Some folks have an echo chamber in front of their eyes, and some have an echo chamber behind their eyes.
Then you can’t associate the nyx with the price of the ticket. That is a scam.
And no, people can’t “get” a nyx for 200M on hypernet. They can “gamble it”, which is a very important difference.
That’s wrong. The hypernet has taxes which makes it a negative sum game.
Funny that you make such a basic mistake then proceed on victim blaming.
1 Like
And they think they smart on top of that 
I just realised, Stefnia is Anderson.
This explains so much. One more to add to the ignore bin.
1 Like
Someone who’s more familiar can correct me if I’m wrong (I was not interested in wasting my money on hypernet offers to be all that experienced in how it operates), but near as I can tell taxes are only levied on the seller, who pays 5% of the total ticket revenue, plus the hypercores they spend to start the raffle in the first place, and even if tickets are taxed, a person can add that tax to the ticket cost and use that figure against the basis of the item price multiplied by the odds of winning.
I see a lot of fist shaking and tongue in cheek insinuations that I am wrong without any specific illustrations of where my description of the actual procedure is not congruent with the way things work.
It is hard for me to imagine a reasonable person looking at those hypernet screens as they go through the process of buying tickets and believing they are buying the item itself and not a ticket for a chance to win that item. The Hypernet looks pretty clearly like the gambling den that it is to me.
3 Likes
Aren’t the taxes only for the person setting up the hypernet offer?
I don’t think the participants have to pay taxes, but I could be wrong about that; I haven’t bought any nodes in ages.
If there are no taxes for the buyer, only for the seller, then what Qia said is correct from the buyer’s perspective:
Anderson, now that’s a name I haven’t seen in ages!
I don’t think they’re the same person though. Even though I’ve clashed arguments with both, I don’t think Anderson would ever call basic arithmetic too hard or deceiving.
I did an eve-who check, the chance that it’s not Anderson is extremely low.
1 Like
You’re right.
1 Like
Is that logic I see?!
1 Like
As someone who regularly posts valuable ships on the hypernet I would like to weigh in;
Firstly hypernetting is not a scam as the only nefarious thing that someone can do is buy a large amount of nodes. The more nodes you purchase the more isk you stand to lose if you do not win your ship back. It is still very possible to lose the ship regardless of how many nodes you have purchased on your own offer. I have lost titans to a single node on multiple occasions.
Secondly large offers rarely finish if you do not purchase a sizeable quantity of your own nodes and even then there is generally a lot of work that goes into having an offer complete via advertising, mailing etc…
Thirdly the hypernet gives people the opportunity to win items that would otherwise be completely out of reach. Are the odds against them? Generally yes, unless you are purchasing large quantities of nodes or have some peculiarly large amount of good fortune. It is also rare that many players would ever be able to afford a 50-200B ship.
In conclusion is it right or wrong? It’s neither, but I do suggest people to gamble within their means and in ways that will not harm them. In short be responsible. Eve is not a very safe place and the hypernet is risk that you are entirely responsible for taking. If you lose that is on you. If you win you get a taste of magic. You decide.
Best,
CD II
6 Likes
It’s fair to say anyone who is playing Eve generally has some free time, at least enough to use a calculator. Perhaps you are trolling. There are hypernetters who send mails stating “get a 150m super” but that has nothing to do with the hypernet and everything to do with that individual. It’s called false advertising. The hypernet is a raffle and it’s very easy to figure out how much you are paying and roughly what your odds of winning are.
1 Like
Anderson has this hangup about sticking to fixed and limited definitions of words and phrases, none of which makes sense in actual use, to then argue for 5 pages about it.
1 Like
As long as the selection is genuinely random then that is not a scam at all. The guy setting up the hypernet has a 50% chance of losing his Nyx and the ISK for the tickets he paid for. So…he can potentially win more than the cost of the Nyx, but he can also potentially lose more than that cost. There’s actually a 50% chance of him losing 3 times what he might win…effectively everything.
For the other players, it is simply a gamble in which they have to decide whether the portion of the average cost of a Nyx that they are gambling is ‘worth it’ relative to the odds. Obviously if you were gambling 1/4 of the cost of a Nyx but only had a 1/10 chance of winning that also would not be a scam but would should a distinct lack of understanding of odds and risk if you took it.
Buying the tickets for your own raffles is a net loss, statistically.
- All tickets are of equal value.
- Given 1, if it is advantageous for a seller to buy 1 of their own tickets, it is advantageous for them to buy all their own tickets.
Intuitively, I think we all know that it would be ridiculous for the seller to buy all their own tickets, but somehow the belief that the tickets the seller buys themselves are worth more than the tickets sold to others stubbornly persists in spite of that intuition.
Buying half of the hypercores (or any other fraction, but half makes for easy math) is statistically bad for the seller. Yes, the seller who buys half their own tickets could, on average, run their raffle twice before losing their raffled item, but that just doubles the costs (2 auctions with two hypercore fees and two 5% tax assessments instead of one) while earning the same revenue (the half auction’s worth of tickets you sold to others two times equals one auction’s worth of ticket revenue total).
It makes sense to buy your own tickets if otherwise your raffle would be cancelled to avoid losing hypercores with nothing to show for the expense. Other reasons exist to buy one’s own tickets for the purposes of marketing, but those are human elements outside the scope of my point that it is mathematically optimal to sell all your tickets to other people if you can, all else being equal.
2 Likes
A scheme that is designed and implemented with a guaranteed ‘House Wins’ result is, in fact, a scam.
LOL!
Sure, the ONE who wins each item comes out on top, but the rest are out 100%. It’s simply about the volume of entrants. Even the person who put up the item lost ISK to the system via Cores that must be purchased… that’s a haircut off the top.
So the winner and the seller both come out ahead (could even be the same person), but not by much.
It’s SomerBlink-Light.
That’s a whole other can of wormholes I could go into about how it was literally impossible for the entirety of the Eve playerbase to produce what was given out on SB and therefore could only have been sustained via hangar drops by devs… but we won’t go there. 
I know a guy approaching 20k Hypernets on his two main toons with monthly revenue hovering around 1t per month… Id have to say thats a success for EvE and HyperNet because thousands of people enjoy it. I also have to say that there is an EXTREME amount of hatred for HyperNet and its mostly justified. The two main reasons are insane markups used by the majority of Hypernetters and the amount of spam generated from the worse of those offenders. Overall, I think that if you can provide better prices… then you should and stop crying about it. I think its a great addition to EvE.
CCP is in the business of catering to nullsec and should be doing what they can to be neutral, eliminate monopolies, and create competition.
Edited for snowflake approval.
1 Like
Hypernet is gambling available to kids also.
4 Likes