Guild trader listings being changed to 14 days??!?

LaintalAy

h9dlb wrote: »

The fundamental argument here is about the 'doubling' of listing fees, based on reducing the active sales period from 30 down to 14 days. Therefore, the ideal solution is to sell on the first listing to minimise the selling costs and maximise profit.

But do it your way...

You are wrong. No matter what price you list something for , no matter how underpriced compared to market norms, someone will look at the TTC website and ALWAYS undercut you, hence high ticket rare items often don't sell within 14 days.

No. I'm not wrong

When this change goes in, any listing over 14 days will expire. That's 16 days earlier than currently.
If you choose to list it again you will pay a second listing fee that will last 14 days.

That means you will pay two listing fees in 28 days. Currently, it's one listing for 30 days.
That means it's slightly MORE than doubling cost.

THEREFORE:
The IDEAL solution would be to sell your item on the FIRST listing.
That is the only scenario that provides they opportunity to sell at the absolute minimum costs.

By all means use TTC to check and undercut any opposition you might have,
Prices will come then down. That's the purpose of this change.

Thank me later.

wolfie1.0.

LaintalAy wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

snip
And Zos has made it very clear in the past that the economy is player driven, and not to be influenced by Zos itself.
snip

The guild trader listing time is part of the economy. ZOS are changing it. Those two things are facts.
Or, do please correct me if either of those two things isn't a fact. But that's how it looks to me.

The only part that isn't 100% true is that ZOS has implemented the change, so its active.

Other than that what you said is true. But also consider that how players react to the change plays a massive factor in exactly how it changes.

I have seen mixed reactions. In 4 high volume trading guilds I have seen reactions basically that this is doesn't have an impact at all. Since volume makes up a lot of their sales if things don't sell in a week it's relisted.

In other guilds it's either oh well I will adjust , or people are upset.

Overall it's a mixed bag. But I feel that it is another barrier to entry for trading for new players and casual players. Which honestly I see as a problem.

And let's be honest here, this is like the 3rd or 4th time we have seen changes that have rolled back some features to "save database space and improve performance" and it looks like it won't be the last.

LaintalAy

DenverRalphy wrote: »

LaintalAy wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

snip
And Zos has made it very clear in the past that the economy is player driven, and not to be influenced by Zos itself.
snip

The guild trader listing time is part of the economy. ZOS are changing it. Those two things are facts.
Or, do please correct me if either of those two things isn't a fact. But that's how it looks to me.

Yes, the fees for listing and the subsequent change in listing times does impact the player driven economy. Hence the uproar. If the solution to avoid increased listing fees for long term items is to drastically cut the list prices, then that runs against Zos' stance that the economy must be player driven. Which is exactly why it can't be the solution. There needs to be either a reduction in listing fees, or the listing time needs to be reinstated to its original term. Otherwise it's just punishing a subset of players who, like it or not, significantly influence the game.

The price reductions will be a result of player behaviour.

ZOS won't change the listing fee as compensation.

I don't know that 'punishment' is the right word. Have you done something bad?

This change affects everyone, all players, will the same additional penalties.
It won't affect me so much, as I don't 'put all my eggs in one basket'

Those players with only one Large Golden Egg to sell, really need to reevaluate the options. Zone Chat might work - you'll know better where your market really is. Might still take six months to sell. You won't pay anything in costs for a 'trade' (not really sure about that one...).


As an aside, ordinary traders using ATT have been battling with changes affecting the LibHistorie library addon for several months. In fact, I'm not even sure it's still a dependency. This has resulted in long periods of manually updating the sales histories of all guilds, sometimes loading up to 1000 pages of sales data.

So don't think that this is just one strategy being used to disrupt player's trading efficiency. Whatever statement ZOS made about 'not getting involved', I'd respectfully suggest that you may have slightly misinterpreted it.

Joining a new guild now is a nightmare for traders, having to wait for the sales data to be effective; and then watching all your listed items change from being 'correctly priced' to being 'overpriced' as the historic prices from all traders average out.

JustLovely

LaintalAy wrote: »

h9dlb wrote: »

The fundamental argument here is about the 'doubling' of listing fees, based on reducing the active sales period from 30 down to 14 days. Therefore, the ideal solution is to sell on the first listing to minimise the selling costs and maximise profit.

But do it your way...

You are wrong. No matter what price you list something for , no matter how underpriced compared to market norms, someone will look at the TTC website and ALWAYS undercut you, hence high ticket rare items often don't sell within 14 days.

No. I'm not wrong

When this change goes in, any listing over 14 days will expire. That's 16 days earlier than currently.
If you choose to list it again you will pay a second listing fee that will last 14 days.

That means you will pay two listing fees in 28 days. Currently, it's one listing for 30 days.
That means it's slightly MORE than doubling cost.

THEREFORE:
The IDEAL solution would be to sell your item on the FIRST listing.
That is the only scenario that provides they opportunity to sell at the absolute minimum costs.

By all means use TTC to check and undercut any opposition you might have,
Prices will come then down. That's the purpose of this change.

Thank me later.

Thank you for what exactly?

DenverRalphy

LaintalAy wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

LaintalAy wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

snip
And Zos has made it very clear in the past that the economy is player driven, and not to be influenced by Zos itself.
snip

The guild trader listing time is part of the economy. ZOS are changing it. Those two things are facts.
Or, do please correct me if either of those two things isn't a fact. But that's how it looks to me.

Yes, the fees for listing and the subsequent change in listing times does impact the player driven economy. Hence the uproar. If the solution to avoid increased listing fees for long term items is to drastically cut the list prices, then that runs against Zos' stance that the economy must be player driven. Which is exactly why it can't be the solution. There needs to be either a reduction in listing fees, or the listing time needs to be reinstated to its original term. Otherwise it's just punishing a subset of players who, like it or not, significantly influence the game.

The price reductions will be a result of player behaviour.

ZOS won't change the listing fee as compensation.

I don't know that 'punishment' is the right word. Have you done something bad?

This change affects everyone, all players, will the same additional penalties.
It won't affect me so much, as I don't 'put all my eggs in one basket'

Those players with only one Large Golden Egg to sell, really need to reevaluate the options. Zone Chat might work - you'll know better where your market really is. Might still take six months to sell. You won't pay anything in costs for a 'trade' (not really sure about that one...).


As an aside, ordinary traders using ATT have been battling with changes affecting the LibHistorie library addon for several months. In fact, I'm not even sure it's still a dependency. This has resulted in long periods of manually updating the sales histories of all guilds, sometimes loading up to 1000 pages of sales data.

So don't think that this is just one strategy being used to disrupt player's trading efficiency. Whatever statement ZOS made about 'not getting involved', I'd respectfully suggest that you may have slightly misinterpreted it.

Joining a new guild now is a nightmare for traders, having to wait for the sales data to be effective; and then watching all your listed items change from being 'correctly priced' to being 'overpriced' as the historic prices from all traders average out.

Wow, you really have a knackfor twisting semantics.

Of course players changing their prices would be "player behavior". What you're conveniently ignoring is that it's a forced or compelled behavior.

And yes, punishment is a completely valid term in this scenario. Zos stated that since a majority of sales are completed within 14 days, then players who list items that take longer than that should have to pay more. Why? Why should items that take longer to sell require higher listing costs? There's zero reason. Therefore an arbitrary increase in gold sinks to only a subset of players infers that those players are somehow negatively impacting the game system. There's no other explanation, because paying more gold does not contribute to maintaining the game system.

As for addons... what does that have to do with the topic at hand? If addons and how they're affected, or how addons affect the traders system, had any relevance in the topic... Then why are Console players also getting pinched by the change? Why make the same changes for PS and XBox servers? They don't have addons.

katanagirl1

I don’t think the shorter listings are a good thing, but I used to make my gold selling furnishing plans and I can’t farm enough in new zones to sell anymore, so maybe I won’t be affected after all.

The rest of my sales are master writs and they were selling fast before everyone decided to take a break and play other games before the console launch. I think I’ve sold a grand total of 2 MWs in the last week.

FlopsyPrince

Alinhbo_Tyaka wrote: »

I think people are getting caught up in pricing's relationship to listing time. While listing price has an effect I think it is secondary to the real problem with the Guild Trader system. That problem is a buyers have no means of finding the items they are looking for other than stopping by each guild trader to search their inventory. Yes there is the unreliable TTC on PC but nothing for the console world. The result is you can have the lowest price but if no players looking for your item stop at your trader it will sit in there for who knows how long. To make matters worse you might have had the lowest price when you listed but by the time a player stops by it could be the highest cost listed item. The fact is the guild trader system was a nice experiment but it has many problems that prevent quick sales with more impact than item pricing.

I have said this many times. Too many say "that's not true" and ignore that it is for so many things.

FlopsyPrince

LaintalAy wrote: »

h9dlb wrote: »

The fundamental argument here is about the 'doubling' of listing fees, based on reducing the active sales period from 30 down to 14 days. Therefore, the ideal solution is to sell on the first listing to minimise the selling costs and maximise profit.

But do it your way...

You are wrong. No matter what price you list something for , no matter how underpriced compared to market norms, someone will look at the TTC website and ALWAYS undercut you, hence high ticket rare items often don't sell within 14 days.

No. I'm not wrong

When this change goes in, any listing over 14 days will expire. That's 16 days earlier than currently.
If you choose to list it again you will pay a second listing fee that will last 14 days.

That means you will pay two listing fees in 28 days. Currently, it's one listing for 30 days.
That means it's slightly MORE than doubling cost.

THEREFORE:
The IDEAL solution would be to sell your item on the FIRST listing.
That is the only scenario that provides they opportunity to sell at the absolute minimum costs.

By all means use TTC to check and undercut any opposition you might have,
Prices will come then down. That's the purpose of this change.

Thank me later.

So you failed to prove anything, except that the cost has gone up.

You cannot control who will find and then buy your item. You fail to cover that completely.

LaintalAy

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

snip

So you failed to prove anything, except that the cost has gone up.

You cannot control who will find and then buy your item. You fail to cover that completely.

I proved that by and large, people are recalcitrant.

I didn't cover who buys my stuff, because it makes no difference.

FlopsyPrince

LaintalAy wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

snip

So you failed to prove anything, except that the cost has gone up.

You cannot control who will find and then buy your item. You fail to cover that completely.

I proved that by and large, people are recalcitrant.

I didn't cover who buys my stuff, because it makes no difference.

That is the point. Some items require a longer listing to be found.

But hey, it goes against your argument so ignore it, even though it is a vital part of selling things.