Trade Investments - Financial Returns - Not Going Bankrupt

Perhaps Richard was being kind to you?

Or he made some adjustment to make up for the position not having been played for a number of years?

Papa Clement wrote:
A 300% return on trade investment is very unusual, so well done Jason2!  I suppose from a small base, a niche product or unique product (like Whisky) supported by all relevant trade buildings, treaties, friendly nations prepared to accept monopoly prices, and a game where most players are trying for economic development rather than war, you might get those levels of returns.  But as a general expectation, plan for something more modest.  

It's in China and income from general trade.  I have some good ideas on why it's happened and been sustained at that level over a number of years but I'll not share as it might tip my hand

But it's the exception...

Vauban-someone in another post did mention the benefit of liners supporting trade. If you do have the recruits and money to spare to invest in those, I would recommend it, I have found they have always helped my trade. If you feel you have the men and money, I would even go as far as fast liners-more expensive but feel based on personal experience that it pays off (plus they are armed and given the number of games with naughty pirates at work...)

It is very hard to have rule-of-thumb numbers because of the number of variables.

I have heard of players gaining significant returns from compounding and running their economy 'hot' for several years.

China might well be a special case since Kwantung has a monopoly on trade for all of China I would imagine you would benefit from the actions of other Chinese players (or special arrangements with the Emperor in respect of inactive Chinese positions). China is probably the largest market by size in the world so if you have a tea monopoly and have allowed lots of foreign nations to buy from you then I expect your trade revenue would soar with a knock on benefit for 'general' trade. It is a bit like Flanders/UDP being a conduit for trade from central Germany - their economies benefit from improvements in central European economies, but as you have previously pointed out, if war erupts then the economy in Flanders/UDP is going to take a hit even if they stay neutral.

I would also suggest sending out a party of prospectors if you can. They might find a previously undiscovered mineral or resource you can invest in to create a new industry...but if you are tight on recruits do bear in mind a party in theory consists of four recruits. If the party goes out and comes back safely (regardless of if it finds something or not) it makes no difference to your recruit numbers...but if something happens to them, you lose four recruits. In various positions in different games, have lost such a party (and so four recruits), usually for "reasons unknown". While I have not been so unlucky, know of players who've done that, lost four recruits, ended up with a negative number of recruits as a result and then even lost a point of economic health as a result (or so it seemed).

Papa Clement wrote:It is very hard to have rule-of-thumb numbers because of the number of variables.

I have heard of players gaining significant returns from compounding and running their economy 'hot' for several years.

China might well be a special case since Kwantung has a monopoly on trade for all of China I would imagine you would benefit from the actions of other Chinese players (or special arrangements with the Emperor in respect of inactive Chinese positions).  China is probably the largest market by size in the world so if you have a tea monopoly and have allowed lots of foreign nations to buy from you then I expect your trade revenue would soar with a knock on benefit for 'general' trade.  It is a bit like Flanders/UDP being a conduit for trade from central Germany - their economies benefit from improvements in central European economies, but as you have previously pointed out, if war erupts then the economy in Flanders/UDP is going to take a hit even if they stay neutral.

Well, in-game Richard is a bit more generous to the other Chinese positions and they can trade in limited ways but the rest of what you say holds true

I sometimes think each position has a "hidden" trade that if you invest in really benefits-so China it's tea; Scotland it's whisky.

England-maybe wool and/or beer?

I seem to recall France in one now-ended game (G6?) made a fortune out of tapestries

I work on the theory those trades in games are a bit like easter eggs on DVDs, Richard has planted them and wants us to find them...but he also wants us to work to find them

There is no definite answer to your question because it depends upon both your position, and also what others have done.

Profit is best from markets you have monopoly over. Naturally, keeping a monopoly on anything is hard, if not impossible. So you can invest, reap a great profit, then others step in, and your profit drops.

My view is that trade in regions is safer and more diversified. Trade in particular products has higher risk and higher reward.

If your position has an ability to make a profitable product, then that is a great place to start. If you're concerned about more diversity and safety in your growth, trade investments in regions are usually a good bet.

I personally think it helps to think about what you're trying to achieve with the money. If you really need a lot of money for your plans, then riskier may be better. Need less? Then perhaps less risky investments will see you to your goals.

Jason2 wrote:I would also suggest sending out a party of prospectors if you can. They might find a previously undiscovered mineral or resource you can invest in to create a new industry...but if you are tight on recruits do bear in mind a party in theory consists of four recruits. If the party goes out and comes back safely (regardless of if it finds something or not) it makes no difference to your recruit numbers...but if something happens to them, you lose four recruits. In various positions in different games, have lost such a party (and so four recruits), usually for "reasons unknown". While I have not been so unlucky, know of players who've done that, lost four recruits, ended up with a negative number of recruits as a result and then even lost a point of economic health as a result (or so it seemed).

I've never been tipped into negative recruits by sending recruiting parties out, but neither have I had great success in using them.

The most common responses were that recruiting parties were 'lost' or 'missing' - I've even had them attacked by locals who really didn't want new deposits of minerals finding which could either depress the prices they were getting for their minerals or discover what they considered they had the right to find when they were ready.

Other responses were that they found a 'silvery grey metal', which extensive analysis failed to reveal any use for. This tends to be particularly the case if you know there is a deposit in a certain area. The thing about metal ore is that you really only have 2 techniques: heat it and bash it. Once you've done that you will end up with some kind of metal. Beyond that it gets tricky, making alloys or finding a better use for that particular metal than the one you already have. It was also quite common to go prospecting for one metal, but finding another since deposits tend to occur together, e.g. lead and silver, copper and tin.

When I have had positive responses from prospectors they tended to discover the same as I already had which is useful in a sense, but doesn't necessarily help developing new trade products.

It may be the case that I have been trying too hard - the 1700s economy was driven by iron and coal - both are not that difficult to discover and not that exciting, but account for the vast majority of output from mines.

If you do decide to go and develop mining on a large scale then it is worth researching mining improvements to boost efficiency (lots of them in the rulebook supplements).

Jason2 wrote:Well, in-game Richard is a bit more generous to the other Chinese positions and they can trade in limited ways but the rest of what you say holds true

I sometimes think each position has a "hidden" trade that if you invest in really benefits-so China it's tea; Scotland it's whisky.

England-maybe wool and/or beer?

I seem to recall France in one now-ended game (G6?) made a fortune out of tapestries

I work on the theory those trades in games are a bit like easter eggs on DVDs, Richard has planted them and wants us to find them...but he also wants us to work to find them

I do like the idea of 'hidden' trades for each position. The Scotland whisky one is fairly obvious, but I'm not sure about China being tea (unless you have invested in it - India was also a major tea producer and probably easier to reach than Chinese positions?) So perhaps with China it could be porcelain?

France did have a sizeable tapestry industry - I did start building one up in G7, but perhaps didn't get it to the size it needed before war started. There were 2 semi-independent sectors. The first was based around Arras (near Calais) and hit its peak in 15th-16th centuries. Many of the craftsmen left for Flanders and helped found the industry there and over time the Arras industry declined. The second (and in my view more interesting) centre was based on the Rhone (Lyon), which by mid-1700s was using the Jacquard loom which was much more efficient. This was what I tried to develop. Not sure whether it would now need an academy or not (or whether it might even be in one of the later rulebooks), but it is worth any player for France investigating. I doubt tapestries are a 'hidden' product, though. More likely French wine is a more obvious initial investment, or perhaps cheese?

England is really tricky - it might not be a product at all, but English expertise at trading? I'm open to suggestions, but I doubt it is either wool or beer. Wool was the staple for centuries, but by 1700s export of wool was declining as it was made into cloth that was then exported. Beer is also an oddity since rapidly rising population meant grain shortages so I'm always concerned that if I invest in beer it could trigger famine. Coal, iron or even Welsh slate are other possibles as products.

More interesting could be to look at the colonies. One reason I was so keen to increase my presence in Bengal in G7 is that it had a huge shipbuilding industry. Mainly merchant vessels, but some warships. The American colonies saw a large expansion in shipbuilding especially in the period immediately before independence, but by then Bengal shipbuilders had around ten times the output of American shipbuilders which gives an indication of how successful the Bengal shipbuilding industry was. The East India Company was quite happy to build ships in Bengal and crew them with locals, sailing both ship and cargo back to England rather than wait for newly built ships from England. So perhaps for Bengal, 'shipbuilding' is the hidden product.

Always worth researching what the global economic centres were in 1700 as it does throw up some surprises.

Deacon wrote:There is no definite answer to your question because it depends upon both your position, and also what others have done.

Profit is best from markets you have monopoly over. Naturally, keeping a monopoly on anything is hard, if not impossible. So you can invest, reap a great profit, then others step in, and your profit drops.

My view is that trade in regions is safer and more diversified. Trade in particular products has higher risk and higher reward.

If your position has an ability to make a profitable product, then that is a great place to start. If you're concerned about more diversity and safety in your growth, trade investments in regions are usually a good bet.

I personally think it helps to think about what you're trying to achieve with the money. If you really need a lot of money for your plans, then riskier may be better. Need less? Then perhaps less risky investments will see you to your goals.

I tend to agree that longer term diversifying trade by region and product is likely to be more successful because monopolies are hard to sustain and your trade is less likely to be hit everywhere by pirates.

Thinking what you need the money for is also a useful discipline. In G7 England has a financial target to meet over the next 3 years so that certainly helps me plan. I might not get there, but it gives me an idea how much I need to be investing. With the Papacy I have the opposite problem: since I don't have the recruits to build a proper army/navy (and the Papacy doesn't fight wars), the need for cash is much reduced. The challenge is what to do with the money - where it will do the most good, possibly by funding missions, etc. I've already done universal education which I could never afford to do in other positions. I could build lots of academies, but other than 'improved missionary techniques' and 'smallpox' I'm not sure that many of the developments I might find would really be of direct benefit to the position. Simply building up cash reserves seems a rather boring game objective to me, while giving it away or lending it to players who may then use it to fight wars doesn't seem to be the right way to use the wealth of the church.

Before anyone suggests it, experience has shown that banks tend to be really bad investments!

Papa Clement wrote:

I do like the idea of 'hidden' trades for each position.  The Scotland whisky one is fairly obvious, but I'm not sure about China being tea (unless you have invested in it - India was also a major tea producer and probably easier to reach than Chinese positions?)  So perhaps with China it could be porcelain?

....

England is really tricky - it might not be a product at all, but English expertise at trading?  I'm open to suggestions, but I doubt it is either wool or beer.  Wool was the staple for centuries, but by 1700s export of wool was declining as it was made into cloth that was then exported.  Beer is also an oddity since rapidly rising population meant grain shortages so I'm always concerned that if I invest in beer it could trigger famine.  Coal, iron or even Welsh slate are other possibles as products.

More interesting could be to look at the colonies.  One reason I was so keen to increase my presence in Bengal in G7 is that it had a huge shipbuilding industry.  Mainly merchant vessels, but some warships.  The American colonies saw a large expansion in shipbuilding especially in the period immediately before independence, but by then Bengal shipbuilders had around ten times the output of American shipbuilders which gives an indication of how successful the Bengal shipbuilding industry was.  The East India Company was quite happy to build ships in Bengal and crew them with locals, sailing both ship and cargo back to England rather than wait for newly built ships from England.  So perhaps for Bengal, 'shipbuilding' is the hidden product.

Always worth researching what the global economic centres were in 1700 as it does throw up some surprises.

In the early 1700s tea essentially came from China. Though it was grown in India in a small and "wild" way (and I think it was early Dutch merchants who reported drinking local Indian tea in around 1600) it's not an export crop for them and no local interest in doing so, it's only the British start encouraging its commercial exploitation in Assam in the early 1800s but it took off when a couple of decades later they brought in seeds from China that in turn led to a hybrid Chinese-Assam crop(exact dates escape me) that an Indian trade in tea production begins.
In-game the rules are that tea is only initially grown as a trade crop in China and if you want to grow it elsewhere you have to get seeds from China (Book of Revelations, p17). Most Chinese players (e.g. not just me but others playing Chinese positions!) tend to introduce a law early on banning the export of Tea seeds without official approval with very nasty punishments for those who try and smuggle them out (As Lord Fong in G2 I had great fun inventing new punishments for barbarians who did so, usually involving how many bits I could have cut off and still keep them alive).
I suppose you could try and cultivate the Indian version in-game, would be an interesting experiment but given that even if you somehow get hold of Chinese seed, and you grow it in the right environment, it will take four years to reach maturity and provide an in-game income, I do wonder if it would take even longer for Indian tea as you might need to first breed a "domesticated" version from the "wild" plant.
I do go in for porcelain production as well but tea is a bigger mass market and I always feel if China has a standoff with the barbarians, threatening to cut off their tea supply is likely to be more effective than cutting off their supply of quality plates

Even in the early 1700s the HEIC (for example) was trying to export woolen products most of the time (though in all fairness failing to find markets) and the cotton industry was being built up, partly through protectionism (thinking of the Calico Act of 1700 banning imports of foreign finished cotton goods), maybe the market and trade for England could be more around cotton production. I always think though an English player ought to look more at the early stages of industralisation that were happening around 1700 and take inspiration there-coke production and how that can then lead to developments in iron production, which can then be exported. Can England push on with steam engine developments to allow its coal mining and similar industries to develop?
Something an English position can consider is consumerism. England was now a consumer society and shopping was establishing itself as a leisure activity for 'luxury' goods-when you think that shoplifting became a distinct (and capital) crime in the late 1690s in England (before then it was "normal" theft) so developing industries that meet that market (at home and abroad) could be an option. If you want to go oddball, did you know from the late 1700s Aberdeen became the world centre of comb production? This was following the development of industrial lathes that allowed it to become an industrialised process...if a player does down the industrialisation path, develops lathes, if there is a consumer society with people wanting to look their best, then maybe produce combs on an industrial basis? (and the waste product from the animal bones used in the process made a good fertilizer)
You have mentioned concerns over famine in regards beer production before, is it something you have encountered in a game?

I think the shipbuilding is a good idea for Bengal (actually it is an industry I am trying to introduce generally in game positions), wasn't it also a major silk producer around the 1700s?

Hi,

My trade theory is that you can just make general investments in area's - which is the easier and safer option for players who are not that interested in trade and just view it as something which shows up on their list of income like tax from nobles, church, commons (bit like investing in a modern day tracker fund).  But generally speaking with such area investments it helps to invest in either your home area or area's you have colonies/trade posts in.  Which you will note likes certain positions like France, England, Spain, Portugal and the UDP a bit of a trade advantage over many other

Also if starting trade in a new area it helps to seed the investment with recruits.

May not be the case but my thinking if that you trade in a trade zone you have no base in your profits will be lower due to paying other people docking fee's, trade tarrifs etc all the time.  While if you do not invest any recruits you are using chartered shipping to move your goods and a good chunk of your profits are going to the shipper.

If however you are interested in trade and willing to take greater risks for higher profits then it is worth while actually looking into your positions historic trades and trying to build them up and perhaps then trying to develop and branch out.

Classic example would be the English triangle trade were you make Maritime investment in textiles and metal goods, an African investment is slaves, gold and ivory and then an American investment in cotton and tobacco.  Then try to figure you better ways to make cotton cloth so you can export it to Europe and if the Russians will give you a Tobacco monopoly in exchange for dredgers and a really high tobacco duty.

I find that Richard tends to reward Governments with a logical plan followed over a period of time.  Sometime I think its not what you do so much as how you do it which matters and merchants and the ecomomy in general seems to like long term and stable governments which show an interest.

Good example of this is protectionism V having a free trade policy in your colonies.  Same positions in different games have done well with totally opposed theories.  

I can also confirm what Papa Clamenti say's about Banks - may be different for the UDP, England and a few others but for most they are a money pit!  My Spanish position decided that since everyone elso seemed to have a Bank it should as well esp since it had a good supply of bullion ready to be minted into nice shiny new coins which could be loaned out to provide low interest mortgages to improve land improvement and higher rated trade loans.

A decade later the Royal Bank of the America's has lost millions of pounds in bad debts on loans.  Insurance and credit guarantee has been even worse!  Have finally got the loan book into annual profit, pity that profit does not match the upkeep costs of all my mints & bank branches!  All in all think it would have been cheaper just to give the silver to Blackbeard.

Oddly apart from its Banking Industry Spanish trade has done well, so I now consider Banking as a fancy type of Trade subsidy offering Spanish merchants cheap capital plus cheap marine and fire insurance.  If anyone has run a profitable bank in Glori please let me know when, how, where?????  Or is it like El-Dorado (which my prospectors are still looking for) and the North West passage.

If you are looking for some "generic" industries to establish, I would recommend fishing and (if appropriate) whaling. They can make a useful financial contribution to your trade income and if you have a harvest failure, once established they can provide an alternative food source (and save some effort in tracking down grain from other nations).

Ref the Eastern trades in 1700

- China controls the world supply of Tea and also exports industrial quantities of silk, fine cottons, porcelain and lacquer ware and imports limited amounts of furs, ginseng and copper resulting in a huge balance of payments surplus and the major problem for its external trade being its cutomers finding enough gold and silver to pay them!  Basically, I do not see the fun in a China position as it seem too easy.

- Think India is a lot more messy and fun.  Its textile Industry not only in Bengal but also from Gujerat and the Coromandel coast was world leading.  Indeed the English ban on foreign finished cotton goods was mostly aimed at Indian products which its home producers could not compete with.

So in 1700 you have the odd situation of the English HEIC which was set up to trade in Spice's but was effectively excluded from most of the spice trade (apart from Indian pepper and a few others) changing into the worlds largest shipper of Indian Calico's to Africa, Europe, the America's and just about every damn place apart from England.  As it struggles to raise enough cash ready cash to pay its tea suppliers.

Comes to something when you have to take over half of the sub continent and help develop the international opium trade just because Lord Fong etc will not buy your lovely wool cloth or sale any tea seeds.  That speaks of a really bad tea addiction.

Jason2 wrote:If you are looking for some "generic" industries to establish, I would recommend fishing and (if appropriate) whaling.  They can make a useful financial contribution to your trade income and if you have a harvest failure, once established they can provide an alternative food source (and save some effort in tracking down grain from other nations).  

Note when your Corsairs take a lot of prizes carrying Fish you need to get the Fish back to port and salt it quickly or it goes off. Would what you do with a Whaler?

Jason2 wrote:In the early 1700s tea essentially came from China. Though it was grown in India in a small and "wild" way (and I think it was early Dutch merchants who reported drinking local Indian tea in around 1600) it's not an export crop for them and no local interest in doing so, it's only the British start encouraging its commercial exploitation in Assam in the early 1800s but it took off when a couple of decades later they brought in seeds from China that in turn led to a hybrid Chinese-Assam crop(exact dates escape me) that an Indian trade in tea production begins.
In-game the rules are that tea is only initially grown as a trade crop in China and if you want to grow it elsewhere you have to get seeds from China (Book of Revelations, p17). Most Chinese players (e.g. not just me but others playing Chinese positions!) tend to introduce a law early on banning the export of Tea seeds without official approval with very nasty punishments for those who try and smuggle them out (As Lord Fong in G2 I had great fun inventing new punishments for barbarians who did so, usually involving how many bits I could have cut off and still keep them alive).
I suppose you could try and cultivate the Indian version in-game, would be an interesting experiment but given that even if you somehow get hold of Chinese seed, and you grow it in the right environment, it will take four years to reach maturity and provide an in-game income, I do wonder if it would take even longer for Indian tea as you might need to first breed a "domesticated" version from the "wild" plant.
I do go in for porcelain production as well but tea is a bigger mass market and I always feel if China has a standoff with the barbarians, threatening to cut off their tea supply is likely to be more effective than cutting off their supply of quality plates

Fair enough - I was going more on memory about tea in India. I'm sure I've been in 1 game a while ago where a player had managed to build up quite a tea industry and hadn't kept up with the new rules. No doubt it was when turns were running a lot quicker as I agree 4-5 years is a long wait. I imagine smuggling tea out of China wouldn't be that difficult if a player really wanted to try it. Perhaps it was (the historical equivalent of) Lord Fong's threats that led to tea being produced in India?

Jason2 wrote:Even in the early 1700s the HEIC (for example) was trying to export woolen products most of the time (though in all fairness failing to find markets) and the cotton industry was being built up, partly through protectionism (thinking of the Calico Act of 1700 banning imports of foreign finished cotton goods), maybe the market and trade for England could be more around cotton production. I always think though an English player ought to look more at the early stages of industralisation that were happening around 1700 and take inspiration there-coke production and how that can then lead to developments in iron production, which can then be exported. Can England push on with steam engine developments to allow its coal mining and similar industries to develop?
Something an English position can consider is consumerism. England was now a consumer society and shopping was establishing itself as a leisure activity for 'luxury' goods-when you think that shoplifting became a distinct (and capital) crime in the late 1690s in England (before then it was "normal" theft) so developing industries that meet that market (at home and abroad) could be an option. If you want to go oddball, did you know from the late 1700s Aberdeen became the world centre of comb production? This was following the development of industrial lathes that allowed it to become an industrialised process...if a player does down the industrialisation path, develops lathes, if there is a consumer society with people wanting to look their best, then maybe produce combs on an industrial basis? (and the waste product from the animal bones used in the process made a good fertilizer)

Cotton/textiles is a strange industry. I do have investments in both in G7, but haven't noticed any great benefit despite various inventions that should help. I'm not that up on the economics of cotton in 1700, but it does seem odd that cotton takes 3 months from America to England or 9 months from India to England. Even if Indian cotton is 3 times cheaper, unless mills are operating at capacity it would seem that it is better to import from America? Jute and hemp were probably more profitable crops from India?

I am trying to go down the industrialisation path - I have the inventions, just not the wealth inside England (yet) to build a consumer society. In G7 only Spain seems to have money and trade with Spain always comes with political strings that normally make it unacceptable.

Jason2 wrote:You have mentioned concerns over famine in regards beer production before, is it something you have encountered in a game?

It is difficult to make a direct connection since famines can appear at random, but investing in cattle (which requires more grazing rather than arable land), investing in chickens (which eat grain), investing in alcohol (which needs grain), would seem to increase demand for grain or farmland which would otherwise be producing grain, and unless the supply of grain increases, logically it could contribute to an increased famine risk. Of course what I should have tried to do is wait until I have a good harvest and then use some of the surplus grain to boost cattle/chickens/alcohol. But as you know after a decade of war I have to do these things slowly.

Jason2 wrote:I think the shipbuilding is a good idea for Bengal (actually it is an industry I am trying to introduce generally in game positions), wasn't it also a major silk producer around the 1700s?

Bengal is amazing economically. I can't remember exactly where I read it but its economy was huge - a bit like California is to the US today. It was a major supplier of saltpetre, dye, textiles (including silk), rice, shipbuilding, and benefited from being the gateway to trade up the River Ganges. Local rulers were divided on religious grounds, but were generally friendly to the English because they saw them as allies against Moghul rule. There was so much wealth available that there was enough for everyone and it was only much later that they attempted to resist English trade.

Stuart Bailey wrote:

Jason2 wrote:If you are looking for some "generic" industries to establish, I would recommend fishing and (if appropriate) whaling.  They can make a useful financial contribution to your trade income and if you have a harvest failure, once established they can provide an alternative food source (and save some effort in tracking down grain from other nations).  

Note when your Corsairs take a lot of prizes carrying Fish you need to get the Fish back to port and salt it quickly or it goes off.  Would what you do with a Whaler?

Hope Moby Dick doesn't come true?

Stuart Bailey wrote:Classic example would be the English triangle trade were you make Maritime investment in textiles and metal goods, an African investment is slaves, gold and ivory and then an American investment in cotton and tobacco.  Then try to figure you better ways to make cotton cloth so you can export it to Europe and if the Russians will give you a Tobacco monopoly in exchange for dredgers and a really high tobacco duty.

Trying to develop linked trade routes like the triangle trade is a good idea, but the problem is that if part of the triangle is disrupted (by pirates, etc) then there is a triple effect on your losses.

I agree on the better textiles technology point, though. Technology should sustain an advantage and make it worth investing more in specific products.

Stuart Bailey wrote:I find that Richard tends to reward Governments with a logical plan followed over a period of time.  Sometime I think its not what you do so much as how you do it which matters and merchants and the economy in general seems to like long term and stable governments which show an interest.

Good example of this is protectionism V having a free trade policy in your colonies.  Same positions in different games have done well with totally opposed theories.  

This is one of the oddities, although I don't think it is as simple as Free Trade vs Protectionism. There are plenty of points on the spectrum.

In G7 I have free trade between England and the colonies, the colonies supplying raw materials to England and serving as a larger home market for my manufactured finished goods. I don't allow trade between English colonies and Spanish colonies because Spanish colonies are huge and would probably be able to provide raw materials cheaper; also I value security of supply since Spain and England have been at war. It would be an own goal to allow Spanish colonial trade to ruin the economy of English colonies and make English factories dependent upon Spanish cotton only to find that supply was cut off when the next war starts.

Spain seems to have gone for general free trade which means a bigger market and higher profits for Spanish producers. But also greater losses in wartime: at times it was almost impossible not to come back with Spanish prizes. Also with Spain so dominant in every market, they can be seen as monopolists so enlightened rulers allow English traders to compete which where this has been tried has yielded good results for everyone (except Spain).

Both approaches work, but curiously both England and Spain are not interested in trade for its own sake, but as an arm of their commercial/foreign policy.

Stuart Bailey wrote:I can also confirm what Papa Clementi say's about Banks - may be different for the UDP, England and a few others but for most they are a money pit!  My Spanish position decided that since everyone else seemed to have a Bank it should as well esp since it had a good supply of bullion ready to be minted into nice shiny new coins which could be loaned out to provide low interest mortgages to improve land improvement and higher rated trade loans.

A decade later the Royal Bank of the America's has lost millions of pounds in bad debts on loans.  Insurance and credit guarantee has been even worse!  Have finally got the loan book into annual profit, pity that profit does not match the upkeep costs of all my mints & bank branches!  All in all think it would have been cheaper just to give the silver to Blackbeard.

Oddly apart from its Banking Industry Spanish trade has done well, so I now consider Banking as a fancy type of Trade subsidy offering Spanish merchants cheap capital plus cheap marine and fire insurance.  If anyone has run a profitable bank in Glori please let me know when, how, where?????  Or is it like El-Dorado (which my prospectors are still looking for) and the North West passage.

Spain should have had an advantage in banking due to her bullion so it is odd how it hasn't worked out.

When I shut down the Bank of England it didn't have a negative effect. I have now ventured back into banking in a small way, but it is too early to be sure of the results. Investing directly in trade would seem to be better than investing in banks.

Jason2 wrote:

Stuart Bailey wrote:

Jason2 wrote:If you are looking for some "generic" industries to establish, I would recommend fishing and (if appropriate) whaling.  They can make a useful financial contribution to your trade income and if you have a harvest failure, once established they can provide an alternative food source (and save some effort in tracking down grain from other nations).  

Note when your Corsairs take a lot of prizes carrying Fish you need to get the Fish back to port and salt it quickly or it goes off.  Would what you do with a Whaler?

Hope Moby Dick doesn't come true?

You may have hit on an interesting defence against piracy. If you have a profitable trade in (for example) wine, and your ships are getting hit by pirates, invest more money in fish. That way the corsairs will have to work twice as hard to get the profitable cargo and may end up with fish instead?

Investment in fish is always useful!

Papa Clement wrote:Fair enough - I was going more on memory about tea in India.  I'm sure I've been in 1 game a while ago where a player had managed to build up quite a tea industry and hadn't kept up with the new rules.  No doubt it was when turns were running a lot quicker as I agree 4-5 years is a long wait.  I imagine smuggling tea out of China wouldn't be that difficult if a player really wanted to try it. Perhaps it was (the historical equivalent of) Lord Fong's threats that led to tea being produced in India?

I think historically the good old HEIC, a bit like your original thinking, realised India had the potential and why should they go all the way to China to buy it from the Chinese when they could grow it themselves.
As to smuggling it out in-game, like I say all players tend to have a rule against it and when the Barbarians are only allowed at Canton and are strictly controlled, well getting it out might be more difficult than you can imagine. I know I'm not the only one who does this but I have a dedicated watch whose sole job is to keep an eye on barbarians at Canton plus spies...in all games where I've played a Chinese position, I've caught people trying to smuggle the seeds out of China but we've never suddenly had another source of tea appear (and I suspect other Chinese players have found the same). Having said that, in G2 I had a remarkably good friendship with India and supplied them with seed and missions to help grow it...interestingly when India then started to export tea (and a lot of it), it didn't harm my tea trade and it's growth in the slightest. I sometimes think in Glory, the demand for tea will always outstrip supply...

Papa Clement wrote:

Cotton/textiles is a strange industry.  I do have investments in both in G7, but haven't noticed any great benefit despite various inventions that should help.  I'm not that up on the economics of cotton in 1700, but it does seem odd that cotton takes 3 months from America to England or 9 months from India to England.  Even if Indian cotton is 3 times cheaper, unless mills are operating at capacity it would seem that it is better to import from America?  Jute and hemp were probably more profitable crops from India?

I wonder, if there is some sort of difference in quality at the time or security of supply? Or even the HEIC controlling the Indian cotton trade and using its influence to make the mills use Indian cotton?

I am trying to go down the industrialisation path - I have the inventions, just not the wealth inside England (yet) to build a consumer society.  In G7 only Spain seems to have money and trade with Spain always comes with political strings that normally make it unacceptable.

Papa Clement wrote:

Bengal is amazing economically.  I can't remember exactly where I read it but its economy was huge - a bit like California is to the US today.  It was a major supplier of saltpetre, dye, textiles (including silk), rice, shipbuilding, and benefited from being the gateway to trade up the River Ganges.  Local rulers were divided on religious grounds, but were generally friendly to the English because they saw them as allies against Moghul rule.  There was so much wealth available that there was enough for everyone and it was only much later that they attempted to resist English trade.

I do recall similar things about Bengal and its economy. Definitely a good one to invest in!

Jason2 wrote:I think historically the good old HEIC, a bit like your original thinking, realised India had the potential and why should they go all the way to China to buy it from the Chinese when they could grow it themselves.
As to smuggling it out in-game, like I say all players tend to have a rule against it and when the Barbarians are only allowed at Canton and are strictly controlled, well getting it out might be more difficult than you can imagine. I know I'm not the only one who does this but I have a dedicated watch whose sole job is to keep an eye on barbarians at Canton plus spies...in all games where I've played a Chinese position, I've caught people trying to smuggle the seeds out of China but we've never suddenly had another source of tea appear (and I suspect other Chinese players have found the same). Having said that, in G2 I had a remarkably good friendship with India and supplied them with seed and missions to help grow it...interestingly when India then started to export tea (and a lot of it), it didn't harm my tea trade and it's growth in the slightest. I sometimes think in Glory, the demand for tea will always outstrip supply...

I guess I find it easier to think as HEIC than China. That said if I was determined to get tea (or anything else) out of a market that was closed to me then I wouldn't try sending spies in. Instead I would get legitimate Chinese traders to smuggle it out and then divert their cargo to me. Might cause a diplomatic incident, but what could the Chinese do against the Royal Navy? Start a war over tea plants that as you pointed out earlier may not survive and if they did then it would be 4-5 years before the crop makes a profit.

I think it is hard to sustain a monopoly like that against a really determined player, even with Chinese advantages.

The other way to break into the tea trade would be to commission pirates to seize vessels carrying tea and pay them for it. Not very honourable, I know, but then not every player is as nice as I am!

Jason2 wrote:
I wonder, if there is some sort of difference in quality at the time or security of supply? Or even the HEIC controlling the Indian cotton trade and using its influence to make the mills use Indian cotton?

Security of supply should have played a factor. I know that having swapped from Indian to American cotton by the mid-1800s, when the Civil War hit America, Liverpool's mills really suffered.

On quality of cotton, it is trickier. Egyptian cotton was better quality than either Indian or American cotton because of the length of the fibres (staple). American and Indian cotton was based on wild cotton plants which had a shorter staple. Over time there was some improvement, but still not up to Egyptian standards. So in our period it shouldn't have made any difference.

My guess (and it is only a guess) is that it comes down to labour. Before cotton can be used the seed heads have to be removed which is very labour intensive. There would be more labour in India than America in 1700, but by 1800 Indian cotton was struggling. Machines were developed to remove the seed heads which gave American cotton the advantage. I don't think HEIC had a monopoly of cotton, although they didn't see the need to invest in machinery in the same way as American cotton producers did.

Also the American cotton prairies were not really opened up until the 1800s and needed improved ploughs because the soil was so hard. It could well be that the American cotton industry wasn't on the scale required to substitute for Indian cotton until later.

Which leaves one obvious question: why didn't England just use Egyptian cotton since it was better quality and closer/easier to obtain? My suspicion is that English mills were just interested in churning out volume rather than quality. Security of supply shouldn't have been an issue from Egypt.

Many thanks for all the advice. I have taken onboard your honest opinions. Clearly there are many intertwining factors in the game and a certain level of random generation.

I guess for now I will make a few small Investments this month while building up a certain level of infrastructure to take advantage of next season.

As Papa points out, a number of investments do better when you have the technology researched to exploit them. There are something like 9 different mining advances, for instance.

It might be worth paying attention if you have any. You can, of course, mine fine without them, they just improve your productivity and reduce the risk of a mine accident that could damage your investment.

Cotton gins can be invented as well, though I generally don't recommend people do purely economic research unless they really can either afford to, or know they're going to focus on that area enough to make those investments in research pay off. Most smaller positions aren't investing enough that the expense of a research academy and the time is worth it. They're better focusing limited resources on mission critical things. Of course, the player decides what's mission critical.

How many of you have noticed a significant difference in the economy in Game 10 versus the others. It just seems sluggish to me in general.

revvaughan wrote:How many of you have noticed a significant difference in the economy in Game 10 versus the others.  It just seems sluggish to me in general.  

Yep. I would agree with that. In some games of lgdr it seems easy to build up huge trade and tax returns. Where as in others it seems a lot harder and a lot more work needed. The good thing is. It’s the same for all players. It’s either easy for all or much harder for  all. Looks To me like Richard sets the benchmarks at the start of the games.  Eight seems very easy. Ten seems a lot harder.

I think that Richard randomizes some game variables when he starts up a new game. Game 8 seemed to start with high economy and high research which has made everybody have an easier time of it.

But I think all those things drift back towards the mean over time.