Maggre
(?)Community Member
Friendly Bear
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:04:20 +0000
Pie
Maggre
I believe that my proposal will actually INCREASE the value of 1 g by keeping prices down, and I think that gcash is a separate issue. I think that there is no conversion from gold to gcash. Moreover, my proposal is not to make prices steady, it is to make them ANCHORED around one price, but everything maintain flexibility.
This is how I see it; People will continue to buy or not buy items from the cash shop. Spending their own money to give to Gaia. But that is where the real money transactions stop, real money has nothing to do with the market place.
This is how I see it; People will continue to buy or not buy items from the cash shop. Spending their own money to give to Gaia. But that is where the real money transactions stop, real money has nothing to do with the market place.
I apologize if this next part is rude, but I can't think of a more polite way to say it:
The marketplace does not exist in a vacuum.
It never has -- even back when the only Cash items were MCs, those were the backbone of the marketplace. They were what investors would stock for future gains, they were what traders would buy low and sell high.
Gold items, for the most part, are technically unlimited in supply; game items are only limited by frequency; event items were the only ones truly limited in supply but had a much larger supply since they were free and could be gathered with mules. And now event items are being rereleased, so they have even less investing value than before, meaning even less buying and selling of these 'collectibles'.
Meanwhile, the vast majority of all new items are Cash items, and more and more of these are LQIs. And how many of them are bought -- and thus, how many end up popping into existence -- is heavily influenced by their price. I am much more likely to buy an item I'm so-so on for 50 GCash than an item I adore for 5000 GCash.
And now, as of last year, the largest source of Gold on the site is also from GCash. GCash is, for better or worse, what makes the Marketplace go 'round.
And that's just looking inside the marketplace. The more important thing is that this is a real site being run by real people who have a real interest in making real money to buy real food to put on their real tables. And who would have to pay that real money to real developers to write real code to build this new marketplace. Your system might all work out nicely on paper, but if you're going to translate it to an actual project, you need to consider how it fits into the grand scheme of things -- including the fact that these people exist, and they might have motives that run counter to your goal. Mostly that they want to sell more GCash, and they'll gladly destroy the Gold market to do it.
If you're going to suggest such a radical overhaul of the system -- and speaking as a non-Gaia programmer, yes, I would call your plan a very radical overhaul -- you absolutely cannot disregard external influences. Everything is a piece of a greater system.
(This is an article I found recently that has some interesting insight on the subject of distrusting anything involving real people. Granted, it talks about this stuff more from a programmer's perspective, but... well, we're on a website, so it very much applies. Specifically this line: That disparity is why it's so important to observe how users actually behave versus the way they tell you they behave. People who do this professionally are called "economists".)
Okay, I have not read that article yet, but I will probably scan it when I am done going through this response I am making to you!
Basically, last night I thought about what you were saying, and how I would like this project to project it self. Basically, what I gather is that the biggest, most simple object that is making the marketplace and economy spike is GGs. Okay that is fine, I will agree to that. But I don't think that Gaia will stop selling GGs because they make money from people who don't give a s**t about the economy.
Basically, if my system were in place, I would hope that it would make item prices in the market place more stable. As I said, every few months, the prices could be openly disputable as still to high or low etc. But this would make it so, when I go to quest for an item,,by the time I have most of the gold, it's not astronomically higher than when I started. This would be because the item's price restriction would have changed with time and account for less people wanting the item as people got it. [this of course does not account for LQIs, I will get there]
In my mind, my system would make it so that GG's are NOT a problem. Their only purpose would be to serve impulsive people who can't wait to just quest their items. Once those people have the items they want, they would stop buying GGs [untill new items they want come out]. I wouldn't expect that these GG buyers would buy extra GGs just to buy up all the LQIs on the market, because if they already have a lot of gold, they would just buy the items they want, why sit on unnecessary items or gold? [I mean if you're buying GGs, you really don't need to sit on gold]
So then LQIs play a big problem in this? I think thats kinda just the flow of things though isnt it? "Ahh this item only has 999 units and its only here for a day!" fine sure, that means the competition to get one is high, and i'm sure the item will be expensive, but when you think about it, how long will it really be before Gaia releases another item almost exactly the same/a good enough substitute that you don't care about that first one?
Like this is how I imagine it:
"Ah I really want this LQI because its got a good hat" *begins to quest* "Oh no! all the stock of that item is out!" *sad because now has 70% of the item's value* [2 weeks later] "OH hey Gaia just release an item kinda similar/better/one I want more, and I've got roughly 70% of that value, good form me" or even "Oh hey since a new item almost similar to the one I wanted two weeks ago just came out, it shot the price of the first item down ad bit and now its more attainable!"
So then in a sense, LQIs become less of a problem because I think we can rely that Gaia will continue to release items that are similar to older ones [we know this because of all the recolors and such] and GGs aren't a problem with this because prices would be more reachable for everyone, and I would imagine people would stop buying GGs when their wishlist is complete.
At the same time, I feel Gaia wouldn't mind going for this as long as they kept up with gold sink events like this one we're having now. Like, What if Gaia only release GGs when they were having these Game-like events? In a sense, the GGs main purpose would be only to fuel the game, because anyone who would buy GGs in the first place would already have their items they want.
TL: DR
I'm really sorry if what I said above isn't super organized.. basically, I just don't see people over buying GGs [which I agree are harmful to the economy] is a market where prices are more anchored around set numbers than now where prices are any number you can pull out your a**.
Also LQIs can be countered by relying on Gaia to keep coming out with new items, Gcash or not, they will eventually end up on the MP where they'd have a controlled range of price they could be sold for. In my system, their price range would be very Gaia-community-controlled as opposed to being just set by the individual seller. [because honestly, I've had other sellers ask me to jack UP my prices before so their own items wouldn't be devalued.]
Pie
Maggre
They WILL retain, and in fact, GAIN value with this system. As long as an item is still decently popular, it will continue to gain value with time, I have accounted for that factor. At the same time unpopular items will generally NOT lose all value. In fact this system is aimed to help cushion their fall
How? Look, if there's three times as much per capita gold in the system and the price has not at least tripled, there's no reason for the seller to sell it -- it's lost profit. Even if they end up selling it for a higher number, the actual value of the gold is a lot less.
In fact, I predict vendors would switch their attention over to pure bartering, since by trading items for items you can allow items to retain their actual value. This would cause the marketplace to stagnate, since no one can buy if no one sells.
I'm gonna be honest, I don't really think I understand what you're saying here with your gold per capita stuff. I have not studied economics. Ever. This proposal is really just me, someone whose studying science, saying, "oh hey I think this might work." So I just want to let you know that. [ahh please don't take that in a bad way though, I am really open to you explaining what you said and considering it, I am also very glad you're coming back to try to explain these things]
But basically, Yes? I guess? I am trying to make it more valuable to just trade items for other items. Like I said, right now an items value is really determined by its gold-price. I think that we should switch the economy to a system where an item's value is more determined by its [for lack of a better word] popularity.
So then what would that mean for gold? Well it would mean that gold is a nice filler! Like in the exchange, if I'm selling an item, but I also include my wish list, if someone offered me an item from my wishlist + some pure as cushion, I would personally take the offer as long as both sides were of roughly the same value. and any gold I accumulated could go to me buying items for fair values in the mp, or event games.
Pie
Maggre
This is true, by making items more accessible, they become more accessible to everyone, but regardless of what kind of system we have, cash users ALWAYS will have an advantage. With a system that gives non cash users a fighting chance, there is less room for abuse.
A cash user or useres could buy up all the stock of a certain item, thats very real. Its happening with the limited quantity items right now! You're predicting problems in my system that are already problems right now. My system isn't aimed to fix there being limited a quantity of items, its aimed to try to help a little bit to make the market place less sporadic, and take limited quantity items into account.
A cash user or useres could buy up all the stock of a certain item, thats very real. Its happening with the limited quantity items right now! You're predicting problems in my system that are already problems right now. My system isn't aimed to fix there being limited a quantity of items, its aimed to try to help a little bit to make the market place less sporadic, and take limited quantity items into account.
Limited quantity isn't a problem. In fact, it's pretty much the whole point of having an economy at all, rather than having every single item on this site available from the unlimited inventory of the Gold Shop.
The problem is that gold is increasing, and inventory -- particularly Cash inventory -- is not. The rising prices balances this -- it makes it harder for the non-Cash user to obtain one, but it also makes the Cash user think twice before buying it on a whim.
This ridiculous wealth gap is also unnecessary. Prior to GGs, Cash users did have an advantage but the market was much more stable -- if Cash users wanted Gold, they could buy a Cash item and sell it on the marketplace. Cash users profited, more items on the site to purchase, no excess inflation.
From a Gold economy standpoint, there is no benefit GGs. And for years, Gaia's policy was that they would not release these kinds of items. Despite that, GGs are here -- because they're easy to make, easy to market, and because ruining the Gold economy is actually good for Cash business. Until this problem is remedied, either by removing GGs or finding an extremely effective way to counteract them, any solution is bound to fail.
Hmm again, not quote sure what you're saying in your first paragraph, If you could explain it a bit more, I would be very thankful. I do like this site a lot and I've not been back on it for very long so I would like to understand the problem better. [otherwise I would not have posted an attempt to help]
I agree with what you're saying here in your second paragraph. In your third, if you're a gold user, it is difficult to buy higher priced GC items from the mp anyway, right? But I do agree that GGs are making it impossible to Gold users to quest these items because even though it is difficult to quest, the price keeps moving farther away, so I think I get your third paragraph.
Basically, I guess, if we could get to a system where a gold user could say, "I have these items, lets cut the 'gold middle man out' I will trade you these 3 items for those 2 items" I feel like that would in a sense, negate all the problems involved with inflation and deflation???
Pie
Maggre
But you're supposing that anyone will BUY the shiny new items. Of course Gaia and cahs useres would do exactly what you're suggesting IF THEY WANT NO ONE TO BUY THEIR ITEMS. I don't care if the item's value is 1000 gold or 100000000000 gold, if it doesn't look good and I don't want it, I'm not going to buy it. Their is no GAIN in them over pricing unpopular items
You're right. Cash users wouldn't set items at a price no one would buy. That's why we have free market pricing.
But you've given this power to Gaia. And I strongly believe that the Gaia we know today? Absolutely would. Every action they've made in the past year has made things more enticing to Cash users and more inaccessible to Gold users. This forces more Gold users to give in and become Cash users. Why wouldn't they claim it'll sell for more on the market, too?
But see, thats why I'm saying that the base price is the only thing set by Gaia. The range that you could set it at would really be determined by how popular the USERS feel that particular item is which gives both Gaia and the users the ability to decide how much an item can sell for. Keeping the price in a range just makes it so prices can jump up or down as radically as they do today in a matter of weeks.
Pie
Maggre
NO I do not think that. I think that is MUCH harder than just focusing on the one marketplace aspect. You make it seem like all users will fall into and follow whatever scheme Gaia comes up with, but you forget that just because Gaia puts something out, doesn't mean anyone is going to buy into it. Moreover, this proposal is simply give all gaians a fighting chance to have a decent inventory.
Why not? People have bought everything else. GoFusion seems to be working out nicely for them. I know people have lost a lot of confidence in Gaia -- myself included -- but I still believe that if they've lasted for over decade without GGs then they're more than capable of developing something else. (Some have argued GoFusion Charms exist for this purpose.)
Meanwhile, I must reiterate: You are, in essence, asking Gaia to completely redesign the marketplace. This plan would involve new code for the marketplace, several new data metrics for each individual item, an entirely new data value to be decided and coded in for every item, statistical analysis to balance the actual equation, and for your system and its UI to be understood by virtually all users without reading any complicated instructions because nobody ever reads instructions.
As I am constantly reminding people at work, programmers are engineers, not wizards!
I think that GoFusion is actually a good thing though. I mean, I think they should ditch Alchemy at this point, but GoFusion is actually not a bad system. They seem to be pretty good with giving out the charms in the DC and at events, so I'm gonna say that of all the 'schemes' Gaia has come up with, GoFusion was not a good example of a bad one. So I guess I'm one of the people who argue that GoFusion was a step in the right direction. And I also agree that GGs are not necessary, but I don't think Gaia will take them away because there ARE impulsive people who will buy them,,I'm just saying, lets create a system where they can't do as much harm? [I think thats the whole point of why I'm trying to accomplish at this point] And maybe my system doesn't cover that entirely, maybe you could help? Maybe you don't believe at all in what I'm trying to accomplish, any of that is fine! :U
Also, I guess...yes? I myself am an engineering student [chemical, not electrical or computer mind you] But yes I am asking them to redesign the marketplace system and I'm hoping to get enough support behind this idea that maybe they'll at least consider it? I'm hoping to come up with a system that solves some of our problems while remains profitable to the staff.
And I really also think that such a system could be universally understood by every user. I really hate to do it, but I will bring up TinierMe again. Their entire economic system was ALL item based, only bartering because you could not trade their currency [gold or their gcash equivallent] so their entire value system WAS just where every user had a general idea that "face items are better than pants items, wings are better than this" etc etc. Some of their problems, however were that the gold market and their cash-equivalent market were very separate. "Cash" users generally only considered trading their "cash" items to gold users if the gold users offered items that were discontinued and therefore rare, BUT IT WAS POSSIBLE for a gold user to have quite a few 'cash' items because of that. Moreover, I'm not saying we should switch entirely to that kind of system, but I think that a system near that is certainly viable for Gaia.
Pie
Maggre
TL: DR
I have seen with another site, TinerMe, that what really drives an item's value is NOT the price tag that the site puts on it, be it price in site currency 0 platinum, or real life money. IT IS THE QUALITY of the item. With my proposal, I don't aim to fix the gcash system which I consider a separate issue and not a problem, I simply aim to make Gaia's economy a bit more reflective of one that I saw WORKED. TinerMe had its own economic problems too, but they were different issues. The part of their economy that worked was that value of item was determined by quality of the item which was determined by the userbase. THIS system that I have proposed aims to give Gaians more of a say in the value of items, thus quelling ever increase of prices in the market place.
I have seen with another site, TinerMe, that what really drives an item's value is NOT the price tag that the site puts on it, be it price in site currency 0 platinum, or real life money. IT IS THE QUALITY of the item. With my proposal, I don't aim to fix the gcash system which I consider a separate issue and not a problem, I simply aim to make Gaia's economy a bit more reflective of one that I saw WORKED. TinerMe had its own economic problems too, but they were different issues. The part of their economy that worked was that value of item was determined by quality of the item which was determined by the userbase. THIS system that I have proposed aims to give Gaians more of a say in the value of items, thus quelling ever increase of prices in the market place.
Except... going back to the very beginning, the problem is not the item price. That's the symptom. The problem is the value of Gold dropping so low that that's the new price that accurately reflects the real value.
Again, I guess all I have to come up with is that, I'm pretty much trying to crate a system where gold is secondary to other items,, more of a bartering system so that all the problems with using a currency system become less destructive/important to the economy?
