open All Channels
seplocked Science and Industry
blankseplocked Ore and Mineral Prices?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Trade Trial
Posted - 2010.09.22 07:38:00 - [1]
 

ok i was thinking of buying a mining alt via the bazarr.. i was checking out the local hubs on Rocks and minerals orders..
I just want to know is it just me or is the mining market just total crap now... well its not as good as it use to be from what i see prices are way down not only that but salvaging too...Im just wandering if a mining toon is a good investment at the time with the current market or am i better off gong missioning or purchasing a mission runner....

Aphrodite Skripalle
Galactic Defence Consortium
Posted - 2010.09.22 07:58:00 - [2]
 

Its definitly not a good investment, imho. Prices will drop even more when you buy and use your miner, too.

Trade Trial
Posted - 2010.09.22 08:12:00 - [3]
 

yeah i thought so...
i thought prices would be alot better then what they are...
is it because the whole pi thing?
or everybody moving to 0.0?

Aphrodite Skripalle
Galactic Defence Consortium
Posted - 2010.09.22 08:57:00 - [4]
 

Macro Miners and lots of people moving into 0.0.

Shador Dal
Gallente
KERBIRNIA WARRIORS
Posted - 2010.09.22 09:13:00 - [5]
 

Running from sanshas ;)

Ned Black
Posted - 2010.09.22 12:35:00 - [6]
 

Not worth it at all. Last time i checked I had 27k zydrine ready for sale... total sell price was an astounding 27 million... I did not sell :p

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2010.09.22 15:13:00 - [7]
 

Mineral prices are plummeting because of the ill advised changes to the insurance system. Thanks to that stupidity in addition to the further stupidity that has made mission running an even more annoying process (constantly getting sent to low sec form a high sec agent) the already existing deflation of EVE currency was further exacerbated and accelerated.

Expect prices to continue to decline as the flow of good into the economy continues to overwhelm flow of isk to represent it.

The removal of the insurance price floor is turning mining firmly into a macro only activity. Since macro-bots are the only ones who will be able to bear continuing on such a mind numbing activity for such small financial gain.

Javajunky
Posted - 2010.09.22 15:41:00 - [8]
 

It's a brutal reality, but it's more than obvious that the CCP doesn't have the moxy, desire or inclination to take on the macro issue in Eve. Macro ratters in null sec, miners in empire. I am surrounded by no less than 15 macro's when I'm collecting ice product for my POS. We've killed the same macro ratter in null sec 3x in my space but it's still profitable for him to fit out another Tengu and come back. None of it matters.

Although I'm only speculating here, CCP doesn't treat the macro as a problem, they treat it as revenue. Find something else to make ISK with. CCP's internal marching orders are probably similiar to the orders given to cops trying to direct traffic around an accident.

"Nothing to see here, move along..."

nuff said

Teiz Denoi
Posted - 2010.09.22 15:54:00 - [9]
 

LOL, remove the tinfoil had bud. Even if CCP thinks of macros as revenue, they wouldn't allow them to operate. Banning macro's makes them more money, when said macro's have to scramble to buy a new account, and a new character transfer. Not that this is the case either, but it's just as viable as your "move along" campaign.

Yes, over supply is part of the problem but also, a lowered demand is also to blame. With lag issues, fewer wars are blowing ships up, and thus fewer new caps are being built. While not THE problem with mineral prices, I'm sure this has a heavy hand in the sway.

Maggee Q
Posted - 2010.09.22 16:28:00 - [10]
 

What's a macro? And how do you identify them?

Not to hijack the thread, but I have a question that is a tangent to one of the post above regarding null sec. Why are mineral and ore prices way cheaper in null sec than they are in high sec?

Javajunky
Posted - 2010.09.22 17:38:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Javajunky on 22/09/2010 17:39:50
Edited by: Javajunky on 22/09/2010 17:38:41
Originally by: Teiz Denoi
LOL, remove the tinfoil had bud. Even if CCP thinks of macros as revenue, they wouldn't allow them to operate. Banning macro's makes them more money, when said macro's have to scramble to buy a new account, and a new character transfer. Not that this is the case either, but it's just as viable as your "move along" campaign.

Yes, over supply is part of the problem but also, a lowered demand is also to blame. With lag issues, fewer wars are blowing ships up, and thus fewer new caps are being built. While not THE problem with mineral prices, I'm sure this has a heavy hand in the sway.


External factors outside the macro canít be discarded but itís a fool errand to assume CCP believes there to be profit opportunity in addressing the issue since that would require time and resources from CCP. I canít find a post in 2010 where a Community Manager mentions the word macro. So I feel pretty good standing by my ďMove alongÖ nothing to see hereĒ

I heard after Incarna CCP is just going to give up and install macro software for the low low price of $3.95 per month. I donít know thatís just a rumor I heard or started. Either way, back to the original OP, find another profession this one is a corpse in empire and is going into that direction in null sec quickly.


Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.09.22 19:32:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Maggee Q
What's a macro? And how do you identify them?

The game is designed to address multiple gaming aspects such as combat, industry and exploration, not just pew-pew. As such do all aspects need to be balanced or one starts to outweigh the others, thereby creating an imbalance.

A macro is a program, which sends keyboard and mouse events to a running application and simulates user input. It can be used to do complex tasks without actually sitting at the keyboard.

What happens when many people start using macros is that these players begin to "wear out" an aspect of the game. When someone would normally mine for 2-3 hours will a macro miner be able to mine 23 hours per day and without sleep. This puts much more ore into the market than is intended by the game designers.

It is then not so much the occasional macro user, who ruins the game, but those who run macros 23 hours per day and over several days or even weeks.

One can identify macro users by the amount of ore they mine and over a period of time. At certain amounts does one need to assume that the player never slept and therefore has to be running a macro.

Maggee Q
Posted - 2010.09.22 22:13:00 - [13]
 

that's not good. is there a way to report these guys? would like to help if possible, if and when i see one. i might've seen one yesterday as a pilot was mining in his Osprey and kept coming back and forth for easily over an hour. He wasn't jetcanning. I tried to message him but he never responded to any of my requests.


LHA Tarawa
Posted - 2010.09.22 23:03:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: LHA Tarawa on 22/09/2010 23:04:57
Check out the latest quarterly report:

http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/QEN/QEN_Q2-2010.pdf

340,000 active accounts, with 712,000 different characters

66,000 scored a kill. (Not sure if that is "on a kill mail", or "laid the final blow"... it doesn't say.

170,000 characters lost atleast 1 ship in the quarter.
868,000 total ships destroyed by other players.


Each active account lost 5.1 ships to PvP for the quarter. That is 1.7 ships per month, per active account.

Those losses include pods, rookie ships, shuttles, cheap frigs...

Are you mining more minerals than it takes to build 1.7, average sized ships, per month?


AND:
55% of logged in characters started their session in high sec.

Changes like system upgrade that were intended to drag people out of high into null sec have failed. No higher % of people in null sec than before.



It seems everyone has a PVP toon and a couple alt accounts with several industrial toons per, and we're somehow surprised that there is massive oversupply of minerals.

LHA Tarawa
Posted - 2010.09.22 23:35:00 - [15]
 

Another tidbit from the quarterly report.

There were 2500 ships per day being self-distructed prior to the insurance change. That is 228,000 per quarter.

These were mostly battleships, the report says. This means the net payout was, what? 75 million to 100 million average. That is something close to 20 trillion ISK a quarter.

This is roughly equal to the amount of bounties paid out.

Prior to Tyrannis, the money supply had been growing by 13 trillion ISK a month. Despite PI shutting off a major ISK sink of POS fuels, ISK increased by only 2 trillion in Junk after the insurance change.


What some call "ill-advised", others would call necessary to stop 10% per quarter increse in the total ISK supply.

cyndrogen
Posted - 2010.09.23 00:40:00 - [16]
 

the problem with minerals vs ships being built is that not everyone wants or can PVP. What we need are more incentives to use up minerals that are used up for other daily activities. I would suggest ship maintenance. Every vehicle should have a maintenance amount associated with it and repairs should also use up minerals. Even if a player chooses to play docked inside their base they will need to use up minerals for maintenance so their freighters and other ships are operational. Failure to maintain your ships will cause decay over time and modules will begin to fail and switch off. Maintenance should only be performed via minerals based on the actual minerals needed to build the ship. So a shuttle would only need tritanium to maintain the ship at 2% the amount needed to build a ship. A POS needs fuel to run monthly and ships should also need minerals for maintenance on a month per month basis.

Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2010.09.23 14:04:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Skex Relbore on 23/09/2010 14:07:23
Originally by: LHA Tarawa

What some call "ill-advised", others would call necessary to stop 10% per quarter increse in the total ISK supply.



Here is a demonstration of the typical lack of understanding that many people have of monetary functions.

Currency has no intrinsic value, It is merely a representation of the value of the goods and services in an economy. In the most basic since the value of a unit of currency is share of the total economic output of that economy.

If an economy has 1000 units of output and there were 1000 units of currency then each unit of currency would equal 1 unit of output. If you have a fix economic output and you increase the currency that's when you get currency inflation since there are now more units of currency representing the same volume of production.

Now in real economies economic output isn't a fixed value it's a moving target based on any number of factors. In EVE those factors are primarily materials in the form of minerals and modules.

The question of balancing isk sinks with isk faucets is the wrong question. The real question that matters is the balance between material faucets and isk faucets.

If material in the form of minerals and modules is entering the game at a greater rate than ISK then you get currency deflation as the buying power of each individual isk increases.

Lets take our simplified economic model again. If you increase the economic output from 1000 to 2000 and keep the money supply fixed at 1000 the value of each individual unit of currency doubles. Because while previously 1 unit of currency represented 1 unit of economic output that same unit of currency now represents 2.

How do I know that's what the situation with EVE economy?

Because the overall price of goods over the balance of the economy is decreasing over time. All the inflation magpies completely ignore the complete lack of any manifestation of inflation in the game in their anti-inflation whines.

There are only 3 isk faucets in this game. Mission rewards, Bouties, and insurance. Every other income generating activity in the game involves the creation or processing of materials.

Miners put more goods in the economy, Wormholers put more goods in the economy industrialists add value to those goods by turning them into stuff people will buy.

The only material sink in the game (other than people quitting) is through ship destruction.

Insurance was actually a great mechanism for dealing with the problem for a number of reasons.

First Insurance fraud despite all the crying accomplished 2 important functions it removed material (minerals in the form of ships) from the economy and increased the isk supply providing a double anti-deflation whammy. It wasn't inflationary because if the price of ships and other materials started rising it would stop being a viable strategy and normal market forces would take over.

Second the higher insurance payout rates encouraged more PVP in larger more expensive hulls. Once could actually fit out a basic BS hull and lose little or no isk in the process.

Now instead of getting a nice simple isk payment to cover the majority of their losses a PVP'er has to go to an alternative income source (which in the end gets down to ratting or mission running which means that they are creating both isk and material further exacerbating the problem. and they also are no longer out blowing ships up.

An increase of total isk in the economy is only a problem if it exceeds the material inputs. This is highly unlikely to ever be a problem since there are no real limits on production and resource harvesting in EVE.

Lady Ayeipsia
Posted - 2010.09.23 17:59:00 - [18]
 

I have a question... how do additional mineral sinks into the equation factor in?

With the addition of Incarna, I thought POS strucutres were now player producted and required both minerals and PI products. How does this new mineral sink factor in? Are not enough POS parts being destroyed/lost to make a large impact in the market?

LHA Tarawa
Posted - 2010.09.23 18:17:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Skex Relbore
If an economy has 1000 units of output and there were 1000 units of currency then each unit of currency would equal 1 unit of output.



Your overly simplistic understanding of economics leads you to totally ignore velocity of money. 1000 units of ISK, or even 400 trillion as exists in EVE, is insufficient to set a price, if it is sitting in an account not moving.

The money has to be used to actively buy up stuff for it to generate demand.

The mega miners would mine, build, self-desturct, then sit on the cash.

What CCP has been trying to do is stop the massive accumulation of wealth in the wallets of the very few.

Relating to today's economy. The banks have been given trillion of dollars in central bank liquidiity injections. I think the number is something like $10 trillion equivelant globally. But the money isn't moving because the people who can borrow don't want to, and the people that want to borrow can't pay it back so the banks won't lend to them.

The velocity of money is slowing, so even if more money is printed out of thin air by central banks, it isn't stimulating inflation because it isn't getting to people that would spend it.

Originally by: Skex Relbore

If material in the form of minerals and modules is entering the game at a greater rate than ISK then you get currency deflation as the buying power of each individual isk increases.

How do I know that's what the situation with EVE economy?

Because the overall price of goods over the balance of the economy is decreasing over time.


Prices are falling because there is more supply than demand. Yes, more ISK can stimulate demand, but ONLY if that ISK is in the hands of people that will spend it.

Prices that were stuck at insurance levels despite 10% per quarter ISK growth indiactes the money wasn't getting into the right hands.

Originally by: Skex Relbore

The only material sink in the game (other than people quitting) is through ship destruction.



WHICH, was my point. Each active account is losing 1.7 ships a month to PVP. This includes pods, rookie ships, shuttles that provide virtually no demand in minerals.

That is not NEARLY enough demand compared to the number of miners.

Originally by: Skex Relbore

Insurance was actually a great mechanism for dealing with the problem for a number of reasons.

First Insurance fraud despite all the crying accomplished 2 important functions it removed material (minerals in the form of ships) from the economy and increased the isk supply providing a double anti-deflation whammy.



And it lead to 10% increase, per month in total ISK. And since all that extra ISK was insufficient to lift the price of minerals off their artificial floor, it clearly wasn't removing enough minerals nor providing the ISK to the right people.

Originally by: Skex Relbore

Second the higher insurance payout rates encouraged more PVP in larger more expensive hulls. Once could actually fit out a basic BS hull and lose little or no isk in the process.



And, again, it wasn't working since we were losing 1.7 ships per active account.

Originally by: Skex Relbore

Now instead of getting a nice simple isk payment to cover the majority of their losses a PVP'er has to go to an alternative income source



They always had to go rat and mission when they lost a ship.

The real problem is that the PVPer to miners ratio is out of whack. We need more PVPers and fewer miners.

We need more boom and less stripers.

How about we double bounties on low sec and 0.0 rats? How about we pay bounties to players when you kill a player that has below 0.0 sec standing? Get the peps in lowsec killing other players for bounties that empires pay for killing player pirates?

Or, as I've long suggested, add limits to how many hours any one account can empire mine per day/week/month. Bring down supply of mins without reducing active accounts.

Deiphobus Deimos
Posted - 2010.09.23 19:01:00 - [20]
 

Uh CCP has done stuff about macroers in the past... they don't sit on their hands like everyone thinks

http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=687

NARDAC
Posted - 2010.09.23 20:14:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Lady Ayeipsia
With the addition of Incarna, I thought POS strucutres were now player producted and required both minerals and PI products. How does this new mineral sink factor in? Are not enough POS parts being destroyed/lost to make a large impact in the market?


Obviously not enough as prices are falling.

Prices will continue to fall until:
1) More boom
2) Less mining
3) CCP doesn't follow through with plan to continually readjust insurance below replacement cost.
4) Some other major chage happens that creates a better balance between supply and demand.


Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.09.23 20:30:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: NARDAC
Prices will continue to fall until:
1) More boom
2) Less mining
3) CCP doesn't follow through with plan to continually readjust insurance below replacement cost.
4) Some other major chage happens that creates a better balance between supply and demand.

What? If the ore and mineral prices are falling then one needs to stop mining. One cannot come with a change to "create a better balance". If someone is out of ISKs while the ore and minerals prices are at the bottom then that is just bad luck. Start to run missions, but do not look to CCP to fix the market so one can continue dreaming between the rocks. This market dynamic is what we want. We do not want fixed prices.

NARDAC
Posted - 2010.09.23 20:47:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Whitehound
What? If the ore and mineral prices are falling then one needs to stop mining. One cannot come with a change to "create a better balance".


My comment was not intended to be perscriptive, only descriptive.

CCP, could indeed make a change that increases mineral demand and lifts prices off the floor.

I do not think they should.

However, I also doubt they will be happy with a solution of "prices get so low that 100,000 miner acounts go inactive" or "you can buy and fit a top-tier BS on the bounties of a single L4".

Whitehound
The Whitehound Corporation
Frontline Assembly Point
Posted - 2010.09.23 21:41:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: NARDAC
However, I also doubt they will be happy with a solution of "prices get so low that 100,000 miner acounts go inactive" or "you can buy and fit a top-tier BS on the bounties of a single L4".

I am not a PvPer, not as some see themselves as PvPers at least. Still, I do recognize EVE as a PvP game and when the market prices have dropped to a low where 100,000 miners would go inactive then that is a good thing! A lot of PvPers will enjoy the low prices and no one has to fear of EVE becoming a mining game. It is a PvP game and cheap is good.

Talon Kitsune
Posted - 2010.09.24 04:17:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Maggee Q
that's not good. is there a way to report these guys? would like to help if possible, if and when i see one. i might've seen one yesterday as a pilot was mining in his Osprey and kept coming back and forth for easily over an hour. He wasn't jetcanning. I tried to message him but he never responded to any of my requests.




There's really no easy way to spot a macro'er. Like the one person said you can watch ore sales over time if you've got nothing better to do. Although, some people are just more productive than others, and some people, like myself do their real world jobs on one monitor while mining on the other, so you're going to start pointing the finger at people who really did nothing. I often get the odd mails "Hey dude you chinese?" although more subtle usually. I make a point of not responding on principle half the time. Who wants to have to defend themselves all day? I run missions the same way sometimes, compared to other MMO's EVE is extremely hands off, so it's pretty easy to multi-task it. No if CCP wants to catch em it won't be player tip offs doing it. Your Osprey guy could be a macro'er or could just be someone whose got the grind down and doesn't want to use jetcans cause he doesn't like getting his cans flipped, which still happens pretty often.

watch strap
Amarr
Esoteric Technologies
Posted - 2010.09.24 10:38:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Talon Kitsune
Who wants to have to defend themselves all day?


people who dont want to get blown up

Aphrodite Skripalle
Galactic Defence Consortium
Posted - 2010.09.24 11:22:00 - [27]
 

Trying to do Pvp and loosing ships because of lag doesnt attract lots of players.
I am playing now for many years and even without blobs and large fleets with 200+ players in one system eve lags several days per week so much, that i barely can drop items from a wreck into my ships cargo.
This really has to fixed first.

Loosing ships while having a dark screen isnt fun at all.

Dr Chau
Caldari
Posted - 2010.09.24 21:01:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: NARDAC
Prices will continue to fall until:
1) More boom
2) Less mining
3) CCP doesn't follow through with plan to continually readjust insurance below replacement cost.
4) Some other major chage happens that creates a better balance between supply and demand.

What? If the ore and mineral prices are falling then one needs to stop mining. One cannot come with a change to "create a better balance". If someone is out of ISKs while the ore and minerals prices are at the bottom then that is just bad luck. Start to run missions, but do not look to CCP to fix the market so one can continue dreaming between the rocks. This market dynamic is what we want. We do not want fixed prices.


^^ Right there. Everyone in here is looking for a 'fix to the economy,' when what is truly needed is a fix to peoples play-styles. I will admit, current mineral sinks are tiny compared to the amount of minerals entering the market, but people shouldn't look to changes from CCP to solve the problems. Eve was designed as a PvP game, and with falling mineral prices, miners will either switch to PvE or PvP until the prices balance out (however at MUCH value* than people are currently used to) or complain increasingly louder on the forums while waiting for their strip miner cycle that'll bring in 25 ISK to finish.

*With less people mining and more people engaging in activities creating ISK from nothing, inflation (or less deflation) will occur, resulting in higher prices for everything. I have no idea the statistics of the EVE economy so I don't know if this inflation will be negligible or enough to keep minerals at similar prices (however you're buying them with ISK that's worth less).

Another good point made in the thread was the velocity of money. The ISK is useless if it's just sitting in someone's account, unless they're spending it, the extra ISK doesn't contribute to inflation.

Shinde Kudasai
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2010.09.25 02:24:00 - [29]
 

I generally agree with the "let the market it sort it out" - but for that to work, a much more aggressive stance against macro-mining is needed.

They've made good steps in that direction, especially when it was peaking (just before Unholy Rage) - but they need to keep that level of force up. It's seemed to be tapering off.


 

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