Info: Calypso Land Deed ROI tracker

[FallenAngel]

Man alot of people here act like they bought shares of something real.

It is a game, there are no promises, and if they decide to not pay out, then they don't have to.
Unless you signed some agreement the rest of us did not, you have no protection, no guarantee, no projected income.

This is the reality, the returns are a bonus.

Again, you own nothing. Be happy that your nothing gives something back.
And just because you paid more than nothing for nothing, does not mean it is worth anything more than nothing.

I am thrilled with the returns, a family friend / accountant manages several hundred million in stock fund/portfolios.

One of the prime funds they have is 17%, they manage millions on that fund alone, because you cannot generally get much better, without getting into legal /moral conflicts.

I mentioned the CLD's return, he laughed it off as an impossibility, or an outright scam. He is certain something is a miss, a game cannot make this much return off virtual things, when he cant with real things without a lot of work.


This is the reality for fund managers, these returns are questionable compared to the reality they see in general.

but if we are brutally honest he is right?
you can not get better, and if that is the case then something must be wrong.
a company giving away such a large proportion of revenue for a short term injection of cash is "crazy", to me it signals that they were unable to find anyone willing to invest or lend them money at a beter rate short term.
i wonder what the fund manager would say if you showed him the TOS/EULA governing this "investment"?

 

[Moonbiter]

but if we are brutally honest he is right?
you can not get better, and if that is the case then something must be wrong.
a company giving away such a large proportion of revenue for a short term injection of cash is "crazy", to me it signals that they were unable to find anyone willing to invest or lend them money at a beter rate short term.
i wonder what the fund manager would say if you showed him the TOS/EULA governing this "investment"?

No agreement real or virtual will protect you against loss of value of your investment. Even pension funds can report losses (i don't think all of them protect base investment value either) and there is fuck all you can do about it.

And as we have seen in Cyprus (a member state of EU no less) even bank deposits are not safe. So at the end of the day, agreement is just a piece of paper.

 

[FallenAngel]

No agreement real or virtual will protect you against loss of value of your investment. Even pension funds can report losses (i don't think all of them protect base investment value either) and there is fuck all you can do about it.

And as we have seen in Cyprus (a member state of EU no less) even bank deposits are not safe. So at the end of the day, agreement is just a piece of paper.

i agree that many people dont realise the risks involved in real life investments, but to say bank deposits are not safe is a mistake, even in the extreme case of cyprus "normal" people with deposits less than $100,000 (in this case) are safe. i might be wrong in thinking all countries insure deposits up to a certain size and it would take the failure of multiple states to end that. and if you believe that multiple states will fail then the only safe investment is land with access to clean drinking water?

 

[RickEngland]

but if we are brutally honest he is right?
you can not get better, and if that is the case then something must be wrong.
a company giving away such a large proportion of revenue for a short term injection of cash is "crazy", to me it signals that they were unable to find anyone willing to invest or lend them money at a beter rate short term.
i wonder what the fund manager would say if you showed him the TOS/EULA governing this "investment"?

Finally someone talks some sense.

It suggests that MA undervalued the initial offering and based on the current investor interest, MA could’ve sold more CLD’s.

That’s ok in hindsight, but CLD’s were struggling to sell in the early days despite players like myself telling people, till I was blue in the face “to get-in BIG”.

CLD was a great solution to a short term problem. However long term it would ONLY be a success if MA managed to triple the player base. In my view they have failed to do that based on tracker stats (that include 10 ped globals).

That puts the game at considerable risk, because the only way MA can secure revenue, is push harder on those THAT already pay them and risk losing those players (but they have little other option).

Like I have said many times to CLD holders, the irony is to protect your own investment CLD holders have to deposit...funny ehhh.

The only other “way-out” for MA is to buy up CLD’s for sale, because ped is invented money until someone withdraws. This may explain the lack of CLD supply, although it would be extremely hard to prove.

One thing is for sure, MA or their advisers are extremely clever. They will do whatever is necessary to maintain the future of their product (that’s why it has lasted so long), whom this hurts along the way is immaterial as long as that purpose is achieved.

We as players value the game and ourselves have much invested, I’d say MA are lucky to have some wonderful customers.

Good day

Rick

edit: Let me add one further thought.

If the player base is not growing fast enough, how else can you increase income?

Dump tons of new stuff on the market, and hope most of that is bought up with deposits rather than in game funds.

That could explain why it's raining items, but that is having a negative effect on existing values, which in turn effects deposits for the resale of those items (but who cares, its short term fix..right).

I'm happy, but like to smile at MA economics, always have.

 

[AxeMurderer]

I agree that CLD are extremely riski investment.
I think that if CLDs fail this game is dead the next day.
But I wonder if there is so big risk are companies like Arkadia team and Cyrene team gonna spend millions dollars and a lot of time and work. If we risk 1000$ and loose sleep after that, how the hell are Arkadia and Cyrene and probably Taulan so stupid to get involved. If they can risk millions why not risk few k$. We are going to drink them anyway.

 

[RickEngland]

I agree that CLD are extremely riski investment.
I think that if CLDs fail this game is dead the next day.
But I wonder if there is so big risk are companies like Arkadia team and Cyrene team gonna spend millions dollars and a lot of time and work. If we risk 1000$ and loose sleep after that, how the hell are Arkadia and Cyrene and probably Taulan so stupid to get involved. If they can risk millions why not risk few k$. We are going to drink them anyway.

The game is unlikely to EVER fold.

The players will fold before the game.

If the lights went out tonight, the product is still viable becasue it exists.

The only change would be a new set of players, knocking on the door of a freshly opened new dawn (and the old players lose all).

So even in the worst case senario, the game will survive in some form. It might have to lighten the load of the management team and directors (but they only have to think about that in worst case).

So as a player only your assets are at risk if you hold any, the house will always still stand.

So keep smiling, it's not all that bad.

Rick

 

[jetsina]

Inbetween the very useful tracking posts late on a Sunday night, this thread is now taking on a whole new look .
Investment is about risk, but not only. At the moment we are all part of a preeeeety small group of people playing an online experience with a payout option. On top of that, some of us have clds. As far as I'm concerned, if EU were to flop we'd all have nothing to show for it. Other than that I see no reason why it shouldn't rumble on at this speed at the very least. Even though I sometimes feel that EU has all the marketing presence of a locked filing cabinet with 'beware of the leopard' written on it, within that filing cabinet sustained life does indeed seem possible, despite the dark monster of MA bugs that also resides within!

I'm hoping for EU to still be around in 20 years' time! Exponentials do worry me, though. Will new players still be joining the game, and if so, then for what purpose: to become über in their lifetimes? Or will it be simply entertainment that is paid for as far as most players are concerned? Wait, we have that now too, don't we?

 

[billairboy]

When talking about MA selling the CLD and how strange it was to them to give away such a large portion of the revenue you should not forget that they probably was under pressure to sell of Calypso so they would have the same 50 % shares from all the planets. Otherwise other planet partners could easier accuse MA for favoring Calypso because MA would get a bigger share of the revenue from that planet compared to the other planets, it would be more profitable for them to have all players on Calypso.

If you use the same thinking you could say "It's stupid to bring in other planet partners, because they take half the revenue when MA could be alone and take it all". Business and investment are more complicated than just comparing different possible return of investment, when buying shares or doing other investment on a open market it more like that, but in business when more variables and long time strategy is involved is more complicated to say what is good or bad.

MA clearly have a longtime strategy to involve more people and investors in the game on a longtime basis, we see that in the forms of the yearly property sells, planet partners, the moon, CLDs sells, shops and so on. I think this is a good strategy, MA are a small company they need more resources and people too help them grow EU. Yes, they lose some of the revenue to the players on a yearly basis, but they also gets attention they can use in marketing and that also have a value. So, it's not so simple as to say, "Stupid, if the ROI was so good, why don't keep all the CLDs for them self?".

 

[AxeMurderer]

When talking about MA selling the CLD and how strange it was to them to give away such a large portion of the revenue you should not forget that they probably was under pressure to sell of Calypso so they would have the same 50 % shares from all the planets. Otherwise other planet partners could easier accuse MA for favoring Calypso because MA would get a bigger share of the revenue from that planet compared to the other planets, it would be more profitable for them to have all players on Calypso.

If you use the same thinking you could say "It's stupid to bring in other planet partners, because they take half the revenue when MA could be alone and take it all". Business and investment are more complicated than just comparing different possible return of investment, when buying shares or doing other investment on a open market it more like that, but in business when more variables and long time strategy is involved is more complicated to say what is good or bad.

MA clearly have a longtime strategy to involve more people and investors in the game on a longtime basis, we see that in the forms of the yearly property sells, planet partners, the moon, CLDs sells, shops and so on. I think this is a good strategy, MA are a small company they need more resources and people too help them grow EU. Yes, they lose some of the revenue to the players on a yearly basis, but they also gets attention they can use in marketing and that also have a value. So, it's not so simple as to say, "Stupid, if the ROI was so good, why don't keep all the CLDs for them self?".

true, true

and while half the players think CLD return are too good to be true at the same time the other half of players are saying CLD returns are too bad to buy them

 

[Austro_Lusitano]

this week: 3,993 ped/deed

 

[NevadaJake]

I wonder if we will see a CLD bubble (burst)? Or are they still an amazing deal at 1450 PED each?

 

[ermik]

I wonder if we will see a CLD bubble (burst)? Or are they still an amazing deal at 1450 PED each?

ofcourse they are an amazing deal at 1450 each, same as Doa RJ ME was at 90k , and UL CB26 @ 150k , or why not mod fap at 400k.

People need hope, and it always take form in terms of oportunity for those less interested in ethics.

 

[Meculus]

I wonder if we will see a CLD bubble (burst)? Or are they still an amazing deal at 1450 PED each?

I think the fact that a noticeable growth in players is happening, people are buying and driving the price up. You might see a decline here or there, but I'd imagine it will keep rising for the foreseeable future especially if the rate of new players continues at its current rate, and more so if it increases.

 

[Meculus]

Spreadsheet updated, column for 1500 per added

 

[FallenAngel]

When talking about MA selling the CLD and how strange it was to them to give away such a large portion of the revenue you should not forget that they probably was under pressure to sell of Calypso so they would have the same 50 % shares from all the planets. Otherwise other planet partners could easier accuse MA for favoring Calypso because MA would get a bigger share of the revenue from that planet compared to the other planets, it would be more profitable for them to have all players on Calypso.

If you use the same thinking you could say "It's stupid to bring in other planet partners, because they take half the revenue when MA could be alone and take it all". Business and investment are more complicated than just comparing different possible return of investment, when buying shares or doing other investment on a open market it more like that, but in business when more variables and long time strategy is involved is more complicated to say what is good or bad.

MA clearly have a longtime strategy to involve more people and investors in the game on a longtime basis, we see that in the forms of the yearly property sells, planet partners, the moon, CLDs sells, shops and so on. I think this is a good strategy, MA are a small company they need more resources and people too help them grow EU. Yes, they lose some of the revenue to the players on a yearly basis, but they also gets attention they can use in marketing and that also have a value. So, it's not so simple as to say, "Stupid, if the ROI was so good, why don't keep all the CLDs for them self?".

you always make good points when it comes to financial matters, and i cant claim to have any more real world experience with these kind of matters than mere curiosity, so forgive me if i fail to understand some of the finer details. the way i see it is "simple", i understand there was pressure to sell a 50% stake in calypso, but they failed to sell a 50% stake in the "real world" and if you take the EULA/TOS seriously they did not sell anything at all with the cld's?
i can in some ways understand that it makes sense for MA to go the PP route to get more outside investment, but it also shows they failed to do this in a more traditional way before this choice, failed so badly that some of their existing investers attempted a boardroom takeover that, in my inexperienced eyes, only failed due to a technicality that the existing board used?
they failed miserably in marketing this game and i wonder if one could even say they did any marketing at all in the traditional sense of the word, ie hire a professional team, give them a serious budget over many years, make targets for goals to be reached, and allow the professional team to plan a marketing campaign to achieve these goals and measure results based on these targets.
my last point would be that interest rates have been incredibly low for the past few years (historically speaking) and the fact that MA could not or chose not to seek financing in this manner but preferred to "give away" large parts of its future revenue at far worse "rates" than it should be able attract financing at surprises me (to use a neutral phrase).
the yearly sales of in game property have always made me think they have been used in a attempt to make their accounts look healthier combined with the mistaken idea that this can be said to be a clever marketing strategy.

 

[Art Jennifer]

More players = More payout
More payout = higher price

There are more players (according to MA) no reason for the price to fall yet.

I'd say for the next year CLD are a safe investment.

Especially with the strengthening real world economies,

 

[Futurama]

For me it seems that the supply has decreased. Those who have paid attention to CLD sales when the auction prices started to rise rapidly might have noticed something too. I quite often saw that the auction was close to empty - 1-1.5 pages with mostly 1 deed auctions (a lot of them overpriced), some 2s and maybe only a few 5s or 10s (sometimes none).

I'm not going to run around in a tinfoil hat saying MA is silently buying them back, that would be only possible in very small amounts, would be unethical and dangerous to their reputation. Could it be that the number of CLD owners is decreasing and large "investors" are owning more and more deeds with every week, by reinvesting their weekly gain, Land owners buying CLDs with their tax income, more deposits from wealthy people etc?

I find this scenario troubling. A random average player with a few deeds, 10, 20 etc. will most likely use this income to buy a new gun, fund his activities, buy new clothes etc. But what does a person with lets say 500, 1000 deeds do? Unless they are gathering funds to reinvest they will most likely start to withdraw money regulary. With 500 deeds its ~ 8k ped a month, I woudn`t mind a nice withdraw every 1.5 month or with 1000 deeds a nice withdraw monthly. Or just save up a bigger sum by waiting a bit longer.

MAs gamble with CLDs was that they offer high returns, hoping that most of the money will stay ingame and make the players stay longer here. Could it be shifting in the future?

 

[Futurama]

More players = More payout
More payout = higher price

There are more players (according to MA) no reason for the price to fall yet.

I'd say for the next year CLD are a safe investment.

Especially with the strengthening real world economies,

And how did this logic work out for today's payment?

 

[billairboy]

you always make good points when it comes to financial matters, and i cant claim to have any more real world experience with these kind of matters than mere curiosity, so forgive me if i fail to understand some of the finer details. the way i see it is "simple", i understand there was pressure to sell a 50% stake in calypso, but they failed to sell a 50% stake in the "real world" and if you take the EULA/TOS seriously they did not sell anything at all with the cld's?
i can in some ways understand that it makes sense for MA to go the PP route to get more outside investment, but it also shows they failed to do this in a more traditional way before this choice, failed so badly that some of their existing investers attempted a boardroom takeover that, in my inexperienced eyes, only failed due to a technicality that the existing board used?
they failed miserably in marketing this game and i wonder if one could even say they did any marketing at all in the traditional sense of the word, ie hire a professional team, give them a serious budget over many years, make targets for goals to be reached, and allow the professional team to plan a marketing campaign to achieve these goals and measure results based on these targets.
my last point would be that interest rates have been incredibly low for the past few years (historically speaking) and the fact that MA could not or chose not to seek financing in this manner but preferred to "give away" large parts of its future revenue at far worse "rates" than it should be able attract financing at surprises me (to use a neutral phrase).
the yearly sales of in game property have always made me think they have been used in a attempt to make their accounts look healthier combined with the mistaken idea that this can be said to be a clever marketing strategy.

Thanks for you words. In real world terms, no they did not sell any property, but in EU terms they sold the right to some of the revenue. I think the lack of good marketing goes hand in hand with the lack of money. It cost a lot of money to make good and big marketing. But at the same time, without marketing they will not get enough players to bring in the money they need to be self financing.

With the decreasing revenue and the bad cash flow they have had a couple of years they probably had a hard time to fine more investors and would have had a hard time finding a bank willing to lend them any more money. With the sell of the CLD they got some short term money that gave them some time to cut some cost and also made a nice marketing event of it in addition to bringing a interesting consent to the game.

 

[Art Jennifer]

And how did this logic work out for today's payment?

You can not take one payment and then generalise it.

That would be like, one blonde person so everyone is blonde.

 

[Jimmy B]

I'm not going to run around in a tinfoil hat saying MA is silently buying them back, that would be only possible in very small amounts, would be unethical and dangerous to their reputation.

Why would that be bad? Are you saying MA should be open about it if they did that, or are you saying MA shouldn't do it at all?

As someone who owns a moderate number of CLDs, I struggle to see why either would bother me to be honest.

Could it be that the number of CLD owners is decreasing and large "investors" are owning more and more deeds with every week, by reinvesting their weekly gain, Land owners buying CLDs with their tax income, more deposits from wealthy people etc?

I find this scenario troubling. A random average player with a few deeds, 10, 20 etc. will most likely use this income to buy a new gun, fund his activities, buy new clothes etc. But what does a person with lets say 500, 1000 deeds do? Unless they are gathering funds to reinvest they will most likely start to withdraw money regulary. With 500 deeds its ~ 8k ped a month, I woudn`t mind a nice withdraw every 1.5 month or with 1000 deeds a nice withdraw monthly. Or just save up a bigger sum by waiting a bit longer.

Well, you're getting a bit speculative here. Couldn't it just be that some people bought CLDs early on with the intention to resell, expecting them to go up in MU, and that those CLDs are now largely in the hands of people who have bought them to keep?

But if you're right, does it really make much difference to MA whether 100 people own 10 each and use them to fund their gameplay or 1 person owns 1000 and withdraws the revenue? Surely the lost deposits from the former people are effectively the same as the withdrawals from the latter person?

 

[Cerberis]

3.99 ?

 

[Futurama]

Why would that be bad? Are you saying MA should be open about it if they did that, or are you saying MA shouldn't do it at all?

As someone who owns a moderate number of CLDs, I struggle to see why either would bother me to be honest.

A somewhat popular idea that floats around is that MA is secretly buying back CLDs. I was thinking that something done like this would be highly unethical since they have always said that there will be (some clds still being looted and given out in events) 60000 deeds. Secretly buying them back in my mind would be the same as releasing less than 60k, but saying that there are 60k deeds available on the market. In this way they would secretly decrease the overall amount of ped payed out, by collecting a portion of it on a MA/Calypso owned avatar. I think this could be classified as lying, fraud, don't you think?

Well, you're getting a bit speculative here. Couldn't it just be that some people bought CLDs early on with the intention to resell, expecting them to go up in MU, and that those CLDs are now largely in the hands of people who have bought them to keep?

But if you're right, does it really make much difference to MA whether 100 people own 10 each and use them to fund their gameplay or 1 person owns 1000 and withdraws the revenue? Surely the lost deposits from the former people are effectively the same as the withdrawals from the latter person?

You could be right, they might just have found more stable hands. But you can't really live off 40-50 ped a week from 10 CLDs, can you? Would you agree that small deed holders still deposit and that those 10 clds give him a few extra ped to offset "bad returns" and keeps him playing? Even if he deposits less, he is still playing and MA can say they have a lot of active players, but a regular withdraw is always bad imho.

 

[Wollongong]

true, true

and while half the players think CLD return are too good to be true at the same time the other half of players are saying CLD returns are too bad to buy them

this week: 3,993 ped/deed

Ah, the irony of having these two posts just next to each other

 

[ermik]

I find this scenario troubling. A random average player with a few deeds, 10, 20 etc. will most likely use this income to buy a new gun, fund his activities, buy new clothes etc. But what does a person with lets say 500, 1000 deeds do? Unless they are gathering funds to reinvest they will most likely start to withdraw money regulary. With 500 deeds its ~ 8k ped a month, I woudn`t mind a nice withdraw every 1.5 month or with 1000 deeds a nice withdraw monthly. Or just save up a bigger sum by waiting a bit longer.

Well if i had 100k USD, i would not be stupid enough to risk it in such a high risk venture as EU CLD´s , just to get a puny 800$ / month.

You would be suprised to see the number of people placing themselves in high debt, to be able to keep playing, buy uber gear and gamble on the CLD´s.

I know people ingame who max out CC to play this game, to be able to have nice gear , skills and the image of a successful person, sure its a good thing to have people buying into the universe, but at some point this also shows that some of the underlying interest in CLD´s are not to get a nice ROI from rl funds, but rather a gamble on prospected growth with borrowed money.

Borrow money to gamble for the win, so the person can pay off debt, both current and prior.

 

[Skaffen]

Hope Dies Last

I predict that at the end of the 2nd year the average ROI (annual) will be 20% - still leaving 3 years 'til the initial investment is repaid.

This is due to RL economic circumstances more than MA's efforts. If you believe the RL economic situation is going to improve through political austerity, or that the political situation is suddenly going to change......GL.

I also expect Overdrive to release a significant amount in the next few months.

 

[Jimmy B]

A somewhat popular idea that floats around is that MA is secretly buying back CLDs. I was thinking that something done like this would be highly unethical since they have always said that there will be (some clds still being looted and given out in events) 60000 deeds. Secretly buying them back in my mind would be the same as releasing less than 60k, but saying that there are 60k deeds available on the market. In this way they would secretly decrease the overall amount of ped payed out, by collecting a portion of it on a MA/Calypso owned avatar. I think this could be classified as lying, fraud, don't you think?

I don't really see it makes much difference how many are out there, as long as the ones that are out there continue to pay out 1/60000 of the allotted revenue.

It all seems a bit unlikely to me anyway.

But you can't really live off 40-50 ped a week from 10 CLDs, can you?

Depends on the player, but I'd have thought in any case that he'll be depositting $4-$5 less a week than he otherwise would.

and that those 10 clds give him a few extra ped to offset "bad returns" and keeps him playing?

OK, maybe, in some cases that will be true. But I don't really think (total deposits - total withdrawals) will be significantly affected by who holds CLDs.

 

[forgo]

If you buy a house, rent it out, and pay for the house in 3 years from the rent, its an amazing deal. Really unheard of.

I am thrilled to pay a commercial building off in 10 years even 20 is fine.

CLDS pose a lower risk by a margin to real estate. Just look at how many foreclose.
How long would it take to sell a house and get the money out?
How long does it take to sell a CLD and process the withdrawl?

Real estate will typically cost more than it gets in at some point, due to RL circumstances. No renters in house, not enough in building to cover costs, ect. Plus you have to actively work and manage Real estate.

This never happens with CLD.

3 year return on investment, minimal effort, superior to the most common investments today, and people are critical of it, makes me question peoples logic.

 

[ermik]

This never happens with CLD.

3 year return on investment, minimal effort, superior to the most common investments today, and people are critical of it, makes me question peoples logic.

My logic is that companies usually dont give away free money.

 

[billairboy]

CLDS pose a lower risk by a margin to real estate. Just look at how many foreclose.

On this I disagree on. In my opinion it's a much bigger risk with CLDs compared to real estates. Of course it also depends on what kind of estate it is, but in general. Games can grow old and loose players fast which would decrease the value of the CLDs and it's also a risk connected to MA, three years is a long time in the gaming business.