this is the time when you buy a couple 500$ packs and reek in the rewards of plex being high 
Either you do not understand what ad hominem means or you are adopting it, never mind, moving beyond that attempted distraction.
The game of musical chairs being played with plex is the reason the price is as high as it is, pure and simple, buy and sell, buy and sell with each turn of the game driving the price up. The volume actually bought to exchange for services and gametime has crashed to a level where it can almost be called trivial.
A brokerage tax means that there is a cost to play that game, a cost to buy and sell and buy and sell. It would have NO impact on those buying to use, and a great impact on the market game Players, to the point where they would move onto something else and let Plex
be something that is actually used.
Yes you know this, which is why you hate and try to denigrate the idea.
In the immortal words of Mandy rice davis, â you would say that, wouldnât you?â
PS Regarding the mention of Plexcoin, are you really so incapable of discerning obvious sarcasm you need it pointed out to you? Do you need pictures?
2 Likes
They could even introduce dynamic pricing. First step that they would have to do was already made. Splitting PLEX into smaller pieces. It can now serve as EVE premium currency now.
Its about mobile games here, but it can be applied to every game.
okay well your gonna needs some figures to back up your claims
You are using a type of ad hominem known as poisoning the well. When you argue that anyone who speculates in the PLEX market are automatically posting self-serving arguments.
Markets do not work that way. Further, it is unlikely that this is what is going on in the PLEX market. The PLEX market actually shows extended periods of price stability. The volatility in the PLEX market is not that extreme and if anything speculators help dampen it down.
You cannot tell who is going to buy and hold and who is going to buy and use at the time of purchase. And you do know that even if you could figure out a way for this to work, that tax would simply increase the price and reduce the number of PLEX available on the market.
Also you might want to spend some time learning about tax incidence. There is a difference between who the tax is legally levied upon and who actually bears it.
In economics, tax incidence or tax burden is the analysis of the effect of a particular tax on the distribution of economic welfare. The introduction of a tax drives a wedge between the price consumers pay and the price producers receive for a product, which typically imposes an economic burden on both producers and consumers.
In other words you want to punish both those who buy and sell PLEX in gameâŚwhy do you want to do that?
In short, you are just simply wrong.
No, it is because you have clearly demonstrated an appalling lack of understanding of economics.
Thank you for proving my point about you using an ad hominem.
Given your stunning level of ignorance regarding economics it makes it rather hard to spot sarcasm from just plain vanilla ignorance.
1 Like
You know, Iâll think Iâll block you for peace of mind.
Of course you have a position to maintain, but you really make it personal for anyone who points out the obvious.
A blind, dumb, rock with a lobotomy could easily see that the market is entirely speculation driven, but when looking at the order depth and the VAST differential between buy orders and sell orders, clearly in your claims that somehow indicates a healthy market. Fees are not just Taxes as a means of raising income you Know, Taxes also in some cases are designed, and used to modify behaviour, and put a cost onto abusive behaviours, thereby discouraging them. A small tax on a single transaction does not significantly modify behaviour, a Tax or fee on repetitive behaviours, makes them an impractical and unprofitable option to continue with. In this case your statement is patently incorrect, you should have listened to your High school teacher, and listened to the whole lesson? Please donât pass yourself as someone with a deep economic understanding, and criticise those who actually have a long career in actually do it for a living.
Amateur experts do not have the answers, they simply parrot poorly understood concepts. It shows.
I wonât tell you my economic qualifications, and experience of the financial markets and the regulation required to keep them healthy, because you will attempt to make something out of it, but I can guarantee that If you actually knew, you would look to be one of the most foolish people ever to make an assumptive statement. But hey ho, you didnât expect to be called out.
I somehow doubt you would care either way as long as you can continue to be able to exploit the lack of market management. But a few poorly understood high school economic lessons sound SO impressive donât they?
Good luck with your speculative ventures, just remember that it is nice to have players in the game to encounter, and it is a shame to get rid of them all for a few virtual dollars.
very impressive but you havent offered any actual argument
all youve done is say how amazing you are but not proved anything
Not trying to, there is no point arguing with such a position, based on either disinformation, and/or ignorance, I put the position before he tried to drown it out. That still stands.
A brokerage fee on Plex Purchases, will modify speculative behaviour by adding a cost to do so, it is no coincidence that it went ballistic, once zero cost citadels for purchase orders appeared.
1 Like
how long did it go ballistic for and to what degree
seems more like it stabilised after a week or two
because its not going ballistic anymore is it
so why would it be any different when you add tax
all that happens is the market stabilises with increased cost to the buyer and the seller
makes it harder to sell plex
discourages people purchasing plex from ccp
lowers the volume of plex on the market
and yet the old players who have plex hoarded still didnt pay any tax
and have a much drier market to saturate
so it seems to me more like you are the one trying to exploit the market here
Never not exploit the market. 
2 Likes
nope, thatâs just isk creation and loss. plex increases come from their demands, give plex more uses that the seller sees and they will increase, after all if you can get 1.5b for $20 compared to the used too 300m for 20$ which one would you take?
Ballistic? Holy crapâŚ
PLEX have had periods of sharp price increases, but they tend not to last longâi.e. after a certain point the price collapses. Even right now we are in a period of modest price growth. And prior to that price stability.
And why do these sharp price increases usually die out? Speculators. A guy who bought PLEX either as a long term investment or early on in the price run up, then dumps their stock of PLEX at the high price stopping the increase and even lowering the price.
Most people do not grasp what is going on with speculation, they often use it to mean manipulation. Further @Alderson_Point and his idea are foolish because, yes I have bought alot of PLEX. I did so because I anticipate the price rising and this way I can use the PLEX to either:
- PLEX my account, or
- Use my stock of PLEX for speculation purposes.
In the latter case instead of using my PLEX all at once to PLEX my account I hold on to them and if I see a run up in the price I sell and take some profits. But Iâll also slow down the price increase and maybe even reduce the price.
Speculation tends to add liquidity to the market and bring stability. The entire fecking Chicago Mercantile Exchange is one big giant orgy of speculationâŚand it brings stability to agriculture markets which absent such speculation can be very volatile. In short, it helps ensure that there plenty of food.
Thatâs good, because from what I can tell from your posts your level of ignorance regarding economics is massively stunning. 
1 Like
I recently heard that undergraduate degree economic books are not correct, and from there up only a part of these books is ok. Well, these books are not holy books, so everyone can be wrong if you ask me. If they would be holy, then they would be wrong for sure.
Depends on which book you read. 
For example, most economics text books focus on equilibrium. But what would we find in, say, the grocery store in equilibrium? Nothing. The shelves would be empty. Supply exactly equals demand.
So, since we walk into grocery stores all the time and see that there is stuff on the shelvesâŚwe are not in equilibrium. It is the out-of-equilibrium aspects of the process that are so fascinating.
Another problem is knowledge. Most of the knowledge utilized in an economic process is dispersed across the actors in that process. And much of it may not be articulable. For example, I bet nobody knows what they are going to have for dinner next Wednesday. But somehow when they do decide the stuff they want to have for dinner will most likely be available.
You wonât get much about this kind of stuff in a textbook either these days.
1 Like
well you know nothing Tecko_pech. try the real world, before judging those that have actually done it.
I remember being in a pub where two digger drivers were discussing that the pilot of a vulcan bomber was wrong, the runway was long enough, they could get it in the air!
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. And someone who doesnât know it is far more dangerous, you sound like some of the âpoliticiansâ I used to have to enlighten about the real world, and not the Rubbish they learned in their youth, They thought they had all the answers, They soon learn otherwiseâŚ
I got paid for that, you will have to learn some other way.
1 Like
lol this guy
1 Like
This should be entertaining.
2 Likes
Do you have anything else besides vague references to something unrated and simple assertions you are correct?
Taxes, irrespective of whether the buyer or seller is legally obligated to pay, raises the price of the taxed good and decreases how much of it is available. So your proposal would make PLEX more expensive not less.
Look at a sales tax. In most states in the U.S. there is a sales tax. In California, where I live, it is 7.25%. So if I go buy something subject to the sales tax that has a price of $100 how much do I really pay? I pay $107.25. Now, is all of the tax burden borne by consumers? In most cases now. The tax will affect both the buyer and the seller.
Further, how exactly would people who buy then use PLEX not be taxed? I contend you cannot do it. They have to pay the tax no matter what. Now maybe they can get a ârebateâ once they use the PLEX, but still the bottom line is that people buying PLEX, all people, will pay that tax.
So exactly how do you envision this reducing PLEX prices when it will do precisely the opposite?
And exactly what is wrong with my explanation of why speculation is not bad, but good? You simply assert things with vague references that you know what you are talking aboutâŚyet you canât explain how this would work, why speculation is bad, etc.
Serious troll response right thereâŚ
So your conclusion is -
- It has to be âMost Playersâ for it to have a negative affect?
- What opportunity cost are you hinting at? (A baseless comment with absolutely no context)
"Me too, I always like to play at a discount."
You canât be serious with this little quip. It makes no sense at all.
Reducing the price of paying a subscription isnât âplaying at a discountâ, unless is it advertised as being âa specialâ. It is in fact playing at a reduced price - Which could in fact entice more people to actually play the game.
At $20 p/m (depending on exchange rates) for a sub, I would be more than happy to see plex prices come down a little.
Then again with the coming changes to Alpha clones, paying monthly subâs may not be an issue. If plexing some of my accounts stays at the level it is now - I will just start extracting some of the 1.5 bil SP I have and converting it to isk