Jump to content


Photo

Tax on Trading Post


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
49 replies to this topic

Poll: Tax on trading post (169 member(s) have cast votes)

If a tax was added onto the trading post, how much do you think it should be?

  1. 5% (41 votes [24.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 24.26%

  2. Between 3-4% (4 votes [2.37%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.37%

  3. Between 2-3% (13 votes [7.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.69%

  4. Between 1-2% (28 votes [16.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.57%

  5. Below 1% / No tax (83 votes [49.11%])

    Percentage of vote: 49.11%

Vote

Posted 26 June 2017 - 02:11 PM #21

PVM Purple
Super Donator

PVM Purple
Posts: 35
Likes: 9
Location: United States


  •  Member since:
    04 Jun 2017

    • Time spent:
      4d 5h 47m 16s

  •  Total level:
    2,277

I think implementing other forms of money sinks into the game that come from osrs should be implemented first to combat the imcominggp into the game.
Examples:

 

Bonds turning untradeable after trading with a % fee to make them tradeable again.

 

Degrading armour and weapons, Barrows equipment, Crystal equipment, Abyssal tentcale, etc.

 

Nightmare zone has also taken a lot of gp out of osrs if that were ever to be implemented here, not that it would be neede for leveling but maybe for the rewards like snapegrass for ironman.

 

I agree to make Degrading Armour and Weapons, this would make a slight effect and would not be inconvenient.

Nightmare Zone would not be a bad idea. Only I think there should still be like a 1-2% tax fee, because a % that small would not make a significant change, but in the long run would definitely help the economy.

Now this may not be like by the majority but I think you should maybe make the "Well Of Goodwill" 50m rather than 25m, that would also help out a lot.



Posted 26 June 2017 - 02:23 PM #22

Greer
User

Greer
Posts: 115
Likes: 43
Location: Lonely Mountain


  •  Member since:
    20 Jun 2017

    • Time spent:
      12d 2h 21m 18s

  •  Total level:
    2,181

I mean.. you're using a service that allows you to sell your goods while you're eating out of your nose. A 2% tax as a repercussion? For sure.



Posted 26 June 2017 - 02:35 PM #23

Sheep
Veteran

Sheep
Posts: 5,002
Likes: 3,868
Location: Netherlands




  •  Member since:
    11 Nov 2016

    • Time spent:
      254d 15h 36m 46s

  •  Total level:
    2,277
    Awards

  •  22 bugs found
My vote is on somewhere around 2% however I also like to hear more suggestions on any kind of money sink.

Just throwing something out there:

People suggested a lottery but that isn't really a money sink, maybe you can add it in another way.
This is the original idea, price is 10m and for example 20ppl donate 10m in the lottery, that's 200m in total, 1 person will win the pot, that's how it suppose to go.

But what if there would be a tax on here too, 200m is the pot, someone wins it and the total of 200m will be reduced with like 1 to 10%, rather see 10% in my opinion or 1/2% less so they wouldn't win 200m but 200-20=180m.
The 20m will be permanently removed, this would be nice to see, also people will lose some money and no one will really notice that they've lost 20m from the total pot because donating 10m and winning 180m.... You wouldn't really notice that.

Something in that direction would be a nice feature.

Another suggestion would be a gambler npc somewhere where you can use an item on or minimum 10m and this npc can double it or you'll lose it , he'll be using like a dice, there would be a higher chance to lose than win to get the idea of some sort of money sink, also a chance to double the item/gp, not as big as losing though.

Let me know what you think, just throwing stuff out there for 'money sink' ideas.


-Sheep.

DiFZ2Y0.png

 

hK2Oxeq.png

lOWOdZK.png

unknown.png
gcsafeR.png

Spoiler

Posted 26 June 2017 - 02:43 PM #24

Nitsua
Super Donator

Nitsua
Posts: 279
Likes: 212


  •  Member since:
    27 May 2017

    • Time spent:
      24d 7h 15m 37s

  •  Total level:
    2,179

  •  2 bugs found

TLDR: No need for a tax (sources: have taken upper 3000 level courses in Economics at Uni)

  • A tax will encourage trading outside of the trading post where no tax is necessary (for bigger priced items that is)
  • A tax will further widen the gap between the poor and rich

If you want to counter the inflation issue every server eventually has to tackle, then you want to add more money sinks (like instances).

 

Also, It would help immensely if a limit was imposed on the trading post so you could not buy more than a few high scale items in 12/24 hours.

Ex. someone shouldn't be allowed to buy 50 AGS and literally control the market.

This artificially increases the price of items.

  • An example of this is the Kodai Wand. Kidda bought out every wand for ~50m/ea. He then sold the wands for 200m. The wands are now stable stable at 100-130m.
  • The Kodai Wand has not become any "easier" to obtain, however it is much more now in price.

 

A tax is only going to piss players off lol. 

However, I think it could work on the micro scale (our community is pretty small compared to something like RS), so I think it would be a good idea to "trial" run it.. however I don't know how you would calculate if it actually improves the economy.. hmm

That being said the other things I mentioned would be a better alternative. 


"You never quit Runescape, you're only afk."

Posted Image


Posted 26 June 2017 - 03:19 PM #25

One two
Legendary Donator

One two
Posts: 76
Likes: 26


  •  Member since:
    22 Jun 2017

    • Time spent:
      4d 13h 29m 20s

  •  Total level:
    2,277

horrible ide the economy is fucked already enough no point to change



Posted 26 June 2017 - 03:31 PM #26

Omicron

Founder

Omicron
Posts: 1,420
Likes: 13,560



  •  Member since:
    18 Jul 2016

    • Time spent:
      421d 5h 25m 48s

  •  Total level:
    2,473
    Awards

 

However, I think it could work on the micro scale (our community is pretty small compared to something like RS), so I think it would be a good idea to "trial" run it.. however I don't know how you would calculate if it actually improves the economy.. hmm

That being said the other things I mentioned would be a better alternative. 

 

 

By looking at the amount of GP that has moved back and forth on the TP in just the last 24 hours, we're looking at a pretty good amount of money to clear from players, a small amount from each, nonetheless, with a % as small as 2%.

 

It's a great option because most players would barely feel it and it would have such a large effect on the economy behind the scenes.

 

 

 

 

 

TLDR; Tax both the buyer & the Seller.

 

I'm not so sure about how this would pan out, but we'd have to look into the it a bit more to see whether it's viable. Even considering taxing the buyer instead as some other large servers are doing. The reason I chose to tax the seller was because the numbers would be in the background, and the buyer wouldn't have to worry about it. If a bond is 80m, the seller puts it up for 80m and the buyer pays 80m. The difference is when the seller claims their GP, a certain % would be lost. It seemed like the simplest idea so that a buyer wouldn't have to pull their calculator out and/or we wouldn't have to modify the visuals on the Trading post interface to accomplish this.



Posted 26 June 2017 - 04:09 PM #27

Shamrock
Veteran

Shamrock
Posts: 471
Likes: 539
Clan: #ICE
Location: United States



  •  Member since:
    13 Jun 2017

    • Time spent:
      95d 17h 17m 22s

  •  Total level:
    2,277
    Awards

  •  2 bugs found

umm how is it fair to tax the seller.. and not the buyer hahahah and tbh all that is going to happen is no one will use the trade post anymore .


Posted Image
Posted Image

Posted 26 June 2017 - 04:10 PM #28

Ny x
Super Donator

Ny x
Posts: 31
Likes: 10
Location: London, UK


  •  Member since:
    24 Jun 2017

    • Time spent:
      2d 12h 8m 38s

  •  Total level:
    1,549

I'm not so sure about how this would pan out, but we'd have to look into the it a bit more to see whether it's viable. Even considering taxing the buyer instead as some other large servers are doing. The reason I chose to tax the seller was because the numbers would be in the background, and the buyer wouldn't have to worry about it. If a bond is 80m, the seller puts it up for 80m and the buyer pays 80m. The difference is when the seller claims their GP, a certain % would be lost. It seemed like the simplest idea so that a buyer wouldn't have to pull their calculator out and/or we wouldn't have to modify the visuals on the Trading post interface to accomplish this.

 

It makes for an interesting debate. As typically on RSPS, as you would imagine, players tend to be more cunning and want the best deal. You might see players increasing prices on items in order to bypass the tax system and therefore just leading to inflation.

 

Perhaps, taxing both parties isn't such a bad idea after all.


tumblr_nnovnqVx6M1sfi0qeo1_500.gif

 

Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment.

Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.


Posted 26 June 2017 - 04:12 PM #29

Take Notes
Extreme Donator

Take Notes
Posts: 336
Likes: 320
Clan: Wronghood


  •  Member since:
    04 Feb 2017

    • Time spent:
      77d 19h 23m 23s

  •  Total level:
    2,277
    Awards

fr why everybody complaining bout a small tax like people really gonna spam edge for hours to avoid spending a few hundred k?


Posted Image

Posted 26 June 2017 - 04:29 PM #30

Nitsua
Super Donator

Nitsua
Posts: 279
Likes: 212


  •  Member since:
    27 May 2017

    • Time spent:
      24d 7h 15m 37s

  •  Total level:
    2,179

  •  2 bugs found

By looking at the amount of GP that has moved back and forth on the TP in just the last 24 hours, we're looking at a pretty good amount of money to clear from players, a small amount from each, nonetheless, with a % as small as 2%.

 

It's a great option because most players would barely feel it and it would have such a large effect on the economy behind the scenes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't say its a great option, but it's an option nonetheless.

If you do go through with this though you might want to make it to where you cannot see who is selling what because people will just end up PM'ing the seller to buy their bulk skilling supplies, high valued items, etc. (even if you do this people can just yell that they are buying it and eventually get it though.. without tax).

 

The real problem that impacts the economy is gambling and extremely rich people who buyout items. This is similar to what Merch clans did on RS until they enacted buy limits to fix it before it got out of hand. It will get out of hand much faster on a smaller community as opposed to RS that has thousands of people buying/selling (aka controlling the market price). 

 

I'm curious what your thoughts are on making buy limits in the TP? 


"You never quit Runescape, you're only afk."

Posted Image


Posted 26 June 2017 - 05:30 PM #31

Jare
Veteran

Jare
Posts: 674
Likes: 689
Location: TX



  •  Member since:
    04 Nov 2016

    • Time spent:
      35d 1h 36m 8s

  •  Total level:
    1,268
    Awards
I actually love the old way of selling/buying items. I miss the days when people would crowd the Grand Exchange or Varrock West spamming what they wanted to buy and/or sell. All the colorful text and disarray was great. I personally think it would be great having both tax and active trading at home or wherever the main marketplace may be. It's better for the community because people are actually communicating whilst trading. It further builds unity within the community! It would be awesome and perhaps a grand thing to bring back that nostalgic feel to our players.

ovxXQnp.pngZ6mBy8Q.png


Posted 26 June 2017 - 05:49 PM #32

Iron Divine
Ex-Staff

Iron Divine
Posts: 150
Likes: 97
Location: Norway



  •  Member since:
    07 Apr 2017

    • Time spent:
      22d 20h 33m 53s

  •  Total level:
    2,277

  •  2 bugs found

I think most people would still use the TP, just because of how AFK it is. You wont have to stay awake all night long just to sell an item, because it would go automaticly over night, this is why i think a 2% cut would be awesome, cus people are lazy (no offense), and they will continue to use the TP. However, it might also make people interract more with eachother, with the old way of trading, like @Jare above me posted, which would be an insanely nice addition in my opinion.


Posted Image

Posted 26 June 2017 - 07:09 PM #33

Gatsby
Legendary Donator

Gatsby
Posts: 498
Likes: 285
Clan: Dynasty
Location: West Egg


  •  Member since:
    23 May 2017

    • Time spent:
      9d 3h 31m 11s

  •  Total level:
    2,277
    Awards

I honestly just can't support this, as there are other alternatives to this. If you do tax, I can see a lot of people just selling without using trading post.


Posted Image

Graphics Section

Need work done? Send me a private message on Discord: gatsby#7852


Posted 26 June 2017 - 07:43 PM #34

CronLad
Veteran

CronLad
Posts: 273
Likes: 289
Clan: Dynasty



  •  Member since:
    06 Mar 2017

    • Time spent:
      34d 12h 33m 52s

  •  Total level:
    2,277
    Awards

  •  6 bugs found

Talks about prices being unstable/too high...Merched crystal seeds to 50 mil last week.

 

 084.png


6O8kkEq.png?1


Posted 27 June 2017 - 12:02 AM #35

Ruwk

Server Support

Ruwk
Posts: 349
Likes: 214
Location: United States




  •  Member since:
    03 Jun 2017

    • Time spent:
      35d 16h 28m 54s

  •  Total level:
    2,277
    Awards

  •  22 bugs found
I voted yes for 1-2%, but if it was more than that my vote would be a no. I think it's a good idea as long as it's not too much because then people would avoid using it at all costs. If it's 1-2% I think a lot of people would still use it over regular trades to save time or while they are offline.

Also I think that the taxes need to be on the buyer and not the seller.

Example: Seller posts item at 10m > Buyer sees item at 10.2m > Buyer purchases item for 10.2m > Seller receives 10m.

This way both the buyer and seller get what they see and expect.

An example of this is the Kodai Wand. Kidda bought out every wand for ~50m/ea. He then sold the wands for 200m. The wands are now stable stable at 100-130m.


@Omricon I saw this too, as well as Kidda do this with Toxic staff of the dead and other people do it with other items. I decided to sell my Toxic SOTD for 16m (which was average) then after it selling decided I wanted to buy it back for Inferno, just to discover that Kidda had bought all of them and was then selling for just under 25m.

If we want to talk about inflation let's also address the fact that the rich people are single handledly able to, and some are, causing that. It's literally a monopoly.

Please add a cap to how many of certain items you can buy in a given time. Like Kodai wand or Toxic SOTD should be capped at like 4 per day.

| EIM "Lydo" | UIM "um im uim" | HCIM "Anticipation" | Classic "REWK" | Realism "uwk" | Main "Ruwk" |


Posted 27 June 2017 - 05:31 AM #36

Ultistic
Veteran

Ultistic
Posts: 789
Likes: 5,469
Clan: IDFWY
Location: 'Murica



  •  Member since:
    18 Jul 2016

    • Time spent:
      205d 18h 13m 37s

  •  Previous username:
    Lowkey

  •  Total level:
    2,277
    Awards

Talks about prices being unstable/too high...Merched crystal seeds to 50 mil last week.

 

 084.png

That's the whole reason behind this topic, it's not just me who does that (lost money doing that btw) It's with any item on the TP. Somebody with 5-10b cash can easily buy out a certain item and make it go up in price by 20-30% and players are left without an option. Reading through some of these comments I like the idea of adding some sort of "limit" on buying a certain amount of an item per day.


Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image


Posted 27 June 2017 - 09:01 AM #37

Omicron

Founder

Omicron
Posts: 1,420
Likes: 13,560



  •  Member since:
    18 Jul 2016

    • Time spent:
      421d 5h 25m 48s

  •  Total level:
    2,473
    Awards

That's the whole reason behind this topic, it's not just me who does that (lost money doing that btw) It's with any item on the TP. Somebody with 5-10b cash can easily buy out a certain item and make it go up in price by 20-30% and players are left without an option. Reading through some of these comments I like the idea of adding some sort of "limit" on buying a certain amount of an item per day.

 

Limits are difficult to impose when someone can simply create a new account and buy more of that item. Sure, we can limit it hard by IP or MAC address rather than just the username.. but there's always a way around that and if someone is dedicated enough they will get around it. 



Posted 27 June 2017 - 09:44 AM #38

Nitsua
Super Donator

Nitsua
Posts: 279
Likes: 212


  •  Member since:
    27 May 2017

    • Time spent:
      24d 7h 15m 37s

  •  Total level:
    2,179

  •  2 bugs found

Limits are difficult to impose when someone can simply create a new account and buy more of that item. Sure, we can limit it hard by IP or MAC address rather than just the username.. but there's always a way around that and if someone is dedicated enough they will get around it. 

"but there's always a way around that and if someone is dedicated enough they will get around it"

^^^The same can be said about this proposed "tax" lul

People can get around it, but will it help the economy a little bit? Most likely.

 

You can work around people creating new accounts:

  • Make it to where you can only use the TP after "x" amount of in-game time
  • Make it to where you can only use the TP if you have "x" total level
  • Lots of different alternatives like this

If a person was limited by what they can buy through their IP & Mac it would cut out most, if not all, of the problem.

Sure, people can get around it, but it would be very tough/tedious (if someone goes through this much trouble to merch then more power to them).

Bottom line though, it would help the economy more than a tax (and still, I would like to see it in-game and see how it works).


"You never quit Runescape, you're only afk."

Posted Image


Posted 27 June 2017 - 10:29 AM #39

sklp
Donator

sklp
Posts: 607
Likes: 238
Clan: Ironman OG
Location: Vet'ion


  •  Member since:
    18 May 2017

    • Time spent:
      10d 9h 39m 48s

  •  Total level:
    2,277

  •  6 bugs found

What is this government controls or some ____? I'm an ironman and I disagree with this, you can't penalise players for trading interactions...

 

Is that how bad the money situation is. There should be a thousand more solutions prior to ever arriving at this idea in the first place. 


IGN : Sklp

CC: Ironman OG

 

:ph34r:


Posted 27 June 2017 - 05:53 PM #40

Iron Divine
Ex-Staff

Iron Divine
Posts: 150
Likes: 97
Location: Norway



  •  Member since:
    07 Apr 2017

    • Time spent:
      22d 20h 33m 53s

  •  Total level:
    2,277

  •  2 bugs found

What is this government controls or some ____? I'm an ironman and I disagree with this, you can't penalise players for trading interactions...

 

Is that how bad the money situation is. There should be a thousand more solutions prior to ever arriving at this idea in the first place. 

Do you even know the consequences of the huge amount of new items hitting the game? U'll litterly end up like a server where 300B is nothing, and the economy is ruined. Fine ur an ironman, and maybe thats why you dont see it, just because you dont trade on a daily basis. 

I know about ur post where u said answers are so short, so why dont you please explain to all of us why you are so much against a 2% fee?


Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


This topic has been visited by 11 user(s)