex? expensive Plex? Do people that wouldn't otherwise buy Plex (or even ones that would) create more Plex when these freefalls start?
Who knows.
For those answers I leave you Claire, although you may want to use a crack team of cryptographers in order to extract sense from his predictions.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147 mcv |
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 23:32:00 -
[50]
Check your calendar. Is it before June 21? Then shut-up, Mkay?
|
|
|
Mu-Shi Ai
The Chrysalis Group
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 23:49:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Mu-Shi Ai on 14/06/2011 23:50:00
Originally by: Jenny Beta
Originally by: Mu-Shi Ai
Okay, but it's not a liability to CCP at all. CCP is obligated to let players cash PLEX in for game time (EDIT: right now, anyway), but it's not obligated to buy the PLEX back if the people decide they'd rather not use the PLEX. It's not as though CCP needs to keep that ~$15 set aside. There is essentially no difference, where CCP is concerned, between whether you settle your account with a PLEX or with a credit card charge. The only potential difference is who paid CCP the cash for your game time.
I agree that there is essentially no difference financially for CCP, but it is a liability.
For example I pay for my gametime with a CC every month, suddenly PLEX prices fall to the point I easily have the isk to buy one. The PLEX I buy was bought two years ago. While this is no net loss to CCP, they experienced an increase in cashflow two years ago and a decrease now. For these two years the PLEX was a liability.
This all averages out so is not a big problem, but big swings in the price of PLEX could upset CCP's cashflow in a noticeable way.
Exactly. It only presents a potential cash flow problem. If, for example, everybody suddenly decided, en masse, that they were going to use PLEX saved up from the dawn of that system for an entire year's game time. But CCP would still have seen that money at some point, anyway. It's highly unlikely, though, that CCP will ever run into this problem.
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 23:50:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Check your calendar. Is it before June 21? Then shut-up, Mkay?
I'm sorry, I have not yet found suitable cryptographers that can make sense of your posts. What does June 21 have to do with your doom and gloom warning about speculating with PLEX, your superior vet knowledge, and well, anything, really?
I reproduce your post with some material bolded for your eating pleasure. I find words are tastiest when accompanied by mustard and or mayo, but your mileage might vary:
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Originally by: Tutskii
All little me has to go on is the prices and how they have been impacted by the recent announcements, starting with the ccp blog on Aurum that launched plex to 420 million immediately after.
Have you noticed that the price of PLEX has now dropped below the level before the aurum dev blog? Maybe you should have listened to the older players who warned you not to speculate on PLEX in response to that blog. The GTC supply glut starts before the expansion and the aurum demand can't start until after the expansion so the timing is all wrong. Aurum can only temper the PLEX crash, not prevent it.
Although I suppose that you could say that your statement works in a different timeline, and you could even choose any random day when PLEX is low (perhaps the next time the ad runs?) in order to avoid admitting you are wrong.
Cowardly, but it might just fly!
As I previously stated, I prefer letting reality settle affairs like these. Reality settled the effects of the ad, its relative length (both times Plex has taken about comparable time to bounce back), and whether it was a good idea to stock up on Plex at that time (my wallet would suggest it was!
Don't let it get in the way of your seering, however. Feel free to state any further predictions, and I shall treasure them and read them daily as to be able to reproduce them when skilled enough individuals can extract some sense from them.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147 mcv |
Rasz Lin
Caldari
Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated
|
Posted - 2011.06.14 23:53:00 -
[53]
Lets face it, the moment clueless professor announced plans for regulating PLEX prices CCP screwed the market. There is no way for PLEX to go down in price. CCP has ZERO market tools at its disposal for making the price smaller without taking direct real money hit. They cant spawn PLEX out of thin air, they cant make GTCs cheaper, they cant reduce PLEX functionality, all of those would cut into their profit. All they can do is buy plex off the market making it more expensive or maybe try stupid fud banners on logon screen.
|
Jerry Pepridge
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 00:08:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Jerry Pepridge on 15/06/2011 00:09:39
Originally by: Rasz Lin
Lets face it, the moment clueless professor announced plans for regulating PLEX prices CCP screwed the market. There is no way for PLEX to go down in price. CCP has ZERO market tools at its disposal for making the price smaller without taking direct real money hit.
1) CCP Creates random account
2) CCP gives said account Unlimited funds/Plex cards either is fine.
3) Said account places 20-30 unit buy orders to hoard plex but remain inconspicuous
4) Said account, Dumps back on buy orders (CLEARING/removing them)
5) Rinse & repeat Step 3 to 4 until buy orders are at desired level
6) Said account Systematically places 20-30 units of plex in "blocking order formation" forcing lemmings to under cut, lowering price.
there is more than one way to do it. they can also just dump a 100-200 unit order 0.1 isk above the highest buy order, but thats 'too obvious' and a tycoon my buy them out.
Zero market tools you say? Are you that Naive 
marketing tool = a character.
|
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 00:10:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Edit: Maybe some confusion can be avoided by the use of the term "balance sheet liability" where appropriate, as in "There can be no question that PLEX is a balance sheet liability for CCP."
Yeah, that sort of thing does help internet debates and conversations. People would often agree more if they were using the same definitions. |
Rasz Lin
Caldari
Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 02:01:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Jerry Pepridge
Edited by: Jerry Pepridge on 15/06/2011 00:09:39
Originally by: Rasz Lin
Lets face it, the moment clueless professor announced plans for regulating PLEX prices CCP screwed the market. There is no way for PLEX to go down in price. CCP has ZERO market tools at its disposal for making the price smaller without taking direct real money hit.
1) CCP Creates random account
2) CCP gives said account Unlimited funds/Plex cards either is fine.
3) Said account places 20-30 unit buy orders to hoard plex but remain inconspicuous
4) Said account, Dumps back on buy orders (CLEARING/removing them)
5) Rinse & repeat Step 3 to 4 until buy orders are at desired level
6) Said account Systematically places 20-30 units of plex in "blocking order formation" forcing lemmings to under cut, lowering price.
there is more than one way to do it. they can also just dump a 100-200 unit order 0.1 isk above the highest buy order, but thats 'too obvious' and a tycoon my buy them out.
Zero market tools you say? Are you that Naive
marketing tool = a character.
So, in your world buying something out and making it scarce will lower the price?
|
Jerry Pepridge
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 02:58:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Rasz Lin
So, in your world buying something out and making it scarce will lower the price?
Nope, just answered your stupidity with facts. (CCP can lower plex price directly)
U mad?
_________________________________________________
|
Rasz Lin
Caldari
Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 06:38:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Jerry Pepridge
Originally by: Rasz Lin
So, in your world buying something out and making it scarce will lower the price?
Nope, just answered your stupidity with facts. (CCP can lower plex price directly)
lower the price how? by making plex scarce? you fail at logic
|
Florestan Bronstein
draketrain
Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 08:44:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 15/06/2011 08:45:12
Originally by: Rasz Lin
lower the price how? by making plex scarce?
... by having stocked up on PLEX yesteryear
there are times when you can buy without increasing prices significantly and there are times when you can crash a market by selling relatively small quantities.
|
Alain Kinsella
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 10:14:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Florestan Bronstein
. . . edit: actually I like this idea a lot - allow EyjoG to spawn PLEXes from nothing up to the amount of PLEX items on inactive/unsubscribed accounts (minus safety margin).
He can sell these to lower PLEX prices and he can buy back PLEX from the market to increase his room for further manipulations. . . .
I believe I mentioned in another thread that PLEX in permabanned (or any banned) accounts could also be fair game. That would give them a decent starting supply, and once the account(s) established they can just go back and forth per an earlier post.
|
|
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 10:30:00 -
[61]
Guys, CCP doesn't need to 'take PLEX from inactive accounts'... where the hell do you guys think PLEX comes from?
|
Florestan Bronstein
draketrain
Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 10:42:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Guys, CCP doesn't need to 'take PLEX from inactive accounts'... where the hell do you guys think PLEX comes from?
so you would rather create new liabilities?
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 14:54:00 -
[63]
They can always give themselves loans of Plex "acquired" when the price is under their flotation band, and use them to lower the price when it is over it.
The "promotion" would indeed seem to show the upper boundary for such a band.
Regardless, with the Aurum store they are creating a convenient way to "destroy" Plex in the future if need be while creating no liabilities, in fact, whatever Plex was "conveniently transformed into vanity items to secretly stock some select areas with Vanity items for Isk" could be dismissed as marketing costs.
Of course, there is no evidence of CCP doing any such thing at this time, and if they were even moderately competent, perhaps ever, but it would be a mistake to ignore that that is a possibility open to them, in my opinion.
However, heavy handed intervention, even in "hard to spot" patterns by random alts :tinfoil: would undoubtedly be spotted by someone. And it is unlikely that they could easily fix a determined swing upwards in price without heavy investment.
But the arguable "moral suasion" of the advert does create a psychological incentive to keep things under their upper band: Do you dump your Plex at 395 or risk them running the advert again or doing something else and have your profits wiped out? If we start from the position that they are not of subhuman intelligence and have an inkling of cause and effect, correlation, and or have looked at the market, then they wish us to be very aware of said upped limit.
The remarkable "bounce" in price does show that the suasion will perhaps not be very effective, and not for very long.
I think the important things here is that we live in a world where CCP makes the rules, and that we have arguably witnessed exactly what they wanted us to see in the Plex market, and a willingness by them to "enforce" those rules. This is backed by the statements about them regulating the Plex market being a possibility: This is not a statement that would be used lightly.
The question is then: what comes after the ad?
Suasion is only effective if its a credible threat.
So something must happen in order to maintain deterrence. The only question is what.
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147 mcv |
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 16:45:00 -
[64]
Supply? Demand? Pointless blabber?
|
Tutskii
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 17:15:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Claire Voyant
Supply? Demand? Pointless blabber?
Yeah, I suppose that was missing, but thanks for correcting that :)
Go make a new disaster, that's what I'm counting on. You're someone else's problem, now I only want you gone...
http://www.eveonline.com/iNgameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1516147 mcv |
Clair Bear
Ursine Research and Production
|
Posted - 2011.06.15 23:58:00 -
[66]
I laugh at your supposition that CCP has no tools to affect the price of PLEX.
They *RUN* the economy and have the giant stick of game design. PLEX are valued based in relation to the economy. Increase the player's earning power and PLEX go up. Come up with a mechanic to nerf the living poo out of people's monthly income, PLEX go down.
No need for trading alts. Just come out with a devblog to the effect of "you know, rat bounties were a terrible, terrible idea. Tags for everyone. The ISK faucets are out of control and must be shut, we'd like to see a max of 100M isk/month income for a typical high sec player" and see what happens to PLEX price.
And in summary, bigger blobs are the answer. Now what was the question? |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |