Buying less than 99

I think that if a stack of 99 is available on the market board and we like the per unit price, but only want to buy say 5 then we should be able to buy 5 from a stack of 99 leaving 94 available to sell. Very beneficial your products sell faster and more reliably while buyers can get what they want. This also helps crafters as they can leave a stack of 99 and know that some of it will sell as opposed to the status quo, which oftentimes leaves people selling a stack of 99 not being able to sell at all, unless we use separate low quantity stacks, and when you only have 40 spaces to sell that is a big hurt on you for not being able to put your products up on the board for sale. Being able to buy X ingots at a time from a stack of 99 would save everyone a large headache. :cool:

No, as a seller you have limited amount of space to list items in, thus Items listed in bulk often can be priced cheaper, but knowing that many buyers only wanted smaller lots sellers often will mark up the unit price to offer a smaller lot service, the cost for this is passed to the buyer of course.

If you know that people usually needs only 5 of that item, why are you selling it in a 99/stack? And if you are able to buy loose pieces, do you think other people who's trying to get rid of their stacks of 99 is just gonna sit there while you undercut them?

Doing so kills of a dimension of the game where aside from pricing your goods, you can also decide to break bulk and sell it at a premium. So no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wazabi

If you know that people usually needs only 5 of that item, why are you selling it in a 99/stack? And if you are able to buy loose pieces, do you think other people who's trying to get rid of their stacks of 99 is just gonna sit there while you undercut them?

Doing so kills of a dimension of the game where aside from pricing your goods, you can also decide to break bulk and sell it at a premium. So no.

---

If this is the "new sub-game" to play, then why are they hand tieing us with only 40 retainer spots? Err more to the point, the ability to sell 40 things at a time.

This idea would clearly benefit the buyer. However, think of it from the seller's side:

- Buying only part of the stack doesn't clear spot in the 40 items I'm allowed to sell at once.
- Buying only part of the stack doesn't put as much gil in my pocket as if you were to buy the whole stack.

Think of real life: Why are there often bulk or wholesale discounts?

If such a feature were implemented, sellers would have to take it into account. There would not be any bulk discounts offered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wulfies

If this is the "new sub-game" to play, then why are they hand tieing us with only 40 retainer spots? Err more to the point, the ability to sell 40 things at a time.

---

Think a little deeper...if they don't hand tie us, then this "sub-game" wouldn't be there.

Other players aren't NPCs.

Doing this would destroy sellers as noone would ever pay for anything above the minimum price.

I've bought and sold things in stacks and I think the system is fine the way it is

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Irenae

I think that if a stack of 99 is available on the market board and we like the per unit price, but only want to buy say 5 then we should be able to buy 5 from a stack of 99 leaving 94 available to sell. Very beneficial your products sell faster and more reliably while buyers can get what they want.

---

I disagree with this. The only reason why the per unit price is so low is because I am attempting to sell 99 of them. If I were selling one or five, rest assured the per unit price would be significantly higher.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wazabi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wulfies

If this is the "new sub-game" to play, then why are they hand tieing us with only 40 retainer spots? Err more to the point, the ability to sell 40 things at a time.

---

Think a little deeper...if they don't hand tie us, then this "sub-game" wouldn't be there.

---

I am all-about the hand-tieing to make it hard but think this is a bit extrememe. For example, when I sell my HQ Electrum Ore, I know to sell 'em in multiples of 4 (4 ores = 1 ingot in this case.) I make no allusions on how peoples minds work but given the price of HQ ore on the market I really doube people are willing to buy more than 20 at a go. As a seller i wish they bought them like that (more space to put other crap materials/gear :) ) but that doesnt seem feasible. So i have 2 options:

1) use 3 or 4 retainer spots with small 4-12 stacks and recheck daily and re-supply as needed or
2) use all my retainer spots and with small stacks and hope that people buy them.

Personally, I do the former rather than the latter to reduce the overstock of supply.

But there in lies an underlying problem said suscintly in another post:

Buying from Stacks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackcat75

Since I didn't read 50 pages of this I am just going to point out until they effectively remove afk botters from the game and allow actual player supply to be the only supply. This would not work as the botters being able to effectively gather large amounts of materials much much faster could easily undercut all the actual player straight out of the market.

---

Till this is done I think however much we advocate our position on the topic, our arguments are kind of moot don't you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wulfies

I am all-about the hand-tieing to make it hard but think this is a bit extrememe. For example, when I sell my HQ Electrum Ore...

---

Ah...I see the problem now. The underlying problem is not retainer space, but more on your choice on what to sell.

Electrum ingot is a lv40+ craft if I remember correctly...the HQ ore doesn't sells well. People at their 40s will generally push it to 50 quickly, which then they would be able to HQ an ingot without the needs of HQ ore. Those that use HQ ore are only Goldsmith, crafting it into HQ ingots to sell it to other classes...however by this time HQ electrum ingot market would had been dominated by level 50 crafters who can easily craft them from NQ ore. Thus the motivation to craft HQ electrum ingot is less than the lower level ingots, which directly results in a lower demand of electrum ore. Even when a goldsmith is using it at level 40 to HQ some of his equipments, he's gonna be needing way more than 4 of them...so I would say you're in the wrong market to break bulk, and you're breaking them wrong.

You might think that increasing retainer space will allow you to sell more...but that's misguided. It only allows you to list more....along with all the other players. Increasing retainer slots by 50% would increase the number of items being sold in the market by 50%. That's 50% more competition than what you are looking at now, 50% more items will be listed in minimum quantity. Do you think your item will still sell? This would allow the minority of dedicated farmer who had perfected their technique (or bots, but that's another separate issue by itself) to move more of their efficiently obtained materials.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wazabi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wulfies

I am all-about the hand-tieing to make it hard but think this is a bit extrememe. For example, when I sell my HQ Electrum Ore...

---

Ah...I see the problem now. The underlying problem is not retainer space, but more on your choice on what to sell.

Electrum ingot is a lv40+ craft if I remember correctly...the HQ ore doesn't sells well. People at their 40s will generally push it to 50 quickly, which then they would be able to HQ an ingot without the needs of HQ ore. Those that use HQ ore are only Goldsmith, crafting it into HQ ingots to sell it to other classes...however by this time HQ electrum ingot market would had been dominated by level 50 crafters who can easily craft them from NQ ore. Thus the motivation to craft HQ electrum ingot is less than the lower level ingots, which directly results in a lower demand of electrum ore. Even when a goldsmith is using it at level 40 to HQ some of his equipments, he's gonna be needing way more than 4 of them...so I would say you're in the wrong market to break bulk, and you're breaking them wrong.

You might think that increasing retainer space will allow you to sell more...but that's misguided. It only allows you to list more....along with all the other players. Increasing retainer slots by 50% would increase the number of items being sold in the market by 50%. That's 50% more competition than what you are looking at now, 50% more items will be listed in minimum quantity. Do you think your item will still sell? This would allow the minority of dedicated farmer who had perfected their technique (or bots, but that's another separate issue by itself) to move more of their efficiently obtained materials.

---

I do not think you read my entire post. I am just using Elecrum Ore as an example, you can inter-change any stackable item for HQ Electrum Ore (it was the first item that came to my head.)

As you said, people will push their level to 50 quickly regardless and will be able to HQ with NQ mats. This would be the case all the way down the pipe (to use an example of the Electrum, Ores ---> Ingots ---> "some finished product") Pretty soon everyone will be able to HQ all the mats from beginig to end (hell, I can do that now without too much effort or risk.)

So at the end of the day, what I really want is to be able to put my stack of 99 and have people buy from my stack in orders of 3 or what ever i feel like. It solves two problems:

1) we can keep the "mini game" or bulk ordering discount
2) I can put my entire supply of an item on the MBs


And also, since we are at what I really want, SE should add a Buy-Oder side of the AH. Concept is below:


Buy-Order Side AH

I really like the buy order idea.

Buying less than 99 probably will raise other issues and won't work as you intended it to. As I've stated in my last paragraph, everyone else will be able to do that. The only reason we are not seeing more 1pc post now is precisely because of retainer slot limits. If we do what you propose, there's nothing stopping me from posting 40 stacks of items set to sell 1 at a time....and others will do the same. That will totally destroys this "mini game" and you'll probably get more ppl crying about 1g undercut (not that I care). End result, you'll find selling way harder than it is now.

I like the buy order idea also. I think it should add another dimension to the markets without effecting to much the normal MB,if handled correctly. A reverse of the MB maybe, where the buyer pays ahead while placing an order.If the order is filled within a set time, the seller is paid and delivery made. If the order is not filled, then gil refunded. This would allow the buyer to play at the sellers game somewhat,but force those in need of an item right now to go to the MB.

My only thoughts are on how messy it would be to implement and how popular it would be,would it be a ghost town or destroy the MB. Even still a buyer v/s seller game to dominate might be fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkwerk

I like the buy order idea also. I think it should add another dimension to the markets without effecting to much the normal MB,if handled correctly. A reverse of the MB maybe, where the buyer pays ahead while placing an order.If the order is filled within a set time, the seller is paid and delivery made. If the order is not filled, then gil refunded. This would allow the buyer to play at the sellers game somewhat,but force those in need of an item right now to go to the MB.

My only thoughts are on how messy it would be to implement and how popular it would be,would it be a ghost town or destroy the MB. Even still a buyer v/s seller game to dominate...

---

GW2 had a similar system so can't be un achievable. Personally I felt it contributed to the sub-game colloquially referred to as "TP wars" which is boring, but it does prove it can be done. Whether it's a success or not, I couldn't say, too many other factors are different in that game than FFXIV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wazabi

I really like the buy order idea.

Buying less than 99 probably will raise other issues and won't work as you intended it to. As I've stated in my last paragraph, everyone else will be able to do that. The only reason we are not seeing more 1pc post now is precisely because of retainer slot limits. If we do what you propose, there's nothing stopping me from posting 40 stacks of items set to sell 1 at a time....and others will do the same. That will totally destroys this "mini game" and you'll probably get more ppl crying about 1g undercut (not that I care). End result, you'll find selling way harder than it is now.

---

Hi, It seemed to work OK in 1.0 and I do not believe we had a "market crash." I made a decent amount of gil /shrug (I might just be the exception :) )

Side Note: I did not mean tot hijack the thread with my "Buy-Order" concept so, if you can, please comment on that post (which some of you have already because I welcome the thoughts and constructive criticism)

I think it would be better if mats that are above 15k were sold in smaller more affordable batches. You divide a batch of 99 into 33 and add a little extra to the price for the smaller bundle. EX: ItemA x 99 = 9k, itemA x 33 = 3.5k. But, people already do this. If you're looking for a specific amount, a commission board per server might be a better idea for you and many.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MPNZ

I think it would be better if mats that are above 15k were sold in smaller more affordable batches. You divide a batch of 99 into 33 and add a little extra to the price for the smaller bundle. EX: ItemA x 99 = 9k, itemA x 33 = 3.5k. But, people already do this. If you're looking for a specific amount, a commission board per server might be a better idea for you and many.

---

That is what is currently implemented in the MBs. Also, its the economy of the server that determines the prices. For example, on Sargatanas, you might be able to buy a cobalt ingot for 2k but on Lamia the same ingot might be 20k (super exageration of course, but the underlying point remains).

To answer your final sentence, see my post #11 :)

The market might or might not crash depending on when is this changes implemented. If the change is implemented before the market matures and stabalize, then you should be able to see a very visible downward price adjustment. If the market is already matured, then we'll probably see only small adjustments. Things seems to work well in 1.0 because there are so little players in 1.0, so price movements to equilibrium level will generally be way slower....so you probably won't be able to tell the difference between both system. Trading in a small market is quite different to trading in a large market.

I think it is relatively easier for players to make money in a small/undeveloped market, or in a market with a lot of constraint, or where information is hard to obtain because there are less competition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wazabi

The market might or might not crash depending on when is this changes implemented. If the change is implemented before the market matures and stabalize, then you should be able to see a very visible downward price adjustment. If the market is already matured, then we'll probably see only small adjustments. Things seems to work well in 1.0 because there are so little players in 1.0, so price movements to equilibrium level will generally be way slower....so you probably won't be able to tell the difference between both system. Trading in a small market is quite different to trading in a large market.

I think it is relatively easier for players to make money in a small/undeveloped market, or in a market with a lot of constraint, or where information is hard to obtain because there are less competition.

---

You are right, there is no proof either way that the market will or will not crash. People seem to be adamant that the market WILL crash due to any type of change that would occur. Personally, that's a huge assumption to be made.

I will concede the fact that the world size was smaller during the 1.0 era as compared to now (since SE did open "new" servers and server transfers took place, I don't think that that significant.) But even with that being said, I do feel that the market would have "matured" by now on pretty much all the servers, thus drops would only seem minor in comparison.

Also, irrespective of mature or not matured market, there will still be market spikes (low and high) due to people a) trying to manipulate the market prices and b) stupid people. So your never going to get a steady equilibrium. You will get close :)

As with your final statement, two things, 1) its a "Duh" moment, anyone with any grasp of economics would/should agree and 2) I am unsure where you are heading with this sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wulfies

As with your final statement, two things, 1) its a "Duh" moment, anyone with any grasp of economics would/should agree and 2) I am unsure where you are heading with this sentence.

---

It may be a "duh" to you...but you'll be suprised how many people are "confused" about economics. Just trying to summarize the real problem that is causing players to be less successful at trading when compared to some of their other games.

This already happened in 1.0.

The fact that they bothered to change it makes it feel like they don't want to go back to that if they have a choice.

Buying in bulk to save money per unit is fine the way it is. You wouldnt force Costco to sell you 5 rolls just because you dont want the whole bag. Leave the free market alone. Just kill the bots and gold sellers!

What has that got to with the free market?

Buyers get the convenience of buying what they need.
Sellers get the benefit of listing 40 different items for sale (read, more chances for sales) instead of 40 different sized stacks of 1 item.

I say this benefits everyone whether you like it or not.

Buyer, no difference. Seller, big difference.

As explained in the previous two pages, what ops propose will destroy the ability of seller to differentiate from others seller through bulk/breakbulk pricing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ishmachiah

I disagree with this. The only reason why the per unit price is so low is because I am attempting to sell 99 of them. If I were selling one or five, rest assured the per unit price would be significantly higher.

---

And no one would buy it because they're buying individually from the discounted stack of 99 less sales.

What everyone keeps telling you is that then sellers would price everything at the per unit price, even if its in a stack of 99, because there's no reason to price any lower.