These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Market Discussions

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Price of the "cheap" BSes going to be more than double?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Linna Excel
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2013-06-05 01:38:26 UTC
I was looking at the BPOs of the new domis... even at 10% waste, the extra mats are more than the base mats. I had a few I stocked up on, but now I'm not sure if I should sell yet... I don't know if even 160 million would be a good deal as some people in my preferred region seem to think it is.

I can has blogging skills!
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#2 - 2013-06-05 01:45:54 UTC
The build cost on a domi is around 200m or so, the same with the geddon.

Whether to get rid of them now depends on how much you got them for, how much you need the isk, whether that isk could be better put to use somewhere else, or whether you dont mind waiting out until they finish rising in price

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Linna Excel
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2013-06-05 04:39:45 UTC
Yeah, I'd rather wait until the sell orders get to the real price.

So if it's 200 to build, I guess I'd like to wait until 210-220 or so.

I can has blogging skills!
Hune Orphious
Orphious Trading Partners
#4 - 2013-06-05 05:07:41 UTC
If you are an active trader you could consider selling them now at the 120MM they presently reside at. If you are not an active trader, hold onto them and let them accrue more value.


However, unless your intention is to really hold onto the Battleships, I would not hold them until they get to their build price, as that could really take a while,.
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
#5 - 2013-06-05 13:41:08 UTC
Linna Excel wrote:
Yeah, I'd rather wait until the sell orders get to the real price.

So if it's 200 to build, I guess I'd like to wait until 210-220 or so.


I had a chat with a friend yesterday who said pretty much this. It's a matter of style, I guess.

I made a bunch of BS's before the patch and he bought a bunch. I'll be happy to take my profit on the early side (maybe at 130 or 140) and then churn that isk through the system a couple of times and double it again in a couple of months.

He, on the other hand, would rather wait until the market has pretty much fully corrected and take his profit with less effort. He's also still sitting on several metric butt-tonnes of ferrogel that we made back in 2008.. so it gives you an idea of how much patience he has.

I don't have that.

I'd also only really want to do this if the economy was subject to significant inflation but it's not and every patch means that CCP might change the goal posts.... Personally I prefer to keep my isk moving on couple of months horizon. :)

enterprisePSI
#6 - 2013-06-05 15:34:28 UTC
Battle cruisers still haven't reached their build cost. Hell , i think procurers still haven't reached theirs. I think it will be far worse with battleships.

The tears of the many, outweigh the tears of the few. Or the one. enterprise-psi©
Esharan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2013-06-05 15:41:48 UTC
enterprisePSI wrote:
Battle cruisers still haven't reached their build cost. Hell , i think procurers still haven't reached theirs. I think it will be far worse with battleships.



Not sure about that...many people had used up all their resources/isk in other speculative area's (moon minerals) prior to the new BS costs being announced...

AND battleships are more difficult to build to begin w/ and get destroyed as rapidly as battlecruisers...I think 3-6 months we'll see these battleships already around 180 (heck they 120 mil now up 30-40 mil already)
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#8 - 2013-06-05 16:27:53 UTC
Esharan wrote:
enterprisePSI wrote:
Battle cruisers still haven't reached their build cost. Hell , i think procurers still haven't reached theirs. I think it will be far worse with battleships.



Not sure about that...many people had used up all their resources/isk in other speculative area's (moon minerals) prior to the new BS costs being announced...

AND battleships are more difficult to build to begin w/ and get destroyed as rapidly as battlecruisers...I think 3-6 months we'll see these battleships already around 180 (heck they 120 mil now up 30-40 mil already)


How will the price of battleships be altered by changes in mineral harvesting?
Illest Insurrectionist
Sparta.
#9 - 2013-06-05 18:11:00 UTC
I'd be happy to sell now at 160 or so.

Mineral prices are predicted to go down.

High end ore got low end minerals. As well as many former ice miners will have to pick up low ends if they want to keep mining without switching systems.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#10 - 2013-06-05 18:11:58 UTC
If the prices of minerals alters (whether due to people swapping to/from ice, or from the new composition), then this will have a knock on effect on BS prices

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
#11 - 2013-06-05 19:20:41 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:


How will the price of battleships be altered by changes in mineral harvesting?


If people keep mining like they did in the past then the prices should drop a bit because Trit and Pyerite prices will go down.

The question is really if people will keep mining like they did in the past.... with the changes to ice I'm not so sure what will happen.

I'm working on the assumption that the new build cost will remain at around what it is now give or take 20mil .


Illest Insurrectionist
Sparta.
#12 - 2013-06-05 20:13:47 UTC
But why would people mine less ore because of the ice changes?

If anything shouldn't it be more ore mined?
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#13 - 2013-06-05 20:15:58 UTC
Illest Insurrectionist wrote:
But why would people mine less ore because of the ice changes?

If anything shouldn't it be more ore mined?


Because they might swap to ice if it is more profitable, or if there is a bottleneck in supply

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Illest Insurrectionist
Sparta.
#14 - 2013-06-05 20:20:12 UTC
Rhivre wrote:
Illest Insurrectionist wrote:
But why would people mine less ore because of the ice changes?

If anything shouldn't it be more ore mined?


Because they might swap to ice if it is more profitable, or if there is a bottleneck in supply


They can't tho. Well unless they leave high sec.

There isn't enough ice in high sec now even for just those who used to mine it.

I guess people could move to low/null to mine ice but i have some strong doubts atm.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#15 - 2013-06-05 20:26:45 UTC
Illest Insurrectionist wrote:
Rhivre wrote:
Illest Insurrectionist wrote:
But why would people mine less ore because of the ice changes?

If anything shouldn't it be more ore mined?


Because they might swap to ice if it is more profitable, or if there is a bottleneck in supply


They can't tho. Well unless they leave high sec.

There isn't enough ice in high sec now even for just those who used to mine it.

I guess people could move to low/null to mine ice but i have some strong doubts atm.



There is plenty of ice in high sec if they spread out.

However, high end minerals are not mined in highsec. The miners in null are the ones who will determine where BS prices go via minerals

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Illest Insurrectionist
Sparta.
#16 - 2013-06-05 20:34:21 UTC
There actually isn't enough ice in high sec. Even if they spread out.

CCP intentionally made it so high sec has a total of 80% of all ice needed to meet demand.

Previously 9x.x% of ice was coming from high sec.

They didn't just move the ice into sites they made the total ice in high sec equal to ~80% of current consumption which is well below what was previously mined in high sec.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#17 - 2013-06-05 20:36:57 UTC
Illest Insurrectionist wrote:
There actually isn't enough ice in high sec. Even if they spread out.

CCP intentionally made it so high sec has a total of 80% of all ice needed to meet demand.

Previously 9x.x% of ice was coming from high sec.

They didn't just move the ice into sites they made the total ice in high sec equal to ~80% of current consumption which is well below what was previously mined in high sec.



Yes, I am aware of this, but, there is a difference between "There isnt enough ice for the needs of null" and "there isnt enough ice for miners to make isk"

Quite the opposite in fact, if Null does not increase its ice mining, then mining ice in high becomes very profitable....and who wants to suck rocks when ice is by far the higher value?

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Marsan
#18 - 2013-06-06 01:20:30 UTC
I suspect that minerals prices will drop for 3 reasons:

1) People moving from Ice to rocks. There are still a lot of low ends in a BS, and a lot of Ice miners I know are switching to Veld, and the like.

2) Null Sec, and Wormhole miners are going to pull in extra low, and mid end minerals mining the ABCs. So even assuming the same level of mining.

3) People will be building fewer battle ships in the short term which will depress mineral prices. (Not to mention battle cruiser building is down as well.

This is why I'm selling all my Scorps at ~120M for 10-30M isk profit a pop. (I guess it's really sold rather than selling as I have only 4 left.) Sure I could hold out for 140 or even 160, but the risk is too great and that isk could be making me a profit else where. (Like selling mining ships and ganking ships in Ice mining systems...) Also some of the Scorps are located in the middle of nowhere and I'm to lazy to haul things like a Battleship.

Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community.