| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Simc0m
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
51
   |
Posted - 2013.10.12 22:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
I think it should be more expensive to import things from highsec to lowsec and nullsec. Currently it's relatively risk-free and inexpensive to buy in jita and import to the various null/llow hubs. As it stands, highsec to nullsec importers like myself only need to mark up most items about 1-2% to recoup jump freighter fuel costs. This allows us to undercut nullsec manufacturers on virtually all items, removing much of the incentive to mine and manufacture in low/null. There are many ways to go about incentivizing industry in low/null, but I think the most straightforward solution is to just increase the amount of isotopes burned by jump freighters. This would make it a bit more expensive to import everything from jita, which would be a boon to mining and manufacturing in low and null. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources
Tactical Narcotics Team
1805
|
Posted - 2013.10.12 23:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
But would do nothing whatsoever about any of the multitude of problems with nullsec manufacturing. A lack of slots for example, or a lack of reason to mine lowends when there's better money in literally anything else. Or the risk.
And it does nothing to stop us from carrier jumping stuff around anyway. |
Simc0m
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
51
|
Posted - 2013.10.12 23:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:But would do nothing whatsoever about any of the multitude of problems with nullsec manufacturing. A lack of slots for example, or a lack of reason to mine lowends when there's better money in literally anything else. Or the risk.
And it does nothing to stop us from carrier jumping stuff around anyway.
I agree, this doesn't fix everything. But it IS a step in the right direction.
|
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources
Tactical Narcotics Team
1805
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 11:02:00 -
[4] - Quote
Simc0m wrote:Danika Princip wrote:But would do nothing whatsoever about any of the multitude of problems with nullsec manufacturing. A lack of slots for example, or a lack of reason to mine lowends when there's better money in literally anything else. Or the risk.
And it does nothing to stop us from carrier jumping stuff around anyway. I agree, this doesn't fix everything. But it IS a step in the right direction.
How is making living in null more annoying while doing nothing whatsoever to counter the need for imports in the first place a step in the right direction? |
Simc0m
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
53
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 14:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:doing nothing whatsoever to counter the need for imports in the first place a step in the right direction?
CCP as I understand it is trying to promote industry in nullsec. That is the direction I am speaking of. Making imported goods more expensive would incentivize the manufacture of goods at the source (nullsec). World governments do this very same thing to promote manufacture at home, through tariffs. This all boils down to very simple economics.
I disagree that this change would make nullsec importing more "annoying". All this does is make it more expensive to import, not more time consuming. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources
Tactical Narcotics Team
1805
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 15:11:00 -
[6] - Quote
Simc0m wrote:Danika Princip wrote:doing nothing whatsoever to counter the need for imports in the first place a step in the right direction? CCP as I understand it is trying to promote industry in nullsec. That is the direction I am speaking of. Making imported goods more expensive would incentivize the manufacture of goods at the source (nullsec). World governments do this very same thing to promote manufacture at home, through tariffs. This all boils down to very simple economics. I disagree that this change would make nullsec importing more "annoying". All this does is make it more expensive to import, not more time consuming.
But it does NOTHING to fix the reasons people don't build in nullsec in the first place. It doesn't promote anything, except maybe ice mining. |
Simc0m
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
54
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 15:23:00 -
[7] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:But it does NOTHING to fix the reasons people don't build in nullsec in the first place. It doesn't promote anything, except maybe ice mining.
The main reason why people don't build in nullsec is that it is not profitable. This is mainly due to competition from importers. This change would force importers to raise prices (slightly) incentivizing null manufacturing. From my experience lack of station production capacity is not the issue. |
Janet Clover
State War Academy
Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 15:25:00 -
[8] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:But would do nothing whatsoever about any of the multitude of problems with nullsec manufacturing. A lack of slots for example, or a lack of reason to mine lowends when there's better money in literally anything else. Or the risk.
And it does nothing to stop us from carrier jumping stuff around anyway.
i do not agree with you it would make it MORE important to mine low end ores because its more expensive to import and export it
now they export high end ore and import low end ore and make isk on both trips. if you make fuel more expensive that becomes less attractive. and carriers cant carry that much only ammo in ships and say 11k for fleet and cargo combined |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |