open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] Evaluate T2 BPO effect on markets.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2010.12.22 14:48:00 - [1]
 

**WARNING: BIG WORDS IN USE!**

For some absurd reason people have started moaning about the presence of T2 BPO's again and threads are filled with misinformation, misconceptions, half-truths and outright lies.

I here by propose that CCP Dr.EyjoG is put to work on an analysis of the market as it pertains to T2 items to ascertain the ramifications of a full or partial BPO removal.

Analysis should include, but should not be restricted to;
- Moon materials; ability to supply materials needed were BPOs to be removed, volumes consumed by BPO vs. Invention, bottlenecks.
- Value and volume of items built with BPOs compared to invention.
- Projected effect on T2 prices should a full or partial removal be implemented.

Whether you support this or not, please give me ideas as to what should be included in such an analysis.

Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon
Posted - 2010.12.22 17:50:00 - [2]
 

Science and Industry subforum would become a ghosttown if EyjoG could finally put this to rest.

Supportan.

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2010.12.22 19:19:00 - [3]
 

Might be off topic a bit, but I would be curious to know if there are any items so miserable that people don't bother inventing them.

I.E. are there any T2 items on the market that are only produced from the BPOs or copies thereof.

Atius Tirawa
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.12.22 20:46:00 - [4]
 

yes, thre are items that are produced by bpos only - quite a few of them actually. . . since basically every mod has a t2 vrsion, less used mods are often bpo only.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront

Posted - 2010.12.22 22:05:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 22/12/2010 22:05:18
Originally by: De'Veldrin
Might be off topic a bit, but I would be curious to know if there are any items so miserable that people don't bother inventing them.

I.E. are there any T2 items on the market that are only produced from the BPOs or copies thereof.

The research I did in my invention days indicated that most if not all of the low-volume items like cap relays and armour hardeners (EANM's are KING!) sees very little non-BPO production.
For some items it is quite simply too resource intensive to turn a respectable profit .. one would need several alts doing invention and supporting jobs to make it work.

FW might have changed things as frigate modules sky-rocketed in price and even cruiser modules went up a bit, but I have no data so can't say for sure. The amount of "useless" mods may have gone down.

Aleena Doran
Posted - 2010.12.22 22:28:00 - [6]
 

Yes, please.

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.12.23 15:25:00 - [7]
 

My understanding is that the T2 BPO dominance is more often seen with ships (particularly interdictors and interceptors) rather than modules.

Would be nice to see it looked at and confirmed one way or the other, though.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.23 15:32:00 - [8]
 

It never hurts to investigate. The truth, after all, is out there.

+1

Crazy KSK
Posted - 2010.12.23 18:49:00 - [9]
 

!

Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2010.12.23 21:23:00 - [10]
 

it should lay the matter to rest once and for all.

However, people will still complain if analysis shows that the impact is minimal.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2010.12.23 22:37:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Glyken Touchon
it should lay the matter to rest once and for all.

However, people will still complain if analysis shows that the impact is minimal.

Personally doubt it is minimal, but I want the numbers regardless. Having any sort of constructive debate using guesstimates and hearsay makes me feel like a politician .. very uncomfortable feeling I dare say Very Happy

If nothing else, CCP can use the data mined by their pet economist to perhaps pull some tweaks and improvements to invention itself out of the hat.

Windjammer
Gallente
Posted - 2010.12.23 23:21:00 - [12]
 

Good idea. While it is obvious that T2 production from a T2 BPO is much more profitable than by use of invention, its unknown what impact T2 BPOs are having on the market. Invention allows for faster production of T2 items, ships especially, because multiple BPCs are being used simultaneously where there is usually only one BPO being used per producer.

Id really like to see such a report. Ive been curious about this subject for some time.

Best regards,
Windjammer

Voogru
Gallente
Massive Damage
We Are John Galt
Posted - 2010.12.24 01:10:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Glyken Touchon
it should lay the matter to rest once and for all.

However, people will still complain if analysis shows that the impact is minimal.


He could make a report that out of 10,000 T2 bpos, 3,000 of them are still in use and 95% of all production comes from invention, and people will still think that T2 bpos are a big impact.

If they suddenly change their mind, they will then just be opposed to T2 bpos for other reasons, such as "THEY ARE UNFAIR".

You can't win. Thats why they probably haven't wasted their time. If CCP puts to bed the current whines from T2 BPO whiners, they'll come up with new whines.

They think that easier invention or removing T2 bpos will make it so they make more money, sadly they can't get it through their thick head that this won't have any positive effect for them, and you'll never prove it to them otherwise because they are so bent against it they just don't care.

It's just like class warfare in real life. I play eve to get away from that crap and sadly these morons want to bring it into this game.


Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Personally doubt it is minimal


See, I told you so.

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
If nothing else, CCP can use the data mined by their pet economist to perhaps pull some tweaks and improvements to invention itself out of the hat.


Invention was improved by 1000% a few months after it was implemented to crash the T2 prices down to where they are now.

The prices on T2 modules dropped by 97%.



Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.12.24 07:59:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
I here by propose that CCP Dr.EyjoG is put to work on an analysis of the market as it pertains to T2 items

Fine so far.

Quote:
to ascertain the ramifications of a full or partial BPO removal.

Meh.

Quote:
Analysis should include, but should not be restricted to;
- Moon materials; ability to supply materials needed were BPOs to be removed, volumes consumed by BPO vs. Invention, bottlenecks.

We already know what the bottlenecks are.
Primary Technetium, secondary neodymium.
We're still running on stockpiles of those since before the Dominion update nearly one year ago.
When the stockpiles get depleted, that's when we'll see the real bottlenecks exerting serious pressure.

Quote:
- Value and volume of items built with BPOs compared to invention.

You don't really need Doc.E.G. to do that again to get a ballpark figure.

The numbers in that QEN long time ago were telling enough, even if they only dealt with volumes. Drones and ammo were not mentioned, only modules and ships.
For ships only, it's 56% from BPOs and 44% from invention.
Modules plus ships combined, 33% from BPOs, 67% from invention.
This obviously means the vast majority of modules are being invented, but exactly how much, a bit harder to determine. Another important "thing" there was the breakdown by ship class. For instance, for interceptors (which back then were mostly sucky and quite low-priced), the ratio was 84% BPO and 16% invention. However, for HACs (which were hugely popular before the introduction of T3 strategic cruisers), it was 25% BPOs and 75% invention. And for Hulks, only 11% BPO and 89% invention.

Long story short, whichever items were more IN DEMAND AND THEREFORE MORE EXPENSIVE had their vast majority of numbers manufactured from invented BPCs, while only the dirt-cheap, near-cost items had their majority built from BPOs, and very likely, not even from all BPOs in existence.
To extrapolate, AT WORST around 33% of the total volume of ISK of T2 items sold were coming from BPO manufacture (and at best even as low as 20%, or lower), with over 67% up to maybe 80% or even higher percentage of ISK volume of items traded coming from invented BPCs.

Ballpark numbers seem pretty clear-cut to me even back then, and we've had an increase in volumes since, with no new BPOs appearing, so the percentages are most likely even more heavily skewed in favour of invention.

Quote:
- Projected effect on T2 prices should a full or partial removal be implemented.

This one is relatively easy, again.

Demand for datacores will slightly increase, raising prices a bit, but not noticeably above normal seasonal fluctuations.
Demand for moon minerals will probably increase from anywhere between as little as 10% to as much as 25%, tops. Most likely figure somewhere around 15%. The effect on price however is much harder to determine. Price increase of moon minerals will of course focus on the two rarest moon minerals of today, technetium and neodymium.

MOST LIKELY PRICE SCENARIOS:

For low-demand T2 items, depending just how low the demand was, prices will increase by at least half, up to several times the current price, to meet the new minimal cost derived from invention. Volume however will dip heavily.

For in-demand T2 modules, price differences will be very small, since most of the cost comes from invention, not manufacture. You won't see much of a difference in either price (at most a 10% increase) nor volume.

For in-demand T2 ships however, prices will most likely increase, but by how much, that's very difficult to determine.
It will solely depend on the way moon mineral prices will evolve and on particular class of ship, since not all use similar percentages of moon minerals.
Price increases anywhere between as little as 5% to as much as 40% are nothing outside the realm of possibility.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force

Posted - 2010.12.24 08:02:00 - [15]
 

...character limit reached.


But you know what, fine, please let him do the analysis, so we won't have to guesstimate anymore, so we can shove clearer numbers down the throats of "skeptics", numbers backed up by some form of authority.

So... supported.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2010.12.24 09:50:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 24/12/2010 09:53:14
Originally by: Akita T

Demand for datacores will slightly increase, raising prices a bit, but not noticeably above normal seasonal fluctuations.
Demand for moon minerals will probably increase from anywhere between as little as 10% to as much as 25%, tops. Most likely figure somewhere around 15%. The effect on price however is much harder to determine. Price increase of moon minerals will of course focus on the two rarest moon minerals of today, technetium and neodymium.

MOST LIKELY PRICE SCENARIOS:

For low-demand T2 items, depending just how low the demand was, prices will increase by at least half, up to several times the current price, to meet the new minimal cost derived from invention. Volume however will dip heavily.

For in-demand T2 modules, price differences will be very small, since most of the cost comes from invention, not manufacture. You won't see much of a difference in either price (at most a 10% increase) nor volume.

For in-demand T2 ships however, prices will most likely increase, but by how much, that's very difficult to determine.
It will solely depend on the way moon mineral prices will evolve and on particular class of ship, since not all use similar percentages of moon minerals.
Price increases anywhere between as little as 5% to as much as 40% are nothing outside the realm of possibility.



I think that the effect on moon minerals will tend to be toward the low end of your prediction as the increase in T2 materials usage will be felt only for ships, not for modules as there is no T2 component wastage for most of the modules.

For lesser used modules the price increase would be capped by the price of equivalent named modules.
For example the rolled tungsten version of the armor plates is better on all account than the T2 version. So to sell the T2 version you generally have to set a price lower than the meta 4 version (barring a critical shortage of the meta 4 version in the area).

So if CCP remove the T2 BPO of the armor plates with the "need" to produce to get a return from your investment the effect would be the disapparence of most if not all of the T2 armor plates.

Some guy would still invent them as a novelty item or because he can't do the math, but they will disappear from general usage, not sell at an higher price.


Edit: forgot to support, even if I doubt the good doctor will give us data with enough details to be worthwhile. he has a habit of giving pre-digested data and only on some limited stuff (for example the past QUEN about T2, why he hasn't given the data about modules production separated from ship production? Ship production divided for size? and so on)

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2010.12.24 10:01:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Akita T
... But you know what, fine, please let him do the analysis, so we won't have to guesstimate anymore, so we can shove clearer numbers down the throats of "skeptics", numbers backed up by some form of authority...

Thank you for that. I am aware of the QEN and the numbers you mention, but if these boards have proven anything to me then it is that "a ballpark" figure, even if right on the money will always be brought into question.

Just so fed up with the guesstimate wars so decided to ask deployment of the WMD Smile

Big Bit
Posted - 2010.12.24 12:36:00 - [18]
 

Was already in one QEN Laughing
And it wasn't nice reading.

Gallians
Posted - 2010.12.24 14:02:00 - [19]
 


Windjammer
Gallente
Posted - 2010.12.25 02:14:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Akita T
You don't really need Doc.E.G. to do that again to get a ballpark figure.

The numbers in that QEN long time ago were telling enough, even if they only dealt with volumes. Drones and ammo were not mentioned, only modules and ships.
Thanks for this. The Doc does some great work and I appreciate your analysis as well.

Best regards,
Windjammer

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.12.26 05:48:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 26/12/2010 05:48:04
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
if these boards have proven anything to me then it is that "a ballpark" figure, even if right on the money will always be brought into question

Doc could come right up and say 92.75% of the ISK-wise volume of T2 items are invented ones, and people would still cry "kill T2 BPOs".
Twisted Evil


 

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