ED: Real World Price of Ships (AKA: fun with numbers)

Starfish · Nov 15, 2014

How much do you think the ships of Elite Dangerous would cost to build in real life?

Well, I decided to try and find out...

The average galactic price of gold in ED is ~9,700 credits per tonne.
The average price of gold on Earth today is $48,200,000 per tonne.
A sidewinder costs 32,000 credits ingame and weighs 25 tonnes, giving it a hull cost of 1,280 credits per tonne (32,000/25).
So each tonne of a sidewinder costs 0.13 times the price of gold (1,280/9,700)
Multiplying this by the real world cost of gold gives us a USD price of a Sidewinder at $159,000,000

This is about the same price as a US Air Force F-35 ($178,000,000). Not bad for a ship capable of interstellar flight (although with admittedly less sophisticated weapon systems!).

For Reference for ship details
http://elite-dangerous.wikia.com/

Sidewinder
Ingame Price: 32,000 credits
Hull Mass: 25t
Price/t: 1,280
Gold Price Ratio: 0.13
USD Price: $159,000,000
Equivalent Object: US Air Force F-35 ($178,000,000)

Now, lets continue for all the ships

Eagle
Ingame Price: 44,800 credits
Hull Mass: 50t
Price/t: 896
Gold Price Ratio: 0.09
USD Price: $222,600,000
Equivalent Object: Boeing 787 Dreamliner ($250,000,000)

Hauler
Ingame Price: 55,720 credits
Hull Mass: 14t
Price/t: 3,766
Gold Price Ratio: 0.39
USD Price: $261,000,000
Equivalent Object: Boeing 787 Dreamliner ($250,000,000)

Viper
Ingame Price: 142,931 credits
Hull Mass: 60t
Price/t: 2,382
Gold Price Ratio: 0.25
USD Price: $710,000,000
Equivalent Object: Vietnam's proposed Space Centre ($600,000,000) - sorry was struggling to find something that cost around this ballpark figure.

Cobra
Ingame Price: 279,718 credits
Hull Mass: 180t
Price/t: 1,554
Gold Price Ratio: 0.16
USD Price: $1,389,000,000
Equivalent Object: Space Shuttle "Endeavour" ($1,700,000,000)

Lakon 6
Ingame Price: 1,045,945 credits
Hull Mass: 155t
Price/t: 6,748
Gold Price Ratio: 0.70
USD Price: $5,197,000,000
Equivalent Object: Large Hadron Collider ($4,400,000,000)

ASP
Ingame Price: 6,661,153 credits
Hull Mass: 280t
Price/t: 23,790
Gold Price Ratio: 2.45 (the first ship in our list that is worth more than it's weight in gold!)
USD Price: $33,099,000,000
Equivalent Object: Build two of the USS Gerald Ford ($28,000,000,000). Alternatively, the ITER project at $50,000,000,000.

Imperial Clipper
Ingame Price: 22,295,860 credits
Hull Mass: 500t
Price/t: 44,592
Gold Price Ratio: 4.60
USD Price: $110,789,000,000
Equivalent Object: International Space Station ($150,000,000,000)

Federal Dropship
Ingame Price: 3,814,205 credits
Hull Mass: 580t
Price/t: 65,197
Gold Price Ratio: 6.72
USD Price: $187,900,000,000
Equivalent Object: Microsoft Corporation ($172,000,000,000)

Lakon 9
Ingame Price: 76,555,842 credits
Hull Mass: 1000t
Price/t: 76,556
Gold Price Ratio: 7.89
USD Price: $380,411,000,000
Equivalent Object: Apple Computers ($530,000,000,000), okay you could buy an Imperial Clipper as well with this much.

and finally...

Anaconda
Ingame Price: 146,969,451 credits
Hull Mass: 400t
Price/t: 367,424
Gold Price Ratio: 37.88 (37 times more expensive than gold!)
USD Price: $730,301,808,062
Equivalent Object: Apple Computers ($530,000,000,000) - can't find a single object/company more expensive than this.

Now we are into big money, lets look at how many Anacondas different countries could build.

USA Federal Annual Budget: $3,400,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 4.65

Combined wealth of worlds billionaires (1,645 of them): $6,400,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 8.76

European Union GDP: $17,578,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 24.07

United States GDP: $16,768,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 22.96

China GDP: $16,149,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 22.11

India GDP: $6,776,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 9.28

Japan GDP: $4,667,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 6.39

Germany GDP: $3,512,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 4.81

Russia GDP: $3,491,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 4.78

Brazil GDP: $3,012,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 4.12

France GDP: $2,534,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 3.47

Indonesia GDP: $2,389,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 3.27

United Kingdom GDP: $2,320,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 3.18

Gross World Product (GWP): $71,830,000,000,000
Total Anacondas Buildable: 98.36

So if the Thargoids ever come to earth, I think 98 anacondas should be able to hold them off, as long as we have a year to dedicate to building them!

So, what do you think? I actually think these numbers come out as quite believable. Don't take it all too seriously though, I only did this to have some fun with the data available in the game. It's not a whine about the price of ships!

edit: here is a full list of everything I was planning to compare the prices to for those who are interested:

May as well include a list of all the things I was planning to compare the prices to (I got a few spread over various amounts before I finished the calculations for all the ships just incase they would be useful/needed):

Price of gold (1t) $48,200,000
USAF F-35 $178,000,000
Boeing 787 $250,000,000
How much Vince McMahon lost in 1 day $350,000,000
Star-shaped super yacht $500,000,000
10000 BMW M3's $629,500,000
Obama or Romney's election campaign ~$1,000,000,000
Space Shuttle "Endeavour" $1,700,000,000
Virgina Class Submarine $2,500,000,000
Hubble Space Telescope $2,500,000,000
Mars Curiosity Rover Mission $2,500,000,000
LHC $4,400,000,000
USS Gerald Ford $14,000,000,000
NASA Annual Budget $18,400,000,000
ITER $50,000,000,000
Bill Gates $81,400,000,000
ISS $150,000,000,000
Microsoft $172,000,000,000
Apple Computers $530,000,000,000

Toumal · Nov 15, 2014

The 2008 bailout would buy one Anaconda. Interesting ^^

Siggi · Nov 15, 2014

I don't think it's at all believable. The prices ramp up only to serve the purpose of an acquisition-based game. It makes no sense whatsoever that a top-spec camper-van (Anaconda) costs approx. 4866 times more than a family car (Sidewinder). In that case if the car would cost £25k the camper-van would cost £121 million.

But it's a game so meh.

Enride · Nov 15, 2014

Thank you for taking the time to do this, I really enjoy this kind of info

Have some rep!

Interesting how the space shuttle is cheaper then the B-2 "spirit" bomber. And a little sad, to be honest.
I dont know anything about economics but for a layman I think it looks believable.
Maybe a bit on the high end on the latter ships but okay for gameplay purposes i guess.

I wonder what the credit cost for stations are

Starfish · Nov 15, 2014

Siggi said:
I don't think it's at all believable. The prices ramp up only to serve the purpose of an acquisition-based game. It makes no sense whatsoever that a top-spec camper-van (Anaconda) costs approx. 4866 times more than a family car (Sidewinder). In that case if the car would cost £25k the camper-van would cost £121 million.

But it's a game so meh.

The Anaconda is hardly a camper van. Car ownership is one thing to compare it to, but I don't think space ships are as popular in the year 3300 as cars are today (where almost everyone owns one).

The worlds most expensive luxury yacht costs over a billion dollars, for example: http://www.therichest.com/luxury/yachts-luxury/the-10-most-expensive-yachts-in-the-world/10/

Whatever issues I may have with the price of the ships ingame, this wasn't intended to start a price whine thread, just have some fun with it

MorkFromOrk · Nov 15, 2014

Siggi said:
I don't think it's at all believable. The prices ramp up only to serve the purpose of an acquisition-based game. It makes no sense whatsoever that a top-spec camper-van (Anaconda) costs approx. 4866 times more than a family car (Sidewinder). In that case if the car would cost £25k the camper-van would cost £121 million.

But it's a game so meh.

You are making an error by classing everything as a car. If the sidewinder was a car you could be looking at an anaconda as being more akin to an aircraft carrier.

Starfish · Nov 15, 2014

Enride said:
Thank you for taking the time to do this, I really enjoy this kind of info Have some rep!

Interesting how the space shuttle is cheaper then the B-2 "spirit" bomber. And a little sad, to be honest.

May as well include a list of all the things I was planning to compare the prices to (I got a few spread over various amounts before I finished the calculations for all the ships just incase they would be useful/needed):

edit: (added to the original post).

Siggi · Nov 15, 2014

A ship can go places a car cannot. If the Anaconda is going to be compared to a ship where a Sidewinder is to be compared to a car, then the Sidewinder needs to lose its SC and Hyper-jump capability. In which case we can pretend the 'warp' drive of the Anaconda is incredibly expensive technology. Then the price differential would make sense. But where all ships have the same basic capabilities the price differentials make no 'real world' sense.
Just having fun with the thread guys, I'm not complaining.

Snyperal · Nov 15, 2014

I like this thread and salute your efforts. Have some rep.

Starfish · Nov 15, 2014

Siggi said:
I don't think it's at all believable. The prices ramp up only to serve the purpose of an acquisition-based game. It makes no sense whatsoever that a top-spec camper-van (Anaconda) costs approx. 4866 times more than a family car (Sidewinder). In that case if the car would cost £25k the camper-van would cost £121 million.

But it's a game so meh.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/1963-ferrari-250-gto-sells-for-52-million/

1963 Ferarri 250 GTO recently sold for $52 million (although that was a collectors car rather than a production line model). I do kinda agree that the top end prices (ASP onwards) do escalate quite rapidly though. A top end of price scale production line Lambo is more like $4 million.

Lobstris · Nov 15, 2014

This is the first and last time we are going to see the Hauler compared to a Dreamliner, rather than a Ford Transit.

Great work OP. Now if E: D gave us the GDP of the system (like the original game, yet another miss... nevermind) we could work out how much of their economy we were trashing in combat zones.
.
*Edit* Actually it does beg the question - why is the Hauler's price per tonne so high? Looks like the underlying costs of ships are biased towards their trade earning potential?

*Edit2* Wonder how much the stations cost? Must be half the wealth of a planet or more tied up in a Coriolis, let alone an O'Neill or Orbis!

Chazzie · Nov 15, 2014

What a great thread - very interesting reading, have some rep!
I suppose something that would have to be factored in is the availability of Gold could be substantially higher, some ship components may vary in price according the manufacturer and such - but was interesting to read.

Morbad · Nov 15, 2014

Siggi said:
It makes no sense whatsoever that a top-spec camper-van (Anaconda) costs approx. 4866 times more than a family car (Sidewinder). In that case if the car would cost £25k the camper-van would cost £121 million.

I don't think either the familiar car, nor the camper-van analogies, are good ones.

The overwhelming majority of people in the ED universe could never dream of affording their own Sidewinder. If they could, there would be millions of them floating around major systems, not handfuls.

Siggi said:
A ship can go places a car cannot. If the Anaconda is going to be compared to a ship where a Sidewinder is to be compared to a car, then the Sidewinder needs to lose its SC and Hyper-jump capability. In which case we can pretend the 'warp' drive of the Anaconda is incredibly expensive technology. Then the price differential would make sense. But where all ships have the same basic capabilities the price differentials make no 'real world' sense.
Just having fun with the thread guys, I'm not complaining.

I'd compare the Sidewinder to a small private sport jet and the Anaconda to a large modern bomber (like a B-1B or B-2). Same "basic capabilities", more than a thousand fold differential in cost.

Or, if you want to stick with the ship analogies, the Sidewinder can be a nice 30' motorboat and the anaconda can be a nuclear powered guided-missile frigate...again, well over a thousand fold price differential.

Chazzie said:
What a great thread - very interesting reading, have some rep!
the availability of Gold could be substantially higher

This is almost certainly the case. Only ~170,000 metric tons of gold have ever been extracted from Earth. It would take a small fleet of Type-6s less than a week to pull the same quantity from the rings of 68 Draconis, for example.

Siggi · Nov 15, 2014

Morbad said:
I don't think either the familiar car, nor the camper-van analogies, are good ones.

The overwhelming majority of people in the ED universe could never dream of affording their own Sidewinder. If they could, there would be millions of them floating around major systems, not handfuls.

I'd compare the Sidewinder to a small private sport jet and the Anaconda to a large modern bomber (like a B-1B or B-2). Same "basic capabilities", more than a thousand fold differential in cost.

Or, if you want to stick with the ship analogies, the Sidewinder can be a nice 30' motorboat and the anaconda can be a nuclear powered guided-missile frigate...again, well over a thousand fold price differential.

This is almost certainly the case. Only ~170,000 metric tons of gold have ever been extracted from Earth. It would take a small fleet of Type-6s less than a week to pull the same quantity from the rings of 68 Draconis, for example.

You're not taking into account scales of economy/production. Certain ships/airplanes cost as much as they do because not enough are wanted. Low demand = high unit cost. Maybe it would be a better analogy if we compared a Transit van to an articulated lorry. Both are built in high enough quantities to factor out scale of production over-cost. In which case my analysis holds true.

Starfish · Nov 15, 2014

Morbad said:
This is almost certainly the case. Only ~170,000 metric tons of gold have ever been extracted from Earth. It would take a small fleet of Type-6s less than a week to pull the same quantity from the rings of 68 Draconis, for example.

Absolutely. For this to be 'accurate' we have to assume that the demand for gold increased at the same rate as the availability / ease of extraction. Which is plausible (although unlikely) given that there would be presumed advanced in electronics and whatnot requiring more gold. Gold is also used alot in space flight.

Morbad · Nov 15, 2014

Siggi said:
You're not taking into account scales of economy/production.

Sure I am. I imagine that Sidewinders are mass produced in comparatively large numbers (just like small planes and motorboats), while Anaconda are more custom order type deals (like advanced bombers and nuclear powered ships).

Starfish said:
Absolutely. For this to be 'accurate' we have to assume that the demand for gold increased at the same rate as the availability / ease of extraction. Which is plausible (although unlikely) given that there would be presumed advanced in electronics and whatnot requiring more gold. Gold is also used alot in space flight.

Gold has gotten exponentially easier to extract in recent history, and if the 20 tons of gold I can extract in an hour in the game is any indication, the ease of extraction is going to accelerate far beyond population or demand for gold.

Gold is worth a lot now because it's a store of wealth, not because of it's commodity or utilitarian value. Yes, gold is useful for electronics (though I don't think any advances in electronics would increase gold demand, quite the contrary) and IR/heatshielding, but if it's value was based on non-vanity uses alone, gold would be about 5-10% of the value it is now. No remotely conceivable increase in practical demand could counter this, let alone the apparently exponential increase in supply that the ED universe suggests.

Starfish · Nov 15, 2014

Morbad said:
Gold has gotten exponentially easier to extract in recent history, and if the 20 tons of gold I can extract in an hour in the game is any indication, the ease of extraction is going to accelerate far beyond population or demand for gold.

Gold is worth a lot now because it's a store of wealth, not because of it's commodity or utilitarian value. Yes, gold is useful for electronics (though I don't think any advances in electronics would increase gold demand, quite the contrary) and IR/heatshielding, but if it's value was based on non-vanity uses alone, gold would be about 5-10% of the value it is now. No remotely conceivable increase in practical demand could counter this, let alone the apparently exponential increase in supply that the ED universe suggests.

Remember, the demand for gold will increase in the world of ED, not only the quantity available for extraction, as there are literally thousands of populated worlds, with many of them having billions of people on them (Lave/Diso have billions IIRC, so if they do - so far from Earth - many others probably will as well). Spaceflight and space budgets must be astronomically greater also what with all the space stations, military fleets, wars in space and so on.

disclaimer: I am no expert on any of this stuff.

Darkfyre99 · Nov 15, 2014

Starfish said:
How much do you think the ships of Elite Dangerous would cost to build in real life?

Well, I decided to try and find out...

The average galactic price of gold in ED is ~9,700 credits per tonne.

The average price of gold on Earth today is $48,200,000 per tonne.

A sidewinder costs 32,000 credits ingame and weighs 25 tonnes, giving it a hull cost of 1,280 credits per tonne (32,000/25).

So each tonne of a sidewinder costs 0.13 times the price of gold (1,280/9,700)

Multiplying this by the real world cost of gold gives us a USD price of a Sidewinder at $159,000,000

This is about the same price as a US Air Force F-35 ($178,000,000). Not bad for a ship capable of interstellar flight (although with admittedly less sophisticated weapon systems!).

One problem: Coffee sells at 1454 cr per ton. Using the same calculations, that means that a ton of coffee in the Elite Dangerous universe is worth $7.2 million, or $7.2 per gram. At about 10 grams of coffee for a cup of coffee, that is one expensive cup of coffee. Not even Starbucks charges that much. Given that right now, coffee retails at less than $0.02 per ounce, coffee must be extremely rare due to being hard to grow, or surface to orbit transport still requires expensive chemical rockets despite the proliferation of fusion thrusters on FTL capable ships, and hydroponic space on space stations is at a premium.

Or more likely, gold isn't quite as rare as it used to be. After all, one of the primary motivations for asteroid mining is that most of the gold on the planet Earth settled into its center, making it rare on the crust. Based on meteorite samples, a single 500m wide asteroid could yield as much gold as has been mined throughout history, as well as iron, silver, platinum, and a host of rare-earth elements.

Still, bonus points for making the effort.

Morbad · Nov 15, 2014

It may be interesting to recalculate the values of ships based on a different commodity than gold, as I highly doubt gold retains the same relative value or holds the same position in ED as it does in the modern world.

Starfish said:
Remember, the demand for gold will increase in the world of ED, not only the quantity available for extraction, as there are literally thousands of populated worlds, with many of them having billions of people on them (Lave/Diso have billions IIRC, so if they do - so far from Earth - many others probably will as well). Spaceflight and space budgets must be astronomically greater also what with all the space stations, military fleets, wars in space and so on.

I took this into account and I still think the per capita supply of gold must be orders of magnitude higher in ED than it is on modern Earth, while the demand is unlikely to be much greater.

The most straightforward, and most damning, evidence of all is a simple comparison in the price of gold vs. other commodities in the game itself. Look at gold vs. silver in ED. It's a 2-to-1 price ratio. Historically, on Earth, this ratio has almost never been smaller than 20-to-1, and has been bouncing between about 50-to-1 and 100-to-1 over the last decade or so.

Either relative supply has increased enormously, or relative demand for gold has decreased, probably both as they are intimately intertwined. Gold is truly a commodity in ED, and no longer some arbitrary store of wealth.

Starfish · Nov 15, 2014

Darkfyre99 said:
One problem: Coffee sells at 1454 cr per ton. Using the same calculations, that means that a ton of coffee in the Elite Dangerous universe is worth $7.2 million, or $7.2 per gram. At about 10 grams of coffee for a cup of coffee, that is one expensive cup of coffee. Not even Starbucks charges that much. Given that right now, coffee retails at less than $0.02 per ounce, coffee must be extremely rare due to being hard to grow, or surface to orbit transport still requires expensive chemical rockets despite the proliferation of fusion thrusters on FTL capable ships, and hydroponic space on space stations is at a premium.

Or more likely, gold isn't quite as rare as it used to be. After all, one of the primary motivations for asteroid mining is that most of the gold on the planet Earth settled into its center, making it rare on the crust. Based on meteorite samples, a single 500m wide asteroid could yield as much gold as has been mined throughout history, as well as iron, silver, platinum, and a host of rare-earth elements.

Still, bonus points for making the effort.

You make a good point. We could assume that food prices have gone up dramatically (there are already talks in todays world about population projections going above the world's ability to produce food), coffee may be seen as a very rare product, especially out in the deep black (on planets where it can't be grown), but it is also very likely that gold prices have come down (or are, at the very least, just made similar as a gameplay mechanic). As Morbad just said, the silver and gold prices don't match-up with today's ratios.

All in the name of fun though, and if someone fancies doing the numbers again using a different resource, they are more than welcome!

I picked gold as, at least in my head, it has a price quite grounded in reality as it is linked to the worlds financial markets (given that paper money is theoretically a guarantee to pay the holder gold in exchange for it's value).

Anyone have an idea for a product that is more likely to have a standard price now and also 1300 years in the future? Maybe hydrogen fuel?