| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Marlanta
   |
Posted - 2006.06.09 12:31:00 -
[1]
Greetings,
IÆm so glad that we have so many graduates of some of the finest EVE business colleges paying attention to this war.
Lets review a single business model here. Lets examine one that is advocated by the Slash and Burn Economics Institute.
MC is embarked on a contract, fair enough, but what is the cost of this contract? Should the many factors and considerations that would constitute a proper business model have been fully explored prior to acceptance, why yes they should!
What are these factors, many on the forums have stated that itÆs a contract and no big deal, but a contract accepted against a previous customer carries other ramifications, for example, do you desire repeat business? Or are all your contracts going to be based on single opportunity contracts. For an example of this, a prostitute is a paid professional and she usually has a working relationship that keeps her fed and happy with repeat and safe business. A ***** on the other hand doesnÆt care and moves from contract to contract with no desire of repeat business, gladly will accept it, but none the less, not a part of her business model.
Any subcontractor in the engineering or construction field would tell you that building something takes time, energy, and effort. To take something down, you only require a demolition contractor. Is that the role of an established and honorable Mercenary contractor? Has MC changed its business model to that of a demolition team only? I bring this up because it has serious consequences on the future contracts that will be available to MC. I would submit, that any serious EVE developer of any space would look at MCÆs performance here as detrimental to a future relationship. After all, if they will take a contract to help me build it, and they wont take the moral high ground to not take a contract to destroy it, well thatÆs one hell of a job reference!
So to those defending MC in this endeavor, youÆre absolutely correct, it is a defensible position from the College of Slash and Burn Economics. I do hope that this lesson in basic negative economic theory helps those defending MCÆs business model understand the wisdom of their positions.
Sincerely,
Marlanta, CEO
IRS Corporation
|
Laythun
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 12:35:00 -
[2]
jesus H christ.
first its OMGBOB threads, and now its OMGMC threads. when will the madness stop???
oh also i hope your not an alt...
If im flaming or not contributing, im sorry. But im trying to get into the [23]
Mods stop messing with my damn sig.
See You In Space Cowboy |
mattzz
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 12:39:00 -
[3]
Edited by: mattzz on 09/06/2006 12:39:57
So you're saying people will be wary of hiring the MC in the future to assist when constructing Outposts etc because there's a risk that in the future someone may contract them to destroy said construction?
If this is the case, who are industrial alliances going to hire to provide protection during large operations? I doubt we'll see the forming of an Alliance who will purely specialise in contracts for non-destructive purposes (Outpost, POS placements).
---
We are recruiting |
Marlanta
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 12:44:00 -
[4]
oh also i hope your not an alt...
Sorry to disappoint, i'm a full fledged account that pays like everyone else 
|
Marlanta
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 12:56:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Marlanta on 09/06/2006 12:56:23
"So you're saying people will be wary of hiring the MC in the future to assist when constructing Outposts etc because there's a risk that in the future someone may contract them to destroy said construction?
If this is the case, who are industrial alliances going to hire to provide protection during large operations? I doubt we'll see the forming of an Alliance who will purely specialise in contracts for non-destructive purposes (Outpost, POS placements)."
I find it difficult to believe that with this game moving towards large alliances, and with the opening of additional systems, that plenty of contracts will exist for both construction and destruction. The challange, and the way to build long term relationships that will keep your corporation fed, is to not confuse the two concerning any previous customer!
Marlanta
|
Miss Overlord
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 12:57:00 -
[6]
mmmm i think the issues here is that MC are a merc corp if they are paid one week to attack x alliacne by y allaince if that contract ends and y alliacne hire them on terms to attack x alliance its all business - i have heard that MC reset standings when one deal is finished.
That said MC arent the only ones that are in the merc business - many smaller operators pick on small corps for ISK - most carebear corps will either fight or pay ISK most Mercs at this end honour the agreements and include a no attack clause for 6 months.
|
Hans Roaming
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 12:58:00 -
[7]
MC practice the business model of being a mercenary, hiring them does not make one immune from future contracts and MC no doubt weighed up the consequences of loss of future business with TBB against the loss of ISK/spoils for this contract and made a business decision.
I doubt TBB is going to put up many more outposts or declare an offensive against its neighbours so they probably thought the prospect of future business would be low.
President
Huzzah Federation
Play EVE on the hard setting, join us. |
Marlanta
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:03:00 -
[8]
 Originally by: Hans Roaming
MC practice the business model of being a mercenary, hiring them does not make one immune from future contracts and MC no doubt weighed up the consequences of loss of future business with TBB against the loss of ISK/spoils for this contract and made a business decision.
I doubt TBB is going to put up many more outposts or declare an offensive against its neighbours so they probably thought the prospect of future business would be low.
Well that seems a bit odd when the next update is about constellation soverignty! I would think that if left alone to prosper, you could see Big Blue space become a Mecca for outpost. All of which would need protecting during construction. Again, short sighted here is the concept that mercs are absolved of responsibility in thier business dealings. The truth of repeat business is that you never know when its going to occur and when it does, why shut yourself out of it!
Marlanta
|
Gradinger
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:11:00 -
[9]
i think the prob here is outposts dont need protection only during their deployment, but always.
|
Alaesa
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:24:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Alaesa on 09/06/2006 13:24:39
Just think of all the contracts MC will get to defend outposts when they have shown how effective they are at taking them.
This thread is just another lame BB propaganda post.
They have tried the "MC are evil griefers attacking nubs", when in fact the are attacking the uber rich tech2 producer from hell and their little police force and their zerg fleet.
They have tried the "TBB are saints and open 0.0 out of the goodness out their hearts", when they do it to as a defense so that nobody will contest their claim
and now they try the "You should never hire MC because they are attacking us ploy" I am sure future contractors of MC will decide for themselves.
I cant wait for the next tactic BB try
|
Marlanta
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:35:00 -
[11]
This thread is just another lame BB propaganda post.
Again, sorry to disappoint, this is a thread about business models in EVE regardless of who or what is involved. It just so happens that the current MC vs TBB war makes a great example to work with. Your thoughts here only illustrate the necessity of such a conversation.
Marlanta
|
heilio
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 13:53:00 -
[12]
I'm thinking you need to go and get laid.
|
Marlanta
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:03:00 -
[13]
Originally by: heilio
I'm thinking you need to go and get laid.
humm, sorry your offer doesn't interest me as I'm sure your not my type. 
|
Hans Roaming
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 14:08:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Marlanta
Edited by: Marlanta on 09/06/2006 13:11:12
Originally by: Hans Roaming
MC practice the business model of being a mercenary, hiring them does not make one immune from future contracts and MC no doubt weighed up the consequences of loss of future business with TBB against the loss of ISK/spoils for this contract and made a business decision.
I doubt TBB is going to put up many more outposts or declare an offensive against its neighbours so they probably thought the prospect of future business would be low.
Well that seems a bit odd when the next update is about constellation soverignty! I would think that if left alone to prosper, you could see Big Blue and other areas of space become a Mecca for outpost. All of which would need protecting during construction.
Again, short sighted here is the concept that mercs are absolved of responsibility in thier business dealings. The truth of repeat business is that you never know when its going to occur and when it does, why shut yourself out of it!
Marlanta
No offence to CC but I'll believe it when it is in game.
One could say that it was an error to base their ability to hold their space because they open it up to new people and to count on the rest of EvE not deciding that TBB was a worthy target because of this.
No doubt you had voices in leadership saying that you guys needed a strong military and you should have listened. 
Anyway if you see how hard MC fight first hand you know they will defend your assets if contracted to do so with equal vigure. Would you want to hire them for guarding an outpost if at the first sign of trouble they fled? So in fact if they are contracted to take on potential customers it is in their interest to fight as hard as they can to create the right impression. What you are saying though is that your leadership might be too upset that MC attacked them in the past and would let their emotion interfere with a commercial decision. Sometimes when leading an alliance you have to put your feelings to one side and decide objectivly so you end up with what is the right choice.
President
Huzzah Federation
Play EVE on the hard setting, join us. |
Evil Thug
|
Posted - 2006.06.09 16:08:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Laythun
See You In Space Cowboy
Omgz0r. Cowboy Beebop 4tw
-----------------------------------------------
Logged in a system, next to you =) |
Liang Zhu
|
Posted - 2006.06.11 21:02:00 -
[16]
It's not a negative business model, it's just a rough neighborhood. Get with the program.
|
Rodge
|
Posted - 2006.06.11 21:44:00 -
[17]
When I was in a merc corp, more than once we got contracts from corps/alliances that we had been contracted against in the past.
There's no better proof for a prospective employer about what you can do than if you blow them to bits
Sig inappropriate-not eve related -Abdalion
[ 2005.04.17 00:34:30 ] Nagilam > u better leave Rodge, u will not gank any1 else 2nite......
|
Nira Li
|
Posted - 2006.06.11 23:20:00 -
[18]
MC won't have any trouble at all to get any new contracts...
You Will Cry My Name
Funny Guys
|
Cmdr Sy
|
Posted - 2006.06.11 23:27:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Marlanta
To take something down, you only require a demolition contractor. Is that the role of an established and honorable Mercenary contractor?
Yeah.
|
thetwilitehour
|
Posted - 2006.06.12 07:26:00 -
[20]
I fail to see why TBB wouldnt hire MC again. If they are saying that, thats their right as a consumer of a product (in this case mercenary services) but really I dont see how MC taking this contract is going to cost them future business. If anything its just cementing their reputation as being impartial and willing to take on anyone.
I would probably include a clause in contract that MC will not fight their most previous employer, simply so that people arent afraid of hiring MC and finding out that MC used that as a basis for gathering intel, but other than that...
Well the OP hasnt realy made an argument. You've made some observations, but you havent formally used deductive or inductive logic to prove any points, since its clearly a fallacy to say that
A hires MC to protect X
Later
B hires MC to blow up X
A will never hire MC again.
Because theres not a shred of evidence that makes this logically true. So while this may well be a thread about business models, I think you should probably consider examining what a business model is and an argument is before posting next time, as it most certainly comes across as a whiny anti MC thread.
|
Kcel Chim
|
Posted - 2006.06.12 08:34:00 -
[21]
Eve doesnt work like this.
Theoretically you will never find a real customerbase if you act as a mercenary because u will always work for someone against someone else. By binding yourself to one alliance or side you will lose your neutrality or the appearance to offer a service instead of just supporting one faction.
So for MC there is no real option in what they should do or not, because everytime somene will call them the devil.
If they take jobs against everyone they MIGHT destroy future relationships (if everyone is shortsighted and thinks taking a contract is something personal) on the otherhand if they only take jobs against certain factions they will be called biased, pets, slaves or asked to join a faction they are obviously "alts" of.
I personally think MC are doing the right thing by pointing out every single time they take a contract that this is just a job. They are not really "warriors" in my eyes as you might consider an alliance with its own agenda warriors. They are more industrialists. They are selling their good - war, destruction - to those whom offers the most for it.
Afterall youre buying t2 stuff from your enemy if its cheapest offer aswell, or arent you ?
In the end its always the clients decision who we wants to hire for a job. Someone who is very good at his profession and is neutral or someone who is more "alligned" with your cause but maybe less good.
Last but not least let us not forget that this neutrality also offers protection for the client. If someone wants to stay in the shadows MC are more attractive then any "alligned" mercenary corp will be because it will be "just a job from an unknown client" and not "a job from the anti bob camp".
In short, in my opinion a merc should have no faction he wouldnt take a contract against because that would remove any credibility from him and reduce him to the hired thug and goon level instead of the shining ruthless professional every merc carves to be.
|
Jesus
|
Posted - 2006.06.12 09:45:00 -
[22]
OMG what a thread
Twll den pob Sais! Y Ddraig Goch ddyry gychwyn |
Sentille
|
Posted - 2006.06.12 13:37:00 -
[23]
While I understand your argument its fundamentally flawed, RL business models and monetory economics don't apply to EVE, a; because its a game to enjoy, b; rules applicable to RL economics and business don't apply as regardless of your situation be you a 1 week n00b or 3 yr veteran of the game isk is always available. RL money is not.
Therefore the MC or any other Merc corp can accept or reject contracts with impunity because there is no risk or penalty in the short, medium or long term in doing so.
Sure, you can question their ethics in contracting to help 'A' one week and contracting to shooting them the next but thats about it.
Also as you've used economics as an argument consider the following hypothetical assumption:
The MC as arguably the most well known group of Mercs in EVE do not operate in a perfectly competative market, their reputation and notoriety are a considerable barrier to entry to any other Merc corp looking to operate at the same level in that market, this makes them more of a monopolist in the market they have chosen, therefore they are able to wield significant power in that market. As a monopolist, customers who wish to purchase their services are obligled to do so on the MC's terms, e.g. we may not like the Microsoft stranglehold on the PC market but I bet over 75% of EVE players use Windows because of standardisation. Therefore an alliance who may need to use the services of the MC in the future will most likely not cause too much fuss if they find themselves red to the MC, as the MC acting as a monopoly, will be in a position to withdraw those services from the customer in the future. Unless of course another Mercenary group appears that can rival the MC in its current state and capacity.
I don't know anyone in the MC and I'm nobodies fanboi (except LV, FTW! ) but I am an economist and dislike seeing a supply and demand argument portrayed, forgive me Marlanta, so crudley.
|
Yual
|
Posted - 2006.06.12 13:54:00 -
[24]
As I understand it, MC is unaffiliated, period. They work by contract and will take any contract with a decent plan and specific attainable goals as long as the price is right. What they wont do is "I'll give you zeeeelions of iskies from my 1 day old character, you destroy XYZABC alliance." Ok mabey for zeeelions... but Seleene is greedy. I hear she wants a personal fleet of titans to 1 shot a pos's shields so she doesnt have to spend hours anymore.
They dont hold grudges(from contract interactions, the shark thing was out of line), have friends, or care about why, the questions they ask are "What?" "How?" and "How much?"
Originally by: W.W. Smith
"Consistancy is a hallmark of a small mind."
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |