There does appear to be an unequal increase in purchasing prices compared to selling prices, but I think this has just been a knee-jerk reaction to losing 2 voting sites. I think, given time, the nstar market will become more stable again. It is even at the best of times a quite significantly fluctuating market anyway.

I wouldn't say it is an abuse of the economy though, no one is pressurising players to sell or buy at the new prices. I went for a walk around the spawn market before and pretty much all of the shops with 'new' raised prices hadn't sold any.

 

Thsts kind of true now they buy our nstars for 360~380 maximum and sell them for like 450

 

And?

Supply and demand brother. If that's the price people are willing to transact at, what problem is it? And how would you change this?

 

The way I see it is they can charge whatever they want, but as long as nobody buys from them, they will eventually be forced to adjust the price. If people are willing to pay 450, then they have no incentive to lower prices.

The easiest thing to do, if you want a large amount of nstars for your own use, would simply be to buy at just a little higher price than they are and make sure you are advertising it. You will get the nstars instead of them, and their incoming supply may take a hit. If you really want to adjust the market, then you would need many people onboard with this to essentially bust up the "nstar cartel" and force prices to a common, acceptable level. The problem is getting enough people with the money to do this to all agree and cooperate.

You only get gouged if you let them gouge you.

 

Haha, it doesn't show much respect because he stated supply and demand? If you truly understood supply and demand, then you would know that it doesn't matter what people set their buy/sell prices at. The market will adjust accordingly. If people want to sell their Nstars to trade signs at 20 bucks, and allow that same player to sell them at 600 bucks, then so be it. It would be unfair to force min/max price caps on the buying/selling of items.

With the logic presented in the original post, you should only be able to sell things at small percentage of what you paid for them. So, why is it okay that the person who originally received the nstars are zero cost, gets to sell them for such an extreme markup over that cost? Also, what if someone bought nstars from someone via auction for 200 per nstar? Are they then only allowed to sell them for a small markup, which would be well below market value?

 

We have lost 2 voting sites but that doesnt mean that the NStart prices have to be more expensive. I totally agree with you.

 

It absolutely does mean they have to be more expensive. If supply decreases and demand stays the same, then prices will increase.

 

Well then you would know that if people are not okay with selling their nstars to trade signs for so low, then they wouldn't do it. By complaining about profit margins, you are indeed talking about min/max caps. If you buy at a certain rate, then only want people to sell them at an 8% profit margin, then you are wanting a max cap on the price they can sell at. The market should dictate the buy/sell price of items, not a mandate.

 

Irl, we would call the behaviour of the shops oligopolistic (cartel like behaviour although perhaps sheep like is more appropriate here lol).

My reaction to this is simple, break up the cartel.

 

If you buy NStars some people who sell it put it on 400$ that is a lot of money just for one NStart

 

Dixan, What Arisen takes issue with is what he percieves as price gouging by nstar sellers. I do not think he cares what the total profit margin is, as much as he is focused on the sudden increase in their profit margin that perhaps does not scale to the adjustment in supply. If people were happy to make say, 15% on nstars, then they should still be happy to make 15% after adjusting the buy/sell prices to reflect the change in supply and demand. It appears as though the nstar sellers have BOTH increased prices AND increased profit margin. They are hoping that people will just accept "their" new price as the standard, and also increase their net profit.

It is entirely up to the people whether they let the price stand, or force it to come down...but I have a feeling people will be too impatient to hold on to their nstars or will be too impatient to wait to buy them. In situations like this, the nstar traders rely on the average person's lack of patience and unwillingness to put in the effort to acquire the nstars cheaper, albeit maybe at a slower rate.

wow, lots of posts while I was typing this..lol

 

The "demand" side arises from the desire for star tools which fluctuates.

Presently, there is an excess of demand for eff 7 in particular, putting pressure on prices.

I understand that if you have the resources then there is a temptation to just spend the money and get the tool; I would do my best to resist such a temptation myself. or at least, if I could not resist then I would hardly complain about the price being upped as a result lol.

In time, the pressure will subside, other things being equal.

 

"- I will not dignify this post with a valid response as I don't feel it shows much respect."

Um, what? Where is there a lack of respect in what I said?

Prices are based on supply and demand. I stated this. I also stated that if a buyer and seller transact at a price, what is the problem? I stated this. I also asked how you would correct this perceived problem?

If you want to post a question, be ready to take additional inferences. There was no disrespect at all here; please refrain from empty histrionics as they're unproductive.

 

I would be interested to know approximately how many nstars enter the economy each day. I know you could get a hypothetical maximum assuming every player voted 4 times a day, but that is unrealistic. I also wonder how many are in circulation now? It would be awesome if we had some statistics on commodities and items that reflect the economic activity on the server.

 

To what John Galt said; yes... this is the nature of demand. If Nstar sellers offered Nstars at $1,000 a piece, if a buyer was willing to pay that price, is that wrong? Or is that just the voluntary agreement between two consenting individuals? The latter is the case, and across the aggregate, that's demand. If John Galt's take is to let prices be prices, I'm for this.

This issue of "price gouging" frankly, is an emotional position. What the cheaper buyer says is "gouging" is quite easily the regular and real market price. In the free market, which this technically is, there is no such thing as price gouging.