start asking LL to turn mainland free to play

[Malanya]

---

Links86 wrote:

LL could still make money off the Sims and buying and selling linden dollars also could charge a small sales commission fee on xstreet marketplace that's how they can still produce revenue for the Labs and if they would do that meaning lower cost to the game meaning more company profit and still allow SL players still make money off of every from land to the content people make that's how you can create a healthy environment for the player and the labs this is my point

---

Many people that create content and run stores on Marketplace or have an inworld presence make their RL living off of their profits. I am not trying to come down on you and your opinions, but I don't think many understand how the sl economy does work as stated in other posts.

So Mainland is free but i will still have to pay $295 USD a month for each of my sims? LOL that sounds fair and healthy environment as you put it. I think the way things are works, sure we would all like to see Mainland and Estate tiers lower, but it is what it is.

I know that a few people who have posted on this thread have very big hearts for people who may not be able to or want to pay to engage in this world, I appalud them, words can't describe their kindness. I also know that there are some great creators that posted on this thread that passion drives them to create, not just profits.

[161488303349]

---

Links86 wrote:

LL could still make money off the Sims and buying and selling linden dollars also could charge a small sales commission fee on xstreet marketplace that's how they can still produce revenue for the Labs and if they would do that meaning lower cost to the game meaning more company profit and still allow SL players still make money off of every from land to the content people make that's how you can create a healthy environment for the player and the labs this is my point

---

your thought is predicated on the idea that lower costs for players leads to more players joining and from this flows more sales and therefore more profits for the host/operator

is not true this

if was true then SL would be dead already. and there would be millions of us now playing on OpenSim worlds

so have to ask why is that?

 

 

[Amethyst Jetaime]

---

Links86 wrote:

My point is that LL can create a new bussines model for Second Life players for exsample for a player who have the 4096 SQM deal lets say that person pays $45 USD a month pluse won't buy more land then he would have to pay more the $50 USD a month that would scare off most of the players of to days shakey real world economy if LL would take out the land size deal for the mainland and the monthly subscription and would find other area of Second Life to make money that would see a mayger population explosion of new and older player comeing back to Second Life

---

 

Easy for you to say 'come up with a new business model.  What do you suggest?  How would they find another way of making money other than to charge players for something else, with the net result that a player still needs to spend money in SL? 

Charge RL companies to market to SL residents?  RL companies tried that already and it didn't work.   People come to SL to escape RL. RL companies marketing to SL residents doesn't work because their ads are ignored at best and resented at worst.

Hit the merchants with extra costs?  They would only pass those costs on to the customers and you would end up paying them.

As things stand now, no one has to pay unless they want land.  This is fair because the people with land are paying for the cost of the servers.  If you don't want to pay that is your choice. You can live off freebies and not have land.  You just want to have land without paying for it.

Hmmm, maybe I should propose to my mortgage company to come up with a new business model so I would not have to pay a house payment.  Maybe they could figure out a way to shift the cost to you.  I'm sure lots of people would want to do business with them then for their mortgages too.

 

[161488303349]

---

Knowl Paine wrote:

I like the idea for an incentive to reduce inventory (data). 

I don't think the incentive should be monetized. 

---

agree the idea needs more thought on the monetisation part

the idea came out of the problem caused by the cost of maintaining large asset storages. and the question: who pays for that?

in SL-style worlds this is paid for by:

- ongoing tiers on landowners. ongoing fees charged to premium members

- one time commissions on purchase of currency and marketplace goods. onetime advertising fees

the host spread the cost of hosting the assets across a wide user base. cross-subsidisation. this pretty much orthodox state capitalism/market theory behaviour

+

in a virtual world bc it is digital then is easy to account for every asset. how they used and by who. and can easy facilate the transfer of them

GD theory in real world application is called greendollars or whitestones. or when partial implemented badly then carbon tax

the basic idea being that every asset has a tangible value in itself. a value not abitrarily determined by another method. like US$ or L$ for example

and bc it does have a tangible value then it can be transferred/exchanged for other things of value

+

can know what you meant by not tying it to monetisation. i think by this you mean the abitrary value mechanism. like abitrarily valuing an asset in terms of cash at point of sale

so the basic idea is that GD is not bound just to LI (land impact). it bound to all assets. so that the world value accounting is inventory-based and not visible space/land-based (tiers)

even tho for performance reasons LI still has to apply to visible space. this a technical value/proposition and not a monetary value/proposition when look at it close

+

if it were inventory/asset based and those inventory assets were transferable/exchangeable and deconstructable so that value can be realised from the recycling then:

1) it makes people think really hard about the volume of assets they include when they build/make stuff. bc inefficient use of assets has a direct effect on your own inventory bottom line. not just on rez assets like houses and trees. but also on attachments

2) customers are going to be more discerning when they buy stuff bc is going to effect them in the same way

3) more high asset content means you have to get the assets from somewhere/somehow. so buy them off the GreenX or whatever is called. AssetX maybe if not like the green word

4) can simplify. just use GD as the inworld money. and not use an abitrary currency like L$

5) you end up with 2 balances. a assets/wealth balance which is the sum of the wealth/assets you hold. a credit/cash balance which holds the value of any GDs you got over

if need more GDs then

a) buy them on the Green/AssetX

b) make something and sell it for more GDs than it contains

c) deconstruct/recycle some of your wealth and turn into GDs

+

i think and this a big think bc am not sure if is right

if we did this then what would be the effects?

1) the cost of hosting is user pays. right across the board. want lots of stuff then pay lots for it

2) space/land can then be paid for in GDs. the land is just another asset. it will consume GDs at scheduled rates. is no different this to say advertising space from an asset pov

3) to trade (buy/sell) GDs unbound to assets (credit/cash balance) then need to have PIU on your account by default. bc the trades done in US$

4) when you transfer something to another person and you set to 0GD sale price (say like a LM giver) then it will eat your credit/cash balance. when your balance hit 0 then cant give/transfer any more stuff where what you giving has more GD value than what you get in return

5) if say set a LM giver to 1GD then will only do the transfer if the customer accepts it. if they not accept then they dont get and they dont give you one of their GD in exchange

is GD cost neutral is 5). bc if they dont want it later on then they can delete/deconstruct/recycle and get their 1GD back

so upto here then would be a mostly social acceptable way i think. the actual details might need some more work tho

+

6) the other thought which may be difficult for people to accept is that your GD credit/cash balance will reduce by a scheduled amount each week/month depending on your asset/wealth. all the way down to 0. assets include both inventory and land/space. if it hits 0 then lost your land like normal. dont lose your own assets tho. but it will start deconstruct/recycle your library assets (which you got for free) and claim the GDs back and put towards your land until you got none of them left either

can still keep playing if you want. like goto 1)

so can start out as free to play with a newbie/pauper wealth. can play as long as you like. but like i say above in 6) it will take from you (to pay your tithe/tax) by deconstruct/recycle your library to release the GDs. all the way down to leaving only your newbie avatar self left in your painted on underwear (:

 

can set this to be quite slow. say like 3 months. so if you not add any value to the world or to other people who might give you some GDs in return for you just being a nice helpy kinda person. then you not get any GDs and the world will eat all your stuff. which you got for free anyways

+

the idea basically predicated on the thought that the Monarch/host fortune is tied closely to the wealth of their subjects/residents. and everyone from the highest most wealthy subject/residents all the way down to the lowliest subject/resident/pauper has to pay their tithes/taxes according to their wealth

grow your wealth then can have/get more stuff and pay more tithes/taxes. Monarch gets rich as well. and more important Monarch is way more sensitive this way i think to the needs of their subjects

+

something like this. the actual implementation details need more thought/work tho i think

like is this a viable alternative to the abitrary US$ tier model that have no tied relationship to the worlds market/economy?

dunno really.  i just like to think about these kinda things

 

[Paul Hexem]

The reason other MMO's can offer F2P is because they create content that people want to pay for. They still wind up with a revenue.

 

LL makes very little content in SL, and what they do make, no one wants. This means they have to charge for the hosting, because if they start taking the revenue from the content, users will stop making it.

[Tari Landar]

---

Links86 wrote:

LL could still make money off the Sims and buying and selling linden dollars also could charge a small sales commission fee on xstreet marketplace that's how they can still produce revenue for the Labs and if they would do that meaning lower cost to the game meaning more company profit and still allow SL players still make money off of every from land to the content people make that's how you can create a healthy environment for the player and the labs this is my point

---

As I suspected, and stated, you know nothing of the Sl economy and how it works. Linden labs DOES already make some revenue from those sources. The bulk of it still comes from tier paying residents. Removing that, without providing something to continue bringing in revenue to replace it, would be completely and utterly stupid of them. They'd be chopping off their own hand to fix a papercut.

So what do you propose they do, on top of what they already do, to replace the revenue lost if your idea is implemented. You need something that they don't already do, and you need something that will bring in a hefty profit-equal to or greater than what those lost tier payments give them. What do you propose is the solution? What you've suggested here in this quote, is not a solution, as it's already in place.

Losing income, is not going to create a healthy space for anyone. If the lab ain't happy, we ain't happy. They lose revenue, we lose too. I don't know why you can't see that lol.

 

[Melita Magic]

Knowl I found your idea very creative, but I think it could lead to a mess trying to have two worlds in one. People would feel like the have nots on either side. People would complain why do they have to pay to buy things or rent land from LL and others get the same functionality for no monetary investment. 

 

[Coby Foden]

---

Links86 wrote:

... and turn the mainland free to play ...

---

Lots of mainland indeed is "free to play".  Thanks to the all kind people they do allow others to enter to their paid regions.  For example one can go freely sailing in many areas.  No fee is collected when you enter a region.

A big thank you to kind land owners.  :heart: :matte-motes-smile:

 

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

 

LL makes very little content in SL, and what they do make, no one wants.

---

*Spews water on the monitor while thinking "Linden Homes"*

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Links86 wrote:

LL could still make money off the Sims and buying and selling linden dollars also could charge a small sales commission fee on xstreet marketplace that's how they can still produce revenue for the Labs and if they would do that meaning lower cost to the game meaning more company profit and still allow SL players still make money off of every from land to the content people make that's how you can create a healthy environment for the player and the labs this is my point

---

Losing income, is not going to create a healthy space for anyone. If the lab ain't happy, we ain't happy. They lose revenue, we lose too. I don't know why you can't see that lol.

 

---

My guess is he is new to SL, having seen it advertised on Steam and, being a gamer, thinks SL is a game and thus should have a business model similar to MMORPGs.

[Links86]

Well if the labs would take out tier fees and size land restricted they would lose so much company revenue for the labs because i would understand that and the maine reason i do because i got a because strong business sense here would be a simple solution to replace the loss of revenue when you create a new account they would charge a one time fee of $10 and that would be it and that would be the replacement for the loss of revenue of the tier fee revenue

 

 

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Links86 wrote:

 

Well if the labs would take out tier fees and size land restricted they would lose so much company revenue for the labs because i would understand that and the maine reason i do because i got a because strong business sense here would be a simple solution to replace the loss of revenue when you create a new account they would charge a one time fee of $10 and that would be it and that would be the replacement for the loss of revenue of the tier fee revenue

 

 

---

In the course of "....because I got a because strong business sense here" - did grammar, spelling and punctuation get lost.

I  am primarily mentioning this because you keep spouting off all kinds of "business advice" that has been repeatedly pointed out to you will not work in SL, yet it is almost painful to try to decipher what you are saying due to lack of said grammar, spelling, and punctuation, thus I truly find it difficult to take anything you say seriously.

 

[Cerise Sorbet]

---

Links86 wrote:

 

Well if the labs would take out tier fees and size land restricted they would lose so much company revenue for the labs because i would understand that and the maine reason i do because i got a because strong business sense here would be a simple solution to replace the loss of revenue when you create a new account they would charge a one time fee of $10 and that would be it and that would be the replacement for the loss of revenue of the tier fee revenue 

 

---

Second Life used to have exactly that, years ago. The basic accounts had that one time fee, and the world remained small. It did not grow much until that was eliminated, and afterward the amount of land people paid for skyrocketed. It might seem strange that a small entry fee would hold people back more than the large land fees, but that is what happened.

[Pussycat Catnap]

OP, read up on the history of SL - they started with a fee to make an account. When they removed it, SL took off like hotcakes.

Its on the downslide now because its old, and too expensive in key areas.

They -do- need to reduce the cost of land by a significant amount. But if they made mainland ownership free, estate land would die very fast... and curiously, the price of mainland would skyrocket.

Like this: People would buy up dozens of free or $10 accounts... and get a lot of mainland, and then sell it on once all the mainland was grabbed up.

- The estates, having to pay tier while mainland didn't, would evaporate. Almost none of them could stay in business under this model. One might have predatory estate barons, but one should not forget the amazing content out there among the estates: and that for every one predatory estate baron, there are likely 10 that do good work for little praise (ok made up ratio, but if the bad ones were majority, estates would be dead long ago).

 

This idea would kill SL.

 

Tier is too high... but a free for all is an equally opposite disaster.

Mainland 512m ownership tier though is $9.95 a month. This, frankly, is probably the only spot in all of LLs land fees that is correct... At that price for that one product, you really do get the value you pay for. Especially with mesh and scaling down avatars, 512m becomes quite a lot of land.

I still think they should up it to 1536m for mainland, or 512m plus a linden home - but that only to cause SL to seem low cost, and to boost premium membership while also driving people who become settled out of linden homes and onto mainland.

Estate land tier, and the costs of tier upgrades above the basic - these should be halved or even cut down to a third of current... Its a question though of whether or not a reduction would drive enough added sales. So I'd do it in steps of about 10-15% per quarter and measure the results before taking the next step.

 

As for marketplace, that should have its shopping cart removed. Instead make it a listing with a button to the location of the object inworld. Thus driving merchants back onto the land and helping continue to fund the reasons we "play" SL: for places to visit and socialize or explore.

 

[Kenbro Utu]

You are really bad at math...

[Tari Landar]

---

Links86 wrote:

 

Well if the labs would take out tier fees and size land restricted they would lose so much company revenue for the labs because i would understand that and the maine reason i do because i got a because strong business sense here would be a simple solution to replace the loss of revenue when you create a new account they would charge a one time fee of $10 and that would be it and that would be the replacement for the loss of revenue of the tier fee revenue

 

 

---

Ok, normally I'm a pretty nice person, and I really try very hard to see all perspectives, even if I don't agree. But frankly, I don't even think you're trying here. My 9 yr old could tell you that your math just doesn't add up, and he's only in 6th grade. A $10 one time fee when an account is created is NOT going to cover lost revenue from tier payments being removed. That's like trying to use one cheerio to feed a thousand men well for a day. It's just not going to happen. Tier payments are recurring, not one time fees. They are an ongoing expense to residents that provide monthly revenue for linden labs. They essentially keep sl going. Aside from that, the mere idea kills off your "free to play" idea. It's not entirely free if you charge a membership fee, which is what you'd be doing, no matter what you call it. Linden labs used to charge a fee. It didn't work out to their advantage. I don't think bringing back a mandatory fee is going to bring new people in to begin with. Many people sign up because its free. They justify it with the thought process that even if it isn't all it's cracked up to be, they won't be out anything. Even if $10 isn't a lot of money, it's enough to ward off potential residents, defeating the desire for growth.

I agree wholeheartedly that tier fees are ridiculous, and if structured differently could benefit both linden labs and the residents(among many other things that could be changed). I also believe strongly that linden labs doesn't always understand what it's doing before it happens, let alone after it happens. I believe they need someone in there with not only actual business knowledge but also the ability to utilize Sl for maximum benefit to all. I think helping them come up with better ways to maintain a steady revenue without basically bending over their customers without so much as a dinner invite, is a good thing. I also believe ideas that help maintain consistant resident retention, without having a negative impact on linden labs or current residents, are invaluable. But half-cocked ideas that cause a loss in revenue, a loss in current residents and a future loss of potential residents, are most definitely not going to benefit anyone. I do know that many, many residents have great ideas that could be implemented. I also know linden labs has a tendency to not listen to us anyway, even when we do present good ideas.

[161488303349]

---

Links86 wrote:

 

Well if the labs would take out tier fees and size land restricted they would lose so much company revenue for the labs because i would understand that and the maine reason i do because i got a because strong business sense here would be a simple solution to replace the loss of revenue when you create a new account they would charge a one time fee of $10 and that would be it and that would be the replacement for the loss of revenue of the tier fee revenue

 

 

---

on this model (one time payment of $10) then would need to get 500,000 new signups every month. month after month forever

is the churn model this

SL been going nearly 10 years now. in whole time has been free to play. has been about 30 million new account signups on free to play

which is about 3 million a year. divide by 12 = 250,000 a month

what you suggesting is that by charging $10 to play instead of free to play then will double the sign up rate

the reason you give is that people will pay this bc of the free land they will get in return

+

so do the numbers on land from business pov

5,000 sims divide 500,000 = 100 people per sim each month forever. cant get that many on a sim. so double the sims. 10,000 sims each month added to the grid

in one year starting from 0. the grid will have 120,000 sims

in 10 years will be 1,200,000 sims. total revenues $600,000,000

compare to current business model: 30,000 sims. revenues $600,000,000

given the hosting and servicing costs involved then from business pov which is the better model? 

+

can certainly see which is the better model from individual customers pov tho

but 

and this the big but

the revenues is reliant on the churn

and where it falls over

bc you run out of new people

 

[Czari Zenovka]

There's also another factor to consider, not everyone has any desire to own/rent land in SL.  Those of us who post on the forums are generally more invested in SL by even knowing this forum exists, but venturing out of one's own circle of friends, all of whom may own businesses and/or homes, can yield some interesting alternate viewpoints.

I used to go to dance venues regularly and thus have talked to a lot of guys in SL - some for only the one dance, others became friends.  The vast majority of them only come to SL for that one activity - dancing (well, maybe they hope that dancing will lead to something else), and have no desire for any land.  One of my male friends has been in SL since 2009, logs in almost daily and, to my knowledge, has never spent one linden in SL.  All clothes and avatar items are freebies, he has no SL home - just logs out in a quiet spot of a public place and logs back into the previous location - even his gifts are freebies.  A recent friend of mine has been given access to homes of several friends so he currently has no interest in land of his own.

Add in the loss of a LOT of estates plus huge portions of mainland being abandoned, any marketing strategy that involves land is doomed to fail.

[161488303349]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

There's also another factor to consider, not everyone has any desire to own/rent land in SL.  Those of us who post on the forums are generally more invested in SL by even knowing this forum exists, but venturing out of one's own circle of friends, all of whom may own businesses and/or homes, can yield some interesting alternate viewpoints.

I used to go to dance venues regularly and thus have talked to a lot of guys in SL - some for only the one dance, others became friends.  The vast majority of them only come to SL for that one activity - dancing (well, maybe they hope that dancing will lead to something else), and have no desire for any land.  One of my male friends has been in SL since 2009, logs in almost daily and, to my knowledge, has never spent one linden in SL.  All clothes and avatar items are freebies, he has no SL home - just logs out in a quiet spot of a public place and logs back into the previous location - even his gifts are freebies.  A recent friend of mine has been given access to homes of several friends so he currently has no interest in land of his own.

Add in the loss of a LOT of estates plus huge portions of mainland being abandoned, any marketing strategy that involves land is doomed to fail.

---

yes agree about the land model in terms of growing more revenues endlessly. it do reach a tipping point

is only so many people who want land for the sake of the land itself. like to have a home and thats all. or to make a creative space to play on just for ourselves mostly. sometimes for others who might drop in from time to time. say like a park or garden or a space platform. a club as well. things like that

+

if look at mainland for example and how come is more abandoned land now

is not that the land being abandoned any more or less faster than ever before. is less people buying it now. cant be the price of the land itself bc is cheaper to buy now than it ever was

so reasons why people not buying

1) Linden Homes

2) Marketplace

3) No profitable resell margins on parcels anymore

1) and 2) are deliberate strategies chosen by linden. why they chose to do this?

+

on marketplace

linden didnt have any choice but to do this if they wanted to hold onto to as much tiers as they could for as long as they could. while also getting the marketplace revenues (commissions) even as small as they are comparatively

so linden had to obtain the two private SL marketplaces that was operating back in the day. bc if they did not then they would of ended up with the same reduction in tiers from shopowners anyways. bc can put 3 magic boxes on 16m land. which was starting to happen at the time. shopkeeprs starting to tier down. magic boxes. and list only on the private marketplaces

so linden choose lesser of 2 evils as effect their business. alternative would have just been to block offworld trading of any kind. but that opens up things like Risk API being shut down as well a ban on offworlds. so i think linden choose the least of all evils by go with marketplace themselves

can say that they would have known all this. the longterm effect on tiers of offworld marketplace. like if i know it then have to assume that the CFO would also know it

+

on linden homes

Linden Homes are easier to manage. both for linden and the new resident home owner. click buy get move in. house provided. predictable experience in terms of the view and setting

downside less people buy normal mainland. but what is the cost/risk of this?

consider. 38,000 about got Linden Homes now. they pay for a 512m tier. minimum revenue $US72 each. many on 3 months or 1 month rollover

 how many of them dont rollover when they in predictable experience Linden Homes vs how many dont rollover when they have unpredictable mainalnd experience?

only linden can know that. but they persevere with it. so the numbers must be at least comparable or better for Linden Homes way

+

resell 

is impacted by first 2

but was also impact by the bubble factor. back in the day 2006/2007 and on. print it and they will come. and we did. land flipping like crazy (:

then we ran of new people to come and join in and resell to. we churn through all the ones who wanted to play the flipping game. a demand driven and funded by churn

was great fun while it lasted. the early movers made a killing. the latecomers took a bath. same like any other goldrush/bubble

+

so mainland only has one value now. the value it brings to the committed creative home/space mainland owner. how many of them have there really ever been in all the history of SL?

not many really. hardly any at all compared to all the other numbers of people that came and stayed or came and went

20,000 maybe? less even probably i think

+

the private islands a bit different  thing. the individual island owner or renter is affected by how much money they  got RL. they cant escape this. so they have to make choices about their spend. is the same for everyone this

if ask the big barons they just say when is less demand they downsize their holdings. when is more demand then upsize. they will keep going while is profits for them in it. good business people make profits in both falling and rising demand markets

linden stuck with the mainland bc of their belief in the contiguous view. private baron not have to care about this

from purely selfish mainland homeower pov this not a bad thing in many ways. bc can quite often these days have the whole sim to yourself or just one or two of you. for weeks and months sometimes

is quite a good deal that from that pov

[Amethyst Jetaime]

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

As for marketplace, that should have its shopping cart removed. Instead make it a listing with a button to the location of the object inworld. Thus driving merchants back onto the land and helping continue to fund the reasons we "play" SL: for places to visit and socialize or explore.

 

---

I don't want to TP inworld to buy an item then arrive at a shop and have to look all over creation for the item I want, wasting a lot of my time. IF I have the time I purchase an item in world to save the commission for the merchant, but a lot of times I don't have that kind of time to take away from my work.  I also don't really like shopping in RL or SL, its just a necessity like any other chore. So overall I'd buy far less than I do now.  A lot of people have limited time on SL and/or don't look at shopping as entertainment.  They probably wouldn't buy as much as they do now either, since MP is much more convenient and efficient and many use MP while at work or in places where they can't access SL.

Then there is impulse buying which I am sure happens far more on MP than in world.  A lot of times I'm on MP looking for something and see other things I like and add those to my cart on a whim.  This increases sales and commissions to LL.  But if I had to TP to three or four places to pick up impulse purchases I wouldn't buy them.

I realize shopping in world is entertainment for a lot of people and other's think every merchant should have an in world store, . In world stores for are a good thing for people that like to shop in world, as well as for being able to see some things before you buy them.  But not everything needs to be seen in world first. Avatar items in particular, since if you go to the store you would more likely than not see the same picture as they have on MP.  Overall, in my experience having an inworld store is no guarantee of better quality or service either.

Lastly not everyone can afford a store, and that would eliminate a number of merchants who rely on the income to fund their SL.  Even those that have stores use some of the money they earn on MP in SL to fund their SL.

So overall, even though more tier may be collected, I don't think it would increase LL's revenue.  I think sales and available content would decrease and thus commissions. And the SL economy would take a hit from merchants who use their MP earnings to finance their SL.

Right now we have a choice of shopping MP or inworld,  Choices are always better than than being forced to shop only one way.

[Czari Zenovka]

---

16 wrote:

from purely selfish mainland homeower pov this not a bad thing in many ways. bc can quite often these days have the whole sim to yourself or just one or two of you. for weeks and months sometimes

is quite a good deal that from that pov

---

I've lived on the same mainland sim for the majority of my time in SL.  There was a time in late 2007-early 2008 that someone had a club on the sim and another time that someone built a shopping mall/small club/rented slip space for boats, but even back then when most of the land was owned I rarely saw more than a handful of people there when I was.  I figured I must be in the opposite time zone or something.

For the last 3+ years the majority of the sim was for sale so, like you said, much of the time I was the only person on the sim.  Now most of the sim is once again owned (due to it being abandoned and sold for 1L sqm) but there are still a number of parcels for sale by land flippers, and I am still usually the only one on the sim.  At most I see maybe 3 other people.  Very interesting.  I also have my home 4000 m in the air.  I may set a home on the water level (water sim) and hang out there for awhile to see if any people wander by.

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

As for marketplace, that should have its shopping cart removed. Instead make it a listing with a button to the location of the object inworld. Thus driving merchants back onto the land and helping continue to fund the reasons we "play" SL: for places to visit and socialize or explore.

 

---

I don't want to TP inworld to buy an item then arrive at a shop and have to look all over creation for the item I want, wasting a lot of my time. 

---

I'd rather save SL from death than make it 30 second more convenient.

SL will die, if merchants don't return to the land. All that kept the many venues where they stuff they sold got used in business was funding tier from renting them shops.

Sometimes you need to think beynd your own self and look at what's best for the larger community.

What will you do, when such 'me me me' thinking causes all of the clubs, art venues, roleplay sims, hangouts, ballrooms, live music venues, discussion venues, meter sims, racing sims, XXX sims, and every single other form of community sim to vanish... because they can no longer fund tier?

What good will anything one buys on market place be, when all that is left is empty mainland and linden homes.

 

[Melita Magic]

---

Links86 wrote:

 

Well if the labs would take out tier fees and size land restricted they would lose so much company revenue for the labs because i would understand that and the maine reason i do because i got a because strong business sense here would be a simple solution to replace the loss of revenue when you create a new account they would charge a one time fee of $10 and that would be it and that would be the replacement for the loss of revenue of the tier fee revenue

 

 

---

Tier for a full mainland sim is about 200 USD. A private estate sim that was not at the grandfathered (old) rate is 300 USD per month. If those people could pay a one time fee of $10 how would that replace $500 a month for Linden Lab?

 

[161488303349]

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

---

I'd rather save SL from death than make it 30 second more convenient.

SL will die, if merchants don't return to the land. All that kept the many venues where they stuff they sold got used in business was funding tier from renting them shops.

Sometimes you need to think beynd your own self and look at what's best for the larger community.

What will you do, when such 'me me me' thinking causes all of the clubs, art venues, roleplay sims, hangouts, ballrooms, live music venues, discussion venues, meter sims, racing sims, XXX sims, and every single other form of community sim to vanish... because they can no longer fund tier?

What good will anything one buys on market place be, when all that is left is empty mainland and linden homes.

 

---

i think you being a bit more gloomy than need to be

+

well-run clubs survive. always have. not well-run and they dont. is same SL as RL this

bars in SL do better. same in RL. they get regulars who keep coming back time after time. the clubs that survive in SL may look like a club. but they bars really. if look at the longtime survivor ones. can see this

+

can also see that is the big brands always present at those club/bars. is not their main store. is a little place with some stuff in it. they not shops really either. they advertising brand boards. the big brands know this. so do the big club/bar owners

+

if look at the big brands at the clubs/bars then can see they changing from direct inworld sell

click the boards and more and more now is redirect to a website. brand website. catalog style. and links on the items to their marketplace shop

+

the thing i think that gets missed the most by heaps of newbie club owners and newbie shopkeepers is:

i dont actual go to a club/bar to shop in those moments. i go to party up. if i get reminded that a brand supports my fav club/bar then i will appreciate that they do. but am not going to stop dancing/socialising then and there and rush off to shop. i will come your shop tomorrow maybe. or stipend day or another day. when i got time

maybe tho sometimes when i am party up and i do click a board and then a link and end up on marketplace then i might see something on the link that i like. if so then i might buy it immediately. or grab a demo

so i can shop and party up at the same time. which i cant do if i have to leave the club/bar dancefloor and leave my friends to go somewhere else and do

+

something we always do when we socialise is chat each other. in open and IM. we chat about stuff. we chat about what else we doing at the same time. catalogs we browsing. youtubes we watching. music we listen to. or what we making for dinner tonight. and what ingredients we putting in it. and babies and kids and teenagers and homework and what others games we might be playing on later. or at the same time

is all very mundane this to world builders and grand society visionaries. but welcome to the world of the consumer

+

how much will brands pay big club/bar owners for this? pay for me and my friends and the other club/bar patrons?

more than what they used to pay for the rental on a little shop way away from the dance/floor area which i am not going to see anyways

why? bc of what i do

what i do is when i click the board and end up on the marketplace then i am going to ask my friend who is with me to have a look and see what they think. is what consumers do. my friend will sell it me. same way i sell it to them when they ask me what i think about what they considering buying

SL is changing and evolving again bc of this. some will work it out and prosper. some not

+

is another thing

back in 2007/8 the single biggest moan was about the over-commercialisation of the inworld. shopping mall city

marketplace is killing shopping mall city exactly like you saying. is this a good thing or a bad thing?

for the creative home/space mainlander in their little houses with pretty gardens who used to get blinged to death by the mall next door then this is great

for the creator who slaves away 30 or more hours a week just to make $250 a week and then have to give $300 a month to linden as tier on their shop sim then is great also

even better the creator can keep the whole $1000 now. $300 more than they made before. so what i do with my extra money i am now getting?

i know. i might get a sim and i can just play on it. like make me a little home or a park or something i can enjoy. just making for the fun of it. and can leave all that work stuff for that other place/space

and if business goes a bit slow and i have to give up the sim for a while then is ok

bc if i have to lose it then i not lose my whole business with it. which is what used to happen to me in the olden days when i didnt have a marketplace shop

+

ps

i actual dont like marketplace personally. i like inworld shopping malls. bigger the better. more even. all i want in my SL really is wall to wall shopping malls and a ocean

but i dont make anything do i. i dont slave away making stuff for other people. i not have any worries about how i am going to make my sim payments either. bc i havent got one

so i what i personally feel is kinda way down on this priority totem and i accept that (:  

 

 

[Drake1 Nightfire]

Just cuz i am a brat,...

Your son started first grade at 3?