Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Info: Calypso Land Deed ROI tracker

Summer is here...

...save up UR peds cuz CLD price is going down as payout decreases with less user decay and lower hours logged...unless player base expansion counteracts...then...:yay:

Brick
 
Terrible returns this week. When and what is the next event on Caly? Longtooth migration?
 
In investment, whatever dividents is profit if the capital does not depreciate. Meaning that as long as the CLD prices stays the same or increases, any dividents is pure profit. We can buy one for one week and resell it, gaining the one week divident in the process
 
Looks like the (desperate?) attempt from MA to crank up the 3 month average by throwing in yet another shared loot ped-sucking event did not help much for this week's payout.

Unless the eomon/longtooth migration will turn the tide, we might see <3.25 ped weekly payouts end of July. Can someone with a calculator do the math on what the ROI will be in that case?

/Slupor
 
hoarse voice : Summer is coming

Feith
 
slupor said:
Unless the eomon/longtooth migration will turn the tide, we might see <3.25 ped weekly payouts end of July. Can someone with a calculator do the math on what the ROI will be in that case?
Click to expand...

Sure we'll see < 3.25, a year ago by the end of the month it was 2.97.

The average payment per deed:
  • in the last 12 months (18/6/02 - 16/6/03) is 4.32
  • in the last 6 months (31/12/02-16/6/03) is 4.46 (probably will become equal to the above number in the next 2 weeks if ROI remain dropping)
Can't see the falling sky really, a normal summer, time to buy stuff cheap :)
 
I believe this with land deeds are just a big scam, through them so they sold the planet without selling it (because they sold the land deeds equal to the planet's value).

I also wonder who the MA that made these "calculations of joy" that they payment on this land deed would be about 27-30% in ROI payment per share because when you look at how it has become so one can see that the payment is only about...

¤ in the last 12 months (18/6/02 - 16/6/03) is 4.32

This means that the payment is 6-7 times lower than estimated, it is to me incomprehensible that one can count so much wrong.

:twocents:
 
valentin said:
I believe this with land deeds are just a big scam, through them so they sold the planet without selling it (because they sold the land deeds equal to the planet's value).

I also wonder who the MA that made these "calculations of joy" that they payment on this land deed would be about 27-30% in ROI payment per share because when you look at how it has become so one can see that the payment is only about...

¤ in the last 12 months (18/6/02 - 16/6/03) is 4.32

This means that the payment is 6-7 times lower than estimated, it is to me incomprehensible that one can count so much wrong.

:twocents:
Click to expand...

Is this not wrong?

As in, 5-6ped range gives 28% at 1000ped value.

So 4.32 (to early to do math) but at 1000ped value thats what around 24-25%

So they are not far off.

Players fault we are seeing lower than estimated returns.

also 19% ROI is pretty dam good you know :)

Most people are happy with anything above 5% in real world :p
 
valentin said:
I believe this with land deeds are just a big scam, through them so they sold the planet without selling it (because they sold the land deeds equal to the planet's value).

I also wonder who the MA that made these "calculations of joy" that they payment on this land deed would be about 27-30% in ROI payment per share because when you look at how it has become so one can see that the payment is only about...

¤ in the last 12 months (18/6/02 - 16/6/03) is 4.32

This means that the payment is 6-7 times lower than estimated, it is to me incomprehensible that one can count so much wrong.

:twocents:
Click to expand...

Please tell us math guru how 4.32 is 6-7 lower than ~5.5 ped. :lolup:
 
Maybe something was lost in translation there.

The payouts are, generally, less than anticipated (publically) by Mindark, but in my opinion the deeds still represent a good return. I'm certainly happy with the returns on my own deeds.

And to use a perhaps tired argument, the market value of the CLDs seem to be going through the roof suggesting that others share my opinion.
 
Dusk said:
Maybe something was lost in translation there.

The payouts are, generally, less than anticipated (publically) by Mindark, but in my opinion the deeds still represent a good return. I'm certainly happy with the returns on my own deeds.

And to use a perhaps tired argument, the market value of the CLDs seem to be going through the roof suggesting that others share my opinion.
Click to expand...

It was great when players were depositing to build stacks of CLD's, and selling those stacks or single CLD's to other players that were also depositing to buy them.

I would suggest that the capital value is only were it is right now, becasue there is a demand to switch assets into CLD from item or skill sales from players that might placing their avatars on summer breaks (or longer).

Becasue really the trend should be falling CLD values if it was based on dividend returns (so clearly it's asset switching).

The issue here is that the original owner may withdraw, but the new owner has not deposited. Under that situation, MA loses as it's not a like-for-like transaction (such as 1 x withdraw = 1 x depositor). Now I say loses meaning that the "first" sales were on a previous years P&L (Profit and Loss account).

Now if that is the case,( and I'm only suggesting it is), then that puts further pressure on depositors, and could have the effect of driving CLD prices higher as players seek a save haven for floating peds.

The bubble will only pop, once all the asset switching (guns/skills too CLD's) has run its course, and the original holders for revenue sold them off.

Just for thought.

Rick
 
Art Jennifer said:
Is this not wrong?

As in, 5-6ped range gives 28% at 1000ped value.

So 4.32 (to early to do math) but at 1000ped value thats what around 24-25%

So they are not far off.

Players fault we are seeing lower than estimated returns.

also 19% ROI is pretty dam good you know :)

Most people are happy with anything above 5% in real world :p
Click to expand...



Sure .. I see the mistake, it took that month's payment and not weekly payout.
 
Another consideration...

Dusk said:
Maybe something was lost in translation there.

The payouts are, generally, less than anticipated (publically) by Mindark, but in my opinion the deeds still represent a good return. I'm certainly happy with the returns on my own deeds.

And to use a perhaps tired argument, the market value of the CLDs seem to be going through the roof suggesting that others share my opinion.
Click to expand...

Players are not only people in market for CLDs...MA is also in market for CLD and if they can buy back CLD from individual who will use CLD funds to fund gameplay then they are really out nothing except possible deposit...MA is buying them back to some extent I would almost guarantee it...question is to what extent...

Brick
 
Art Jennifer said:
Is this not wrong?


So they are not far off.

Players fault we are seeing lower than estimated returns.
Click to expand...

yeah, right.. blame the players..
Maybe you should look at those who run the UNIVERSE?!?
 
das said:
yeah, right.. blame the players..
Maybe you should look at those who run the UNIVERSE?!?
Click to expand...

Whay i play less its simple......
I am No 32 in all time hunting and if you look back for a year i am at No 13, still my best looted item i from year 2008 a Jaguar foot guards M (ul) do i have to say more.
 
Summer time.

But, what i'm not sure of, is what the payout are based on. Is it only on the decay/fees on the planet, or does it also have some connection to the total amount of deposits made for the period?

Example:
Case 1: CLD payout = (Calypso decay + Calypso fees) x 25 % / 60 000 CLD

or do the formula look like something like this?

Case 2: CLD payout = (Calypso decay + Calypso fees) / (Total decay in the universe + Total fees in the universe) x (Deposits for the period - Withdrawals for the period) x 25 % / 60 000 CLD

I believe it's the formula as in "Case 1" they use, but i'm not sure. If they use something like "Case 2", that could also explain a decline in CLD payouts, because of the fact that CLD owners probably deposits less money now than they did before they had the CLD. Instead of making weekly/monthly deposits they use the profit from the CLD to play with. With less money being deposited the revenue also declines if the payout are calculated as in the case 2 formula. But if it's calculated as in the first formula, this would not effect the payouts.
 
billairboy said:
But, what i'm not sure of, is what the payout are based on. Is it only on the decay/fees on the planet, or does it also have some connection to the total amount of deposits made for the period?
Click to expand...

MA has stated a few times that it is purely based on decay/fees. Off course that means that 90% of the vocal persons on this forum are sure that this is a lie :)
 
valentin said:
Whay i play less its simple......
I am No 32 in all time hunting and if you look back for a year i am at No 13, still my best looted item i from year 2008 a Jaguar foot guards M (ul) do i have to say more.
Click to expand...

No, you really don´t have to say more... just repeat this over and over and over and over and over and over.

And over.

And over.
 
billairboy said:
Summer time.

But, what i'm not sure of, is what the payout are based on. Is it only on the decay/fees on the planet, or does it also have some connection to the total amount of deposits made for the period?

Example:
Case 1: CLD payout = (Calypso decay + Calypso fees) x 25 % / 60 000 CLD

or do the formula look like something like this?

Case 2: CLD payout = (Calypso decay + Calypso fees) / (Total decay in the universe + Total fees in the universe) x (Deposits for the period - Withdrawals for the period) x 25 % / 60 000 CLD

I believe it's the formula as in "Case 1" they use, but i'm not sure. If they use something like "Case 2", that could also explain a decline in CLD payouts, because of the fact that CLD owners probably deposits less money now than they did before they had the CLD. Instead of making weekly/monthly deposits they use the profit from the CLD to play with. With less money being deposited the revenue also declines if the payout are calculated as in the case 2 formula. But if it's calculated as in the first formula, this would not effect the payouts.
Click to expand...

CLD are planet based, which supports case 1. Furthermore, MA has confirmed that it is case 1. So I'd go with case 1.

You are right of course, that CLD owners deposit less in relation to their amount of gaming than they would without the income. But...some just play more... I know that I do play more, but I do not deposit less than before. A CLD payout is basically me earning money, and immediately depositing it back into the game. So this should not affect the payouts.

Furthermore, as people sign up, the effect of the old players upon the deposits should become less and less too.

PS: Summertime? I am still waiting for the drop of Summer 2012 to dissappear :D
 
Was about to sell my deeds, but ill wait till next Monday i think.
 
New VU with new stuff always brings in more peds
 
billairboy said:
Summer time.

But, what i'm not sure of, is what the payout are based on. Is it only on the decay/fees on the planet, or does it also have some connection to the total amount of deposits made for the period?

Example:
Case 1: CLD payout = (Calypso decay + Calypso fees) x 25 % / 60 000 CLD

or do the formula look like something like this?

Case 2: CLD payout = (Calypso decay + Calypso fees) / (Total decay in the universe + Total fees in the universe) x (Deposits for the period - Withdrawals for the period) x 25 % / 60 000 CLD

I believe it's the formula as in "Case 1" they use, but i'm not sure. If they use something like "Case 2", that could also explain a decline in CLD payouts, because of the fact that CLD owners probably deposits less money now than they did before they had the CLD. Instead of making weekly/monthly deposits they use the profit from the CLD to play with. With less money being deposited the revenue also declines if the payout are calculated as in the case 2 formula. But if it's calculated as in the first formula, this would not effect the payouts.
Click to expand...

My understanding of payout is:

All decay+fees divided by 2 on Calypso for Calypso born Avatars. (MA 50%, CLD/players 50%)
All decay+fees divided by 4 on Calypso for Immigrants (non Calypso born avatars) (MA 25%, CLD 25%, PP origin 50%)

All decay+ fees divided by 4 on Any other planet by Calypso born Avatars. (MA 25%, CLD 25%, PP 50%)
All decay+ fees divided by 0 on any other Planet by non Calypso Avatars. (MA perhaps gets a default cut(unless they consider the purchase of planet the alternative to fees), but CLD do not)

So a vast majority in game are CLD Payees, since Calypso has the most originating Players.
This means we could all leave Calypso, and still get paid in CLD.... just less. (I believe other planets had an influx of Calypso players in previous months, thus the lower, diluted payout. We still got revenue, just a portion of normal levels.)

I would guess overall ingame the deposits are up by a bit, but since many are spending off planet, The same decays and fees normally seen, do not reflect well in CLD. It seems to me the economy has grown overall.

Deposits and withdrawls are removed completely from the formula. They have no impact on the ongoing revenue stream the in-game economy provides.

IF you are recruiting any friends and family ect, then have them start on Calypso. :)
 
Last edited:
updated the sheet as it was almost 24h since payout..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top