I agree looking at snap shots of tech prices at different times of the set is interesting and informative, but I don't see how it's more accurate than looking at the average. Which part of the set is being over-represented in the set long average? I would say not the grabbing phase, because lower quantities of tech are being sold at that point, and because high tech prices really affect the rate of growth in a positive way then as well.

If he really hadn't bought food last set then why would you mention him in reference to high food prices being good for techers, and catching the "food peak"?

Yes, I know, but if you thought Andrew and myself sold too early, then it means that, had you been teching, you probably would have taken huge losses on food stock, because all it takes is one person to dump 400m bushels on the market and the food peak is over for good, and crashes too fast from then on for anyone else to get out of the market at a good price, because stockers have more food to dump than the server can consume, and the only way their food sells is if they can temporarily be the lowest seller out there (until the next person goes lower than them). You don't have any experience as a full techer on Primary. Alliance techer experience is irrelevant. There are often billions of bushels selling a day there, and rarely crashes like are seen in Primary.

Yes, this is partly true, although if you're doing it too slowly you're going to be going well over $2b while turns pile up and to take those turns you're going to have to eat a lot of corruption. But what oldman said is that techers are greedy *during the crash,* and only have to price lower, which I'm willing to say is just flat wrong. That doesn't work for reasons already described. And also, once you do that, you are losing lots of money on food, and not "catching the food peak."