These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Can we get rid of CSM after the recent PLEX insider trading fiasco?

First post
Author
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#241 - 2017-03-30 17:28:58 UTC
Zarek Kree wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Because they are dumping Aurum as a form of currency and allowing PLEX to be sub-divided and for these sub-divided PLEX to take the place of Aurum there will be increase demand for the new sub-divided PLEX.


That's a legit point. The demand for Aurum will be shifted to PLEX, which will put some upward pressure on the price over the long term. However, I'd argue that such pressure will be entirely offset by the introduction of the PLEX Vault which should almost entirely eliminate PLEX losses through ganking because it eliminates the need to manually move PLEX in-game. So the supply is also increased over the long term because PLEX will no longer be getting blown up and wasted.


My view is that I'm not entirely sure the increased demand for PLEX is going to matter that much in the end. Up until now people would buy Aurum, soon they'll switch over to PLEX, so the increased demand should be offset by increased supply. Of course, there is something going on in markets that allows for asset price bubbles--i.e. when the price of some asset becomes uncoupled from that assets intrinsic value. For example, experimental economics shows that in an experiment where there is an asset that pays out a dividend of $0.24/period and the experiment runs for 9 periods and participants are given various amounts of "cash" and the asset. The initial price of the asset should be $3.60, and it's price should fall from that initial value by $0.24 every turn. In fact, classical/rational expectations indicates there should be no trading at all really. After all, the price of the asset is going to be exactly equal to it's dividend payouts from that point forward (discounting is ignored as it is only 9 periods and there is not much time between periods). Yet in experiments the assets are often traded a prices well below their intrinsic value, then the price rises and overshoots it's intrinsic value at the time, and eventually crashes well before the 15th period--i.e. there is an asset bubble even when there is no uncertainty.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Zarek Kree
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#242 - 2017-03-30 17:29:06 UTC
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
It just did... there is a discount the next few days.


CCP routinely runs discounts - and frequently much greater than the current 15%. Those discounts are one of the ways CCP controls the in-game exchange rate ensuring that it stays relatively flat. The recent spike may very well be why they put it on sale. A discount leads to people buying it, which increases supply, lowers in-game demand and reduces the exchange rate.
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#243 - 2017-03-30 17:39:12 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


If you have less than 1000 AUR, it will be deleted.
Period.


Nope.

Quote:
Next up: Aurum conversion for players with Aurum balances of 1000 or less. The goal behind the initial plan was to minimize devaluation of PLEX at launch due to Aurum stockpiles entering the market, which is still a big priority, but, we hear you loud and clear that leaving some balances to not be converted is not a good enough solution.

After several days of looking at alternatives, we now intend to delay conversion for small balances rather than not converting at all. On feature release, we will convert Aurum balances greater than 1000 to PLEX immediately, and then, 3 months later, convert balances under 1000 Aurum. This should mitigate impact on the PLEX market and give us a good window to look at activity and adjust if needed.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#244 - 2017-03-30 17:40:03 UTC
Zarek Kree wrote:
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
It just did... there is a discount the next few days.


CCP routinely runs discounts - and frequently much greater than the current 15%. Those discounts are one of the ways CCP controls the in-game exchange rate ensuring that it stays relatively flat. The recent spike may very well be why they put it on sale. A discount leads to people buying it, which increases supply, lowers in-game demand and reduces the exchange rate.


True, meaning if you just bought PLEX for ISK...whoops.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Xenuria
#245 - 2017-03-30 17:54:48 UTC
Oh Look! It's this thread again...

Nobody on the CSM did any kind of insider trading. If they did I would be shouting it from the highest mountain tops for all to hear.
Zarek Kree
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#246 - 2017-03-30 17:57:28 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
My view is that I'm not entirely sure the increased demand for PLEX is going to matter that much in the end. Up until now people would buy Aurum, soon they'll switch over to PLEX, so the increased demand should be offset by increased supply. Of course, there is something going on in markets that allows for asset price bubbles--i.e. when the price of some asset becomes uncoupled from that assets intrinsic value. For example, experimental economics shows that in an experiment where there is an asset that pays out a dividend of $0.24/period and the experiment runs for 9 periods and participants are given various amounts of "cash" and the asset. The initial price of the asset should be $3.60, and it's price should fall from that initial value by $0.24 every turn. In fact, classical/rational expectations indicates there should be no trading at all really. After all, the price of the asset is going to be exactly equal to it's dividend payouts from that point forward (discounting is ignored as it is only 9 periods and there is not much time between periods). Yet in experiments the assets are often traded a prices well below their intrinsic value, then the price rises and overshoots it's intrinsic value at the time, and eventually crashes well before the 15th period--i.e. there is an asset bubble even when there is no uncertainty.


That's an interesting experiment. The pattern actually describes a classic bubble pretty well. The difference is that most bubbles are associated with uncertainty. The fact that it can happen under conditions of complete certainty almost sounds like the Greater Fool Theory in which rational buyers purchase items well above their intrinsic value in the belief that somebody else will be even more "foolish" than them and pay an even greater value.

Of course it's all rooted in behavioral economics/finance. People aren't rational - especially in a game in which they have much greater risk tolerance. That's why economics is a social science and not a hard science. If I'm not mistaken, CCP keeps a trained economist on the payroll to help them navigate these issues.
Zarek Kree
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#247 - 2017-03-30 18:02:27 UTC
Xenuria wrote:
Oh Look! It's this thread again...

Nobody on the CSM did any kind of insider trading. If they did I would be shouting it from the highest mountain tops for all to hear.


I wish I could like this post more than once. Conspiracy theorists are going to believe what they want to believe, but I still appreciate hearing CSM members openly dispute such nonsense.
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#248 - 2017-03-30 18:20:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Zarek Kree wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
My view is that I'm not entirely sure the increased demand for PLEX is going to matter that much in the end. Up until now people would buy Aurum, soon they'll switch over to PLEX, so the increased demand should be offset by increased supply. Of course, there is something going on in markets that allows for asset price bubbles--i.e. when the price of some asset becomes uncoupled from that assets intrinsic value. For example, experimental economics shows that in an experiment where there is an asset that pays out a dividend of $0.24/period and the experiment runs for 9 periods and participants are given various amounts of "cash" and the asset. The initial price of the asset should be $3.60, and it's price should fall from that initial value by $0.24 every turn. In fact, classical/rational expectations indicates there should be no trading at all really. After all, the price of the asset is going to be exactly equal to it's dividend payouts from that point forward (discounting is ignored as it is only 9 periods and there is not much time between periods). Yet in experiments the assets are often traded a prices well below their intrinsic value, then the price rises and overshoots it's intrinsic value at the time, and eventually crashes well before the 15th period--i.e. there is an asset bubble even when there is no uncertainty.


That's an interesting experiment. The pattern actually describes a classic bubble pretty well. The difference is that most bubbles are associated with uncertainty. The fact that it can happen under conditions of complete certainty almost sounds like the Greater Fool Theory in which rational buyers purchase items well above their intrinsic value in the belief that somebody else will be even more "foolish" than them and pay an even greater value.

Of course it's all rooted in behavioral economics/finance. People aren't rational - especially in a game in which they have much greater risk tolerance. That's why economics is a social science and not a hard science. If I'm not mistaken, CCP keeps a trained economist on the payroll to help them navigate these issues.


CCP DrEyjo no longer works for/with CCP. He accepted the position of rector at Háskólinn á Akureyri back in 2014.

Edit:

BTW, that experiment has been done a number of times with similar results.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Sullen Decimus
Polaris Rising
The Bastion
#249 - 2017-03-30 18:27:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Sullen Decimus
This entire thread is ******* hilarious. You're literally spewing **** while shooting yourself in the foot for your own arguments you're presenting. Before I get to that though if we leaked anything why the hell wouldn't we have done it months ago? We were never informed when this dev blog was even going up but knew about it months in advance. There is no way we would have known about it going up the days leading up. Now how you're literally wrong and proved it yourself.

This image has been linked in the forum already http://i.imgur.com/69fHmVs.png

You point to the 20% increase as us buying up the market. Here's the thing. see those blue bars across the bottom? Those are the daily volume traded. Notice how it literally didn't change at all during the increase. It actually had a small decrease! So you're argument is shot. There is no backing of it at all. In fact, it supports we didn't leak anything because the market volume didn't change at all. PLEX is known to have waterfall effects in it's price so if anything it's much more likely plex sellers started to see the price going up (from natural market fluctuation) and decided to hold their plex while it was rising as any knowledgeable market person would do. This happens all the time in this market.

Also IF WE DID leak anything, plex is one of the single easiest items to track. Our accounts/alts are the most scrutinized in the game. Even if we told friends about it to get a benefit that **** is easy to track. Your argument is dead. Leave it in the grave and lay off the conspiracy koolaide awhile.

CSM XI Member

Twitter: Sullen_Decimus

Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus

Zarek Kree
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#250 - 2017-03-30 18:52:43 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
CCP DrEyjo no longer works for/with CCP. He accepted the position of rector at Háskólinn á Akureyri back in 2014.


That's disappointing to hear. I always thought having a trained economic adviser on the development team was cool. Though CCP Quant certainly does some great economic data analysis.
Veine Miromme
Gallente Federation
#251 - 2017-03-30 23:01:59 UTC
Nicolai Serkanner wrote:
It just did... there is a discount the next few days.

1 PLEX \OFFER\
Save $2.99
$16.96


2 PLEX \OFFER\
Save $10.16
$29.74


MOST POPULAR
6 PLEX
Save $14.73
$104.97


12 PLEX
Save $29.46
$209.94


28 PLEX
Save $68.74
$489.86


the more free players using plex
the more plex goes up

the more people buy plex to sell them
the lower plex goes (the more it goes down)



Distribution of wealth


Wealth inequality in the United States
Statistics[edit]

Distribution of net worth in the United States (2007).[17] The net wealth of many people in the lowest 20% is negative because of debt.[17] By 2014 the wealth gap deepened.


In 2007, the top 20% wealthiest possessed 80% of all financial assets.[18] In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 35% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 51%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. In 2011, financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 43%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%

...
Inherited wealth may help explain why many Americans who have become rich may have had a "substantial head start".[23][24]

---> You know, if you take away Americans inherited name, and seek forfeiture of their other rights, it of course does explain why their wealth is substantially less than those rich people the courts protect and should lose their trillions by the hundreds after the spoils of war.

Also , the 20-80 rule need not apply.

Ship Type : Out of pod (for now)

Bjorn Tyrson
Infinite Point
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#252 - 2017-03-30 23:21:38 UTC
I thought the rise in plex price was triggered by the rorqual nerf? it doesn't line up perfectly with it, but it still lines up a hell of a lot better than with the plex announcement. (and makes more sense than the plex announcement does) plex are needed to extract skills, or to sell characters.
rorquals get nerfed, people decide to get out of roq mining, either by extraction or sale, plex prices start creeping up.

although far more likely, this is just the natural price creep we always see happen at around this time of year since there hasn't been a sale in a while. and almost on schedule, ccp announces 15% off, which will push prices back down.

if there WAS a csm leak, and people where buying up plex on mass, well someone just lost a whole bunch of money.
Veine Miromme
Gallente Federation
#253 - 2017-03-30 23:36:07 UTC
Veine Miromme wrote:

wealth = assets − liabilities

change of wealth = income − expense.

All that is required is to hold the CSM liable and have their assets seized and forfeited.
That way, their wealth will be reduced, or possibly so, if the equation works.
If the equation does not work, then their wealth will be used to compensate for the loss of ethic derived powers...

Change their wealth, so that the people getting income from PLEX can justify their expense to buy a Citadel as their home, instead of feeling like if it is a liablity and have it ransomed to the highest bidder.

Ship Type : Out of pod (for now)

Soel Reit
Dambusters 617 Sq
#254 - 2017-03-30 23:48:47 UTC
Xenuria wrote:
Oh Look! It's this thread again...

Nobody on the CSM did any kind of insider trading. If they did I would be shouting it from the highest mountain tops for all to hear.


oh yea.... you would... sure Roll
ahahahahahhahahahahahahahhaahahah

pls you are ealy man!
1st of April is in some hours!

stfu till then LolLolLolLol
Veine Miromme
Gallente Federation
#255 - 2017-03-31 00:10:53 UTC
The same goes for weapons and ships. The less PLEX they have & more liability , the less power of defense they'll have for their citadel homes.

& this also goes for their moral opportunities.

There are powers that be who know when the oppressed are unfairly denied.


Take away their ships, weapons and ability to defend themselves, in equal values, and they will lose credibility and the power to protect the value of those assets, credit and so on.

Ship Type : Out of pod (for now)

Zarek Kree
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#256 - 2017-03-31 00:57:56 UTC
Veine Miromme wrote:
The same goes for weapons and ships. The less PLEX they have & more liability , the less power of defense they'll have for their citadel homes.

& this also goes for their moral opportunities.

There are powers that be who know when the oppressed are unfairly denied.


Take away their ships, weapons and ability to defend themselves, in equal values, and they will lose credibility and the power to protect the value of those assets, credit and so on.



Okay, fine. I'll bite...WTF are you talking about dude? It's like you're running your posts through a random word generator.
Veine Miromme
Gallente Federation
#257 - 2017-03-31 01:01:37 UTC
Zarek Kree wrote:


Okay, fine. I'll bite...WTF are you talking about dude? It's like you're running your posts through a random word generator.

lol

you don't seem friendly.

Ship Type : Out of pod (for now)

Soel Reit
Dambusters 617 Sq
#258 - 2017-03-31 01:06:03 UTC
Veine Miromme wrote:
Zarek Kree wrote:


Okay, fine. I'll bite...WTF are you talking about dude? It's like you're running your posts through a random word generator.

lol

you don't seem friendly.


he is friendly.... just opting for friendly fireCool
Vigirr
#259 - 2017-03-31 01:25:37 UTC
Veine Miromme wrote:
Zarek Kree wrote:


Okay, fine. I'll bite...WTF are you talking about dude? It's like you're running your posts through a random word generator.

lol

you don't seem friendly.


It's not about being friendly or not, he's pointing out that your post makes no fcking sense. And it doesn't, so he's right.
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#260 - 2017-03-31 05:00:10 UTC
Zarek Kree wrote:
Veine Miromme wrote:
The same goes for weapons and ships. The less PLEX they have & more liability , the less power of defense they'll have for their citadel homes.

& this also goes for their moral opportunities.

There are powers that be who know when the oppressed are unfairly denied.


Take away their ships, weapons and ability to defend themselves, in equal values, and they will lose credibility and the power to protect the value of those assets, credit and so on.



Okay, fine. I'll bite...WTF are you talking about dude? It's like you're running your posts through a random word generator.


Post modernist nonsense at it's finest.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online