| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Droidster
   |
Posted - 2004.07.31 15:56:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Droidster on 31/07/2004 16:47:48
ATTENTION ALL MINERS - PREPARE TO LOSE 30% OF YOUR INCOME IN SHIVA
The devs have made the following statement regarding Shiva: "When placing a bid order (buying stuff), the order amount will be put aside (in escrow) while the order is active."
see http://www.eve-online.com/features/shiva/market/
This means traders and min buyers will no longer be able to place unsecured orders. The consequence of this will be that player market orders for freight/luxury/armaments/ships will virtually cease and orders for minerals will probably decrease by around 30% average. For example, right now you can get 70-75 in core empire for Isogen and 60-65 in the outlying mining districts where it is produced. You can kiss those prices good bye. Plan on getting about 65 in core empire and 40 or lower in an outlying area and zero anywhere else. The same goes for the other minerals.
I suggest screaming now, because if you wait until Shiva comes out to scream you will have a two week "income holiday"  while the devs scramble to eliminate this ill-advised change.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 15:56:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Droidster on 31/07/2004 16:47:48
ATTENTION ALL MINERS - PREPARE TO LOSE 30% OF YOUR INCOME IN SHIVA
The devs have made the following statement regarding Shiva: "When placing a bid order (buying stuff), the order amount will be put aside (in escrow) while the order is active."
see http://www.eve-online.com/features/shiva/market/
This means traders and min buyers will no longer be able to place unsecured orders. The consequence of this will be that player market orders for freight/luxury/armaments/ships will virtually cease and orders for minerals will probably decrease by around 30% average. For example, right now you can get 70-75 in core empire for Isogen and 60-65 in the outlying mining districts where it is produced. You can kiss those prices good bye. Plan on getting about 65 in core empire and 40 or lower in an outlying area and zero anywhere else. The same goes for the other minerals.
I suggest screaming now, because if you wait until Shiva comes out to scream you will have a two week "income holiday" while the devs scramble to eliminate this ill-advised change.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 16:27:00 -
[3]
As to "fake buy orders", how many have you actually encountered? I am a trader. I execute hundreds of buys every week. I can tell you in the last 2 months I have had a buy order fail on me exactly TWICE. We are talking <1% of trades. Also, if the player fails a buy they get fined. (Of course what they should do is pay the fine to the seller who got failed, but that is neither here or nor there).
The failed trade problem is microscopic. If you move mins to empire and the sell fails--hey you are in empire. Its not like you will have to go another 30 hops to sell your megacyte. You have to go maybe 5 hops max.
The real issue here is PRICES WILL PLUNGE. I don't know what you are thinking if you think failed buy orders are a problem. How about getting 5500 instead of 6500 for your megacyte?  Would that be a problem for you? Because that is what is going to happen if this change isn't stopped.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 16:27:00 -
[4]
As to "fake buy orders", how many have you actually encountered? I am a trader. I execute hundreds of buys every week. I can tell you in the last 2 months I have had a buy order fail on me exactly TWICE. We are talking <1% of trades. Also, if the player fails a buy they get fined. (Of course what they should do is pay the fine to the seller who got failed, but that is neither here or nor there).
The failed trade problem is microscopic. If you move mins to empire and the sell fails--hey you are in empire. Its not like you will have to go another 30 hops to sell your megacyte. You have to go maybe 5 hops max.
The real issue here is PRICES WILL PLUNGE. I don't know what you are thinking if you think failed buy orders are a problem. How about getting 5500 instead of 6500 for your megacyte? Would that be a problem for you? Because that is what is going to happen if this change isn't stopped.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 16:36:00 -
[5]
30%
I picked this number as a rough estimate of what the price will drop on the most heavily traded commodities, mins. Like I said the price will probably drop a minimum 15% in core empire and 40-50% in outlying areas, so I averaged this to 30% overall min price decrease. This is based on estimates of what will happen to big corp buyer's liquidity. Traders like me will have liquidity cut 90%. I will have to pull 90% of my orders off the market and btw I don't make bogus orders.
Freight, armaments etc will drop to ZERO. a 100% decrease in price. Get ready to recycle (or trash in the case of freight) because you will not be able to sell these goods at any reasonable price (except to NPCs who are far away in most cases).
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 16:36:00 -
[6]
30%
I picked this number as a rough estimate of what the price will drop on the most heavily traded commodities, mins. Like I said the price will probably drop a minimum 15% in core empire and 40-50% in outlying areas, so I averaged this to 30% overall min price decrease. This is based on estimates of what will happen to big corp buyer's liquidity. Traders like me will have liquidity cut 90%. I will have to pull 90% of my orders off the market and btw I don't make bogus orders.
Freight, armaments etc will drop to ZERO. a 100% decrease in price. Get ready to recycle (or trash in the case of freight) because you will not be able to sell these goods at any reasonable price (except to NPCs who are far away in most cases).
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 17:04:00 -
[7]
Danton is right. The change will severely damage the market and push the armaments trade onto the market forum and external sites. The market forum will become a "spam fest" as he says.
BTW this change will not decrease the income of traders like me much. I will make steeper margins on fewer orders. What it will do is drastically cut the income of sellers (mostly miners) because of the loss of liquidity. Right now I provide hundreds of millions in liquidity to the market. Under Shiva that will drop to 20-30 million and it will come straight out of the miners and freight sellers pockets.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 17:04:00 -
[8]
Danton is right. The change will severely damage the market and push the armaments trade onto the market forum and external sites. The market forum will become a "spam fest" as he says.
BTW this change will not decrease the income of traders like me much. I will make steeper margins on fewer orders. What it will do is drastically cut the income of sellers (mostly miners) because of the loss of liquidity. Right now I provide hundreds of millions in liquidity to the market. Under Shiva that will drop to 20-30 million and it will come straight out of the miners and freight sellers pockets.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 17:40:00 -
[9]
Orestes - the reason liquidity will shrivel is that traders like me will no longer be able maintain all their orders. For example, lets say a trader has a bankroll of 20 million and they want to trade in isogen. They put up orders 100K @65 in outlying regions like Molden Heath, Lone Trek etc. These orders will fill slowly, 5k here, 10k there. Even with 10 such orders the 20 million covers ALL these orders because even if an order maxes out it only costs 6.5 million. To break the trader 4 orders would have to max out on the same day which is not going to happen in 4 different low volume regions at the same time.
What you are missing is that the 20 million is just the cash reserve. THE TRADER HAS 150 MILLION IN ASSETS so they are worth all their orders. For example, lets say someone cashes out one of the buys and fills me for 100K isogen. All I do is go pick and sell 20,000 antibiotics I have lying around and I am back up to 20 million in cash the same day. Then I head back to the region and put up another buy order for 100K.
What this means is I can easily maintain orders for a total of million isogen in 10 different regions at once. If you stop me from doing this all those orders will disappear and the miners will have nowhere to sell their isogen. They will have to hump their isogen to empire. I might instead put out 2 orders for 20K @40 or 20K at @50 only in my most high volume regions. All the other regions will go zero. This loss of liquidity will cost me a little bit, but it will cost the miners a LOT because they will lose 80-90% of the buy orders they are currently seeing and if they sell locally they will get a much worse price.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 17:40:00 -
[10]
Orestes - the reason liquidity will shrivel is that traders like me will no longer be able maintain all their orders. For example, lets say a trader has a bankroll of 20 million and they want to trade in isogen. They put up orders 100K @65 in outlying regions like Molden Heath, Lone Trek etc. These orders will fill slowly, 5k here, 10k there. Even with 10 such orders the 20 million covers ALL these orders because even if an order maxes out it only costs 6.5 million. To break the trader 4 orders would have to max out on the same day which is not going to happen in 4 different low volume regions at the same time.
What you are missing is that the 20 million is just the cash reserve. THE TRADER HAS 150 MILLION IN ASSETS so they are worth all their orders. For example, lets say someone cashes out one of the buys and fills me for 100K isogen. All I do is go pick and sell 20,000 antibiotics I have lying around and I am back up to 20 million in cash the same day. Then I head back to the region and put up another buy order for 100K.
What this means is I can easily maintain orders for a total of million isogen in 10 different regions at once. If you stop me from doing this all those orders will disappear and the miners will have nowhere to sell their isogen. They will have to hump their isogen to empire. I might instead put out 2 orders for 20K @40 or 20K at @50 only in my most high volume regions. All the other regions will go zero. This loss of liquidity will cost me a little bit, but it will cost the miners a LOT because they will lose 80-90% of the buy orders they are currently seeing and if they sell locally they will get a much worse price.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 18:12:00 -
[11]
Reply to Orestes -
When a trader makes profit it is a question of (1) the margin (2) the rate the order is filled (3) the shipping costs to the sell location, and (4) how long it will take to sell.
If I am restricted to my cash on hand for my buy orders I will have to put out only a handful of orders (currently I have HUNDREDS of orders outstanding). This handful will have to be the fastest filling, highest volume orders possible for me to maintain a reasonable profit over time. Any order which fills slowly or will be slow to sell, forget it is cancelled.
To give you a sense for it here is a random sample of a few of my orders:
Transcranial Microcontroller 4,000 10/10
Transmitter 25 19845/20000
Soil 1 10000/10000
Antibiotics 50 10000/10000
Carbon 30 9657/10000
Dairy Products 4 10000/10000
Construction Blocks 25 15667/20000
Ectoplasm 100 8975/10000
This is a completely random sample. I did not pick them. ALL of these orders would cancelled if I had to cover them by cash because they all move way too slowly. For example, look at the CB (construction blocks). I make nearly 100% margin (they sell at 500). In two months I have made 2.1 million gross. It will cost me 500K to have them shipped etc so I will net about 1.5 million when I get around to selling them. Great. It costs me nothing to maintain this order, except having to travel there and put it up. With Shiva it will cost me 500,000 credits to maintain this order. My ROI will plunge to 400%. Its not worth.
Also, when I put up the CB order I didn't even know if it would fill. I have plenty of CB orders that look like this: 10000/10000. They sit there UNFILLED. Each one of them would cost me cash under the proposed system.
Under Shiva ALL of the above orders would be cancelled. What that means is that players will find it much more difficult to sell their freight. The only buyers will be NPC.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 18:12:00 -
[12]
Reply to Orestes -
When a trader makes profit it is a question of (1) the margin (2) the rate the order is filled (3) the shipping costs to the sell location, and (4) how long it will take to sell.
If I am restricted to my cash on hand for my buy orders I will have to put out only a handful of orders (currently I have HUNDREDS of orders outstanding). This handful will have to be the fastest filling, highest volume orders possible for me to maintain a reasonable profit over time. Any order which fills slowly or will be slow to sell, forget it is cancelled.
To give you a sense for it here is a random sample of a few of my orders:
Transcranial Microcontroller 4,000 10/10
Transmitter 25 19845/20000
Soil 1 10000/10000
Antibiotics 50 10000/10000
Carbon 30 9657/10000
Dairy Products 4 10000/10000
Construction Blocks 25 15667/20000
Ectoplasm 100 8975/10000
This is a completely random sample. I did not pick them. ALL of these orders would cancelled if I had to cover them by cash because they all move way too slowly. For example, look at the CB (construction blocks). I make nearly 100% margin (they sell at 500). In two months I have made 2.1 million gross. It will cost me 500K to have them shipped etc so I will net about 1.5 million when I get around to selling them. Great. It costs me nothing to maintain this order, except having to travel there and put it up. With Shiva it will cost me 500,000 credits to maintain this order. My ROI will plunge to 400%. Its not worth.
Also, when I put up the CB order I didn't even know if it would fill. I have plenty of CB orders that look like this: 10000/10000. They sit there UNFILLED. Each one of them would cost me cash under the proposed system.
Under Shiva ALL of the above orders would be cancelled. What that means is that players will find it much more difficult to sell their freight. The only buyers will be NPC.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 18:57:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Droidster on 31/07/2004 19:29:33
Reply to Orestes -
Quote:
"Why are you placing huge quantity orders when there's no guarantee they'll fill"
Because the trader doesn't know ahead of time which will fill and which won't. In my example above you saw I managed to buy 5000 out of 20000 Construction Blocks (over 2 months--long time) but another order for 10000 antibiotics went unfilled. The traders put out many orders in the hopes that a few of them will fill and that is where they make their money.
You put in large orders because (1) sometimes you luck out and someone sells you a huge quantity all at once, and (2) there are MANY commodities and it takes time and effort to post an order. When I post an order for a commodity in a region I don't want to have to do it again for a long time. Going to Molden Heath 15 times to post 15 orders for 1000 construction blocks would just be a supreme waste of time. I go there ONCE and put in an order that I expect to last for three months.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 18:57:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Droidster on 31/07/2004 19:29:33
Reply to Orestes -
Quote:
"Why are you placing huge quantity orders when there's no guarantee they'll fill"
Because the trader doesn't know ahead of time which will fill and which won't. In my example above you saw I managed to buy 5000 out of 20000 Construction Blocks (over 2 months--long time) but another order for 10000 antibiotics went unfilled. The traders put out many orders in the hopes that a few of them will fill and that is where they make their money.
You put in large orders because (1) sometimes you luck out and someone sells you a huge quantity all at once, and (2) there are MANY commodities and it takes time and effort to post an order. When I post an order for a commodity in a region I don't want to have to do it again for a long time. Going to Molden Heath 15 times to post 15 orders for 1000 construction blocks would just be a supreme waste of time. I go there ONCE and put in an order that I expect to last for three months.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 19:53:00 -
[15]
That's right, Harry, if all orders require cash up front the cost of mins will go up (the ask price). And the bid price will go down. Its called the "spread". Miners will get less for their minerals/ore and manufacturers will pay more for their minerals.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 19:53:00 -
[16]
That's right, Harry, if all orders require cash up front the cost of mins will go up (the ask price). And the bid price will go down. Its called the "spread". Miners will get less for their minerals/ore and manufacturers will pay more for their minerals.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 22:28:00 -
[17]
Reply to Anderi:
First of all TRADERS ARE NOT BUYING ON CREDIT. If they don't have the money the trade fails. So could we please stop talking about credit. Noone can loan money or buy things on credit in EVE.
Second, when you lose liquidity both the volume AND the price will drop. There are a myriad ways this will happen, but to take a simple example. I currently compete with about 6-10 other traders/buyers in outlying regions for isogen and some other mins. All of us have outstanding orders way beyond our cash. Nevertheless we bid against each other. I bid 65.13 he ups me 65.15 etc. This happens across 8-10 different regions. We are the liquidity in those regions. If we can only bid our cash this will be impossible. Each of us will be restricted to one or two regions instead of 10. We will decrease our quantity somewhat but we will NOT put multiple tiny orders in a lot of different regions because it would be time consuming to tend such orders and moreover we would miss big sales which is where a lot of the profit is.
The upshot is each trader will specialize in fewer regions. That means instead of competing against 10 other traders I will compete against maybe 2 and all three of us will offer lower prices because we will need bigger margins to justify the tiny volume we can afford. For example, if I can put out 200 million in orders a 15% margin is ok because I can make 30 million in two weeks (reasonable for me). If I can only put out 30 million in orders (= cash on hand). I have to make 100% margin to make the same amount of money. That means instead of bidding 60-65 on Isogen I am going to be bidding 35-40.
I don't know why the non-traders on the this thread are acting like they don't believe the traders who know what they are talking about. I do this every day for a living. I generate between 50 and 100 transactions EVERY DAY for players. When you sell your mins or your consumer electronics or whatever, it is me (or a trader like me) who is on the other side buying it from you. If you cut our ability to make unsecured orders ALL THOSE OFFERS ARE GOING TO GO AWAY and you will not be able to sell your stuff for anything like what you selling it now.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.07.31 22:28:00 -
[18]
Reply to Anderi:
First of all TRADERS ARE NOT BUYING ON CREDIT. If they don't have the money the trade fails. So could we please stop talking about credit. Noone can loan money or buy things on credit in EVE.
Second, when you lose liquidity both the volume AND the price will drop. There are a myriad ways this will happen, but to take a simple example. I currently compete with about 6-10 other traders/buyers in outlying regions for isogen and some other mins. All of us have outstanding orders way beyond our cash. Nevertheless we bid against each other. I bid 65.13 he ups me 65.15 etc. This happens across 8-10 different regions. We are the liquidity in those regions. If we can only bid our cash this will be impossible. Each of us will be restricted to one or two regions instead of 10. We will decrease our quantity somewhat but we will NOT put multiple tiny orders in a lot of different regions because it would be time consuming to tend such orders and moreover we would miss big sales which is where a lot of the profit is.
The upshot is each trader will specialize in fewer regions. That means instead of competing against 10 other traders I will compete against maybe 2 and all three of us will offer lower prices because we will need bigger margins to justify the tiny volume we can afford. For example, if I can put out 200 million in orders a 15% margin is ok because I can make 30 million in two weeks (reasonable for me). If I can only put out 30 million in orders (= cash on hand). I have to make 100% margin to make the same amount of money. That means instead of bidding 60-65 on Isogen I am going to be bidding 35-40.
I don't know why the non-traders on the this thread are acting like they don't believe the traders who know what they are talking about. I do this every day for a living. I generate between 50 and 100 transactions EVERY DAY for players. When you sell your mins or your consumer electronics or whatever, it is me (or a trader like me) who is on the other side buying it from you. If you cut our ability to make unsecured orders ALL THOSE OFFERS ARE GOING TO GO AWAY and you will not be able to sell your stuff for anything like what you selling it now.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 15:07:00 -
[19]
Traders Do Not Buy on Credit: as I said before if you lack the money the trade fails. I know a lot of you people out there are not traders but try to understand the difference between making lots of ORDERS over cash and making a BUY over cash (cannot be done). I do not owe anybody any money.
Secondly you cannot currently make an order past your current cash. It is only the SUM OF ALL YOUR ORDERS that can exceed cash. Since most of the orders fill very slowly trade fails are rare. How rare? I do 50-100 buy transactions per day. In the last two months I have done about 5000 transactions. During that time 2 have failed. Thats 1 in 2500.
I would like to reiterate what Codaarix pointed out earlier. A lot of people think corps have some bottomless wallet that will support any number of orders. Did you read what he said? He has 2 billion in cash and 20 billion in orders. What do you think will happen to min prices in Amarr when he has to cancel 18 billion in orders? Get a clue people. Mineral prices will be crushed. Doesn't anybody get it? THATS 18 BILLION IN ORDERS GONE.
Finally, I would like to reiterate another thing I pointed out earlier: the real losers will be the miners. Traders like me will lose a little, but it means we will just make more money on fewer orders, ie, instead of having to pay 65 for isogen and doing 300 million in business. I will pay only 30-40 and do 30 million in business. I make the same. The loser is the miner who only gets 40 for their isogen instead of 65.
Sharp eyed readers may have noticed in the above the contraction in volume. They may ask: if you are doing only 30 million instead of 300 million what happened to the other 270? Answer: that 270 is isogen the miners will have to either (1) consume themselves or (2) ship to core empire and sell to guys like Codaarix (who will be offering less price also). That's right: miners will have to spend MUCH more time hauling small amounts of minerals and will get less anyway when they arrive. They lose both TIME that they could have spent mining and MONEY because Codaarix, Loladoll, me, and every other trader will be offering MUCH lower prices.
BATTLESHIPS MORE EXPENSIVE: a few people may wonder what the macro effects of this will be. If everybody gets less for their mins what does it matter if all prices fall. If battleships drop by half in price also its ok if min prices fall, right? Wrong! You're forgetting that when liquidity vanishes the bid goes down AND the ask price goes up. On the contrary battleship prices will increase. At the same time you are getting a 30% cut in your income plan on BS prices going up 60%. You are looking at Megathrons at 160 etc. Codaarix will have fewer min buy orders = fewer minerals = fewer battleships produced = higher battleship price. When 90% of market liquidity is lost you will make less AND pay more to equal the lost liquidity.
Even if CCP was to try to "fix" this by dumping mins on the market, for example by increasing mining laser speeds, you would still lose because you would have to spend a lot more time hauling.
I am not putting this thread out for my own benefit. This is something that if it happens will greatly decrease everyone's playability.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 15:07:00 -
[20]
Traders Do Not Buy on Credit: as I said before if you lack the money the trade fails. I know a lot of you people out there are not traders but try to understand the difference between making lots of ORDERS over cash and making a BUY over cash (cannot be done). I do not owe anybody any money.
Secondly you cannot currently make an order past your current cash. It is only the SUM OF ALL YOUR ORDERS that can exceed cash. Since most of the orders fill very slowly trade fails are rare. How rare? I do 50-100 buy transactions per day. In the last two months I have done about 5000 transactions. During that time 2 have failed. Thats 1 in 2500.
I would like to reiterate what Codaarix pointed out earlier. A lot of people think corps have some bottomless wallet that will support any number of orders. Did you read what he said? He has 2 billion in cash and 20 billion in orders. What do you think will happen to min prices in Amarr when he has to cancel 18 billion in orders? Get a clue people. Mineral prices will be crushed. Doesn't anybody get it? THATS 18 BILLION IN ORDERS GONE.
Finally, I would like to reiterate another thing I pointed out earlier: the real losers will be the miners. Traders like me will lose a little, but it means we will just make more money on fewer orders, ie, instead of having to pay 65 for isogen and doing 300 million in business. I will pay only 30-40 and do 30 million in business. I make the same. The loser is the miner who only gets 40 for their isogen instead of 65.
Sharp eyed readers may have noticed in the above the contraction in volume. They may ask: if you are doing only 30 million instead of 300 million what happened to the other 270? Answer: that 270 is isogen the miners will have to either (1) consume themselves or (2) ship to core empire and sell to guys like Codaarix (who will be offering less price also). That's right: miners will have to spend MUCH more time hauling small amounts of minerals and will get less anyway when they arrive. They lose both TIME that they could have spent mining and MONEY because Codaarix, Loladoll, me, and every other trader will be offering MUCH lower prices.
BATTLESHIPS MORE EXPENSIVE: a few people may wonder what the macro effects of this will be. If everybody gets less for their mins what does it matter if all prices fall. If battleships drop by half in price also its ok if min prices fall, right? Wrong! You're forgetting that when liquidity vanishes the bid goes down AND the ask price goes up. On the contrary battleship prices will increase. At the same time you are getting a 30% cut in your income plan on BS prices going up 60%. You are looking at Megathrons at 160 etc. Codaarix will have fewer min buy orders = fewer minerals = fewer battleships produced = higher battleship price. When 90% of market liquidity is lost you will make less AND pay more to equal the lost liquidity.
Even if CCP was to try to "fix" this by dumping mins on the market, for example by increasing mining laser speeds, you would still lose because you would have to spend a lot more time hauling.
I am not putting this thread out for my own benefit. This is something that if it happens will greatly decrease everyone's playability.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 17:36:00 -
[21]
Reply to Dianabolic / "Ghost Orders" -
I will second what Codaarix said. The idea that our orders are "ghost orders" that do not affect the true price or the market in general is not right.
First of all bigtime traders like Codaarix do not waste time making bogus orders. Second of all boundary/0.0 traders like me who DO have a lot of unfilled orders need those orders to find the market. Lets say I place 6 orders in different places and only 1 fills. Calling the others "ghost orders" is misplaced because (1) those ghost orders affect the price: often the reason they don't fill is because a local trader had to up their price over my "ghost order", so even if the order does not fill it may have affected the price seriously, (2) I need those orders to find the market; without placing all six I never would have found that one place where there was gap.
Also, to those who call traders "middlemen" who do nothing I would point out that we organize all the aggregation and shipping. I aggregate jillions of little batches of mins and see they get shipped to the right place (which is not always an obvious thing). Without that aggregation it means miners have to ship their own loads in small amounts often to the wrong place. This is enormously wasteful. It is hundreds of miners shipping 100 here, 100 there while they could have been mining. That is exactly what will happen if unsecured orders are prevented: miners have to ship themselves or get paid a LOT less.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 17:36:00 -
[22]
Reply to Dianabolic / "Ghost Orders" -
I will second what Codaarix said. The idea that our orders are "ghost orders" that do not affect the true price or the market in general is not right.
First of all bigtime traders like Codaarix do not waste time making bogus orders. Second of all boundary/0.0 traders like me who DO have a lot of unfilled orders need those orders to find the market. Lets say I place 6 orders in different places and only 1 fills. Calling the others "ghost orders" is misplaced because (1) those ghost orders affect the price: often the reason they don't fill is because a local trader had to up their price over my "ghost order", so even if the order does not fill it may have affected the price seriously, (2) I need those orders to find the market; without placing all six I never would have found that one place where there was gap.
Also, to those who call traders "middlemen" who do nothing I would point out that we organize all the aggregation and shipping. I aggregate jillions of little batches of mins and see they get shipped to the right place (which is not always an obvious thing). Without that aggregation it means miners have to ship their own loads in small amounts often to the wrong place. This is enormously wasteful. It is hundreds of miners shipping 100 here, 100 there while they could have been mining. That is exactly what will happen if unsecured orders are prevented: miners have to ship themselves or get paid a LOT less.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 18:34:00 -
[23]
Well, as I said before the price is neither going to drop or increase--it is going to do both. What will increase is the spread, the difference between the bid and ask, and the difference between the city and county. The country bid will plunge. The country ask will increase. The city bid will decrease and the city ask will skyrocket. Table:
country bid -------
country ask +++
city bid ---
city ask +++++++
My prediction is that if this happens the screams will be loud and instantaneous and the devs will act immediately. Look at what happened to super conductors. A few Tech2 manufacturers whined about the price and the devs dumped 25,000 superconductors on the market. What do you think will happen when 4000 miners all scream bloody murder at once? The only question is what they do. Hopefully it will be to eliminate the restriction they never should have put in place to begin with.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 18:34:00 -
[24]
Well, as I said before the price is neither going to drop or increase--it is going to do both. What will increase is the spread, the difference between the bid and ask, and the difference between the city and county. The country bid will plunge. The country ask will increase. The city bid will decrease and the city ask will skyrocket. Table:
country bid -------
country ask +++
city bid ---
city ask +++++++
My prediction is that if this happens the screams will be loud and instantaneous and the devs will act immediately. Look at what happened to super conductors. A few Tech2 manufacturers whined about the price and the devs dumped 25,000 superconductors on the market. What do you think will happen when 4000 miners all scream bloody murder at once? The only question is what they do. Hopefully it will be to eliminate the restriction they never should have put in place to begin with.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 23:34:00 -
[25]
DisfiguredThief: How will producers be affected if at all?
DT, traders do not usually buy from manufacturers/producers.
The way producers will be affected is that they will find it more expensive and time consuming to acquire raw materials and they will raise their prices accordingly. In general producers will be relatively unaffected.
The losers will be miners, especially small miners and anybody who sells anything in small quantities in out of the way places (like eg mission runners selling loot goods for example).
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 23:34:00 -
[26]
DisfiguredThief: How will producers be affected if at all?
DT, traders do not usually buy from manufacturers/producers.
The way producers will be affected is that they will find it more expensive and time consuming to acquire raw materials and they will raise their prices accordingly. In general producers will be relatively unaffected.
The losers will be miners, especially small miners and anybody who sells anything in small quantities in out of the way places (like eg mission runners selling loot goods for example).
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 23:54:00 -
[27]
Zioh - (and all the other people who have a hard time understanding this) TRADERS DON'T BORROW MONEY. You said it yourself: you should have to pay when you get the goods. WE DO. In EVE Online whenever you buy a good you pay in cash at the time of the sale. Why is this so difficult to understand?
You are confusing BUYING a good with ORDERING a good: two different things. And for your information the real world is the same as EVE: you can order anything you want as long as you pay when it arrives WHICH WE DO. Try this: call a luxury car dealership and order an expensive car delivered to your door. Tell them you will pay in cash when it arrives. I guarantee you any dealership will deliver the car no questions asked (except your address).
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.01 23:54:00 -
[28]
Zioh - (and all the other people who have a hard time understanding this) TRADERS DON'T BORROW MONEY. You said it yourself: you should have to pay when you get the goods. WE DO. In EVE Online whenever you buy a good you pay in cash at the time of the sale. Why is this so difficult to understand?
You are confusing BUYING a good with ORDERING a good: two different things. And for your information the real world is the same as EVE: you can order anything you want as long as you pay when it arrives WHICH WE DO. Try this: call a luxury car dealership and order an expensive car delivered to your door. Tell them you will pay in cash when it arrives. I guarantee you any dealership will deliver the car no questions asked (except your address).
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.02 00:09:00 -
[29]
Zioh - that's right. When you buy a car for cash they don't ask for credit references. They will only ask for a deposit if you factory order a custom car. If you order a car off the lot for cash they will show up at your door no questions asked. Give it a try.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.02 00:09:00 -
[30]
Zioh - that's right. When you buy a car for cash they don't ask for credit references. They will only ask for a deposit if you factory order a custom car. If you order a car off the lot for cash they will show up at your door no questions asked. Give it a try.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.02 00:16:00 -
[31]
I don't know why people think failed orders are such a threat. Less than 1 out of 1000 of my trades have failed, a microscopic fraction. Thats 999 happy customers to every 1 unhappy customer. You want to eliminate 90% of the liquidity in the game because of that?
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.02 00:16:00 -
[32]
I don't know why people think failed orders are such a threat. Less than 1 out of 1000 of my trades have failed, a microscopic fraction. Thats 999 happy customers to every 1 unhappy customer. You want to eliminate 90% of the liquidity in the game because of that?
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.03 00:58:00 -
[33]
(Note I have posted a link to this thread in the Shiva market discussion)
Response to Xavier Arron who accuses me of pulling "figures out of thin air" - I do 50-100 market transactions every day. In the commodities and regions I deal I know the market cold and know my competitors, their resources and practices. My estimates are based on this experience.
For your information Xavier every serious trader has a keen idea of both their individual and collective impact on the price/volume of the market. For example, in at least one core empire region I am the ONLY bidder on holoreels right now. (Holoreels are handed out by the thousands to mission runners.) That means if I say the price is 30, it is 30. If I say it is 50 it is 50. If I set no bid, the price is ZERO -- the mission runners can stash, trash or haul, but they can't do what they want to do: get cash. I know EXACTLY what the liquidity is on that item because I am making it--all of it.
In mins I am only one of many bidders, nevertheless I have a strong knowledge of the impact my bids have on the market and I know how my competitors affect the market as well. For example, Codaarix has stated earlier he would have to take down 90% of his volume (from 20 billion to 2 billion). This exactly matches my own estimates: I will have to take down about 90% of my volume. Any trader, not just me, can tell you what the effect of this will be on prices and I assure you my estimates are CONSERVATIVE estimates of what will happen to prices if 90% of the volume on the market is cancelled.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.03 00:58:00 -
[34]
(Note I have posted a link to this thread in the Shiva market discussion)
Response to Xavier Arron who accuses me of pulling "figures out of thin air" - I do 50-100 market transactions every day. In the commodities and regions I deal I know the market cold and know my competitors, their resources and practices. My estimates are based on this experience.
For your information Xavier every serious trader has a keen idea of both their individual and collective impact on the price/volume of the market. For example, in at least one core empire region I am the ONLY bidder on holoreels right now. (Holoreels are handed out by the thousands to mission runners.) That means if I say the price is 30, it is 30. If I say it is 50 it is 50. If I set no bid, the price is ZERO -- the mission runners can stash, trash or haul, but they can't do what they want to do: get cash. I know EXACTLY what the liquidity is on that item because I am making it--all of it.
In mins I am only one of many bidders, nevertheless I have a strong knowledge of the impact my bids have on the market and I know how my competitors affect the market as well. For example, Codaarix has stated earlier he would have to take down 90% of his volume (from 20 billion to 2 billion). This exactly matches my own estimates: I will have to take down about 90% of my volume. Any trader, not just me, can tell you what the effect of this will be on prices and I assure you my estimates are CONSERVATIVE estimates of what will happen to prices if 90% of the volume on the market is cancelled.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.03 01:20:00 -
[35]
RE: Deadeye - SMALL ORDERS MAKE UP FOR BIG ONES?
Deadeye and others have suggested that the ability to place remote orders might compensate for the drop in volume. For example, instead of opening a bid for 500K units I could open a remote bid for 50K units and repeat that ten times each time it filled.
First of all the devs have suggested a second "improvement" that will cap the total number of orders--something that will actively penalize trying to do this.
Second of all the remote bid functionality is only within a region meaning you still have to travel there. The ability to remote just the region is strictly a fine-tuning change that saves a few hops here and there. It will in no way come close to compensating for the loss in volume. To do what you propose I would need to (1) have view of multiple regions simultaneously, and (2) be able to set bids immediately in any of those regions without having to travel to them. Neither of these things is proposed for Shiva. (Orestes suggestion that sometime in the indefinite future it might be possible is idle speculation that has no bearing on the change we are facing immediately in Shiva).
Third of all, even if these conditions were met they would only mitigate the damage caused by the loss of volume not compensate for it. The reason for this is two-fold: (a) the smaller chunked orders would not satisfy a large seller, if 500K shrinks to 50K, it is 90% loss in liquidity no matter how you slice it, (b) the paperwork and time expenditure for me and other traders would skyrocket. I already have hundreds of pages of hand-annotated market references and notebooks full of checklists. Having to track 10 times the number of orders AND travel to the region to instantly renew them on a sellout is not a likely scenario.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.03 01:20:00 -
[36]
RE: Deadeye - SMALL ORDERS MAKE UP FOR BIG ONES?
Deadeye and others have suggested that the ability to place remote orders might compensate for the drop in volume. For example, instead of opening a bid for 500K units I could open a remote bid for 50K units and repeat that ten times each time it filled.
First of all the devs have suggested a second "improvement" that will cap the total number of orders--something that will actively penalize trying to do this.
Second of all the remote bid functionality is only within a region meaning you still have to travel there. The ability to remote just the region is strictly a fine-tuning change that saves a few hops here and there. It will in no way come close to compensating for the loss in volume. To do what you propose I would need to (1) have view of multiple regions simultaneously, and (2) be able to set bids immediately in any of those regions without having to travel to them. Neither of these things is proposed for Shiva. (Orestes suggestion that sometime in the indefinite future it might be possible is idle speculation that has no bearing on the change we are facing immediately in Shiva).
Third of all, even if these conditions were met they would only mitigate the damage caused by the loss of volume not compensate for it. The reason for this is two-fold: (a) the smaller chunked orders would not satisfy a large seller, if 500K shrinks to 50K, it is 90% loss in liquidity no matter how you slice it, (b) the paperwork and time expenditure for me and other traders would skyrocket. I already have hundreds of pages of hand-annotated market references and notebooks full of checklists. Having to track 10 times the number of orders AND travel to the region to instantly renew them on a sellout is not a likely scenario.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.03 03:44:00 -
[37]
I agree with Rosenbaum on this. A lot of the posters on this thread apparently don't understand what buying on margin is. The mis-use of the term in the Shiva feature statement is adding to the confusion. Buying stock "on margin" means buying stock with money loaned by the brokerage and using the stock itself as the collateral.
Making an unsecured market order has absolutely nothing to do with buying something on margin. No loan is involved, no collateral is involved. There is no relation whatsoever. I know most people out there are not financial experts but at least could we try to use the basic terminology correctly.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
Droidster
|
Posted - 2004.08.03 03:44:00 -
[38]
I agree with Rosenbaum on this. A lot of the posters on this thread apparently don't understand what buying on margin is. The mis-use of the term in the Shiva feature statement is adding to the confusion. Buying stock "on margin" means buying stock with money loaned by the brokerage and using the stock itself as the collateral.
Making an unsecured market order has absolutely nothing to do with buying something on margin. No loan is involved, no collateral is involved. There is no relation whatsoever. I know most people out there are not financial experts but at least could we try to use the basic terminology correctly.
_____________________________________________
I am motivated by various things, mostly ISK. |
| |
|