One must praise Ursan for his amazing ability to produce lovely counterarguments. +1 to all his arguments is in place.
On the other hand, to provide a good counterargument, one could say that Ursan is only one point of view. I agree with this argument, and further with the fact that Ursan is a forum groper.
To actually make this post relevant, I will stop trolling Ursan and now attack Kaiza. Prepare yourself for artillery, K-boy.
On the one hand, gem regulation will allow for more players to have gems, as the price will not be able to continuously rise, as it is now. However, on the other hand, you are preventing the price from reaching equilibrium. Effectively, with regulation, you will be implementing a price ceiling, which would be below the equilibrium price and quantity. Thus, there will more gems sold at a lower price. This effectively makes the gem worth less, and thus makes the idea of gems—>gold less viable. Thus, this will reduce the amount of gems —> gold and thus reduce A net’s profits.
YOU MUST NOT STOP ANET FROM EARNING MONEY. IT NEEDS MONEY TO SURVIVE.
LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS. THE PRICE WILL GO UP, PEOPLE WILL BUY GEMS WITH REAL LIFE MONEY, AND ANET will survive. And I get to keep playing for only having paid $60
Merry christmas to all, and to all a good fight!
-MK