These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Periodic Melted Nanoribbon Post - Buy Now!
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jerry T Pepridge
Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC.
#41 - 2014-12-11 14:49:25 UTC
Hannah Flex wrote:

I assume your are not a T3 producer, so let me shed some light on the MNR spike.

The spike in late October was do to the fact that the BOM of the 3 "minor" subsystems was changed, which meant that you could produce those subsystems for around 15m and sell them later for 40-60m using the new BOM. So every T3 producer that was not living under a rock, squeezed out every billion of isk they could get and produced those changed subs until the patch hit. Even at a 8-10m price-point for MNR your would still had make a very good profit. The problem was that at some point in the following days some of the needed other materials where completely sold out in EvE, so that there was no point in buying more MNR at even higher prices. That was the only reason you see this crazy spike, not T3 destroyer, not market manipulation.

Than ofc after the patch hit prices went back to normal and the current low is also do to the fact, that many producers did sit now on thousands of subsystems they needed to sell over a longer period of time (1-2 month), while most of there cash was "frozen" this way. So they ofc took breaks from normal production cycles and demand for MNR slowed down.


Nice explanation, (raw explained this but not the associated spike, to me earlier as well, but reading this makes sense) coupled with Hardly any MNR used in T3 Dessie (which is sht according to theorycrafters), a saturation of Subsystems & hulls, and hardly any major fleet fights of welping, + increased Scanning & WH activity from patch (aka MNR supply)

=

Holding the bag.

@JerryTPepridge
RAW23
#42 - 2014-12-11 15:11:23 UTC
Grey Havens wrote:

Apologies for the harsh tome of my above post, and thank you for the explanation.


No problem. I was not expecting a polite response and, on the assumption that you were going to call me a filthy liar, spent some of the afternoon learning how to use screenshots, paint and imgur. I've mailed you the screenshot that I was going to post with the title, 'stock dumping like a pro'.

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.
HeXxploiT
Doomheim
#43 - 2014-12-11 17:46:04 UTC  |  Edited by: HeXxploiT
Hannah Flex wrote:
HeXxploiT wrote:
Hannah Flex wrote:
HeXxploiT wrote:
For those who don't know how to read a chart...

Clearly nanoribbens have been manipulated over the past 2 months.


What exactly was, is manipulated and how?
If its so "clearly" than why do i have problems seeing any "manipulation" at all, all i see is a curve that did follow supply and demand.



http://i.imgur.com/9jXVsF2.jpg

If you look at late October it's evident that someone bought up a sizable chunk of these right off the sell and flipped them for a higher price hence the overnight explosion in price and hasty retreat as the influx of new ribbens corrected the price over the following days. Orders on the 30th Oct of 24,000 more than doubled the average daily volume and supports this idea.

Very basis chart analysis.


I assume your are not a T3 producer, so let me shed some light on the MNR spike.

The spike in late October was do to the fact that the BOM of the 3 "minor" subsystems was changed, which meant that you could produce those subsystems for around 15m and sell them later for 40-60m using the new BOM. So every T3 producer that was not living under a rock, squeezed out every billion of isk they could get and produced those changed subs until the patch hit. Even at a 8-10m price-point for MNR your would still had make a very good profit. The problem was that at some point in the following days some of the needed other materials where completely sold out in EvE, so that there was no point in buying more MNR at even higher prices. That was the only reason you see this crazy spike, not T3 destroyer, not market manipulation.

Than ofc after the patch hit prices went back to normal and the current low is also do to the fact, that many producers did sit now on thousands of subsystems they needed to sell over a longer period of time (1-2 month), while most of there cash was "frozen" this way. So they ofc took breaks from normal production cycles and demand for MNR slowed down.


Technical analysis is an entirely different subject then due diligence although both are extremely useful. My comments were strictly technical analysis and I made no comments whatsoever nor do I claim to know anything about nanoribbens or T3 production. The difference we're discussing here is the difference between trade and investment. An investor who has educated himself concerning an issue has done his due diligence and is investing in value. A trader looks at a chart and makes a prediction based on past performance.
Jerry T Pepridge
Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC.
#44 - 2014-12-14 18:21:13 UTC
so, raw23

how about a screenshot of just the 4b worth of these that u have.

chart still says timber

how do u feel about dooping MD noobs out of isk?

@JerryTPepridge
RAW23
#45 - 2014-12-15 00:51:54 UTC  |  Edited by: RAW23
Jerry T Pepridge wrote:
so, raw23

how about a screenshot of just the 4b worth of these that u have.

chart still says timber

how do u feel about dooping MD noobs out of isk?


I'll go you one better than a screenshot. Check your contracts.

As to duping noobs out of isk, I'm not sure how that would have been possible since MNs are up since I posted this thread and anyone who bought when I posted will have made a profit (albeit a small one so far).

Edit - I'm also wondering now what the effect of the ISBoxing changes will be. I hadn't realised that ISBoxing the higher end holes was a thing but it turns out quite a few guys were doing that who won't be able to next month.

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.
Jerry T Pepridge
Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC.
#46 - 2014-12-15 01:32:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerry T Pepridge
RAW23 wrote:

I'll go you one better than a screenshot. Check your contracts.


20b would have been more fitting, but yeh u have 1147 of them.

RAW23 wrote:

As to duping noobs out of isk, I'm not sure how that would have been possible since MNs are up since because i posted this thread and anyone who bought when I posted will have made a profit (albeit a small one so far).


Fixed.

@JerryTPepridge
RAW23
#47 - 2014-12-15 01:54:25 UTC
Jerry T Pepridge wrote:


20b would have been more fitting,


Damn! Missed opportunity Big smile

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.
HeXxploiT
Doomheim
#48 - 2014-12-15 03:16:42 UTC
Jerry T Pepridge wrote:
so, raw23

how about a screenshot of just the 4b worth of these that u have.

chart still says timber

how do u feel about dooping MD noobs out of isk?



You know I'm not pushing this issue but my money is on the bet that you don't know the first thing about charts. Big smile
Jerry T Pepridge
Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC.
#49 - 2014-12-15 03:18:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerry T Pepridge
HeXxploiT wrote:
Jerry T Pepridge wrote:
so, raw23

how about a screenshot of just the 4b worth of these that u have.

chart still says timber

how do u feel about dooping MD noobs out of isk?



You know I'm not pushing this issue but my money is on the bet that you don't know the first thing about charts. Big smile


says the nerd second guessing plex in scc- last night

gtfo

"so have we reached an opinion on plex yet guys"

"guys"

:(

@JerryTPepridge
Makhpella
Bad Taste.
#50 - 2014-12-15 04:42:10 UTC
This was pretty poor. I give you no credit.
Hannah Flex
#51 - 2014-12-15 10:01:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Hannah Flex
HeXxploiT wrote:

Technical analysis is an entirely different subject then due diligence although both are extremely useful. My comments were strictly technical analysis and I made no comments whatsoever nor do I claim to know anything about nanoribbens or T3 production. The difference we're discussing here is the difference between trade and investment. An investor who has educated himself concerning an issue has done his due diligence and is investing in value. A trader looks at a chart and makes a prediction based on past performance.


I understand that traders only go by the chart and some basic knowledge, what i don't understand is the confidence in there own analysis and how it is often stated/posted. I wish the words they use analyzing a chart would reflect more about how well they actually understand a market.

So taking your "analysis":
Quote:
If you look at late October it's evident that someone bought up a sizable chunk of these right off the sell and flipped them for a higher price hence the overnight explosion in price and hasty retreat as the influx of new ribbens corrected the price over the following days. Orders on the 30th Oct of 24,000 more than doubled the average daily volume and supports this idea.

Very basis chart analysis.


First of you do actually state at the end that its just your "idea", but the first part make it sound like it's a fact and "basic chart analysis". In this case however the conclusion why the spike happend is simply false, since there was not this evil mastermind that manipulated and "flipped" MNR for a 50-100% profit. This completely misrepresent the market at this time and gives a false impression on what can be done to the MNR market.

So i guess all i want to say is that traders should more often simply say "I don't know what really happened, but lets speculate."
HeXxploiT
Doomheim
#52 - 2014-12-15 17:56:54 UTC
Hannah Flex wrote:
HeXxploiT wrote:

Technical analysis is an entirely different subject then due diligence although both are extremely useful. My comments were strictly technical analysis and I made no comments whatsoever nor do I claim to know anything about nanoribbens or T3 production. The difference we're discussing here is the difference between trade and investment. An investor who has educated himself concerning an issue has done his due diligence and is investing in value. A trader looks at a chart and makes a prediction based on past performance.


I understand that traders only go by the chart and some basic knowledge, what i don't understand is the confidence in there own analysis and how it is often stated/posted. I wish the words they use analyzing a chart would reflect more about how well they actually understand a market.

So taking your "analysis":
Quote:
If you look at late October it's evident that someone bought up a sizable chunk of these right off the sell and flipped them for a higher price hence the overnight explosion in price and hasty retreat as the influx of new ribbens corrected the price over the following days. Orders on the 30th Oct of 24,000 more than doubled the average daily volume and supports this idea.

Very basis chart analysis.


First of you do actually state at the end that its just your "idea", but the first part make it sound like it's a fact and "basic chart analysis". In this case however the conclusion why the spike happend is simply false, since there was not this evil mastermind that manipulated and "flipped" MNR for a 50-100% profit. This completely misrepresent the market at this time and gives a false impression on what can be done to the MNR market.

So i guess all i want to say is that traders should more often simply say "I don't know what really happened, but lets speculate."


Well first off it's probably not only a safe bet for anyone trading to assume that nobody who says anything has the first clue about anything and do their own homework. Secondly you just stated in a matter-of-fact sort of way that there was not an evil mastermind flipping this issue. Do you know this for a fact or is this just your idea? I do this sort of thing all the time and so do many other traders. This is what it looks like when I'm playing the evil mastermind so naturally from my experience I can hypothesis that someone else will do this.
-Ye hypocrites!!
Hannah Flex
#53 - 2014-12-16 13:21:53 UTC
HeXxploiT wrote:

Well first off it's probably not only a safe bet for anyone trading to assume that nobody who says anything has the first clue about anything and do their own homework. Secondly you just stated in a matter-of-fact sort of way that there was not an evil mastermind flipping this issue. Do you know this for a fact or is this just your idea? I do this sort of thing all the time and so do many other traders. This is what it looks like when I'm playing the evil mastermind so naturally from my experience I can hypothesis that someone else will do this.
-Ye hypocrites!!


I fully understand your concern regarding my "matter-of-fact" way of also stating things, which ofc from your point of view is rather ironically :p

Like i stated demand simply went up for the given reason and anyone that bought MNR at this time could confirm that this was a normal step by step market reaction to the increased demand. It started first with buyouts from 3.8-4.5m, later on buyouts up to 4.9m followed by buyouts up to 6.2m. The difference was that buy orders followed the sell order buyouts step by step and the new MNR listed did not come from the "mastermind", but rather your usual MNR suppliers, which noted that demand was extremely high. Most seemed to not know what the BOM change meant for prices or did not know of the BOM change at all. I was actually surprised that MNR prices where still this "low" at 5-6m, while most T3 producer would have payed up to 10-12m at this time. It seems that most of the suppliers where quite happy with the 50% price increase and could not form some sort of temporary cartel or price agreement. Ofc time was also essential, since you only had time to produce until the patch.
Dante Lennelluc
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2014-12-18 13:54:40 UTC
Hi all,

From a trading noob perspective, what is to be gained by manipulating the price down by using your own sell orders? Is it just a case that the manipulator has a large stockpile waiting to dump when the price spikes and gathering even more stock with cheaper buy orders?
Jerry T Pepridge
Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC.
#55 - 2014-12-18 14:31:56 UTC
Dante Lennelluc wrote:
Hi all,

From a trading noob perspective, what is to be gained by manipulating the price down by using your own sell orders? Is it just a case that the manipulator has a large stockpile waiting to dump when the price spikes and gathering even more stock with cheaper buy orders?


most of the time its one dude holding the bag (large stockpile) and several sheep playing 0.01 lemmings

despite what u read here, market manipulation is the 0.01%

@JerryTPepridge
RAW23
#56 - 2014-12-18 14:34:42 UTC
Dante Lennelluc wrote:
Hi all,

From a trading noob perspective, what is to be gained by manipulating the price down by using your own sell orders? Is it just a case that the manipulator has a large stockpile waiting to dump when the price spikes and gathering even more stock with cheaper buy orders?


You might want to manipulate a market downwards for a number of reasons. I think what is going on in the MN market is one of two things. Either

a) The standard trader move of holding a price down at a low level to stock up at that level before manipulating in the other direction. This gives you the best possible price on large amounts of goods that you will unload at your preferred higher price. It also provides you with the cheapest possible stock of goods for use in pushing the market around in the future.

or

b) A manufacturer might want to keep materials prices low while the finished goods sell either at a normal level that is higher relative to the materials price or at a level that is much higher than normal.


Other reasons you might want to push a market down include driving other traders out of the market by slimming profits down through crushing a margin, but that doesn't seem to be what's going on with MNs.

There are two types of EVE player:

those who believe there are two types of EVE player and those who do not.
Niskin
The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc.
The Chicken Coop
#57 - 2014-12-18 15:02:52 UTC
Before Rhea there was no shortage of opportunities to collect MNs in wormholes. Any group big enough to clear all their combat anoms quickly is also big enough to run Sleeper Data/Relic sites, or clear their statics, or roll their statics and clear them and repeat until they pass out from exhaustion. There may be a small spike in supply due to people checking out Shattered Wormholes, but it's not likely to last long. Any sustained increase is likely to be small, because the real treasure in those holes is C5/C6 gas.

When I explore my connections I sometimes find holes cleared of all their anoms and non-WH sigs. This is rare though, and is due to people who have been farming these things all along. In contrast, I had 27 anomalies in my home hole last night, mostly combat sites. Add in several Sleeper Data relic sites and the rats from the few Gas/Ore sites and you'll see the bottleneck isn't the availability of sites.

The bottlenecks are the number of players willing to do PvE in wormholes, followed by the RNG. Running the same site many times, I've seen anywhere from 0 to 7 MNs per run. I can't speak to anything on market trading theory, but I can tell you for sure that the addition of Shattered Wormholes didn't have any major impact on the supply side of MNs.

It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog

Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship.

-MooMooDachshundCow
Jerry T Pepridge
Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC.
#58 - 2014-12-18 15:34:01 UTC
Niskin wrote:

The bottlenecks are the number of players willing to do PvE in wormholes, followed by the RNG.


The RNG is terrible, which is why the gas is a dependable income source, and C3+ hole has the nicer sleeper blue loot to consider so those sites are always desirable.

The issue is Trust in WH's, you can very easily steal from Corp hangers, ship arrays, etc, the Mobile depots helped this somewhat, but here: is an interesting read.

We had 2 pos in our C3 Null static hole, 1 was for Directors, 1 was for players/recruits (mainly a group of RL friends playing), however only the directors ship array was 'safe' from theft, making WH recruitment, nearly impossible for low end WH corps.

If some of the changes come thru the obvious being corp roles, i think every man and his dog will move there nullsec ratting alt to WH's C4+ corps and farm the blue loot. the sites, the PI (not sure if this crap is profitable but sec status used to effect it), the Mobile depot, all they need is a mechanism for Ship arrays and WH > Null PVE will occur.

The demand for these items has changed, they added some to a few already heavily oversupplied items, most players have a T3 or 4, (how many do you have?) lying around by now with the only major volume spikes being a Null fleet welp, or a new null doctrine, but the only ones profiting there are the FC's (AAA for eg), the JF pilots.

Another change made was the interceptor immunity to bubbles, may not appear alot, but cloaky nullified tengu, or 15m interceptor u decide.

Since they hit my RADAR they have been around 3.6, 3.7-3.8, OPs claim to be making 10% is unfounded at this point.

there are much better & safer markets to go long in atm.

@JerryTPepridge
Jerry T Pepridge
Meta Game Analysis and Investment INC.
#59 - 2014-12-18 16:54:37 UTC
here are some more things to consider: link

T3 rebalance, aka T3 nerf.

They cover too many roles already.

im speculating they will remove:

Nullify Subsystem (they recently gave this to Ceptors)
Fleet booster Subsystem ( give ppl a reason to train into Command ships)
Covert subsystem ( not required at all, more a convenience thing, bringing other probe/cloaky ships to light)
Ewar Susbsystem. ( again, upcoming buff to Recons)

pure speculation, what do you all think?

@JerryTPepridge
Niskin
The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc.
The Chicken Coop
#60 - 2014-12-18 17:05:11 UTC
There are a lot of factors that could affect the demand side of things. Even the Recon changes announced today could change the demand equation. The T3 rebalance will certainly reduce the demand for them, at least at first. If there is a legit reason to choose a Recon versus a HAC versus a T3 then that will lower demand also.

If changes happen that make wormhole living easier that will certainly increase supply. Things like a POS code revamp would have a major effect. But at the same time, if T3 ships are still the best for many wormhole purposes then the demand will increase along side the supply.

I think we're in for an interesting year in EVE, the changes that are in the works could mess up a lot of people's projections.

It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog

Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship.

-MooMooDachshundCow