Rares prices.... (27,000+ views)

[agamemnus]

Please, everyone. Jagex is killing trading in this game and there's nothing anyone can do about it (if they aren't members, that is). Let's stop bashing each other -- focus on the real enemy! :wall:

[Duke_Freedom]

I may have been a bit less than careful with my terminology, but I think you know full well what I meant there. Yes, the risk was there.. but people THOUGHT there wasn't any. Very much as in all bubbles, people started to think that because the prices had always gone up before that they would continue to do so forever.

 

 

 

My problem with people like you who have always been sceptic about rares is that they were sceptic about them when blue phats reached 5mil, when they reached 30mil, when they passed 100mil and now that they are 400mil. If some people had listened to you a couple years ago, they would have missed out on a 10000% price increase - that is the reality.

 

 

 

However I have never denied that rares are speculative items and that there are plenty of risks involved, including but not limited to the fact that it is not "impossible" that Jagex could ever make them untradable, that another dupe would take some time, that - at the time the person buys - they may be overbought and set back for a temporary drop, or that there might even be a fundamental change in the economic fundamentals on which the claim that rares will go up on long-term is based.

 

 

 

Yes I have claimed for years that rares will "always" go up on the long-term. Guess what I have been right about that for years as well, as so many other people with me. There is no bubble in that, it can be explained by simple economics. It was, however, based on a collection of (rough) assumptions, where population growth and money supply growth were the most important factors as well as the fact that the supply of rares slowly deprives over time. Since the first two of those assumptions have significantly changed (for the worse) over the last year, you (and everyone) should already have noticed that I have become a lot more cautious about long-term statements on rares. The recent updates make things only worse. The reason why rares are currently falling is because of these changes and other speculation though - not because of some sort of bubble, no matter how much you'd want to believe that.

 

 

 

Corrections in such unrealistic, overheated markets are good things, as far as I am concerned. Especially given how many of the people who participated in that market earned their "wealth".

 

 

 

As I had already explained in another thread to you - there have been plenty of (large) corrections in the prices of rares in the past. Rares had always bounced back up though, which proved the strength of the rares throughout the years. Things may or may not be different this time and a lot will still depend on how effectively the whole trading system will work in January.

 

 

 

I'm not sure where you got scamming from. There's nothing innately wrong with charging exorbitant prices for any item you own, as you're not forcing anyone to buy.

 

 

 

I have to agree with Sly here - although I have to add that most good merchants long realized that they can make more money by trading the items with smaller profit margins but in larger volumes for a net higher profit.

 

 

 

However, the minute Jagex's measures against scammers started resulting in heavy fallout for the honest people, my support for Jagex stops dead. For exactly the same reason, by the way, that I supported them originally - punish the guilty, not the innocent, and punishing the guilty does not justify you in collateral damage to the innocent in the process.

 

This is ridiculous. Taken literally, this prohibits any punishment or preventative action, anywhere, ever. There is always uncertainty, there is always collateral damage.

 

 

 

There's nothing "ridiculous" about the ideology that good people shouldn't suffer (much) from measurements against bad people. In fact, I strongly agree with EugenyG on that, and it is one of the main reasons why I've always been against the random events, especially when they proved to be ineffective.

 

 

 

Price manipulation, as defined by Jagex, is collaberating with other players in order to raise the market price of a good or goods.

 

 

 

Wrong. Price manipulation is defined as lying or consciously making up rumours about some aspect of an item in order to raise or lower the price of the item. For example, publically spamming in fally world 2 that santa's will be double their current price at christmas is price manipulation, as well as spamming the discontinued item board that some rare is rising or falling or that they will become untradable.

[monkeyboo2]

Well i don't have time to read through all this, but in general, Duke Freedom is right that rares will bounce back somewhat.

 

However, if Jagex made them untradable when they were a low price, Jagex could say 'hey, you only lost a small amount of money' and make up their usual fun about how its for the greater good =D> .

 

 

 

However, I do agree somewhat with SLY WIZARD that 13+ people on this game have a respsonsibility to look after their own things, rather than pointing the finger everywhere else.

 

I got 'hacked' for 100m and my Mod Crown in June 2007. It was a good trick he played on me; and i never fully recovered from the blow. However it was my fault for falling for the trick. His ambition for my money is not to blame as far as i am concerned.

 

However this does not mean i cannot complain and 'have justice' against him by getting his account banned, or forcing him to give me my money back. Both of which i failed to do btw, even with contact irl. And it is my fault for failing, i could have done more.

 

 

 

It is a twisted kind of blame/justice system, however it works and i congratulate my 'hacker' for his good plan, good research on me and outplaying me and the authorities.

 

 

 

It was my responsibility to look after my account and what was on the account, and he outplayed me.

[luker2d2]

The prices will still raise although will be ALOT harder to merchent because of the 3k limit.

[qeltar]

 

My problem with people like you who have always been sceptic about rares...

 

 

I've been playing RS for two years. The bubble was well in gear when I arrived.

 

 

 

And for the record, I have *never* made predictions about when the bubble in rares would "pop". I've only said that I felt it *was* a bubble, and that at any time Jagex could make systemic changes to the game that would stick a pin in it. And that's exactly what has happened. (I realize you said you've been saying the same, and I'll take your word for it.)

 

 

There is no bubble in that, it can be explained by simple economics.

 

 

That there may be an economic basis for a bubble doesn't change that it is a bubble. In fact, there *usually* is -- especially while the bubble is expanding and lots of people seek to explain why.

 

 

 

But bubbles always have another factor too -- irrational demand. And that's definitely been the case with rares.

 

 

The reason why rares are currently falling is because of these changes and other speculation though - not because of some sort of bubble, no matter how much you'd want to believe that.

 

 

This is the flip side of what I said just above. Much as people always have rationalizations for why bubbles expand, so too do they find "simple explanations" for why they implode. That's not to say that you are wrong in explaining what caused the bubble to pop, but it doesn't negate what I'm saying at all.

 

 

 

In this case, though, it is more than just changes in population and money supply growth. Jagex has made fundamental changes in the game that are driving out many money-obsessed players. This is helping pop the bubble because those people are largely the ones who inflated it in the first place.

 

 

As I had already explained in another thread to you - there have been plenty of (large) corrections in the prices of rares in the past.

 

 

Here's your phat price chart. I don't see any large corrections in phat prices from 2004 to 2006. And I am not aware of any that occurred since then -- until this past month.

 

 

 

This is what has helped build the bubble -- people feeling like these were infallible, "foolproof investments".

 

 

 

 

 

There's nothing "ridiculous" about the ideology that good people shouldn't suffer (much) from measurements against bad people.

 

 

The problem with using this argument here is that a rather large percentage of merchants were "bad people", depending on one's definitions of course.

[meili]

It's not the fault of merchants or greedy players that rare items are worth so much.

 

 

 

Gp enters the game every minute and more and more of it is always available. The only way for gp to leave the game is through shops, con, armor repair and players quitting for good. Far more money enters RS than leaves. While this doesn't affect mass-produced items, like food, logs, ores, it causes incredible inflation in terms of the prices of items that can't be readily acquired (i.e. rare or discontinued items).

 

 

 

:? I think I still have an old post somewhere that states phats could never be worth more than 100million each because no one player has that much money. This *used* to be true. Well, surprise surprise, gp is so cheap now that players can buy even 400million rare items.

 

 

 

RS is an old game now and players have acquired what would have been considered impossible wealth back then.

 

 

 

This is why I *like* con, it removes gp from the economy. I hope the next 5 skills released are also money sinks, we need those badly.

[EugenyG]

Qeltar: Just looking at Duke's statistics, keep in mind the graph is logarithmic rather than arithmetic, and thus the absolute price hikes/falls are actually much sharper than the graph shows. For example, between June and early August 2005, a difference of about 1.5 months, rare prices have more or less quadrupled, (e.g. from 20mil for blue hat to about 80m).

 

 

 

That's pretty extreme even for rares. Falls are usually easier to explain as (other than dupe events of course) they usually happen when Jagex brings new expensive items in the game, which everyone wants and thus dumps rares to raise cash.

 

 

 

A very sharp rise though, I'd imagine, indicates either a game mechanic change that disadvantages rares, a big nerf of items that are alternatives to rares, or a -very- major influx of cash into the game. I don't recall something happening behind the scenes (although perhaps that's when major bot farmers started their operation :-/). Of course it could also be something less like a major price manip.

 

 

 

Do you have any idea what caused it back then?

[Duke_Freedom]

and that at any time Jagex could make systemic changes to the game that would stick a pin in it

 

 

 

Jagex can make systematic changes to the game to reach anything want - there's no use in pointing that out. Jagex did nothing to stop rare price development for years. Yes, it was always a risk that they would do so at some point anyway. Real life government can take away your house if they pass a law which allows that - do you point that out to those who consider buying a house as well?

 

 

 

That there may be an economic basis for a bubble doesn't change that it is a bubble.

 

 

 

There is no "bubble" once the continous price increase can be explained by economics.

 

 

 

But bubbles always have another factor too -- irrational demand. And that's definitely been the case with rares.

 

 

 

Irrational demand could not have supported rares prices for so long, nor could it have supported them during the past 1.5 year stagnation period from crashing. Nor would it currently support them from crashing down too fast. Rares can only drop back so much until some merchants, investors or normal skillers will buy all the available panic-supply away, causing prices to go back up.

 

 

 

The reason why rares are currently falling is because of these changes and other speculation though - not because of some sort of bubble, no matter how much you'd want to believe that.

 

This is the flip side of what I said just above. Much as people always have rationalizations for why bubbles expand, so too do they find "simple explanations" for why they implode. That's not to say that you are wrong in explaining what caused the bubble to pop, but it doesn't negate what I'm saying at all.

 

 

 

It negates your claim that rares are crashing because they are/were a bubble. They are crashing because of a fundamental change within the game. Without that change, they wouldn't have gone down currently. We both know that, there's little to discuss about that and you are wrongly relating the current price drop to rare prices being a bubble.

 

 

 

Here's your phat price chart. I don't see any large corrections in phat prices from 2004 to 2006. And I am not aware of any that occurred since then -- until this past month.

 

 

 

You quoted the logarithmic price graph, but anyway I see a clear 3 month long depression in the period from february 2004 to may 2004 (during which the prices halved) and there was a set back between the peak in mid june 2005 and august 2005 of roughly 30-40%. Ofcourse the dupe was the worst crash ever seen and - excluding extraordinary low sales that only happened intra-day for a few hours - the price of a complete phat set + cracker lost no more than 75% of its value back then.

 

 

 

We are currently looking at a ~30% price drop in ~1.5 month time, so far rather comparable with the period from june 2005 to august 2005, with the difference that there are plenty of fundamental reasons for this price drop - unlike the price drop from june 2005 to august 2005 which was 'merely' a temporary correction on the ridiculous price increases in the recent history before that price drop (which were the result of massive large scale price manipulation, by the way).

 

 

 

The problem with using this argument here is that a rather large percentage of merchants were "bad people", depending on one's definitions of course.

 

 

 

I still don't believe that justifies taking large multiplayer aspects out of the game that many honest players used to enjoy as well.

[quitthegame]

Yes I have claimed for years that rares will "always" go up on the long-term. Guess what I have been right about that for years as well,... you (and everyone) should already have noticed that I have become a lot more cautious about long-term statements on rares.

 

 

 

Hey, you're not allowed to claim credit for saying rares will always go up, and also be more cautious now. That's part of what always means... you're not allowed to change your mind or hedge your prediction without it implying that your earlier prediction was wrong :P That's why I argued against people saying rares would always go up in the first place ... I think when I first started playing RS and debated this with you here, rares were about half what they are now, but I never said they couldn't double or triple in price before crashing, I think I stipulated that they probably would. "Guess what I have been right about that for years as well" If you make a prediction using the word always, you're not right until RS ends, are you? There's a reason why predictions are traditionally made at 3 and 12 months intervals, not unto eternity. Chances are that of Microsoft, Google and Apple, 2 or 3 of them will no longer exist as an autonomous entity in 100 years. That doesn't mean that they are bad investments right now, it just means that very few companies last for hundreds of years. I would be willing to make a very large wager that rares won't go up for 20 years, because I don't think RS2 will last half that long from now. ...I feel like an actuary explaining that nothing lasts forever, how dull.

 

 

 

Irrational demand could not have supported rares prices for so long, nor could it have supported them during the past 1.5 year stagnation period from crashing. Nor would it currently support them from crashing down too fast. Rares can only drop back so much until some merchants, investors or normal skillers will buy all the available panic-supply away, causing prices to go back up.

 

 

 

Historically bubbles have lasted for periods of up to 10 years, why do you think RS is different? Why do you claim that merely because they've always recovered before, that this will always happen again? We used to say that because the sun comes up every day, that it always will, but now we know that it only has 4.5 billion years left before it expands to swallow the earth. ;) You are aware that downwards price corrections occur during bubbles, and that happens, but then one time it doesn't happen and there's a final crash?

 

 

 

It negates your claim that rares are crashing because they are/were a bubble. They are crashing because of a fundamental change within the game. Without that change, they wouldn't have gone down currently. We both know that, there's little to discuss about that and you are wrongly relating the current price drop to rare prices being a bubble.

 

 

 

Most bubbles' end is triggered by an actual event that fundamentally changes the market. That doesn't mean that the bubble didn't exist. Although I don't personally think that the current drop in rare prices is even close to being catastrophic enough yet to justify having this discussion ~_~

 

 

 

However, the minute Jagex's measures against scammers started resulting in heavy fallout for the honest people, my support for Jagex stops dead. For exactly the same reason, by the way, that I supported them originally - punish the guilty, not the innocent, and punishing the guilty does not justify you in collateral damage to the innocent in the process.

 

This is ridiculous. Taken literally, this prohibits any punishment or preventative action, anywhere, ever. There is always uncertainty, there is always collateral damage.

 

 

 

There's nothing "ridiculous" about the ideology that good people shouldn't suffer (much) from measurements against bad people. In fact, I strongly agree with EugenyG on that, and it is one of the main reasons why I've always been against the random events, especially when they proved to be ineffective.

 

 

 

Duke are you intentionally misreading my argument? I was very careful to be quite definite. Taken literally, Eugeny's arguments implied that absolutely no collateral damage was acceptable, which is ridiculous since there is always collateral damage, so his philosophy becomes a philosophy of inaction. It may seem like a small distinction, but the reason it is crucial to point out is that the reason to draw up unrealistically absolute pronouncements is that they allow you not to look at both sides and weigh the costs and benefits, just come up with some nutty absolute that will obviously be violated, and then feign some fake indignation and your argument is complete. It is ridiculous, and intellectually dishonest, and I won't stand for it.

 

 

 

To respond to your point, "the ideology that good people shouldn't suffer (much) from measurements against bad people". I feel that when good individuals are wrongly punished by being mistaken for bad people, that is a great tragedy. When good people in the aggregate are harmed by measures taken against bad people, then I feel like you have to weigh the costs and benefits, if good people will suffer greatly but the benefits outweigh that, how could you not favor the measure? I guess I don't see this as an unnatural thing, because I realize how basic the problem of dealing with miscreants is to society. Mathematically, the most basic problem in a small tribal society is balancing the interest of the individual vs. the interests of the society. This leads to two game theoretic situations, firstly the creation of an autocratic leader to avoid inaction, secondly the ostracism of noncooperative miscreants to avoid selfish behavior modeled after the prisoner's dilemma from game theory.

[remington]

Long story short:

 

 

 

Rares are RARE.

 

 

 

There won't ever be any more of them.

 

 

 

Right now MANY players are selling and PANIC selling.

 

 

 

This causes prices to go down.

 

 

 

This happened EVEN WORSE when the dupe happened.

 

 

 

And prices went back UP after the dupe....

 

 

 

Rares WILL go back up this time as well. It will just take longer.

 

 

 

Prices on the GE can change by +- 5 percent. 5 percent of 200 million is 10 MILLION gold. So there's the possibility of making 20 MILLION on a merchanted P-hat.

 

 

 

5 percent of 20 million is 1 million. So there's a possibility to merchant 2 million on lesser rares.

 

 

 

Right now players are in shock and FEAR, the ONLY question about buying rares NOW, is whether to do it today, or wait and see if you can save any MORE money by them going down over the next weeks/months.

 

 

 

Rares used to be used by day traders, to make tens of millions a day.

 

 

 

Now they will be used as a long term investment. Then IF the game is healthy by the end of next year, they will start to be used by day traders again.

[quitthegame]

.

 

Rares WILL go back up this time as well. It will just take longer.

 

 

 

 

Would you bet your life on it? If not, what is the purpose in speaking in such a stentorian fashion? If yes, then Lol.

[remington]

.

 

Rares WILL go back up this time as well. It will just take longer.

 

 

 

 

Would you bet your life on it? If not, then you are feigning more certainty that you really feel. If yes, then Lol.

 

 

 

I can't bet on a sure thing.

 

 

 

I base my post on reality.

 

 

 

The reality is rares haven't changed. The players have.

 

 

 

The players that USED to trade rares are now either leaving, or doing something else, so they are selling at ANY cost to get cash.

 

 

 

After the game stabilizes, OTHER players will collect rares. When that happens the price will start to go back up.

 

 

 

Like it's done after PAST "hiccups".

[quitthegame]

 

I can't bet on a sure thing.

 

 

 

The quote actually runs, "I only bet on a sure thing." Apparently you're somewhat of an opposite-minded person. That's cool though, you like to speak in absolutes with such feigned conviction that you feel like you don't need to support or defend your arguments, and that works for you. That's probably why you named yourself after a kind of gun, you shoot from the hip. =D> At least you do it consistently, that's a virtue. Keep on shooting.

[Duke_Freedom]

Hey, you're not allowed to claim credit for saying rares will always go up, and also be more cautious now. That's part of what always means... you're not allowed to change your mind or hedge your prediction without it implying that your earlier prediction was wrong :P

 

 

 

I always added the disclaimer of the required truth of the assumptions that backed up the claim when I made such statements. If you can't understand the meaning of assumptions backing up a certain theory then that is your shortcomming.

 

 

 

Historically bubbles have lasted for periods of up to 10 years

 

 

 

Historical bubbles didn't see procentual increases of ~15% per month and certainly didn't last for long if they did without any fundamental reasons backing the rise up. Rares have succesfully done this for over 4 years.

 

 

 

Why do you claim that merely because they've always recovered before, that this will always happen again?

 

 

 

As I had already explained in another thread to you - there have been plenty of (large) corrections in the prices of rares in the past. Rares had always bounced back up though, which proved the strength of the rares throughout the years. Things may or may not be different this time and a lot will still depend on how effectively the whole trading system will work in January.

 

 

 

Reading is a skill too. And there seems to be too much panic in the market currently which will most likely lead to the opposite of a price bubble - a certain rock bottom.

 

 

 

Most bubbles' end is triggered by an actual event that fundamentally changes the market.

 

 

 

If it requires an external event to end the "bubble" it is certainly not completely a bubble at the very least. The whole point of a real bubble is that it would end sooner or later without any external events causing it, simply because the excesses would be unmaintable.

 

 

 

Taken literally, Eugeny's arguments implied that absolutely no collateral damage was acceptable

 

 

 

And we both know that EugenyG didn't mean it as litterally as the extend you are interpretting it or are you intentionally ignoring that?

 

 

 

which is ridiculous since there is always collateral damage

 

 

 

You see how easily you make claims about "always" as well? Well it is certainly not true that every anti-bad-people measurement has to hurt good people.

[remington]

 

I can't bet on a sure thing.

 

 

 

The quote actually runs, "I only bet on a sure thing." Apparently you're somewhat of an opposite-minded person. That's cool though, you like to speak in absolutes with such feigned conviction that you feel like you don't need to support or defend your arguments, and that works for you. That's probably why you named yourself after a kind of gun, you shoot from the hip. =D> At least you do it consistently, that's a virtue. Keep on shooting.

 

 

 

No, I based my reply on the fact that if I go into a casino, and try to find a "sure thing" to bet on I won't.

 

 

 

 

 

I based my "conviction" on the "absolute" that ever since rares have been in-game they have trended up.

 

 

 

That with-in several months of any correction they are back up, and over the pre-correction price.

 

 

 

If rares were a stock on the market, brokers would be going crazy buying right now with such a history of gains.

[quitthegame]

 

Historical bubbles didn't see procentual increases of ~15% per month and certainly didn't last for long if they did without any fundamental reasons backing the rise up. Rares have succesfully done this for over 4 years.

 

 

 

I don't agree, I'll look for counterexamples in a bit.

 

 

 

edit: I was going to look for counterexamples of 15% per month, but I'm instead going to give this example instead of a bubble in something just as silly as party hats :lol:

 

 

 

"The Tulip Bubble

 

 

 

There is some record of speculative bubbles dating as far back as the 1300s, but the first that stands out from history took place in Holland from approximately 1620 to 1637. This speculative bubble involved rare, collectible tulips. The tulip, native to the Mediterranean, was first imported to Holland well before 1600. Beautiful tulips gradually became collector's items for wealthy Dutch people. As time progressed, rarer and more valuable classes of tulips emerged. Tulips mutated by botanists and others infected by a virus called "mosaic" (which did not kill the tulip, but instead caused its petals to develop contrasting "flame" patterns) began to sell for incredible prices. Entire homes, horses and carriages were traded for tulip bulbs in some cases.

 

 

 

Further enabling the bubble was the innovative climate of Dutch finance. While futures contracts had been in use for several centuries by this time, Dutch speculators invented a new financial instrument similar to what is known today as the option. The low cost and tremendous leverage of this security broadened the speculative frenzy and allowed all members of Dutch society, including farmers, chimney sweeps and maid-servants to give up their jobs and speculate in tulip bulbs. Land and other assets were pledged for credit with which to purchase tulips, bringing leverage into the picture.

 

 

 

In 1637 the bubble stretched and burst. Credit had been exhausted; bulb dealers were unable to find buyers for their more expensive bulbs, sparking a selling panic. The plunge in tulip bulb prices left many who had purchased on credit bankrupt. Earlier contracts to purchase (such as futures and options) were defaulted upon, and soon a nationwide depression followed. In the end, rare tulips sold for almost nothing, down over 99% from their peak. "

 

 

 

Isn't that in your hometown? Maybe that's why you don't think the party hat bubble is a little amusing , it's in your blood :P :P

 

 

 

Aha, one more tulip bubble quote "A wealthy merchant had paid 3,000 florins (280 pounds sterling) for a rare Semper Augustus tulip bulb, and it disappeared from his warehouse. After thoroughly searching his warehouse, he saw a sailor (who had mistaken the tulip bulb for an onion) eating it. The sailor was promptly arrested and spent months in jail."

 

 

 

Why do you claim that merely because they've always recovered before, that this will always happen again?

 

 

 

As I had already explained in another thread to you - there have been plenty of (large) corrections in the prices of rares in the past. Rares had always bounced back up though, which proved the strength of the rares throughout the years. Things may or may not be different this time and a lot will still depend on how effectively the whole trading system will work in January.

 

 

 

Irrational demand could not have supported rares prices for so long, nor could it have supported them during the past 1.5 year stagnation period from crashing. Nor would it currently support them from crashing down too fast. Rares can only drop back so much until some merchants, investors or normal skillers will buy all the available panic-supply away, causing prices to go back up.

 

 

 

So in one paragraph you say things may or may not be different this time, in another paragraph you say it's impossible for rares to drop back without going up, how is my reading comprehension at issue here? You're the one contradicting yourself, not me. I think it is very disingenuous for you to attack me for an inability to read, when the thing you said that I actually quoted supports my interpretation, and the thing you mention I didn't quote at all! Come on now...

 

 

 

Here's an interesting quote about irrationality and bubbles:

 

 

 

"Puzzlingly, bubbles occur even in highly predictable experimental markets, where uncertainty is eliminated and market participants should be able to calculate the intrinsic value of the assets simply by examining the expected stream of dividends . Nevertheless, bubbles have been observed repeatedly in experimental markets, even with sophisticated participants such as business students, managers, and professional traders. Experimental bubbles have proven robust to a variety of conditions, including short-selling, margin buying, and insider trading .

 

 

 

While it is not clear what causes bubbles, there is evidence to suggest that they are not caused by bounded rationality or assumptions about the irrationality of others, as assumed by greater fool's theory. It has also been shown that bubbles appear even when market participants are well-capable of pricing assets correctly. Further, it has been shown that bubbles appear even when speculation is not possible or when over-confidence is absent ."

 

 

 

That's certainly an interesting quote, although it leaves me more confused than before I read it. Ah well.

 

 

 

If it requires an external event to end the "bubble" it is certainly not completely a bubble at the very least. The whole point of a real bubble is that it would end sooner or later without any external events causing it, simply because the excesses would be unmaintable.

 

 

 

This is simply false. Real bubbles often end with a precipitating event and then snowball from there. Think of raindrops or snowflakes, they are formed from water collecting around a speck of dust. But if the humidity is low, then no raindrops will form. The bubble is the humidity, the precipitating event is the speck of dust.

 

 

 

Here's an interesting quote about the 1929 crash in the US: "After an amazing five-year run that saw the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) increase in value fivefold, prices peaked at 381.17 on September 3, 1929. The market then fell sharply for a month, losing 17% of its value on the initial leg down. Prices then recovered more than half of the losses over the next week, only to turn back down immediately afterwards. The decline then accelerated into the so-called "Black Thursday", October 24, 1929. A record number of 12.9 million shares were traded on that day." This bubble seems to have created its own dust speck out of its increasing volatility, at least according to this quote, so this is an example of a bubble that ends on its own. I just mention it because people always refer to prices going back up as proof that it was just a correction, but here prices started to recover and then went back into a fatal downturn.

 

 

 

Here's a good example of a crash that required an external event: "The Florida Real Estate Craze

 

 

 

Beginning with Florida real estate, the 1920's saw the greatest period of speculation in American history. Sparked by the favorable climate, farmers who wished to enjoy warm winters while their land lay fallow purchased plots of land in Florida. They were soon followed by successful bankers from New York, eager to vacation and flaunt their wealth at the same time. Then, as is true today, real estate could be purchased on mortgage for only about ten percent down, which provided the financial leverage for the boom. Mania rapidly built, with acres of Florida swampland going for up to a thousand dollars (a lot of money at the time) and dirt being trucked in to make swamps into land to meet the demand of speculators. At the peak, one third of the population of Miami consisted of real estate agents which in hindsight should have been a warning of impending disaster. Among wealthy Americans, a contest of extravagance took place, with everyone trying to own the most palatial estate around.

 

 

 

The Florida real estate bubble was burst prematurely by a sudden hurricane (hardly unknown to the region) which destroyed many homes and caused tremendous property damage. Soon prices collapsed, and the usual bankruptcies and defaults followed not far behind. Florida was quickly forgotten as speculation went national in the stock market boom of 1926-1929. "

 

 

 

Taken literally, Eugeny's arguments implied that absolutely no collateral damage was acceptable

 

 

 

And we both know that EugenyG didn't mean it as litterally as the extend you are interpretting it or are you intentionally ignoring that?

 

 

 

I already explained this in my last post, the reason I object to his arguments is because he states things extremely absolutely, which means he doesn't have to consider all facets of the issue. If he didn't mean it literally, then I would have presented different but equally valid objections. I.e., if he had merely said that collateral damage is undesirable, but sometimes unavoidable, then he would have had to consider the practical issue of how it could have been avoided while accomplishing the same goals. By saying the ridiculously absolute thing he actually said, he avoids having to consider that problem. See?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

which is ridiculous since there is always collateral damage

 

 

 

You see how easily you make claims about "always" as well? Well it is certainly not true that every anti-bad-people measurement has to hurt good people.

 

 

 

Give an example then. I couldn't think of one such measure that didn't at least inconvenience the general populace, but if you can, don't keep it to yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

p.s. all quotes from wikipedia, no need to tell me it's not a scholarly source, I have no plans to present a paper on RuneScape in any academic forum.

[qeltar]

Do you have any idea what caused it back then?

 

 

Before my time, but a perusal of past game update announcements suggests a possible impact from the introduction of Farming.

 

 

Jagex can make systematic changes to the game to reach anything want - there's no use in pointing that out.

 

 

I think there is.. when most people have become conditioned to thinking that the prices will "always go up" -- particularly due to being told this by most rare merchants. (Even if not you, I'm sure you will admit that many if not most merchants feed people this line.)

 

 

Real life government can take away your house if they pass a law which allows that - do you point that out to those who consider buying a house as well?

 

 

It's a matter of odds and degrees. Very few people are actually at risk of having the government "pass a law to take away their house", so this is basically a strawman.

 

 

 

If I knew anyone who lived in an area with a government as all-powerful and controlling as Jagex is with its game, and its housing prices had shot up to the degree that rares have in RS, yes, I would.

 

 

There is no "bubble" once the continous price increase can be explained by economics.

 

 

:lol:

 

 

 

Sorry, but that's complete nonsense. Most, if not all bubbles can be "explained by economics". They are still bubbles.

 

 

Irrational demand could not have supported rares prices for so long, nor could it have supported them during the past 1.5 year stagnation period from crashing.

 

 

Huh? Where do you get this stuff from? Bubbles can go on for VERY long periods of time, and can be notoriously difficult to predict.

 

 

Rares can only drop back so much until some merchants, investors or normal skillers will buy all the available panic-supply away, causing prices to go back up.

 

 

Why, because you say so? Because it happened last month or last year?

 

 

 

Maybe. Maybe not.

 

 

 

As the big boys say, "past history is no guarantee of future performance". With the major structural changes going on the game today, you could be right or you could be very, very wrong.

 

 

They are crashing because of a fundamental change within the game. Without that change, they wouldn't have gone down currently.

 

 

Well, yes. Bubbles burst because of triggers -- specific reasons. That doesn't mean they aren't bubbles.

 

 

I still don't believe that justifies taking large multiplayer aspects out of the game that many honest players used to enjoy as well.

 

Well, I agree to some extent. But before you tried the argument that "good people shouldn't suffer (much) from measurements against bad people." And sorry, but the fact is that many merchants deserved what they got here -- and many more, while not guilty of any wrongdoing, don't get any sympathy from me that their "cash cow" has been taken to the abbatoir.

[qeltar]

 

Right now players are in shock and FEAR, the ONLY question about buying rares NOW, is whether to do it today, or wait and see if you can save any MORE money by them going down over the next weeks/months.

 

 

 

Rares used to be used by day traders, to make tens of millions a day.

 

 

 

Now they will be used as a long term investment. Then IF the game is healthy by the end of next year, they will start to be used by day traders again.

 

 

 

No offense, but you really seem to have bought the swill peddled by the discontinued item shills far more than I'd have expected from you.

 

 

 

Yes, the items are rare. You know what? There are lots of rare things that are worth jack squat. The only reason that these particular rare items are so (over)valued is because of all the hype and mystique that has built up over the years about them.

 

 

 

Which has, I might point out, been pushed and reinforced continuously by those seeking to profit from these goods. You mention fear -- its counterparts are greed and envy, and those have been the main motivations responsible for inflating the rare balloon.

 

 

 

If the game changes so that fewer people really care about wearing a silly paper Burger King hat, then the value of those hats will drop in price, no matter how rare they are. And it is my belief that the changes we are seeing so far are leading the game in that direction.

[hippomchippo]

So uh...Should I sell or hold my santa hat?

[remington]

 

Right now players are in shock and FEAR, the ONLY question about buying rares NOW, is whether to do it today, or wait and see if you can save any MORE money by them going down over the next weeks/months.

 

 

 

Rares used to be used by day traders, to make tens of millions a day.

 

 

 

Now they will be used as a long term investment. Then IF the game is healthy by the end of next year, they will start to be used by day traders again.

 

 

 

No offense, but you really seem to have bought the swill peddled by the discontinued item shills far more than I'd have expected from you.

 

 

 

Yes, the items are rare. You know what? There are lots of rare things that are worth jack squat. The only reason that these particular rare items are so (over)valued is because of all the hype and mystique that has built up over the years about them.

 

 

 

Which has, I might point out, been pushed and reinforced continuously by those seeking to profit from these goods. You mention fear -- its counterparts are greed and envy, and those have been the main motivations responsible for inflating the rare balloon.

 

 

 

If the game changes so that fewer people really care about wearing a silly paper Burger King hat, then the value of those hats will drop in price, no matter how rare they are. And it is my belief that the changes we are seeing so far are leading the game in that direction.

 

 

 

Well, I guess we shall see over the next year.

 

 

 

Whether it was owning a wearable rare that made players want them, or if it was the hype.

 

 

 

And I haven't "bought any swill".

 

 

 

I look at the rares in the game the same as I look at "rares" in reality.

 

 

 

Is modern art being so "great and useful" what makes it so expensive?

 

 

 

Or is it hype and peoples want?

 

 

 

All I have is past history to back me up, and seeing as I'm sure we'll both be here in 365 days, this will have to wait till then for an honest conclusion.

 

 

 

So I'll just sit here and say over and over: "No whammies, no whammies, no whammies, STOP!" till then....

[Knight_Zaros]

To the Topic Starter, Honestly how do you get off saying that rares are going to be untradable the first of jan? I mean was there some announcement Jagex made that we where not all aware of. The reason the market is in a "SLUMP" is because free trade in runescape is dead in a little over a week now. A mear 3k trade difference isn't even worth the time to most people to even think about caring about. So trade value is set to what Jagex wants it to be. Not saying its right or wrong. But the facts are the facts. This does not mean that rares are going to be untradable.

[Duke_Freedom]

I could have known that you would come up with the Tulip affaire again, which shows how little understanding you have of what rares are and why they are so expensive - and I'm not going to waste my time arguing it.

 

 

 

So in one paragraph you say things may or may not be different this time, in another paragraph you say it's impossible for rares to drop back without going up, how is my reading comprehension at issue here?

 

 

 

I stated in one paragraph that things may or may not be different indeed - in which I was referring to long-term effects. In the other I was stating that there is so much panic around currently that it is the most likely that they'll probably hit rock bottom at some point - which is a short-term effect. Do I really need to go point that out in every sentence I write?

 

 

 

If it requires an external event to end the "bubble" it is certainly not completely a bubble at the very least. The whole point of a real bubble is that it would end sooner or later without any external events causing it, simply because the excesses would be unmaintable.

 

This is simply false. Real bubbles often end with a precipitating event and then snowball from there. Think of raindrops or snowflakes, they are formed from water collecting around a speck of dust. But if the humidity is low, then no raindrops will form. The bubble is the humidity, the precipitating event is the speck of dust.

 

 

 

It is not. If your bubble requires external events to burst, it is not a bubble. A bubble is about excesses which get worse and worse over time - if it would not collapse on its own at some point, then why would there be any need for it to collapse at all (under the assumption of non-changing economic factors)...

 

 

 

Here's a good example of a crash that required an external event: "The Florida Real Estate Craze

 

 

 

I'm sure you realize that there is a huge difference between the requirement of an external event or the fact that external events may speed up the death-blow of a bubble. Real bubbles do not require external events and would crash under their own weight sooner or later even under consistent economic factors. That would have happened with the Florida real estate example you gave as well.

 

 

 

In fact, economics can easily proof that real bubbles will crash on their own sooner or later, because the size of endless bubbles would, at some point, outgrow the economy which is obviously impossible.

 

 

 

which is ridiculous since there is always collateral damage

 

You see how easily you make claims about "always" as well? Well it is certainly not true that every anti-bad-people measurement has to hurt good people.

 

Give an example then. I couldn't think of one such measure that didn't at least inconvenience the general populace, but if you can, don't keep it to yourself.

 

 

 

I gave that some thought before I wrote it down already. One example could be a detection system that checks whether the executable of a certain game has the correct file size that it should have (in order to detect altered (cracked) executables). Hurts no genuine people who will always have the right file size and works as security measurement against cracked executables (yeah I know, they are probably be able to get around that again, but we know that's not the point here).

 

 

 

If I knew anyone who lived in an area with a government as all-powerful and controlling as Jagex is with its game, and its housing prices had shot up to the degree that rares have in RS, yes, I would.

 

 

 

Ok well at least you are consistent then and I can agree with this line of thought, except that you are forgetting too easily that Jagex ignored the (what you guys consider to be) "discontinued items problem" for over 5 years. There is/was no indication that they would do anything about it. The best time that they could solve the "issue" for once and for all (during the dupe) they consciously choose not to remove them and actually advised people to not panic and sell their rares too low!

 

 

 

In fact, they even stated that they would not remove p-hats from the game ever as that would be an overreaction. Seriously, when are you guys going to admit you are fighting a weak case here?

 

 

 

Relevant Jagex quotes:

 

 

 

For now I would just recommend that you avoid buying or selling partyhats/crackers completely for the next few days whilst things settle down.

 

 

 

If you sell now you just risk getting ripped off, because currently people are overreacting. Bear in mind that the number of party-hats in circulation now is still less than the number around 1 year ago.

 

 

 

Due to a number of false rumours going around I'd like to state a couple of things:

 

 

 

1) We are NOT going to delete all p-hats ever, that would be a total overreaction.

 

2) We are NOT going to rollback all the save-games, that would also be overreacting.

[lord_british]

why would Jagex completely remove these discontinued items when all they have to do is sit back and wait for them to get deleted through inaction and/or rule-breaking?? :-k

 

 

 

It's just one headache too far to take overt action no matter what the "incentive" they have when doing little to nothing serves their purposes without all the whingeing such action would generate. #-o

 

 

 

Just as they're not going to delete these silly holiday gimmick items, they're not going to add new ones either.

 

 

 

On the whole, as time passes, there will be fewer and fewer available, and eventually, there will be too few to sustain the absurdley high prices these can fetch at the moment (whether due to artificial hiking of prices or not) and the market for them will all but dissappear :ohnoes:

[monkeyboo2]

why would Jagex completely remove these discontinued items when all they have to do is sit back and wait for them to get deleted through inaction and/or rule-breaking?? :-k

 

 

 

 

Jagex is CRAZY!

[Scizorz]

Well, yellows went back up 25m in 24 hours so :)