Cure for Excessive Stockpiles
Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2011 5:33 am
Both the AI and players (especially players using strategic behavior in the market) tend to accumulate excessive stockpiles that can choke the economies of other countries unable to obtain critical products except through craftsman production.
Except in an absolutist state, the owners of these stockpiles would seek to make the best economic use of them – sitting on them would not normally do this. Even if owned by an absolute ruler, “shrinkage’ from theft, corruption, cronyism, smuggling, officials turning a blind eye, or creative use of available institutions would see some leakage of products into markets where there is a demand. Historically, embargoes tend to leak heavily, if taken seriously at all – restrictions less comprehensive provide ample opportunities to take advantage of any available trade channel.
Therefore, I propose that leakage set in well below the level of current wastage. The 19th Century could not survive on just-in-time manufacturing and distribution, so stockpiles are important. Leakage would not occur for amounts up to a reasonable multiple of recent average monthly turnover for the particular country – this multiple should vary depending on how dependent the country is on imports of the product and whether it has strategic significance. The rate of leakage would be boosted by the smaller size and lower offer/ask ratio of the market for the product, the presence of buyers paying a premium price, government policy types, etc. If the market is in glut already, and all interested buyers are satisfied, there is little reason for leakage.
I think the concept is sound in game – the implementation raises some questions.
Would the owner derive revenue? No, not to the official PC pool, as the value is being appropriated by irregular means of one kind or another. The price paid might be just taken out of the system, or it might go to pirates and the like, or to the owner’s societal dividend generally or for the specific regions producing the product – or it might just be taken out of the system. This aspect is not particularly important.
Who can buy? Not the original owner. Not those with large shares of the buy side. It would be those unable to get orders filled who will look for alternative channels and shadier characters. This might start with neighbors and those served by the owner’s homeland Maritime Trade Box (or that of other areas making the product), then expand out.
When and where is it sold? In reality, it is most likely to end up in an adjoining or nearby country, although the lure of gold could attract the goods around the world through anyone’s merchant ships. I would think this best calculated and implemented right after normal trade transactions are completed, with unsold stock carried over to later turns with the same criteria for purchase. Leakage would be reported to the owning player, and it would be nice to have a general “smuggling report” to learn of reports of leakage from various countries.
One complication is the many products for which there is no market – this might be handled by adding a “black market” dummy seller to allow orders to be placed – although calling it a black market doesn’t really fit the period – maybe “independent merchants” might be better.
Thoughts?
Except in an absolutist state, the owners of these stockpiles would seek to make the best economic use of them – sitting on them would not normally do this. Even if owned by an absolute ruler, “shrinkage’ from theft, corruption, cronyism, smuggling, officials turning a blind eye, or creative use of available institutions would see some leakage of products into markets where there is a demand. Historically, embargoes tend to leak heavily, if taken seriously at all – restrictions less comprehensive provide ample opportunities to take advantage of any available trade channel.
Therefore, I propose that leakage set in well below the level of current wastage. The 19th Century could not survive on just-in-time manufacturing and distribution, so stockpiles are important. Leakage would not occur for amounts up to a reasonable multiple of recent average monthly turnover for the particular country – this multiple should vary depending on how dependent the country is on imports of the product and whether it has strategic significance. The rate of leakage would be boosted by the smaller size and lower offer/ask ratio of the market for the product, the presence of buyers paying a premium price, government policy types, etc. If the market is in glut already, and all interested buyers are satisfied, there is little reason for leakage.
I think the concept is sound in game – the implementation raises some questions.
Would the owner derive revenue? No, not to the official PC pool, as the value is being appropriated by irregular means of one kind or another. The price paid might be just taken out of the system, or it might go to pirates and the like, or to the owner’s societal dividend generally or for the specific regions producing the product – or it might just be taken out of the system. This aspect is not particularly important.
Who can buy? Not the original owner. Not those with large shares of the buy side. It would be those unable to get orders filled who will look for alternative channels and shadier characters. This might start with neighbors and those served by the owner’s homeland Maritime Trade Box (or that of other areas making the product), then expand out.
When and where is it sold? In reality, it is most likely to end up in an adjoining or nearby country, although the lure of gold could attract the goods around the world through anyone’s merchant ships. I would think this best calculated and implemented right after normal trade transactions are completed, with unsold stock carried over to later turns with the same criteria for purchase. Leakage would be reported to the owning player, and it would be nice to have a general “smuggling report” to learn of reports of leakage from various countries.
One complication is the many products for which there is no market – this might be handled by adding a “black market” dummy seller to allow orders to be placed – although calling it a black market doesn’t really fit the period – maybe “independent merchants” might be better.
Thoughts?
