open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked T2 BPO Holders Make 1/3 of T2 Items (and all the profit?)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

Author Topic

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2009.08.23 11:26:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Ssnakezor
remove t2 bpo, that's what I'd agree for based on what has been discussed Twisted Evil


/support

remove or convert them into xxx runs BPO, its a farce people were allowed to keep them after lotteries gone.

Lana Torrin
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.08.23 11:32:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Vanessa Vasquez
I'd vote for a complete removal of all T2 bpo's or make T2 availiable for everyone.


I'd vote for a complete removal of T2 BPOs.. Making them available to everyone wont fix anything.. If they are removed then invention needs to produce better BPCs (as in make the base one 0/0)

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.23 11:53:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Komi Toran
Originally by: Venkul Mul
stuff

And that post begins with a quote from me for what reason, exactly? I fail to see how anything I talked about there had anything to do with what you posted. Am I quoted because you desperately want my opinion on your highly tangential subject of choice?



Originally by: Washell Olivaw
The reason for this, while T2 BPO's do indeed have a larger profit per item, invention allows you to handle bigger volumes. BPO allows you to sell 10 items at 500k isk profit, making you 5 million. Invention allows you to sell 100 items at 100k isk profit, making you 10 million. As for flexibility, an inventor in the vagabond market before the speednerf easily switched to other ships and modules. A Vagabond BPO owner just saw his time to recoup the purchasing cost double from 3 to 6 years. A lottery winning Vagabond BPO owner saw his asset value drop by several billion.


Originally by: Komi Toran
Originally by: Washell Olivaw
Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 22/08/2009 17:29:42
Next time I'll add the disclaimer: Numbers are to illustrate the point so I don't have to do 30 minutes of math on one or two T2 products. Happy now?

I thought said disclaimer was implied in the impossible neat numbers, forgot I was on the EVE forums.


Washell, you aren't the only one who makes the 10X statement. It's a common myth that is repeated by inventors to convince themselves that they are doing better than a BPO owner. You'll see it referenced constantly on the forums.


So, to sum it up:

Washell Olivaw: inventor advantage is the number of item produced in a span of time

Komi Toran: no it isn't.

Venkul Mul: inventor advantage is in flexibility.

To me it seem we were all speaking of what is the inventor advantage.


Some other reason for your rage?

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.23 12:01:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade
Originally by: Venkul Mul

A T2 BPO owner if the price tanks has only 2 options:
- continue to build a the items at reduced returns until the market recover (and him selling a low price will make that requiring more time);
- shelve the BPO (with complete loss of production) and produce some invented item with better returns than his BPO. And shelving the BPO mean that you have several billions doing nothing.




And the problem is what exactly - that the BPO owner bought into a bad investment? I hardly think that is a good arguement for not boosting invention, just an attempt at protectionism.


Read my posts instead of jumping to conclusion.

I haven't argued against the OP suggestion, I have argued against some of the other posts suggesting removal of the BPO.

In particular the post you cites is simply an explanation of what is the main advantage of a inventor in the current system.

If you read post 18 to the end you will see that I support the idea of increasing the ME and PE of invented BPC in proportion to the research doen on the T1 BPO.

What I don't support is removal of the T2 BPo.


Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.23 12:08:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade

Probability Multiplier/ME modifier/PE modifier

0.8 / +20 / +15
1.2 / +10 / +10
1.6 / +5 / +5
2.0 / +0 / +0

Increase invention research time to balance if needed.



While the rest of your proposal are fair, the ME/PE you suggest are excessive if applied to ships.

Look a ship T2 BPO stats, the value you suggest are several months of research. Getting them from a decryptor seem a bit excessive.

A useful change would be to implement different decryptors for ship, modules and rigs.

That would allow different characteristics for the different decryptors.

A module decryptor giving +20 run will not be a problem while a ship decryptor giving +20 runs would be excessive.

+20 ME for ammunitions and modules would be high but still reasonable, for ships it would be excessive.

Castaspella
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
Posted - 2009.08.26 01:25:00 - [36]
 

So this thread hasn't seen much activity in a day or so, so to solicit the minority players (i.e. those that hold T2 BPOs) is there any reasonable objection to this idea? It seems like an improvement across the board to me, though I would love more input as appropriate to this topic.

Please remember what I initially said about whine.

Truely,

Sig Sour
Posted - 2009.08.26 06:11:00 - [37]
 

This topic (along with moon mining) is what inspired me to take a 4 month break from Eve, I am not too happy about the imbalance going on.

The only reason to invent at this time is to keep the isk out of T2 BPO holders hands.

Lana Torrin
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.08.26 06:16:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Sig Sour
This topic (along with moon mining) is what inspired me to take a 4 month break from Eve, I am not too happy about the imbalance going on.

The only reason to invent at this time is to keep the isk out of T2 BPO holders hands.


I can understand why.. Because these 2 topics are both dealing with the rich getting richer and there is less and less the pore(er) can do about it..

I'm guessing this is why T3 production doesn't rely on anything static (this is a great idea BTW). Pity T3 ships aren't currently that great and very very expensive.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.26 07:10:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Castaspella
So this thread hasn't seen much activity in a day or so, so to solicit the minority players (i.e. those that hold T2 BPOs) is there any reasonable objection to this idea? It seems like an improvement across the board to me, though I would love more input as appropriate to this topic.

Please remember what I initially said about whine.

Truely,


Having the ME/PE of the T1 BPC affecting the invented BPC was the original idea for CCP.

If they haven't implemented it after 3 years probably there is some programming problem.

Sad as it would have made a lot of people happy (me included).

So the best alternative options are:
- changing the base value of the invented T2 BPC to 0/0;
- make them researchable.

I am for the first option as it will be the easist to implement.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.26 07:11:00 - [40]
 

Originally by: Sig Sour
This topic (along with moon mining) is what inspired me to take a 4 month break from Eve, I am not too happy about the imbalance going on.

The only reason to invent at this time is to keep the isk out of T2 BPO holders hands.


If you say so.

Most of my isk come from invention.

Bonny Lee
Caldari
Starkstrom
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2009.08.26 08:34:00 - [41]
 

I dont know why you all cry so loud. T2-Market is perfectly fine now.
If you want you are able to buy a t2-bpo like everybody else.

For example a t2-bpo is one of my long-term goals and i dont know why
they should be killed. You can earn lots of money with invention and
there will be no change if t2-bpos are gone or not.

You are jealous. Thats the point.
T2-BPOs are a little part of EvE.
Get one if you wish to or be quiet.

Castaspella
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
Posted - 2009.08.27 03:54:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Bonny Lee
I dont know why you all cry so loud. T2-Market is perfectly fine now.
If you want you are able to buy a t2-bpo like everybody else.

For example a t2-bpo is one of my long-term goals and i dont know why
they should be killed. You can earn lots of money with invention and
there will be no change if t2-bpos are gone or not.

You are jealous. Thats the point.
T2-BPOs are a little part of EvE.
Get one if you wish to or be quiet.

Thank you for the input, though it appears we disagree on this. I'm not sure you understood my suggestion, as I am specifically advocating for no functionality change to existing T2 BPOs. Yes, what I am suggesting would likely have the net effect of reducing the profitability of today's existing T2 BPOs, though they would still maintain significant value as owning them would still allow manufacturers the ability to produce the item without inventing.

Also, I don't see any tears, are you sure you heard crying?

Aias Telemonias
Posted - 2009.08.27 04:09:00 - [43]
 

Edited by: Aias Telemonias on 27/08/2009 04:45:52
Originally by: Traska Gannel
Finally, it would seem to me that it might be time to phase out the T2 BPO's. Perhaps this could be done by changing them into extended run BPCs. For example, if the cost to invent a T2 BPC was 500k ISK and an equivalent T2 BPO had a market value of 1 billion ISK - then the T2 BPO could be converted into a 2000 run BPC which would place T2 BPO and invention on a more even footing and when the T2 BPO was used up the owner would have recovered their investment (and the perceived problem would be out of the game).


I agree with this very much. I am a high-tech (haha, T2) manufacturer and in constant struggle with the somehow-lower-than-production-cost batches of T2 items on the market (this price is caused by people with T2 BPOs who can research their stuff, obviously). while it is true that t2 BPC owners can be more flexible with a changing market, it is also true that inventors have an unfair competition, which leads to the conclusion, "why attempt to compete with BPO owners?" eh.

EDIT: after some more reflection and pondering, I am less sure of my original stance because it seems as though, really, inventors do have some very crucial advantages over BPO owners; namely the flexibility and possibly the rate of production. Other than that, everything does seem to be fairly well balanced, since T2 BPOs take so long to copy/research (like someone else said, billions of ISK doing nothing).

Aias Telemonias
Posted - 2009.08.27 04:48:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Castaspella
Thank you for the input, though it appears we disagree on this. I'm not sure you understood my suggestion, as I am specifically advocating for no functionality change to existing T2 BPOs. Yes, what I am suggesting would likely have the net effect of reducing the profitability of today's existing T2 BPOs, though they would still maintain significant value as owning them would still allow manufacturers the ability to produce the item without inventing.


In other words, I agree with your stance in its entirety, and I also thank you for bringing this to attention.

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.27 06:55:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Aias Telemonias
EDIT: after some more reflection and pondering, I am less sure of my original stance because it seems as though, really, inventors do have some very crucial advantages over BPO owners; namely the flexibility and possibly the rate of production.


You forget, and it is something most people seem to forget to take on board (especially the pro-bpo lobby on the forums Wink) that any half decent industrialist with a T2 bpo is an inventor aswell...

Amad Kadu
Posted - 2009.08.27 13:06:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade
There are a variety of other possible ways to boost invention:

Change base ME/PE to 0/0.

Change base invention BPC runs. for example:

Ships - BS:2 BC:2 CR:5 DD:5 FR:5
Modules - 15
Ammo - 15
Rigs - 5

Change decryptors so they have a bigger effect on ME/PE and no effect on runs (if you also change runs as above) for example:

Probability Multiplier/ME modifier/PE modifier

0.8 / +20 / +15
1.2 / +10 / +10
1.6 / +5 / +5
2.0 / +0 / +0

Increase invention research time to balance if needed.



Sounds good. The multiplier values for decryptors should be looked at, but the direction is right.
And this would be much less complicated to be implemented.

To quote a famous captain: "Make it so, ..."

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.27 13:32:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade
Originally by: Aias Telemonias
EDIT: after some more reflection and pondering, I am less sure of my original stance because it seems as though, really, inventors do have some very crucial advantages over BPO owners; namely the flexibility and possibly the rate of production.


You forget, and it is something most people seem to forget to take on board (especially the pro-bpo lobby on the forums Wink) that any half decent industrialist with a T2 bpo is an inventor aswell...


And on those slots play exactly by the same rules than any other inventor.

The big differences are 2:

- invention require a much lower initial investment but has higher activity costs;

- the owner can't change what the BPO produce so if the market change he will still produce that item or lose the revenue from the investment, the inventor will shift production and still use most of his investment.

Both are mixed blessing. You can spend a lot at the start and then gain more, but at the risk of a shift in the market depressing your investment or you can spend less and gain less, but keeping a better opportunity to adapt to changing situations.


If both player start with the same sum the one choosing the BPO route will do less work but will have 1 item, the one choosing then inventor path could easily use the isk required to buy 1 T2 BPO to buy several invention alts and invent a lot of stuff, but that will require a lot of in game time spent managing the different characters.


BiggestT
Caldari
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2009.08.27 13:45:00 - [48]
 

I agree with this.

T2 BPO'S still hold much value yet the t2 market, and the majority all benefit.

If not for the producers than just for eve in general, look at the prices of t2 ships these days
CCP has done nothing besides lolfail alchemy to remedy the t2 cost crisis..

el caido
School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2009.08.27 15:40:00 - [49]
 

TL;DR - The OP's idea is one of the better offered solutions to balance T2 manufacturing without removing T2 BPOs completely.

As a T2 BPO holder, inventor, and general industrialist, my opinion is that invention has razor-thin and sometimes negative profit margins. But I will continue to do it. As others have said, the quick volumes one can produce via invention is a plus ... but only in certain situations. Obviously, it is a necessary evil to build the newer T2 items and ships. I buy T2 comps for much less than the Jita standard, but even then the margins are awful for many invented items. Ultimately, I find that invention is currently worth the trouble, but you need to watch your markets much more carefully.

On the other hand, I continue to amass my T2 BPO collection whenever feasible. But as it has already been said, the future of T2 BPOs is always in question. I am always cognizant that the billions of ISK I 'invested' into T2 BPOs may someday be suddenly destroyed by a devblog. And with the increased demand plus the resellers perpetually inflating the costs of T2 BPOs, prices become even more outrageous. The set-it-and-forget-it build times and wider margins make this easily the more attractive of the two options (at least for me). And to speak to some of the alienated non-T2 BPO holders - I don't conduct RMT or ISK farming. Being able to dump amassed ISK into T2 BPOs is one of the few eccentric hobbies of older carebears like myself. Wink

Just to play devil's advocate - Generally, T1 manufacturing is still a much easier and more profitable venture over most invention. Conversely, for the ISK involved in purchasing a T2 BPO, you could make far more by manipulating markets and/or reselling. I haven't looked into booster or T3 production yet, so I cannot speak towards that.

Anyway, to shift attention back to the OP - I like the idea. Either a buff in decryptor bonuses or some sort of ME/PE effect from the T1 BPO is a great step towards leveling the playing field without completely shafting the minority of BPO holders. However, a straight 1:1 ME/PE effect is far too much. For instance a 100ME T1 BPO should not generate 100ME T2 BPCs. Instead, some sort of ratio of waste would be a better choice ... like 30ME 1% waste T1 BPO would generate 0ME 10% waste T2 BPCs or a 90ME .5% waste T1 BPO would generate 3ME 5% waste T2 BPCs (numbers used for illustrative purposes, not fact).

As a side note: chance-based game mechanics suck.

Aias Telemonias
Posted - 2009.08.27 17:07:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: el caido
As a side note: chance-based game mechanics suck.


couldn't agree mpre Rolling Eyes

but i wonder how you'd change that... anyway, don't let me distract from the OP.

I do agree that it would be completely tyrannical to shaft the minority T2 BPO holders by totally devaluing their investments, but I still think letting the ME/PE of the T1 BP affect the ME/PE of the T2 BPC is a good idea.

Na'amah
The Children of Lilith
Posted - 2009.08.28 00:21:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Castaspella
*cut*


You severely overestimate T2 BPOs in the current market.

Whilst true, BPO owners will make more profit per unit than an inventor, you haven't taken into account the main balancing factor behind T2 BPOs and how they actually produce their profits: time.

About two years ago, I could make a Hulk for roughly 30m ISK (based on Jita prices for components etc), and sell it for anything in the region of 150m ISK. A healthy profit per unit, yes, until you realise I could only make 10 of those Hulks every 8 days at best. As invention picked up, and more and more people started using it, two things happened; prices for hulks fell by about 30%, but costs more than doubled (Yes, I realise there was more going on than just Invention driving up the costs of T2 Components...). When I parted ways with the BPO (April of this year roughly, the last time I updated my spreadsheet) the actual material cost was 61,953,889.34 ISK/Hulk, and assuming an average sale price of 97.5M ISK, 995,291,098.48 ISK profit per month (35,546,110.66 ISK per unit == 1.78m profit per hour).

Based on the value I sold it for, it would take over 6 years before it actually started turning a profit. I didn't set the price that I sold it for; it was one of the very inital offers I had from the get go when I offered it for sale. I did the math and thought it would be stupid not to sell when I did; the market told me what it was willing to offer, and in this game, you take when the goin's good.

The reduced wastage isn't the issue, its the output volume that limits the profit.

In times where inventing a given item is unprofitable for Inventors, they can just go invent something else; the markets natural demand of that initial item will slowly eat through the available quantity, driving the price back up which is presumably when people would start inventing it again, thus putting a soft cap on the actual profit any given T2 BPO that can also be invented can produce per unit.

I'm not going to say that T2 BPOs were unbalanced before invention, because they were in certain specific circumstances; the demand for Hulks when the BPOs initially dropped was immense, but because of the limited availability of the BPOs themselves, and the (very) limited output of those BPOs, demand vastly outstripped potential supply, leading to the massive prices we saw for Hulk hulls initially. But the imbalance was created by design in order to essentially limit the proliferation of T2. Invention fixed the supply vs demand problems, and created a new profession for people to make some good ISK with when done correctly. Equally, not every T2 BPO is worth a ****ton, and quite a few made barely any profit even before invention.

The problem with potentially increasing the profits of Invention, is for every person that would see extra profit... there are 5 other people that would see more room to undercut just to get their manufactured goods sold.

tl;dr: T2 BPOs aren't the money print you think they are. Run the maths proerly before you start to insinuate otherwise.

Castaspella
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
Posted - 2009.08.28 03:58:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Na'amah
Originally by: Castaspella
*cut*


Stuff

tl;dr: T2 BPOs aren't the money print you think they are. Run the maths proerly before you start to insinuate otherwise.

Thank you for the input. I realize that having even a single Hulk BPO is not the "set for life" item that many of the, shall we say less non-whiny, other players advocating for changes to T2 BPOs seem to assume (though ~1.3B per month for very little ongoing effort is quite a lot of cheddar). This is not about nerfing T2 BPOs.

My proposal is simply to enable inventors to net a greater share of the overall profit available within the T2 manufacturing arena, while still maintaining T2 BPOs as a valuable item. While this would naturally have some impact on the profitability of today's T2 BPO holders (which would likely be the outcome of any meaningful boost to the invention process), my opinion is that it will be a mostly welcome change that will elevate the inventor/manufacturer to a position of modest profitability as opposed to their general position today as a check/balance against rampant T2 price gouging.

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.28 20:07:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul

And on those slots play exactly by the same rules than any other inventor.

The big differences are 2:

- invention require a much lower initial investment but has higher activity costs;

- the owner can't change what the BPO produce so if the market change he will still produce that item or lose the revenue from the investment, the inventor will shift production and still use most of his investment.

Both are mixed blessing. You can spend a lot at the start and then gain more, but at the risk of a shift in the market depressing your investment or you can spend less and gain less, but keeping a better opportunity to adapt to changing situations.


If both player start with the same sum the one choosing the BPO route will do less work but will have 1 item, the one choosing then inventor path could easily use the isk required to buy 1 T2 BPO to buy several invention alts and invent a lot of stuff, but that will require a lot of in game time spent managing the different characters.




Maybe for someone new to T2 BPOs, but if you are buying now, then you are probably too rich for it to matter tbh - a 5 year (or more) return is utterly silly imo.

Your points are moot, and not relevant to the issues raised here, the vast majority of ship T2 BPOs have been in their owners hands for quite some time - the large scale investments you speak are a distraction to the actual problem, namely that existing ship T2 bpo owners command 56% of the market, way in excess of anything we had been led to believe by CCP (or indeed the bpo owners themselves Wink )

Some players got in excess of 10 T2 bpos from the lottery, and additionally those players with good T2 bpos made such a huge fortune (far in excess of anything else in game at that time) they could afford to buy up more T2 bpos (at a [for the time] good price) and are now sitting on wealth only 0.0 alliances can hope for (moons)

SXYGeeK
Gallente
do you
Posted - 2009.08.28 22:54:00 - [54]
 


the OP's suggestion would not increase the profitability of invention, It would perhaps net a reduction in the cost of T2 items as they would require slightly less resources.
this is evidenced by the fact that there are plenty of T2 modules for which there exist no BPO's (items added after the conversion from lottery to invention) and invention on these modules does not yield more profitability than those modules that do have BPOs.

It may however reduce the difference in profit margin between a T2 BPO and an invented BPC, but this would simply serve to deteriorate the investment made into these BPOs. what people seem to neglect when stating these are a "license to print ISK" is that they are finite, they can only produce so many items in a given timeframe. currently as CCP reports they can only keep up with 1/3 of the market demand, that number will shrink as BPOs are lost or demand increases. If T2 BPOs really where a license to print isk they would be covering 100% of demand as they would simply undercut invention. (there are low demand modules where this is currently the case, inventors can simply make other modules)

To get into invention requires a relatively small investment that can be made up in a few sales, it is flexible and able to adjust to market changes.
These BPO holders have invested billions, and it will take many years for them to recuperate their investment, some likely never will.
Large investments always return slowly, the T2 BPO’s are not abnormally profitable when compared to other large investment possibilities in the game.
Look at Obelisk freighters for example, to produce at a good rate will take about 10 billion isk investment, a profit margin of perhaps 100 million a month (not including labor) means it will take about 8 years to pay back.

T2 BPO’s are not unfair, they are not some evil monster that is gobbling up all your potential invention profits, in actuality it is the inventors who have destroyed the hope of many T2 BPO investments ever paying themselves back.

A little about me, I have dabbled in invention didn’t stick, I have dabbled in manufacturing couldn’t handle the spreadsheets, I do not own any T2 BPOs, I am an honest miner and sometimes do a little fighting to defend my own.


Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Biotronics Inc.
Initiative Mercenaries
Posted - 2009.08.29 00:57:00 - [55]
 

Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 29/08/2009 00:58:08
Originally by: SXYGeeK
the OP's suggestion would not increase the profitability of invention, It would perhaps net a reduction in the cost of T2 items as they would require slightly less resources.
this is evidenced by the fact that there are plenty of T2 modules for which there exist no BPO's (items added after the conversion from lottery to invention) and invention on these modules does not yield more profitability than those modules that do have BPOs.
Exactly this.

Some players think that datacores are 'free'.
Some players are just outright stupid.
This should never be forgotten, nor underestimated.

The prices are dictated by competing inventors.
The only difference between invention and T2 BPOs is that T2 BPO owners can still make decent profit at the prices which are driven down by inventors undercutting each other..

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.29 07:46:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: SXYGeeK

stuff


NOT RELEVANT!!

T2 BPOs were originally given out free (effectively), their 'value' has no bearing on this arguement.

T2 BPOs are base ME/PE 0/0, and are researchable, they allow those builing with them an unfair advantage over inventors - default cost and effort (invention process, increased material cost etc - a BPO requires none of this).

Donatien de'Sade
Red Federation
Posted - 2009.08.29 07:47:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 29/08/2009 00:58:08
Originally by: SXYGeeK
the OP's suggestion would not increase the profitability of invention, It would perhaps net a reduction in the cost of T2 items as they would require slightly less resources.
this is evidenced by the fact that there are plenty of T2 modules for which there exist no BPO's (items added after the conversion from lottery to invention) and invention on these modules does not yield more profitability than those modules that do have BPOs.
Exactly this.

Some players think that datacores are 'free'.
Some players are just outright stupid.
This should never be forgotten, nor underestimated.

The prices are dictated by competing inventors.
The only difference between invention and T2 BPOs is that T2 BPO owners can still make decent profit at the prices which are driven down by inventors undercutting each other..


Rather proves the point that BPO owners have an unfair advantage, thanks

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.08.29 09:32:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade

T2 BPOs were originally given out free (effectively), their 'value' has no bearing on this arguement.



You stupid or what? I can count BPOs in hands of original owners on fingers of one hand. Most BPOs were already sold for HUGE amounts of isk. So if you are counting the profit made by each BPO over invention i hope you DO calculate costs of acquiring said BPO in the process? Or are you hypocrite and for you "every t2 BPO was free"? Sorry but HACs did cost around 50-80bil and the 40mil/piece advantage over inventors need to cover that expense. Of course you know that but you again ignore the fact.

So instead of whining take your isk and BUY this AWESOME money printing machine. I can sell you my 2x scorch L blueprint: 15bil a piece (lets say 28bil for both). Want to buy them? Or whine that "i cant get BPO and BPO holders get too much profit?". My offer stands.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.29 09:52:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Castaspella

Thank you for the input. I realize that having even a single Hulk BPO is not the "set for life" item that many of the, shall we say less non-whiny, other players advocating for changes to T2 BPOs seem to assume (though ~1.3B per month for very little ongoing effort is quite a lot of cheddar). This is not about nerfing T2 BPOs.



My well researched Apoc BPO make 950 millions/month.

Very good bread to go with that cheddar. Yum.

(no, I don't have a Hulk BPO)

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2009.08.29 09:58:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Donatien de'Sade

Maybe for someone new to T2 BPOs, but if you are buying now, then you are probably too rich for it to matter tbh - a 5 year (or more) return is utterly silly imo.

Your points are moot, and not relevant to the issues raised here, the vast majority of ship T2 BPOs have been in their owners hands for quite some time - the large scale investments you speak are a distraction to the actual problem, namely that existing ship T2 bpo owners command 56% of the market, way in excess of anything we had been led to believe by CCP (or indeed the bpo owners themselves Wink )

Some players got in excess of 10 T2 bpos from the lottery, and additionally those players with good T2 bpos made such a huge fortune (far in excess of anything else in game at that time) they could afford to buy up more T2 bpos (at a [for the time] good price) and are now sitting on wealth only 0.0 alliances can hope for (moons)


No, Donatien, it is very relevant for old owners too.

Read Na'amah post. She did the right thing for maximum return from a investment, she sold the hulk BPO and invested the isk in a more profitable activity.

Probably she got at least 60 billions, probably more. I don't know how she invested them, but if she brought a few alts with R&D and inventing skills and with the standing for some R&D corporation she would have exchanged her single BPO output for several inventors output (11 invention slots and 11 production slots each!).

More in game work and more profit.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only