Fixing the Economics

[aramis]

The prices for transport in MGT are BADLY broken. (Not even going to the spec trade side of things.

I cranked out a spreadsheet with budget boxes (but not skimpy-crew, albeit only 1 pilot, 1 nav, std engineers, no medic, 1 gunner, no stewards) to figure out base cargo costs. I used 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1200, 1400, 1600, 1800, and 2000 Td Ships. None are fitted for passengers. Financed value is 100%. Maintenance per half-month, annual payment per half-month, fuel per jump, salaries per half-month.

I got the following landmarks for cost per Td of cargo:

Jump ____ J1 _______ J2 _______ J3 _______ J4 ________ J5 _________ J6 __
Max ____ 699.96 _ 1,316.77 _ 2,432.97 _ 5,157.50 _ 19,026.67 _ 111,265.74
Avg ____ 645.14 _ 1,159.88 _ 2,022.08 _ 3,768.07 __ 9,322.59 __ 70,703.81
Min ____ 538.16 _ 1,050.15 _ 1,903.51 _ 3,396.43 __ 7,311.50 __ 44,323.65
Median _ 646.07 _ 1,156.44 _ 1,992.19 _ 3,610.38 __ 8,053.17 __ 61,072.32
StDev ___ 42.79 ____ 68.62 ___ 152.75 ___ 517.31 __ 3,543.95 __ 25,387.21

A couple notes: For J1 and J2, 400Td is the optimal hull; for J3-J6 2000Td is. Figured that irony should be shared.

This means that a good price per ton for shipping cargo should be on the order of:


Basal Ton Cost ____ 687.93 _ 1,228.50 _ 2,174.83 _ 4,285.37 _ 12,866.54 _ 96,091.03
Round to next 100 _ 700.00 _ 1,300.00 _ 2,200.00 _ 4,300.00 _ 12,900.00 _ 96,100.00

Basal cost is the lower of (minimum + 2 StDev) or (Average + StDev)… and means a profit for those in optimized hulls.

Now, Mid Passengers Single occupancy, presuming a level 1 steward, should be 4.4 cargo tons equivalent (CTE) each (4 for pass, 0.4 for steward SR), plus KCr4.425 (2 for PassLS, 0.2 for Steward LS, 0.1 for 1/20 monthly salary, 2.125 for increased maintenance and payment)

Single occupancy high passengers: 6 CTE (4 for SR, 1 for steward SR, 1 for Passenger's cargo ton) plus KCr4.875 (2 for pass LS, 0.5 for steward LS, 0.25 for 1/8 monthly salary, and again, 2.125 for increased maintenance and payment.)

Double Occupancy Low:
2.4 CTE (half a stateroom, but a share of the steward @ SO)
+KCr 2.6625 (1.5+0.1+1.0625)

Double occupancy high:
4 CTE (2T SR, + 1T StewSR, +1 Cargo Ton)
+KCr2.8125 (1.5+.25+1.0625)



_________________ J1 ________ J2 ________ J3 ________ J4 ________ J5 _________ J6 __
Basal Ton Cost _ 687.93 __ 1,228.50 __ 2,174.83 __ 4,285.37 _ 12,866.54 __ 96,091.03
MP, SO _______ 7,451.88 __ 9,830.42 _ 13,994.24 _ 23,280.64 _ 61,037.78 _ 427,225.52
MP, DO _______ 4,313.52 __ 5,610.91 __ 7,882.09 _ 12,947.40 _ 33,542.20 _ 233,280.97
HP, SO _______ 9,002.56 _ 12,246.03 _ 17,923.97 _ 30,587.24 _ 82,074.25 _ 581,421.16
HP, DO _______ 5,564.21 __ 7,726.52 _ 11,511.81 _ 19,953.99 _ 54,278.66 _ 387,176.61

But, since those numbers are ugly, let's round passengers to the nearest Cr100 for J1-3, and Cr1000 for J4-6, and use the rounded basal


_____________________ J1 ________ J2 ________ J3 ________ J4 ________ J5 _________ J6 __
Round to next 100 __ 700.00 __ 1,300.00 __ 2,200.00 __ 4,300.00 _ 12,900.00 __ 96,100.00
MP, SO ___________ 7,500.00 __ 9,800.00 _ 14,000.00 _ 23,000.00 _ 61,000.00 _ 427,000.00
MP, DO ___________ 4,300.00 __ 5,600.00 __ 7,900.00 _ 13,000.00 _ 34,000.00 _ 233,000.00
HP, SO ___________ 9,000.00 _ 12,200.00 _ 17,900.00 _ 31,000.00 _ 82,000.00 _ 581,000.00
HP, DO ___________ 5,600.00 __ 7,700.00 _ 11,500.00 _ 20,000.00 _ 54,000.00 _ 387,000.00

Massaging them for love of round numbers or half-rounds (bt not cargo below J5 - just passenger fares)

_____________________ J1 ________ J2 ________ J3 ________ J4 ________ J5 _________ J6 __
Round to next 100 __ 700.00 __ 1,300.00 __ 2,200.00 __ 4,300.00 _ 13,000.00 __ 96,000.00
MP, SO ___________ 7,500.00 _ 10,000.00 _ 14,000.00 _ 23,000.00 _ 65,000.00 _ 430,000.00
MP, DO ___________ 4,500.00 __ 6,000.00 __ 8,000.00 _ 13,000.00 _ 35,000.00 _ 235,000.00
HP, SO ___________ 9,000.00 _ 12,000.00 _ 18,000.00 _ 31,000.00 _ 85,000.00 _ 585,000.00
HP, DO ___________ 6,000.00 __ 8,000.00 _ 12,000.00 _ 20,000.00 _ 55,000.00 _ 390,000.00

Now we have some workable numbers. Profit is slim; it can be raised by more down payment, reducing crew salaries to profit shares, having better stewards, or reducing fuel costs from refined to unrefined.

The XLS exported from iWork Numbers with my original calulations.

 

[rancke]

Interesting. Jump-1 is almost competitive with jump-2 and is competitive with jump-3, while jump-4 is significantly less competitive. What are the design differences that causes that?


Hans

 

[aramis]

It's the proportional losses, and the non-linear expansions

for 1Jn and 2weeks Pn, counting just JD/PP/JFuel/PFuel:
J1P1 is 6T+(15% Hull)
J2P2 is 6T+(30% Hull)
J3P3 is 6T+(45% Hull)
J4P4 is 6T+(60% Hull)
J5P5 is 6T+(75% Hull)
J6P6 is 6T+(90% Hull)

Average cost per ton-parsec:
J1 645.14
J2 579.94
j3 674.03
J4 942.02
J5 1,864.52
J6 11,783.97

Here's the raw data visually:

Edit:bottom line is J1, then J2, J3 J4, j5, and top, J6

The hiccups are due to bridge and crew thresholds.

Baseline total "dead tonnage" for cargo is
12 Pilot, Nav, gunner Staterooms
01 Turret (for mail)
05 Jump Drive
01 PP
-1 MD (except at Drive A)
40 Bridge (tho below 1001, it's 20, and below 201 it's 10)

 

[Jame]

I like MGT trade; it's the only one I've ever actually understood.

 

[aramis]

I like MGT trade; it's the only one I've ever actually understood.

Trade itself isn't broken, only freight & pax pricing.

 

[Cryton]

YOINK!! Thanks Wil, my game will be better for these.

 

[Jame]

Trade itself isn't broken, only freight & pax pricing.

I don't understand; could you explain?

 

[robject]

I don't understand; could you explain?

He's saying that traders don't get enough money for shipping freight and passengers to meet expenses, except (perhaps) for Jump-1 ships. Others go broke, fast.

 

[aramis]

He's saying that traders don't get enough money for shipping freight and passengers to meet expenses, except (perhaps) for Jump-1 ships. Others go broke, fast.

Exactly.

Plus that the speculation system provides sufficient variability in both core prices and world-to-world differences that one can make a profit on stuff for ships up to J3 to make a profit; J4 is iffy.

 

[Fox's Master]

Thank you, Aramis!

Your analysis of the in-game issue for economics proved my original point several posts ago. At the time, while ostensibly trying to figure our the expenditures versus profit for both Serenity and Traveller, the more demanding question posited the following: "how do you stay ahead of the repo man with costs and trade so completely incongruous to one another." Again, I get the "having to make money to make the mortgage" hook in the game ~ but, if the players are that concerned about making their 'nut' every single month...that will get old, very fast.

 

[aramis]

I've always presumed the pricing (since the first time I did the math on a J2 ship back in 1987 or so) was a form of price fixing to prevent viable long range direct trade, and discourage scheduled J2 mobility.

Modern spreadsheets and my still growing know-how of how to effectively use them made the task come together easier.

Even so, under other systems, the price points vary widely due to system pricing differentials; T4 and TNE are the only two that share a pricing scheme flat out, and T20 and HG are close enough that it makes little difference for non-airframe ships, and by being able to reduce the sensors on T20, one can actually reduce the costs a bit more and up the profits. The Type R as portrayed in classic, however, isn't as efficient, due to the 5% airframe penalty in T20.

First thing I did when I got the T20 draft with ships in it was build a 200 ton budget j1 box, establish that it could carry cargo at a profit, and then try the 400 tonner... but at the time, we didn't have a T&C system for T20...

 

[atpollard]

Your analysis of the in-game issue for economics proved my original point several posts ago. At the time, while ostensibly trying to figure our the expenditures versus profit for both Serenity and Traveller, the more demanding question posited the following: "how do you stay ahead of the repo man with costs and trade so completely incongruous to one another." Again, I get the "having to make money to make the mortgage" hook in the game ~ but, if the players are that concerned about making their 'nut' every single month...that will get old, very fast.

Actually, "Serenity" was an old paid-off ship with no mortgage but far behind in repairs that avoided the main trade routes to scratch out a living in the marginal trade areas.

The economics of a ship with no mortgage is very different than a ship with 100% financing ... Fuel (or unrefined), life support, annual maintainence, and crew salary (or shares).

 

[aramis]

Actually, in the one system that really covers it (TNE), nope, maintenance will have climbed to meet or exceed annual payment...

 

[atpollard]

Actually, in the one system that really covers it (TNE), nope, maintenance will have climbed to meet or exceed annual payment...

But in the systems that are fun to actually play in (CT & MT), maintenance costs are fixed.

 

[Tellon]

But in the systems that are fun to actually play in (CT & MT), maintenance costs are fixed.

Actually TNE (the rules systems and concepts) are fun to use -- but I do house-rules and MT thrown in -- but I will stand up for TNE ..

 

[Jame]

He's saying that traders don't get enough money for shipping freight and passengers to meet expenses, except (perhaps) for Jump-1 ships. Others go broke, fast.

I'm confused; someone else was complaining about how it was too easy to make money with the MGT trade system...

Why not just figure out prices for Jump-2 pax and shipping that're based on the current prices?

 

[rancke]

But in the systems that are fun to actually play in (CT & MT), maintenance costs are fixed.

Say rather, they're ignored for purposes of game play.


Hans

 

[aramis]

I'm confused; someone else was complaining about how it was too easy to make money with the MGT trade system...

Why not just figure out prices for Jump-2 pax and shipping that're based on the current prices?

Two separate issues. Spec trade really has little to nothing to do with how expensive tickets should be except in certain odd fringe cases.

The case of the extant MGT prices in the core book are a case of bearing no relation at all to how much said ships cost to operate. They set the costs too low for J1, ignored the advice given (by myself and others) to actually figure out the relationships, made a lucky stab at J2,

Now, it just so happens the classic HP=KCr10 MP=KCr8 would work VERY nicely for J1, and KCr1 for freight is quite generous. But that is the thing they threw out.

 

[atpollard]

I'm confused; someone else was complaining about how it was too easy to make money with the MGT trade system...

As a general observation for most versions of Traveller, passengers and cargo usually generate too little profit to pay a mortgage (and the defecit gets worse for high jump ships).

Speculative Trade, on the other hand, will usually generate piles of money for a character with a few 'merchant' skills.

Hence the discussions about prices being too high AND prices being too low.

 

[atpollard]

Actually, in the one system that really covers it (TNE), nope, maintenance will have climbed to meet or exceed annual payment...

That sounds broken too me.
Maintainence exceeding the payments on a new vehicle for something that was properly maintained seems excessive. I agree that maintainence should increase with age, but not that much. YMMV