open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked The Economy
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (11)

Author Topic

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:26:00 - [1]
 

Preface
A recent DEV blog stated that there is currently about 80 trillion isk in this game. We also know that there are approximately 180,000 accounts in eve. So the average isk/account is 444,444,444isk.

We also know that a good part of the eve population is made up of players with more than one account. In fact, it's not uncommon to know people with 4-5 accounts at a time. So some players, just based on averages, have roughtly 2 billion isk at their disposal.

The Economy

Ok, averages don't really tell you much about what's actually happening in game. Some players are rich, others poor, so it's not a great indicator. However, what it does show is that there's an enormous amount of wealth in this world and not enough people to distribute it properly.

Let's say the richest .01% of eve had half of all the world Isk. This leaves 40,000,000,000isk in eve. Again, average it out among players and you still get roughly 200 million isk per account. Ok well that's better, but man that really seems like a lot of money for a character!

What it boils down to is that there's too much currency in game, and the population is too small to handle it properly.

But there's more

Trade in the real world is limited by a large number of factors (cost, limited resources, limited growth potentials, competition) In the game, competition is very limited in it's abilities. Everyone and anyone can be a tradesmen, there's no real limiting factor. You can't limit the resources flowing into the market, because they're unlimited.

I think if you took a look at ore production vs consumption in the game, you'd find that more ore is produced from mining daily than is consumed. This means that there is always the option to build yourself. T2 used to be the exception to this rule, but it has since changed with recent patches and the addition of invention. Sure the components were easy to get, but the BPO's were a limiting factor.

Because of this game mechanic, the market runs into an unusual and unatural conflict. Prices are driven down by more and more competition.

Well that's odd

Understanding the Trade elements, and Wealth are very important for this next aspect. The game suffers from heavy inflation which means market prices go up. But the game also suffers from an unnatural price deflation for market goods because of the current ability for unlimited competition. This results in a relatively stable market price which hides the truth.

INFLATION

A LOT of people in the game do not understand how Inflation works, and as a result, do not think it's happening. They use market prices as the only indicator for why things are the way they are. But in truth, inflation is happening on every level.

Personal wealth growth

Every player in even is steadily getting wealthier everyday. Some invest in goods such as ships and gear, others, in Outpost and POS, other's in more liquid investments such as trade run goods. In the real world, this is totally impractical and to some extent, unacceptable. If everyone becomes rich, then technically, there is no such thing as wealthy or poor. Now keep in mind, this is a very general statement, there are obviously always exceptions and isolated incidents where one guy doesn't have much isk this week or the next.

How is this happening?

There are 3 main contributing factors to why the Server is being flooded with wealth which will be examined next. The largest single contributor is the current system for INSURANCE (I capitalize strictly because I hate it), Random isk generators, lack of Sinks (not the kitchen variety).

INSURANCE
The economist who so lovingly told us everything factually while really telling us nothing important gave us a spiffy new graph that said roughly 80,000 Ravens were destroyed in an 8 month span. So lets do the simple math and figure that 10,000 Ravens are destroyed every month.

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:26:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 12:01:10
Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 11:54:48
Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 11:41:30
Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 11:33:17
Lets play conservative and say ALL of these unfortunate Ravens were fully insured(for all intensive purposes it won't matter as I'll show in a minute). At roughly 100,000,000 payout per Raven, this results in 1 Trillion isk added to the server each month for 1 ship type. Of that, approximately 1/3 is sunk back into the server to purchase the insurance. So roughly speaking, 650 billion isk are added to the world magically every month just from Raven kills.

*Please note here that this number does have a floor due to basic insurance. That floor is roughly 320 billion isk added magically every month for Raven losses if 0 were insured via the system.

Beyond the shear fact that this makes no sense whatsoever, it's causing a lot of this accrued wealth to arise. Players who should be getting poor are infact retaining wealth.

Random isk generators

Ok, the most common of these is agent missions. I really couldn't think of a broad term to encompass them better than Random Isk Generators (RIGs)

In the real world, I go to work for an empoyee and 2 things happen, input and output. The sum of the Input always equals the sum of the output, with 0 net gain. I go work for bobby for 8 hrs and charge him 10 dollars an hour. Bobby has now received my labor for 8 hrs, and he has given me some of his wealth as a trade off. Within the system, nothing magically appears.

RIGs do not work in this manner. I put in my time and effort to run an agent mission, and the server randomly produces ISK as the tradeoff. All of the sudden, there is a net gain within the system that doesn't work.

Now for obvious reasons, Games have to provide RIGs or else we'd never have anything. But, about 2 years ago, Eve increased thier RIG allowances by better paying agent missions, and much more valuable and more frequent 0.0 ratting. This wouldn't be terrible if they Added proper Sinks to the game.

Sinks

Sinks are placed in games to regulate the intake of currency through RIGs. What eve never did, was increase the amount of sinks substantially to counter this increase. As of late, they have added new or at least better sinks, IE the LP Store to help with this problem, but it's still not enough on it's own. While it has probably finally brought balance to the currency, there was already an enormous amount of damage done before hand.

OK SO?

What this all leads to is for lack of better explanation, MOST EVERY PROBLEM IN EVE.

When this game first started, and really for it's first 2 years of being, the world was very harsh. People actually felt the loss of a ship rather than shrug it off. Gear was very prized as well, for t2 was all but non existent, and t1 didn't have the frequency of drops that are now a result of increased spawns from virtually everything (ratting, Agent rewards, Missions, etc). Yes, Inflation even affected more by gear drops, Zomg.

Blobbing

One of the most obvious truths of blobbing is that it's so easy to do because if you lose a ship, get another one. Entire fleets get wiped out day after day, and yet people continue to come back for more. It used to be, wars were settled over very few large encounters because neither side could afford to keep fighting so heavily.
Now, I lose a ship, I say oh well, and grab another. Keep in mind, frigates grow more costly when inflation isn't out of whack. So the arguement that they'll always come back in frigates if nothing else really isn't true.

Capital Blobbing


Nothing more needs to be said, just look up one section.

Cost of T2

This is more an older arguement and less relevant now, but. T2 purchase cost is typically 5-10 times what they cost to build. This is less about demand and more about inflation.

Macroers

Yes it actually gets worse because of this... continued...

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:31:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: MotherMoon on 22/10/2007 11:40:19
Edited by: MotherMoon on 22/10/2007 11:38:32
I'm listening/...

so basically your pointing out that 1/80th of all isk in the community is effectively in the past 8 months, form the insurance of one ship.

I'd like to see what the total isk in the community was 8 months ago.

Does this number, 80 trillion, encompass all assets? or isk only?
I have about 70mil isk on hand
and about 300 mil in assets/ships/modules.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:37:00 - [4]
 

200M is "way too much" for a character to have? What the hell is wrong with you? I have about 600M across my 2 characters and sure as hell don't feel "rich".

200M is just about enough to buy, insure & fit a fleet BS. Better not lose it cos you'll only get half of that back. If your "too rich" player loses 2 battleships, he's broke.

I find this "too rich" whine particularly poignant coming as it does from a member of one of the richest alliances in the game. Go tell your alliance mates that you should only have 200M each INCLUDING CORP FUNDS, and if they agree and get rid of the excess ISK (transfer it to an alt, then biomess the alt is the simplest way) then I might be inclined to listen to you.

Until then, I'm more inclined to laugh at you.

Tamia Clant
New Dawn Corp
New Eden Research.
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:43:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Yaay
Every player in even is steadily getting wealthier everyday. Some invest in goods such as ships and gear, others, in Outpost and POS, other's in more liquid investments such as trade run goods. In the real world, this is totally impractical and to some extent, unacceptable. If everyone becomes rich, then technically, there is no such thing as wealthy or poor. Now keep in mind, this is a very general statement, there are obviously always exceptions and isolated incidents where one guy doesn't have much isk this week or the next.


Everyone getting wealthier each day isn't a problem by itself. There'll always be people that make more ISK than others, so there'll always be a distinction between poor and rich. If it comes to the point that anyone can buy a raven with pocket change, then manufacturers will increase the price. You claim that there's too much competition on the market, but you're taking an oversaturated (probably Jita) market into account, which is one of the very few markets that can't be easily controlled by a single entity.

Also, while you so fervently mention massive ISK faucets such as insurance, you don't talk about the various ISK sinks even a single time through your post. When you take blueprints, (think capitals, outpost platforms, etc) skills, POS structures, NPC trade goods constantly consumed by starbases, tax rates on market and contracts, among other things, there's still a large amount of ISK being taken out of the economy.

Furthermore, you can easily see that CCP is aware of the issue and is taking measures to stop many of the current ISK faucets. Missions have less bounty rats, new regions have been added with just drones, which cause zero inflation, and extremely expensive NPC-sold-only items, such as the most recent blueprints and skills. All these factors contribute to balance, and while I see your concern, Eve's economy isn't even remotely close to collapsing.

Banana Torres
The Green Banana Corporation
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:43:00 - [6]
 

There are rich players. And there are new players.

If you balance the game for the rich players, for example by removing insurance, then the new players will have a much harder time.

And will go and play a game that is more fun for them.

Then there won't be any players.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:49:00 - [7]
 

"Players who should be getting poor are infact retaining wealth."

best point here.

and to the above and everyone that posts after, I think you should take into account that the op doesn't state any opinion on how to change the system.

so don't say something foolish like

"don't remove insurance"
because the op is not saying this.

and I must agree, with agents and complexes and ratting creating isk, there could be some way of making it so that the richer you get the harder it is to hold on to your isk.

make it more expensive for the rich to live.
while letting younger players keep it easy.

but this would in fact increase the price of things on the market, because inflation would take full effect, leading to it being harder for new players, and I'm wrong?

so the question is, even if these are the facts, how to deal with them.

sure agents could pay out more the more isk is lost in the community, but then the sinks would have to grow, and then the RIGs wold have to grow and then the sinks again!!

thus 1000 isk today could be the same as 10000 isk in a few years, and that would really do nothing would it?

Znorey
0utbreak
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:50:00 - [8]
 

I think your insurance story is a bit misleading. You are forgetting the fact that there are a lot of players who insure their ships and dont loose them within the period that it is insured. Especially in empire. This ISK is basicly 'lost'.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:52:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Yaay
Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 11:33:17
Lets play conservative and say ALL of these unfortunate Ravens were fully insured(for all intensive purposes it won't matter as I'll show in a minute). At roughly 100,000,000 payout per Raven, this results in 1 Trillion isk added to the server each month for 1 ship type. Of that, approximately 1/3 is sunk back into the server to purchase the insurance. So roughly speaking, 650 billion isk are added to the world magically every month just from Raven kills.

*Please note here that this number does have a floor due to basic insurance. That floor is roughly 320 billion isk added magically every month for Raven losses if 0 were insured via the system.

Beyond the shear fact that this makes no sense whatsoever, it's causing a lot of this accrued wealth to arise. Players who should be getting poor are infact retaining wealth.




You're neglecting some huge ISK sinks

Skillbooks - it's surprising how these add up, even though they're one-time costs.

LP store items

Market taxes

POSs <--- the big one

POS consumables <--- the other big one

Players quitting without giving me their stuff

If you're really worried about ISK fountains, then make an effort to extirpate macro-ratters. Those guys produce two or three ravens worth of insurance per day each. Ratting missioning produces so much more ISK than insurance that there's practically no comparison. The net insurance for a Raven is, what? 70M. That's 2-3 hours of missioning or 0.0 ratting. The average ratting/mission raven lasts far longer than 3 hours, ergo insurance is not the main source of ISK growth. The figure of 650Bn ISk that you cite is a whopping 3,611,111 ISK per month per player!!!!111OMGBBQWTF

That's not a significant sum even for someone who started that month.

Furthermore, it is not only acceptable but necessary for the amount of ISK in the game to increase. First, more assets are being produced; if you double the amount of assets in the game, you need double the amount of ISK to buy them. Second, for assets to continue to be produced, there needs to be a steady supply of ISK such that the market is liquid enough to reward producers (miners, industrialists, ratters/missioners who reprocess rat loot) for producing. Otherwise you get deflation, which is even more destructive than inflation.

Given that prices have generally fallen over the last year, it is arguable that the EvE economy is not suffering from inflation except for the very rare supply-limited items which will always increase in price as the total size of the economy grows.

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:56:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 11:57:58
Originally by: Znorey
I think your insurance story is a bit misleading. You are forgetting the fact that there are a lot of players who insure their ships and dont loose them within the period that it is insured. Especially in empire. This ISK is basicly 'lost'.


it is in fact a vast minority of players who suffer that fate. Additionally, for those lucky to survive 1 insurance cycle, it actually takes 3 for the server to catch up. 3 cycles, 9 months... how many ships actually last this long and are insured the full time.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:57:00 - [11]
 

once again I'll say it.

we need to know what the total isk was 8 months ago for any of this to mean anything.

Cipher7
Posted - 2007.10.22 11:57:00 - [12]
 


The fundamental difference between Real-World Economy and MMORPG Economy :

In the real world, people can't quit the game.

You could say with the case of real world economies you have a "captive audience."

200m to 400m is alot? That's about the cost of 1 t2 fitted Battleship.

Try again.

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:00:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: MotherMoon
once again I'll say it.

we need to know what the total isk was 8 months ago for any of this to mean anything.


It's gonna be based on an exponential curve i can almost gaurentee... in other words, the worse it gets in it's totality, the faster it grows.

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:02:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 12:07:12
cont....

Macro farmers come in more and more waves as the value of isk drops. What was once enough to sustain, now isn't anymore, thus creating more demand for isk and more need for macro farmers. The truth is that deflation would actually hurt macro farmers.

If you don't believe it, just look at game time card sales. 6 months ago, 250 million was enough to purchase a 90 day GTC from another player in the community of eve. Today, it's roughly 400million. More isk needed to make the same amount of real life money requires more source of income. Thus, more macro accounts, more ways of skirting the EULA.

There is an unusual hard cap on this number though... Because a macro farmer can only make up to a certain limit of isk per day, he is constrained by physical limits. When this limit causes him to actually lose more money via monthly subscription than he can make selling GTCs, he will be forced to give up and move on. Unfortunately, this limit is so outrageous, that there is virtually no chance it can be met. That means, unless inflation stops, there is never a time where more macroers won't be seen coming into the game.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:04:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Yaay
cont....

Macro farmers come in more and more waves as the value of isk drops. What was once enough to sustain, now isn't anymore, thus creating more demand for isk and more need for macro farmers.


but were getting more rich, and prices are staying the same.

thus shouldn't the need for isk be lower?

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:09:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 12:16:22
Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 12:12:26
Originally by: MotherMoon
Originally by: Yaay
cont....

Macro farmers come in more and more waves as the value of isk drops. What was once enough to sustain, now isn't anymore, thus creating more demand for isk and more need for macro farmers.


but were getting more rich, and prices are staying the same.

thus shouldn't the need for isk be lower?


No, because the value of the isk is becoming lower as well. It's a multi layered problem, reread the first part of the thread... there is a balance between the problems with manufacturing and with inflation that hide this.... thus creating confusion as to what's actually happening.

While I can afford a ship very easily, I can also afford to lose it more readily. How I got my money doesn't matter. There are people who will always buy Isk rather than work for Isk. Keep in mind too that as the server grows in subscriptions, the need for newer players remains high.


Also read the points about blobbing, People used to prize their possessions in this game more, now they're very careless with them. In other words, say i like coffee. 2 years ago, coffee was 5 dollars a cup, so i made sure to drink every last drop. Now coffee cost 10 cents per cup. I become careless, i don't worry about drinking all of it, because quiet frankly, i can always buy another.

MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:11:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: MotherMoon on 22/10/2007 12:11:35
I am rereading it now but I like to point out that isk is now at about 2-3.00$ for 100 mil.

a year ago this number was 20$ for 100 mil isk.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:22:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Yaay
Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 12:07:12
cont....

Macro farmers come in more and more waves as the value of isk drops. What was once enough to sustain, now isn't anymore, thus creating more demand for isk and more need for macro farmers. The truth is that deflation would actually hurt macro farmers.

If you don't believe it, just look at game time card sales. 6 months ago, 250 million was enough to purchase a 90 day GTC from another player in the community of eve. Today, it's roughly 400million. More isk needed to make the same amount of real life money requires more source of income. Thus, more macro accounts, more ways of skirting the EULA.

There is an unusual hard cap on this number though... Because a macro farmer can only make up to a certain limit of isk per day, he is constrained by physical limits. When this limit causes him to actually lose more money via monthly subscription than he can make selling GTCs, he will be forced to give up and move on. Unfortunately, this limit is so outrageous, that there is virtually no chance it can be met. That means, unless inflation stops, there is never a time where more macroers won't be seen coming into the game.


Even at 400M, a macro ratter can make his 3-month sub within 2 days at most. If GTCs were 10x as expensive, macro-ratting would still be very profitable. But are you complaining about macroing or insurance? If it's macroing, then I am 100% alongside you. My corp has zero tolerance for ISK farmers, macroers and ISK buyers, whether red, blue or green. I hope yours is the same.

Furthermore, although GTCs are about 20% more expensive than they were 6 months ago, almost everything else is cheaper. If the ISK supply has grown (and I share your belief that it has) then it has grown in line with the asset supply as well.
If inflation becomes a problem, then the easiest fix for CCP is to tweak the tables for asteroid size and loot drops - as in fact they intend to do with the new "improved" low-end ores. I'm told that empire is getting pretty crowded for miners these days.



PS: Cheaper ships aren't inherently bad: people feel able to fit better ones and care less about losing them.


Znorey
0utbreak
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:26:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Yaay
Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 11:57:58
Originally by: Znorey
I think your insurance story is a bit misleading. You are forgetting the fact that there are a lot of players who insure their ships and dont loose them within the period that it is insured. Especially in empire. This ISK is basicly 'lost'.


it is in fact a vast minority of players who suffer that fate. Additionally, for those lucky to survive 1 insurance cycle, it actually takes 3 for the server to catch up. 3 cycles, 9 months... how many ships actually last this long and are insured the full time.


I agree, altho this reduces the amount your forecasted with about 1/3rd. But I dont think the the problem lies there. You have to ask yourself the question where does this ISK go?

To the people who loose their ship? No, they loose approx 120-130M for the raven + insurance and gain 100M from insurance. So, not even talking about the modules, they in fact loose 20-30M.

To the manufacturers? Well, if they are plain mineral buyers and ship sellers I dont think they profit a lot. As the market is very competitive. This is excluding T2 manufacturers ofcourse.

To the miners? Ofcourse they get their products for free because they just float in space. But how much do they really earn. I've mined in a hulk in high sec. This gave me a net profit of 10M/hour. Now is that really too much?

So this ISK is in fact infused back into the economy, but the main question is this -and I hope I'm not shooting myself in the foot here- Who actually benefits from it?

Probably the T2 manufacturers(w BPO or wo BPO/invention) and their suppliers i.e. basic goods for invention such as Encryption method books and such.

But needless to say, this has been well known for a long time.

Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:29:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 22/10/2007 12:29:17
Yaay, how about making the game hardcore? Let me see if I see your point clearly and propose New Game Economy.

1. Limited asteroids that respawn once every six months.

2. Remove all insurance.

3. Change all missions and complexes to reward security status.

4. Limited loot drops at 0.01%.

5. CCP gives players ISKs once a month at the start of subscription cycle.

Feels like RL isn't it? :)


Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:33:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 12:33:56
Originally by: Znorey
Originally by: Yaay
Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 11:57:58
Originally by: Znorey
I think your insurance story is a bit misleading. You are forgetting the fact that there are a lot of players who insure their ships and dont loose them within the period that it is insured. Especially in empire. This ISK is basicly 'lost'.


it is in fact a vast minority of players who suffer that fate. Additionally, for those lucky to survive 1 insurance cycle, it actually takes 3 for the server to catch up. 3 cycles, 9 months... how many ships actually last this long and are insured the full time.


I agree, altho this reduces the amount your forecasted with about 1/3rd. But I dont think the the problem lies there. You have to ask yourself the question where does this ISK go?

To the people who loose their ship? No, they loose approx 120-130M for the raven + insurance and gain 100M from insurance. So, not even talking about the modules, they in fact loose 20-30M.

To the manufacturers? Well, if they are plain mineral buyers and ship sellers I dont think they profit a lot. As the market is very competitive. This is excluding T2 manufacturers ofcourse.

To the miners? Ofcourse they get their products for free because they just float in space. But how much do they really earn. I've mined in a hulk in high sec. This gave me a net profit of 10M/hour. Now is that really too much?

So this ISK is in fact infused back into the economy, but the main question is this -and I hope I'm not shooting myself in the foot here- Who actually benefits from it?

Probably the T2 manufacturers(w BPO or wo BPO/invention) and their suppliers i.e. basic goods for invention such as Encryption method books and such.

But needless to say, this has been well known for a long time.


The person who benefits from it is the person who get's the insurance. I have 100 mil, i buy a ship. I lose the ship, i get back 30 million. now that ship was worth 100mil and i used it for it's intended (?) purpose. I then got 30 mil after i used up my resource in that ship. I have a net gain of 30 mil to my wallet with 0 work done.

Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Edited by: Jenny Spitfire on 22/10/2007 12:29:17
Yaay, how about making the game hardcore? Let me see if I see your point clearly and propose New Game Economy.

1. Limited asteroids that respawn once every six months.

2. Remove all insurance.

3. Change all missions and complexes to reward security status.

4. Limited loot drops at 0.01%.

5. CCP gives players ISKs once a month at the start of subscription cycle.

Feels like RL isn't it? :)




That's an extreem take on the points. It's not about 1 extreem, ie your take, or another extreem, ie the server now. It's about the balance between them.

Anderian Ashald
Gallente
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:44:00 - [22]
 

Just posting out of curiosity, but isn't trillion one million million? Or one quintillion in Great Britain.

If it's one million million, then 80,000,000,000,000 / 180,000 = 444,444,444,444 (444 billion average, that doesn't sound right, does it?)
If it's quintillion, then 80,000,000,000,000,000,000 / 180,000 = 444,444,444,444,444 (a really large number :D).

Reference: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/trillion

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:45:00 - [23]
 

Going from 100M to 30M is an odd conception of "net gain".

The net insurance ISK gainers are the players who produce the value-adds; the miners who produce the minerals, and the manufacturers who produce the ships from those minerals. They turn 0ISK -> SomeISK. The relationship is not directly coupled though. They receive ISK before the insurance is paid. But they receive much more than they normally would, because people buy their products in the knowledge that they will receive a partial 'refund'. Insurance functions as a kind of huge subsidy to ship manufacturers and miners, artificially stimulating demand.

Since they are who the insurance ISk "drains" too, all that is required is to make sure that miners and manufacturers have an equivalent ISK-sink.

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:51:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
Going from 100M to 30M is an odd conception of "net gain".

The net insurance ISK gainers are the players who produce the value-adds; the miners who produce the minerals, and the manufacturers who produce the ships from those minerals. They turn 0ISK -> SomeISK. The relationship is not directly coupled though. They receive ISK before the insurance is paid. But they receive much more than they normally would, because people buy their products in the knowledge that they will receive a partial 'refund'. Insurance functions as a kind of huge subsidy to ship manufacturers and miners, artificially stimulating demand.

Since they are who the insurance ISk "drains" too, all that is required is to make sure that miners and manufacturers have an equivalent ISK-sink.


It's an economic principal. You've used up the worth of an item when it expires... ie a ship blows up in eve. You've benefited from the full value of what you paid for said item. Who you bought it from, or who has the money you paid for it doesn't matter. What matters is that you got value out of it's use. That value isn't determined by you, it's determined by the life of the product.

If after you've used up the worth of the item, and thus used up 100mil in worth, yet somehow retain 30 million in worth from the insurance, then the system has generated a favorable outcome for you.

Moghydin
Silver Snake Enterprise
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2007.10.22 12:54:00 - [25]
 

I think that any research based on general averages is statistically wrong. You don't see many statistical research data which is built around general average and there's reason behind that. If you have, for example, 100 ISK and I have 2 ISK, then on average each of us has 51 ISK, which of course gives us the totally wrong picture. I think that the current situation in Eve is a huge gap between rich and poor. There are players who can lose faction fitted battleship and won't notice it, and there are those for whom losing a HAC or T2 fitted battleship is a big loss. Btw, even general averages suggests that. If we have 400mill on average, it's not too much in terms of HACs and T2 fitted battleships.

Now, we could have made better observation if we had data on wealth distribution between different sectors, for example - character age, character occupation, character place of residence etc, etc. Only when this data will be available, we can understand the state of Eve economy.

Yaay
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Posted - 2007.10.23 02:14:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Moghydin
I think that any research based on general averages is statistically wrong. You don't see many statistical research data which is built around general average and there's reason behind that. If you have, for example, 100 ISK and I have 2 ISK, then on average each of us has 51 ISK, which of course gives us the totally wrong picture. I think that the current situation in Eve is a huge gap between rich and poor. There are players who can lose faction fitted battleship and won't notice it, and there are those for whom losing a HAC or T2 fitted battleship is a big loss. Btw, even general averages suggests that. If we have 400mill on average, it's not too much in terms of HACs and T2 fitted battleships.

Now, we could have made better observation if we had data on wealth distribution between different sectors, for example - character age, character occupation, character place of residence etc, etc. Only when this data will be available, we can understand the state of Eve economy.


Which is why i very clearly stated that averages present a problem with facts. However, you can see that by removing half of the total amount of isk on the server for only 0.01% of the population still presenst a problem with the average. People say oh 200 mil isn't a lot of money, but in actuality, it is in the game. This game wasn't originally intended as everyone have a battleship all the time. But honestly, I lose a Battleship these days, like most people i have a laugh and get a new one. It's making things that shouldn't be so disposable just that, very disposable. It's making this game too hello kitty and not enough of what it once was.

Umbi13
Posted - 2007.10.23 10:05:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Umbi13 on 23/10/2007 10:08:39
Your insurance argument is very twisted to your side of the argument, which i agree with. But the blatent manipulation undermines the most of what you are saying.

raven deaths put isk into eve.
no, raven deaths take isk out of eve, since 1/3 of the money is goes to purchasing new insurance, at least 1/3 * the number of ravens destroyed is the money leaving eve. That is a sink.

Unfortunately. Eve pumps in so much isk, that that sink doesnt do much. (there is also gear attached to those ravens)


A raven that is alive is a 90 million isk asset. A destroyed asset becomes a salved value of 2/3 of that 90 million, since raven must be bought again. But we are not talking economics. We are talking that raven death puts money into eve.

Reem Fairchild
Minmatar
Punic Corp.
Posted - 2007.10.23 10:14:00 - [28]
 

I don't understand here. You point to things that drive the prices up, then point to things that help keep them down and how these things balance each other out to keep prices relatively stable. And then you say that that is a problem?

Sounds to me like you described yourself how the market in Eve is working perfectly.

Umbi13
Posted - 2007.10.23 10:21:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Reem Fairchild
I don't understand here. You point to things that drive the prices up, then point to things that help keep them down and how these things balance each other out to keep prices relatively stable. And then you say that that is a problem?

Sounds to me like you described yourself how the market in Eve is working perfectly.


no, he isnt saying they balance each other out. He is saying they are both working opposite. market stuff goes down. Because of competition, unlimited resources, and low barriers to entry. The market items go down in price. They wont go up. because too much supply.

And things that cant be manufactured, the prices are going way way up. because there is soo much isk in eve, that most people use it as toilet paper. Especially the caldari, because they think they are so much better than everyone else. I hope they get isk paper cuts.

Andrue
Amarr
Posted - 2007.10.23 10:21:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Yaay
Edited by: Yaay on 22/10/2007 11:57:58
Originally by: Znorey
I think your insurance story is a bit misleading. You are forgetting the fact that there are a lot of players who insure their ships and dont loose them within the period that it is insured. Especially in empire. This ISK is basicly 'lost'.


it is in fact a vast minority of players who suffer that fate. Additionally, for those lucky to survive 1 insurance cycle, it actually takes 3 for the server to catch up. 3 cycles, 9 months... how many ships actually last this long and are insured the full time.
How can it be a 'fact' to you? Unless you are a dev in disguise you can't possibly have access to the proof behind it.

In any case I think you're wrong. I stopped insuring my ships several years ago because it was so rare to lose them. From chatting to other people it seems I'm a little unusual in never having lost a ship in a mission (and only twice when less than a month old ratting) but most people still hardly ever lose their ship.

I reckon that insurance premimiums are a net sink and quite a big one at that.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (11)

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