Itsuki Koizumi Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Is it me or has Standard Price increased from 3mil/100tech to 3mil/50 tech? From the looks of that pic which is pretty recent, it seems majority of sellers are going for the 3mil/50 tech price now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Coleman Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Yeah people got real greedy. I remember when it was 3mil/100tech still and when donation were about 12-15mil. Now there like 24 mil and some extra tech. Tis, Tis, Greedy People Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova Blue Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Just using 1st glance...it could be a half now/half later type thing...where the person get $3Mill now, sends 50Tech...and send 50Tech later. Could be totally wrong here, and it could be a Seller's Market, but my 1st thinking is what I see. --Mags Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Count Rupert Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 (edited) Yeah people got real greedy. I remember when it was 3mil/100tech still and when donation were about 12-15mil. Now there like 24 mil and some extra tech. Tis, Tis, Greedy People It's interesting that the sellers are the ones considered the greedy ones when in fact if anyone is being greedy it's the buyers. The buyers have a built in advantage. Prices are held down due to the limitations posed by aid slots. If there were no restrictions placed on aid transactions, prices for both tech and donations would be higher since at almost any of the current prices tech and donations are bargains. I can buy 50 tech for $3 million when it would cost my nation $63 million to buy the same 50 tech itself. That means I buy at just under 5% of my cost. Even at $3 million for 50 tech it is one of the best bargains going. Sure it would be nice to still get 100 tech. It'd be nice to still get the 150 tech for $3 million I remember paying too. The problem is as the game has matured the ratio of sellers to buyers has been dropping. Sellers don't sell as long as they used to as they have more profits and with alliance banker pushes and the like many new nations don't even have to sell tech at all. The number of new nations joining is down over what it has been in years past. Meaning the overall average NS has been creeping leaving more and more buyers chasing fewer and fewer sellers. It's only natural for prices to rise in the face of such conditions to tempt those who wouldn't otherwise sell. That's beside the point that it's the buyers who have traditionally pushed the price upwards, not the sellers. As buyers find it harder and harder to find sellers at old price points some buyers start to offer a higher price in the hopes of securing deals. As more and more offer the new price, it soon reaches critical mass and the new price becomes the market price and the process starts all over. I was a big seller of donations and I remember the price runup from $3 million up to $15 million. That runup was entirely fueled by the buyers. As the number of buyers exceeded the supply, it meant some buyers used to getting donation every month found themselves not getting one. This resulted in many of them upping the price they were willing to pay to ensure they got one. It's all numbers, as long as demand exceeds supply the price will rise. You want to go back to where the price was; find a couple thousand new nations. Edited January 5, 2010 by Count Rupert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Hendrix Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 It's interesting that the sellers are the ones considered the greedy ones when in fact if anyone is being greedy it's the buyers. The buyers have a built in advantage. Prices are held down due to the limitations posed by aid slots. If there were no restrictions placed on aid transactions, prices for both tech and donations would be higher since at almost any of the current prices tech and donations are bargains. I can buy 50 tech for $3 million when it would cost my nation $63 million to buy the same 50 tech itself. That means I buy at just under 5% of my cost. Even at $3 million for 50 tech it is one of the best bargains going. Sure it would be nice to still get 100 tech. It'd be nice to still get the 150 tech for $3 million I remember paying too. The problem is as the game has matured the ratio of sellers to buyers has been dropping. Sellers don't sell as long as they used to as they have more profits and with alliance banker pushes and the like many new nations don't even have to sell tech at all. The number of new nations joining is down over what it has been in years past. Meaning the overall average NS has been creeping leaving more and more buyers chasing fewer and fewer sellers. It's only natural for prices to rise in the face of such conditions to tempt those who wouldn't otherwise sell. That's beside the point that it's the buyers who have traditionally pushed the price upwards, not the sellers. As buyers find it harder and harder to find sellers at old price points some buyers start to offer a higher price in the hopes of securing deals. As more and more offer the new price, it soon reaches critical mass and the new price becomes the market price and the process starts all over. I was a big seller of donations and I remember the price runup from $3 million up to $15 million. That runup was entirely fueled by the buyers. As the number of buyers exceeded the supply, it meant some buyers used to getting donation every month found themselves not getting one. This resulted in many of them upping the price they were willing to pay to ensure they got one. It's all numbers, as long as demand exceeds supply the price will rise. You want to go back to where the price was; find a couple thousand new nations. I have many nations that are smaller than my own with 5x the tech. The $3m/50 has kept me a seller. I find it supports mid-strength nations better like myself. I used to make about 50% profit under the $3m/100, but now I'm making 75%. That's about $2.25m that I can put forth to my warchest or an economic wonder. I think the market would die out in a $3m/100 or even a $3m/150 marketplace. What does concern me however, is that since I started playing a year ago, the number of nations has dropped at an alarming rate. I'm afraid what buying tech will look like for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleepiB Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Large nations aren't exactly greedy, they value their aid slots far far more than the cash that occupies them. I wouldn't flinch at paying 6m per 100 tech if the aid slot capacity was increased. Many if not most of the large nations grew up selling tech for 3m/150 or 3m/100. Tech buying is a race of sorts, and if you don't use your aid slots to full effect you fall behind. People are growing faster too, which means they spend far less time selling tech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Grist Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 (edited) I only pay 3 million if its for 100 tech, personally I think if your going to give 3 million for 50 tech, you might aswell just aid them with 3 million. Your not getting your money's worth. Thats my opinion, though. I remember ages ago when It was 3 million/150 tech. I think 3 million for 50 tech is a bit pointless for big nations, expecially if that nation your doing the deal with is not in your alliance, maybe an exception is in place if that nation is new to the game and apart of your alliance. Plus if I want to keep up to date with my tech buying, then 50 tech deals arent really going to help. It's a bit of a "In my day" scenario with me Edited January 5, 2010 by Jack Grist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurunin Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 I think 3 million for 50 tech is a bit pointless for big nations, expecially if that nation your doing the deal with is not in your alliance, maybe an exception is in place if that nation is new to the game and apart of your alliance. have to say i agree with this...if you doing a $3mil/50 tech with a new nation in your alliance that sounds fine...but with other nations sounds like a bit of a ripoff to me... i've been selling tech for 6 months now, all $3mil/100...i've yet to have one problem...if anything these kinds of deals help build trust between a seller and buyer to have repeat deals Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Philip Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 I think the price is rising, and sellers are willing to ask for 3m for 50 tech. It's a good move as I see it, gives the seller a better profit for what can be quite a effort, and give them a greater economic advantage over the piles of people who don't but really should. As I see it it's a merit selling tech and sellers deserve a good advantage for it and the money encourages them to remain engaged with the game which is pretty slow when you're new and got little cash. I started offering 2mil/50 about 8 months ago, the only thing being I asked for the tech up front, this weeded out the scam artists and the not very smart as well as securing as many deals as I wanted. Now I'm offering 3mil for 50 up front and if anyone wants a slot then just offer up 50 tech to me; http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_d...Nation_ID=73994 There's a disadvantage to the rising price though for growing middle nations because older nations like mine have grown on 3mil/100 deals, maybe even 3mil/150 and we'll be even harder to reach in the rankings. Oh dear, what a pity, never mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Da Ville Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 I agree with Count Rupert, it's supply and demand. It's still a win/win situation for buyer and seller. The $3mil/50tech also encourages sellers to stay in 'business' longer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Coleman Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 I only pay 3 million if its for 100 tech, personally I think if your going to give 3 million for 50 tech, you might aswell just aid them with 3 million. Your not getting your money's worth. Thats my opinion, though. Thank you, Finally someone understands me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfsPride Posted January 6, 2010 Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 IMO outside of the alliance, it should remain 3/100. In house deals should be 3/50 for growth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Count Rupert Posted January 6, 2010 Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 Thank you, Finally someone understands me. Well, you're always free to buy the tech yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sande Posted January 6, 2010 Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 The way I see it: We should have 3 mil for 100 tech as a minimum price for tech. Even 3 mil for 150 tech would be OK for all I care. CN has a lot of large nations who want tech deals and only a few nations that would actually sell tech. If we aid these precious sellers up to the point where they have to buy tech themselves, we just cause more problems for our own tech buying chances. So, doing 3 mil for 100 tech deals seems more beneficial for your alliance because the small nations will stay small longer and you get a lot more tech that would help you fight in a war. There is absolutely no use of large nations that do not have any tech. Do not grow your small nations too big just so they could stop tech dealing with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viluin Posted January 6, 2010 Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 (edited) If I'm paying $3m/50 I demand they are at least somewhat on time with their deliveries. With the quality of the average tech seller nowadays, I'm not willing to pay most of them that kind of money for a lousy service. I still don't quite understand it, I'm sure most people have homes with computers, so you'll find it hard to convince me that you can't log in at all on a certain day. And not just once, but with every delivery. If you have time to eat, sleep, and do other stuff then you have time to log into CN for 3 minutes. People are just lazy, really. I'd never pay $3m/50 unless the seller has proven himself to be reliable first. Edited January 6, 2010 by Viluin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamcoltra Posted January 6, 2010 Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 lol I am laughing at the posts of "I remember when it was 3M for 100 tech" because back in the beginning it was 3M per 50tech... and we used middle men... remember that? I also remember when donations were $20:9M and when it went to 15, and then back down again. Our economy is like every other economy, it goes up with demand, down with supply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariobro Posted January 6, 2010 Report Share Posted January 6, 2010 when i started 3m/150 and some people even willing to do donations from anywhere from 3-12 million. just because the RL economy is bad, it seems like its effected the Cyberverse as well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin32891 Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 when i started 3m/150 and some people even willing to do donations from anywhere from 3-12 million. just because the RL economy is bad, it seems like its effected the Cyberverse as well... I remember this. Ahh the good old days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trace Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 (edited) Lol I remember when Donations used to go for under 3M. You could find 1M or 1.5M rather easily. 3M/150 tech really wasn't all that popular, although gramlins did it as an alliance which made it well known, but not many folks actually sold it for that price. Them's the effects of a game that's been running at least 3 years longer than it should have. Edited January 7, 2010 by Trace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asawyer Posted January 7, 2010 Report Share Posted January 7, 2010 As Count Rupert points out, you're still getting tech at a fraction of the cost it would take to buy directly. You can complain that your predecessors got to buy it at a cheaper rate, but there's nothing unfair about the price going up. At $3 million for 50 tech, tech deals can remain profitable even above 5000 infrastructure. Military requirements aside, this allows people to sell tech much longer. Plus long term sellers end up being more reliable, so everybody wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grandeza Posted January 8, 2010 Report Share Posted January 8, 2010 (edited) to all those saying us sellers are greedy for a changing economy Q.Q moar Edited January 8, 2010 by grandeza Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larpo09 Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 I don't see the point of older nations wanting to have 100tech/3mil deals or 150tech/3mil. It slows down the a new nation's potential growth, which most of the time are the tech sellers. There's a real chance that the new players of CN might be disinterested because of the slowness in the game and be inactive, which will eventually be a loss for buyers of tech because it will be one less tech seller in Planet Bob. If older and larger nations collects tens of millions or hundreds of millions from taxes alone, why not let smaller nations grow faster, for a very low cost from their nations. With a faster growth rate, new players will be more interested to build up their nations, which will eventually lead them to be active in the bigger gameplay of CN (i.e. politics, wars, alliance relations etc.). Someone might argue that if new nations build up faster and suddenly becomes a new tech buyer, it will also be a loss for all of the tech buyers. That might be true, but it will make the gameplay of CN more interesting. Because in a scenario where only a very few nations are tech selling, and a big percentage of Planet Bob are hungry for tech, well the cheapest way to get tech is tech raiding or doing more wars, which will make this game a whole lot more interesting...more interesting than the era we are now in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronicMaster Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 That's not politics that's business. If there are buyers giving 3M/50, sellers would be stupid to sell 3M/100. The equation is as simple as it is easy. Cry for the old times as long as you want to. If you insist on your 3M/100 deals and find your slots to be open all the time, truth is revealed. I don't have any reasons to slow my economy down, do you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golan 1st Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 I don't see the point of older nations wanting to have 100tech/3mil deals or 150tech/3mil. It slows down the a new nation's potential growth, which most of the time are the tech sellers. There's a real chance that the new players of CN might be disinterested because of the slowness in the game and be inactive, which will eventually be a loss for buyers of tech because it will be one less tech seller in Planet Bob. If older and larger nations collects tens of millions or hundreds of millions from taxes alone, why not let smaller nations grow faster, for a very low cost from their nations. With a faster growth rate, new players will be more interested to build up their nations, which will eventually lead them to be active in the bigger gameplay of CN (i.e. politics, wars, alliance relations etc.). Someone might argue that if new nations build up faster and suddenly becomes a new tech buyer, it will also be a loss for all of the tech buyers. That might be true, but it will make the gameplay of CN more interesting. Because in a scenario where only a very few nations are tech selling, and a big percentage of Planet Bob are hungry for tech, well the cheapest way to get tech is tech raiding or doing more wars, which will make this game a whole lot more interesting...more interesting than the era we are now in. Again, the problem of big nations is not the price, but the efficiency of aid slots, as explained well in this post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sande Posted January 9, 2010 Report Share Posted January 9, 2010 And another problem as I stated before is that if we aid these active small nations up too fast we will not have any more tech sellers. Actually, there will be almost no tech deals since so many new nations are added and there are so many oldies that want tech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.