On second thought, you’re right…it doesn’t really screw up the economy. We should let them use free transfer to exploit getting tier 6 mets so that you can server hop.
Why should respec be free?
Hmm…screw up the economy by allowing server hopping to farm node to allow you to get skill point which will be fixed eventually…
Your misguided economic theory knows no bounds. You try to argue economics without even putting effort into researching how it really works…and dismissing real knowledge on the grounds that it does not apply here until John Smith hops in. The points which you have pointed out, and which I have replied, which you choose to deny/question (since I have no credentials here), which John Smith (an economist) validated…which you refuse to accept. I see no way to talk sense into you as you’re encapsulated in your own world despite the input from many of the posters here.
Many of what you say is true individually….but you failed to connect them together and understand how they interact with each other. You can’t even get the definition of price ceiling/floor right despite it being pointed out (I’m actually quite amazed that you think ceiling/floor is good, and claim that both is in place when only 1 is.). This isn’t how someone with a clear analytical mind would approach things.
(edited by Wazabi.1439)
It’s a necessary constrain in the game to sink gold and reduce speculation.
It’s a necessary constrain in the game to sink gold and reduce speculation.
I think the argument stems from people not wanting to be labeled as less skill. Even though there are never equality in terms of skill, admitting to be inferior is a blow to their fragile ego. It is easier to blame it on something else than themselves for their inability. For those interested, this is being coined the “dunning Kruger” effect.
I think CdrRogdan.8907 is getting a lot of stuff mixed up and and confused about the relationship of what affects what….a common problem when trying to analyses an economy. Also, I think you have some serious misinterpretation on some economic terms or misunderstood the way it works…like price ceiling/floor.
When I look at it, I take a neutral stance. I don’t see right and wrong…only what affects what.
Looking at the buy order…that’s an indication of how much demand is on a certain goods at a certain price. It doesn’t matter what’s the motivation of the buyer. Sell order indicates the supply of a goods at a certain price. Those who doesn’t want to wait for whatever reason will choose to fulfill these orders, while those who don’t mind waiting will post an order. Thus by having both buy/sell order, we have the flexibility of either trading now or later for more or less profit/cost. There will be more transactions (more trades) in the market, which equates to more in-game resources getting to the hands of those who needs it, raising the general utility (best wiki utility, I don’t see how I can leave out this technical term) of the players.
This, off course, could be exploited…by 1 super wealthy player. But, it is offset by the transaction cost of TP, and also by the global market. So the question is will the player’s utility be higher by removing buy orders to kill the exploiters? Also, we need to ask is there any evidence that a super wealthy player is able to actually manipulate AND profit from the market? Keep in mind that being able to manipulate the market does not automatically means he can profit from it (dynamic price). Off course none of us will be able to provide this evidence…but the dev will have sufficient data to pin point these people and take action accordingly, probably outside the game world if they are gold seller (dev are gods).
Many of the suggestions made in this forum assumes price remain static after their proposed changes…same here with big players moving and profiting from the market. The biggest determinant to that is the 2 million participants in the market.
@Siyeh.2407
I personally don’t think equilibrium will ever be reached given that the supply and demand is not static. I see it more as a theoretical nirvana, a center of gravity if you would where price would converge and fluctuate around.
If taste and preference change, the economy will just behave in a different way…much like the change in fashion and taste. Now, getting a little into technicalities here…if preferences change in that it can no longer be described by a convex curve, then the foundation of economic breaks down.
Agree. Historical price chart allows a person to subjectively form his opinion on the average price of an item.
You two beat me to it.
@John Smith
Thanks for pointing out the reason where player doesn’t maximize profit. As Siyeh.2407 puts it, maximizing their utility seems more fitting in describing player’s behavior.
@dish
Nice catch on the price ceiling example…that was a tricky one.
@cdrogdan
The price is already moving according to supply and demand in the current state. Removing bidding will limit speculation, but even without it, it only makes it harder to buy at whoever that decides to sell low, and and put them up for sale at a higher price when the time is right. Along with that, it removes an indicator of demand, and also removes the flexibility and convenience for someone who wants quick cash to get rid of their item.
The game already have build in mechanism to impede market manipulation through sales tax, listing fee, and a large market. It’s even harder to both manipulate and exploit it for profit under this environment. As for speculation, I don’t see that as a problem as it is between 2 consenting person (buyer willing to buy at the price seller is willing to sell). So the question that remains is that is removing bidding worth it to forfeit the option to increase the liquidity of the market.
If only I can answer questions that you directed at me, I’m afraid you’re taking this too personal and it might cloud your rationality.
Lol… I second that motion
My friend just mentioned a very good point about the posting fee. If there is no posting fee, the TP will become a giant bank.
Deflation is an overall decrease in price level of most if not all item. That can only happen when money in circulation shrink. Changes in the supply and demand can also lower price but that’s not deflation.
@maxster
true…people with more time on the TP screen will have an advantage…not that I’m complaining.
let the undercutting continues!!! Cheers!
trading is a zero sum game. If there are only a demand for 100 of the item, and there are a supply of 200 of it, only 100 will sell. If you have the time to log in, find you’re being undercut, then lower your price for free, then others can do it too. It will drive the price to the lowest reservation price faster…buyer actually benefits from that, not seller.
@Rukh
And your conclusion is based on?
@Rukh
Correct…what they fail to realize is that demand will also drop when the price is being pushed up, and when it can be sold above vendor price, supply will flow back in. They see how the price will raise from the reduced supply, and stop there. They didn’t think how price will move after that.
I don’t quite understand what you’re talking about the gold corporation thing.
1. Custom bidding is not risk free.
Yes, I’m speaking in terms of turning a profit from putting a bid then sell the item, making profit as long as the spread is sufficiently wide. I do farm items with wide spread. For items with higher transaction volume, the spread usually don’t last long. For slow moving item, there can be a 40% spread like you say. I am merely fronting the payment to those who have no patient to post and wait for their item to sell, and earning premium for it. Although it is profitable and relatively low risk, it is not no risk at all. If the flavor of the month changes or if A-net changes something that impacts the demand of said item, I stand at losing. Also, I suffer from liquidity risk if the item doesn’t sell fast enough where I could had invested in a lower return investment and flip it quickly. This is how the market works.
2. Crafting is not supposed to be profitable.
I’ll put the blame on crafting being too easy to level and a global market. Not necessarily a bad thing as I’ve manage to buy what I can’t craft at an affordable price.
3. A ceiling/floor hurts the economy
There is a complicated explanation that I don’t think you guys are interested in hearing…I don’t know how to make it simple.
4. Transparency is better for the market.
Ok, this I misunderstood what you’re trying to say. What you propose is an auction system with a range of reservation price. I must say it is one of the more interesting ideas I’ve seen in forum post. No comment on that.
5. I just described the stock market! What’s the problem?
To many (me), trading is a game within a game…
6. These are real people, therefore it functions like a real economy.
All the factors you’ve listed determines price, true. From an economist’s perspective, we look at things on a more general view..so advertising, location and such are not considered in the model. What you describe falls more on to marketing…and looking more from a single company’s perspective. For an economic model of any kind, human behavior is an important factor. A game economy simply follows a much simpler model (still complicated) with less variables, and some unique constrains. The underlying foundation applies to both. Example: people prefer to pay less than to pay more for a homogeneous goods, price depreciates when supply exceeds demand. Prices of goods are all driven by people’s action.
Careful….your argument is based on real world…thus according to KwwB, it does not relate to the game economy…thus your point is irrelevant.
@kwwb
You failed to justify your arguements rationally so you choose to dismiss my arguments by saying it has no relation with the real world…which by the way you could not substantiate. English is not my first language, but that has nothing to do with my arguments. There are no real world economics or game world economics. Economics just describes how various factor interacts with eachother.
I apologize for coming off as a smug. My last sentence in my first reply was provocative, my bad…it doesn’t contribute to anything. However, that doesn’t invalidate my point…or the fact that your argument is baseless.
To op,
I’ve mistaken you as kwwb in some of my replies. My apologies.
(edited by Wazabi.1439)
@kwwb
You are the person providing a solution to a perceived issue. Not everyone is good at everything…and you are the the one belittling yourself with your replies. Game is not real world…but the people playing it are, and their behaviour remains the same. Or is it that you choose not to see it as such because you can’t understand how it work in the real world?
The first two point that I’ve made is pretty intuitive, pointing out the flaws in your suggestion which you had up till now failed to address.
On my point regarding deadweight and market transparency, I find it necessary to go a little deeper into the mechanics of economics to present my point.
Instead of addressing my point or admit that you have no reasonable arguments to that, you choose to call me a troll.
Not everyone is an expert in everything. You put up some suggestions, I argued against them base on my expertise. How is that trolling?
Hated it like Op puts it… though I understand how some of the things I dislike needs to tie up with the lore….
Game economy and real world economy are driven by real people. In that sense, what applies in the real world economy applies in the game world as well. What the game world have is a much simpler economy in which the model is described by less variables, and with certain constrains/or lack of compared to the real world. This results in a simpler model with less simultaneous equations to solve.
My first two point has to do with considerations what your suggestion neglected to include/consider. My third point with the deadweight has to do with the efficiency of resource allocation, which if you truly know what’s the implication you’ll know it affects the game economy as well since, again, it is real people participating in it.
On your third suggestion, the visibility on sales/buy order is to increase the transparency of the market and providing more information to the participants to that they can make a more accurate guess on the market price. Removing that increases the uncertainty, which affects how a person price their goods. That “could” result in a greater variation in prices. Increasing market transparency results in a more stable price with less fluctuation. In case if you think I’m pulling this out from nowhere, there are plenty of academic articles that had proven it.
If you disagree with my points, argue on the point.
(edited by Wazabi.1439)
not cool……
/15 char
its bad…some of my gold was missing….if it was just roll back…that means I missed out the profits that I’ve made. They better have a good explanation and compensation for that.
same.
/15 character
I’m assuming the motivation of wanting the floor price to be at 15% is so that people can make more profit selling trash in TP. In that context, if things are not selling at vendor1, what makes you think it will sell at vendor 15%? If it is being sold at vendor15%, that reduces the demand of it as compared to at vendor +1c. The only reason the price is vendor +1c is because that was the floor. Actual demand of the item is much lower than the vendor price.
@Jia Shen.4217
Before you move on to proposing suggestion, answer the following question:
How much is a trash worth to you?
If it is priced at vendor +1 will you buy it?
What determines the value/price of an item?
This is the internet…personal achievements and traits that I state doesn’t mean anything. I can say I’m 60 years old retired ex-economist that lives of the interest payment of my 10 million dollars portfolio but doesn’t means it’s true. How much a person knows about a subject of discussion is often reflected in the statements he make, and same goes for the “real” attitude (I’m also guilty of some bad ones).
Like I say, you can argue it’s a game…I won’t be able to top that.
What op proposes won’t change my game, and it won’t change how the market works. If you learn how to trade, you’ll be able to make a profit in any environment. If you refuse to learn how to trade and wants the system to protect you, you’ll still never learn how to trade in that environment. Even if the environment is as op proposes, you still do not know how to make your goods sell, and the better trader will still always be better than you and accumulate more wealth than you…and they will still have more control of the economy than you do.
All these arguments stems from players getting punished or losing money for their own mistakes. Tell me, how is that bad? Isn’t that how we learn? All these positive reinforcement BS and participation medal had succeeded in making everyone feel good…but in a real sense did you actually accomplished/learn anything significant? All it succeeded is shaping a generation that cannot take responsibility from their own failure and learn from it.
You can say this is just a game…true…I can’t argue with that. But take some time to think about what I say…all these complain about a game…is just an extension on a person’s attitude to challenges that he/she will face now and in the future.
buying from custom bid is not risk free. First, someone have to decide to sell it to your lower price rather than posting a sell order. Then, when you post it up, someone have to decide to buy it at your selling price rather than putting up a buy order. Often, the spread is only slightly larger than 15% that makes the profit margin not worth the risk/time. When one is discovered through, it tends to balance out. If someone is willing to spend the time and take the risk, then they deserve the return.
Crafting was never meant to be profitable. Even if you don’t know that, the ease of maxing crafting should had told you something about it. If you still hold by the illusion taht crafting should be profitable, you do not know the laws of supply/demand.
Any price ceiling/floor only hurts the economy as a whole. Look for articles on deadweight. The market is already a living organism and price already reflects supply and demand. Your post only serves to demonstrate your lack of economic understanding. Read up the other post that addresses the issue that you are trying to “solve” rather than posting a new thread on the same topic.
@RebelYell
Nice tie up with reference to game and inflation
Many doesn’t understand the effect of high inflation. A person’s purchasing power remains the same despite of inflation. However, how a person price an item depends on how much he expect the inflation to be. If the inflation is certain (through action of anet), then we have a stable market. If not, then we’ll have a market with crazy price fluctuation.
John smith noted that it the LIFO was not intended. They are fixing it. That contributes to undercutting. My arguments on the timed posting stands. If the whole reason is so that you are punished less for your mistake, I would say no. Mistakes should be punished. Other games had fostered a weird way of thinking on how a market works by babysitting them…I think that needs to stop. The adaptation skills of playing a game has diminished to the point that many player ask for changes for anything that doesn’t go their way.
Speculation activities is negatively related to the cost of doing so. A higher cost of selling will discourage such activities by making it harder to make a profit. So no to zero fees. If they want to put in a tax for buy orders, be my guest. I can adapt.
I didn’t want anything…just stating that these changes change nothing other than making it less painful for mistakes, while at the same time might be bad for the economy. No fee makes it easier to manipulate the market…but it is debatable that if the market is sufficiently active, it cannot be manipulated even without the fees. As for timed listing, doesn’t change the prime determinant of price…so you won’t get to sell your item at a higher price magically.
I’m saying this in the context that people are asking for change because they think the changes will allow them to sell for more.
If your context is about the cost of mistakes, then I agree that your proposal will make it less costly…but I believe that every mistake must be punished so that people can learn and adapt…and those that can’t…well…Darwin’s theory is all I can say.
If someone can buy cheap gem to boost the price up…that means each consecutive purchase made will be more expansive…pushing the price up. When the buying is done, the average price of their gem stock will be higher than the 35s/100 gem. Given the wide spread, when they try to sell it at 40s, the price will depreciate for each consecutive sales..making their average selling price lower than 40s.
Now I haven’t play the gem market yet…but I think if there was an exploit on making speculative gains, it could be due to being able to make a bulk purchase/sale that’s being locked into 1 price. Fixing that would do (if that’s the problem to begin with), you don’t need to limit the number of gem purchases. Still…I don’t see much harm on the restrictions you propose to the average gem purchaser that buy it for their own use.
That means you are not familiar with the price of the item that you’re trying to sell…If you can adjust the price, others can too. It just brings the price to the “reservation price” (check wiki on definition) that a seller is willing to sell faster. If your reservation price is higher than other seller, theirs will still get sold first. No difference there. In fact, it benefits the buyer. You just have to accept the fact that for any item where many people are trying to sell, you pretty much have not much say in the price.
@luckdemon.8619
Having no fee allows for market manipulation. Timer will not change the price people are willing to pay for an item…so it won’t magically make your item sell at a higher price. What it will do is that people will be more conservative in pricing, so you’ll see more severe undercutting down to a seller’s reservation price. You also fail to note the negative aspect of “other” game’s auction house where price can be controlled by a small group of players.
(edited by Wazabi.1439)
You were supposed to make cash out of crafting, but it seems most items won’t let you accomplish that.
So many items being sold for less than their material costs…
I don’t ask for high profit, but at least SOME profit.
Crafting makes money in other MMO, thus it is reasonable for you to “assume” the same applies here. When things doesn’t turn out to be what you expect/want, it does not mean it is broken. When crafting is so easy, and 2million players with access to the same market, it is obvious that crafting is not a money maker. Even if you didn’t realize that, some pre-launch post and strategy guide already states that crafting is not a get rich quick scheme…it’s for legendary item.
Having said that, it doesn’t matter either way to me if bags are soul bound or not. Market change, and you can change and get over it. Even if bags are soulbound, trust me, you won’t magically be making a profit out of it with the amount of crafters that can craft bags.
I have a ton of iron to get rid of, I dont believe at all that its only worth 5 copper, but im going to get rid of it anyway at 5 copper because it wont sell otherwise. Not a single person can possibly believe that iron, a more valuable metal than copper, is worth less than that.
Just something I thought to add about this statement…by asking a question. In a normal character progression, how many zone spawns copper and how many zone spawns iron? As far as I can recall, only the newb zone spawns copper, and the next 2-3 zone spawns iron…no surprise there’s more iron than copper in the market.
Prophet.6954
How well are the items selling at +1 vendor price? Adding 15% to the price floor is just going to increase the difficulty in selling the item if it sells at all. Your sell price doesn’t mean it will be sold at that price.
Ixal.7924
The advantage of selling instantly is up to personal preference. If earning 15% less (not losing money here) beats running to a merchant to sell my goods for me, than fine…especially when you’re in a dungeon. Also, what’s your definition of market value? The price you think it’s worth? The current lowest selling price? Both wrong. Market value is always in a flux that depends on the usefulness of the item and supply of the item at any given time. No one can tell for sure the “market value” of an item as it is not fixed.
nvidia? You lost me there dish
@max
Well…I think that may be the intention of dev, for money to be made from TP, thus encouraging more TP activity? I think it’s obvious that crafting is all about legendary…
@illgot
I fully agree with no price floor and just let people selling below vendor if they want to. I don’t like constrains in the market.
However, looking at A-net’s intention to protect the Newb/“carebears” (always loved that term in eve), they’ve put in a price floor…if that was an intention, then I think a 15% price floor above vendor price would be more effective in what they are trying to achieve.
Having said that…the reason we have so many carebears around is that all other MMO had placed them in a protective environment…and they got accustomed to a world where some of their ignorance has no consequences. They rely on the game to prevent them from making stupid mistakes. This is much like the nanny states in real world. It doesn’t actually protect them in the long run but only makes them more ignorant and rely on the game (government) to further protect them from themselves.
Current price of item is driven by income (among other factors). If income increases, price of item is going to be increase. However, price of trash item probably won’t change at all even if income increase.
People that makes more money than you are better than you be it through illegal (exploits) or legal (trading, effort) method. Lv80 equipment are relatively cheap…only thing expansive are the exotics…that’s because there are more people willing to pay money for it now and very little supply. You can’t blame others for not being able to afford a Ferrari in your current income…you’ll just have to be content with something that’s within your reach given your ability to generate income…or improve your ability to generate income relative to others. It’s not like you can’t complete the game without exotics.
(edited by Wazabi.1439)
As I’ve said, it’s by design. It’s even in the strategy guide….it says don’t expect to make big money. Aside form the factors you’ve listed, I think the most important is that it is too easy for anyone to max it. That creates more competition for selling crafted goods.
Max
Glad we can find something to agree on. This game does not favor crafter…in fact dev never intended for crafter to make big money…it is by design. Even if undercutting does not exist, the drop rate and ease of maxing crafting reduces crafted good’s demand.
As for not able to change price, yes, it makes seller less flexible. Just means you have to put more thoughts into pricing your goods…and harder to speculate.
You might need to note the biggest difference between eve and this: logistics. This difference changes the way market behaves as well.
In all, i take it as a game with different rule…no big deal.
@y u mad
Let me ask, as you are gathering mushroom, did you did any research on how much it will sell? It takes a lot of effort to gather 500 mushroom…did you evaluate if that is worth your effort at any point of time? If I know it’s not worth anything, I won’t go for that at all.
Welcome to a large player based market.