EVE Search - Bloggers #25, EVE Economics

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Bloggers #25, EVE Economics

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
FactorzGT Quantum Industries	Posted - 2006.08.19 17:01:00 - [151] i read the whole blog but don't have time to read all the comments, so i might be repeating what someone else has already said - if that is the case then consider it stamped. 1) insurance ... yes insurance puts more isk into the game ... the money made from insurance is actually only 70 mil in the blog example but the battleship still costs 100mil to replace so you actually have an ISK sink of 30mil ... also consider that when a ship is lost - so are many fittings - and for a good Tech 2 setup on a battleship that is easily another 20mil ISK ... since the items are destroyed completely (poof gone forever) that is also an ISK sink ... (yes i know some survive but i would say in at least half of the cases it is looted by the enemy ... so to the player at a loss it is a further sink to him) 2) HAC prices - i cannot fly a HAC yet but i have a dream of one day piloting a Cerberus ... however at market average of 230-260 million i cannot see myself ever using one for anything more than just ratting. UNLESS ... a) you increase supply in increasing volume until the market average settles at about 150mil isk per ship. b) decrease the amount of time it takes to make a BPC - still have it just slightly longer than the time it takes to MFR one, but only by a little bit - this would promote the ability for other builders to arrange purchase agreements with BPO holders and they can fly their BPC's to areas where they want to make their own market as a [item] seller c) increase the money making drivers such as concord bounties so it can be afforded at current price ALSO - you need to allow us to see the markets of other regions ... it does not make sense that i can see whats for sale in a system 20 jumps away in the same region, but not the system 2 jumps away because it's a different region ... i highly suggest you make it a skill with a couple pre-requisites that will allow us to see the markets of other regions where skill 1 allows visibility of 1 additional region per level and once at level 5 there is a 2nd tier skill that allows 1 more region per skill level up to visibility of ALL regions at level 5 of said skill 2 (almost like another career path where you're more of a market maker and a broker - i mean if Nike can utilize china to make cheaper shoes to increase profits at the cost and time of shipping overseas ... why shouldn't i be able to haul a load of 100 missile launchers from caldari rich Lonetrek to maybe thge not so abundant Heimatar simply because i took the time to train the skill and allow mysef the opportunity to analyze the market) final thought: leveling the playing field needs to be promoted - massive conglomerate alliances who have an extensive network of tech 2 BPOs have a strangle hold on the pvp battlefield as well as the profit potential of selling in open market ... allowing other alliances and players to have reduced cost access to such items will drive competition and drive prices down ... i'm not saying make more BPO's ... but rather make a method for players to gain access through more in game EFFORT (player/player trade deals etc) rather than a chance position of opportunity with a research agent
Adamus TorK Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.20 12:37:00 - [152] Edited by: Adamus TorK on 20/08/2006 12:45:32 Quote: # Player A has 100 million ISK, Player B has a "Generic Battleship". Total ISK: 100 million # Player A buys the "Generic Battleship" from Player B for 70 million. Total ISK: Still 100 million. # Player A insures the ship for 30 million ISK, ISK dissapears into the void. Total ISK: Now only 70 million! # Player A loses the ship within the insurance period, gets a payout of 100 million. Player A has 100 million, Player B has 70 million, Total ISK: 170 million! [ACK!] Actually Player A would buy an another 'Generic Battleship' from the insurance payout for 70M and insure again for 30M. Player A bought a 100M worth Battleship. Player B got 70M ISK for his battleship, beacuse its was the only price he was able sell it. No, insurance payout not puts any ISK in EVE's economy. Its keeps the players value's, just as in the real word, expect that EVE's Insurance Company is not dynamic. Its still pay 100M for a 70M worth ship. There was 170M ISK at the start too. Player B's Battleship worth only 70M on the market, while the Insurance Company still estimated it for 100M. Whatever you say, the only that that brings ISK into the economy here is NPC Bounty and Agent Reward. Mining, looting and receive items from Agents are fine. These are Free Goods. Anyone can have them, and these items only worth as much as other players pay for it. Also T2 Stuff does nothing with economy in this case: The T2 BPO owners/sellers sell their items at price as much as the customers pay for it. In my opinion, the 16M cost 425mm Railguns are not beacuse the inflation or hyperinflation. Its beacuse the T2 Monopoly. And the Battleship insurance has nothing to do with it. CCP gave too high Bounty for the Agent Rewards and NPCs in belts. Agent missions and Complexes are Farmalbe.... what were you waiting for? My solution: less ISK reward and bounty < more loot and item offer PS: Remember this: In every economy, things WORTH as much as people PAY for it. ---------------------------------
Kropotkin Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2006.08.20 13:57:00 - [153] Am I the only one who cannot see the graphs in the original devblog? Dissecting the HTML, I find their links point into staff.ccpgames.com which I suppose might not be publicly accessible.
Brian Detaah Destructive Influence	Posted - 2006.08.20 15:30:00 - [154] Edited by: Brian Detaah on 20/08/2006 15:33:12 Originally by: Adamus TorK Edited by: Adamus TorK on 20/08/2006 12:45:32 Quote: # Player A has 100 million ISK, Player B has a "Generic Battleship". Total ISK: 100 million # Player A buys the "Generic Battleship" from Player B for 70 million. Total ISK: Still 100 million. # Player A insures the ship for 30 million ISK, ISK dissapears into the void. Total ISK: Now only 70 million! # Player A loses the ship within the insurance period, gets a payout of 100 million. Player A has 100 million, Player B has 70 million, Total ISK: 170 million! [ACK!] Actually Player A would buy an another 'Generic Battleship' from the insurance payout for 70M and insure again for 30M. Player A bought a 100M worth Battleship. Player B got 70M ISK for his battleship, beacuse its was the only price he was able sell it. No, insurance payout not puts any ISK in EVE's economy. Its keeps the players value's, just as in the real word, expect that EVE's Insurance Company is not dynamic. Its still pay 100M for a 70M worth ship. There was 170M ISK at the start too. Player B's Battleship worth only 70M on the market, while the Insurance Company still estimated it for 100M. Whatever you say, the only that that brings ISK into the economy here is NPC Bounty and Agent Reward. Mining, looting and receive items from Agents are fine. These are Free Goods. Anyone can have them, and these items only worth as much as other players pay for it. In short, no. The example of insurance adding isk is totally right and you are wrong. The size of the payout from the insurance compared to the price does not matter. If said payout was only 70 mill then the net added isk is 40 million isk. Insurance creates isk because its not really an insurance system. In an insurance system you pool risk (that your ship might be blow up) of alot of players. The sum of all premiums paid from all people insure has to (ideally) be larger or equal to the cost all damages incurred by those insured. Because people are risk adverse (wiki it youself, you lazy bastards) there is a margin between what people are willing to pay to be insured and what it cost to insure them. If this was true for the eve insurance (that the sum of the losses (insured losses) was equal to the sum of the premiums) then it would be isk-amount neutral. Oh, and bounties from rats, minerals and Agent rewards are not free goods. They do require both labour and capital to get. Free goods are only goods with no social oppotunity cost, since the above mentioned require work then they have an oppotunity cost. No free lunch. And prices and value (social utility) are only the same if, and only if, there are no externalities and everything is traded on the market. Just because something is not traded and so has no price, say babies, doesnt mean they are worthless. To be priceless is not to be worthless ;) ------------------------------------------------ `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.' `The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.' `The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master - - that's all.'
Adamus TorK Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.20 16:12:00 - [155] Yes, I recalculated it, and every that kind of loss puts 70M in eve system :/ ---------------------------------
Soul Huntress Out Siders	Posted - 2006.08.20 20:08:00 - [156] first wranglydoodely staff.eve-online.com isnt a good place to put pics on as i atleast cant see them. and secondly you talk about comparing demand vs production on T2 items comparing to RL economics wich is totally wrong as in RL you would have a multitude of new manufacturers after 3months who have copied the product and is selling it like mad. in eve 7ppl have a constant high cashflow into their wallets for years due to a seriously flawed lottery system that CCP havent been arsed to fix. these 7ppl that have lets say a vagabond BPO talk to eachother and start pushing up prices to silly amounts and then they use the silly amount of cash they earned for years and buy up as many of other BPO's as they can and then keep building but dont sell to starve the market and thus push the price up even higher. rinse/repeat and continue to the next T2 item as it has been shown before that those who gets BPO's rarely get only 1 but multiple BPO's. and not just 2-3 but there have been numerous reports of the same ppl getting 7-8 BPO's. and still with now around 30k active people on the server we still have the same amount of BPO's released as when the server was at 3k active people. CCP created the HAC shortage CCP made sure that the 7 who got their BPO(with a seriously flawed lottery) would be able to capitalize on it for years and not a couple of months tops as in the RL economics as you are comparing eve economics mechanism's. start selling all T2 BPO's on open market 3 months after the agent release.
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2006.08.20 20:43:00 - [157] Wow, I just read this entire thread. Nice to see that EVE has such a varied userbase Now excuse me while I go outside and let my head explode. For the state for the state for the state

Redundancy	Posted - 2006.08.21 10:11:00 - [158] I'm still kicking admins about the staff web server.

WhiskeyDP	Posted - 2006.08.21 11:15:00 - [159] i see lots of whine in here. if something is too expensive dont buy it. u get 2 muninns/claymore/sleipnir for the same price as 1 vagabond and its the same with several other t2 ships. i have said it before and ill say it again: its too much isk in the game and it all started with lvl4 missions when they started with those and i get the feeling it just getting worse and worse(ofc this is just my oppinion. i dont have stats to show it but would be great to see if its actually is true) ================== === wts BPC's - check my bio. Best Collection ingame?
Lake The Praxis Initiative Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.08.21 11:18:00 - [160] There seems to be an (unsurprising) confusion about the concept of 'ISK Faucet'. Just because you personally gain ISK, or lose ISK doesn't make it an ISK Faucet/Sink. We're thinking in the scope of the entire game here. But to simplify the concept assume you are the entire game. There are no other players, there's no one to trade with. Generally: If you can do something that increases the amount of ISK in your wallet without taking it out of someone else's it's an ISK Faucet. So ship destruction is actually an indirect ISK Faucet through insurance. Every ship that's destroyed in EVE creates ISK from the insurance pay out. Subtract the cost of the insurance (zero, in the case of 'basic insurance') to figure the ISK Faucet 'value'. Conversely every insurance contract that expires after the 12 week duration is an ISK Sink.

Zarch AlDain Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2006.08.21 13:53:00 - [161] Originally by: Lake Edited by: Lake on 21/08/2006 11:51:37 I wouldn't be so proud about the price of T1 ships/modules/etc not inflating. In empire space where production capacity is plentiful supply is virtually unlimited and as such prices are tied to just a few ticks above the sum price of their constituent minerals. So why is the price of minerals not inflating? Zarch AlDain The Blackwater Brigade
Lake The Praxis Initiative Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.08.21 14:53:00 - [162] The price is remaining fairly consistent for (the full basket of) minerals because the value of isk and the value of those minerals are both dropping at about the same rate. A useful tool when thinking of economics (in eve or elsewhere I suppose) is to consider how many player-hours it takes to produce, or earn the isk for, some item or result. Obviously the number of player-hours required to mine (or rat + refine loot, etc) the minerals for a battleship has dropped with the advent of t2 miners, mining barges, mining laser upgrade modules, mining foreman skill, etc. So if a given basket of minerals takes less effort to procure, but costs the same, then the value of isk must have dropped in equal proportion to the effort required, all other things being equal (and rarity shouldn't be too big of a factor yet, there are still plenty of asteroids out there that go un-mined).
Cker Heel ISS Logistics Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.08.21 15:07:00 - [163] Originally by: Alyx Pretzel I'd really like to see discussion of the base mineral side of the economy. The cool stats would be universal refinery input and output. For all the station refineries and mobile refineries in EvE, how much ore/ice/scrap goes in, and how many minerals are produced. Per day. Add in moon harvester output, and this would be a decent proxy for gross universal production. Then publish insurace stats(ships lost per day) and you have gross universal destruction :-). Aside from the CPI(consumer price inflation) basket, monetary baskets I've seen consist of base tradeable commodities -- like copper and cement. So an EvE basket would have minerals and moon raws. Hmm, using prices of moon raws to track ISK value may be more interesting since raws are not dropped and very rarely refined from scrap. On the otherhand they are not traded as heavily as minerals, so the results would be more volatile. Originally by: Soul Huntress comparing demand vs production on T2 items comparing to RL economics wich is totally wrong as in RL you would have a multitude of new manufacturers after 3months who have copied the product and is selling it like mad Hardly. Take commercial jets. Boeing and Airbus have very limited production ability with waiting lists of years for new jets. If they could produce more, they would, but their factories are running flat out and there is absolutely no way to increase how many jets are produced this year. That sounds exactly like t2 to me.
Diragi Paradox v2.0 Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2006.08.21 15:18:00 - [164] Edited by: Diragi on 21/08/2006 15:19:21 Originally by: Cker Heel Originally by: Soul Huntress comparing demand vs production on T2 items comparing to RL economics wich is totally wrong as in RL you would have a multitude of new manufacturers after 3months who have copied the product and is selling it like mad Hardly. Take commercial jets. Boeing and Airbus have very limited production ability with waiting lists of years for new jets. If they could produce more, they would, but their factories are running flat out and there is absolutely no way to increase how many jets are produced this year. That sounds exactly like t2 to me. Exactly; what the concept people are missing is called barriers to entry Research and development - some products, such as microprocessors, require a massive upfront investment in technology which will deter potential entrants. ie: aquiring the T2 BPO would be your "massive upfront investment in technology" So to see if there's inflation in T2 items take the skillbook sales vs hac prices graph at take it one step further. From that graph we can see that the two are highly correlated... however I would suggest that there is still inflation there (the people who bought the hac books and quit, or have moved on to dreads, etc...)
Lake The Praxis Initiative Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.08.21 15:26:00 - [165] Originally by: Cker Heel Take commercial jets. Boeing and Airbus have very limited production ability with waiting lists of years for new jets. If they could produce more, they would, but their factories are running flat out and there is absolutely no way to increase how many jets are produced this year. That sounds exactly like t2 to me. The virtual impossibility of constructing the infrastructure to build a jumbo jet from scratch in the next 12 months does not mean that if projected world demand for jumbo jets was expected to rise in the next decade production couldn't be increased. That's the situation we have with T2 BPOs. They're running at full tilt and no amount of demand, even if the Cerberus price hits 3B/each, will make them run any meaningfully faster. And, to head off another one, it's also similar but not equivalent to patents. As someone already mentioned it's in the patent holder's interest to keep prices at a 'sweet spot'. If someone purchased all the Cerberus BPOs, and then offered them for no less than 3Bn a piece, they'd make essentially nothing (there are collectors in EVE). In this simplified case where supply is fixed the producers should raise prices so there is precisely as much demand (at that price) as they can supply. What EVE is progressing towards but still lacks to a real significant degree is production infrastructure. You get a little bit of the effect with production queues (having to plan ahead, cyclic overstock, etc), but it won't get really interesting unless the devs really embrace POS production by reducing factory availability (or hitting 800,000 subscribers, ahem).
Athren Soulsteal Gallente Orion Faction	Posted - 2006.08.21 18:45:00 - [166] Edited by: Athren Soulsteal on 21/08/2006 18:49:40 Below are some important economic terms as they relate to games and directly to EVE which is a GAME Inflation is a rise in the general level of prices, as measured against some baseline of purchasing power. This is where an item, such as a medium hybrid charge, has a base price of ten (10) isk. If you have to pay twelve (12) isk this month for the item which sold for 10 isk last month then you have inflation because you ISK is worth less than before. Deflation is a decrease in the general price level, over a period of time This is where an item, such as a medium hybrid charge, has a base price of ten (10) isk. If you have to pay five (5) isk this month for the item which sold for 10 isk last month then you have deflation because you ISK is worth more than before. Stabilization is when someone tries to prevent a recent item price from dropping below the inflated price by placing buy orders slightly above that price. This is where a player, with a vested interest, will place buy orders at a higher price than the deflated price. The player would buy the medium hybrid charge at eight (8) isk to both raise the price from the deflated price of five (5) isk and to keep the base price from being reset. Base Price is the cost of producing an item. Note: time and skill are not counted in games for base price. The base price for a medium hybrid charge would be the cost of the materials (value) plus the percentage of the Blue Print plus the cost of the manufacturing slot. Ok now here is where it gets a bit tricky because not every player has the same cost of producing goods. Actually here is where the PVP in manufacturing comes in because things such as faction rating with your manufacturing stations, whether you buy or mine your own materials, using a BPO or a BPC etcà come into play. But for this discussion I will use general numbers and use a 100 run BPC for the example. The base price of the medium hybrid charge will be the minerals cost (5 isk) plus the cost of BPC in this case 50 isk divided by the runs (50 /100r = 0.5 isk a unit) plus the cost of renting the factory say 100 isk divided by the unit run (100 / 100r = 1 isk unit). Note it actually cost less per unit if you make more of an Item. Making 100 scorpions in a run can actually save you 75% on the cost of making one scorpion but thatÆs a different discussion. Ok the formula for the base price is ((5 isk) + (50 /100r = 0.5) run (100 / 100r = 1) = base price). In this case the base price would be 6.5 isk so selling at 10 isk would net you 3.5 isk per unit profit. Also the base price of 6.5 isk would be the Floor Price. Incidentally the Ceiling Prices is typically 200% above base/floor or in this case 13 isk, prices below ceiling prices are considered fair profit. Artificial Pricing is placing an itemÆs price higher than it should be because the seller has an artificial monopoly. Using the example of the medium hybrid charge, lets say that I have the only BPO copy in the game this gives me an Artificial Monopoly because I am the only one that can manufacture this item. Do not confuse this with one of a kind consumable item such as having a legendary set (Blood Dragons armor, shield, and sword). The difference is that it is not an item to collect but an item that can be manufactured. Because I have the monopoly I could sell medium hybrid charges at 1000 isk which is 20,000% profit. No other game would ever let such an imbalance to occur. Artificial Monopoly is when a minuscule group of players is given an item that should have been disseminated to a larger group of players. Below is a perfect example of what an Artificial Monopoly is. ôLetÆs say that I am the only baker anywhere so I can charge whatever I want for my bread. Because I am also the Kings brother no one is allowed to make bread so I also have no competition.ö
Athren Soulsteal Gallente Orion Faction	Posted - 2006.08.21 18:46:00 - [167] Edited by: Athren Soulsteal on 21/08/2006 18:46:46 In EVE the Blue Print Lottery and lack of seeded BPO has created not only an artificially Monopoly but has created Artificial Inflation. Artificial Inflation is where an artificial price rises because players are gaining more money and thus able to pay more. Instead of the price rising because isk is worth less or could buy less the price is raised because players are getting richer. Again using the medium hybrid charge example if because players are making millions of isk daily I raise my price from the artificial 1000 isk to 2000 isk then I have been allowed to artificially inflate the economy. Remember that my base price has not changed therefore I have not raised my price for any other reason but greed. Of course if I actually had competition I would never have been able to create the artificial pricing in the first place. Yes there are isk faucets and sinks but if you have a healthy economy it all balances out. Simply put, there has to be an open non-monopolistic market selling and buying consumables at fair profits. So get the Reverse Engineering and Invention in game as well as seed the market with 10,000 (10% of the player base) of the existing T2 BPOs and EVE will be back on tract, well at least the economy will. The hardest part for most of the posters to keep in mind is that EVE is a game and should be fun for the majority not a select few. So what if 50% of the EVE players get t2 BPOs and the prices drop to realistic game prices. All it would mean is that all of EVE will be having fun not just the 1-2% that has the current monopoly. Games should be fun for all not just a privileged few. Quote: Think about the people that did fight you fairly. Think.... that were honorable and helped you out in times of need. Those are the real heroes of EVE. I wish I could fit all the Quote
WhiskeyDP	Posted - 2006.08.21 19:01:00 - [168] Edited by: WhiskeyDP on 21/08/2006 19:02:04 why does ppl only stare them selfs blind on bpo's like some hac's(not all have a huge profit/month), cap2's and so on. overall buying(from someone) a t2 bpo is just as bad investment as many t1. seed 10k more bpo's of each type and u will have a no market at all. the isk will still be ingame and wouldnt help anything. i said it before: instead of getting stuck on a few selective ships/modules, start using other options if its too expensive and the producers must lower their prices. i dont understand why ppl whine about hac's(yes its mostly hac prices and cap2's they whine about) use either the hac that isnt so expensive or use the command ships(those bpo's who have been sold on auction lately have about 2years wait before the isk they invested are back in wallet). i can name plenty with t1 bpo's that is much better then that ;) ================== === wts BPC's - check my bio. Best Collection ingame?
WhiskeyDP	Posted - 2006.08.21 19:08:00 - [169] Edited by: WhiskeyDP on 21/08/2006 19:09:42 another thing: lots of isk isnt the same as having fun. it doesnt have to be a "i win button". as long as u enjoy the game(what ever u do in eve) and make new friends u should be happy, but mainly it comes down to enjoying what u are doing. ofc everyone wants to work for something else. i would rather have the feeling i had when i first warped with my noob ship or the feeling i had when i bought my first omen even if i had to travel 60+ jumps to buy it instead of maybe 500b in assets. sure isk helps but its not necessary and vital for enjoying this game. again i say its way too much isk ingame and its too easy to get them ================== === wts BPC's - check my bio. Best Collection ingame?
Depko	Posted - 2006.08.21 21:14:00 - [170] I am very interested into macroeconomics and this blog described how the inflation works. I don't agree, that destroying things (e.g. ships blown up) is the main way fighting inflation. The oposite is true, then faster are things destroyed(e.g. HACs) than higher is the demand for them. than higher the demand, than higher the prices. In real world economy, the issued money (by a centra bank) is backed up by GDP growth. If players create (loot, produce, get from agent) more things, then the additional money from agent is backed by real value and no inflation may happen. Inflation happens, if there is more money available than things that can be bought for it. E. g. 500 mil. ISK in game, 5 HACs in game => average price of a HAC is 100 mil. ISK. If players earn 600 mil ISK but there will be one more HAC, 6 HACs, then there is still no inflation. Let's say, 2 HACs are destroyed, 2 players want to buy 2 HACs from the remaining 4 HACs. then the price will go up even if there was a "money sink" in destroying 2 HACs, because there is higher demand compared to the supply, than before. the rising wealth of the players alone, isn't a reason to worry about inflation. You should worry about inflation, if money is growing faster than the ammount of the goods in market. That can be solved by players earning less money, or by producing more goods,(e.g. new items in game, faster production times, issuing more BPOs for inflated goods). In real world economy, the inflated money goes to the governement as an hidden tax. in eve the inflated money goes to Tech II producers. What justifies it ? In real world economy, iin case of inflation, the central bank would raise interest rates. they money would be taken from market to banks, and the demans would be lowered. but there is no such thing in eve.

Depko	Posted - 2006.08.21 21:25:00 - [171] Originally by: Kanuo Ashkeron Originally by: Brian Detaah "If you add just money you get inflation, if you add just quantity you get deflation." Its this part I disagree with. It doesnt follow from the equation that if money supply rises then prices rise. It only follows if quantity is constant. PS: In economics and in movies, whenever i hear "austrians" are involved, i reach for my gun. Above is only a simplification, to demonstrate the effects of adding either money or quantity. Of course you will never get constant quantity in a real system. The point is, that both should be increased not only one. I agree with you very much. Putting more ISK into the game isn't the only reason for inflation. the second reason is having not enough goods in game that will be bought by players. With 10% more money in economy, and 9% GDP growth, you get 1% inflation.
Depko	Posted - 2006.08.21 21:32:00 - [172] I think GDP could be calculated by making a sum off: - mined ore - refined minerals from ore - produced ships - looted things from missions - LP from agent It's questionable by my opinion, if the missions for agents can be considered "services" and consequently a part of GDP.
Bagehi Caldari BFG Industries	Posted - 2006.08.21 21:33:00 - [173] It seems someone is misusing ôeconomic termsö to prove a point. So, in an effort to keep things clear, I will try to straighten out some misconceptions. Edited by: Athren Soulsteal on 21/08/2006 18:49:40 Below are some important economic terms as they relate to games and directly to EVE which is a GAME Inflation is a rise in the general level of prices, as measured against some baseline of purchasing power. This is where an item, such as a medium hybrid charge, has a base price of ten (10) isk. If you have to pay twelve (12) isk this month for the item which sold for 10 isk last month then you have inflation because you ISK is worth less than before. - Not true. Inflation is a decrease in the value of money compared to a standard. Often inflation is valued as the currency compared to gold, or the currency compared to a weighted average of other currencies, or compared to the weighted average for basic food stuff (wheat, butter, and beef are commonly used). Just because a single item changes in price, does not mean inflation has occurred, that is called ôprice fluxuationö. Deflation is a decrease in the general price level, over a period of time This is where an item, such as a medium hybrid charge, has a base price of ten (10) isk. If you have to pay five (5) isk this month for the item which sold for 10 isk last month then you have deflation because you ISK is worth more than before. - Again, inflation and deflation are measures of the value of the money, not the value of the product. Stabilization is when someone tries to prevent a recent item price from dropping below the inflated price by placing buy orders slightly above that price. This is where a player, with a vested interest, will place buy orders at a higher price than the deflated price. The player would buy the medium hybrid charge at eight (8) isk to both raise the price from the deflated price of five (5) isk and to keep the base price from being reset. - Market Stabilization occurs only through government intervention or monopolistic practices (which can range from single major seller/buyer market pressure to cartel price manipulation). Artificial Pricing is placing an itemÆs price higher than it should be because the seller has an artificial monopoly. (Artificial pricing can also be when a seller undercuts below ôcostö û also known as ômarket dumpingö) Artificial Monopoly is when a minuscule group of players is given an item that should have been disseminated to a larger group of players. Below is a perfect example of what an Artificial Monopoly is. ôLetÆs say that I am the only baker anywhere so I can charge whatever I want for my bread. Because I am also the Kings brother no one is allowed to make bread so I also have no competition.ö I have never heard of an Artificial Monopoly before. Wikipedia doesnÆt list it. My economics books donÆt list it. I canÆt even find it in any of the periodicals electronically listed at my school. My conclusion is that you made this term up. Monopolies are only artificial. A true monopoly can only be imposed by a government. Whenever a corporation attempts to create a monopoly, they will fail as they will either make it very profitable for someone else to enter the market or they will make an alternative an economically viable option. There are only two forms of monopolies: a government owned monopoly where they make illegal to compete with them and a government imposed monopoly (which is most commonly referred to as a patent). So, as I previously posted, the current T2 situation is similar to the market release of a product. There is a "patent" on the products so competition is scarce. When the "patents" expire, expect prices to decrease as competition increases (this being the release of the new science skills).
Depko	Posted - 2006.08.21 22:17:00 - [174] Originally by: Bagehi So, as I previously posted, the current T2 situation is similar to the market release of a product. There is a "patent" on the products so competition is scarce. When the "patents" expire, expect prices to decrease as competition increases (this being the release of the new science skills). The reason of a patent is to pay back the investements done before something, e.g tech II equipment was invented. What investements have the tech II BPO owners done, to be covered by a patent ? How long it takes to bay back to them the reporting by a research agent and doing nothing more for the BPO ?
voidvim Minmatar Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.08.22 01:23:00 - [175] great blog more please
Lake The Praxis Initiative Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.08.22 09:16:00 - [176] For those of you just skimming along because the thread is now to page six: If you missed Bagehi's post #174 a few above this one, go back and read his text in italics. Good stuff.
Athren Soulsteal Gallente Orion Faction	Posted - 2006.08.22 19:58:00 - [177] Edited by: Athren Soulsteal on 22/08/2006 20:00:39 Quote: have never heard of an Artificial Monopoly before. Wikipedia doesnÆt list it. My economics books donÆt list it. I canÆt even find it in any of the periodicals electronically listed at my school. My conclusion is that you made this term up. Monopolies are only artificial. A true monopoly can only be imposed by a government. Whenever a corporation attempts to create a monopoly, they will fail as they will either make it very profitable for someone else to enter the market or they will make an alternative an economically viable option. There are only two forms of monopolies: a government owned monopoly where they make illegal to compete with them and a government imposed monopoly (which is most commonly referred to as a patent). Ok if you read my post then you know I said "In Games" Did you search the Posts of the major MMOGs? Items in games are not real nor are the "money" in games. They are not handled like real life items but are instead handled but the economics in a game. Seriously when is the last time you went into the park near your house and got a few silver pieces for killing a troll? If you were able to do that just think where your local economy would be. You can not apply RL economics to games, besides working Game economics have been around for years. Go find someone that has played MUDs/MMODs/MMOGs and ask them about game economics and to explain to you Artificial Monopoly/ Inflation is. And your joking about Wikipedia right? Or are you seriously saying that if someting is not in wikipedia it doesnt exist. Go to wikipidia and type "shield recharger" EVE is a game which is suppoed to be fun for the many not the few. Quote: Think about the people that did fight you fairly. Think.... that were honorable and helped you out in times of need. Those are the real heroes of EVE. I wish I could fit all the Quote
Coran Ordus Ominous Corp Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2006.08.22 20:36:00 - [178] Originally by: Athren Soulsteal EVE is a game which is suppoed to be fun for the many not the few. All economics aside, you are making the assumption that flying a HAC is more fun than not flying one. I don't see how this is true. Furthermore, if 50% of the population was flying them, I think people would be having significantly less fun.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.22 21:30:00 - [179] Originally by: Eilie Originally by: Blog Since this is a very important point that people seem to miss very frequently when this is discussed: trading money between two people doesn't (usually) increase the amount of money in circulation. Although trading money between people doesn't affect the amount of money in circulation, it can still result in inflation as in this common scenario: Step 1) Person X sells tons of GTCs for ISK. Step 2) Person X uses his 'free' ISK to bid higher on T2 BPOs and other rare items. Step 3) Inflation! Resulting in the real players having to work harder to have a chance to win a T2 BPO auction! I bet 100 mil that this post is deleted which will prove CCP knows they really messed up the economy with GTC sales and unfair T2 lotto! If I had seen this post earlier I'd have taken your bet, and 100mil isk.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.08.22 21:31:00 - [180] Originally by: Eilie Originally by: Blog Since this is a very important point that people seem to miss very frequently when this is discussed: trading money between two people doesn't (usually) increase the amount of money in circulation. Although trading money between people doesn't affect the amount of money in circulation, it can still result in inflation as in this common scenario: Step 1) Person X sells tons of GTCs for ISK. Step 2) Person X uses his 'free' ISK to bid higher on T2 BPOs and other rare items. Step 3) Inflation! Resulting in the real players having to work harder to have a chance to win a T2 BPO auction! I bet 100 mil that this post is deleted which will prove CCP knows they really messed up the economy with GTC sales and unfair T2 lotto! If I had seen this post earlier I'd have taken your bet, and 100mil isk.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.