Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Does this apply? you may not interfere with the virtual economy of Entropia Universe.

Spawn

Spawn

Slayer
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Posts
8,076
Location
The Netherlands
Society
The Ministry
Avatar Name
Storm Spawn Bootcamp
Some reselling traders have bought up all the limited thrusters for 35 ped, and are now reselling them for 90+ ped. L thrusters were selling for 930% this last week, and now are back at 1330%, the resellers are trying to sell them for 1880%

So the question is: Should I report em for breaking the new rule? or is this business as usual?
 
can't hurt to report them if you feel your enjoyment of the universe is affected. i doubt MA bans them (maybe they wanted to do loads of space flights but then decided to not do and forgot the latest prices o the items ;) ) ...but maybe just more BPs will drop by a support case?
 
id report them, i could see buying them all and reselling for a higher price but 90+ is way to high thats pure manipulation of the market
 
This is clear manipulation, how dare they make and extra 55 ped on each?

If they sell one to each of the 1 million accounts Entropia has, that is an amazing 55 million ped worth of manipulation!

Report! report! report!
 
Spawn said:
Some reselling traders have bought up all the limited thrusters for 35 ped, and are now reselling them for 90+ ped. L thrusters were selling for 930% this last week, and now are back at 1330%, the resellers are trying to sell them for 1880%

So the question is: Should I report em for breaking the new rule? or is this business as usual?
Click to expand...

How about just not buying them and letting aucs run out?

Cripes...Why make a simple solution so complicated?







Tippin'
 
The thrusters were steadily dropping for weeks, and were down to 800%, then all of a sudden back up to 1600%. It certainly does reek of market manipulation.

They were still way overpriced at 800% but at least they were finally starting to drop to a more reasonable range rather then being in the insanity range.

There are already listings back down to 1200s, and some at 800% again, so doesnt look like its working too well.
 
Spawn said:
Some reselling traders have bought up all the limited thrusters for 35 ped, and are now reselling them for 90+ ped. L thrusters were selling for 930% this last week, and now are back at 1330%, the resellers are trying to sell them for 1880%

So the question is: Should I report em for breaking the new rule? or is this business as usual?
Click to expand...

Do not buy them. So simple like that. Resellers in street trading can not affect statistics of prices (because is not registered). Statistics of prices only could be fixed in auction selling, or pre-fixed by SOB through manipulation in auction. If that last occurs, now exist a rule, and with that, Mindark could punish them to bad people who manipulate prices.
 
This isn't anything new. It's always been done and will always be done.

Question is, when does this become manipulation of the market?
Is it ok if I buy something and put it right back with a price 2-6 ped higher than I bought it for or is it if I do the same thing but set the price tag 20-50 ped higher. Or is it when I put the price at a certain percentage level above the last sale?

I have been doing some reselling myself over the years and that goes for most of us probably, question is when does it become manipulative trading?
 
nope (too short)
 
buy low sell high... ?

I know that sometimes the market can go down on them too, and they have a chance for a big loss. I have been getting some thruster BP's to drop off making parts. Just do some vehicle parts crafting and get your own BP, now you dont have to worry about manipulation... I think~
 
See this scares me. What if I grind a mob dropping (L) items valued at 115% MU. After a month of grinding I end up with 40 of them and figure if I sell them at 110% people who use the items regularly will buy in bulk. Though it's not intended to "Manipulate" the market.... it IS in essence doing so temporarily lowering the value of the items ruining the game play for everyone else who's priced theirs at 115-120%.

I REALLY wish MA could be a bit more specific when it comes to rules like this.

Menace
 
Menace said:
See this scares me. What if I grind a mob dropping (L) items valued at 115% MU. After a month of grinding I end up with 40 of them and figure if I sell them at 110% people who use the items regularly will buy in bulk. Though it's not intended to "Manipulate" the market.... it IS in essence doing so temporarily lowering the value of the items ruining the game play for everyone else who's priced theirs at 115-120%.

I REALLY wish MA could be a bit more specific when it comes to rules like this.

Menace
Click to expand...

Well, most likely someone will report you to MA. You will be locked for 2 months then you will get unlocked after you have been deemed not guilty. The most likely scenario after selling something that gets cheaper after the sale.
 
Spawn said:
Some reselling traders have bought up all the limited thrusters for 35 ped, and are now reselling them for 90+ ped. L thrusters were selling for 930% this last week, and now are back at 1330%, the resellers are trying to sell them for 1880%

So the question is: Should I report em for breaking the new rule? or is this business as usual?
Click to expand...

No, that doesn't apply. There was a sudden spike in demand due to the release of a new planet/thing. People wanted to go see it. It's just supply and demand making the price go up, not market manipulation.
 
I wonder if this is related to a significant number of players being locked a few months back, the majority being unlocked after a few days / weeks.

I dont think it is intended to affect normal trading but more likely people who are doing major manipulating. If that's you, then you may need to reconsider, but if you're a normal hunter / miner / crafter / trader I doubt it's aimed at you.
 
MA can't/won't/should not do anything

This is how free market works look at the stock market IRL buy low sell high.

I have not tried this in EU (To Poor IRL lol) but when I was a WOW addict for the 1st year it was out I spent 90% of my time buying all ores under my personal selling price and then reselling them for 10-15% profit.

MA can't do anything as its a free market and it won't affect your game play as if you are that desperate you would make some yourself and if they try and act as a "Big Brother" on auction all the resellers would leave and shit imagine how many peds would be gone from the game in that case.
 
Mega is right, no need to panic.

Mindark had to implement this rule, if not for now, then for the future.
This rule is most likely for those resellers on auctions that do nothing else.
Have a close look on auctions and you spot them easy.

I bet these accounts are only used to gain peds and withdraw the profit.
No idea on how much, but I can imagine 2k peds a month is possible.
To most that isn’t much, but to others in this world, it’s half a month’s income or more.
When this game gets more players, we also might get more resellers.

I doubt this rule will be used much, unless you’re a hardcore reseller.
 
John_connor said:
MA can't/won't/should not do anything

This is how free market works look at the stock market IRL buy low sell high.

I have not tried this in EU (To Poor IRL lol) but when I was a WOW addict for the 1st year it was out I spent 90% of my time buying all ores under my personal selling price and then reselling them for 10-15% profit.

MA can't do anything as its a free market and it won't affect your game play as if you are that desperate you would make some yourself and if they try and act as a "Big Brother" on auction all the resellers would leave and shit imagine how many peds would be gone from the game in that case.
Click to expand...

Buying/selling items on an auction cannot even closely be compared to a stock market.

And comparing the economy here to a game like WOW is just.... :lolup:

If you think it's okay to intentionally limit the supply of a given item to drive up prices, especially by buying up everything available, and then trying to resell it for a huge markup, try it in the United States and many other countries, and you'll find yourself under investigation.

There is a reason, for example, that home improvement stores are closely watched when hurricanes approach a coastal town, because there has been a past history of price gouging (jacking prices up on what has suddenly become a necessity) on things like generators, or plywood. Even grocery stores have been caught stockpiling bottled water, withholding it until prices inflated, and then flooding the market at the new, higher price when need was at its highest (and they have been fined, etc..).

The same thing during gas shortages... monitoring is done to protect the public from price gouging. The recent high prices in the United States (and globally) would have been much higher if not for some oversight and quiet warnings.

Suddenly looting a large number of something, and deciding to sell above current "market price" is not, IMHO, a violation of the rules... that's just hoping for a higher return.

On the other hand, buying up the entire stock of a given item (especially one with limited supply) and placing it back up in order to fix prices higher, would be an abuse of the system according to the new 'policy' IMHO.

Price fixing is, and has been for a very long time, illegal in many countries including the US, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, and is generally frowned upon (and has been prosecuted) in the EU. Personally I'm glad to see MA starting to move toward taking a stand on it. Though I think they should be much clearer in their policy declarations (perhaps even including examples of what they consider a violation).
 
Soradin said:
Price fixing is, and has been for a very long time, illegal in many countries including the US, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, and is generally frowned upon (and has been prosecuted) in the EU. Personally I'm glad to see MA starting to move toward taking a stand on it. Though I think they should be much clearer in their policy declarations (perhaps even including examples of what they consider a violation).
Click to expand...
since they want to sell shares on the market eventually, after they finally do an IPO, they need to do stuff like this, so that they can get rid of restrictions like this:

http://www.mindark.com/press/press-releases/documents/mindark_prospekt_en.pdf
http://!!!!!!!!!!!!!.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/uhoh.jpg?w=640

even though for some it appears that those
restrictions were already ignored...
https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/...rk-Interview&p=2737772&viewfull=1#post2737772

http://www.realtid.se/ArticlePages/..._Realtid727/20070227152851_Realtid727.dbp.asp
Coachman said:
Listed owners from 2006. Might reflect the situation as it is today in some parts.

Mindarks alla aktieägare
Mindarks aktiebok
Den 29 dec 2006
Innehav ägare med minst 500 aktier, siffror i procent

Akteiinvest FK AB 0,01
Bankaktiebolaget Avanza 0,02
Marco Behrmann, Landvetter 0,36
Bo Bergman, Kalmar 0,01
Urban Bothén, Västra Frölunda 1,70
Patrik Broddesson, Australien 0,27
Carnegie Investment Bank AB 27,04
Sevo Daniel, Göteborg 0,17
E-trade Sverige AB 0,18
Tom Edlund, Göteborg 0,17
Lena Edman, Göteborg 0,00
Birgitta Ekasala, USA 0,01
Annika Eriksson, Göteborg 0,23
Expression AB 0,57
Lars Falk, Göteborg 0,17
Fischer Partners Fondkommission AB 0,42
Hanna Friberg, Göteborg 0,21
Andreas Funksjö, Göteborg 0,86
Rolf Funksjö, Göteborg 0,44
Golden Shadow Pictures, USA 0,36
Martin Gunnarsson, Sätila 0,01
Anders Gutenbrant, Stockholm 0,87
Lars Hammarström, Göteborg 1,74
Eva-Liz Harju, Stockholm 0,01
Christian Holmqvist, Lindome 0,17
Anders Johansson, Göteborg 0,00
David Johansson, Bromma 0,17
Jimmy Johansson, Västra Frölunda 0,31
Kaupthing Bank Sverige AB 0,01
Kronboken AB 1,94
Rickard Lagerbäck, Mölndal 0,17
Anders Larsson, Skövde 0,00
Jonny Lindh, Torslanda 0,00
Charlie Lindholm 0,01
Magnus Martinsson, Göteborg 0,17
Daniel Molin, Göteborg 0,09
Nordea Bank AB 4,42
Nordnet Bank AB 0,04
Kristina Olsson, Göteborg 0,08
Peter Olsson, Västra Frölunda 0,02
Stefan Olsson, Mollösund 0,01
SEB Securities Services Corporate Actions 12,32
Stefan Serrander, Stockholm 0,03
Niklas Severinsson, Göteborg 0,09
Skandiabanken AB 3,73
Patric Sundström Nordenmann, Töllsjö 0,24
Svenska Handelsbanken AB 0,63
Alf Svensson, Göteborg 0,18
Carl-Reinhold Uggla, Göteborg 0,01
Jan Welter Timkrans, Göteborg 39,04
Adrian Welter, Mölnlycke 0,01
Kim Welter, Västra frölunda 0,01
Anthony Wong, Vallda 0,01
Bernt Wåhlin, Göteborg 0,26
Samt: ”Ej offentliga ägare 6 st” 0,02
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

SpikeBlack said:
Distributor on some http://www.imdb.com/company/co0064771/

out of the 8 films Jon is credit as director http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0414481/

they're distributor of 7, the production company behind 2 and he was an actor in all of them.

Even more interesting is the domain info

http://whois.pho.to/golden_shadow_pictures_468_n_camden_drive/

Administrative Contact:
Jacobs, Jon nevereverdie@xxx.xxx.xxx
Golden Shadow pictures
468 N Camden Drive
Suite #300
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
US
3055765957
3055765943
Click to expand...

and they have the trademark on 'NEVERDIE'

How on earth did he find out about the sale of CND :scratch2:

Have to give credit to Thanatos as he found most of that last year

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/showthread.php?185107-Nobody-at-MA-has-anything-to-say-about-Rocktropia&p=2383143&viewfull=1#post2383143

but I never knew that they were a small shareholder in MA.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Why the hell was Neverdie allowed to become a shareholder when this sell off of shares was done an no one else in the US or Canada was allowed to? Is he, and his Golden Shadows Pictures not domiciled in the US?
 
Last edited:
Mariko Ninja said:
Mindark had to implement this rule, if not for now, then for the future.
Click to expand...

why now? its not as if its a new phenomenon. they didnt have to implement this rule, they should remove the mechanism that allows it, the buy out. people will still be able manipulate the market, they just risk some punishment now if noticed.
 
mastermesh said:
since they want to sell shares on the market eventually, after they finally do an IPO, they need to do stuff like this, so that they can get rid of restrictions like this:

http://www.mindark.com/press/press-releases/documents/mindark_prospekt_en.pdf
http://!!!!!!!!!!!!!.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/uhoh.jpg?w=640
Click to expand...

this has nothing to do with any potential IPO, that restriction is common to all non-US based floatations, something to do with US and Canadian legislation. by not offering the shares for residents of these countries they dont have to comply with a whole raft of regulations.
 
After Arkadia launch I lost interest in hunting.... and my lack of interest was amplified by lootable space.....So I was inactive until the atrox Queens' event.

Over all, to me, hunting is almost a mindless activity especially when one is driven by events and missions (hunting might need more thinking, and a bit interesting when it is driven by loot demand and MU).

Anyway, based on a comment by Mastermesh (after i've posted something saying that trading was boring .... and he countered that) I tried to do some trading....

In my opinion trading is quite interesting... and it involves a lot of thinking..... and i was attracted to that part of activities in EU. Trading is the most reliable way of making peds...(ofcourse a bad decision could make one lose a lot of peds too). So, now I've a different view of trading.....but the time one has to spend... and the margin one can get ..... It's really not worth it... unless one does it just for fun.

The info above is a sort of my disclosure in reference to my opinion below :)

If the uber players can set the price of things at an exorbitantly high MU or a crafter can sell an object at a very high mu compared to the ingredients needed, and these are not illegal

..then

why a regular trader (its a recognize profession who are supposed to buy at low and sell at high) who buys something @ 1300% MU and sells @ 1600% MU would be illegal..................btw his gain is only 23% (1600-1300/1300) - the auction fee !!

On the other hand you don't see it illegal if a crafter put that item in acution @20000% (1000 peds/tt5 peds) MU in the first place!

I don't think it's illegal.... and yes I do believe that it's MA's responsibility to control price.... coz they are on the supply side of everything in EU.

Personally, I think MA has neglected this supply side... and gave too much adventage to uberplayers and some older players who are knowledgeable about this game.... making it too costly to play at low mid and mid level (majority of the players). These (low mid and midlevel) are the players who are disillusioned (i guess it takes time to recognize that spending on MU and hunting in taxed LA is a big hole in returns) about this game.........they whine in the forum, become inactive, or leave the game. The result is a stagnant or shrinking EU with a very murky/uncertain future in an environment where the competition is going to be even fierce!

And here is one example of fierce competition as shown by google trend for search index during the preceeding one year!

 
Last edited:
Buying something at 800% and relisting at 1600% is not in my opinion market manipulation.

Buying something at 800% and relisting at 1600%, and having an alt/friend buy it and then relist it at the same or similar price - that is market manipulation.
 
Jimmy B said:
Buying something at 800% and relisting at 1600% is not in my opinion market manipulation.

Buying something at 800% and relisting at 1600%, and having an alt/friend buy it and then relist it at the same or similar price - that is market manipulation.
Click to expand...

Exactly.... :)
 
aridash said:
this has nothing to do with any potential IPO, that restriction is common to all non-US based floatations, something to do with US and Canadian legislation. by not offering the shares for residents of these countries they dont have to comply with a whole raft of regulations.
Click to expand...

I know that, but the issue that bothers me is that the 'rule' was 'bent' for ND (and probably others too that never made it to the publicly released list of shareholders), which is very sour much sour grapes. ND's already proved he thinks he's above the law in game. If he's holding shares of MA in the US that he shouldn't legally be since there's a restriction on ownership in the US, it makes it appear that he thinks he's above the law IRL too, and MA is in on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domicile_(law)
In law, domicile is the status or attribution of being a permanent resident in a particular jurisdiction. A person can remain domiciled in a jurisdiction even after they have left it, if they have maintained sufficient links with that jurisdiction or have not displayed an intention to leave permanently.
Click to expand...
 
mastermesh said:
If he's holding shares of MA in the US that he shouldn't legally be since there's a restriction on ownership in the US
Click to expand...

What restriction are you talking about ?
Can't a USA citizen own oversea shares ?

Can't he own a company lets say in Holland (From what I read is also good place to hide from some taxes, but another more usual tax paradise would also work) that bought those shares ?
 
Infinity01 said:
why a regular trader (its a recognize profession who are supposed to buy at low and sell at high) who buys something @ 1300% MU and sells @ 1600% MU would be illegal..................btw his gain is only 23% (1600-1300/1300) - the auction fee !!

On the other hand you don't see it illegal if a crafter put that item in acution @20000% (1000 peds/tt5 peds) MU in the first place!

I don't think it's illegal.... and yes I do believe that it's MA's responsibility to control price.... coz they are on the supply side of everything in EU.
Click to expand...

I'll attempt to simplify the difference...

A single crafter or someone that loots something can put it up on auction at whatever price they want.. that's no problem, because there is competition.

The problem, as I see it, are Cartel type behaviors. One person trying to sell something they craft far above market value really doesn't impact the market. On the other hand, if they attempt to manipulate the market by attempting to create a cartel, and control the entire supply of an item or items by limiting their supply to only what the cartel supplies (even if it means buying up what others put up at lower prices than they desire) and fixing prices high, is a problem.

Same for traders..... buying what people put up at below market, trying to sell for market or a bit above... that's trading.

Buying up the entire stock of an item, and re-listing it at a much higher price and then watching the auction and/or having comrades watch the auction.... again, a Cartel type situation... to buy up anything anyone puts up below what they want to set the price at, is price fixing, and thus, is a problem.

Of course, my definitions of problems are the way I see them, and what I *assume* and hope MA is looking out for.
 
They can buy and sell anything & everything they want at whatever price they want! :wise:

why would you think otherwise? (A: does not apply)

Menace said:
See this scares me. What if I grind a mob dropping (L) items valued at 115% MU. After a month of grinding I end up with 40 of them and figure if I sell them at 110% people who use the items regularly will buy in bulk. Though it's not intended to "Manipulate" the market.... it IS in essence doing so temporarily lowering the value of the items ruining the game play for everyone else who's priced theirs at 115-120%.

I REALLY wish MA could be a bit more specific when it comes to rules like this.

Menace
Click to expand...
here's your clarity...

if you hunt and loot those items with 120% markup, sell them for 100% or less if you really wish to do that...
(you looted them, you can sell at ANY price you like! Auction even supports selling items for less than 100%)

if you hunt and loot those items with 120% markup, post them for 200%, get your friend to buy them all and trade them back to you so you can establish a new higher markup for those items, then try to resell them at this manipulated inflated price... this is market manipulation, this is breaking the rules...

if you buy all of 1 item on auction from various people you don't know with your own peds, and repost those items with some higher markup to make more peds on your investment... this is just "buy low/sell high", might make a few people unhappy, but it will make your ped card happy!... and it's ok to do! :wise:

Investing in a business venture is not Market Manipulation!
 
Last edited:
Soradin said:
Buying up the entire stock of an item, and re-listing it at a much higher price and then watching the auction and/or having comrades watch the auction.... again, a Cartel type situation... to buy up anything anyone puts up below what they want to set the price at, is price fixing, and thus, is a problem.

Of course, my definitions of problems are the way I see them, and what I *assume* and hope MA is looking out for.
Click to expand...

Price fixing in the manner you describe is a risky business though. Remember ATAU HoF day?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top