These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Margin Trading Scams and Proposed Fixes
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ignitious Hellfury
Minmatar Republic Military Skool
#101 - 2013-10-09 23:04:31 UTC
What you don't understand is that scamming is a GOOD THING for eve. I'm still sad they got rid of free from contracts. Any means of taking is from the stupid and delivering it to the clever is good.

Plus, this only works in suspicious scenarios: What, this guy has a buy order for vaga for 1,000,000,000 and there is a vaga for sale in station for only 300m? LOL I'll get this free isk! ... cmon now kids, lets just use our brains instead.
James Akachi
Perkone
Caldari State
#102 - 2013-10-09 23:06:46 UTC
Ignitious Hellfury wrote:
What you don't understand is that scamming is a GOOD THING for eve. I'm still sad they got rid of free from contracts. Any means of taking is from the stupid and delivering it to the clever is good.

Plus, this only works in suspicious scenarios: What, this guy has a buy order for vaga for 1,000,000,000 and there is a vaga for sale in station for only 300m? LOL I'll get this free isk! ... cmon now kids, lets just use our brains instead.

I agree completely. My comments are only related to the mechanisms of the market buy orders.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#103 - 2013-10-09 23:15:05 UTC
James Akachi wrote:
If they are taken down or completed then they go away. They don't stay up for the next several days, indicating a promise that cannot be fulfilled. Since this can apparently be done without having the money to begin with, I retract my suggestions, but this is a disconcerting system to say the least.


I was talking about the times they disappear between the time you click on them and the time you finish the sales window and click ok.

You just have to remember that no harm can possibly come from being left in the exact same position you were in before you tried selling to the buy order, and the buyer has lost their broker fee without a successful transaction to show for it. So why would the system be designed to needlessly charge buyers broker fees?

If there's an order that they can't afford right now, but nobody's trying to sell to them, what's the problem? When someone does try to sell to the order, the broker checks the escrow account and wallet, and if there are not sufficient funds, the exchange doesn't take place and the prospective seller is left entirely unharmed.


It's like going to a store, putting your items in the cart, and finding that you don't have the money to pay when you get to the register. Nobody gets in trouble because no contractual relationship has been in trouble and no transaction has taken place. You simply leave with what you had when you walked in, and the store retains the goods you were interested in.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#104 - 2013-10-09 23:58:56 UTC
James Akachi wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
James Akachi wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
James Akachi wrote:

No, it is placing a buy order that looks inviting by controlling the sell orders available, then lowering your wallet balance so when someone attempts to sell you the item, you cannot cover the purchase. With Margin Trading the "buyer" only needs to put a percentage of the buy order in escrow. The only problem I have is that it is then possible for the market to show buy orders that will fail, this makes no sense.



The ability to put up more buy orders than you can cover with your liquid balance is the entire point of the skill. And since a buy order failing cannot possibly hurt anyone (as they are left in the exact same position they were in before it failed), there's no reason to change this.

The skill does not allow you to put up a buy order you cannot currently cover, am I mistaken?

If that is true then my suggested fixes would not affect those legitimately using the skill to put up multiple buy orders, but either it needs to be displayed which buy orders are not a guarantee, or they should simply be delisted when the buyer's funds are reduced.

The idea that the in-game market is displaying orders which cannot be fulfilled reflects poorly only on the game itself.


You are mistaken: The margin trade skill allows you to put up an order you do not have the funds to fully cover. At MT5, you need 24% of the necessary isk to create an order.

FYI: There is no such thing as a GUARANTEED buy order. They don't exist in this game. Only sell orders are guaranteed, so run your business using that knowledge and you'll be fine!

It would be nice if this was indicated anywhere in the market or tutorials, then. With this in mind I will be sure never to try to make ISK off the market directly.


Fine by me.... that just leaves more opportunities for me to enjoy!
James Akachi
Perkone
Caldari State
#105 - 2013-10-10 00:00:32 UTC  |  Edited by: James Akachi
RubyPorto wrote:
James Akachi wrote:
If they are taken down or completed then they go away. They don't stay up for the next several days, indicating a promise that cannot be fulfilled. Since this can apparently be done without having the money to begin with, I retract my suggestions, but this is a disconcerting system to say the least.


I was talking about the times they disappear between the time you click on them and the time you finish the sales window and click ok.

You just have to remember that no harm can possibly come from being left in the exact same position you were in before you tried selling to the buy order, and the buyer has lost their broker fee without a successful transaction to show for it. So why would the system be designed to needlessly charge buyers broker fees?

If there's an order that they can't afford right now, but nobody's trying to sell to them, what's the problem? When someone does try to sell to the order, the broker checks the escrow account and wallet, and if there are not sufficient funds, the exchange doesn't take place and the prospective seller is left entirely unharmed.


It's like going to a store, putting your items in the cart, and finding that you don't have the money to pay when you get to the register. Nobody gets in trouble because no contractual relationship has been in trouble and no transaction has taken place. You simply leave with what you had when you walked in, and the store retains the goods you were interested in.

That is a flawed analogy. This is not a store transaction, it is an order which in some cases could never have been funded. A sell order cannot be put up and maintained without having the physical goods that are being sold. Nor can a contract of any sort function in this manner. I do not understand why anyone would expect a market system to list false buy orders.

You keep repeating that it doesn't harm anyone. Well aside from the scam that has been discussed earlier in this topic that is true. I am not claiming it is bad because people make money in an illicit manner from it. I'm saying it is contrary to the function of an official ingame market system.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#106 - 2013-10-10 00:12:39 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
James Akachi wrote:
That is a flawed analogy. This is not a store transaction, it is an order which in some cases could never have been funded.

So is putting the goods in your cart when you don't have the money in your bank account (assuming you plan to pay with a debit card). You say "I want to buy this" the broker (cashier) calls your bank (or the computer does it) and the bank says "there isn't enough money in the account, don't complete the transaction." Where is the flaw in the analogy?

There's a reason why most businesses do not take special orders (or usually any order that cannot be filled immediately) without a deposit. They adapted to the fact that (barring a specific contract), an order is not binding until the goods have changed hands. Deposits allow them to recover any expenses they may have incurred by making the goods available to the customer.

Quote:
A sell order cannot be put up and maintained without having the physical goods that are being sold. Nor can a contract of any sort function in this manner. I do not understand why anyone would expect a market system to list false buy orders.


Why should the broker check the escrow account unless someone's asking him to?

They aren't false buy orders. The skill allows you to tell the broker "I'll have the rest of the money available by the time someone asks to fill the order." Since you're the only one who can possibly be harmed by your own failure to do so, what's the problem?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
James Akachi
Perkone
Caldari State
#107 - 2013-10-10 01:04:35 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
James Akachi wrote:
That is a flawed analogy. This is not a store transaction, it is an order which in some cases could never have been funded.

So is putting the goods in your cart when you don't have the money in your bank account (assuming you plan to pay with a debit card). You say "I want to buy this" the broker (cashier) calls your bank (or the computer does it) and the bank says "there isn't enough money in the account, don't complete the transaction." Where is the flaw in the analogy?


In that the store didn't put up a notice saying you had the money to purchase those items when you entered the store. It's not at all comparable.

Quote:
Quote:
A sell order cannot be put up and maintained without having the physical goods that are being sold. Nor can a contract of any sort function in this manner. I do not understand why anyone would expect a market system to list false buy orders.


Why should the broker check the escrow account unless someone's asking him to?

They aren't false buy orders. The skill allows you to tell the broker "I'll have the rest of the money available by the time someone asks to fill the order." Since you're the only one who can possibly be harmed by your own failure to do so, what's the problem?

It's not about who it harms. It's about buy orders being on the market that cannot be fulfilled, the system knows this because it knows your wallet balance. This is completely antithetical to any market system I know of.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#108 - 2013-10-10 01:25:19 UTC
James Akachi wrote:
In that the store didn't put up a notice saying you had the money to purchase those items when you entered the store. It's not at all comparable.


Find where in the market screen it guarantees that all buy orders are always fully supported. Just because you make an assumption doesn't make it a fact.

Quote:
It's not about who it harms. It's about buy orders being on the market that cannot be fulfilled, the system knows this because it knows your wallet balance. This is completely antithetical to any market system I know of.


I just mentioned one. Ordering something from a store that doesn't require a deposit. Some of those orders may never be picked up because the person who ordered the item realized they didn't have the money. No goods change hands, no money changes hands, no problem.

Also, the market server doesn't do a database call of every wallet in the game every server tick. That would be insane. So it doesn't actually know every wallet balance in the sense you think it does. It checks the balance of a wallet when it makes sense to check it, that is to say when it needs to know the balance either because someone's checking the balance or trying to make a transaction. It's like an ATM; the machine doesn't know everyone's balance, but it can (and will) check if asked.

If you agree that the system as it is now cannot hurt anyone, why should it be changed?

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Ethrei
Dragon.
Pandemic Horde
#109 - 2013-10-10 01:40:25 UTC
I skipped 6 pages, I''ll assume (and safely so) that I didn't miss anything.

Anyhow, I came all this way just to say, OP, you seem butthurt. Were you the victim of your own ignorance and foolish, impulsive greed? It sure does sound like it. Maybe you should work on that instead of the 'broken system' that only actually punishes people too stupid to pay attention. Common sense and paying attention to what is going on is more than enough to avoid getting scammed; 6 years running and SOMEHOW I've avoided getting scammed by this horribly broken and scam-filled system.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
After all, a fool and their money are soon parted.
James Akachi
Perkone
Caldari State
#110 - 2013-10-10 01:47:35 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
James Akachi wrote:
In that the store didn't put up a notice saying you had the money to purchase those items when you entered the store. It's not at all comparable.


Find where in the market screen it guarantees that all buy orders are always fully supported. Just because you make an assumption doesn't make it a fact.

Where in the market screen does it say buy orders can be false? I've been playing for 6 months and never even knew this was a possibility until a week ago through a third party website. Who would assume that an in-game market shows you orders that will fail? That's ludicrous.

Quote:
Quote:
It's not about who it harms. It's about buy orders being on the market that cannot be fulfilled, the system knows this because it knows your wallet balance. This is completely antithetical to any market system I know of.


I just mentioned one. Ordering something from a store that doesn't require a deposit. Some of those orders may never be picked up because the person who ordered the item realized they didn't have the money. No goods change hands, no money changes hands, no problem.

Also, the market server doesn't do a database call of every wallet in the game every server tick. That would be insane. So it doesn't actually know every wallet balance in the sense you think it does. It checks the balance of a wallet when it makes sense to check it, that is to say when it needs to know the balance either because someone's checking the balance or trying to make a transaction. It's like an ATM; the machine doesn't know everyone's balance, but it can (and will) check if asked.

I didn't mean to say it should; I was referring to the game knowing you don't have the funds when you place the order initially. Checking balance periodically to remove unfunded orders is one of the possible solutions I presented earlier before knowing orders could be placed without having the funds to begin with.

Quote:
If you agree that the system as it is now cannot hurt anyone, why should it be changed?

It can, but only those who don't do their research. I agree that scam is a non-issue. It should be changed because it's misleading to list orders that will not go through, especially if they would not have even gone through when they were placed.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#111 - 2013-10-10 06:51:20 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
James Akachi wrote:

Where in the market screen does it say buy orders can be false? I've been playing for 6 months and never even knew this was a possibility until a week ago through a third party website. Who would assume that an in-game market shows you orders that will fail? That's ludicrous.


I never claimed that it said that. I am only claiming that nowhere on the market screen does it guarantee that all orders will complete.
If you assume otherwise (as you are doing in trying to shift the burden onto me), that's on you.

Quote:
I didn't mean to say it should; I was referring to the game knowing you don't have the funds when you place the order initially. Checking balance periodically to remove unfunded orders is one of the possible solutions I presented earlier before knowing orders could be placed without having the funds to begin with.


So you're saying that newer marketeers (y'know, the ones for whom the skill is most important) should have to work out in advance what order (generally largest to smallest) to place their orders in so that they can place all the orders they want before running into an arbitrary liquidity requirement?

Why should the balances be checked until someone tries to fill the order? Why should new marketeers be arbitrarily punished for momentary liquidity crises (you know, the type that new, inexperienced, relatively poor market traders are likely to have)?

Incidentally, all the first restriction would do to the margin scam is require that the scammer quickly transfer money out of the account after placing the order; something he does in the process of the scam anyway.

Quote:
It can, but only those who don't do their research. I agree that scam is a non-issue. It should be changed because it's misleading to list orders that will not go through, especially if they would not have even gone through when they were placed.


They are left with exactly what they had before they tried to sell to the order, so how are they harmed by the order failing? Are you claiming that there should be some sort of guarantee that there will be a customer ready to buy an overpriced item you bought just because you bought it at a ridiculous price?

Check out the Fiddle Game scam for the RL equivalent of the Margin scam. The scam is over when you buy the fiddle.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
James Akachi
Perkone
Caldari State
#112 - 2013-10-10 13:37:52 UTC
Do people really come into this game and not assume that orders displayed by the game's own market system for months would have had a possibility of being fulfilled at some point in their lifetime? I find that hard to believe.

Should I need to conduct a thorough investigation of skills to make sure other critical game systems such as contracts or manufacturing job requirements aren't lying to me?
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#113 - 2013-10-10 17:39:13 UTC

Have you ever ordered drive through only to discover you don't have your wallet? Ever have a prescription filled only to leave it behind because you don't have your insurance card? Have you ever As long as you don't take possession of the food (aka like eat the food before realizing you can't pay for it), there are very few recourses a business can take against you.

Many businesses deal with "false buy orders" on a regular basis. The majority of times it is accidental, and they eat the cost of prepping the food and hope to sell it to someone else. Sometimes it is malicious (did you ever have unpaid pizza delivered to someone as a prank?), and in these cases the Business owners take steps to avoid future losses.

In EvE, which is purposely dystopic, you too can suffer from "false buy orders". You can also implement good business practices to avoid future losses (like researching the true value of your goods, as well as their sales volume and volatility). And unlike the above scenarios, when the buy order fails, you keep the goods, which are NOT perishable, meaning it is even easier to avoid losses like the above.

In short.... do some research when engaging in trade-for-money, and quit trying to change the market system because your to lazy or incompetent to cope with this simple concept.

RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#114 - 2013-10-10 18:19:43 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
James Akachi wrote:
Do people really come into this game and not assume that orders displayed by the game's own market system for months would have had a possibility of being fulfilled at some point in their lifetime? I find that hard to believe.


So you're saying that you did make an assumption, it turned out to be wrong, and now you're angry.
Every game is different, and it behooves you to investigate investments before making them.
When I first saw one of these, I asked someone what the hell was up, and had it explained to me. It's pretty damn obvious that there's something fishy about a buy order for hundreds of millions of ISK more than the lowest sell order.
It doesn't take all that much clear thinking to just not buy the fiddle.

Quote:
Should I need to conduct a thorough investigation of skills to make sure other critical game systems such as contracts or manufacturing job requirements aren't lying to me?


If you don't have Production Efficiency 5, the Material requirements a blueprint will show you will be wrong if the blueprint has extra materials that also appear in the normal materials.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
James Akachi
Perkone
Caldari State
#115 - 2013-10-10 19:34:54 UTC  |  Edited by: James Akachi
RubyPorto wrote:
James Akachi wrote:
Do people really come into this game and not assume that orders displayed by the game's own market system for months would have had a possibility of being fulfilled at some point in their lifetime? I find that hard to believe.


So you're saying that you did make an assumption, it turned out to be wrong, and now you're angry.
Every game is different, and it behooves you to investigate investments before making them.
When I first saw one of these, I asked someone what the hell was up, and had it explained to me. It's pretty damn obvious that there's something fishy about a buy order for hundreds of millions of ISK more than the lowest sell order.
It doesn't take all that much clear thinking to just not buy the fiddle.

Actually I have never seen this scam or had a buy order fail, I've repeatedly mentioned I have no problem with the scam's existence. That is irrelevant to my point, which is solely that the market should not display incorrect information.

Quote:
Quote:
Should I need to conduct a thorough investigation of skills to make sure other critical game systems such as contracts or manufacturing job requirements aren't lying to me?


If you don't have Production Efficiency 5, the Material requirements a blueprint will show you will be wrong if the blueprint has extra materials that also appear in the normal materials.

I am aware. Unlike the market issue, that is a bug.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#116 - 2013-10-11 03:32:00 UTC
James Akachi wrote:
Actually I have never seen this scam or had a buy order fail, I've repeatedly mentioned I have no problem with the scam's existence. That is irrelevant to my point, which is solely that the market should not display incorrect information.


What's incorrect about it? Someone has placed an order for those items and has promised to have the ISK by the time someone tries to sell to them. They've paid their fee to the broker, so why shouldn't the order remain until it completes, expires, or fails?

Quote:
I am aware. Unlike the market issue, that is a bug.


I thought after 9 months it became a feature... Lol

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mnemonym
Salvage Security Services MK.VII
#117 - 2013-10-18 07:29:11 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:

What's incorrect about it? Someone has placed an order for those items and has promised to have the ISK by the time someone tries to sell to them. They've paid their fee to the broker, so why shouldn't the order remain until it completes, expires, or fails?


The order should cease to exist BEFORE it gets the point of failure, if the wallet cant cover the order it has no validity.

Orders should not fail, this is the issue.

I'm sitting at the station, I have the goods, the order is still present, I go to sell the product, and lo and behold the system fails the trade..... had it been the case that the person putting up the buy order cancelled it, I would say working as intended. but the system failing the trade for no penalty is wrong
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#118 - 2013-10-18 08:40:16 UTC
Ignitious Hellfury wrote:
What you don't understand is that scamming is a GOOD THING for eve. I'm still sad they got rid of free from contracts. Any means of taking is from the stupid and delivering it to the clever is good.

Plus, this only works in suspicious scenarios: What, this guy has a buy order for vaga for 1,000,000,000 and there is a vaga for sale in station for only 300m? LOL I'll get this free isk! ... cmon now kids, lets just use our brains instead.
While I agree, margin trading scams exploit the fact that EVE has a different market system to any other game. Coming from any other MMO you would never think that an order on the market had any ability to fail, so until you've read about it or fallen for it, you don't know about it. Scammers should have to put in effort to scam, and I think MT scams require no effort thanks to that fundamental misunderstanding.
Here I'll quote myself from prevously:
Lucas Kell wrote:
The only change I'd make to margin trade is adding a column to state the amount in escrow for the order (probably as a %). It's not unrealistic to have that information, and it would not stop stupid people falling for trade scams.

See the problem with margin trading is that coming from other games, you won't know about it until after you've been scammed (or if you've read up on it specifically). It's not a common thing in games and it's never explained, so you are assumed to know that an order can fail. By adding a column to show the amount in escrow people would see it and say "I wonder what that means" then go find out. That doesn't mean an order with less than the full amount in escrow is a scam, it would just give you the information you need to make informed decisions.

tl;dr
MT scams prey on lack of knowledge about game mechanics. Providing information that points to those mechanics allows a player to educate himself before falling prey to one, if he so wishes.


On top of that, for some reason the spam of "look at this EPIC FAIL market order! LOL!" annoys me more than any other spam.
Now spam, there's an issue that need resolving.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Sylphy
TSOE Po1ice
TSOE Consortium
#119 - 2013-10-18 10:27:20 UTC
Actually, the solution si pretty simple. And it would eliminate a lof of the scams.

When placing a buy order, the portion that you're willing to pay for the item(s) in question is taken out of your wallet and put in a reserved state until the sale goes through and currency is given to the seller or you cancel the buy order and money returns to you.

The fact that you can put a 2bil buy order without actually having 2 bil in your wallet is a scam on it's own..

The character does not represent the views/opinions of its Corporation or Alliance.
Yolo
Unknown Nation
#120 - 2013-10-18 10:56:00 UTC
When a trade fails because you have no funds, the margin is transfered to the person trying to sell to you instead of returned to your wallet.

This means, you can still trade using margin trading exaly like today, but there is an added risk.
When someone puts up a fake/scam buyorder, it would be of economical interest for someone to find these rare items and meet the order to cash out the margin.

If someone is scammed, and they will be, they get the margin so in the end their economical blow is reduced by 24% and their chance of staying in the game increases exponentionally.

What ya think?

- since 2003, bitches