Ccp response needed. whats being done to lower plex prices

[Teckos_Pech]

Think of it this way, if you are going to start a business you have to have a store front/factory/facility, right? So you go out and lease such a facility. That facility means you incur certain costs if you sell 1 item of 1 million. Now, in the long run you can get a bigger (or smaller) facility, so in the long run these costs are also variable, but in the short run they are fixed.

Fixed costs are due to various impediments like contracts, transaction costs, and the like. These prevent the firm (or consumer) from moving directly to the optimal position immediately. With the facility example it is somewhat obvious; you’ll have a lease and you’ll have likely paid at least 1 months worth of rent if not more. You’ll pay this often before you even sell a single item.

Server costs are fixed. CCP cannot run out and just get a new server on a whim. There are all sorts of things restricting them from doing this.

As such, the notion that a skin is preferred in that it does not entail additional server costs is just not relevant as those server costs are going to be incurred even if CCP sells no PLEX and has just 1 customer logging in. Granted with just 1 customer logging in they may have to shut down soon, but the point is they still incur those costs.

Fixed costs do not vary with output (however you measure it). It is literally a fixed dollar amount, say $500,000. You pay that. No more, no less. If one player logs in you pay $500,000. If 50,000 log in you pay $500,000.

If you sell 0 skins you pay $500,000 in server costs. If you sell 10,000 skins you pay $500,000. If 10,000 player sub via PLEX and 20,000 sub via credit card you incur $500,000. Same if the numbers flip flop (20,000 sub via PLEX/10,000 via credit card).

You can only not incur that $500,000 by shutting down.

[yellow_parasol]

interesting. you don’t stop trying, despite me saying to let it rest. this underlines my suspicion, that it’s not actually about the person not understanding something.

thank you for your efforts.

[Salvos_Rhoska]

I would think CCPs strategy is to provide as many services for PLEX as possible so as to encourage more PLEX purchase/use.

Inversely, this is also good for their sub sales, as the more PLEX gets sunk into non-subs and the higher PLEX rises, the more attractive/necessary buying a sub becomes instead.

Ofc also the higher PLEX goes, the more incentive to purchase for resale for isk.

This is a silly thread arguing semantics and splitting hairs for the sake of argument.

[Bjorn_Tyrson]

How about a more relatable example since not everyone owns a pool. But most people who play eve have a place to live. (At least I would hope so… if you are homeless and still playing. Priorities please.)

So let’s say you have a 100 bedroom house, apt. Whatever. You need to pay rent/mortgage on that house every month no matter what.
That is the server costs.

You fill the house with roommates. Even better those roommates pay you enough that you actually make a profit from those rooms. (The users)

One day you decide to take up painting. And you offer to paint pretty murals in people’s rooms for them as a way to make a little extra cash. (Skins)

Now in an ideal world, everyone who gets murals painted will also keep paying rent. But do you really think that anyone who can’t afford the rent is going to want to pay for a mural?

And would you rather those people pay you rent every month? Or rely on enough people buying enough paintings to pay for the whole thing?

[yellow_parasol]

Flabbergasting. i say “i’m done” and no one cares.

Do people really comprehend, what’s written? more and more it looks like you’re doing this, because your brains forces you. less and less it looks like you’re trying to teach me something. instead it looks like you just need to “spread your knowledge”, ignoring the fact that you actually have no idea how to approach the problem.

and you don’t. you just keep trying with examples, instead of starting asking questions to find out where my train of thoughts is flawed. that is actuallythe correct way to go. not continuously trying to hammer something in while ignoring to look for the actual problem but to ask questions to unknot the thought process.

very interesting. thanks. and try to stop this reactionary slavery you’re actual victims of. it’s disturbing af. at closer look, it becomes apparent that you don’t want to “help”, you just want to be told that you’re right. the “helping” part seems to be rationalization of your behaviour.

have a nice day and good luck with that approach towards life.

[Garresh]

Dude… just sub for X time interval then immediately cancel once payment processes. Lots of services do recurring bills and every single one of them can be set to single-payment by doing this.

[Bjorn_Tyrson]

Okay… you want us to ask questions then fine. I’m just drunk enough to humor you.

Do you understand the basic concepts of gross income, net income, and operating costs?
Do you understand the difference between recurring expenses and income, and non-recurring expenses and income?

[JC_Mieyli]

i think if youre gonna ask him questions you should start from the beginning
which is
do you hate players who sub with plex
past experience indicates the answer is yes

[Linus_Gorp]

@yellow_parasol

Do people really comprehend, what’s written? more and more it looks like you’re doing this, because your brains forces you. less and less it looks like you’re trying to teach me something. instead it looks like you just need to “spread your knowledge”, ignoring the fact that you actually have no idea how to approach the problem.

Want to know why you don’t get it? You and they are talking about completely different things. What you wrote in your posts has nothing to do with what they think you wrote and try to explain to you.

I must admit that it is kind of amusing watching this. Also interesting how Teckos jumped on that train. I honestly didn’t expect him to as he’s one of the more intellectual posters on these forums. Guess he got caught in the wave somewhere along the way.

[Teckos_Pech]

@yellow_parasol

and you don’t. you just keep trying with examples, instead of starting asking questions to find out where my train of thoughts is flawed. that is actuallythe correct way to go. not continuously trying to hammer something in while ignoring to look for the actual problem but to ask questions to unknot the thought process.

Okay, do you follow the point that has been made?

Total costs = fixed costs + variable costs?

And do you follow the point that:

Server costs are part of fixed costs?

And do you follow the point that fixed costs are incurred irrespective of how much output you have?

So now let me quote part of your post that has started us down this bunny trail and took us deep down the rabbit hole.

@yellow_parasol

sinking plex into gametime means that this (these ) sunk plex equals 30 days of running server costs. 30 days of service CCP provides for one (500 ) plex.

Or let me ask you this question:

Assume, for the sake of discussion, you want to buy a skin. Why does it have value? What are you going to do with it?

Put it on your RL car? No.
Hang it on your wall in your home/apartment? No.
Wear it to work? No.
Make a cute little doggie outfit for your dog (or cat)? No.

Where exactly are you going to use it?

[yellow_parasol]

@Linus_Gorp

I honestly didn’t expect him

i did. Don’t tell him, though, i don’t want him to get angry about it, for no real reason.

@Teckos_Pech

Where exactly are you going to use it?

i don’t know. your mom?

/me runs away.

[Teckos_Pech]

@yellow_parasol

i don’t know. your mom?

So you lied about asking questions. Okay. Thanks.

[yellow_parasol]

no, no, no. sorry about that.

i’ll properly reply when i got time again. for now it’s just shorts, because weekend.

[Octoven]

I hear tons of suggestions that CCP has inflated PLEX prices by increasing the demand for PLEX while supply remains the same. Case in point, allowing MCT, Resculpt, SKINs, SPs, and now the latest as PLEX in place of AUR for NEX. I do not think any of the reasons is enough to drive the price of PLEX as much as it has been. If the demand has increased, one would assume the volume of sales would increase as well…or at the very least remain about the same since after all if one assumes the increase in price is suppose to offset supply vs demand. Would not the price going up decrease the demand enough to keep sales volume the same? When looking at the market there seems to be an overall correlation between price and volume. If we took an everyday item such as Hob T2s:

You can see that as prices spike, volume tends to fall and as prices tank, volume of sales goes up. I realize this is a cheap and common item compared to a PLEX; however, its a similar model on a majority of commonly traded items…that is except for PLEX.

The volumes do remain pretty close to the same but they do trend downward beginning after June…which is also when PLEX was broken up and prices started to skyrocket. I can accept the demand argument had the volumes remained similar as seen in the first part of the year, but this seems more like prices are still a bit out of control. 2.5M is where it should be normalized at but they are still higher than this.

I can’t see demand playing this large a role in price increases, I admit it does play a major role, but I suspect there is some market shenanigans going on here too. More so than prior split. People are still getting used to the whole value of a PLEX idea and seems there is some taking advantage of it. Now, I have personally witnessed CCP intervening in PLEX prices in the past so I know they can.

[Teckos_Pech]

@Octoven

The volumes do remain pretty close to the same but they do trend downward beginning after June…which is also when PLEX was broken up and prices started to skyrocket. I can accept the demand argument had the volumes remained similar as seen in the first part of the year, but this seems more like prices are still a bit out of control. 2.5M is where it should be normalized at but they are still higher than this.

I can’t see demand playing this large a role in price increases, I admit it does play a major role, but I suspect there is some market shenanigans going on here too. More so than prior split. People are still getting used to the whole value of a PLEX idea and seems there is some taking advantage of it. Now, I have personally witnessed CCP intervening in PLEX prices in the past so I know they can.

Ahhh the joys of empirical work.

You are implicitly assuming that there is only a demand side effect. As I noted back upstream a bit…

@Teckos_Pech

Okay, let us look at scenario 1. In this case, some of these people might have bought PLEX to sell for ISK…now they aren’t. They’d rather have X. So now we have less PLEX being sold for ISK and that means an inwards shift in the supply curve. This means that the price of PLEX will go up.

As I noted above, people who might have been buying PLEX to sell for ISK may not be using the PLEX for one of the new features. This would be a supply side effect.

Trying to figure these things out empirically is extremely difficult. The problem here, empirically, is we have a system of equations and as such we have an identification problem. If you are lucky and have good date you might partially identify the system of equations (e.g. the supply or demand function), but identifying both is the exception not the norm.

In fact, in looking at your graphs it seems to me that early on in the time series there were more instances when the quantity was above your red line, then later on not so many. So there maybe a negative supply effect here as well. Not that the demand curve shifting outward and the supply curve shifting inward simultaneously would have reinforcing effects on the price and an ambiguous effect on the quantity.

[Octoven]

Yet when looking before and after the split you can at least agree volumes have been below the red line a lot more often than before the split. Which does at least say something about splitting the PLEX up…less are buying be it high prices or the fact it’s split itself who knows but since prices spiked very high after the split one would assume the increased lower volume occurrences observed after the split would be because of price in at least a large cause of.

[Teckos_Pech]

@Octoven

Yet when looking before and after the split you can at least agree volumes have been below the red line a lot more often than before the split. Which does at least say something about splitting the PLEX up…less are buying be it high prices or the fact it’s split itself who knows but since prices spiked very high after the split one would assume the increased lower volume occurrences observed after the split would be because of price in at least a large cause of.

You are interpreting these things through your own personal views. What is really going on is open to considerable conjecture.

This reminds me of my work. I’ll be asked to answer question X. I’ll come back with the answer then various managers will ask, “Why?” I’ll respond, “I don’t know.” They’ll looked vexed. I’ll then patiently explain that in answering X the analysis was not designed to answer Y. In fact, I’ll continue, we really do not have the data to do Y. Or if we do happen to have some data it would necessitate an entirely different type of analysis and there is no assurances that we can get such an answer (e.g. the identification problem). Worst case scenario the answer is not fitting with their a priori beliefs and so they get vexed even further. Once it took awhile to get various “powers that be” that a null result was not bad. That while they were hoping for a negative result, at least it is not positive and that the argument of the counter parties can indeed be countered with a null result.

We have no evidence that CCP wants PLEX prices to be higher. Yes, a higher PLEX price in game may very well mean more people will buy them OOG to sell on the market for ISK, but at the same time a higher IG price means fewer people will want to buy at the higher prices. Further, the opportunity cost of using PLEX for things other than ISK increases as the ISK price of PLEX increases.

I have yet to see a credible narrative of why let alone the how of driving up PLEX prices makes any real sense.

Now, people whining about high PLEX prices getting a price cap in terms of ISK for PLEX…that totally makes sense to me. I would totally love to get such a wealth transfer myself. When you are the recipient of a wealth transfer it is awesome.

[yellow_parasol]

@Teckos_Pech

Where exactly are you going to use it?

• on a ship
• in my hangar, as reserve for when the price goes up

that’s not really the question i had in mind, but that’s my fault. i only ever bought one skin, for 800k (?), and it’s a 30 day skin.

questions i hoped i’ll get asked…

• why do you think it matters how the money is accounted for?

well, because different things have differenf costs. a plex bpught for a sub is mostly wasted, while a plex for a skin is mostly profit.

• why would you even care to differentiate?

because details matter. accounting is bitchy. i’d try to get most people to pay the sub with real money, to put the effect of isk-subscriptions on the plex price to a minimum. that makes the price of plex easier to control, too. less people wasting plex on subs is good, more people wasting plex on skins is better.

all this started, because one guy thought it’s smart to engage in a useless discussion about my observation. the observation is that CCP apparently wants less people to sub via isk. that’s all there is to it. it’s undeniable, for everyone to see, and they aren’t going to turn that around. Ever. anyone who can’t afford the money-sub, can play as alpha. so all those who can’t afford the isk-sub either still can play as alpha.

it’s a good way of getting rid of all those who aim to never pay at all, who feel entitled to playing despite not wantingto support the company directly. in today’s time, the old saying that it doesn’t matter who buys the plex, is irrelevant. the more people put money into the system, the better. then we have 100% people who pay, instead of 50% who pay and support the other. (as example).

realizing that this conversation started only, because some guy couldn’t wrap his head around my observation, makes me feel like this is a waste of time now. vOv

[JC_Mieyli]

@yellow_parasol

a plex bpught for a sub is mostly wasted

bought on which market
cash or isk

@yellow_parasol

that makes the price of plex easier to control, too. less people wasting plex on subs is good, more people wasting plex on skins is better.

im not sure that would have the result you are expecting
im quite certain it would be worse not better

@yellow_parasol

the observation is that CCP apparently wants less people to sub via isk. that’s all there is to it. it’s undeniable, for everyone to see

im not convinced it seems more like youve come to this conclusion on your own
if anything id say ccp are trying to encourage any kind of sub whether its plex or cash
or even alpha

@yellow_parasol

it’s a good way of getting rid of all those who aim to never pay at all

why would they want to
the only reason would be to downgrade the servers which makes no sense at all
the hardware is paid for already and the alpha clone program contradicts this concept
downgrading means they dont have the server capacity to take on new subs so im really not convinced they are trying to do this

@yellow_parasol

the more people put money into the system, the better.

but if there are less people playing there are less people to put money into the system
if people arent subbing with plex who will the whales sell their plex to
no more plex subs means no more whales spending $1000+ p/m on plex
youre assuming ccp can support their entire business model based on people buying plex to feed their skin addictions
well players dont have skin addictions and that market is easily saturated
the monthly sub is far easier to exploit and has much lower saturation because it needs to be refreshed every month

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Octoven

but I suspect there is some market shenanigans going on here too.

I agree with this and the rest of your analysis.

Player PLEX manipulation is real, organised and concerted.

Not only because the market is behaving irrationally, periodically, but also because of the sheer raw fact that EVE has some of the most conniving, clever and subversive players of any game in history.

Anyone that claims PLEX market is not deliberately manipulated has clearly completely misunderstood the nature of EVE. It is in all cases completely rational to expect that in EVE, absolutely everything is manipulated by players. This is an axiom which defines EVE itself.