CLD payout does not correlate to activity

[Acro]

How could I miss this

CLD payout is 1/2 of MA's income from planet calypso. 1/4 for CLD owners, 1/4 for team running planet calypso; and the other half for MA.

Since MA has to get money out of the game to pay for costs and such; they need a quite steady amount each week/month. If the playerbase does not cycle enough ped, but the drained money remains the same, it would mean that the active players get less loot.

So, a side fact of this is; that CLD payout in not tied to the number of players playing; but tied to the amount of money MA needs on daily basis to run.

So even if activity is cut in half; the CLD payout would remain stable. It would be the people playing being charged with the extra cost.

Does, in short the following statement:
there is no correlation between ingame activity and CLD returns

So let's debunk that thought many of us (me included) had.

 

[dr3w]

So let's debunk that thought many of us (me included) had.

Let's shrink whole playerbase till two persons: me and you. You have 60k CLDs, and I playing.

I think, no need to continue.

 

[Ace Flyster]

How could I miss this

CLD payout is 1/2 of MA's income from planet calypso. 1/4 for CLD owners, 1/4 for team running planet calypso; and the other half for MA.

Since MA has to get money out of the game to pay for costs and such; they need a quite steady amount each week/month. If the playerbase does not cycle enough ped, but the drained money remains the same, it would mean that the active players get less loot.

So, a side fact of this is; that CLD payout in not tied to the number of players playing; but tied to the amount of money MA needs on daily basis to run.

So even if activity is cut in half; the CLD payout would remain stable. It would be the people playing being charged with the extra cost.

Does, in short the following statement:
there is no correlation between ingame activity and CLD returns

So let's debunk that thought many of us (me included) had.

CLD payments are based on revenue generated. Which in turn comes from decay.

If there was no activity there would be no cld payouts.

If activity cut in half cld payout would cut in half. Decay wise

The correlation between CLD and activities involving decay is DIRECTLY proportional

Rgds

Ace

 

[minim]

CLD payments are based on revenue generated. Which in turn comes from decay.

If there was no activity there would be no cld payouts.

If activity cut in half cld payout would cut in half. Decay wise

The correlation between CLD and activities involving decay is DIRECTLY proportional

Rgds

Ace

Atleast this is the info we have about it

 

[Ace Flyster]

Atleast this is the info we have about it

Very true, but i am not one for conspiracy theories

If people don't believe it (not saying you don't ) then how they can put money into PE is beyond me!

Rgds

Ace

 

[Acro]

I can prove MA needs the money to pay for their expenses.
There is the official notion that CLD stand for 1/4th of the revenue of planet calypso; 1/4th for dev team; and other half for MA. So I can prove that 1/4 of Calypso revenue goes to the CLD owners.


can you prove MA only charges decay? Which official announcement, not made by Marco 7 years ago, stated that decay is the only charge? State me any official statement since that single quote of marco, that they only charge decay.

 

[das]

You know how much % MA get's from PP income, you don't know if they charge us an extra seperate % of turnover.
This means your statement is based on nothing
for example
100 peds cycled, 1.25% to CLD, 1.25% to Calypso team, 2.5% to MA
But none said 95% is the normal return, could be that it's 93% & MA takes an extra 2% from all ingame peds cycled.
Edit : even those 2% could change depending on the amount of money they need that week

 

[Acro]

You know how much % MA get's from PP income, you don't know if they charge us an extra seperate % of turnover.
This means your statement is based on nothing
for example
100 peds cycled, 1.25% to CLD, 1.25% to Calypso team, 2.5% to MA
But none said 95% is the normal return, could be that it's 93% & MA takes an extra 2% from all ingame peds cycled.
Edit : even those 2% could change depending on the amount of money they need that week

Well it was advertised to planet partners that they would get 50% from revenue for all activity on their planet for people that joined their planet; and 20% or so from participants from other planets.
So unless they make false statements to their business partners (which would be a criminal fact, namely contract breach) we can fairly assume that planet partners do get 50% of the revenue.

So either way; or MA does an illigal activity or the above must be true.

 

[billairboy]

Well, this post have at least one major flaw. MA get their money when the player make their deposits, so MA already have 100 % of our money, so increasing the payout to CLD owners means less money to MA.

One point you made could possible be true, if the player don't make enough depositions to the game, MA lowers the loot to finance the cost of running the game. This is probably very likely.

 

[Wollongong]

How could I miss this

CLD payout is 1/2 of MA's income from planet calypso. 1/4 for CLD owners, 1/4 for team running planet calypso; and the other half for MA.

Since MA has to get money out of the game to pay for costs and such; they need a quite steady amount each week/month. If the playerbase does not cycle enough ped, but the drained money remains the same, it would mean that the active players get less loot.

So, a side fact of this is; that CLD payout in not tied to the number of players playing; but tied to the amount of money MA needs on daily basis to run.

So even if activity is cut in half; the CLD payout would remain stable. It would be the people playing being charged with the extra cost.

Does, in short the following statement:
there is no correlation between ingame activity and CLD returns

So let's debunk that thought many of us (me included) had.

Okay... so first you say CLD payout is a fixed percentage of income, and then you say it is not related to the income from the planet?

And you base this on...what? The money we all decide to pay is directly linked to how much MA needs?

Your logic deduction is very flawed.

 

[aridash]

CLD been around how long? has this question been raised before? of course. and it clear when activity increases, due to events or seasonal change, the payout changes. im sure someone one did a graph to show the impact of a new mob or VU cgange (dont recall exactly).

 

[Skaffen]

tt hee hee

MA do not hold enough financial reserves to cover the IG tt value - we can deduce from this, that they do not restrict their cash realization to activity IG.

 

[OZtwo]

How could I miss this

CLD payout is 1/2 of MA's income from planet calypso. 1/4 for CLD owners, 1/4 for team running planet calypso; and the other half for MA.

Since MA has to get money out of the game to pay for costs and such; they need a quite steady amount each week/month. If the playerbase does not cycle enough ped, but the drained money remains the same, it would mean that the active players get less loot.

So, a side fact of this is; that CLD payout in not tied to the number of players playing; but tied to the amount of money MA needs on daily basis to run.

So even if activity is cut in half; the CLD payout would remain stable. It would be the people playing being charged with the extra cost.

Does, in short the following statement:
there is no correlation between ingame activity and CLD returns

So let's debunk that thought many of us (me included) had.

Yes this very much somewhat true. And a lot who will debate this forgets that at one time MA took in all money made from Calypso** were as now they need to pay out to CLD owners and to find that extra money at needed times, they need to change the systems so that they will still make a profit plus now pay off CLD owners.


** Yes, yes land areas and other stuff if I missed any were paid out as well

 

[Arch]

How could I miss this

CLD payout is 1/2 of MA's income from planet calypso. 1/4 for CLD owners, 1/4 for team running planet calypso; and the other half for MA.

Since MA has to get money out of the game to pay for costs and such; they need a quite steady amount each week/month. If the playerbase does not cycle enough ped, but the drained money remains the same, it would mean that the active players get less loot.

So, a side fact of this is; that CLD payout in not tied to the number of players playing; but tied to the amount of money MA needs on daily basis to run.

So even if activity is cut in half; the CLD payout would remain stable. It would be the people playing being charged with the extra cost.

Does, in short the following statement:
there is no correlation between ingame activity and CLD returns

So let's debunk that thought many of us (me included) had.

Bingo!

 

[Tepes]

Acro, first of all, I think you are a VERY bored fellow. Much more than me But this thread is good.

Since MA has to get money out of the game to pay for costs and such; they need a quite steady amount each week/month. If the playerbase does not cycle enough ped, but the drained money remains the same, it would mean that the active players get less loot.

TRUE - Even if MA should respect a certain amount of TT loot being returned (the coveted 90%) is clear that they are more than willing to get their expenses back + some more.

So, a side fact of this is; that CLD payout in not tied to the number of players playing; but tied to the amount of money MA needs on daily basis to run.

Partially TRUE - the number of players does not matter, only the depos/gains in game. 1 demented Saudi prince or Mafia guy with a knack for gaming could make MA happy for a long, long time. But 50% of the revenue going to MA regardless of CLDs I think covers the maintenance costs. If not, the amount of money they got for CLD's initially (and not spent on previous obligations) should give them a buffer.

In theory one could check CLD payouts against the bi-annual audited report, but good luck with that (reports are delayed, most numbers significant only to professionals) - one could deduct if the 1/4 player share was respected or was "pinched" to pay for costs as you imply.

So even if activity is cut in half; the CLD payout would remain stable. It would be the people playing being charged with the extra cost.

Absolutely WRONG! How could you even reach this conclusion? It would imply that MA will pay the same return when they face a 50% drop in revenue, trying to lower the loot return by 50%.

Next month by this logic, they would pay 4ped/week or so while reducing the loot to 25% of what was 2 months prior. One month later, as pissed off players are cutting down on their play as crafters are doing right now, still the CLD return will be ~ the same because loot will be reduced even further?

CLD returns will drastically fall with the player's activity going down, and also loot for players will go down because loot is not related to the individual spending (as it should be) as they already said but to the general spending corroborated with a slot machine/good items/good BP's. No more funds in, no more good loot but for sure no more CLD returns.

 

[PaulCrystal]

you deposit, the money goes to MA with the CC company taking its cut ( or not, if you bank transfer) MA has your money and gives you an equivalent in PED minus costs. So far the planetpartner/cldholder has not gained a single cent. Now, as soon as the depositing person starts playing a part of his raw ped value is returned to him in resources. the rest (around 6%) is the average loss you have on everything you do (assuming mining, crafting, hunting). you can cover the loss by selling what you looted for a MU and try to break even/profit in which case you make up for the loss, but another player still has to cover it.

MA splits whatever entropia income (your tt loss) there is in the way set by their agreement with the PP.

CLD INCOME IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO TURNOVER.

edit: did not include auction, refine, transport fees, credit period and other things for clarity sake.

 

[jambon]

I can prove MA needs the money to pay for their expenses.
There is the official notion that CLD stand for 1/4th of the revenue of planet calypso; 1/4th for dev team; and other half for MA. So I can prove that 1/4 of Calypso revenue goes to the CLD owners.


can you prove MA only charges decay? Which official announcement, not made by Marco 7 years ago, stated that decay is the only charge? State me any official statement since that single quote of marco, that they only charge decay.

A) Why do they need representative to restate facts that have already been said? Whether it was said 7 years or 7 days ago it's still a fact. The only difference today is that there are more ways than ever to get decay (vehicle fuel expenditure, planet transport costs...etc).

B) Um... they made $6million USD selling CLD's to people in the first place. I'm pretty sure that's enough money to keep them all fat and giggly for quite a while.

 

[PaulCrystal]

A) Why do they need representative to restate facts that have already been said? Whether it was said 7 years or 7 days ago it's still a fact. The only difference today is that there are more ways than ever to get decay (vehicle fuel expenditure, planet transport costs...etc).

B) Um... they made $6million USD selling CLD's to people in the first place. I'm pretty sure that's enough money to keep them all fat and giggly for quite a while.

Because people want to be reassured that something is like it is only to ignore it afterwards and bitch that CLD revenue is black magic and witchcraft.