These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Melted Nanoribbon price

Author
RAW23
#1 - 2014-02-25 23:04:48 UTC  |  Edited by: RAW23
Since the other one got locked:

So, what's going on with the melted nano prices? Consensus in SCC (thanks Brock) was that the basic cause was the much easier scanning mechanics making wormholes more accessible to day trippers. That sounds reasonable to me but I'd certainly like to hear other views.

At the same time in the last ten days or so there has been some pretty heavy downwards manipulation to help the trend along.

The big question, it seems to me, is how much of the downwards pressure is natural and where we can expect the bottom of the market to be? Will it spring back up to the 4.5mil mark when the pressure is taken off or does it have further to fall?

The low so far has been at the 3.4mil mark although lots of people have been leaping in at that level to buy up stock. My personal suspicion is that it will be heading back up a bit naturally in the next month or so, at least a bit and that if it has been manipulated down we might see a hard push up once the manipulators are happy with the stockpiles they have built up.

Disclosure: I was sitting on a small pile but I have cashed it out to focus on active trading so my interest now is purely academic as I'm just trading the margin. Still, I would like more insight into this as it's a market I have been following since my second week in eve (I got my start in trading running ribbons up from Amarr to Jita and making 500k-1mil per unit hauling in a frigate - good times).

Edit - Just to add why I think it's being manipulated down:

a) the big blocking order at 4.5mil that appears to have no intention of selling and dwarfs the normal order size.

b) a very unusual number of large sell orders (500-1.5k) which just aren't seen in the normal operation of the market due to most buyers buying to build T3 rather than trade.

c)Lots of very small orders which also seem to have no interest in getting themselves sold but which create the illusion of downwards pressure by lengthening the sell order list.

d) A very unusual number of orders with short expiry dates (many of which expired without selling). I'm not quite sure what the purpose of these short lengths is but I do remember them as being a standard feature of the regular manipulations of technetium that went on in the first 18 months of the tech boom.

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#2 - 2014-02-26 06:23:48 UTC
My thoughts:

- Wormhole peace is increasing production of MNRs. Effect: Supply increase.
- No major 0.0 alliance is using strategic cruisers as a core component of their fleets. Effect: Demand decrease.
- Interceptor buffs allow you to move through nullsec without bubble issues without requiring a strategic cruiser. Result: Demand decrease.
- A general consensus exists that the Ishtar is better than strategic cruisers in most PVE right now. Result: Demand decrease.

At the first sight of WH space getting toward war, I'd change my recommendations, but right now I call MNRs a 'sell'.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#3 - 2014-02-26 07:06:03 UTC
Oh and also, I don't think WH daytrippers contribute all that many MNRs to the economy. The people running capital escalations in locked-down C5s/C6s are responsible for most production.

The absence of any WH evictions of note is what I referred to as 'wormhole peace'.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Setsune Rin
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2014-02-26 08:22:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Setsune Rin
'evictions of note' is an illusion, c6's used to be burned down regularly (and still are to a much lower degree) but that hardly affected the NPC kills number in w-space as a whole since c5's are much more numerous and almost as good as c6's for farming escalations.

i think you're wrong on the c5/6's causing the most production

sleeper BS drop quite a bit of it sure, but on the grand scheme of things MNR's are not that big a deal, most of the isk comes from the blue loot and a c5/6 escalation farm will not produce a staggering number of MNR's because its only 28 battleships per site.

what i have noticed on the other hand is an exponential increase in lower class occupation, especially C4's
these used to be pretty dead, finding an occupied c4 was uncommon while right now you'd be harder pressed to find an empty one.
not that high class is much better, that is suffering from much higher occupancy rates as well

if you were to change point 1 of your point to simply say that increased occupancy of w-space is driving production that you'd be pretty close to the mark.
Edward Harris
Inner Geek
#5 - 2014-02-26 16:18:47 UTC
Let's not forget the fact that CCP has disabled the use of T3s in highsec plexes. Along with the Marauder changes, T3s are no longer viable mission runners/plexers, which leads to a drastic decrease in demand.
Alek Azam
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2014-02-26 16:42:11 UTC
All the 'leet' null pvpers have gone back to farming isk in C6s, now they have lost all their big toys.

Blog: http://sellyourmainbro.blogspot.co.uk/

Twitter: @_Alek_Azam_

Bane Nucleus
Anomalous Empire
Transmission Lost
#7 - 2014-02-27 01:46:13 UTC
Setsune nailed it. Wormhole space, from my point of view, has been a lot busier lately in term of population. More people running sites equals more MNR out there. Coupled with the null meta shifting away from the huge T3 fleets and changes in other ships, you have a bigger supply and much less demand.

No trolling please

RAW23
#8 - 2014-02-27 15:28:57 UTC
Thanks for the input guys.

It certainly sounds like there is a consensus that WH space is much busier and that supply has gone up. on the other hand, I'm not so convinced about demand being significantly depressed. As far as I can see there is little evidence of demand dropping off in Jita and the main customers for T3 ships have always been L4 mission runners, with quite a few people running FW missions in them now as well. Perhaps the nullsec changes have made a small change to the demand but, based on Jita anyway, I can't see much evidence that it is massive.

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#9 - 2014-02-27 20:33:28 UTC
RAW23 wrote:
Thanks for the input guys.

It certainly sounds like there is a consensus that WH space is much busier and that supply has gone up. on the other hand, I'm not so convinced about demand being significantly depressed. As far as I can see there is little evidence of demand dropping off in Jita and the main customers for T3 ships have always been L4 mission runners, with quite a few people running FW missions in them now as well. Perhaps the nullsec changes have made a small change to the demand but, based on Jita anyway, I can't see much evidence that it is massive.


It's more that a good number of players that might previously have used a strategic cruiser are using Ishtars instead.

Mission runner demand for hulls isn't all that large - they don't lose many ships and they usually only keep one or two hulls at a time. Nullsec ratting demand is higher - even though less people participate in 0.0 ratting, they lose more ships.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

RAW23
#10 - 2014-02-27 23:28:41 UTC  |  Edited by: RAW23
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
RAW23 wrote:
Thanks for the input guys.

It certainly sounds like there is a consensus that WH space is much busier and that supply has gone up. on the other hand, I'm not so convinced about demand being significantly depressed. As far as I can see there is little evidence of demand dropping off in Jita and the main customers for T3 ships have always been L4 mission runners, with quite a few people running FW missions in them now as well. Perhaps the nullsec changes have made a small change to the demand but, based on Jita anyway, I can't see much evidence that it is massive.


It's more that a good number of players that might previously have used a strategic cruiser are using Ishtars instead.

Mission runner demand for hulls isn't all that large - they don't lose many ships and they usually only keep one or two hulls at a time. Nullsec ratting demand is higher - even though less people participate in 0.0 ratting, they lose more ships.



You may well be correct (edit - you are definitely correct!) but I can't see any evidence of a decline in demand in Jita. Perhaps, though, the ships used in Null are built down there and wouldn't show up as missing from the Jita stats. Or perhaps a decline in end user sales is being concealed by greater than normal volumes of transactions between traders.

However, in addition to sales due to losses, I have always assumed a significant number of sales have always been to mission runners newly graduating into the ships (many of whom, I assume, don't hang around in eve in the long term because their chosen career is boring as hell).

Edit - I had probably assumed that more highsec and FW mission runners lost T3 ships due to my own appalling record with them when grinding standings Big smile

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#11 - 2014-02-28 01:31:09 UTC
RAW23 wrote:


You may well be correct (edit - you are definitely correct!) but I can't see any evidence of a decline in demand in Jita. Perhaps, though, the ships used in Null are built down there and wouldn't show up as missing from the Jita stats. Or perhaps a decline in end user sales is being concealed by greater than normal volumes of transactions between traders.

However, in addition to sales due to losses, I have always assumed a significant number of sales have always been to mission runners newly graduating into the ships (many of whom, I assume, don't hang around in eve in the long term because their chosen career is boring as hell).

Edit - I had probably assumed that more highsec and FW mission runners lost T3 ships due to my own appalling record with them when grinding standings Big smile


If something is forcing you to dabble in PVE, use a battleship. They scale much less with player skill and perform better when piloted badly than a HAC or T3 or command ship.

I'm not sure unit turnover correlates all that strongly with end user demand. Look at tech 2 ammunition turnover - the actual use of ammunition (end user demand) is probably fairly constant in busy highsec regions at least, but spikes of turnover occur when a producer dumps an enormous stock on the market, or a market speculator or manipulator buys an enormous amount at one time.

I know I personally have caused the biggest spike in Null S in the last 12 months in Sinq Laison in a failed market manipulation, and two of the other spikes in smaller, more successful ones, and each time my purchases were utterly unrelated to underlying user demand.

(I'm also considering trying to crash a regional ammunition market as an experiment, not so much for potential profit as much as it is a learning experiment).

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Qalix
Long Jump.
#12 - 2014-03-04 15:38:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Qalix
RAW23 wrote:
Thanks for the input guys.

It certainly sounds like there is a consensus that WH space is much busier and that supply has gone up. on the other hand, I'm not so convinced about demand being significantly depressed. As far as I can see there is little evidence of demand dropping off in Jita and the main customers for T3 ships have always been L4 mission runners, with quite a few people running FW missions in them now as well. Perhaps the nullsec changes have made a small change to the demand but, based on Jita anyway, I can't see much evidence that it is massive.

I don't know much about the market side, but T3s for running L4s is a thing of the past. I don't doubt some people still do it, but ever since the HM nerf, the time investment to run the L4 is too high compared to other ships.

As far as demand in general goes, exploration is still best in T3, so maybe the exploration buffs account for the "missing" T3s from L4s.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#13 - 2014-03-04 16:07:55 UTC
Sabriz makes a good point about potential fluctuations in t3 production, but I think the real story is changing patterns of t3 use. Certainly less people are graduating to t3's than before as they have disappeared from hisec exploration, and are less popular than they historically have been for missions. T3s are also less popular for nullsec ratting than they have been historically. But I doubt these people are turning around and actually selling their t3s. I think the real culprit is the t3's disappearance as a main-line fleet ship.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.

InterStellar Architect
InterStellar Architects Corporation
#14 - 2014-03-05 06:27:11 UTC
I would feel uneasy about holding a lot of Melted Nanoribbons as an investment.

We all know how much CCP likes to change things around, and make resource usage more evenly distributed, like they have with the moon goo.

Right now melted nanoribbon is the most expensive and frequently used tech 3 material, I would not be surprised if it gets nerfed, to give more weight to other tech 3 salvages.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#15 - 2014-03-05 07:45:00 UTC
InterStellar Architect wrote:
I would feel uneasy about holding a lot of Melted Nanoribbons as an investment.

We all know how much CCP likes to change things around, and make resource usage more evenly distributed, like they have with the moon goo.

Right now melted nanoribbon is the most expensive and frequently used tech 3 material, I would not be surprised if it gets nerfed, to give more weight to other tech 3 salvages.


This.

Remember when Alloyed Tritanium Bars were worth something? I'd hate to be sitting on five thousand of those now.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

joyous the
Slippery Penguin
#16 - 2014-03-05 13:32:38 UTC
Why would you need to sit on mn's? While you were on here spouting about how it's a bad investment a few days ago, in game it was clearly evident the market was on the verge of going up as sell orders had stagnated. If you were smart, you picked up a few thousand a couple days ago and made a few bil now.
RAW23
#17 - 2014-03-21 01:56:43 UTC
Looks like 3.4 was at least the temporary bottom of the market. Back up to c. 4mil now. I'm still having difficulties working out the 'natural' price though, as there is hard manipulation going on in both directions and manipulation trends have always been beyond my ken What?

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#18 - 2014-03-21 05:48:53 UTC
RAW23 wrote:
Looks like 3.4 was at least the temporary bottom of the market. Back up to c. 4mil now. I'm still having difficulties working out the 'natural' price though, as there is hard manipulation going on in both directions and manipulation trends have always been beyond my ken What?


I think the primary driver for demand at the moment is speculation.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Axel FoIey
Audacious Entrepreneurial Businesspersons Academy
#19 - 2014-03-22 04:33:16 UTC
I haven't jumped into the Nano Ribbon Bonanza yet, but I can say that it is affecting the T3 market to glorious instability, and thus profits.