These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Decline in numbers... starting to turn into RAPID!!!

First post
Author
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#2581 - 2015-11-24 16:42:09 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Lots of people seem to lack the ability to scrutinize individual situations and changes to judge whether a change would be good or bad, which is what leads to the stupid "change is good" thinking that creates more problems than in solves.
You lack this same ability, you simply jump to "change is bad" instead.

Jenn aSide wrote:
And whether they are wrong or right will depend on how well CCP controls the evolution of the game.
It won't though. Progress will always ensure that things that used to be difficult are easier and new things add new challenges. Older players will always complain about how things were tougher back in their day.


Jenn aSide wrote:
The best part of EVE (for people like me) was it's undocumented 'find out for yourself and HTFU' nature. Newer players are robbed of that and the opportunities to gain pride from overcoming barriers. Pride is one of those emotional ties that keeps people playing and the game simply has less for an indivudal to be proud of today than in the past.

I was proud of my Navy Raven I grinded in high sec for using a regular raven i had to train for after training those stupid learning skills, not so proud of the TFI BPC I bought after ONE NIGHT of FW missions 2 weeks ago in a bomber on an alt I created 2 months ago....
Good for you, now it's more documented than it was but there's more features. Like I said before, times change. Now there are simply different challenges for newer players and you're complaining because thye don't have the same challenges as you did.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Working for something you want is not punishment.
I didn't suggest it was. I suggested that you want all newbies to be punished by bad mechanics so they take as long as you took to figure out the game. The thing is, that's your experience. I found it no more difficult to figure out than a newbie has it now. I certainly didn't have to spend months grinding missions when I started, so that tells me that it wasn't the difficulty of the game but your ability to pick it up. Even now a bad player will have a hard time getting going.

Jenn aSide wrote:
People like you (in game and in real life) think you are helping people by making things easier for them (or advocating with the powers that be). You aren't, you are taking something important from them. Namely , the ability to survive on their own after you stop giving them stuff. My buddy who loaned me that Navy Raven I eventually bought taught me this in game (i already knew it in real life). Thats why he SOLD me the Raven rather than gifting it to me.
No I don't, you no absolutely nothing about me, in-game or out. You've got your own preconceptions about who you think I am and you refuse to look past that prejudice at what is actually said. The way I see it, the game should be a challenge but the challenge should be entertaining. That means that some parts of the gameplay do need to be easier while others need to be harder. For example I think that joining up with your mates should carry a significantly lower risk of becoming a target for mass wardeccers and mining in highsec should be a lot safer than it is. At the same time I think incursions in highsec need to be nuked and trading should have significantly higher overheads. A lot of static mechanics like ice and asteroid belt size and locations should be much more dynamic so the economy shifts about a lot. The thing is this isn't even the first time I've stated things like this and every time you simply ignore it then at a later point make some ludicrous claim that all I want is to protect the carebears.

The thing is, it's clear you don't live with the rest of us in reality which is why you seem to believe no safety reducing changes have ever been made and you seem to have no concept of the economy having changed over time, so you see someone making an amount that would have been quite large back in 2007 but don't realise you could buy significantly more with less isk back then. Sounds like selective memory to me mate.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Zaed Trevize
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2582 - 2015-11-24 16:47:18 UTC
You are discussing NPE and player progression like if it was a topic with an objective answer when in truth (in my opinion, of course) is a completely subjective judgement made by every single player/customer after a moth or two and the answer is overwhelmingly "not worth my time/money". Sure this people don't have our knowledge of the game... but they also lack our personal investment. In other words they are better judges because they are the intended target.
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#2583 - 2015-11-24 17:18:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Lucas Kell wrote:
]No I don't, you no absolutely nothing about me, in-game or out.


That's not true. I know you from your posting. So does everyone else here. Now there are 2 possibilities: the rather large group who think the same things about you that I do are wrong (which is possible) or they (and I) are right and you suffer delusions about the kind of person you are. IMO the latter is way more common than the former, and your propensity to see yourself as 'fighting for the underdog' is a common trait of those who do the latter.

TL;DR if you think everoyne around you is a ...hole or some kind, you're probably the hole.

Quote:

The thing is, it's clear you don't live with the rest of us in reality which is why you seem to believe no safety reducing changes have ever been made and you seem to have no concept of the economy having changed over time, so you see someone making an amount that would have been quite large back in 2007 but don't realise you could buy significantly more with less isk back then. Sounds like selective memory to me mate.


I'm sure a thing of two happened that reduced safety, but those are moot because all the tons of other things that happened that enhanced safety. There is that 'false equality' sense you display in action again.

As for the economy, that's just you projecting. At no point have i spoken about the value of isk. I make a steady 90 mil isk an hour with my Mach in Wicked Creek right now,if you told me 90 mil in 2007 I would have crapped my pants, it's not the same now. And i never said it was.

But things spew wealth so much now adays that even if you adjust for 2007 isk, it's crazy. The main reason why CCP has historically been a sandbox company is because they just aren't very good in making content (notice how much got screwed up by Crimson Harvest?) and don't know how to balance rewards across the whole span of their game. It would be more helpful to them if people were honest about rewards in game, but people are too stuck in their own wallets and ideology.

Likewise with player retention and NPE stuff. They (like you) are too busy feeling sorry for folk and advocating 'change" (ie giving them free stuff basically) to understand (let alone admit) that the best way forward might be a tougher, less forgiving game. Mainly because that kind of game fosters stronger emotional ties from pride and frustration. ie "like it was in my day.... you know, when the game was growing"
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#2584 - 2015-11-24 17:51:36 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
That's not true. I know you from your posting. So does everyone else here. Now there are 2 possibilities: the rather large group who think the same things about you that I do are wrong (which is possible) or they (and I) are right and you suffer delusions about the kind of person you are. IMO the latter is way more common than the former, and your propensity to see yourself as 'fighting for the underdog' is a common trait of those who do the latter.
No, you really don't, as evidenced by your repeated misrepresentation of my views. And mate, you're part of a very small group of people who disagree with someone then immediately claim that it's down to the opposing parties character flaws.

Jenn aSide wrote:
but those are moot
And this right here is the problem. Opposing arguments are invalid because your argument exists, that's basically what you're saying. Because some changes increased safety all other changes are irrelevant. This is why changes you don't like go ahead, because your arguments are ridiculous enough to be simply dismissed as bittervet tears. You'd only be helping yourself if you took a more rational and balanced approach.

Jenn aSide wrote:
ThatAs for the economy, that's just you projecting. At no point have i spoken about the value of isk. I make a steady 90 mil isk an hour with my Mach in Wicked Creek right now,if you told me 90 mil in 2007 I would have crapped my pants, it's not the same now. And i never said it was.
90m would have bought you 2 battleships in 2007. Good luck with that now.

Jenn aSide wrote:
But things spew wealth so much now adays that even if you adjust for 2007 isk, it's crazy. The main reason why CCP has historically been a sandbox company is because they just aren't very good in making content (notice how much got screwed up by Crimson Harvest?) and don't know how to balance rewards across the whole span of their game. It would be more helpful to them if people were honest about rewards in game, but people are too stuck in their own wallets and ideology.
Not really, you were just a newbie in 2007. I'd been around a couple of years so isk pretty much poured in then too. People don't need to be honest about it, CCP have access to all of the stats in a way that none of us could see it even if we wanted to.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Likewise with player retention and NPE stuff. They (like you) are too busy feeling sorry for folk and advocating 'change" (ie giving them free stuff basically) to understand (let alone admit) that the best way forward might be a tougher, less forgiving game. Mainly because that kind of game fosters stronger emotional ties from pride and frustration. ie "like it was in my day.... you know, when the game was growing"
They, unlike you, are trying to make it so that when new players join they feel like there's a good reason for them to continue playing. A tougher game only fosters stronger emotional ties if the player sticks around long enough for that to happen. When I started, it was tough, sure, mainly because far less was documented, but there were considerably less mechanics and a fraction of the playerbase - I rarely got caused issues by other players. Now there's a better learning curve but far more on that curve, and the number of players looking to instantly destroy half of what you own and scam you out of the rest is much higher. Just going "let's make it tougher" isn't going to increase retention.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#2585 - 2015-11-24 18:27:41 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
They, unlike you, are trying to make it so that when new players join they feel like there's a good reason for them to continue playing.


And they are failing. They are failing because they are responding to the situation like you would.

Does EVE actually have to die for them to see that the soft and cuddly way just doesn't cut it? The difference between CCP and you is thatr you can afford to be this wrong about things.

Quote:

A tougher game only fosters stronger emotional ties if the player sticks around long enough for that to happen. When I started, it was tough, sure, mainly because far less was documented, but there were considerably less mechanics and a fraction of the playerbase - I rarely got caused issues by other players. Now there's a better learning curve but far more on that curve, and the number of players looking to instantly destroy half of what you own and scam you out of the rest is much higher. Just going "let's make it tougher" isn't going to increase retention.


This is one of the many reasons i dislike you on a personal level. You excoriate me for a thing, then you do the thing you accused me of. Here you are looking at the game through some rose colored glasses ie "I rarely got caused issues by other players". I did get caused issues. I survived a suicide gank, I had people in my missions in Dodixie and Vylade everyday trying to bait me, got spam mail about isk doubling etc. You , like the rest of us, weren't the whole game back then, yo don't know what happened to others back then, and yet you don't even try to account for the possibility that you may just have been lucky.


Spyra Gryra
Space Men
#2586 - 2015-11-24 21:09:40 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Spyra Gryra wrote:
Nice story, Indahmawar Fazmarai. I'm not sure how you thought your little socioeconomic essay was analogous to some noobsec alliance blobbing you and your band of bumblefucks.



Analogy is a risky technique, since it doesn't suits to all intelects.


Sick burn, guy.

Your analogy was pretty ham-fisted. I suppose I should be thankful it didn't involve WW2 and the Nazi's.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#2587 - 2015-11-24 21:17:30 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
And they are failing. They are failing because they are responding to the situation like you would.
Verdict is out on that one, they've barely got started on it.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Does EVE actually have to die for them to see that the soft and cuddly way just doesn't cut it? The difference between CCP and you is thatr you can afford to be this wrong about things.
Neither I nor CCP are suggesting "soft and cuddly". You just can't see anything between two extremes. For you if they make any change to make it even slightly easier, that's "soft and cuddly". The thing is, on some points we even agree, like incursions for example.

Jenn aSide wrote:
This is one of the many reasons i dislike you on a personal level.
Roll It's just a game buddy.

Jenn aSide wrote:
You excoriate me for a thing, then you do the thing you accused me of. Here you are looking at the game through some rose colored glasses ie "I rarely got caused issues by other players". I did get caused issues. I survived a suicide gank, I had people in my missions in Dodixie and Vylade everyday trying to bait me, got spam mail about isk doubling etc. You , like the rest of us, weren't the whole game back then, yo don't know what happened to others back then, and yet you don't even try to account for the possibility that you may just have been lucky.
Exactly, you got caused issues and you got ganked. I had an easy time (primarily because I'm remotely competent). Now you have an easy time and you see some newbies (like your mate) having an easy time, yet you ignore the countless players who aren't having an easy time. It's just as it always has been, some people find it easy, some don't. This idea that CCP are making everything "soft and cuddly", it's in your head because you can only see in extremes. Like I said earlier, while mechanics are being explained better and the learning curve is being shortened, the number of things on that curve are increasing and the existing playerbase it getting more and more adept at ruining your day, and while some mechanics are made safer, others are made more risky.

The thing is, if you have it your way and the game stays as difficult in every way, then the existing playerbase gets stronger and stronger while new players start as far down the ladder as ever. Since EVE isn't like other games, there's no "levelling zone" and those newbies are thrown in with these ever stronger veterans and EVE becomes less and less appealing to new players.

At the end of the day, I trust CCP to take it in the right direction. A decent overhaul of PvE is long overdue and the new proposals look to be taking it in what I believe is the right direction. I understand that you disagree and to be quite honest, I don't really care. All the time you're going to continue misrepresenting my opinions and unwilling to have a reasonable discussion, anything you say is irrelevant to me.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Indahmawar Fazmarai
#2588 - 2015-11-24 21:54:28 UTC
Gorebane wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:


Veterans players convinced CCP that the game didn't needed radical new content that could be assimilated and mastered from scratch. So now the game just keeps adding content which demands to learn older content already mastered by veterans, in order to reach it. Like moving golaposts, new players are left behind by game evolution. When they master T1 dessies, CCP adds T3 dessies and then command dessies, so the veterans have new toys, but the new players will never enjoy those toys since they're still mastering T1... flying them against the veterans with T3. (That was an analogy, btw)

Veterans had a tougher game but that game didn't included veterans as they are, and didn't included CCP turning a deaf ear to anyone not old and organized enough to complain and demand change.



Your problem is, is that no matter what people tell you, you think Veterans suck and you're hard done by. When we started you needed almost every skill to level 5 before you could learn the next. So veterans the way you see them, didn't exist, but they did, because people that went a PvP route from the start left PvEers behind by (and I jest not) YEARS.

CCP have catered massively to the "I want it now" crowd as has been explained to you multiple times by allowing you to be n pretty much any ship you want in the space of 2 months from a brand new character.

Stop bitching about veterans, the reason they are the bane of your (noobs) life, is not because "they" make your life miserable, but because of your impatience and "I want it now" attitude, YOU make your own life miserable.


I don't know what you're talking here. I've been playing EVE on and off since October 2008. I am not a new player and haven't started any new character in more than 2 years.

Some people claim that EVE fails to retain players because it's "easier" than when they were retained. I contest that EVE is easier and also that the problem with population is not caused by the retention of PvP players.

That is secondary to my arguments on the dwindling population.

EVE doesn't needs to replay the fantasies of "toughness" of the veterans. It needs to identify who is paying CCP and for what reason, then engage those players as needed and make sure that they keep paying the show.

EVE is a PvE game. A highsec game. A solo game. That's your average EVE player. He outnumbers all other player profiles combined. And he's been ignored and neglected for years.

Now he's killing the game one player at a time.

CCP even admits it. The issue are PvE players who quit.

What they don't explain is why the plans to improve PvE will take two years when that's longer than the average time a PvEr stays subscribed, and why PvE has been handed to the incompetent hands of some developers who never engaged the PvE community, let alone the highsec PvE community.
Ginnie
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#2589 - 2015-11-24 22:10:20 UTC
Fascinating...I usually log in around 8 to 9p MST and there's usually between 14 and 16K people on. I intentionally try to find remote and isolated high sec (0.7 to 0.5) systems to run missions in and there are anywhere from only me to about 3 others in the system and neighboring systems.

It sounds plausible enough tonight, but wait until tomorrow. Wait for the common sense of the morning.

Avvy
Doomheim
#2590 - 2015-11-25 01:02:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Avvy
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:


CCP even admits it. The issue are PvE players who quit.




Well the PvE kind of sucks in this game compared to some other MMOs.

I've had it where I've been given 3 missions the same in a row, where's the fun in that?

Balancing standing is a pain in the butt if that's what someone wants to do.

If players build things and others just keep knocking them over eventually those building will stop as they won't see the point in building anymore.

The reality is PvE and PvP players don't mix very well. They never have done and probably never will do.



What this game has got going for it is it's spaceships and a sandbox.


I've been around since 2005 on and off and used to PvE, but in this game I've no more interest in PvE. So if there are others that feel the same, that could also explain some of it.


Edit:

Although, I did hear there was an event although I'm not sure if it was just PvE and a lot of you guys seem to have found it fun. So if it was then maybe there's hope for the old girl yet.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#2591 - 2015-11-25 07:41:40 UTC
Avvy wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:


CCP even admits it. The issue are PvE players who quit.




Well the PvE kind of sucks in this game compared to some other MMOs.

I've had it where I've been given 3 missions the same in a row, where's the fun in that?

Balancing standing is a pain in the butt if that's what someone wants to do.

If players build things and others just keep knocking them over eventually those building will stop as they won't see the point in building anymore.

The reality is PvE and PvP players don't mix very well. They never have done and probably never will do.



What this game has got going for it is it's spaceships and a sandbox.


I've been around since 2005 on and off and used to PvE, but in this game I've no more interest in PvE. So if there are others that feel the same, that could also explain some of it.


Edit:

Although, I did hear there was an event although I'm not sure if it was just PvE and a lot of you guys seem to have found it fun. So if it was then maybe there's hope for the old girl yet.


The event was PvE (shoot rats, get juicy rewards), and apparently the fun was all the crazy PvP that developed around it (shoot the guys shooting rats, shoot the guys getting rewards, steal the rewards...).

So Crimsom Harvest counts as a success because PvPrs had a blast. As for PvErs... I don't know. Apparently there's another event in the making (Operation Frostline) but there's no details and you bet PvPrs will have a blast with it, and PvErs... dunno.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#2592 - 2015-11-25 08:32:16 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
The event was PvE (shoot rats, get juicy rewards), and apparently the fun was all the crazy PvP that developed around it (shoot the guys shooting rats, shoot the guys getting rewards, steal the rewards...).

So Crimsom Harvest counts as a success because PvPrs had a blast. As for PvErs... I don't know. Apparently there's another event in the making (Operation Frostline) but there's no details and you bet PvPrs will have a blast with it, and PvErs... dunno.

I'm curious, if you did not like the Crimson Harvest, exactly what kind of PvE do you want CCP to add? The content was in all spaces, including highsec, where standard security rules apply so you mainly had to just race other players for the reward. Are you asking for PvE content that is completely free of interference from other players? Or are you just complaining about the limited scope of the event?

Certainly, by every obvious metric, the event was a success even if it was just of limited scale. It got people logging in, in space doing stuff, and generated player interactions in every sector of space - the very purpose of PvE in this game. If you are going to complain about that event, I am not sure CCP is ever going to be able to satisfy your moaning for "better PvE", whatever that is.
Samir Duran Xadi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2593 - 2015-12-01 20:58:09 UTC
Further dip to 2006 levels what's the excuse this time?
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#2594 - 2015-12-01 21:45:55 UTC
Samir Duran Xadi wrote:
Further dip to 2006 levels what's the excuse this time?


Fallout 4 has hit everything from EVE to p0rnhub. vºv

Anyway, the prospects are not bright looking. Why should anyone play EVE now, when all future plans revolve around giving new toys to a small slice of the older players?

I wonder if anyone at CCP has ever tried looking at their patch notes with the eyes of a prospective new customer. Watching the development of EVE as someone who haves little to no previous knowledge of EVE?

Think about Citadels. Tell a friend that you can own your space station in EVE. Then tell him that it's not a place, but a interactable object in space, and you can't even see your ship, let alone your avatar, while you're docked there.

Yes, exactly what every SF fan since Babylon 5 or Deep Space 9 dreamed of: an object in space to click.

And that, mind you, is CCP at its finest. Ask anyone, everyone will agree that CCP Seagull is the best EP ever an the current plans are awesome.

Just they make no sense unless you've been hooked to this subscription drug for years. And maybe not even then.
Harry Saq
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2595 - 2015-12-02 18:54:00 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Samir Duran Xadi wrote:
Further dip to 2006 levels what's the excuse this time?


Fallout 4 has hit everything from EVE to p0rnhub. vºv

Anyway, the prospects are not bright looking. Why should anyone play EVE now, when all future plans revolve around giving new toys to a small slice of the older players?

I wonder if anyone at CCP has ever tried looking at their patch notes with the eyes of a prospective new customer. Watching the development of EVE as someone who haves little to no previous knowledge of EVE?

Think about Citadels. Tell a friend that you can own your space station in EVE. Then tell him that it's not a place, but a interactable object in space, and you can't even see your ship, let alone your avatar, while you're docked there.

Yes, exactly what every SF fan since Babylon 5 or Deep Space 9 dreamed of: an object in space to click.

And that, mind you, is CCP at its finest. Ask anyone, everyone will agree that CCP Seagull is the best EP ever an the current plans are awesome.

Just they make no sense unless you've been hooked to this subscription drug for years. And maybe not even then.

Yeah, I think not being "in" the actual Citadel is a huge mistake.
Kiandoshia
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2596 - 2015-12-02 19:39:59 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Again, nonsense. Like in real life so in game, you can measure hardship.

Economically: A couple years ago a friend introduced another friend to the game. We taught him how to run missions and explore and such. A couple months into the game he wanted to join us running incursions for TVP. I loaned him my old rookie incursion Maelstrom. 2 days later he gave it back because with the isk from the incursion he was able to buy and fit the TVP 'basic' t2 fit Machariel. 2 days from new to incursions to flying a Pirate Faction battleship in pve...

When I started in 2007 my buddy sold me his navy raven on an installment plan. Took 2 months to pay it off running missions every day.

When i started there was no warning to you are about to go into low sec. Now there is. When i started there was no warning that you were about to undock without mission critical items. Now there are. When i started missions would tell you the objective but NOT how to complete them, now they do.

CONCORD could be tanked or evaded. Gankers got insurance pay outs from ganking, can flipping was real, ships had less EHP. Many of the defensive modules like MJDs and target breakers didn't exist. If you got jammed and thought you were smart for carrying FoF missiles, before your ship exploded you got to watch FoF missiles slam into the nearest structure, now they ignore structures unless you directly agress the structure 1st.

A noob in null sec was limited to belt ratting, now that same noob can be in a navy Vexor making 50 mil per hour in a matter of days after subbing. Before if you wanted to make 80k LP form one mission you had to do serious work training and getting into a ship that could do level 5s and grinding the hell-standings to do it. Today, you sub, train caracal for a few days, join a FW corp and BOOM, 80k LP from one FW mission.

On and On and On and On I could go. Half this game is aquisition, and it's so easy to aquire wealth now it's crazy. 1.2 bil plex crazy.



Hmm.. and I thought I was getting better at Eve... or at least making the number in the wallet go up =(
Rat Scout
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2597 - 2015-12-02 20:10:51 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:



Half this game is aquisition, and it's so easy to aquire wealth now it's crazy. 1.2 bil plex crazy.


Sooo its easy to gather 1.2 bill ISK or not?! I am confused.



Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#2598 - 2015-12-02 20:12:09 UTC
Rat Scout wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:



Half this game is aquisition, and it's so easy to aquire wealth now it's crazy. 1.2 bil plex crazy.


Sooo its easy to gather 1.2 bill ISK or not?! I am confused.





It's crazy easy.
Rat Scout
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2599 - 2015-12-02 21:48:57 UTC
yay, easy plex for us!
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#2600 - 2015-12-02 22:01:06 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
And that, mind you, is CCP at its finest. Ask anyone, everyone will agree that CCP Seagull is the best EP ever an the current plans are awesome.
Not everyone. The way I see it seagull brought it right back to "Say lots of words, deliver disappointment". The sov changes feel rushed and don't really seem to be moving towards fun gameplay, and right on the heels of that is citadels which are being delayed and breaking straight way from their new structure contesting mechanics. At some point after that is stargates, and I can't help but feel that it will either never materialise or come way too quick and too early and be terrible.

Honestly, judging by the massive investment into their VR development, I imagine the plan is "limp along until VR revenue takes over".

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.