MapleStory Economy & College App Essay

I need some help relating MapleStory to my college application essay. Obviously, writing about my addiction to MS isn't going to be a good essay. I think that MS has sparked my interest in Economics. Is there any way I can write my experience with MS to show my aspiration to major in Econ?

A little more information why I chose to write about this topic: True, I'm addicted to Maple. But I spent well over 5 years merchanting on MS. Until the start of my senior year, I knew almost nothing about that factors that drive the prices of items in Maple. I learned nothing from doing business in MS. But in the start of my senior year, I became interested how the economy works in the real world. So I took a Microeconomics course (1 semester). Now, a few weeks before the end of the semester, I found myself wanting to learn more Economics (our school only offers one semester). I wish to take more Economics classes in college. My intended major is something business related, because I feel passionate about business. I have been in the MS business for 5 years. You may consider it "no life" or whatever. But I think I can experience the same thrills from gaining wealth on MapleStory and in real life.

I understand majoring in business is also not about getting rich or wealthy. The other reason why I like Economics is because it is so logical. It suits me because I am logical.

My application (to University of California schools) has two essays, which prompt would this topic fit more?

1) Describe the world you come from - for example, your family, community or school - and tell us how your world has shaped your dreams and aspirations.

2) Tell us about a personal quality, talent, accomplishment, contribution or experience that is important to you. What about this quality or accomplishment makes you proud and how does it relate to the person you are?

To be honest...the first prompt is the only prompt that fits with what you want to talk about. But please do note that connecting MS and Economics is a risky thing to do; talking about a kiddy video game and not getting across about economics could be detrimental to your application. And that is something you might want to think about. But its doable, if you get your point across clearly.

But do you have anything else that you could talk about? Most people - when completing those personal statements - talk mostly about their real life stuff.

Note: I'm also an UC applicant (California resident); I submitted my UC apps a couple of days back.

I have nothing going IRL for me. How else would you suggest that I communicate my passion for Economics?

Also, I know I'm a bit late with my application. Everyone else has submitted to a few schools at least. I threw away 5 rough drafts I wrote for both prompts. >__>

Are you involved in any activity (school clubs, extracurricular) that relate to Economics? Or have you done something for a family/friend that relates to Economics?

No to both questions. I found the course interesting, 'tis all. Of course, there is another thing I believe I can write about. However it's kind of personal. I'll PM you if that's fine?

I have a degree in economics from UC Riverside. I can tell you with ease that Maplestory's economics does not fit many economic models, for the basic reason that it deals with potentially infinite resources. Please avoid any comparisons at all costs.

What you could do is research and talk about recent developments in the past decade. They certainly have made people pay more attention to the economy in general. Well, when a recession hits, that's usually the only thing people talk about. Did any recent economic crises spark your interest in the past 5 years?

MS might not fit any economic model with ease, but I think there must be some strong economic principle that I can associate MS with. The only one I can think of right now is supply and demand. Maple sparked my interest in economics in the most unusual way. I never had any opportunities to learn about economics before my last year of high school. Before my last year, I knew nothing about real life economics. Because of Maple, I wanted to know how economics applies to the real world. *here's where I need to explain at least a few broad similarities between MS and the real world economics and I'm not talking about economic models*

Goals, check your PM.

MS might not fit any economic model with ease, but I think there must be some strong economic principle that I can associate MS with. The only one I can think of right now is supply and demand. Maple sparked my interest in economics in the most unusual way. I never had any opportunities to learn about economics before my last year of high school. Before my last year, I knew nothing about real life economics. Because of Maple, I wanted to know how economics applies to the real world. *here's where I need to explain at least a few broad similarities between MS and the real world economics and I'm not talking about economic models*

You don't get it. Maplestory doesn't have any real economies of scale. Supply and demand in MS is backwards. When hackers increase supply, prices drop.

In the real world, when supply goes up, price goes up. When supply goes down, price goes down. Look at the television industry. This is occurring for the manufacturing of television sets.

You can't compare MS and the real world. Apples and oranges. You will get stuck trying to find some broad similarity between MS and the real world because frankly, there isn't much to go on, for reasons already outlined.
Economics is all about economic models. They explain situations, such as price, quantity, or something else, and predict them. It is the logical step from knowing all the key terms and types of market manipulations.

I'm saying this for the reason being that the broader you go, the less impact your point will come across. It won't hit hard enough. Shift the focus!

Say that playing an online MMO's marketplace, which dealt with virtual goods, gave you heavy interest in the function of real life markets, which function on limited resources. I suppose you could say both are subject to some form of market intervention, opportunity cost, inflation, but really, none of the fun stuff. No interest rate, no real money supply(m0, m1, m2) you could nail down, no bonds, stocks, etc.

I'll abandon this topic then. I was going to tie MS to the principle of supply and demand. But I had no clue that it was backwards in MS, lol. Your last suggestion to write about how playing an online MMO's marketplace gave me an interest in the function of real life markets isn't very strong. I'll stick to something I can explain better.

That was my only interest you killed. I'm not sure how to write this at all now. Should I just BS something to explain about how the real life economic crises sparked my interest?

You don't get it. Maplestory doesn't have any real economies of scale. Supply and demand in MS is backwards. When hackers increase supply, prices drop.

In the real world, when supply goes up, price goes up. When supply goes down, price goes down. Look at the television industry. This is occurring for the manufacturing of television sets.

Wait a minute. Doesn't an increase in supply result a surplus at the initial price, causing a downward pressure on the price as suppliers try to get rid of the excess stock? Wouldn't that cause the equilibrium price to fall instead of rise?

Note: Assuming that Demand remains constant, that is.

Wait a minute. Doesn't an increase in supply result a surplus at the initial price, causing a downward pressure on the price as suppliers try to get rid of the excess stock? Wouldn't that cause the equilibrium price to fall instead of rise?

Note: Assuming that Demand remains constant, that is.

This.

When prices go up, it's usually if the demand is high or if there is scarcity. This is where MS fits in.

For example, look at The Great Depression. Most notably produce and Henry Ford's Model A car. Both dropped in price due to overproduction or a drop in demand (although, Ford was more or less closer to demand dropping than overproduction). What happened? Both drop in price and a drop in production, which then caused its demand to rise back up.

You don't get it. Maplestory doesn't have any real economies of scale. Supply and demand in MS is backwards. When hackers increase supply, prices drop.

In the real world, when supply goes up, price goes up. When supply goes down, price goes down. Look at the television industry. This is occurring for the manufacturing of television sets.

Yes, for example, when the nintendo wii came out, there was no way they could meet supply, so the price of them fell through the flo- OHWAIT they being resold for massive amounts over the RRP. The television set thing, if its actually happening, I don't really pay huge attention to tv prices, would be because of an oversupply, or drop in demand which lead/is leading to an oversupply

Wait a minute. Doesn't an increase in supply result a surplus at the initial price, causing a downward pressure on the price as suppliers try to get rid of the excess stock? Wouldn't that cause the equilibrium price to fall instead of rise?

Note: Assuming that Demand remains constant, that is.

Whoa! That one question assumed a lot of things all at once.

An increase in supply would result in a surplus if the price doesn't change, but it does. It would cause a downward pressure if demand drops as a result, bringing the price back to the original equilibrium. But what if demand remains constant, such as the oil industry?

You want demand to remain the same. Okay. Say supply increases, because a lot of money is being made in a given market. Suppliers want to make as much money as they can. So price goes up. They wanna see how much they can ride the good times. If demand remains constant, that's a thumbs up sign to keep things going. It is showing suppliers that elasticity to price isn't bothering demand. You would otherwise be looking at a vertical supply curve.

Another reason prices increase when supply increases is due to speculative reasoning. If a consumer fears prices will continue going up, he/she will buy at the current market price to avoid having to pay even higher prices in the future. This indirectly causes prices to go up because the supplier will be able to put into motion higher supply, lowering average cost due to expansion, but still desiring to 'surf the price wave'. If demand sinks, that's when prices drop. Lowering average cost due to technological gains doesn't necessarily mean prices can drop, because you're able to pad the margins. This changes the insight to the previous comment regarding the ability of a firm to lower price due to economies of scale.

Special note: if you follow this reasoning, it is easy to understand how depressions and bubbles form!

This.

When prices go up, it's usually if the demand is high or if there is scarcity. This is where MS fits in.

For example, look at The Great Depression. Most notably produce and Henry Ford's Model A car. Both dropped in price due to overproduction or a drop in demand (although, Ford was more or less closer to demand dropping than overproduction). What happened? Both drop in price and a drop in production, which then caused its demand to rise back up.

Scarcity in the long run does not fit in the MS world, a world filled with infinite goods/mesos. The scarcity factor in MS doesn't often take into effect since demand must remain the same for higher price and lower quantity to occur. But in MS, demand doesn't stay the same for scarce goods. :p If you are a Keynesian economist, you have to believe prices go up mostly due to demand. If you are a supply side economist, you believe demand is being created, not responded.

Higher production does result in economies of scale, lowering average cost, allowing a manufacturer to lower the price if it isn't set at a mass market price. Keep in mind if demand is low, the price could be dropped but the cost could be subsidized by the manufacturer. This happens with televisions, cars, and gaming consoles quite often in today's markets.

Prices can increase if supply increases, which may or may not be due to higher demand. A decrease in the cost of raw material could increase supply, which could cause an increase in price as well.

Yes, for example, when the nintendo wii came out, there was no way they could meet supply, so the price of them fell through the flo- OHWAIT they being resold for massive amounts over the RRP. The television set thing, if its actually happening, I don't really pay huge attention to tv prices, would be because of an oversupply, or drop in demand which lead/is leading to an oversupply

That is a bad example, I'm sorry. Supply was low for small intervals of time due to Nintendo not anticipating high demand. At that point, if demand remains the same while supply decreases, then the result will be higher equilibrium price and lower quantity, ergo, the Ebay effect. Over the year's period of time, supply did increase overall, and so did the price.

A good example to note prices falling with supply falling accordingly is when graphics cards or processors are being EOL. You will usually see companies selling off remaining stock of the goods at good prices to stimulate some demand but not for the long term of that good, since it is being EOL'ed.

<--- Believer in Keynesian economics

Reading about all this stuff reminds me of the way the SSD market has been over the past four years.

At first when SSDs came out, they were SLC (single layer cell). They were EX-PEN-SIVE. A 128GB drive was over $1000. Very few were made, the price stayed high, and very few people bought. Soon after, MLC (multi layered cell) was developed which dropped the $/GB by 60% - TRIM and garbage collection were introduced - supply increased, demand increased, and price massively decreased. But then something happened. Apple began to include SSDs in their Macbooks which caused a huge shortage in the market for MLC NAND. Prices rose, demand fell down the tank, and supply tanked. Suppliers closed up shop since they couldn't sell anything. It took over 9 months for the market to correct itself and for prices to fall. In Februrary of this year, MLC NAND was $3.50/GB for consumers. It's been falling steadily since.

I thought it was interesting that after Apple caused a shortage that suppliers would stop producing and close up shop. I thought as price increased, suppliers are encouraged to create more so they can sell more at that price.

It depends on how the essay turns out. You really ought to not focus that much on Maplestory and focus more on economics in the essay.

An increase in supply would result in a surplus if the price doesn't change, but it does. It would cause a downward pressure if demand drops as a result, bringing the price back to the original equilibrium. But what if demand remains constant, such as the oil industry?

According to MacGraw Hill, gasoline prices have flcutuated sharply over the last half-century. Reductions in demand from new energy-saving technologies led to the long decline in price after 1980. If you're talking about the last decade, then yes, rapid growth in the world demand for oil relative to supply produced steeply growing price trends.

Actually the reduction in demand for oil was more due to recessions and the aftermath of the oil supply shock. Rarely does the demand for oil ever die down. But as we saw a few years ago when oil surged past $150 a barrel, and in the mid 1970's, there are few times when the public curbs its demand for oil for a half year period at least.

There really haven't been many energy saving technologies implemented in the past half century. if you browse through resource economics data, you will see that the technology to make cars incredibly efficient (such as 15 mpg trucks becoming 31 mpg trucks) has actually existed for a long time. But the cost, or to be more specific, the initial outlay has always been considered too high and as such considered a low adoption product. Irregardless, if you look at how mpg has grown, it is a very disgusting picture. It reflects the stubborn mentality this country has had that we have limitless resources. It's only been recent that all the major economies admitted we don't run on limitless everything.

If you read your post again, you will catch something interesting. You said that reductions in demand from new energy-saving tech led to a decline in price after 1980. However if that were the case, why has price overall gone up in the past 10 years, when the emergence of hybrid/electric vehicles has even tripled mpg? One could argue that the rate of growth of developing countries far exceeds the rate of saving from gas, so in the big picture new tech barely dents demand, but what if those developing countries are removed from the equation? There are enough hybrid vehicles in the market, and the cash for clunkers program was a wonderful success in getting rid of many low mpg vehicles.

I think it's more to do with an unexpected result: with the savings from higher mpg, people are driving more. The expectation that drivers would drive the same amount with the same amount of gas but for higher mpg was not realistic.

Kind of like how technology for crop yields has truly taken off, but still demand has not wavered. Why? The expectation is people will eat the same amount and not more now that there is more yield.

But I've reached the limit of this subject. Need more data to keep going.

Thank you. I posted it as a query more than a challenge. I will read and address any questions I have at a later time. I was also curious about this:

You want demand to remain the same. Okay. Say supply increases, because a lot of money is being made in a given market. Suppliers want to make as much money as they can. So price goes up. They wanna see how much they can ride the good times. If demand remains constant, that's a thumbs up sign to keep things going. It is showing suppliers that elasticity to price isn't bothering demand. You would otherwise be looking at a vertical supply curve.

Regarding the last sentence, how can you determine that the supply curve is going to necessarily be vertical in a situation where the demand remains constant? Are you referencing a Classical AS model in which AS is vertical and AD affects price? I had a hard time with economics to be honest.

Look at the following picture:



Demand is constant. No matter how high you increase the price of a given good, demand remains throughout. The product (usually oil) is deemed inelastic, because the demand doesn't waver enough in response to a %change in price.

Supply is inelastic in the very short run also, no matter what the price. It is then that suppliers increase/expand supply to meet the inelastic demand, so then supply begins to change. Initially this doesn't happen since all oil resources are using stock supply and not new shipments.

Ergo, you get this phenomenon: