| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
4237
   |
Posted - 2013.10.07 20:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Here's the point: Modules and Ammo are primarily produced through invention, so removal of those BPO's wont do anything but HURT the BPO holder....
Better point: At the time of those posts, the "worst" module, the Expanded Cargohold II, with 81% of supply produced by BPO was profitable to invent.
Literally the instant the market demands more of an item than the BPOs for that item can provide, they become irrelevant in setting the market price.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
4238
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 07:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Kethas Protagonist wrote:The pro-T2 BPO camp has several good arguments, but "inventors would not benefit from T2 BPO removal" is overreach.
The set of "items not worth inventing" is not the same as the set of "items where invention loses money."
There are already tons of high margin, low volume T2 goods to produce via invention. They're a horrible pain to get sold if you end up making some (they get really peaky because lots of people come running). How does adding more to that pile help inventors?
Remember, for the most part, a rational inventor is product agnostic, so the price spike for low volume items will have to be much higher than simply the additional material and invention costs for inventors to produce them.
BPO owners are relatively locked into their production, so they'll keep churning their low volume production so long as they can get a reasonable profit (in ISK/hr, not % return, ofc).
Inventors would not benefit from the removal of T2 BPOs because inventors are able to avoid those markets dominated by BPOs without cost, the market price of markets not dominated by BPOs is unaffected by them, and the markets not dominated by BPOs are far more numerous than those that are so dominated. In other words, feeding Jita's hyperbolic 3 Crow/month habit is not going to be particularly appealing for inventors.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
4248
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 22:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
Haulie Berry wrote:Oh, I see. You're a margin humper. Guess that pretty much tells us what the approximate mix of lazy and stupid is, here.  Probably mine your own minerals 'cause they're free that way, too. 
Alice Loreley wrote:By the way i build to many ships (including capitals) alone, just by my own hands without spending single isk to hear you sarcastic bullshit.
And is proud of it, to boot.
Alice Loreley wrote:but in fact t2 bpo is still more profitable than invention.
%Profit is about the least useful measure of profitability. And, if you insist on using it, you absolutely must include the costs incurred by tying up tens of billions of ISK into the BPO.
For invention and manufacturing: ISK/hr and ISK/billion invested are far better measures. And by either of those measures (especially ISK/billion invested), Invention comes out far ahead.
Aischa Montagne wrote:Your figures show me that you may be a good Producer, but you seem not to like to trade. But trade is the secret to make profit. The ability to produce is one possible requirement to increase value. I think your assumption are wrong. The Jita - price is not the Price the top sellers pay. At least I would not try to buy at Jita.
only my 2 cents, and this is a already mentioned Tipp in this discussion.
Using Jita sell order prices for raw materials and buy order prices is a pretty standard pessimistic model for use in calculating expected profit.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
4264
|
Posted - 2013.10.12 23:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
Rath Kelbore wrote:It was a poorly implemented system and should be fixed. As for how to fix it in a way that's fair for everyone(current bpo holders), I don't know.
They did fix it. They introduced invention. This moved alliance income from T2 BPO ownership (at the time, moons weren't worth much because all the T2 BPOs in the game didn't come near to using up all the moon goo) to moon ownership (an income source that can be shot at), and allowed anyone to start making bucketloads of ISK making T2 items.
T2 BPO owners got their monopoly broken, and everyone else got to start producing T2 items, causing prices to plummet. So now we have cheap T2 goods, and a ton of people making a ton of money off of those goods.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
4265
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 02:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rath Kelbore wrote:Good points. However, don't t2 bpo's have an advantage over invented bpc's? Why have remnants of an old system in place other than not wanting to be unfair to people that have purchased or at one point won valuable t2 bpo's? Maybe that's enough reason to keep them in place. It just seems it serves no purpose to have them.
I wasn't around before invention and don't own any t2 bpo's. So my point of view on the subject is admittedly limited.
T2 BPOs can make a small volume of one specific good at a low marginal cost with astronomical capital requirements.
Invention can make a large volume of many varied goods at a higher marginal cost with little capital requirements.
BPOs have some advantages, Invention has many advantages.
Why not remove the BPOs? Because nobody is hurt by their continued existence, so there's no reason to arbitrarily punish people for making certain legitimate investments. Not confiscating legitimately acquired goods is the default position; you need a strong reason to confiscate legitimately acquired goods from people. "Why not?" is not a strong reason to do something.
I wasn't around before invention, and I don't own any BPOs either. But the information on the state of the market pre-invention is readily available. Not to mention that divining that state is trivial.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
4265
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 09:18:00 -
[6] - Quote
Alice Loreley wrote:Haulie Berry wrote:Alice Loreley wrote:Sheri Angela wrote:T2 invention is certainly profitable. I build mainly hulls, but occasional rig from time to time. Average ROI investment is around 18% across my entire portfolio of products, but a lot fluctuation in margin by product over time. While I say ROI I honestly think in cashflow.
I've only run into a few products where T2 BPO owners could keep up with demand such as the Astarte or at least that's my assumption from the consistently low price point. Glad to hear some new details. What do you think about t2 drones? I'm sharp on Gallente invention and as i expect this course of further action will be more than logical. But i still have a little doubt about my success because my math is based on solid probability 42%. But it's no warranty for me to receive exactly the same number of t2 bpc after invention cycle. I... what? So let's break this down: Even with the plethora of tools available that utterly trivialize determining if a certain item is a good choice for invention, you can't figure it out on your own? And, yet, you're still butthurt about BPOs? What was I saying about a mix of lazy/stupid earlier? Oh dear, are you still here? I was quite sure i've explained myself earlier. Are you lazy to read posts or stupid to understand what does they mean? Don't waste your time, sweet butthurt is somewhere else, waiting for you to deliver some pleasant times. 
T2 drones are better than T1 drones, but what is a conversation about the relative combat efficacy of different drones doing in your thread about how you think that Timmy shouldn't have a shiny toy if you don't get the same thing?
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
RubyPorto
SniggWaffe
WAFFLES.
4276
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 15:15:00 -
[7] - Quote
Dex Thunakar wrote:Hmm I didn't say it's unfair that people buy them. What's unfair is that they were originally given to certain players for free...
1. Not for free. Not "given" to anyone.
2. There's no indication that the lottery was unfairly run while it existed.
"the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
d-£-󦦦º-ó-ꦪ¦¦e¦¦-í-ë-í-󦦦+¦¦¦»-ö¦+b-¥¦º¦¦¦¦¦½¦¦-ö-ëa-Ŧ+-¥¦í¦+-à-à¦ñc¦ó-á¦í-ƒ¦«¦½¦Ö¦¦¦á-ò-çl-Ǧ¢-ü¦+-û¦ƒ¦¦-ô-ë-Ö-ô¦Ñ-ô¦¬¦½e¦+¦¿¦ù¦¦¦ÿ¦ù¦Ñ¦¼-ò-ꦽ¦¦¦+¦+-ö¦¦-à¦á¦ú¦ÿ |
| |
|