|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 07:00:00 -
[1] - Quote
I went through and got some numbers on sisi regarding highsec CO changes and nullsec POCOs. Highsec COs have indeed had all their import/export taxes doubled. The sisi export tax rate is 200 isk/m3 or 1200 isk/u for p3's (like robo), and 12 isk/m3 or 18 isk/u for p2's (like coolant). This corresponds to a "10%" tax rate in highsec on sisi. The sisi tax rate is essentially a joke number: it's based on a reference value that doesn't place any importance on the "market value" or "maximizing profit" aspects of the game at all. If we assume the p3 is Robotics (70k isk/u) and that the p2 (say, Mech Parts) is worth 10k isk/u, then the p3 tax rate is actually 1.7% and the p2 tax rate is a laughable 0.18% based on market values.
With current market prices, a POCO costs about 100m isk to fully deploy/upgrade (including BPC LP value). Unfortunately, the tax rate can not be set above 100%. Since the highsec values correspond to "10%", just imagine highsec x10 as the highest tax you can set on a POCO. If you have reds set to 100% tax rates and the reds are exporting p1s or p2s, they aren't going to care about the miniscule tax. On p3's a 100% tax rate is actually a fairly sizable hit, but not enough to stop a user if they don't have other easily accessible options, because what the heck, "my time is free". A 100% tax rate nullsec POCO is almost certainly more profitable than a highsec POCO doing extraction just because of nullsec abundancies. p1 extraction in nullsec is laughably cheap even at "100%" POCO tax rate. It's about 0.912 isk/u, which if you're extracting chiral corresponds to about a .12% market tax rate. It can essentially be ignored.
What does this mean for the overall market? Let's look at daily Jita volumes and assume an average "20%" tax rate for nullsec/lowsec POCOs. If half the PI supply comes from nullsec/lowsec, we can guesstimate how much prices should rise after an equilibrium is reached -- when POCOs have been deployed on all planets players have interest in, and when the market has evened out so that producers are making about as much profit (in isk/u) as they are now. Yeah, not totally realistic, but w/e it makes for an easier estimating. The rise is not that much, only about 1200 isk/u based on pure export value ( surprised? :math: ) for Robo, plus whatever trickle-up effect you get from more expensive p1/p2 supply and import costs. Call it about 2,000 isk/u overall. In short, if nullsec/lowsec taxes are not pretty much all set to 100%, the effect JUST FROM TAX CHANGES will not be a big deal. If everyone sets POCO tax rates to 100%, the effect is more amusing -- over a 10% rise in price -- but since most p3s are made in highsec that scenario is unrealistic. People buying PI goods to build POCOs and the disruption as POCOs are set up or fought over will have a much greater near-term impact on the PI market. Since PI is boring, it's likely that the near-term spike could be quite long lived. But any changes in price should be attributed to the setup and fighting over POCOs themselves, not to tax changes.
Can an alliance make isk from taxing POCOs in their region? Let's assume it supplies the entire universe with enriched uranium. That's about 1m units/day. At 100% tax rates (heh), that would be about 180m isk/day for the alliance, or 5.4b/month. That's a ridiculous scenario and it's still only a fraction of a tech moon. Basically, POCOs are terrible for alliance income until their handling of taxes is SUBSTANTIALLY changed by CCP, or the reference values for taxes reset way, way upward. Oh, and if your "20%" tax rate POCO has users exporting 100,000 units of p2s PER DAY (heh), it will still take a month to recoup costs of putting it there in the first place.
WHAT CAN BE DONE? Well, as I mentioned in two older, less-wordy posts: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=208048#post208048 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=224363#post224363 CCP needs to give the POCO owners greater control over the exact taxes. I would recommend the following:
FIRST: reset the default "reference tax values" to represent full Winter 2011 market value of the average good for that tier, instead of the fantasy values they currently have. This would have two immediate effects: increasing the isk paid by users of highsec COs (an increase of an isk SINK, which your economist should love), and increasing the range of values over which POCOs can be taxed. This is the easy, no-brainer option.
SECOND: give the POCO owner the ability to change those "reference tax values", per tier (p0/p1/p2/p4 goods). This is an expansion of the current fairly nice POCO configuration menu and would allow POCO owners total flexibility in setting their tax rates, saving future game balance headaches. Just let the players handle the market, as it should be.
If CCP does not do this, there are SERIOUS FUTURE GAME DESIGN PROBLEMS which will crop up: Problem 1: nobody likes POCOs. Corporate joes bug their corp CEO or alliance CEO to put POCOs up, because PI is important to some poor people. However, the corps and alliances hate the things because they can not provide good income, have to be deployed in dozens/hundreds of places, and sometimes get shot at. They are Not Fun. Problem 2: nobody cares about POCOs. If they don't generate corp/alliance income, and if they're trivial to replace, nobody is going to bother to reinforce them, or defend/kill them when they are somehow reinforced.
It's clear POCOs are going to be the fundamental interface between Eve and DUST 514. Please don't screw up their economics, or DUST will fail. That's something CCP cannot afford. Please change POCOs before release. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
48
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 04:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:If you want changes, you'd likely be better off posting in the test server forum where it might get read by a dev.
I posted links to the this discussion there in two POCO threads.
Regarding isk per p1, p2, etc comment -- I think the percents will be staying. It's because you can set taxes at different rates based on standings red/blue/orange/etc. Plus when you show info on a POCO it tells you your tax "rate", not rate per p1, rate per p2, etc. An interface thing. But, my second suggestion (allow user customization of reference value for p1, p2, etc) would have the same solution you desire. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
57
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 22:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
With today's blog announcing Interbus COs going up in place of all current lowsec/nullsec COs, POCOs just became an even worse thing for their owners. They have to compete with Interbus CO tax rates (the new 'standard'). Since that rate is low and the cost of putting up a POCO is a few months of taxes (at least), killing the Interbus COs is pretty much a form of griefing to whoever lives in that space. Any local resident would prefer an Interbus CO over putting up their own, given the current taxation schemes and POCO costs.
Regarding PI usage in general -- yes PI usage needs to be expanded but that is not the topic of this thread. This thread is about how, given the current market, POCO taxation options are absolutely terrible and will lead to players not enjoying this new game feature, at all. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
60
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:57:00 -
[4] - Quote
trianna Ekanon wrote:pmchem wrote:With today's blog announcing Interbus COs going up in place of all current lowsec/nullsec COs, POCOs just became an even worse thing for their owners. They have to compete with Interbus CO tax rates (the new 'standard'). Since that rate is low and the cost of putting up a POCO is a few months of taxes (at least), killing the Interbus COs is pretty much a form of griefing to whoever lives in that space. Any local resident would prefer an Interbus CO over putting up their own, given the current taxation schemes and POCO costs.
Regarding PI usage in general -- yes PI usage needs to be expanded but that is not the topic of this thread. This thread is about how, given the current market, POCO taxation options are absolutely terrible and will lead to players not enjoying this new game feature, at all. you're missing the point, if PI is expanded into a widespread and competitive market, suddenly justifying installing and fighting over the newly available tax revenue can become a reality. Right now theres too few opportunities to actually create a sizeable tax revenue spread across many tens of thousands of planets.
No, I'm not missing the point. My post and analysis is based on a specific set of data: reality. Current proposals and test server data, current game mechanics, current market consumption of PI goods. I feel like you're some incognito CCP dev going "no just wait, if the PI market is expanded everything will be ok I promise!" Well, that's nice, and I realize that POCOs will be more attractive if PI usage is greatly expanded and PI becomes a higher isk volume market.
Right now, it's not. Deal with it. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
68
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 17:19:00 -
[5] - Quote
JitaJane wrote:So POCOS are not a good investment for Null mega alliances but could be worth it to smaller alliances/ renters. Working as planned.
No, you are wrong. They are even worse for smaller alliances since it will take them much longer to make a profit on their investment of laying down a POCO. Interbus COs are much better for small groups. Killing Interbus COs will be a form of griefing. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
75
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 17:51:00 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Omen wrote:You may accuse us of many things, but one thing we are not guilty of is not reading this thread!
We are monitoring this and many other threads, I won't get into defense mode and try and defend the feature against all sorts of claims. I will re-iterate that we want POCOs to be valid for small corporations, we want highsec to act as a crowded/low income safety for the market as a whole while the land of opportunity is Lowsec. We want Alliances to be able to enjoy 0% tax for their own space. We want PI be a catalyst for space battles as much as it is a low effort passive income.
Regarding the taxation topic itself. I have called a meeting with CCP:s economist to go through the issues raised.
Best regards Omen
Omen, thank you for the reply. In the long term, I imagine that PI income should be much more important than moon mineral income. That will be necessary for DUST 514 to succeed, as players will need to REALLY care about planets. When PI becomes more important than moons, alliances will not be taxing their own POCOs at 0%. Instead, POCOs will be a form of alliance income. That is why I am so concerned about the taxation issue: without it having higher reference values and also being fully customizable by the players, there is much less incentive for players to deploy and fight over control of POCOs.
Hopefully your economist will appreciate both the disparity between current reference values / market values, and how the increased taxation would function as an ISK sink. PI-producing players themselves could pass off the increased taxation in the form of higher prices at market, so a change in default taxes should not "hurt the little guy". |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
76
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 16:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
POCOs have 15m EHP. That's their defense for now. They are very cheap to replace (100m isk) and have 15m EHP, plus a reinforcement timer. Some people may shoot them but it's not gonna be done casually because of "kids". It takes a long time to reinforce one unless you have a nicely sized, very high DPS gang (or capitals). Since they only cost 100m isk and have a reinforcement timer, they are trivial to defend/replace.
I am not worried about POCO defenses at the moment, they are low value targets. By design. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
82
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:46:00 -
[8] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:From the devblog thread, the wiki page listing the new base tax values is up: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/CustomsOfficeI'd say this changes things a lot. POCO income for P1 or P2 extraction planets is now 144mil/BIF or 3.2mil/AIF per month, at 10% taxes. On a busy planet, that should repay the office in a couple months.
Excellent changes. This is the "first step" from my initial post -- a straight up rebalance of reference tax values. Hopefully they continue to change them in the future, as their market values float.
POCOs are now competitive with Interbus COs. I'm not sure which I'd prefer to have in my system. We'll see! |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 02:28:00 -
[9] - Quote
To anyone reading my thread, I have no idea what this tengen san guy is talking about. After Interbus COs were announced he still seemed to think all lowsec/nullsec COs were disappearing on patch day (they are not). He also wanted lowsec COs to be 0% tax for whatever reason, and of course POCOs have had that option since they were first announced.
I am guessing he's just a highsec guy with a bunch of alts doing PI in lowsec who doesn't actually want lowsec groups to be able to exert some control over their home turf. Who knows! |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 17:20:00 -
[10] - Quote
On sisi they are 1-run BPCs. |
|

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
87
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 06:29:00 -
[11] - Quote
Covert Kitty wrote:Right now lowsec PI is less profitable than nullsec (including wormholes), however is easily raidable by the large alliances.
Lowsec PI should be less profitable than nullsec or WH. That's by design. But easily raidable? POCOs have reinforcement timers, so large alliances would have to send fleets to the systems not once, but twice in order to kill a structure than gives us no significant benefit (compared to a tech moon), no great killmail, no loot, etc. Plus they have a lot of HP so to reinforce them you'd want to use capitals or a really, really big high DPS fleet. A large alliance like mine has absolutely zero interest in sending capitals many regions away to kill some meaningless POCOs in lowsec. Our fleets are busy doing fun stuff like fleet fights in nullsec instead of randomly shooting lowsec PI structures.
If COs are killed in lowsec they are mostly going to be killed by other lowsec residents: I suggest you defend your turf. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
91
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 18:02:00 -
[12] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:Velicitia wrote:Tornado/Naga/Talos/Oracle...
fit for gank over tank... they will be an "easy" and "cheap" fleet that can throw out DPS like crazy. Yea, you just need 10-15 of these to reinforce or kill a POCO in 20 minutes. On the other hand, that fleet can be countered by a well balanced t1 cruiser/destroyer/BC fleet. Fun fights. Quote:I am becoming more and more convinced that CCP is doing things to start breaking up the "Great Wall of Carebear". I'm not sure what this means 
a good post by Jack.
If you just bring a pure tier 3 BC fleet and start shooting a POCO you leave yourself open to attack. While doing a very boring and distracting activity. Opportunity for more fights (thought it's likely fights will happen at the reinforcement timer exit, which is one of the goals of POCO design!)
and yeah all the carebear tears, so frustrating, especially since POCOs only show up in lowsec and nullsec. Everything in lowsec/nullsec should be player driven and have risk. CCP protected carebears in crucible by removing insurance payouts for deaths to CONCORD, therefore giving additional protection to the hordes of missing running bots (currently the most popular form of botting) from suicide ganks. POCOs have nothing to do with carebear activities. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 00:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
Shayla Sh'inlux wrote:putting a 100mil POCO on just to collect 2000 isk per day in tax.
someone here is really really bad at math |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
101
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 03:16:00 -
[14] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:This thing is really made of fail. Tax rates are 100 times what devs stated they would be in high sec, while big alliances and WH corps get another isk faucet. T2 will skyrocket in the short term over this as POS are forced to shut down due to no longer being profitable.
I don't think you understand the concept of isk "faucets" and "sinks", at all. Total misuse. Nor do you seem to realize that the market just needs some time to reach a new equilibrium. Why would POS shut down, after all, if T2 is skyrocketing "in the short term"? None of what you post makes sense.
|

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
102
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 03:53:00 -
[15] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: Read the dev blog, the taxes are set by CCP, but they're designed to fluctuate with the market.
Are you telling me to read the dev blog when referring to a change that CCP made, AFTER the last POCO dev blog, directly because of the original post of this very thread, written by me? The mind boggles. Nolo contendere.
Also you still don't understand faucets/sinks in terms of isk supply, search it or something. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
102
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 04:17:00 -
[16] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:[quote=pmchem] Yes, I am, because it's a key point you seem to have missed. If the tax is variable, there cannot be any point it reaches equilibrium.
Math. Next you'll be telling me a sum of an infinite series of positive numbers cannot converge to a finite value. Besides, CCP doesn't need to change it daily, weekly, or even monthly. There isn't continuous flotation of reference values. They're not magically varying numbers. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 14:58:00 -
[17] - Quote
Tam Tran wrote:CCP Omen wrote: I won't get into defense mode and try and defend the feature against all sorts of claims. I will re-iterate that we want POCOs to be valid for small corporations, we want highsec to act as a crowded/low income safety for the market as a whole while the land of opportunity is Lowsec. We want Alliances to be able to enjoy 0% tax for their own space. We want PI be a catalyst for space battles as much as it is a low effort passive income. Well ya better start getting defensive about this 'feature' as it just another heavy handed attempt by CCP to get folks into the low/null sec PvP.This KILLS the hi-sec ONLY corps who want PoS's for production/RP/whatever...now its low-sec/null PI where you will inevitability be engaged in PvP and have to defend of take over a POCO(s). Please revise this change or explain how you CCP see this change IMPROVE gameplay for ALL and that it is simply not just a forcing PvP lowsec/null issue if you want a PoS that doesn't bankrupt you just exporting materials to keep your PoS running.
You quoted Omen, so I don't see why you're so confused. The tax change makes POCOs actually potentially useful and important, which encourages a long-standing Eve Online game design principle: highsec is lowest risk, lowest reward. Now highsec has unavoidable taxes, while lowsec is the land of opportunity and nullsec alliances get to do as they please with tax rates. POCOs and PI will now be catalysts for space battles, while remaining low effort passive income.
In the meantime, people running no-skill highsec alts that pay for their own PLEXes each month just getting PI goo from planets will have to wait a bit for the market value of PI goods to equilibrate to higher prices in order to get the same profits as before. While you wait for that I recommend acquainting yourself with "flying in space" -- maybe even in lowsec. I hear some fun new Tier 3 BCs were just introduced. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
120
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 03:52:00 -
[18] - Quote
Turhan Bey wrote:If you want more activity and more conflict, then give people more reason and incentive to travel there. (EDIT: And stay there.)
Maybe if there was some sort of economic structure unavailable in highsec, which provided tangible isk benefits, and could be owned by people who stayed there and allied together to defend their turf, yet used by others if they so choose??? |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
121
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 14:32:00 -
[19] - Quote
The PI alliance thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=39865&find=unread is the exact sort of player-driven, emergent, economic, non-highsec gameplay that the PI tax change helps create. Bravo. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
123
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 00:39:00 -
[20] - Quote
Velicitia wrote: and look a this, a goon not calling the empire dwellers pubbies for once ... what else has CCP fixed in Crucible? as for the underwhelming response, and the "hm, maybe W-space" responses ... that's neither here nor there. The fact is that SOMEONE is taking the initiative to do something rather than QQ.
Well, look at my posts where I lay out the case for higher PI reference tax values, the effect Interbus COs would have on POCO desirability, or basically any post of mine where I'm not trolling some hysterical whining pubbie like Cygnet L (thanks for continuing to bump my thread btw). I try to be logical, sincere, and thoughtful when seriously discussing game design. I get my trolling in elsewhere. |
|

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 00:21:00 -
[21] - Quote
Yinzer Haverford wrote: As a solution, I would suggest allowing skills and/or CONCORD standing to play a role in calculating tax rates when using High Sec COs. We already have the ability to reduce sales taxes through skills and reprocessing taxes by improving our standing with NPC corps.
Your solution is basically just to reduce taxes, because that's what the end result would be. Which would re-introduce the gameplay/design problems which taxes are fixing. POCOs are here to stay -- highsec is low risk and therefore should be low reward, as repeatedly stated by the devs. It's time to adjust. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 02:09:00 -
[22] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:pmchem wrote: Your solution is basically just to reduce taxes, because that's what the end result would be. Which would re-introduce the gameplay/design problems which taxes are fixing. POCOs are here to stay -- highsec is low risk and therefore should be low reward, as repeatedly stated by the devs. It's time to adjust.
I think that would depend on how much it reduces the taxes. By 10% at level V? Probably not a big deal. A combination of skills + standing that cuts tariffs by 15%? Could be interesting, a reward for keeping high sec status. The skill would have to only apply to NPC-owned COs.
High sec status the standard in highsec, not the exception. Having something like Caldari Faction standing at 9+ to get good Jita prices is a long, difficult grind which few traders finish. Having good sec status is comparatively trivial and commonplace -- even in nullsec, where pvp doesn't reduce sec status!
I'd preach patience, and revisit the taxes and game mechanic in a few months after the markets and producers have had time to adjust. I think people will be pleasantly surprised. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 03:12:00 -
[23] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: More than one alliance has recently released information supporting claims against goonswarm and Mittani that the chairman used his foreknowledge of the upcoming expansion to position goonswarm in position to line it's pockets at the expense of other players via the new changes to PI.
How is this ethically different then previous abuses such as the T20 affair which mired the former Band of Brothers alliance in controversy?
Do you feel that goonswarms current flooding of the eve online forums with dismissive, even derisive and insulting, comments on any opposition to the new PI arrangement hurt or help your efforts to bring all of eve under the unified heel of goonswarm?
What's your position of the in-game deletion by CCP that several of your alliance mates have proposed should be done to characters belonging to rival alliances such as TEST who have dared raise questions about the legitimacy of Mittani's own admitted intent to profit heavily at the expense of players in low and high sec? Do you feel that such an exercise of influence with CCP would damage goonswarms claims of being a legitimate alliance?
Your posting, hahaha ohgod. I had copied/pasted prior posts of yours just to give other goons a laugh but now I can't even tell if you're intentionally serving these up to me or just drunk or something.
Mittani foreknowledge of upcoming changes to PI? I did post this thread in public, weeks ago, and CCP replied in public they were looking at the feedback in it. Goons found out about the changes after I saw this post ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=415176#post415176 ) the day after Thanksgiving, and that post itself was referencing a different eveo post! Just, comedy. We found out the changes went in at the same time as everyone else, while people like you didn't show up to the discussion until pages of posts after the change went in. Also, please cite sources on that 'released information' thanks, haha.
I would be more dismissive and derisive in this post, but I feel you are attempting to get this thread locked for trolling. A shame. Please stick to economic analysis. Your posts contain nothing but Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD), because they're otherwise just comic relief. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 03:22:00 -
[24] - Quote
so you have one post from a guy with incorrect and absurd intelligence (goons shooting all lowsec COs? really? think about that). that guy then asks if mittani knew in advance. this is your "information supporting claims" that "the chairman used his foreknowledge".
yeah seems real solid you should run with that straight to evenews24 |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 03:24:00 -
[25] - Quote
quick someone summon riverini to the thread |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
134
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 03:27:00 -
[26] - Quote
haha we're too late, en24 just ran an article on the tax change: http://www.evenews24.com/2011/12/02/custom-office-taxes-taxes-have-gone-up-yes-please-stop-doing-pi/
even they think cygnet is wrong
Quote: So there has been a tremendous amount of complaining about the new tax scheme implemented by CCP with regards to Planetary Interaction and Custom Offices. To some extent I can understand it; nobody likes paying taxes. As an economist I can go on ad nauseam about deadweight loss, reduced output, higher prices and so forth that taxes engender, but IGÇÖll save you from that coma inducing boredom.
However, it does seem to me that there is a bit too much whining and crying from the masses over this. With the changes of crucible we have seen PI prices head sharply upwards. So much so, that the increase in taxes are vastly offset by the increase in prices.
Consider an operation that produces 300,000 noble, base, and heavy metals and 300,000 non-chiral structures. This is refined down to 2,000 units each of precious, reactive and toxic metals and chiral structures. These are exported from the mining planet and imported to the production planet to make robotics at a cost of 600,000 isk (400,000 for the export and 200,000 for the import, for simplicity assume the prior cost here was 1/20 of this, or 30,000 isk).
Now those 2,000 units are eventually turned into 75 robotics and exporting this costs 525,000 isk. Last time I looked at Jita prices, probably out of date, these were selling for 80,000/robotics. That translates into 6,000,000 in revenues. After taxes you make 10,350,000 -> 4,875,500 isk. Prior to Crucible and the run in PI prices, let say September, youGÇÖd get maybe 50,000/robotics with vastly lower taxes or around 4,875,500 -> 3,693,750 isk. In other words, the price increases as a result of Crucible has been, at least for now, a 32% increase in your PI profits. Sure it would be nice if taxes were merely a 10th of what they are at now. Yeah your returns would be even higher, but it isnGÇÖt nearly as bad as some are making it out to be.
So please quit PI if the tax issue sends you into a nerd rage. I for one thank you for reducing the supply on the market and helping to increase prices and drive up my profit margins. Will PI prices come back down? Maybe. With the higher prices some marginal POSGÇÖs might be torn down reducing demand. With the higher prices and the use of POCOs in null & low security and wormhole space, more people might enter in those areas thus increasing the supply. The long run impact though is not clear. It is an empirical question and I donGÇÖt think anyone out there has done the required analysis yet to figure out where the price will end up. So I plan on sitting back and enjoying the ride.
|

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
135
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 16:49:00 -
[27] - Quote
Judging by Jita prices, there are no problems at all with this change. PI products are still available and reasonably priced. People are fighting over POCOs. Highsec had an isk sink go up in size.
Looks pretty good so far. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
136
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 21:22:00 -
[28] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote: I don't see any other alliance posting on any thread on this subject on this board but you.
It's because it is our posting that gives us our strength.
By the way all the POCO activity and market prices post-patch are proving me right so far. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
139
|
Posted - 2011.12.04 16:50:00 -
[29] - Quote
Cygnet is so mad at these changes and his loss of the posting war that he continues his bitter attempt to get the thread locked for off-topic trolling. Dude needs a forum temp ban.
In other news, people are realizing that the world has NOT ended and PI is still something they can do, so forum opposition from anyone not named Cygnet has fallen to a trickle. The tax changes are good and POCOs are flying off the shelves. Expansion success. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
141
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 04:52:00 -
[30] - Quote
Gar Earthbendiir wrote:I guess there's lotsa good points put up in these 13 pages.... TL;DR past page 3 for me.
tl;dr - I make a post about taxes which economically minded people and CCP agree is a good thing for the game. Expansion includes the change. Hysterical highsec (and some lowsec) people are mad their profits are reduced by some small percent and furiously post about how this will be THE DEATH OF EVE UNSUBBING 40000 ACCTS!!! Other people argue or laugh in response. Markets prove me correct and POCOs are a popular success, life goes on. |
|

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
142
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 01:19:00 -
[31] - Quote
Hundo Kay wrote: Incursions are sick isk
That's actually the next thing that needs to be nerfed. Incursions are too much of an isk fountain, it's crazy. They are in need of iteration.
POCOs seem to be turning out quite well so far, I am happy. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
145
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 01:19:00 -
[32] - Quote
When I was reloading my Erebus shooting an Interbus CO, I kinda wished I had cross trained to a Rev on my dread char so I could just totally afk this sort of thing.
hey team papercuts where is my 'resume shooting after reloading' option |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
145
|
Posted - 2011.12.10 02:30:00 -
[33] - Quote
Nekopyat wrote: Yep, the numbers were screwy. The market has actually adjusted nicely.
Yeah, as I posted elsewhere -- the pre-crucible speculation and tax effects are kind of cancelling each other out for large segments of the market. Everything is going quite smoothly and no tax cut is needed. If anything, raise them even higher. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
145
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 05:34:00 -
[34] - Quote
Alisarina wrote:Strange, I'm making millions per planet per day on all of my characters doing PI in high sec on factory planets. With you saying if you don't use POCO's you loose money it seems I'm breaking your rule.
it's because he is bad at eve and life |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
146
|
Posted - 2011.12.11 23:03:00 -
[35] - Quote
bilingi wrote:MAYBE hes bad or maybe the other dudes lieing like you usually do?
yes, by being exactly correct in all my posts in this thread it means I usually lie
good call |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
158
|
Posted - 2011.12.14 16:47:00 -
[36] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:RubyPorto wrote:pmchem is the Good Goon Faerie.  Does that mean he comes out of a bottle of absinthe? If so, that would explain how goons seem to have such power at CCP, what with all the devs getting hammered and coming up with new features....
I did drink a 5-year old bottle of absinthe when I finished my PhD. So in a sense, that's true. |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
159
|
Posted - 2011.12.16 19:18:00 -
[37] - Quote
I kind of miss the controversy and panic of 8 pages ago.
GSF is taxing its POCOs to pay for their install and defense and things are working quite well so far. Any special news from highsec or lowsec? |

pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
159
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 20:29:00 -
[38] - Quote
I like that people unrelated to the POCO reinforcement or defense are just showing up for fights. It's like a mini PVP arena. |
|
|
|