FYI: CLD returns are 3 MONTHLY averages.

[Shard-Angel]

Greets.

For a long time I had been asking about the Average returns of CLDs - as I had come back to EU after a long break - just for the CLD investments. As I distinctinctly remember reading the in EU BUZZ section about the payouts being "averaged" over 3 months - and NOT: Actual Income of *X / 60,000 shares.

I had voice this a couple of times - as I could no longer see it in the EU BUZZ section anymore (which I suspected had been edited from the original release) - but no one recalled seeing that bit of info before.

Well..... here is the proof (which I am sure will be changed once this is posted here, so save the images for information preservation):

Mouseover from the YEARLY Revenue:

Mouseover from the WEEKLY Revenue:

Mouseover from the Projected ROI:

Well. There it is.

So how does this affect the payouts?

Well.. you see.. there are lies... damned lies.. and then there's statistics. I had voiced earlier that all these "events" that MA is constanly churning out of thin air = a LOT of ped burn = a LOT of revenue generated, and WHY were the CLD returns a STEADY ~4.x over months? If anything is STEADY in an erratic world of MMO revenues = it has been capped/averaged out. But that too was dismissed.

Almost all CLD holders have a perception (until reading this post ie ) that "ACTUAL" earnings are to be split by *X/60,000. Where *X = revenue generated AFTER PP splits.

However, in reality, that X is averaged out over 3 months and THEN paid out to CLD holders.

Here is a basic example of how an average would affect final numbers.
KEEP IN MIND THESE ARE NOT ACTUAL NUMBERS - JUST FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES:

(Note I have just averaged 3 weeks as an example - and NOT the actual 3 months - just to show HOW MUCH your income will deviate from the ACTUAL vs a "3 week" average.)

Arbitrary numbers:

Above arbitrary numbers in graphical form:

As you can see, the PEAKS (event incomes) are NEVER actually paid out FULLY, and the DROPS are averaged out to match the "averages". THIS is why we dont see major swings in ROI payments over the weeks - regardless of the events.

This is just a FYI thread. Please feel free to discuss this. Please keep it clean.

I hope this helps.

Bonus Challenge to community:
* Can any math wizard use actual ROI data and compute the REAL GRAPHS over 3 months after PP splits?
* Can anyone Reverse-compute actual Calypso earnings per week?

 

[Acro]

I replace the original text with something more usefull

 

[Kilgore Cain]

Hmm

The "Projected weekly revenues" are an average off the last 3 months no surprise there ,BUT that doesn't prove the actual payout is an average does it ?

 

[RickEngland]

I think the note on the CLD is purely to to provide data for the CLD information, as it's not linked directly to the accounts.

That way the programmers dont have to constantly update the info of the CLD "deeds" in game, they just base it on an average for visual purposes only. Add up the last 52 weeks of revenue for example and I bet its a different number becasue of this.

On another matter I always felt that the first few weeks of CLD revenue is likely to be the real data before any adjustments to even the revenue stream and make the player base feel more comfortable with their investment, but I'm a cynical guy thats been in commercial management too many years....hee,hee.

Rick

 

[Supertramp]

How can you be so sure that events are generating more income?

People who are hunting on the events are just not working on their daily quests, so it makes sense to have stable cld returns even during events in my opinion...



Edit : and because this thread is based on your own assumptions, maybe the title could be renamed to "CLD returns COULD be...", less confusing.

 

[Svarog]

I saw those lines but always thought they refer to how those approximate values on the deeds are calculated, not the actual weekly payouts.

 

[Spawn]

It would explain that the income from the first few months of cld income were way more "swinging" up and down, compared to this years first period's income. Thx for this insight

 

[billairboy]

I think you have misunderstood the information. The three month average are only used to calculate the expected future payout for the year to come. Instead of using the last 12 month, they use the last three month x 4, because they think that is more accurate.

 

[Harmony.]

like others have said, you misinterpret the text on the deeds.

 

[Dave Stevens]

Hi Shard-Angel,

I'll add another "you've misinterpreted the deed" vote. The deed shows a projection of potential future income, based on a rolling 3 month average or previous actual payouts.

It in no way implies the payouts themselves are an average.

 

[Art Jennifer]

It would explain that the income from the first few months of cld income were way more "swinging" up and down, compared to this years first period's income. Thx for this insight

Ofc its an average.

 

[Dave Stevens]

If the income is an average as you claim, I'd expect you to be able to predict the next weeks income to within say +/- 2% (i.e. 0.1 ped) because 12 of the last 13 weeks would be the same this week and next week.

If its outside that range, then it isnt an average.

If it is inside that range, then it MAY be an average, but still doesnt prove it is.

BTW, we've had bigger swings than 0.1 ped already this year, so I'm confident that it isnt average, which fits all the observed and stated evidence.

 

[Artrat]

Dude, you're reading it wrong.

 

[Futurama]

We don't have any useful statistics how events influence activity. If the same amount of people hunt big robots instead of atrox/spiders/whatever spending more or less the same amount of ped they do daily (or can afford to spend in a week). Than the end result is more or less the same. With such huge hp mobs ofc the hof list is fucked up, but it does not necessarily mean more activity.

Could it be that MA is failing to achieve more activity with such events than the daily average?

 

[Spawn]

We don't have any useful statistics how events influence activity. If the same amount of people hunt big robots instead of atrox/spiders/whatever spending more or less the same amount of ped they do daily (or can afford to spend in a week). Than the end result is more or less the same. With such huge hp mobs ofc the hof list is fucked up, but it does not necessarily mean more activity.

Could it be that MA is failing to achieve more activity with such events than the daily average?

I remember last year with merry mayhem payouts were huge during mm, and the week after that was the lowest ever. This year mm took a lot longer, and the effect wasn't that noticeable.

 

[Futurama]

I remember last year with merry mayhem payouts were huge during mm, and the week after that was the lowest ever. This year mm took a lot longer, and the effect wasn't that noticeable.

Exactly, so maybe this robot event or most other events, that take considerably longer time actually do not increase overall activity at all... People just switch from their iron challenges to shared loot big bots and spend more or less the same amount.

 

[jetsina]

If the income is an average as you claim, I'd expect you to be able to predict the next weeks income to within say +/- 2% (i.e. 0.1 ped) because 12 of the last 13 weeks would be the same this week and next week.

If its outside that range, then it isnt an average.

If it is inside that range, then it MAY be an average, but still doesnt prove it is.

BTW, we've had bigger swings than 0.1 ped already this year, so I'm confident that it isnt average, which fits all the observed and stated evidence.

Well pointed out. Also, with a running (moving) average you know which figure (the oldest one) will drop out and be replaced by the new week. If the figure that drops out increased the average when it was fresh, then either the week 13 weeks before that was pretty weak, or our drop-out was genuinely a strong week. As we can check this in the statistics, we can also predict whether a completey average week (over the new 13 weeks) would cause an increase or decrease in payouts over the week before.

In short: if it's quarterly not annually, then Christmas can return to affect the payouts 3 months later simply by falling out of the figures and the average presented will swing above and below an annual value depending on the season/seasons it covers (assuming seasonal fluctuations!).

 

[OZtwo]

Well, the good news here from what I got from my last post on this issue is that there just isn't any issue here. CLDs are doing just fine with the 3 events going on and CLDs at a low. After the events, I guess CLD return will just go back up to normal?

But with that said. After my first post on this, I forgot that MA was trying to make the game play overall cheaper for players to play. So with that, until we get more players in game due to this, CLD returns will take a hit as well.

 

[Farmer Smurf]

How lame is it, that we cant just ask the game provider to explain it to us...

 

[Dave Stevens]

How lame is it, that we cant just ask the game provider to explain it to us...

They did explain it - the payout is based on the previous week PP income. It will go up or down depending on the activity from calypso and avatars born on calypso.

BTW, if it was a 3 month average, then the last week's PP income would have needed to be negative (i.e. less than zero players causing decay) to result in the last CLD payout, so I think we can safely say it isnt a rolling 3 month average.

 

[Timewarpman1]

So I assume about 5 years to get back an investment of 100 clds.

.....is this game even going to be around in 2020?

 

[Farmer Smurf]

it was around 10 years ago?

 

[SpikeBlack]

If they were maintaining the expected returns that MA quoted then it was about 3-4 years to return their original 1000ped price.

Remember that CLD payout is based on decay from players, if they blow their wad on a single event then the decay they generate will be a lot lower than if they had been able to recycle it serveral times.

 

[Skaffen]

Rev n' U

The scary thing is that CLD payout is just a proportion of deposits, not net gain (profitability/decay).

- If deposits stop so does the game...quickly. MA must make clear what reserves they have in relation to IG tt value, hopefully the CLD float hasn't been paid out as bonus!

 

[Svarog]

MA must make clear what reserves they have in relation to IG tt value, hopefully the CLD float hasn't been paid out as bonus!

They don't have to provide reserves for the whole ingame tt value, only for your deposits over the last 6 months (EULA, section 6).

 

[tamlin]

Assuming I haven't made any obvious mathematical errors...

We don't have any useful statistics how events influence activity.

We have some now. 3.74 before Corinth spidery-botty "Entropy" mob. 4.49 after.

Assuming CLD payouts are indeed only based on previous week income:

Speculation was that they cost around 5000 PED to kill. This is however only offensive cost, and at that maybe a bit low too - but let's use it.

Every "Entropy" killed gives 2500 PED to MindArk, 1250 PED to Planet Calypso AB (or less, unless I misread Kim), and finally 1250 PED to all the CLD's, meaning ~ 2.08 PEC/CLD.

50 such mobs would have generated over one PED/CLD.

Assumption: Hunters participating did not hunt their normal mobs during this time, but they had more decay than they normally do.


I think this can be used as a starting point.


For fun:
3.74/CLD/w = 897,600 PED Calypso income (that week).
4.49/CLD/w = 1,077,600 PED Calypso income (that week).

Extrapolating:
3.74/CLD/w = ~4.7 mil. USD/y. MA gets 2.3, CLD holder and Planet Calypso AB get 1.17 mil USD each.

4.49/CLD/w = ~5.6 mil. USD/y. MA gets 2.8, CLD holder and Planet Calypso AB get 1.4 mil USD each.

The scary thing is that CLD payout is just a proportion of deposits, not net gain (profitability/decay).

Incorrect (at least wrt the info we have been given). CLD payouts is based on the income of Calypso the "planet". You spend 100 PED shooting mobs, 50 PED go straight to MA, 25 PED to Planet Calypso AB (or whatever the company is called), and 25 PED to CLD's.

 

[Kilgore Cain]

Assuming I haven't made any obvious mathematical errors...


Every "Entropy" killed gives 2500 PED to MindArk, 1250 PED to Planet Calypso AB (or less, unless I misread Kim), and finally 1250 PED to all the CLD's, meaning ~ 2.08 PEC/CLD.

50 such mobs would have generated over one PED/CLD.


I think this can be used as a starting point.


For fun:
3.74/CLD/w = 897,600 PED Calypso income (that week).
4.49/CLD/w = 1,077,600 PED Calypso income (that week).

Extrapolating:
3.74/CLD/w = ~4.7 mil. USD/y. MA gets 2.3, CLD holder and Planet Calypso AB get 1.17 mil USD each.

4.49/CLD/w = ~5.6 mil. USD/y. MA gets 2.8, CLD holder and Planet Calypso AB get 1.4 mil USD each.



Incorrect (at least wrt the info we have been given). CLD payouts is based on the income of Calypso the "planet". You spend 100 PED shooting mobs, 50 PED go straight to MA, 25 PED to Planet Calypso AB (or whatever the company is called), and 25 PED to CLD's.

ONLY if all mobs was no looters .......................

 

[Skaffen]

AHai!!

They don't have to provide reserves for the whole ingame tt value, only for your deposits over the last 6 months (EULA, section 6).

Exactly, so how much IG tt value has been spent? - It is a bit like Fulltilt, and you know how that went.

 

[Legion]

I just had a look at the prices for the deeds in auction and just laughed, the prices for those would mean you would recoup your investment in 7.5 years if you average the pay the deed says. Worst investment ever (unless you got them early when they were sold by MA)

 

[Harmony.]

I just had a look at the prices for the deeds in auction and just laughed, the prices for those would mean you would recoup your investment in 7.5 years if you average the pay the deed says. Worst investment ever (unless you got them early when they were sold by MA)

But what if they are at 1700 in half a year, are they still a bad investment?