| Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - 02:06 am |
I made a little test with some of my corps. I raised the saleries from 300 to 400 and discovered, that they all lost profit.
Air Transport lose 0.13B SC$ per month
Computers lose 0.18B SC$ per month
Electronic Components lose 0.22B SC$ per month
HT Services lose 0.19B SC$ per month
Household Products lose 0.15B SC$ per month
I thought they would gain more profit with higher saleries, because they would produce more, but no...
Back to 300
| Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - 04:24 am |
If profit went up there would be no reason not to raise salaries. However, if you are the president, how did this affect tax revenue, health and education contributions, and investment fund contributions?
| Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - 12:09 pm |
Hektor, it's just like in real-life. When your boss pays you double if you work 12 hours a day instead of 8 you are more productive per day. But if your boss pays you 5 times your pay if you pay 24/7 you wont be able to increase your productivty equaly as you simply cant work 24/7. Same in the game, if you increase the salary to a certain degree your profit will rise but there is a point at which the increase in costs are above the increase of prodution increase. Allways remember salaries of 300 mean you allready pay three times of the 'standard-wage'
| Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - 02:06 pm |
If point scores matter to you, I imagine that increasing salary from 300 to 400 gives you a welfare index boost that is taken into account for points. I've not tried it myself, but that is my theory!
| Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - 11:16 pm |
Ebenezer, 300->400 does give you maybe 1 Point of Welfare if not less. Thats at about 125-130 Country Welfare
| Thursday, December 12, 2013 - 08:00 am |
Yes, thanks Borg Queen. I was thinking of the President and CEO rankings. I suspect the points system there has a measure of your average welfare index, so increasing that index, even by less than 1, would have a marginal benefit to your ranking points. With enough corporations, that might make up a place or two in the rankings and the possibility of an award. You would have to assess whether the increased costs on the corporations are worth the effort though!
| Thursday, December 12, 2013 - 11:04 am |
Ebenezer, higher salaries causing less profit= less corp value=less total asset value=less score=lower ranking
| Friday, December 13, 2013 - 07:57 am |
Sure, but is it offset by the higher welfare value? I don't know, just throwing it out there for comment! The wise words say that a well run corporation scores more points than several less well run ones. However, it doesn't say whether it would consider you running a corporation well with higher welfare and less profit or vice versa!
That said, my average welfare over 520 corporations is 121.7 at the moment and I've got very few of them paying a salary over 300 - only when necessary to keep full employment in countries where 'sometimes' the owner is over zealous in creating new corporations before the population is in place.
| Friday, December 13, 2013 - 08:33 am |
Successfull Corp=High Profit
How you get High Profit is up to you but in the end thats the only thing that counts.
| Saturday, December 14, 2013 - 04:47 pm |
You all explained very well.
only the point Aries made, should be researched a little more.
the profit might decrease a bit, but the contribution to the country (if you own it) and taxes, might increase more than the lost profit.
so 300--> 400 might not be beneficial for all the reasons you explained but it is a bit unclear at the edges.
The change in the corporate welfare index: >3 <4.
It takes several days to slowly increase.
The country welfare index does not change.
| Sunday, December 15, 2013 - 04:00 am |
Okay I understand. It is more complex than I thought. I have been in and out of this game the last 5 years, and I am still a noob
| Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - 04:24 am |
What are the optimal salaries?
| Wednesday, December 18, 2013 - 05:32 am |
it depends star foth