EVE General Discussion

I too have two accounts. Let's say I rat on account one, and mine on account two. This means that I sacrifice mining income on account one, and ratting income on account two. And if I have three accounts ... I trust you get where this is going.

Opportunity cost is not a "device". It is a very real tangible cost. I do something, and by doing that I forfeit the income I would have gotten by doing something else. Let's say I make 100 million ISK an hour* with my Ishtar. If I don't fly my Ishtar and argue with an internet spaceship pilot who doesn't understand the most basic concepts of economy instead, then I end up having 100 million ISK less than I would have if I had just ratted with my Ishtar. Therefore, arguing with you cost me 100 million ISK.

The same goes not only for arguing, but also for mining. If I mine for an hour instead of ratting, and I cannot sell that ore for more than 80 million ISK, then I have lost 20 million ISK.

And instead of ISK, please insert whichever useful good I could be buying for that amount, be it a ship or ammunition or fuel, because - again - ISK by themselves have no value beyond the value of what I can buy with them.

For Example: If I want ore, I could mine for an hour and get 80 million ISK worth of ore. Or I could rat for an hour and get 100 million ISK, and then buy 100 million ISK worth of ore. Meaning that mining the ore myself would actually have cost me 20 million ISK worth of ore.

*) Those figures are made up because its easy to calculate with them. I don't make 100 million with a single Ishtar, and I don't make 80 million with a single Barge.

No, my bro. Dont do this to yourself...

Opportunity cost analysis is conducted beforehand, so as to inform your choice.
Its not a "cost" in and of itself, its an analysis of potential cost between options of action.
Dont whip yourself after making that choice, that another choice might have been better, in retrospect.
The cost is made real only after the opportunity cost analysis, but then only from the choice you made, not from the ones you didnt.

Lets say you have 100 options, and you must choose one.
You evaluate the opportunity cost of each, vs the others.
You then make a choice for one of those options.
That does not mean you lost the mass, or individual, benefit you might have gained from one or all of them.

You made your choice. Only that one will cost you. The others never occurred. The others cost you nothing.

Infinite may have been the wrong term.
Inexhaustible, would be better.
There is no end to the amount of ore and isk that can be generated by players harvesting either, for free.
The abundance of isk in EVE is not regulated by a central bank.
The abundance of minerals in EVE is not regulated by depletion, as would be the case IRL.



No, Im not forgetting time, nor have I ignored it. I addressed it at great length in discussion with Jonah earlier in this thread.
That discussion centered on the value of time itself (as invaluable), as opposed to what you do with time you have.
You are not paid for your time, you are paid for what you do with your time.
This might seem like hairsplitting, but its crucial to understanding what the value of time actually is, and is not.
I cant buy time from you. I can only buy what you do with your time.
If I could buy time from you, I could apply that time to myself or another employee, and wouldnt need to hire you at all.
Time cannot be bought. Only what you do with it, can.

The significance of this, according to the above, is that the value of what you did do with your time, is not dependent on what you didnt do with your time.
What you didnt do with it, is not a cost, or a loss. You cant lose or suffer a cost from a choice, and application of time, that you never enacted.



Me too, bro. Enough for a place to live, something to eat, computer and EVE, and Im happy.

But the issue of, and relationship between currency and material, I already addressed:

Ore has value because people that dont generate minerals, want it.
Currency has value because people that dont generate isk, want it.

Isk and minerals are a) an inexhaustible faucet b) free to anyone that has the capacity to access them.

Cost is only incurred when someone tries to exchange one for the other, materials for isk, and vice versa.
That cost is determined by the supply/demand of both values, whether material or isk.

The value of time, is only in what you do with it. Not what you chose not to do with it.

That... about sum it up?

Which means that when you USE those rocks to manufacture something, the value of those rocks is an EXPENSE. When you record an acquisition of assets as revenue... when you USE those assets they become an expense... a cost to make the good you are making.

A simple way to say this is "the minerals you use to manufacture are not free".

Which you continue to fight as being inaccurate.

Some of the logic in this thread is so twisted that it's a veritable Gordian Knot.

You are arguing that there is no COST.

That is simply 100% not true... which you have to admit if you accept the fact that when you mine the materials are revenue.

Once you get the revenue from mining... if you use those assets... you have A COST. You have to, otherwise you'd double up on your profit from reality. If you record a PLUS to asset value when you mine, then you must record a MINUS when you use those assets.

Perhaps you just don't know what the words mean.

Self mined minerals are revenue (which you said you agree with). You don't add additional revenue when you sell an asset you record as revenue because you already realized it when you mined. So if you use those minerals to manufacture, you record a negative change to your assets... (you're using a certain amount of raw materials which were recorded as revenue).

And do you know what a negative change to assets that are used in manufacturing is called? It's called a COST. We've been referring to that as an "opportunity cost" for the last 8 pages or so.

The rocks are revenue... exactly the same as bounties from pirates are revenue. They are assets gained without cost. The fact that one is in a currency and the other is an asset that can be easily liquidated has absolutely no impact on how it's treated. Your view that minerals that are mined are free is EXACTLY the same as believing that minerals purchased with isk earned by ratting should be considered free. Both views are just dumb.