These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Plex Prices

First post
Author
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#381 - 2015-04-20 10:35:09 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

The mineral index doesn't matter one hill of beans if the total end product prices are still decreasing. It means either the build costs were reduced or the profits on manufacturing were reduced.


They are still decreasing? Sad

So we still have tier 3 BS @ 140 mil
Carriers sub 900 mln ISK
Supercarriers @ 21 bn
Cruisers sub 10 mil
Freighters below 900 mil, most certainly.
Titans at 80bn?

Roll


Quote:
CCP has released the inflation numbers and 4 of the 5 indicators are deflationary, with minerals being the only inflationary index.


Their CPI calculation is irrelevant: they take a Tengu and see a 60% decrease from the price of 1bn - whoah-hey lets put that into the index with an unknown weight attached - presto deflation!

You want to see Eve's CPI metrics, you look at Tech 1 only, which are 80% of the total ships used in New Eden.

All capital ships are Tech 1, except for the JFs.

And do address the point of 28 trillion ISK entering & staying per month. ISK can only be "lost", or destroyed by using NPCs' products or services, everything else is just its healthy breathing through the system.
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#382 - 2015-04-20 10:45:41 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Lucas Kell wrote:
GankYou wrote:
Priest Amarr wrote:

CCP doesn't lose money from high plex prices


They do, actually. Smile
No they don't. As I said above, when one of the ETC traders was interviewed they stated that the number of codes sold does not change with the price of PLEX, likely either because peopel have a set amount they want to spend or codes or the price increases attract more players buying fewer each for the same total.


Timeframe has to be taken into account, as we are experienced almost 2007 levels of player activity currently. So it is possible that the ones purchasing plex right now are the only people interested to spend any monies on this game at all.

In an expanding economy with new players taking note of plex everyday, they would lose on sales. Smile

I do agree, however, that it is a most intricate balance - deterring established players from subscribing via plex en masse & maximising the number of plex sold.

Quote:
GankYou wrote:
Since prices topped just short of 1bn ISK, that would constitute a 40% decrease, or 1.66 plexes being required to purchase the same basket of commodities, compared to just one back in Nov of 2014.
Prices didn't really top just short of 1bn, at least not steadily. If you look at the PLEX graphs the price suddenly shot up rapidly just prior to the isboxer announcement. To me that was an artificial raise being pushed by someone with enough capital to get the price primed for cashing out around the time the announcement was made (which actually raises questions of who had prior knowledge of the change) as you can see here. Even without any other changes I don't think the price would have stayed there without someone holding it up as it was too sharp a rise to be the natural price increase.


"Artifical raise"
"Natural price increase"

When I bought out Megacyte and Zydrine Empire-wide on March 20th that was pretty natural, and true price discovery ensued. Smile

It is irrelevant how one views this development - market forces conspired to make it so, and the peak is for everyone to see, especially those who would be trying to retrace those levels. Blink
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#383 - 2015-04-20 11:14:51 UTC
GankYou wrote:
Timeframe has to be taken into account, as we are experienced almost 2007 levels of player activity currently. So it is possible that the ones purchasing plex right now are the only people interested to spend any monies on this game at all.

In an expanding economy with new players taking note of plex everyday, they would lose on sales. Smile
Like you say, more players taking note of PLEX everyday, on both sides of the market. While a single player may not buy as many PLEX, there's always someone in right behind him saying "last month it wasn't worth my money, but now it is". you also have to account for how many people have a set real money budget and get as much PLEX as they can get for that regardless of how much ISK it turns into.

GankYou wrote:
"Artifical raise"
"Natural price increase"

When I bought out Megacyte and Zydrine Empire-wide on March 20th that was pretty natural, and true price discovery ensued. Smile

It is irrelevant how one views this development - market forces conspired to make it so, and the peak is for everyone to see, especially those who would be trying to retrace those levels. Blink
Yeah, but when you talk about the price dropping you have to talk about a steady price, not a random peak. I could go and buy out an item, quadrupling it's price n the very short term. After a week it's back to normal. We wouldn't then say in a months time that the item had drastically decreased in price since a month ago, since it was never actually at that price, just pushed up temporarily due to an out of the ordinary trading pattern.

To be honest, I think you know the difference :D

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#384 - 2015-04-20 11:25:27 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Lucas Kell wrote:

Yeah, but when you talk about the price dropping you have to talk about a steady price, not a random peak.


Volume didn't change during the development leading upto the 1bn ISK mark, and had gone up significantly afterwards - during the crash. The thing you regard as "random" are actually the markings of fundamental changes, and turns in the market.

It doesn't matter how these peaks and troughs occur, because following a major change, an instrument may not see those prices again for years, even decades.

Most of the time it is characterised by panic selling, or buying. Smile

Quote:
I could go and buy out an item, quadrupling it's price n the very short term. After a week it's back to normal.


That is only possible in illiquid markets and commodities.

Quote:
We wouldn't then say in a months time that the item had drastically decreased in price since a month ago, since it was never actually at that price


If the volume had stayed the same, and transactions occurred, then yes that price is indeed more than just chart noise. Blink
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#385 - 2015-04-20 12:49:32 UTC
GankYou wrote:
Volume didn't change during the development leading upto the 1bn ISK mark, and had gone up significantly afterwards - during the crash. The thing you regard as "random" are actually the markings of fundamental changes, and turns in the market.

It doesn't matter how these peaks and troughs occur, because following a major change, an instrument may not see those prices again for years, even decades.

Most of the time it is characterised by panic selling, or buying. Smile
If someone was previously buying and selling each PLEX once and instead switched to just buying twice as much, the price would increase but the volume would remain the same, which is what I believe happened that caused the price to shoot up by nearly 100m in under 2 weeks. As the announcement hit, the volumes then spiked as they cashed out at the inflated price.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#386 - 2015-04-20 13:01:50 UTC
A 13% rise over that time period in anticipation of significant and fundamental news is entirely healthy. Smile

You need to account for the fact that the stockpile that had been accumulated during the movement has to be sold, in order to bank a profit. With the volume that is required to push prices of this commodity higher, one can argue that the participants only made 5-7% on average, if even that. Blink

Still, 7% on a trillion investment is 70bn ISK. Smile
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#387 - 2015-04-20 13:12:36 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:

As the announcement hit, the volumes then spiked as they cashed out at the inflated price.


Sell volume. Blink Any buy orders which had not been updated in time had indeed constituted a fair share of the dump - price at that time averages around 896 mln.

As is ordained by the Almighty - some suckers need to be left holding the bag. Pirate
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#388 - 2015-04-20 13:26:14 UTC
GankYou wrote:
A 13% rise over that time period in anticipation of significant and fundamental news is entirely healthy. Smile

You need to account for the fact that the stockpile that had been accumulated during the movement has to be sold, in order to bank a profit. With the volume that is required to push prices of this commodity higher, one can argue that the participants only made 5-7% on average, if even that. Blink

Still, 7% on a trillion investment is 70bn ISK. Smile
At the time that the prices were rising there was no anticipation of the announcement, it wasn't hinted at prior to Nov 25th. Otherwise I'd agree that the entire market adjusting to a change would cause that. As it wasn't it leads me to believe it was only a couple of individuals at most. I imagine that knowing there was to be a change that would cause a drop in the PLEX price and sitting on a substantial number of PLEX, it would have been impossible to ships that stockpile at with just sell orders and without taking a loss. However by raising the price substantially so that buy orders were significantly higher, the stock could then be dumped onto them, like you say, leaving some suckers holding the bag.

Of course it's all speculation, I simply refuse to believe that the stable price went from mid 800s to high 900s in under 14 days with no announcements of changes pushing it. It just seems like short term manipulation to me.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#389 - 2015-04-20 13:28:37 UTC
Never under-estimate the madness and delusions of the masses once the final ball gets rolling. Blink
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#390 - 2015-04-20 14:47:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Market McSelling Alt
GankYou wrote:
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

The mineral index doesn't matter one hill of beans if the total end product prices are still decreasing. It means either the build costs were reduced or the profits on manufacturing were reduced.


They are still decreasing? Sad

So we still have tier 3 BS @ 140 mil
Carriers sub 900 mln ISK
Supercarriers @ 21 bn
Cruisers sub 10 mil
Freighters below 900 mil, most certainly.
Titans at 80bn?

Roll


Quote:
CCP has released the inflation numbers and 4 of the 5 indicators are deflationary, with minerals being the only inflationary index.


Their CPI calculation is irrelevant: they take a Tengu and see a 60% decrease from the price of 1bn - whoah-hey lets put that into the index with an unknown weight attached - presto deflation!

You want to see Eve's CPI metrics, you look at Tech 1 only, which are 80% of the total ships used in New Eden.

All capital ships are Tech 1, except for the JFs.

And do address the point of 28 trillion ISK entering & staying per month. ISK can only be "lost", or destroyed by using NPCs' products or services, everything else is just its healthy breathing through the system.


You assume two things rather poorly. First that most capitals are bought on the market at all and not simply built (thus not actually being counted in CPI) and second that there is enough capitals to overshadow the pirate BS, Navy BS and module market.

CCP Takes ships and fits them with common fittings, since the price of modules has been decimated over the last years the price of the total package is still low. And yes, many T1 ships have dropped and continue to drop in price.

Also why shouldn't the drop from a 90day post release price of 1bil for a tengu that now sells for 140mil not be included? Inflation is inflation and deflation is deflation. But cherry picking one segment or a handful of ships and declaring their graphs and stats wrong is just bad form.

Also to add, take the archon for example. It is down from a 1000 day stable high of 1.5bil to 1.05bil. http://www.eve-markets.net/detail?typeid=23757#history

Yes even capital ships are showing deflationary pressure (See compression changes). Build cost is still 930mil.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#391 - 2015-04-20 16:01:31 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Market McSelling Alt wrote:

You assume two things rather poorly. First that most capitals are bought on the market at all and not simply built (thus not actually being counted in CPI)


That is irrelevant, as the value is being built into them from the current Trit, Pyerite, Mexallon valuations.

If they were honest, they'd calculate CPI just as they do with Mineral index, because Trit, Pyerite, Mex, Isogen, Nocx, Zyd & Mega are the irreducible necessities in our universe that one needs to merely survive & function.

Has been so, and so it remains.

Quote:
CCP Takes ships and fits them with common fittings, since the price of modules has been decimated over the last years the price of the total package is still low.


Yes, they take T1-fit battleships circa 2003 @ 99mil total and compare them to T2-fit battlecruisers, and then say there is no inflation in Eve. Big smile

Prices are stable!

Quote:
Also why shouldn't the drop from a 90day post release price of 1bil for a tengu that now sells for 140mil not be included?


Because that's an illiquid commodity, which also happens to constitute only a minuscule fraction of spaceships used.

We're talking about placing a £12,000 bottle in the same basket with standard table wine.

Quote:
Inflation is inflation and deflation is deflation. But cherry picking one segment or a handful of ships and declaring their graphs and stats wrong is just bad form.


Yes, indeed - do not cherry pick and single out Deadspace loot, and acknowledge that they had been great inflation in the price of ship hulls. Smile

Quote:
Also to add, take the archon for example. It is down from a 1000 day stable high of 1.5bil to 1.05bil. http://www.eve-markets.net/detail?typeid=23757#history

Yes even capital ships are showing deflationary pressure (See compression changes). Build cost is still 930mil.


That is the case, and following the Nullsec ore changes later this month, that is also expected and welcomed. Should probably take until the end of the Summer to properly rebalance.

But what of the 28 Trillion ISK per month being injected into the economy? Blink
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#392 - 2015-04-20 17:34:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Market McSelling Alt
Actually when battleships came out they weren't cheap. The fact remains that cpi has gone up and down but has averaged more down in the relevant time frame of the last half decade. Furthermore if that 99mil bs you keep bringing up is worth 150mil today after 12 years then you just proved inflation a non factor. Unfortunately for you bs weren't 99 mil back in the day and ships in the teir 2 and 3 are actually cheaper.


Again stop looking at a couple of items and look at the entire primary market together. Yes individual segments have inflated due to buffs, nerfs, game changes but the cost of staple goods and the culmination of the market is deflationary.

Knock that off quoting 28 tril injected monthly without first having the numbers of what was removed. Thousands of accounts have been banned with untold amounts of assets and isk. Also sinks are not included in that number. Stop with the purposely misuse of incomplete data.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Molic Blackbird
Orion Faction Industries
Orion Consortium
#393 - 2015-04-20 17:45:47 UTC
GankYou wrote:

But what of the 28 Trillion ISK per month being injected into the economy? Blink


An increase in money supply is one part of what brings about inflation. You are leaving out the amount of materials that are also being injected into the economy. If there are 28 trillion ISK worth of minerals, moon goo, meta loot and other items entering the game, inflation will be mitigated to a large extent.

Elizabeth Norn
Nornir Research
Nornir Empire
#394 - 2015-04-20 17:49:17 UTC
Is 28T not the number after sinks? Sure banned accounts and people quitting aren't accounted for, but it's pretty close to the stats we were given a few years ago (http://blog.beyondreality.se/ISK-faucets-sinks).
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#395 - 2015-04-20 18:02:17 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Market McSelling Alt wrote:
that 99mil bs you keep bringing up is worth 150mil today after 12 years then you just proved inflation a non factor.


So we went from there being no inflation in Eve, to inflation being a non-factor. Fascinating. Smile

That example contained the Armageddon battleship, which cost 60 mil then, and 180 now - a 200% increase, or ((180/60)^(1/12) - 1) * 100 = 9.58% avg yearly inflation.

And around 5.8% for Tier 3 battleships - since 2006.

Quote:
Unfortunately for you bs weren't 99 mil back in the day and ships in the teir 2 and 3 are actually cheaper.


Yes, they were 50-60 mil for Tier 1 like the Armageddon and 80-100mil for Tier 2 such as the Apocalypse. That is why I didn't include tiericide of either Battleships or Battlecruisers in the initial figure, but that further establishes the point.

The fully-T1 fit 99 mil example is straight from their own presentation - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ie9V2P5El0E#t=14m41s

Blink

Molic Blackbird wrote:
GankYou wrote:

But what of the 28 Trillion ISK per month being injected into the economy? Blink


An increase in money supply is one part of what brings about inflation. You are leaving out the amount of materials that are also being injected into the economy. If there are 28 trillion ISK worth of minerals, moon goo, meta loot and other items entering the game, inflation will be mitigated to a large extent.



Yes, we can only hope there isn't too much ISK on balance, after accounting for healthy growth, chasing these resources. Faucet:Sink ratio was changed from 2 to 1.66 in early 2013 - can be found in the above presentation at 28:20 timestamp. Blink
Elizabeth Norn
Nornir Research
Nornir Empire
#396 - 2015-04-20 20:18:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Elizabeth Norn
GankYou wrote:

That example contained the Armageddon battleship, which cost 60 mil then, and 180 now - a 200% increase, or ((180/60)^(1/12) - 1) * 100 = 9.58% avg yearly inflation.


Those had their material requirements significantly increased when BS tiericide happened though, but you know this, so what is your point?
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#397 - 2015-04-20 20:43:08 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
This is why I made a remark on Tier 3.

As to the whole grand purpose, I guess if one doesn't see it - there is none.

Carry on as you were. Blink

P.S. For those who haven't seen the 2014 Economic presentation, it is the most current one to my knowledge - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2hsqEvPGWQ
Alexi Stokov
State War Academy
Caldari State
#398 - 2015-04-21 03:18:12 UTC
Wow have not been in game for a bit. Was not expecting 850 PLEX
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#399 - 2015-04-21 03:23:11 UTC
GankYou wrote:
This is why I made a remark on Tier 3.

As to the whole grand purpose, I guess if one doesn't see it - there is none.

Carry on as you were. Blink

P.S. For those who haven't seen the 2014 Economic presentation, it is the most current one to my knowledge - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2hsqEvPGWQ



Did you even watch your own video?

Go to 7:04 and take a look, see how ALL of the indexes are under 100.

Guess you know what that means?

Trit might have gone up 300% since game start, but I guess you can't guess where Zyd, or Mega or the high ends sans Nox has gone?

Bet you forgot to mention how CCP deliberately changed production requirements for ships in the specific groups you are pointing out.

You seem to also have completely abandoned the idea of Capital ship inflation, I thought that was a staple for your argument.

The fact remains, that everything from Modules, ammo, T2 and T3 goods have all decreased in price. Faction and DED has been decimated. Zyd, Mega, Morph all decimated. The build formulas were changed during Tiericide, and we are still seeing the effects of "Mineraless Mining" where miners simply compress their ores and sell that instead of refining.

You cannot argue with CCP's own numbers, own stats, own graphs and then turn around and point to them for support. You didn't even watch your own video.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#400 - 2015-04-21 04:05:13 UTC
Elizabeth Norn wrote:
Is 28T not the number after sinks? Sure banned accounts and people quitting aren't accounted for, but it's pretty close to the stats we were given a few years ago (http://blog.beyondreality.se/ISK-faucets-sinks).



Total production is around 2.5Q per year, total destruction around 0.75Q per year. That 28T per month (0.3Q per year) is probably the liquid ISK added after sinks but not considering accounts that go long-term inactive; 56M per subscribed account sounds pretty believable as an average.

Personally I am surprised PLEX haven't gone higher with how stable 0.0 has been for such a long time. Or, more specifically, I'm surprised that ISK as a currency hasn't devalued considerably.

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