Passages x distance: some thoughts on cost.
- Thread starter captainjack23
- Start date
There will be no demand for getting four parsecs in a month (40 day, actually -- a jump averages about 10 days)), because for anything over a parsec, the per parsec cost of jump-1 traffic is more expensive that the per parsec cost of jump-2, jump-3, and even jump-4 traffic. So for a distance of four parsecs (assuming that there is an intermediate world for a jump-2 ship to refuel at), the choice is getting there slightly cheaper in two jumps-2 or a bit more expensively in just one jump.EDG said:
If there isn't an intermediate world, jump-4 wins hands down over any detouring jump-2 ship spending three jumps to get there.
Actually, the per parsec cost of jump-6 traffic is quite high, something around six times that of jump-3 traffic. So you'd have to be in a real hurry to prefer one jump-6 over two jump-3. (Three jump-2 cost roughly the same as two jump-3, though, so jump-3 clearly wins over jump-2).
Hans
I'd like to propose a radically different approach.
The thing is, the CT trade rules aren't roleplaying at all. It's what I like to call "The Merchant Game". It can be a fun game, especially if you have a referee that doesn't allow players to unload 62 computers at 300% on a world with a population level of 4, but until there's a chance that the +4 broker the PCs hire is actually a +1 broker with an overblown reputation or a scumbag who plans to cheat them blind, until you get negative modifiers for having a Vargr crewman, until you get stuck with a speculative cargo because a rival free trader got into port yesterday with a similar cargo, it's just not roleplaying.
I know this is very last minute, but how about an event-driven trade system? One where the PCs arrive at a new world to find that the only available cargo is one that'll take them to the world the referee wants them to visit next instead of a cargo that the players, after spending two hours perusing the UWPs, decide will be most profitably sold on a world the referee never even thought about before. One where a rival free trader arrived at the same world at the same time and frames the PCs for a crime in order to get the only worthwhile freight contract available. Or the owner of the cargo decides to award the contract to the ship that solves a little problem for him. Or the maneuver drive conks out and strands the PCs in a system until a new frammistat can be ordered from the neighboring world, trapping them on this world for a couple of months with a desperate need to make some money to make the next loan payment[*] (Said payment being a lot less than if the ship had been bought from new; it wasn't, of course, because new ships aren't employed tramping around the universe. Instead, they're used for 40 years or so, then sold for 25% of original price (i.e. 5% down, 20% borrowed) to optimists who bet that they can make enough money to cover the inevitable repairs before something big and expensive breaks down).
[*] The good news is that the ship doesn't wear significantly as long as it's stuck on the ground. Except for the surface paint, of course.
Hans
The thing is, the CT trade rules aren't roleplaying at all. It's what I like to call "The Merchant Game". It can be a fun game, especially if you have a referee that doesn't allow players to unload 62 computers at 300% on a world with a population level of 4, but until there's a chance that the +4 broker the PCs hire is actually a +1 broker with an overblown reputation or a scumbag who plans to cheat them blind, until you get negative modifiers for having a Vargr crewman, until you get stuck with a speculative cargo because a rival free trader got into port yesterday with a similar cargo, it's just not roleplaying.
I know this is very last minute, but how about an event-driven trade system? One where the PCs arrive at a new world to find that the only available cargo is one that'll take them to the world the referee wants them to visit next instead of a cargo that the players, after spending two hours perusing the UWPs, decide will be most profitably sold on a world the referee never even thought about before. One where a rival free trader arrived at the same world at the same time and frames the PCs for a crime in order to get the only worthwhile freight contract available. Or the owner of the cargo decides to award the contract to the ship that solves a little problem for him. Or the maneuver drive conks out and strands the PCs in a system until a new frammistat can be ordered from the neighboring world, trapping them on this world for a couple of months with a desperate need to make some money to make the next loan payment[*] (Said payment being a lot less than if the ship had been bought from new; it wasn't, of course, because new ships aren't employed tramping around the universe. Instead, they're used for 40 years or so, then sold for 25% of original price (i.e. 5% down, 20% borrowed) to optimists who bet that they can make enough money to cover the inevitable repairs before something big and expensive breaks down).
[*] The good news is that the ship doesn't wear significantly as long as it's stuck on the ground. Except for the surface paint, of course.
Hans
rancke said:
Hans: It's not a change, it's a return to Bk 2....
other relevant changes you should be aware of (joining this discussion late):
stewards are not 1 per 8 under MoTrav Draft 3.2...
Each steward can serve 1 HP per level of skill or 5 + (5 * level) mids.
They went with HP being KCr5 per Pc, and mids KCr2.5 per parsec... at which point, due to the steward requirements, high passengers take 6-8 tons (depending upon the steward's level) each, and mid passengers take about 4.2 to 4.4 tons each (again varies by steward level). Plus life support at 1.3 to 2 per HP (1 is the steward), and 1.1 per MP...
Also, non-cargo pure designs are not needed, if one does the math based on a pure cargo design and equates the costs per ton of shipping. Mostly since, as passengers are more risky than most cargoes, they have to be worth more per ton than cargo for the same distance in order to be worth carrying.
Given the draft's rules, they are not. The universe these rules describe definitely IS NOT the OTU of your comfort. It's looking a lot more like prototraveller....
Ah, I see. OK, I'll just say this: Book 2: Used for one year. High Guard: Used for 30 years (OK, HG and its derivatives -- and HG had its own problems. But still). Anyway, IMO returning to Book 2 is a Really Bad Idea. 'Nuff said.AKAramis said:
Well, that certainly invalidates all my old calculations, and those of others, be they based on T4 or CT.
I'd be willing to bet good money that this isn't actually plausible, but I'm not going to waste my time doing the calculations. And, who knows, I may be wrong.
No one cares that these changes makes the underlying universe incompatible with 30 years worth of previously published material? Granted, a lot of said PPM had its own discrepancies, but still, is that any reason to introduce more?
Fortunately, none of this affects my suggestion for an event-driven trade system :wink:
Hans
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
rancke said:
well, yeah, some of us do.
captainjack23 said:
I do, as well.
And Hans, read this thread from the beginning, and you'll see that I did the math, and the Cr/Td ratios for passenger/parsecs are sub-KCr1...
Well below if you have Steward 1 and J1 or J2...
Mongoose is reimagining the OTU it would seem.
I'll probably not use the OldOTU, and am likely not to use the NewOTU, either, anymore.
EDG said:
I can answer this question from the Shipper's perspective based on running a business in CT that bought Speculative Cargo, paid the freight to ship it and sold it using employees living on the worlds.
I found that Book 2 items with a high cost per dTon could easily be shipped long distances and sold at a profit. At 1000 cr per parsec (assume consecutive jump 1 ships), shipping a 1 MCr per dTon cargo 6 parsecs would cost only 6000 credits per dTon (raising the average cost to 1.006 MCr. If the world had even a +1 sale price modifier, then the average sale price would be 1.1 MCr creating a profit of 0.094 MCr per dTon on an a 1.006 MCr investment (9.3% profit) over a period of 12 weeks (1 week jump + 1 week layover). By selling the cargo to raise the working capital for the next purchase, I can afford to buy and ship one such cargo every 12 weeks. My buyer and seller can generate 4 shipments per year for a 0.376 MCr Profit (on 1 dTon cargo shipments).
Assume that some 'fool' builds a J6 trader and is looking for cargo. I agree to help him out and ship my cargo on his ship at the unheard of rate of 10,000 CREDITS PER PARSEC PER TON OF CARGO. My typical 1 MCr cargo now costs 60,000 credits per dTon to ship raising my investment to 1.06 MCr per dTon. The +1 sale modifier and the 1.1 MCr average sale price remain unchanged, so the new profit is .04 MCr per dTon on an a 1.06 MCr investment (3.7% profit) over a period of 2 weeks (1 week jump + 1 week layover). My buyer and seller can generate 25 shipments per year for a 1 MCr Profit (on 1 dTon cargo shipments).
I chose this extreme case to illustrate the basic dynamics.
* For systems in which the base Cost per dTon of cargo varies, more expensive cargo can be economically shipped further and at higher per dTon shipping costs.
* The greater the potential difference between the purchase and sale price, the further the goods can be shipped.
* The opportunity cost of the money means that speed is often much more important than shipping costs.
* Shippers can afford to pay high prices to rapidly ship expensive goods, but the lots will be smaller.
atpollard said:
the other thing is that if you have a 2 point differential, you expect 20% gain, and it wasn't uncommon to be able to leverage a 4 point gain (broker 4, if you don't allow broker to affect the purchase end, broker 2 if you do).
If you can leverage a 4 point gain, that is an expected 20% gain in value, making shipping KCr5 goods as good as carrying freight, and KCr10 goods better than freight.
If you can leverage a 2 point spread, KCr10 is as good as freight.
These spreads are higher under MoTrav and T20, since they use 3d table with a different spread.
This is why the megacorporations like Tukera can crush the little guy. Useing jump 3 or 4 ships on the main routes, they do alot of scheduled freight and passenger bussines and allso move long range high profit items over multi-subsector ranges. While maintaining Jump 1-2 ship service on the feeder routes. They own whole worlds and private starports that us little guys can not use. They have offices at every important starport :?
Us little guys in our Owner/Captain, 200 - 600 dTon, Jump 1 or 2 ships are left with the crumbs. We can not load up our ships with Mcr+ worth of speculative cargos and spend months moveing it 10+ parsecs. The risk is to high that something will go wrong at some point along the route. To do that you would need a Scout or Navy auxiliary type ship of some sort with longer legs and good weapons. But then are are starting to drift over into a semi-military type of arrangement.
Us little guys in our Owner/Captain, 200 - 600 dTon, Jump 1 or 2 ships are left with the crumbs. We can not load up our ships with Mcr+ worth of speculative cargos and spend months moveing it 10+ parsecs. The risk is to high that something will go wrong at some point along the route. To do that you would need a Scout or Navy auxiliary type ship of some sort with longer legs and good weapons. But then are are starting to drift over into a semi-military type of arrangement.
AKAramis said:
In practice, most goods are far cheaper than the 1 MCr per dTon in my earlier example so the shipping costs are a much bigger piece of the cost of doing business. However, in CT at least, it was often easy to find two worlds where the BUY and SELL modifiers for the worlds mean that a variety of goods can regularly be sold for twice the purchase price (3x or 4x always required a lot of luck and a good Broker).
Building on AKAramis' points, there are actualy a lot of ways to justify higher shipping costs. This does not mean that all cargos should cost this much to ship, just that some should.
Fundamentally, if the cost of shipping (defined nicely in MoTrav draf 3.1 as one Td/Pc) is Cr1000, most any good that you can afford a markup of Cr0.1 per kg per parsec is worth shipping if you can sell a ton's worth.
Yes, there are few that don't mesh (firearms, for example, seem to be packed with a SG=0.05....) on the Bk2 and T20 tables.
For comparison, given that Cr1 is roughly 2007US$5... I bought a copy of pitchcar. Shipping was $5, with a shipping weight of 1100g, and a base price of $40. And that's ON World... even at Cr1=$3, that's still quite a shipping markup onworld, so goods will probably ship with up to around 15% of retail being tacked on as a shiping cost.
BTW, this also means that the IISS is charging twice what they pay on mail runs...
Yes, there are few that don't mesh (firearms, for example, seem to be packed with a SG=0.05....) on the Bk2 and T20 tables.
For comparison, given that Cr1 is roughly 2007US$5... I bought a copy of pitchcar. Shipping was $5, with a shipping weight of 1100g, and a base price of $40. And that's ON World... even at Cr1=$3, that's still quite a shipping markup onworld, so goods will probably ship with up to around 15% of retail being tacked on as a shiping cost.
BTW, this also means that the IISS is charging twice what they pay on mail runs...
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
AKAramis said:
Hey. Replacing all those scouts eaten by giant cosmic energy squid costs bucks. Crew too, I guess.....
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
The table above is just the costs relative to J1, right ?AKAramis said:
So we have a reasonable metric for the relationship of expenses by distance, it seems. Does this consider shipping space, or is just the cost/displacement curve considered (bigger ships may be more economical, I suppose overall.).
One last question - this assumes dedicated jumps to max, right ? A ship capable of jump 4 that jumps 2 would have greater cost than the same ship configured to jump 2 and jumping 2, correct ? I'm assuming here that fuel isn't a big consideration.
So, if I read it right, it looks like cost per per parsec can work up to jump 3 for the larger ships: if jump 3 costs 3xJ1, the cost ratio for J3 is less than three, so good. For the smaller, it's reversed - the cut point is
2 (or 1);
So, regardless of the actual Cr involved, if one 1 unit of profit is defined as cost +10% (or 20% ?) and thus the cost/profit is 1.1/1 for J1.....
So for the 400t financed ship we get 2.2/1.9 @ J2 and the profit goes up, actually to 1.15 - or 50% greater profit than J1. But at J3 it crashes to .89 ( an 11% loss) So. Explains all those jump 2 merchants.
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
Freight: not gonna cut it.
For freight, its all about a full hold. the likelihood of a full hold goes up based on Jump (improving ones mod by the greater choice of planets -aramis tabled it a while back) but not profit -so a smaller ship has less of an advantage as jump increases. (full is full ). with no mods, one expects 35+17.5+3.5=56 tons; each +/-1 alters the above by 8 tons.
cargo holds for selected hulls from AramisFarberwerks:
200T ("Free Aramis")
143 103 73 43 13 -17
400T ("Subsidised Aramis")
277 217 157 97 37 -23
800T ("Stretched Aramis")
581 511 441 371 301 221
1000T ("Fa....uh.... Hefty Aramis")
769 702 629 559 489 399
So, even with a maxed out mod of +5 (In to Ri, say)you're not going to fill the holds: about 96 on average...maxing to 136 (three rolls of 6, although the major, medium lots rolling 6s gives you close to 130, anyway) *
The J1/200 ship is way short except at max rolls, and the rest of the 200 series can fill the hold (mostly) on an average roll. IF you have the good mods, though- a more common run may net a +1 or +2, and those are about 64-72 tons.
Assuming that freight is the gold standard (good steady income) and the basic cost per ton, we'd need to figure spec cargo around that.
Based on some earlier comments by y'all, I'm thinking that if we assume a J2/400T ship is the workhorse for small ship (tramp)/character shipping, on your avaerage blah world to blah world run, we can expect it'll have from 150 to 160 tons of cargo space after picking up freight.
On larger ships, unless subsidised, and even then, one could easily not be able to afford to lift with just frieght.
Now, except possibly low berths, we can't turn the empty hold into passenger space, so spec is the issue. Which seems to be broken -highly available, and generally profitable.
So, putting spec aside, one justification for passengers is when you are have a full hold, or no more cargo (spec or otherwise) passages are the only way to up profit - and it doesn't at this point...in fact, it'll need to be a good bit higher than cargo to even justify the support space...since cargo never causes problems in the lounge, gets in fights, or hijacks the ship.
Does it make sense given the above that if spec is downgraded (as Aramis suggests), that available freight may need to be upped ?
I'm taking for granted that passages are going to need to be changed: I like the option of increasing the passengers per steward over increasing costs at this point.
* yeah, i know that one can punch it higher with good broker rolls; however, I'm also ignoring the TL diff, so I'm hoping its a wash)
For freight, its all about a full hold. the likelihood of a full hold goes up based on Jump (improving ones mod by the greater choice of planets -aramis tabled it a while back) but not profit -so a smaller ship has less of an advantage as jump increases. (full is full ). with no mods, one expects 35+17.5+3.5=56 tons; each +/-1 alters the above by 8 tons.
cargo holds for selected hulls from AramisFarberwerks:
200T ("Free Aramis")
143 103 73 43 13 -17
400T ("Subsidised Aramis")
277 217 157 97 37 -23
800T ("Stretched Aramis")
581 511 441 371 301 221
1000T ("Fa....uh.... Hefty Aramis")
769 702 629 559 489 399
So, even with a maxed out mod of +5 (In to Ri, say)you're not going to fill the holds: about 96 on average...maxing to 136 (three rolls of 6, although the major, medium lots rolling 6s gives you close to 130, anyway) *
The J1/200 ship is way short except at max rolls, and the rest of the 200 series can fill the hold (mostly) on an average roll. IF you have the good mods, though- a more common run may net a +1 or +2, and those are about 64-72 tons.
Assuming that freight is the gold standard (good steady income) and the basic cost per ton, we'd need to figure spec cargo around that.
Based on some earlier comments by y'all, I'm thinking that if we assume a J2/400T ship is the workhorse for small ship (tramp)/character shipping, on your avaerage blah world to blah world run, we can expect it'll have from 150 to 160 tons of cargo space after picking up freight.
On larger ships, unless subsidised, and even then, one could easily not be able to afford to lift with just frieght.
Now, except possibly low berths, we can't turn the empty hold into passenger space, so spec is the issue. Which seems to be broken -highly available, and generally profitable.
So, putting spec aside, one justification for passengers is when you are have a full hold, or no more cargo (spec or otherwise) passages are the only way to up profit - and it doesn't at this point...in fact, it'll need to be a good bit higher than cargo to even justify the support space...since cargo never causes problems in the lounge, gets in fights, or hijacks the ship.
Does it make sense given the above that if spec is downgraded (as Aramis suggests), that available freight may need to be upped ?
I'm taking for granted that passages are going to need to be changed: I like the option of increasing the passengers per steward over increasing costs at this point.
* yeah, i know that one can punch it higher with good broker rolls; however, I'm also ignoring the TL diff, so I'm hoping its a wash)
I'd suggest a trade index based off of TL and Pop. (THe nature of the goods is determined by Tradecodes).
Realistically, it should be based upon some rough value conversion and include a resources index of some kind, but that way is too picayune for my gaming needs.
Let's Use TradeIndex=Sqrt(TLCd*PopCd) where TLCd is the Tech Level as a number and PopCd is the Population code as a number.
Tons to be available should be 10^((Trade Index+1d6)/3)...
Trade index:
Max Spec Goods:
(for simplicity, use a 2-5-10 progression all the way up...)
Note that a TL15 Pop 10 is still going to cap a couple thousand tons or so per source. I'd limit sources per starport to equal Pop as well, thus allowing about 10KTd/week on that PopA TLF world.
Note that this means trade per sophont goes down as Population goes up and as TL goes up, but this is based upon my belief that a world will become both more introspective and self sufficient the larger the population gets. It would appear that Mongoose agrees with that by the law level columns on information, trade and travel...
Realistically, it should be based upon some rough value conversion and include a resources index of some kind, but that way is too picayune for my gaming needs.
Let's Use TradeIndex=Sqrt(TLCd*PopCd) where TLCd is the Tech Level as a number and PopCd is the Population code as a number.
Tons to be available should be 10^((Trade Index+1d6)/3)...
Trade index:
Code:
Population
TL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3
2 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4
3 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 5 5
4 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6
5 2 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7
6 2 3 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8
7 3 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8
8 3 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9
9 3 4 5 6 7 7 8 8 9 9
10 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 9 10
11 3 5 6 7 7 8 9 9 10 10
12 3 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 10 11
13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 11 11
14 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 11 12
15 4 5 7 8 9 9 10 11 12 12
16 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 11 12 13
17 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 13
18 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 13
19 4 6 8 9 10 11 12 12 13 14
20 4 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 13 14Max Spec Goods:
Code:
TC Tons Displacement
+1d6 of Spec Available
1 2
2 5
3 10
4 __________ 22
5 46
6 100
7 215
8 _________ 464
9 1000
10 2154
11 4642
12 ______ 10000
13 21544
14 46416
15 100000
16 _____ 215443
17 464159
18 1000000
19 2154435
20 ____ 4641589
21 10000000
22 21544347
23 46415888
24 __ 100000000
25 215443469(for simplicity, use a 2-5-10 progression all the way up...)
Note that a TL15 Pop 10 is still going to cap a couple thousand tons or so per source. I'd limit sources per starport to equal Pop as well, thus allowing about 10KTd/week on that PopA TLF world.
Note that this means trade per sophont goes down as Population goes up and as TL goes up, but this is based upon my belief that a world will become both more introspective and self sufficient the larger the population gets. It would appear that Mongoose agrees with that by the law level columns on information, trade and travel...
captainjack23
Cosmic Mongoose
The only change I'd make is to consider using the mod to be 2d-6 or 7 . Given no planet resource code, that can be used as a cover-all to include variation by all kinds of things...it gives a 0 or 1 average change, though and that may be an issue...although, my gut feeling is that the spec tonnage is still high - I'll be checking that. Perhaps 1d6 -2 (gives some below par performers).AKAramis said:
Okay, for the CT worlds (MGT ?) the numbers suggest that these will be the most popular combinations (the band, happily, covers ~50% of the
frequencies of both stats.
Pop TL
5 16.6 7.7
6 13.9 9.7
7 11.2 11.3
8 8.4 11.9
9 5.5 11.5
So, the bulk of the TI values will range from 5 to 9
which suggests that the sweet spot for frequency will be this part of the TI table.
Population
TL 5 6 7 8 9
5 5 5 6 6 7
6 5 6 6 7 7
7 6 6 7 7 8
8 6 7 7 8 8
9 7 7 8 8 9
I suspect the last two rows will be the prime "common" trade planets for the tramps - in addition to higher TI numbers, they also have some but limited space tech - jump in the case of 9...which should mean that they might well appreciate a jump 2 ship to move stuff. (probably a roleplaying angle, but a fun one)
Also, this kind of classic second or third rate port + small freighter run, will have the best shot at matching tech for tech on freight and fits lots of trade codes (can be Ri, can be Ag, In, etc, lots, really. )...so assume about 60 -70 tons freight on a conservative average....passengers, eh at this point.
The spec tonnage we'll be seeing in this range, is
6 100
7 215
8 464
9 1000
10 2154
11 4642
12 10000
13 21544
14 46416
15 100000
The bold represents the range generated by TI =7 - what I think is the most likely value encountered.
So. assuming the 65 ton freight load, excess hold is as follows for small ships that can make a profit/cost of at least 1.1
200/J1 143 = 78 empty
200/J2 103 = 38 empty
400/J1 277 = 212 empty
400/J2 217 = 152 empty
So, on the pad, at a low average tech world, with average to high population, this is what the tramp/free trader will be looking at, assuming the mythical average and median values and rolls.
Obviously, looking at the available spec cargo is next, but dammit, Its late, and I have a very comfy bed waiting.....and a three year old with a drum......
(note, all the above use the CT values for pop. They're close to the MGT
especially in this range. I'll do the same for EDG next, unless it just happens to get posted by someone else...... :wink: )
I'd been thinking 2d6-7... but the 1d6 can readily be replaced with Effect Die.
That (2d-7) would lower the minimum (by 6) and maximum (by 1) for a net of 11...
3d3-6 (aka 3dFudge) would do as well, but without so wide a range, and with a stronger central tendency.
Freight should roughly equal square root of spec size... but be randomized.
Use lower of Source or Dest TI, and subtract distance. Add 1d6 if an opposed trade pair.
subtract 1d6 (separately for each) to find Priority cargoes and to find security cargoes.
Mail should be this value as a number of tons.
Note that I'm a small ship universe kind of guy, and this will put the largest systems having a few thousand ships a week in and out IF THE OTHER ENDS can support the trade; that's not a safe bet, either...
Also, It is my contention that the vast majority of interstellar shipping is speculation, rather than demand.
That (2d-7) would lower the minimum (by 6) and maximum (by 1) for a net of 11...
3d3-6 (aka 3dFudge) would do as well, but without so wide a range, and with a stronger central tendency.
Freight should roughly equal square root of spec size... but be randomized.
Use lower of Source or Dest TI, and subtract distance. Add 1d6 if an opposed trade pair.
subtract 1d6 (separately for each) to find Priority cargoes and to find security cargoes.
Mail should be this value as a number of tons.
Code:
TI d6 of Freight
1 1
2 1
3 1
4 1
5 2
6 2
7 3
8 4
9 6
10 8
11 12
12 17
13 25
14 36
15 53
16 78
17 114
18 167
19 245
20 360
21 528
22 774
23 1136
24 1667
25 2447Note that I'm a small ship universe kind of guy, and this will put the largest systems having a few thousand ships a week in and out IF THE OTHER ENDS can support the trade; that's not a safe bet, either...
Also, It is my contention that the vast majority of interstellar shipping is speculation, rather than demand.
