| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
   |
Posted - 2007.11.07 13:39:00 -
[1]
BSAC Mineral Market Manipulation û MinMa«
As I mention before, IÆm interested in raising a large amount of ISK (~ 1-2 Trillion) with the purpose of manipulating the mineral market. If you have any concerns regarding security please address them elsewhere. This post is to gauge interest in this area.
Although I would love to reveal the exact details of how I plan to run this venture, I donÆt want the idea to be scooped. Therefore, IÆm going to release just enough information to give a rough idea of the venture. The basic idea is very simple and it has been used successfully by others in the past; buy low, hold, sell high. IÆm adding a new twist to this basic idea. IÆm going to manipulate the mineral market by ôartificiallyö creating demand and supply on target minerals and items. In order for this to work, I need a large sum of ISK. For instance, in Metropolis alone 300 Billion ISK in minerals was traded last month.
About a year ago, I was fortunate enough to participate in Dr SlurmÆs OCR project. All the calculations shown here are based on his OCR .xls data distribution covering December 27, 2005-06. Interestingly, 3,771 Billion ISK in minerals was traded in Heimatar during that time. I would like to share the results from a simulation I ran to determine whether or not this idea is feasible. Using a single item, OCRÆs daily average mineral price, and a 1,248 Billion ISK budget spread over one year, I obtained the following:
Purchases: 1,248,640,780,070.40
Market Sales: 699,926,316,773.40
Delay Sales: 1,098,925,839,840.00
Total Sales: 1,798,852,156,613.40
Profits: 550,211,376,543.00
ROI (year): 44.06%
Monthly ROI: 3.088%
Believe or not, 3.088% is a very significant number; itÆs 550 Billion ISK that is actually free money available in the mineral market. This return does not include the effects of mineral price manipulation which will only increase returns. Also all minerals were bought and sold at the average OCR price. So there are additional earnings to be made by setting up buy/sell orders.
Links:
BSAC - Trust
OCR project
|
Vanya Nenharma
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 14:14:00 -
[2]
I'm with you as long as you will buy my minerals ;), than hold it for a while and I will provide more minerals cheaper than yours - when yours hit market. Because minerals does not require manufacturing you just need to get it from filthy miners.
|
Dr Slurm
General Commodities
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 14:31:00 -
[3]
Wow looks like you made some real use of that data.
It's better then Quafe! |
Hexxx
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 15:21:00 -
[4]
Shoot for 1.5 trillion.
Oh, and good luck. 
Consulting, IPO Template, and Stock/Bond definitions.
|
Kitex
Blacktag Test Labs
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 15:38:00 -
[5]
Meaning no disrespect, I'll be very surprised if anyone has any serious interest in funding this. It's just too much.
3% is probably an admirable return on 1-2 trillion, but the scale will be irrelevant to any prospective investor. I've come to expect at least 6%.
My biggest objection to your plan is that mineral manipulation on the kind of scale you're proposing would probably result in net loss to my operations exceeding 3% monthly.
Blacktag - Buy ships / Fittings / Drones / Ammo in BULK with Delivery! |
Mahavy Seth
Viper Squad
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 16:22:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Mahavy Seth on 07/11/2007 16:22:07
 Originally by: Kitex
Meaning no disrespect, I'll be very surprised if anyone has any serious interest in funding this. It's just too much.
3% is probably an admirable return on 1-2 trillion, but the scale will be irrelevant to any prospective investor. I've come to expect at least 6%.
My biggest objection to your plan is that mineral manipulation on the kind of scale you're proposing would probably result in net loss to my operations exceeding 3% monthly.
If you read all of it, hes just saying thats the average return on his calculations and it can/will change once he starts manipulating prices, I'm sure with proper data, and studying of the market once he starts this endevour it could reach 6%+ easily.
Lots of other investments have started out around 3-4% in this forum and have reached anywhere from 6-8% per month and stayed there after the first 3-4 months, and at the same time doubling the value of the shares/bonds purchased.
As I posted in his original thread, I support this, I think it will be very hard yes, but if he cant do it, how will it hurt you? You will get your isk back eventually, and still have made some on top.
I myself have taken over a market on a certain manufacturing product in Jita before and made billions very quickly once I got everything set up correctly. It will be the same for this, slow, then explosion.....if handled correctly that is. 
I think the pure potential in this outweighs the risk, but thats just my opinion.
Mahavy
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 16:23:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Dr Slurm
Wow looks like you made some real use of that data.
Yes indeed very useful information. I wished you had continued the OCR project. Do you by any chance have this yearÆs mineral data for Heimatar and Jita? Is it too much to ask?
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 16:32:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Hexxx
Shoot for 1.5 trillion.
Thanks for the support. However, the venture will start small, somewhere around 300 Billions. That should be large enough to cause some interesting ripple effects in the mineral market.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 16:50:00 -
[9]
Expected returns of 3% are just no where near the level I'd require to participate. I know it could go higher... but it would have to more than double for me to start thinking about it.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:03:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Kitex
3% is probably an admirable return on 1-2 trillion, but the scale will be irrelevant to any prospective investor. I've come to expect at least 6%.
The problem when people simply quote interest rates is that interest rates are ill defined. We have no standard definition and people compare simply by the numbers quoted. Some common definitions are:
1) Interest_rate = 100 * Dividend_per_share / Original_share_price
2) Interest_rate = 100 * Dividend_per_share / NAV_share_price
Definition one applies to ôBond typeö investments, where you get a defined return and your share value does not change over time. Definition two applies to ôGrowth typeö investments where your share intrinsic value growths over time. Both of these calculations donÆt even consider buy back price.
Comparing ôBond typeö investment with ôGrowth typeö investments based on rates alone is like comparing apples with oranges. I added this link to a pdf file that shows what IÆm trying to describe. The graph shows the proper way to compare 10,000 ISK invested in a 7% ôBond typeö vs. invested in a (4%, 5%, and 6%) ôGrowth typeö investment.
Graph
Our goal is to achieve 5-6 % ôgrowthö returns, which I think is doable based on the simple model presented in the OP.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:14:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Shadarle
Expected returns of 3% are just no where near the level I'd require to participate. I know it could go higher... but it would have to more than double for me to start thinking about it.
This is not a ôBondö Fund and there is no minimum guaranteed return. ItÆs a ôGrowthö Fund; you will get whatever returns the Fund makes. The 3% is based on a simple model buying directly from the market using 2006 average daily mineral prices.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:25:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Block Ukx
Originally by: Shadarle
Expected returns of 3% are just no where near the level I'd require to participate. I know it could go higher... but it would have to more than double for me to start thinking about it.
This is not a ôBondö Fund and there is no minimum guaranteed return. ItÆs a ôGrowthö Fund; you will get whatever returns the Fund makes. The 3% is based on a simple model buying directly from the market using 2006 average daily mineral prices.
I do understand this. But it is yet another thing I dislike when investing. I dislike growth investments in general (there are exceptions). I'd much rather get all the profits returned in dividends. Especially with a 300 billion IPO I don't think I'd want it growing any larger.
This is just the way I personally feel, I'm sure many others feel differently. But even if I knew there were 6% guaranteed returns I wouldn't definitely invest, yet the best guess atm is 3% returns with the hopes of 6-7%. That is simply too low for me these days, I've had my expectations raised. I want hopes to be 10%+ and expectations to be 6-7% minimum. Others won't be as demanding as I am though 
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:35:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Shadarle
This is just the way I personally feel, I'm sure many others feel differently. But even if I knew there were 6% guaranteed returns I wouldn't definitely invest, yet the best guess atm is 3% returns with the hopes of 6-7%. That is simply too low for me these days, I've had my expectations raised. I want hopes to be 10%+ and expectations to be 6-7% minimum. Others won't be as demanding as I am though
I respect your opinion and I wish I could promise 10%+ ôgrowthö percent, but that is simply impossible in the mineral market.
The power of a growth fund is in its compounded interest. A 3% ôgrowthö fund will outperform any 7% Bond. Granted it will take it will take 53 months to do it.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:38:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Block Ukx
but that is simply impossible in the mineral market.
I have to disagree here. I happen to know it isn't even hard to achieve. Though I've tried a bit less than 300 billion, it just argues the point that such large sums probably shouldn't be used.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:44:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Shadarle
I happen to know it isn't even hard to achieve. Though I've tried a bit less than 300 billion, it just argues the point that such large sums probably shouldn't be used.
Well, I agree with you. If you can make 10% ôgrowthö and scale it into the 100Æs of billions then you shouldnÆt invest here.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:51:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Block Ukx
Originally by: Shadarle
I happen to know it isn't even hard to achieve. Though I've tried a bit less than 300 billion, it just argues the point that such large sums probably shouldn't be used.
Well, I agree with you. If you can make 10% ôgrowthö and scale it into the 100Æs of billions then you shouldnÆt invest here.
I guess it depends what you're trying to achieve. If you want to give large returns then 300 billion is way too much. If you want to do something big that no one has done before then 300 billion is not enough (ISSO has done 300 bil).
But shareholders should know that having 300 billion will mean lower returns than if you had say 100 billion and lower still than having 50 billion, etc.
So it's a trade-off between returns and "wow".
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:56:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Shadarle
I guess it depends what you're trying to achieve. If you want to give large returns then 300 billion is way too much. If you want to do something big that no one has done before then 300 billion is not enough (ISSO has done 300 bil).
But shareholders should know that having 300 billion will mean lower returns than if you had say 100 billion and lower still than having 50 billion, etc.
So it's a trade-off between returns and "wow".
I thought is clearly stated it in the OP.
"IÆm interested in raising a large amount of ISK (~ 1-2 Trillion) with the purpose of manipulating the mineral market."
The 300 B is a starting point, not the end point.
|
Ramblin Man
Empyreum
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 18:03:00 -
[18]
It's an impressive idea, and it seems you have the numbers to back it up (nice use of the data, I must say!  ).
However, due to the nature of the ISK requirements and the fund itself, I think you'd attract more interest selling it as a cooperative with a few big players all moving the same way. However, I'll be the first to admit I know next to nothing about game theory and higher economics, so there may be reasons why doing it that way is unsound.
If it is, though, then that's the way I'd go. That way it's much more realistic that you'd reach critical mass on capital.
Welcome to the dark side old friend. .Shar
Where we hate people through words. |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 18:03:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Block Ukx
Originally by: Shadarle
I guess it depends what you're trying to achieve. If you want to give large returns then 300 billion is way too much. If you want to do something big that no one has done before then 300 billion is not enough (ISSO has done 300 bil).
But shareholders should know that having 300 billion will mean lower returns than if you had say 100 billion and lower still than having 50 billion, etc.
So it's a trade-off between returns and "wow".
I thought is clearly stated it in the OP.
"IÆm interested in raising a large amount of ISK (~ 1-2 Trillion) with the purpose of manipulating the mineral market."
The 300 B is a starting point, not the end point.
Indeed, but this runs counter to the goals of a regular investor. An investor generally wants profit. The more money you have the more you can manipulate the market, but the more money you have the harder it will be to make a good return.
Hopefully you'll be able to find people willing to invest 300 billion for your 3-6% profits. I'll stop posting here as I will only hurt your efforts it seems.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Ricdic
Caldari
Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd
Zzz
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 18:25:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Ricdic on 07/11/2007 18:25:58
Block you have run a public corp before now haven't you? What was the value of that corporation? Basically how much public isk were you in control of at that time? I think that's where the big problem will occur.
You are talking of 300b like it's church change and 1-2 trillion as your expectation. This is a phenomenal amount of money and frankly I don't think I could find anyone in this game I would feel comfortable holding onto such an amount.
As Rambling Man said, unless you can split it up somehow between a handful of people I can't see this having a chance.
edit: said wrong person
Need Empire Research Slots. Click here |
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 18:52:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Ricdic
Block you have run a public corp before now haven't you? What was the value of that corporation? Basically how much public isk were you in control of at that time? I think that's where the big problem will occur.
BSAC NAV is about 26 Billion.
Originally by: Ricdic
You are talking of 300b like it's church change and 1-2 trillion as your expectation. This is a phenomenal amount of money and frankly I don't think I could find anyone in this game I would feel comfortable holding onto such an amount.
As Rambling Man said, unless you can split it up somehow between a handful of people I can't see this having a chance.
Yes, you are absolutely correct trust is a BIG BIG issue in a huge Fund. ThatÆs why I introduced the MinMa Trustee system to mitigate security. In essence, the Trustee system will split assets among various investors.
|
FastLearner
Fury Holdings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 19:10:00 -
[22]
Edited by: FastLearner on 07/11/2007 19:14:53
I could, in theory, be interested in participating in such a scheme. There are two key elements I look for before investing Fury Holdings / Fury Bank funds:
1. How well protected am I against scamming/going inactive.
2. What is the likely range of profits (minimum, expected, maximum).
In the case of your proposal, #1 looks absolutely rock solid: the use of a trustee system means (if I read it right) that my only real exposure is to lack of performance. Trustees would be independently conducting organised and coordinated trading to affect the market in a beneficial (to them) way.
#2 is the potential problem for me - as the targetted returns are significantly below the minimum I'd consider acceptable. That, however, isn't necessarily the end of it: as I could see definite secondary profit sources arising from being a participant in such a scheme.
My main concern is the number of participants. To a large extent the success of such a scheme depends on certain key information being kept relatively confidential. Anyone involved in the scheme has the ability to privately profit from the information they have access to. From my perspective I'd seriously consider becoming involved in one of two scenarios:
1. If there will be a lot of trustees and a low entry barrier to becoming one then I'd buy-in at the absolute minimum, regard that pretty much as a written-off cost of doing business and use the information obtained to profit (even at your scheme's expense) to the maximum.
2. If the intent is to keep trustees to a minimum by setting a realistically high buy-in amount then I'd be far more tempted to commit a significant amount of ISK and restrict my side activities to those which would also benefit the scheme as a whole.
Trustees are not only entrusted with (their own) assets, but also with information on the scheme's goals, objectives and tactics. It's the latter which actually concerns me more than the former.
EDIT: I note I've set no figures on what I consider to be significant amounts of ISK. For the purpose of this discussion I'd be looking at 10 billion as about the absolute minimum to even be considered as a trustee - and I'd frankly prefer the barrier to be set even higher (30 billion, or 10% of initial capital would be about my ideal level of buy-in). There'd be nothing to stop potential trustees raising funds from smaller IPOS/bonds - I'd do a burst of promotion on Fury Bank (or finally get around to releasing the long-delayed Premium Bonds) to raise whatever funds I committed.
|
Pang Grohl
Gallente
Sudo Corp
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 20:17:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Block Ukx
Originally by: Shadarle
I guess it depends what you're trying to achieve. If you want to give large returns then 300 billion is way too much. If you want to do something big that no one has done before then 300 billion is not enough (ISSO has done 300 bil).
But shareholders should know that having 300 billion will mean lower returns than if you had say 100 billion and lower still than having 50 billion, etc.
So it's a trade-off between returns and "wow".
I thought is clearly stated it in the OP.
"IÆm interested in raising a large amount of ISK (~ 1-2 Trillion) with the purpose of manipulating the mineral market."
The 300 B is a starting point, not the end point.
It's a grand plan for sure. Though, I'd liken to using a sledgehammer when flyswatter will do. I see it taking far less than the monthly traded isk volume to be able to guide the market where you want it, and even less to maintain that position once you've achieved it.
***
Si non adjuvas, noces
(If you're not helping, you're hurting)
Improve Share Transfers |
Ambo
2nd Outcasters
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 20:32:00 -
[24]
It seems to me that this is a pretty risky proposal for, at best, moderate returns... I just don't see it being attractive unless someone has 10s of billions that they can literally do nothing else with.
|
Letias
Caldari
Teikoku Trade Conglomerate
Visions of Warfare
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 21:32:00 -
[25]
My concern with this venture is not trust so much as feasibility. You basically need 300 people to invest 1 billion each and from what i have seen average investment is towards the 250 million mark. I have no issue with the trust of the venture or the ability of Block, but i would prefer to invent in something that i know will sell out. At this stage is just don't see it happening.
I could at the moment put maybe a billion in but who would supply the other 299, would you still start with a small amount or is it pointless in this venture seeing as your aim is market manipulation?
|
FastLearner
Fury Holdings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 21:34:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Letias
My concern with this venture is not trust so much as feasibility. You basically need 300 people to invest 1 billion each and from what i have seen average investment is towards the 250 million mark. I have no issue with the trust of the venture or the ability of Block, but i would prefer to invent in something that i know will sell out. At this stage is just don't see it happening.
I could at the moment put maybe a billion in but who would supply the other 299, would you still start with a small amount or is it pointless in this venture seeing as your aim is market manipulation?
You don't want 300 people investing 1 billion, you want 10 people/organisations investing 30 billion or 6 people/organisations investing 50 billion.
|
Letias
Caldari
Teikoku Trade Conglomerate
Visions of Warfare
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 21:36:00 -
[27]
It might be what you want but how likley are you to get it?
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 21:44:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Letias
It might be what you want but how likley are you to get it?
Lets see... finding 300 people or finding 6-10 people. Seems like 6-10 is easier.
300 people don't even read this forum regularly, heh.
If this seemed very profitable he'd have no problem getting 30-50 billion from 6-10 people.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Letias
Caldari
Teikoku Trade Conglomerate
Visions of Warfare
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 21:47:00 -
[29]
Well it seems like he is having problems that kinda was my point.
|
Hanoi Hana
Mitsubishi Group
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 21:52:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Hanoi Hana on 07/11/2007 21:53:32
Will the returns remain at 3% after you begin trading and the market tries to follow you? The 3% is based off of no market response. I am not sure if this is significant or insignificant, because I'm not smart enough to extrapolate this further on my own.
How hard would you have to work to run this manipulation, also? Is it an hour per day, or 0.01 constantly for 40+ hours a week? It is one of many important things to consider when trusting somebody with a large amount of money.
|
FastLearner
Fury Holdings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 22:07:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Shadarle
Originally by: Letias
Well it seems like he is having problems that kinda was my point.
This is because stating returns of 3-6% is not going to get big investors to buy in.
I think this would work much better as a co-operative venture, rather than an IPO. Get a bunch of rich traders together and get them to promise to keep all discussions private. Work as a collective body or a cartel to manipulate prices one at a time. I'd be far more interested in this than in buying into an IPO.
I tend to agree that it may well work better as a cartel than as an IPO - as that avoids a whole ton of administrative oversight required to run a trustee-based IPO. I'd also suggest that minerals isn't the cheapest or most profitable market to manipulate. T2 materials, for example, would probably be a lot easier/more productive for a few different reasons.
|
Outa Rileau
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 22:22:00 -
[32]
I myself have played with the idea of mineral market manipulation, in my mind, however the scale of it would have to be huge, depending on where you decide to operate.
Once i thought of the effects it would have on the entire economy, it became even more interesting to me. The mineral market in eve seems very flexible when you consider how high and low miners are willing to go, as long as they are forced to. A plan such as yours would no doubt have impact on the movement of the average prices, and when or if the prices reach the currently implemented caps, it would dampen or halt any profit. Also thinking of the impact towards people, and the shareholders themselves is intruiging. You'd effectively be manipulating the foundation for almost the entire eve economy. If you fixed prices high, the price of goods would rise, if you managed to somehow lower them, you'd be reducing the cost of goods, but only to your financial ability. With the latter, you might just run out of isk.
In the long run, inflation might strike, and result in miners demanding more. If somehow prices would go low, you'd be effectively extending the amount of time needed by miners to make X worth of ISK at it's current value. If you happened to boost the price, all goods would gradually rise in price, and leave mission running and other forms of income less viable.
I don't know how much you'd be able to affect the market, or whether you even have the ability to manage a large enough chunk of it, but depending on how and where you decide to do your business, and how much you're willing the drive up prices, an investor might just reduce the value of their own investment in your endeavor over the long run. It's all tied together, and the mineral market is at the center.
If you happen to somehow get this going though, i might consider investing to keep my ISKies at their current value 
Disclaimer(And yes, it's for exactly this post!): I'm no financial genius nor professional; although i do believe my understanding of the eve market is somewhat good, i will never claim any of my thoughts on this to be the absolute truth or to even have any foundation at all. (this is an alt if you couldnt figure btw) |
Nebuchadnezzar I
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 22:47:00 -
[33]
It is an interesting concept and one many make a living off smallscale in EvE im sure. In EvE, as opposed to raw product manipulation IRL, i do not believe it can be done so massively - put simple due to one element: supply is essentially unlimited.
|
Kitex
Blacktag Test Labs
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 04:34:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Kitex on 08/11/2007 04:35:36
Originally by: Mahavy Seth
As I posted in his original thread, I support this, I think it will be very hard yes, but if he cant do it, how will it hurt you? You will get your isk back eventually, and still have made some on top.
My point was that mineral manipulation on such a large scale would negatively impact profits in my own ongoing operations. Profits from such manipulation aren't coming from nowhere - they'd be coming from other players, a large concentration of whom are probably reading this post and not even realizing that supporting this is bad for them in the long run. It all depends what sector of trade or industry you deal in.
Aside from finding it extremely unlikely to ever amass over 1% of EVE's total currency into a single IPO, those are the reasons I would not support this plan with ISK. I'd actually commit considerable assets, both time and currency, to disrupting said manipulations if any [fissure] in the plan or opportunity presented itself.
Mineral manipulation is just bad for bid'ness. From my perspective, of course
edit: c.rack is apparently a naughty word.
Blacktag - Buy ships / Fittings / Drones / Ammo in BULK with Delivery! |
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 14:27:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Letias
Edited by: Letias on 07/11/2007 21:35:38
I could at the moment put maybe a billion in but who would supply the other 299, would you still start with a small amount or is it pointless in this venture seeing as your aim is market manipulation?
No it is not pointless because I donÆt expect to raise 300B in one day.
Pang Grohl comment, ôI see it taking far less than the monthly traded isk volume to be able to guide the market where you want it,ö suggests that this idea might work with less ISK than anticipated. In reality, I donÆt need to collect 300 B to get started, and perhaps 90 B would be enough. At the present time I have no information to accurately determine how much isk is needed to manipulate one Region. The raised capital will be put into work immediately.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 14:33:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
How hard would you have to work to run this manipulation, also? Is it an hour per day, or 0.01 constantly for 40+ hours a week? It is one of many important things to consider when trusting somebody with a large amount of money.
I believe in working smarter not harder. No, IÆm not going to sit down and constantly update orders 0.01 isk at a time; it is not necessary. This venture is not about trading or manufacturing, it is about taking advantage of the market inefficiency.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 14:39:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Nebuchadnezzar I
It is an interesting concept and one many make a living off smallscale in EvE im sure. In EvE, as opposed to raw product manipulation IRL, i do not believe it can be done so massively - put simple due to one element: supply is essentially unlimited.
While resources are in ôunlimited", time is not. It takes time to turn those resources into something useful. Remember, only 3,771 Billion ISK in minerals was traded last year in Heimatar.
|
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 14:53:00 -
[38]
funny enough i think minerals do both too much volume to be susceptible to manipulation given the hard caps CCP has put in on prices -- you'll only sell trivial amounts above the hard caps to the ignorant -- and also not enough volume to liquidate your holdings fast enough if/once you do establish a price bubble.
your market data doesn't show you which stations those minerals are moving through. you need to capture order activity in quasi-realtime and this is easily manipulated (even unintentionally) by people cancelling orders.
if you focused on manipulating supply you could make some money, but you do it easily with very minute fractions of a trillion isk ;)
|
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 14:55:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Block Ukx
it is about taking advantage of the market inefficiency.
to expand on my comment about the market research you've done;
i think your data shows a fictional inefficiency. none of your posts make it sound like you've actually watched mineral buy and sell orders for very long.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 15:01:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Kitex
My point was that mineral manipulation on such a large scale would negatively impact profits in my own ongoing operations. Profits from such manipulation aren't coming from nowhere - they'd be coming from other players, a large concentration of whom are probably reading this post and not even realizing that supporting this is bad for them in the long run. It all depends what sector of trade or industry you deal in.
Aside from finding it extremely unlikely to ever amass over 1% of EVE's total currency into a single IPO, those are the reasons I would not support this plan with ISK. I'd actually commit considerable assets, both time and currency, to disrupting said manipulations if any [fissure] in the plan or opportunity presented itself.
Mineral manipulation is just bad for bid'ness. From my perspective, of course
I understand your point, and without me telling you the whole plan I wonÆt be able to convince you that this venture will not hurt your business. I strongly believe this plan will improve the eve economy.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 15:04:00 -
[41]
Originally by: tornpain
funny enough i think minerals do both too much volume to be susceptible to manipulation given the hard caps CCP has put in on prices -- you'll only sell trivial amounts above the hard caps to the ignorant -- and also not enough volume to liquidate your holdings fast enough if/once you do establish a price bubble.
your market data doesn't show you which stations those minerals are moving through. you need to capture order activity in quasi-realtime and this is easily manipulated (even unintentionally) by people cancelling orders.
if you focused on manipulating supply you could make some money, but you do it easily with very minute fractions of a trillion isk ;)
Your view of mineral market manipulation is totally different to what I have in mind.
|
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 16:03:00 -
[42]
Let me back up a bit.
Originally by: Block Ukx
In order for this to work, I need a large sum of ISK. For instance, in Metropolis alone 300 Billion ISK in minerals was traded last month.
The latter doesn't prove the former, and in fact hurts your argument.
And from the original thread:
Originally by: Block Ukx
I think the great appeal of this venture is its nature; to control and manipulate the mineral market. Looking at the size of this market, 100 Billion wonÆt do it.
How are you calculating your isk requirements, exactly?
Basically any trader in the reprocessing line of work "manipulates" the mineral market, and we all do it very successfully with much, much less isk, with much greater theoretical profit, though potential profit certainly hits an isk ceiling on a per-region basis.
You have to also figure that any meddling eventually will put more and more economic incentive on people to compete on the supply side rather than simply satisfying the demand side...
I guess the point I'm trying to make is you must be really bad at what you do (or are trying to do) if it takes you a trillion isk to completely dominate a region.
|
Saint Luka
The Illuminati.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 16:14:00 -
[43]
Potential, buy a seveer amount at a low-med price, making the market dry thus forcing prices up, once you feel prices are at a peak, sell. Once the market has crashed from said influx, buy again, rince and repeat.
Smart, with capital it can work well and bring in some awesome profits.
We'll just have too see who's up for such a gamble, shame i'm poor.
-
|
Hanoi Hana
Mitsubishi Group
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 16:33:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Block Ukx
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
How hard would you have to work to run this manipulation, also? Is it an hour per day, or 0.01 constantly for 40+ hours a week? It is one of many important things to consider when trusting somebody with a large amount of money.
I believe in working smarter not harder. No, IÆm not going to sit down and constantly update orders 0.01 isk at a time; it is not necessary. This venture is not about trading or manufacturing, it is about taking advantage of the market inefficiency.
Can you please explain how you plan to take advantage of market inefficiency if you are not updating the moment you get bid out? Won't letting orders sit below top spot cause you to lose out on your several percent?
This is an interesting idea, but I would like you to be more specific about what inefficiencies exist and a little more about how you plan to take advantage of them, so that we can discuss more the practical implementations rather than a simulation that likely assumes perfect efficiency on your part, which will not be had without you burning your eyeballs by staring at an LCD screen 23/7.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 16:58:00 -
[45]
Originally by: tornpain
How are you calculating your isk requirements, exactly?
300 billion is based on Metroplis monthly trades. Some have argued that I would need less. I have no way to know the exact amount needed to observe the changes IÆm looking for, but I would think 300 B should be enough to start with.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 17:06:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
Can you please explain how you plan to take advantage of market inefficiency...
Sorry, but I will not disclosed that information.
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
Won't letting orders sit below top spot cause you to lose out on your several percent?
You are still thinking like a trader. This venture is not your ussual by low sell high tactic.
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
Will the returns remain at 3% after you begin trading and the market tries to follow you?
I expect returns to be better than 3%. Target returns is 5-6%
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
The 3% is based off of no market response. I am not sure if this is significant or insignificant...
Yes, very significant. It is essentially free money sitting on the market.
|
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 17:59:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Block Ukx
Originally by: tornpain
How are you calculating your isk requirements, exactly?
300 billion is based on Metroplis monthly trades. Some have argued that I would need less. I have no way to know the exact amount needed to observe the changes IÆm looking for, but I would think 300 B should be enough to start with.
You presented 300 billion as the isk-volume traded in minerals through Metropolis in a month.
I am pretty sure you can do whatever you intend to do with as little as 3 billion isk per mineral, based on my personal experience in trading in the mineral markets -- I've personally manipulated the spread on individual minerals with less, though only briefly until someone with more money squeezed me out of my comfort zone.
Your proposal for 1-2 trillion sounds less than credible when you point-blank admit you have no idea how much money you need to run the venture you propose.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 18:17:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Shadarle on 08/11/2007 18:19:27
For any sort of price manipulation to work it has to be done in multiple regions and on some (not all) of the minerals.
Trit is the easiest to manipulate as it is the hardest to haul around in large quantities. If you buy out a billion trit from the market it will take a long time for that much to get hauled back... and people will pay an inflated price in that period.
Unfortunately trit still has a price ceiling, making it not worth doing this to.
The reason to have 300 billion or 1 trillion isk is not to cause a bubble but to keep the bubble inflated for a set period of time until you can sell off all your stuff at the inflated price. You do this for half of the minerals and hold it for several days if not a week in multiple regions. This causes the other minerals to start dipping in price to keep the basket price from jumping too far. As those dip low enough to let the bubble burst and you buy up mass quantities of all the other minerals instead and watch the whole situation reverse itself.
Rinse and repeat. You just need a massive amount of money to be able to manipulate the market across multiple regions and to be able to hold the manipulation for a long enough time that it effects the other minerals.
The only reason I'm giving this much away is because I don't think this will actually occur. Only people with 100+ billion could even attempt it... so I'm not worried about random people trying this.
But I see this being worth about 20-30% on each swing, which would take a week or two. So I would imagine if done correctly the returns would be in the 50% range monthly. It's WAYYYY too risky to do it for a meagerly 3-6% return as you could just as easily try this just as 20 freighter loads of high end minerals come in and overwhelm you.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 18:27:00 -
[49]
What Shadarle describes is already being done in game, and already has other people doing their best to disturb the market manipulators.
It's a shame it's not the kind of thing that gets more publicity. Maybe if we got prettier charts and graphs...
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 18:39:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Shadarle
But I see this being worth about 20-30% on each swing, which would take a week or two. So I would imagine if done correctly the returns would be in the 50% range monthly. It's WAYYYY too risky to do it for a meagerly 3-6% return as you could just as easily try this just as 20 freighter loads of high end minerals come in and overwhelm you.
You will be buying shares, so if you are correct and earnings are that hi you will receive them. IÆm going to distribute the profits. This is NOT a Bond offer.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 19:20:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Block Ukx
Originally by: Shadarle
But I see this being worth about 20-30% on each swing, which would take a week or two. So I would imagine if done correctly the returns would be in the 50% range monthly. It's WAYYYY too risky to do it for a meagerly 3-6% return as you could just as easily try this just as 20 freighter loads of high end minerals come in and overwhelm you.
You will be buying shares, so if you are correct and earnings are that hi you will receive them. IÆm going to distribute the profits. This is NOT a Bond offer.
The question is if you'd be doing the same thing I discussed or if you had other plans.
The only reason it would be hard to make 30% profit would be a lack of minerals to buy up, thus unused capital. If you maintained the bubble with 1/2 your money then the returns would only be 15%.
I honestly think 300 billion is overkill unless you're trading across every region in safe space and manipulating them all at the same time. In which case you may need that much if you try to hold prices steady for more than a few days.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 20:17:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Shadarle
The question is if you'd be doing the same thing I discussed or if you had other plans.
No, my plan is different. There wonÆt be any mass hauling and I wonÆt attempt to create a bubble like the one you described. However it will feed from those mineral swings like the one you explained.
Originally by: Shadarle
I honestly think 300 billion is overkill unless you're trading across every region in safe space and manipulating them all at the same time. In which case you may need that much if you try to hold prices steady for more than a few days.
For starters, IÆm going to focus in two Regions. You might be correct that 300 B is overkill and therefore IÆll attempt to raise money in phases, look at the effects of my plan, collect data, and then decide if more money is needed.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 21:16:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Block Ukx
There wonÆt be any mass hauling
Not sure if this was meant as a differentiation from my idea. But my strategy involved no hauling either. It seems to me any hauling would just be a LOT of work.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Nummb
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 21:38:00 -
[54]
I have been investing with Block since around February-March of 2007. He has been "in" the mineral market for a long time. I think he is unintentionally leaving out some information because as we like to say "it's a trade secret".
His BSAC mineral track record has been impressive, and those investors who have put in hundreds of millions of isk have seen growth. The thing is, he is running his business like a real company instead of a virtual pretend business that only works within the confines of a game. His business model has been to find a niche, study it and then reside in the background always having a hand in everything that goes on.
Also, he mentions the 300 million free isk sitting on the markets. That is an interesting and very valid but very misunderstood point. We talk all day long about buying low and selling high. We also talk about supply and demand etc...What we don't talk about is how the interactions all tie together. Everything in the market that can be produced (i.e. all T1 and T2 items) has a life cycle. I am not talking about items that can be looted from NPC's, only those items which need players to create them. There are two ways to buy from the market;  through a buy order, which 95% of Eve does not use or uses in very limited capicity due to the initial limit of 5 and through current sell orders which are put up by other players. It is not uncommon to open up the market and find lots of items and minerals up in sell orders that are less than buy orders in the same region. Most of this is due to people selling stuff in low sec for less than it goes for in high sec, but some of it boils down to the basics of all business...location, location, LOCATION.
Anyway, now I am rambling. Block already has a hand in the market, he just is asking for more money, hence the IPO to further his business plan.
-
|
Hanoi Hana
Mitsubishi Group
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 21:39:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Block Ukx
For starters, IÆm going to focus in two Regions. You might be correct that 300 B is overkill and therefore IÆll attempt to raise money in phases, look at the effects of my plan, collect data, and then decide if more money is needed.
How can you split your plan into parts? I was under perhaps a mistaken impression that it's all or nothing.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 21:56:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
How can you split your plan into parts? I was under perhaps a mistaken impression that it's all or nothing.
There seems to be a controversy as to what would be the ideal amount to manipulate the mineral market. I donÆt have any solid evidence to say that is 300 B, thatÆs my intuition. Certainly the plan can be put into action with less, but it might not be as effective.
So a possible compromise is to release the venture in stages, gather information and decide as to what should be the optimal size.
|
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 02:44:00 -
[57]
So you really have no clue how much isk you'll need? Christ, man, do a dry run with a couple billion and extrapolate.
|
FastLearner
Fury Holdings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 02:51:00 -
[58]
Originally by: tornpain
So you really have no clue how much isk you'll need? Christ, man, do a dry run with a couple billion and extrapolate.
That's just not possible. There's a "critical mass" of ISK required for any decent market manipulation - below that you get your fingers burned and learn nothing about what would happen with more capital. That critical mass varies depending on lots of factors (region, item, source of item etc). The tricky part is picking an initial invesmtment size for this which is definitely large enough to succeed - but doesn't leave too much ISK sitting around idle.
|
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 04:12:00 -
[59]
Obviously you pick an item with less volume. Do I have to do all the work for this for you and your alt?
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 04:20:00 -
[60]
Originally by: tornpain
Obviously you pick an item with less volume. Do I have to do all the work for this for you and your alt?
WTS: clues, by the cartload. Complementary cluebats and cluehammers included.
The mineral market is NOT like "any other market".
"Insights" you gather over price manipulation in any other markets DO NOT apply verbatim to the mineral market.
_
New character creation guide | [CNVTF] corp recruiting | Stacknerfs explained |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 04:30:00 -
[61]
Originally by: tornpain
Obviously you pick an item with less volume. Do I have to do all the work for this for you and your alt?
LOL at the idea that FL is the alt of the OP.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 04:34:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: tornpain
Obviously you pick an item with less volume. Do I have to do all the work for this for you and your alt?
WTS: clues, by the cartload. Complementary cluebats and cluehammers included.
The mineral market is NOT like "any other market".
"Insights" you gather over price manipulation in any other markets DO NOT apply verbatim to the mineral market.
Here's a clue for you: focusing on a pair of minerals might indeed involve less than 300 billion in volume. Or even a different hub, zomgs~!
In the future please feel free to convo me with similar brilliant additions to the discussion so that I may berate you more directly and appropriately -- I've added you to my address book so you may do so without CSPA charge.
|
Ricdic's Hoe
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 04:46:00 -
[63]
I <3 this thread
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 05:00:00 -
[64]
Originally by: tornpain
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: tornpain
Obviously you pick an item with less volume. Do I have to do all the work for this for you and your alt?
WTS: clues, by the cartload. Complementary cluebats and cluehammers included.
The mineral market is NOT like "any other market".
"Insights" you gather over price manipulation in any other markets DO NOT apply verbatim to the mineral market.
Here's a clue for you: focusing on a pair of minerals might indeed involve less than 300 billion in volume. Or even a different hub, zomgs~!
In the future please feel free to convo me with similar brilliant additions to the discussion so that I may berate you more directly and appropriately -- I've added you to my address book so you may do so without CSPA charge.
How interesting that another person equally annoying has the same first letter in his name. I'm curious, have you had problems with dancing staplers?
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 05:05:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Shadarle
I'm curious, have you had problems with dancing staplers?
What sort of epicurean delight lies buried in this subject? I might have to charge you isk for continuing this line of discussion.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 05:12:00 -
[66]
Originally by: tornpain
Originally by: Shadarle
I'm curious, have you had problems with dancing staplers?
What sort of epicurean delight lies buried in this subject? I might have to charge you isk for continuing this line of discussion.
Do you honestly think you sound enlightened or intelligent using words like epicurean? I'm as much a fan of hedonistic delights as the next guy, more so perhaps, but I fail to see the point in bringing it up on these forums, thus I plan never to mention it.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Ricdic's Hoe
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 05:21:00 -
[67]
Pfft. Well I can spell Internationel!
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 07:06:00 -
[68]
Originally by: tornpain
Here's a clue for you: focusing on a pair of minerals might indeed involve less than 300 billion in volume. Or even a different hub, zomgs~!
Since we're trading clues here, how's about the value of a SINGLE mineral in a SINGLE day in a SINGLE hub ?
Would it surprise you at all to find out that, oh, we're talking anywhere from 5 to 40 BILLION ISK per day per mineral per ANY major hub ?
Oh, I'm sorry, did that somehow screw up your math ? "oops..."
_
New character creation guide | [CNVTF] corp recruiting | Stacknerfs explained |
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 13:41:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: tornpain
Here's a clue for you: focusing on a pair of minerals might indeed involve less than 300 billion in volume. Or even a different hub, zomgs~!
Since we're trading clues here, how's about the value of a SINGLE mineral in a SINGLE day in a SINGLE hub ?
Would it surprise you at all to find out that, oh, we're talking anywhere from 5 to 40 BILLION ISK per day per mineral per ANY major hub ?
Oh, I'm sorry, did that somehow screw up your math ? "oops..."
You're wrong. You pulled that 5-40 billion number out of thin air.
I've personally pushed the bid/ask spread on pyerite to 37% in Rens with less than 5 billion, and done about 30million units of volume before the bid crept back up.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 13:48:00 -
[70]
Originally by: tornpain
You're wrong. You pulled that 5-40 billion number out of thin air.
No, Akita is not. That information is available if you know were to look.
Originally by: tornpain
I've personally pushed the bid/ask spread on pyerite to 37% in Rens with less than 5 billion, and done about 30million units of volume before the bid crept back up.
IÆm not interested in pushing one mineral spread for a few days. My goal is to manipulate and control the mineral market.
|
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 16:01:00 -
[71]
Lonetrek only did 3.5B, 5.3B, and 2.8B in tritanium the previous three days. Region-wide. How's that translate to 5-40 billion in a single system?
Your numbers are completely fictitious.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 16:21:00 -
[72]
Originally by: tornpain
Lonetrek only did 3.5B, 5.3B, and 2.8B in tritanium the previous three days. Region-wide. How's that translate to 5-40 billion in a single system?
Your numbers are completely fictitious.
Because as soon as you start to manipulate the price, buying out all orders below a certain point, other people will start hauling in greater quantities of that mineral. The amount sold for that day will be far greater than a "normal" day.
You should know this as you claim to have done it yourself, which I somehow doubt. People who have actually done this know that you have to at least double the normal traded quantity of a mineral per day if you want to manipulate the market very well. I personally would want 10 times the regularly traded amount at minimum, so I could sustain the manipulation a little longer if I had to.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 16:48:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Shadarle
buying out all orders below a certain point
This is pretty much the dumbest way to get your start in market manipulation.
I flooded enough pyerite to clear the buy orders down to my target level, put up my own buy order, and undercut the lowest sells for a 37% spread. I get my minerals somewhere between the highest buy order and my target level. It really works best when there's a thin level of demand, as I noticed has been the case during the week in Rens lately. I could have kept going but I ran out of cheap pyerite to dump into the buy orders and I spent my freighter money on poker. 
|
Kilda Shepp
Perkone
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 18:29:00 -
[74]
Originally by: tornpain
Originally by: Shadarle
buying out all orders below a certain point
This is pretty much the dumbest way to get your start in market manipulation.
I flooded enough pyerite to clear the buy orders down to my target level, put up my own buy order, and undercut the lowest sells for a 37% spread. I get my minerals somewhere between the highest buy order and my target level. It really works best when there's a thin level of demand, as I noticed has been the case during the week in Rens lately. I could have kept going but I ran out of cheap pyerite to dump into the buy orders and I spent my freighter money on poker.
You need to come back when you've spent more then 5 minutes looking at the Market screen. Filling buy orders doesn't lower the sell orders price, all it does is give a larger spread. A spread in which will be filled by sell orders. You're manipulating the wrong side.
If you place a cheap sell order others will most likely undercut you by 0.01 isk. You can't manipulate people who HAVE the product already. It's much easier to manipulate the people who have the ISK but not the product.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 18:34:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Kilda Shepp
Originally by: tornpain
Originally by: Shadarle
buying out all orders below a certain point
This is pretty much the dumbest way to get your start in market manipulation.
I flooded enough pyerite to clear the buy orders down to my target level, put up my own buy order, and undercut the lowest sells for a 37% spread. I get my minerals somewhere between the highest buy order and my target level. It really works best when there's a thin level of demand, as I noticed has been the case during the week in Rens lately. I could have kept going but I ran out of cheap pyerite to dump into the buy orders and I spent my freighter money on poker.
You need to come back when you've spent more then 5 minutes looking at the Market screen. Filling buy orders doesn't lower the sell orders price, all it does is give a larger spread. A spread in which will be filled by sell orders. You're manipulating the wrong side.
If you place a cheap sell order others will most likely undercut you by 0.01 isk. You can't manipulate people who HAVE the product already. It's much easier to manipulate the people who have the ISK but not the product.
Not to mention that if he actually knew how to manipulate a market effectively he wouldn't be so short on money he couldn't afford a freighter.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Pang Grohl
Gallente
Sudo Corp
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 19:12:00 -
[76]
Originally by: tornpain
Originally by: Shadarle
buying out all orders below a certain point
This is pretty much the dumbest way to get your start in market manipulation.
I flooded enough pyerite to clear the buy orders down to my target level, put up my own buy order, and undercut the lowest sells for a 37% spread. I get my minerals somewhere between the highest buy order and my target level. It really works best when there's a thin level of demand, as I noticed has been the case during the week in Rens lately. I could have kept going but I ran out of cheap pyerite to dump into the buy orders and I spent my freighter money on poker.
Hmmm... so you lowered the bid price and the ask price by supplementing existing supply and replacing existing demand in an already oversupplied market. Good on you for making money at it, but that's not a trend you want to sustain for long term growth. If you paid attention to the OP you'd see that the goal is not just short term gains, but long term equity growth as well.
In your scenario you're decreasing the value of the market which will disinterest suppliers and speculators. If you're a supplier making this manipulation, this is a good thing in the long run. If you're a speculator making this manipulation, it's a bad thing in the long run. You need other speculators and a steady supply to drive market prices up in an efficient and cost effective manner. Otherwise your stuck investing a lot of effort and cash in pushing and pulling the market.
***
Si non adjuvas, noces
(If you're not helping, you're hurting)
Improve Share Transfers |
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 20:54:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Kilda Shepp
You need to come back when you've spent more then 5 minutes looking at the Market screen. Filling buy orders doesn't lower the sell orders price, all it does is give a larger spread. A spread in which will be filled by sell orders. You're manipulating the wrong side.
If you place a cheap sell order others will most likely undercut you by 0.01 isk. You can't manipulate people who HAVE the product already. It's much easier to manipulate the people who have the ISK but not the product.
You need to come back when you understand what I did. I don't care what the sell orders are, I'm taking pyerite bought at 37% below the lowest sell order and reselling it.
Originally by: Pang Grohl
Hmmm... so you lowered the bid price and the ask price by supplementing existing supply and replacing existing demand in an already oversupplied market. Good on you for making money at it, but that's not a trend you want to sustain for long term growth. If you paid attention to the OP you'd see that the goal is not just short term gains, but long term equity growth as well.
In your scenario you're decreasing the value of the market which will disinterest suppliers and speculators. If you're a supplier making this manipulation, this is a good thing in the long run. If you're a speculator making this manipulation, it's a bad thing in the long run. You need other speculators and a steady supply to drive market prices up in an efficient and cost effective manner. Otherwise your stuck investing a lot of effort and cash in pushing and pulling the market.
I like having markets to myself  What makes a supplier in your opinion though? Anyone who can get the product in question outside of a buy order? That's pretty trivial for minerals as one might imagine...
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.11.10 01:14:00 -
[78]
Ok, let's tone the insults down a bit and reasoning up a notch.
First off, not everything scales well, and not everything that does scales linearly.
So, no, starting smaller scale won't help you much in determining how things will evolve on a larger scale.
Granted, in manipulating the market, buying off all sell orders and "holding on" to it is not always the best option.
This is only the best option is supply is relatively scarce, and you have enough ISK to buy off most of the supply for days at an end.
But on the other hand, so is creating an artificial spread by dumping your goods on the buy orders.
For that to work, those that do set up buy orders normally need to watch their orders only rarely, or else the spread shrinks again soon.
Bottom line is, your "touch" needs to be gentle but steady, and over a longer period of time, if you wish for serious profits out of speculations like the OP describes.
_
New character creation guide | [CNVTF] corp recruiting | Stacknerfs explained |
Galgorth
|
Posted - 2007.11.11 01:40:00 -
[79]
How would FIX being kicked out of 0.0 space impact this plan of yours?
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.11 12:37:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Galgorth
How would FIX being kicked out of 0.0 space impact this plan of yours?
None at all. This venture will be carry out in empire and run by alts.
|
Pang Grohl
Gallente
Sudo Corp
|
Posted - 2007.11.12 06:55:00 -
[81]
Originally by: tornpain
Originally by: Pang Grohl
Hmmm... so you lowered the bid price and the ask price by supplementing existing supply and replacing existing demand in an already oversupplied market. Good on you for making money at it, but that's not a trend you want to sustain for long term growth. If you paid attention to the OP you'd see that the goal is not just short term gains, but long term equity growth as well.
In your scenario you're decreasing the value of the market which will disinterest suppliers and speculators. If you're a supplier making this manipulation, this is a good thing in the long run. If you're a speculator making this manipulation, it's a bad thing in the long run. You need other speculators and a steady supply to drive market prices up in an efficient and cost effective manner. Otherwise your stuck investing a lot of effort and cash in pushing and pulling the market.
I like having markets to myself What makes a supplier in your opinion though? Anyone who can get the product in question outside of a buy order? That's pretty trivial for minerals as one might imagine...
A supplier is the person introducing new product to the market, in EVE terms, miners, re-processors, importers, manufacturers, and NPCs. The fact that it's trivial to source minerals is part of the reason there's over supply in so many places.
***
Si non adjuvas, noces
(If you're not helping, you're hurting)
Improve Share Transfers |
Hanoi Hana
Mitsubishi Group
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 01:56:00 -
[82]
Am I to understand that you have essentially made the decision that you will be rolling out an IPO for this? I was under the impression that this idea was lukewarmly received, due to your general theory on how this will work, the massive funds needed to be raised, the necessity of a long-term manipulation, and the very small profits, estimated at not likely less than 3% and hoping for 5-6%.
Maybe I've been looking at this thread through the wrong sunglasses, but I'm not fully confident that this business venture is more worthwhile than many others.
|
Block Ukx
KDM Corp
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 12:23:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
Am I to understand that you have essentially made the decision that you will be rolling out an IPO for this?
Yes, I made the decision to do a public offering. I have a prospectus ready for it.
I am working on a document outlining MinMa« Trustee rules and regulations and creating some incentives for large investors.
I am currently looking for Underwriters.
|
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 16:06:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
Maybe I've been looking at this thread through the wrong sunglasses, but I'm not fully confident that this business venture is more worthwhile than many others.
I say this about every public EVE IPO I've ever read. I'm not sure this argument holds much water; obviously many people are interested in any sort of return involving none of their own time and effort.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 21:29:00 -
[85]
Originally by: tornpain
Originally by: Hanoi Hana
Maybe I've been looking at this thread through the wrong sunglasses, but I'm not fully confident that this business venture is more worthwhile than many others.
I say this about every public EVE IPO I've ever read. I'm not sure this argument holds much water; obviously many people are interested in any sort of return involving none of their own time and effort.
But I also happen to know you do not have all that much money personally, so you don't really fall into the category of someone who has to find uses for large chunks of money that would otherwise sit idle.
I also wondered why this moved in the IPO stage already when it really didn't seem to be getting luke-warm support at best. I don't quite know who will be investing in this. But perhaps there are enough people who will settle for 3-6% expected returns (in a fairly risky venture) to launch this. I'll see what the final draft of the IPO says to see if there is any reason a large investor would want to buy into it.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 22:06:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Shadarle
I also wondered why this moved in the IPO stage already when it really didn't seem to be getting luke-warm support at best. I don't quite know who will be investing in this. But perhaps there are enough people who will settle for 3-6% expected returns (in a fairly risky venture) to launch this. I'll see what the final draft of the IPO says to see if there is any reason a large investor would want to buy into it.
you agreed earlier that most people will invest in a known name for 5% or less
its a fact that there are not enough ipos to invest in compared to the investors lately
____ __ ________
_sig below_
devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
_lies above_
CCP Morpheus was here
Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn
[yellow]Kaem |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 23:49:00 -
[87]
Originally by: SiJira
Originally by: Shadarle
I also wondered why this moved in the IPO stage already when it really didn't seem to be getting luke-warm support at best. I don't quite know who will be investing in this. But perhaps there are enough people who will settle for 3-6% expected returns (in a fairly risky venture) to launch this. I'll see what the final draft of the IPO says to see if there is any reason a large investor would want to buy into it.
you agreed earlier that most people will invest in a known name for 5% or less
its a fact that there are not enough ipos to invest in compared to the investors lately
Sure, if it is ISSO obviously there are some people willing to get 5%. Ionia, Ricdic, DS, PP, and tons of others could easily get a fair bit of investors at 5% I'm sure. I didn't say anyone who posts on these forums could get 5%. Plus this isn't even guaranteed 5%. It is a guess of 3-6%... but there is even a chance you'll lose a ton. So this is nothing close to what I've ever referred to in the past.
I've already said there is a chance he will get enough investors to move forward. I will never discount that there is a chance people will invest in a new venture that seems "cool". I just doubt any massive investors will chip in and I know I am very unlikely to.
I would have been far more interested if it was done by allowing large investors to buy their own minerals based on directions from Block. But that is not how it is going to be done.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
tornpain
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 00:50:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Shadarle
I would have been far more interested if it was done by allowing large investors to buy their own minerals based on directions from Block. But that is not how it is going to be done.
What price would you be willing to pay Block for this service?
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 02:53:00 -
[89]
Originally by: tornpain
Originally by: Shadarle
I would have been far more interested if it was done by allowing large investors to buy their own minerals based on directions from Block. But that is not how it is going to be done.
What price would you be willing to pay Block for this service?
I have no clue. Honestly it doesn't seem like he is in it for the money, he seems to want to try to impact the entire market with his actions. But it would be beneficial for all parties to do so. It's a pointless discussion atm though as this is not the direction things are going.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |