If there were no market fees...


Another_Fan

 

Posted

How would your behavior change if there were no market fees? What would the market look like?

The most obvious difference is that we'd have one less influence sink, which would lead directly to inflation.

I think a second, more subtle result would be an increase in perceived supply. The total number of items dropped wouldn't change, but the number which are available for purchase at any given point in time would probably go up.

Right now, I think a lot of people list things for 1 inf, or for 75% of the going rate, because they are afraid of being stuck with an unsold item and having to sacrifice the listing fee if they yank the item off the market and relist it for a lower amount. As a result, a lot of people get to buy things for less than they are really worth, which results in the shelves emptying out pretty quickly.

If we didn't have any fees, I think people would experiment with listing things really high, waiting for a bit, then dropping the price. Of course, that's exactly the sort of behavior the market fee was intended to discourage, but would it really be so bad? If things were listed at too high a price and no one bought them, then at least they'd be on the market. Right now we have a lot of places where there are 0 items for sale. If someone does list an item for too much, then they could relist them lower without penalty, which would make the items more available to people.

I'm not really seeing a downside here, except for the loss of an inf sink. What if the listing fee vanished, but the sales fee became a flat 10% of the sale price? The inf sink would remain, but the artificial downward pricing pressure would vanish. Prices in some areas would go up, but so would supply. I'm happy with that trade-off.


Avatar: "Cheeky Jack O Lantern" by dimarie

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by peterpeter View Post
How would your behavior change if there were no market fees? What would the market look like?

The most obvious difference is that we'd have one less influence sink, which would lead directly to inflation.

I think a second, more subtle result would be an increase in perceived supply. The total number of items dropped wouldn't change, but the number which are available for purchase at any given point in time would probably go up.

Right now, I think a lot of people list things for 1 inf, or for 75% of the going rate, because they are afraid of being stuck with an unsold item and having to sacrifice the listing fee if they yank the item off the market and relist it for a lower amount. As a result, a lot of people get to buy things for less than they are really worth, which results in the shelves emptying out pretty quickly.

If we didn't have any fees, I think people would experiment with listing things really high, waiting for a bit, then dropping the price. Of course, that's exactly the sort of behavior the market fee was intended to discourage, but would it really be so bad? If things were listed at too high a price and no one bought them, then at least they'd be on the market. Right now we have a lot of places where there are 0 items for sale. If someone does list an item for too much, then they could relist them lower without penalty, which would make the items more available to people.

I'm not really seeing a downside here, except for the loss of an inf sink. What if the listing fee vanished, but the sales fee became a flat 10% of the sale price? The inf sink would remain, but the artificial downward pricing pressure would vanish. Prices in some areas would go up, but so would supply. I'm happy with that trade-off.

The one big problem is it would make the market manipulation mini game even more popular than it already is. With 0 transaction costs you could buy up all of something leave it up on the market at a high price, once supply starts to come back in or the market gets away from you, delist and relist at your average purchase price plus 1 inf.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Another_Fan View Post
The one big problem is it would make the market manipulation mini game even more popular than it already is. With 0 transaction costs you could buy up all of something leave it up on the market at a high price, once supply starts to come back in or the market gets away from you, delist and relist at your average purchase price plus 1 inf.

Hmmm, maybe. If I were playing that kind of game, I wouldn't relist very many items at one time anyhow. Still, that's a good point.


Avatar: "Cheeky Jack O Lantern" by dimarie

 

Posted

No listing fees would remove the risk from marketeering, and no 10% sales fees would remove one of very few influence sinks in the game. I can't see how either of them would not be a huge downside.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laevateinn View Post
No listing fees would remove the risk from marketeering, and no 10% sales fees would remove one of very few influence sinks in the game. I can't see how either of them would not be a huge downside.
Yes, but the 10% fee could be on the sale rather than half of it on the listing, which would take care of the influence sink. And there would still be a risk in marketeering of wasting your time or buying things for more than you'll be able to sell them. But it would reduce the risk, and that might be a good enough reason to keep the fee.

I still think that the listing fee distorts the market and leads to lower prices and empty shelves. Meh. I guess it's not that interesting a thought.


Avatar: "Cheeky Jack O Lantern" by dimarie

 

Posted

If you want to know what the market would be like without a listing fee, just look at EVE Online's economy, which allows you to change your bid/sales prices for either a nominal fee or no fee at all, I can't remember which. What happens is that you'll put up something for 100k, say, and ten seconds later someone else sees you're undercutting them and edits their price on the same item to 99,999.99. Another five seconds later someone else edits theirs to be 99,999.98. And so on and so forth. It's the only reason I don't consider their market completely superior to ours.

The listing fee mechanism rewards you for picking a good price and sticking to it. It forces players who cannot afford the listing fee to list at below the floor price of an item, generating lowball sales. It presents the choice of whether to relist an item that's not selling (time and market slot cost), or losing the listing fee and relisting at a price that's more likely to sell (influence cost). I think these are all good things, because they introduce risk and make market dynamics more interesting. There are far worse ways for the market to be distorted in any case.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laevateinn View Post
What happens is that you'll put up something for 100k, say, and ten seconds later someone else sees you're undercutting them and edits their price on the same item to 99,999.99. Another five seconds later someone else edits theirs to be 99,999.98. And so on and so forth. It's the only reason I don't consider their market completely superior to ours.
I agree with the frustration at those situations, but this happens with bids constantly in CoH. I'll have an 8mil bid, and when I check it a day later I'll sometimes see the recipie bought for 8,000,001. The relevant difference here is that people in Eve can see what the buying and selling prices are, rather than just the transaction history, making it significantly more common. Listing fees aren't the only thing mitigating this chicanery. That, and I'd say money is more important in Eve, so there's more incentive there than we will ever see
here.

I'd rather get rid of the listing fees and implement spay and neuter laws on the "+1" bidders, even though I realize that's a somewhat difficult solution.

I think Eve's economy is the most fascinating aspect of that game, and while it simply would not make sense in CoH —as if Wentworth's does— I would hope that Eve's market is an example of something done right.


 

Posted

Market fees are just a cost of doing business. Just view them as a challenge you must overcome.


 

Posted

I would destroy more inf.(Not doing at Fulmens levels but i try to contribute)


 

Posted

I think the market system in CoX needs a major overhaul no matter how you look at it.
but there are also a fair amount of players that are trying to alter prices some realize it some don't. like the 308 people that are bidding on lvl 50 Acc IOs but they are bidding less than 100,000inf well sorry to say when i make extras of that enhancement I NEVER sell it for less than 400,000 mostly because it cost more than that to make the things in the first place and that is the cost without even talking about salvage or the cost of the recipe (if it is not already memorized) now personally i think that the cost of enhancements that you have memorized is WAY WAY WAY too high. and that is also something that needs to be reworked in this game, not to mention that we still have to pay to add a base item that we either Built ourselves or earned by some other means. I mean why should i have to pay Inf. to place an item in my base when i already built the item in my base... just my $0.04


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hott_Head View Post
I think the market system in CoX needs a major overhaul no matter how you look at it.
but there are also a fair amount of players that are trying to alter prices some realize it some don't. like the 308 people that are bidding on lvl 50 Acc IOs but they are bidding less than 100,000inf well sorry to say when i make extras of that enhancement I NEVER sell it for less than 400,000 mostly because it cost more than that to make the things in the first place and that is the cost without even talking about salvage or the cost of the recipe (if it is not already memorized) now personally i think that the cost of enhancements that you have memorized is WAY WAY WAY too high. and that is also something that needs to be reworked in this game, not to mention that we still have to pay to add a base item that we either Built ourselves or earned by some other means. I mean why should i have to pay Inf. to place an item in my base when i already built the item in my base... just my $0.04
Much truth in here. I think the best way the devs could overhaul the market is to put price caps in for the high end stuff. Can we agree on 40 million as the most any IO should cost on the official market?

RagManX


"if the market were religion Fulmens would be Moses and you'd be L. Ron Hubbard. " --Nethergoat to eryq2

The economy is not broken. The players are

 

Posted

No, we can't. Price caps are a bad idea.

Wait, what do you mean by the "official market"? Do you mean Wentworths? Because prices at WW are set by the PLAYERS so it doesn't seem like an 'official' market.


Paragon City Search And Rescue
The Mentor Project

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by RagManX View Post
Much truth in here. I think the best way the devs could overhaul the market is to put price caps in for the high end stuff. Can we agree on 40 million as the most any IO should cost on the official market?

RagManX
Don't be absurd. The price cap should obviously be set by the NPC's. They know best. 250 for common salvage, 1000 for uncommon, 5k for rare. And set recipe prices should be roughly the same as the table cost for regular recipes. If something does acc/dam, then the price should be the average of the prices for an ACC and a DAM common IO recipe.

Problem solved.

As for my OP, it doesn't look like anyone considers the effect a listing fee has on supply to be a problem, and the deterrent effect on markeeting is probably a good thing.


Avatar: "Cheeky Jack O Lantern" by dimarie