Star Trek Online I've repriced the C-store, tell me what you think
 Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 11
05-26-2011, 12:36 PM
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Ashur1 All that you have to do now is to buy Cryptic, then we might actually see these changes. :p
i tried but atari told me i needed more then a sandwich and my stupidity.....

now i have two sandwiches
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 12
05-26-2011, 01:06 PM
If nothing else you had some really humorous descriptions. So thanks for the laughs.

Should some (not all) of the C-store prices be reevaluated? Probably. But that's why I tend to wait for one of the frequent sales to grab stuff. Most of the time.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 13
05-26-2011, 01:25 PM
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Wraith_Shadow That's funny because i love when people post on things putting them down when they thing they are complaining about is listed. Many (obviously not all) of these are based around prices set by the C-store and Standardized and are even reference albeit jokingly under said item. Take Bridge options for example. The klingon packs usually run about 2 for 80 points, the fed packs 3 for 120 there for a base price is easly assumed 40 for each. But once you get above that they tack on more to the price, Hence in the opening statement
You forgot that a company also has variable costs which are used to create a price.
So scaling the price down means scaling the caribale costs down.
Yet every product has different variable costs, so you can't just take numbers from other items and apply them to item xyz.
Every Product has its own Break-even-point. Thats the amount a company has to sell of A SPECIFIC product to have neither income nor losses.

If my memory serves me right, there should be an example calculation somewhere in the forums, I don't know in what thread I posted it back then though.

Scaling prices without knowing ALL the numbers can quickly result in losses, even if you put some numbers up.
Some of your numbers are just Cryptic's divided by two.
I won't deny the possibility that some of your prices might even turn a loss they had from an item into gain, but its much more likely that they won't.

So lets get back to the the numbers divided by two:
Lets, for the sake of the argument, assume that the Gal X is breaking even.
If you just reduce the price by half without the number being sold it will no longer break even but being a loss for the company.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 14
05-26-2011, 01:43 PM
yeah, cryptic doesn't have a magic "C-store coding machine" all these items cost cryptic real money to make, you can't summarily cut prices without knowing how much work actually goes into making these products.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 15
05-26-2011, 08:38 PM
Economicly they are selling one item. Sure they Make that item, the test it, they program it and they they make it all shiney. But they ONLY DO THAT ONCE. They don't have to remake it every time, they don't have to individually produce them for each person. So yes, there are plenty of variables that they use to indicate price but at the same time once they've made their money back everything from that one item afterwards is profit. You don't even need to be a feregi to see that. So once said money is made off of an item and in the case of the Dreadnaught Once the item has been nerfed into unpopularity or surpassed by the new flavor of the month MVAM we'll say, lowering the price would be more cost effective because people who thought it was too expensive before are now buying it as well as the New ship out is still making a good chunk of money as well.

i didnt post this as a "hey fix it now'. it's only my OPINION. As much as you might not like it, why don't you Do something constructive like adding your input to what you would consider Fair pricing Rather then just Telling others they can't speak their mind?

Honestly, what is your price for the Dreadnaught. What do you think is Fair given its current standings and all the ships that have come out since?

This is a post to exchange ideas on pricing not to be rude and just tell some one they're doing it wrong with out at least adding how you would have done it.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 16
05-26-2011, 09:44 PM
LoL great post got quite a few laughs for sure :p

In reality all prices in the C-Store should be redone but probably wont
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 17
05-26-2011, 10:27 PM
Thank you, all it is is a humerous Opinion on the pricing. I'd seriously love to hear feed back on how much people think they should pay for items rather then just people telling me how i'm wrong lol
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 18
05-27-2011, 09:41 AM
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Wraith_Shadow Economicly they are selling one item. Sure they Make that item, the test it, they program it and they they make it all shiney. But they ONLY DO THAT ONCE. They don't have to remake it every time, they don't have to individually produce them for each person. So yes, there are plenty of variables that they use to indicate price but at the same time once they've made their money back everything from that one item afterwards is profit. You don't even need to be a feregi to see that. So once said money is made off of an item and in the case of the Dreadnaught Once the item has been nerfed into unpopularity or surpassed by the new flavor of the month MVAM we'll say, lowering the price would be more cost effective because people who thought it was too expensive before are now buying it as well as the New ship out is still making a good chunk of money as well. i didnt post this as a "hey fix it now'. it's only my OPINION. As much as you might not like it, why don't you Do something constructive like adding your input to what you would consider Fair pricing Rather then just Telling others they can't speak their mind? Honestly, what is your price for the Dreadnaught. What do you think is Fair given its current standings and all the ships that have come out since? This is a post to exchange ideas on pricing not to be rude and just tell some one they're doing it wrong with out at least adding how you would have done it.
The dreadnough was just an example. And even though they don't have to actually produce it it can still make a loss if they don't sell a specific number of them at the given price .

And they do btw produce it.
Every time someone klicks that button the server makes of copy of that item and transfers it to the account.
It might be questionable how far financial mathematics can be applied to an onlinegame (especialy since a company has a monopol to ingame items), yet not knowing the numbers and suggesting some won't make it better.
And just btw they do have to make it every time a new. Just more abstract.
Everytime someone buys it the server makes a copy of that item, see the data traffic being used during this process as the items variable costs.

And no I won't make any suggestions, because I don't now how much they have to sell of product x that it breaks even, I don't know about their fixed costs or their variable costs.
I also don't know what between which amounts they have gain. (yeah not only selling not enough of a product can hurt but too much too).

And since we are already at it:
repricing has its own costs, since someone has to reculculte all those numbers above (and many more) to make sure the company doesn't loose money.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 19
05-27-2011, 01:17 PM
So.... instead of participating in the point of the Thread you're just here to Whine and cry about why i did a no no? Seriously. And it's also very likely that when ever that purchase button is pushed on the Dreadnaught that it isn't copied but rather unlocked? The c-store is already coded into the game there for through constant patches that the items in said store are aleady IN the game. Buying it from the store just unlocks it for use. Kind of like when you jump on a server in the game and the server has been modded to allow certain rules or additions ( FPS games have these a lot) and from an economical stand point even if the item IS copied and transfered every time no, they don't need it at a certain price to make money or break even. That only applies if there is a limited amount. Lowering the price of the Dreadnaught (as it's our running example) would Not only STILL MAKE THEM MONEY every time that unlock button is used but it would actually stimulate sales because more people would be buying at a lower cost.

That means more people buying makes up for the price difference on an item that's already paid for itself possibly hundreds of times by now. You're entire arguement is filled with the same holes you're trying to put into mine. And if you HAVE no opinion then why are you debating this? The point isn't to rewrite the C-store but to get people discussing price changes they'd like to see. And Personally if you CAN'T keep an open mind on it then by god you have no place on a Star Trek Forums little boy.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 142
# 20
05-29-2011, 08:38 AM
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Wraith_Shadow So.... instead of participating in the point of the Thread you're just here to Whine and cry about why i did a no no? Seriously. And it's also very likely that when ever that purchase button is pushed on the Dreadnaught that it isn't copied but rather unlocked? The c-store is already coded into the game there for through constant patches that the items in said store are aleady IN the game. Buying it from the store just unlocks it for use. Kind of like when you jump on a server in the game and the server has been modded to allow certain rules or additions ( FPS games have these a lot) and from an economical stand point even if the item IS copied and transfered every time no, they don't need it at a certain price to make money or break even. That only applies if there is a limited amount. Lowering the price of the Dreadnaught (as it's our running example) would Not only STILL MAKE THEM MONEY every time that unlock button is used but it would actually stimulate sales because more people would be buying at a lower cost. That means more people buying makes up for the price difference on an item that's already paid for itself possibly hundreds of times by now. You're entire arguement is filled with the same holes you're trying to put into mine. And if you HAVE no opinion then why are you debating this? The point isn't to rewrite the C-store but to get people discussing price changes they'd like to see. And Personally if you CAN'T keep an open mind on it then by god you have no place on a Star Trek Forums little boy.

You know I nearly fell from my chair when reading that little boy thing- from laughing.

Well first of all: So you, the one using caps every 2 sentences and deliberately ignores facts given by people, and claiming that the same have holes where there are none, is the adult and the one trying to explain financial mathematics to you is the little boy? OMG
You know a forum, even a ST forum is meant for discussion. If you can't stand critique about your posts, you might be the one who shouldn't post in a (Star Trek) forum. And yes, these brackets are there for a reason.

And about that whining accusation: Who is the one indirectly saying: Make the items cheaper I can’t /don’t want to afford them? I give you a little hint: It’s not me.

Again: It doesn't matter if they actually produce every single peace or not. But what do I know after 5 years of learning this nonsense and passing a 3-4 hour lasting vocational matriculation examination about business administration and accounting. And yes passing doesn't mean I was good at it. I got, in fact, just and average grade.

The point is: It doesn't matter which specific cost a product has to shoulder, it still has to shoulder costs.
Even if they only need to do the actual work once, the product still has to shoulder other costs.

Material
+Material indirect material costs (%-amount from material)
+conversion costs
+indirect conversion costs(%-amount from Production costs)
+[...]
------------------------
Manufacturing costs
------------------------------------------------
net costs
price - net costs = marginal income(MI)

Break-even-point = Fixed costs/MI

BeP...Amount of that item they have to sell to BREAK EVEN.

And sorry that I’m the one who has to break it to you but a company’s goal is not to break even but to make money.
Or why do you think people buy shares and invest in companies? If someone holds 20% of the company they he/she also wants her/his share from the profit distribution. So they have to add around 10% profit magin to make a price

And before you start 'But they don't have to produce them' again - No but do you think their computers run without electricity? Or that their toilets clean themselves? You can replace material and so on with every product specific cost you want, it’s just an example. (. It doesn’t really matter which costs they use to calculate their net costs, but that they have net costs is a fact.)

And these 15§§ you are paying them every month, are maybe between 2§§ and 5§§ for them, the rest goes to what do I know what money sink in their company. It is really marginal which costs they have to add in, fact is they have to do that in order to stay in business.
I won’t deny that C-Store items probably have higher administration costs than everything else, but so what? They still have their net costs and the MI, also fixed costs.
You might want to say know that the devs said that they need to ask for money for C-store items in order to create them –> in no contrast to the text above.

So where is the point of all this?
If you they sell and item with net costs of 1300 for 650, they would have a loss of 650 every time someone clicks that button. If you sell it for exactly 1300 you will still lose money. (Catchword fixed costs).
Dreadnought as example: If its production costs are 1500 and you sell it for 1000, you have a loss of 500 every time someone buys it and will NEVER break even, no matter how many dreadnoughts they sell. They would in fact accumulate losses.

And this is why you can’t make a price without knowing their net costs.
And yeah about me not showing new arguments: Why should I, while the old one still stands?

And this is also not about you being wrong but about the fact that it isn't as simple as you seemingly think.
But yeah you have won, I won't bother explaining it again and therefore don't plan to open this thread another time.

Last but not least: