2013 SL RESIDENT / BUSINESS SURVEY

[Heavenly Villa]

Just to clarify - the CBD is a group of proactive business people in sl who want to improve the ability for businesses in sl to survive and grow.

We come from different areas and different experience, but our philosophy is the same - working together to achieve a stronger, growing SL for all.  We are realistic in what we may or may not be able to achieve.

We have just started so there is alot we need to work through.  This survey is a start to help provide us with information to identify issues facing business people in SL - freebies, land costs, marketplace, resident retention, lack of ability to communicate directly with LL, start up costs, marketing etc.  Nor are we only interested in our own opinions. The survey is to get a range of views from people in SL.

We are NOT here to promote our own business or to develop and sell our own products as a group.  We are looking beyond our own immediate business to the bigger picture. 

As for the group "credentials" - why is this important ?  We dont have PhDs in economics, but that doesnt mean we dont have a clue as to what is going on or arent capable of making SOME difference. 

I struggled to make my store successful for several years, in a market where several big furniture stores had a monopoly.   Several other small designers had the same frustrations and two of us started a collaborative of home and garden stores.  This has been running for almost two years now and my store is doing better than ever. 

In rl, I have a qualification that gives me the skills to know how to do a survey.  I also managed a not-for-profit agency for 4 years.   When I took over the agency it had very little money in the bank and was at risk of losing the government contracts that it had in a time when other funding was drying up due to the recession.  It also had an almost non-existent client base.  

By the time I left (to do other things), it had a sizeable amount of income, secure contracts, a large client base and a good standing in the community.   Being able to achieve this meant I had some "smarts" at running a business and knowing what is involved and it is NOT all about the "economy". Many factors, both in SL and RL, contribute to running a successful business and thereby to the economy.    It not just about understanding what an economy is.  Many people in SL, both small and big business operators, understand what does and doesnt affect the success of their business. 

Thanks 

 

[Czari Zenovka]

I think you are making some assumptions that aren't necessarily true in many instances:

I see merchants as being on a continuum between those who do not need to make any income from producing content and therefore do not need to place any value on their time,  and those who make all their income from producing content and must therefore ask fair value for their time.

It is not a black/white, either/or.  You are assuming that those who do not need to make income from producing content do not place any value on their time.  Often those who are successful in RL endeavors have learned to value their time very wisely and I would say that same ethos would follow them into SL.  Whether this type of person chooses to supplement their RL income with their SL endeavors is a moot point on the subject of valuing time.

To continue on this theme, you are assuming someone who doesn't have to place a value on their time as evidenced "to you" by charging lower prices, already an incorrect assumption, especially stated in such a broad-brush manner, must therefore make enough RL income and don't need to make money in SL.  Speaking for myself, and having pretty much laid out my entire financial situation on these forums, I very much need to make extra income to supplement my disability check which is the ONLY income I receive and which places me statistically at poverty level.  SL is one way I am attempting to supplement my income; however, there are several reasons why I am not as prolific as others, the main one being my health.  I have days I spend in bed due to my health when I would love to be as fortunate as you to enjoy good health and be able to sit at my PC all day with a mind clear enough to create new items including the time needed to take photos, clean them up in Gimp, package the items, advertise them, etc.

And where you are does not mean you have superior or inferior quality of merchandise or customer service, or are in some way morally superior to those in other locations on the continuum.

I agree with this up until the "morally superior" part.  If you are referring to me personally, I have never claimed any moral superiority so not sure where that came from.  If it is a generic "you" I'm still a bit puzzled.

For example, those who have plenty of free time and/or no need for SL income, can afford to earn nothing for their time and can charge very little or nothing for their products, which has driven prices down. This is good for customers, but not good for those who do need their SL income -- often because it is the only earning option left to them --  and must earn something for their time. 

Here you are making the assumption that a merchant charging less for an item: (1) can "afford" to and (2) is purposely trying to drive prices down, thus cutting into the profits of those who "value their time," both incorrect in the broad sense.  Again, I can only speak for myself.  I covered (1) in my previous paragraph.

As for (2), the reason my prices may be lower for an item is because I determine what I consider a fair price for the quality of work offered.  Many of my items are ones I made years ago (which I am in the process of re-vamping and why my in-world store is currently closed) and I priced my items comparable to my building skills at that time.  I continue to use this measuring stick in creating any product.  The LAST thing on my mind was and is to deliberately set low prices for competitive reasons.  There may very well be some merchants who do that, just as there are some very large, well-known merchants who offer lousy to no customer service.  It is not a broad-brush issue.

As a sidenote to this: One of my friends who began her business at the same time as mine and became quite successful keeps telling me I don't charge enough for my items.  She isn't saying this from your point of view, but because she cares for me as a friend and feels I am not asking what my work is worth.  Setting prices for me is one of the most challenging things in being a merchant.  I check out merchants selling similar items and see prices all across the board - some selling an item for 5L, others for 200L where I may price mine at 60L.  I've also seen items that are amazing and way better in quality than some of my items, but priced at less than mine, so trying to figure out the "right" price is a skill unto itself.

Therefore I don't see any way for those at opposite ends of the continuum to make common cause.

The OP of this thread is presenting a way that a group proposes to help the SL economy grow. As previously stated, the vast majority of merchants in SL do not make a RL living from their businesses for a variety of reasons, but *all* merchants are a part of the whole that is the SL market/economy and in this I see us all united.  I'm not sure why you would want to set up an adversarial us vs them situation.

I get the impression from reading many of your posts that you either have been low-balled in prices by a direct competitor which has cost you business and are reacting to that, which is human nature. We all have our hot buttons. My initial impression is reinforced by statements like this one in a later post in this thread:

Bottom line: Short term, driving prices down looks like a good thing, but just as when during the depression farmers stopped growing food* because the prices were too low, in the long term (and I see no way to stop the trend) it will mean that SL will no longer be a good place for many creators to invest their time and energy

Until you brought it up, pricing was not an issue in this thread.  My response to Medhue was to object to the reasoning that only merchants making most of their income in SL should have any voice in LL marketplace policies that would affect *all* of us, not just a tiny segment.  Nowhere in any of that exchange was pricing mentioned, except in the broad sense of earning a RL income.  Inferring that all merchants who have small stores or lower prices are trying to undercut you/larger merchants at worst or don't need to make RL money at best is simply not true in the big picure.

You then give an example in another post:

I have several friends who have chronic debilitating illnesses whose ONLY income -- and only opportunity to earn income -- is SL. Driving prices into the ground has hurt them. Everyone has the right to set any price they want, or give things away free, and I would never want to change that -- but I think everyone needs to be aware of the long term effect of driving prices down to the point where people no longer find it profitable to produce content.

Basd on this I would think you could understand where I'm coming from as I am in this exact situation, with the possible exception of them not currently drawing any disability income, but mine is certainly not a liveable income.  Why would I want to hurt my own sales if I felt I could in good faith charge a higher price and thus make more much needed income?  I could turn this theory around and say that large, well-established merchants who can afford full sims to showcase their goods, who have the energy to be prolific in their creations, and can afford to better advertise, ie. purchasing listing enhancements, etc. are taking business away from me because I cannot afford that exposure, but that would be ludicrous.

I have never, ever posted on this forum to complain that I'm losing sales because other merchants are doing x,y,z.  I believe firmly that my success is directly proportional to the time and energy I put into any endeavor and if my health does not currently lend itself to being able to cash out decent RL funds...that's my problem.  Using the "driving down prices" as some excuse just doesn't wash with me,

 

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

Personally, I feel that if a merchant is not making a major portion of their income from SL, they should have no say in how things should be changed to benefit every1. It is more likely that people who do earn their living in SL will have a much better grasp on what the real issues are. It is also more likely that the advice given by these merchants will have a more positive impact on all businesses.

 

---

*Sighs*  So only a select group of merchants (and it has been mentioned, shown, demonstrated, etc., etc. many times that the number of merchants who earn a RL income from SL is extremely small) are the only ones to have any say in policies that affect all SL merchants. It is not more likely that only these merchants have advice that will have a "positive impact on all businesses."  I have said this so many times I am blue in the face but there are merchants with a wonderful grasp on business, great customer service, wonderful products, etc. who either don't have the time to devote to making their SL business their RL income or who prefer to maintain a smaller business and enjoy other aspects of SL as well - with a myriad of other situations falling in between.

Please tell me you did not actually say that, Medhue.  This hasn't been a great day and I really don't want to get into a debate with you...lol.

---

I do not mean to offend, but I understand how it can be offensive. In no way am I inferring that all smaller merchants are incapable of giving good advice, but that it is unlikely that most have enough data to be able to discern between those issues that affect every1 and those that only affect their field. Forums like these are where a smaller merchant can voice their opinions and test out their theories. I don't think many understand the damage they do to every1 when they scream for changes that they have no clue what the whole of the ramifications are. Myself included. Even I have to stop myself from supporting changes that might seem good in the beginning, but after deep thought, are obviously bad for the whole of the economy.

<snip>

So, the intend of my statements is to protect those smaller merchants that I seem to be bashing. I could very easily do the opposite and blame all the woes of our economy on these small merchants in an attempt to restrict entry into my market. If 1 looks at my actions tho, I encourage as many people to learn animation as possible and help those people more than any other animator in SL. There are many other pitfalls when merchant groups are formed to promote change, but I don't have time to go into all of them.

---

ACK!!!  I didn't mean to stir up another political debate...lol.

I do appreciate your clarification, Medhue.  I still do not agree that the size of a merchant's store, ie. how many products sold or offered and/or making a RL income from SL has any bearing *in general* (there are always exceptions) on having a better grasp of the issues of being a SL merchant.  I'm thinking of a merchant who is well-known on these forums who, to my knowledge, does not pull a RL income from the SL business and, due to the niche, has a smaller product line than some others who post here, but who has an amazing grasp on business in general, SL business in particular, and is a whiz with statistics.

As I said to Pamela, I personally hold only myself responsible for my success or failure in a given endeavor, including a SL business.  I recognize and appreciate your willingness to help others; I was even a recent recipient of your kindness in an offer you proposed, so I don't at all think you are against smaller merchants, which is why I responded to you.   As for possible pitfalls of groups promoting whatever agenda, I would generally agree with you. (I cannot speak for the OP's group as I have not yet completed the survey nor really looked into it enough to have an intelligent opinion.)  My only point in my response to you is that we as merchants are all in this together - improving the economy of SL, imo, is all of us doing the best we can to promote positive change, not dividing up into splinter groups based on various factors.

[Pamela Galli]

Czari, I think you pretty much completely misunderstood my post, beginning with construing my explaining that everyone is on a continuum as the opposite: "either/or" or "black/white".

I do understand that you are ill and I am thinking of you and those like you trying to earn some extra income as prices are being driven down (and I understand now that you may not be affected by this in your choice of pricing).  

(Until two years ago, btw, the only things I sold in a box were houses. Nothing else was boxed because I did not have time to do it. Then a family member joined the business and over a years time we boxed and listed.)

[Toysoldier Thor]

Medhue,

Lets just say that I completely disagree with your views of world politics and economics.... as basically does the vast majority of ALL people of all countries that operate a wide spectrum of economic models. Why do I say that?  Because if the "Libertarian" fully free market economy is the utopia perfect model which all world economies should strive to attain to solve all their woes.... then why has NO country come close to operating this "perfect model". 

Heck even the USA that is arguably the the most free economy in the world (or at least they think they are) is as you openly admit not even close to a libertarian style of full free market economy.  I wont ask you why because you will come up with a laundry list of soapbox theories / reasons that I don't want to hear. 

But the facts speak for themselves.... its a model that is simply not feasible and can only exist as a "fantasy" great model in the minds of libertarians and the extreme right wing teacup parties.  None of these people - you included - has any real life posterchild example to show anyone else that a complete free market economy can work because no country is stupid enough to experiment with this fantasy economic model.

As for your one response to my comment suggesting that I said the USA is an example of a "Free Market"... try reading my post again.  I said the USA has experimented with simple smaller scale examples of moving the country toward a more free market economy by doing stupid things like deregulating industries.  AND we all saw the instant result from these failed / failing experiments... all the national and global impacting massive disruptions / collapses of economic stability.  You can only image if it was a full scale deployment.

As for your logic on how a Free Market economy would have solve the corruption on wall street and Eron and savings and loan and mortgage back securities etc.... WOW I shake my head at your understanding of economics.  Thats like saying "The house is on fire but if we only threw more gas on the fire this would never happen".  Your perceptions of economics are so skewed its only value is that its entertaining and comical to read.

What ever you respond to this posting - as I know you will - I will no longer be engaging in this topic.  There is no value.

[Medhue Simoni]

You can respond or read my responce if you want, it really makes no difference to me. I actually enjoy arguing about economics and am open to hearing any valid arguement that any1 can throw at me. I'm even open to adjusting my view, which is the point of debating the issues. I have yet to hear any real or valid example backed up with some basic understanding of the paticular crisis' you speak of. The facts are that there were already hundreds of thousands of regulatory laws on the books, with many broken during all they major financial crisis' and nothing at all was done about those. A few less laws out of hundred of thousands is not a significant difference to blame it all on those few less laws. The Community Reinvestment Act played a major role in the housing debacle as well as 2 companies designed to make it easier for low income people to buy homes, which was Fannie and Freddie. That sounds like the opposite of a Free Market. Matter of fact, it sounds alot like socialism.

The more economically free a nation is, the greater the economic growth. The US dominated the world during a time we were a hundred times more free economically than we are now. China is becoming more and more capitalistic, and they are growing economically faster than any nation on this earth. The more they loosen the strings, the faster they grow. The Soviet Uniion collapsed because their centerally controlled economy was spending more than it produces, and they did not know how to allocate resources efficiently, despite having access to foreign markets to guage they resource allocation by.

I know it sounds drastically different than what we have now, but a completely deregulated market would means that every financial statement would be rigorously checked by each person because they won't have 1 entity to watch over them. The result would be thousands, if not millions of regulators, meaning every person invested. These people would then voice their opinions openly and critically about every move a company makes, much like we do with LL. I'll admit that the kind of Free Market system that I'm talking about would not have been possible as little as 20 years ago, but the times have changed.

[Medhue Simoni]

---

Heavenly Villa wrote:

Just to clarify - the CBD is a group of proactive business people in sl who want to improve the ability for businesses in sl to survive and grow.

We come from different areas and different experience, but our philosophy is the same - working together to achieve a stronger, growing SL for all.  We are realistic in what we may or may not be able to achieve.

We have just started so there is alot we need to work through.  This survey is a start to help provide us with information to identify issues facing business people in SL - freebies, land costs, marketplace, resident retention, lack of ability to communicate directly with LL, start up costs, marketing etc.  Nor are we only interested in our own opinions. The survey is to get a range of views from people in SL.

We are NOT here to promote our own business or to develop and sell our own products as a group.  We are looking beyond our own immediate business to the bigger picture. 

As for the group "credentials" - why is this important ?  We dont have PhDs in economics, but that doesnt mean we dont have a clue as to what is going on or arent capable of making SOME difference. 

I struggled to make my store successful for several years, in a market where several big furniture stores had a monopoly.   Several other small designers had the same frustrations and two of us started a collaborative of home and garden stores.  This has been running for almost two years now and my store is doing better than ever. 

In rl, I have a qualification that gives me the skills to know how to do a survey.  I also managed a not-for-profit agency for 4 years.   When I took over the agency it had very little money in the bank and was at risk of losing the government contracts that it had in a time when other funding was drying up due to the recession.  It also had an almost non-existent client base.  

By the time I left (to do other things), it had a sizeable amount of income, secure contracts, a large client base and a good standing in the community.   Being able to achieve this meant I had some "smarts" at running a business and knowing what is involved and it is NOT all about the "economy". Many factors, both in SL and RL, contribute to running a successful business and thereby to the economy.    It not just about understanding what an economy is.  Many people in SL, both small and big business operators, understand what does and doesnt affect the success of their business. 

Thanks 

 

---

Thanks Heavenly,

I greatly appreciate the openness of your comment. Really, I'm as nosy as any1 and like to have some understanding of the people that come and put something out here for us to see or give input to. Please forgive me if I was harsh. I didn't think the survey was bad at all, just would have liked to seen more questions about freebies. That would be some interesting data. Looking forward to seeing the results.

[Medhue Simoni]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

 

 

---

ACK!!!  I didn't mean to stir up another political debate...lol.

I do appreciate your clarification, Medhue.  I still do not agree that the size of a merchant's store, ie. how many products sold or offered and/or making a RL income from SL has any bearing *in general* (there are always exceptions) on having a better grasp of the issues of being a SL merchant.  I'm thinking of a merchant who is well-known on these forums who, to my knowledge, does not pull a RL income from the SL business and, due to the niche, has a smaller product line than some others who post here, but who has an amazing grasp on business in general, SL business in particular, and is a whiz with statistics.

As I said to Pamela, I personally hold only myself responsible for my success or failure in a given endeavor, including a SL business.  I recognize and appreciate your willingness to help others; I was even a recent recipient of your kindness in an offer you proposed, so I don't at all think you are against smaller merchants, which is why I responded to you.

  As for possible pitfalls of groups promoting whatever agenda, I would generally agree with you. (I cannot speak for the OP's group as I have not yet completed the survey nor really looked into it enough to have an intelligent opinion.)  My only point in my response to you is that we as merchants are all in this together - improving the economy of SL, imo, is all of us doing the best we can to promote positive change, not dividing up into splinter groups based on various factors.

---

I'm a radical. I'll admit completely. Every1 that's ever known me will tell every1 that I'm a radical. I don't say this to sound cool or anything. I've never been 1 to care much about what others might think of me as I see concentrating on those things as deviating from what I think is right for me. How many people agree makes no difference to me. I only want to see the data and facts about an issue. Of course, I don't want to be misrepresented tho, and don't intend on hurting any1 feelings. When I'm not in debating mode, I'm very much an encouraging person. Or, at least, I like to be encouraging.

 

[Madeliefste Oh]

---

Heavenly Villa wrote:

 

We want to help you to grow your business in SL and for that to happen we need your feedback.  Please take a few minutes to complete the survey.  Your feedback will help us to help you and the SL economy, to help improve those things in SL we all know are frustrating or not going well.   

 

---

Thanks for bringing this survey, and thanks for your efforts to help us all.

Though I'm very cynical about the actual influence you can have on is LL, I admire the attempt and I'm interested to see the results.

[Darrius Gothly]

Like Madeliefste, I too applaud your goals and intentions. However I also have a great deal of concern that after careful study of the Customers, Sellers, Products, Prices, etc. etc. you will come to the same conclusion as many of us have ... that the real roadblock to growth and survival of the SL Economy is Linden Lab itself.

My initial entry into the Forums was prompted by an initiative they announced that would have had dramatic (and IMO disastrous) effects on the economy and "Personality" of User-to-User sales within SL. To me it was clear evidence that they did not fully consider the follow-on effects of their intentions and had not really grasped the complexity of the economy.

Since that time, I have witnessed time and again decisions made that most usually appear deranged at first blush, and almost without exception demonstrate a lack of understanding after some consideration. By and large, their "Business Decisions" seem not only to be geared toward impeding growth, but at times are explicity and exactly opposite to the best advice of the smartest and most knowledgeable contributors around.

If there is any benefit to be derived from a consortium of Merchants and Sellers (and concerned Buyers) such as your group, I remain convinced that it will be by dint of forceful action and legal decree ... and NOT by appealing to LL's common sense or by rational reasoning.

To summarize, I am of the opinion that your group would be most effective if they follow one of two paths:

1. Pooling of financial and legal resources to bring legal actions against LL to protect IP Rights, ensure fairness in dealings with Merchants and Customers, and once and for all clarify the legal fiction of the "worthless L$ coupon", or
2. Find and dedicate the Group toward actions that can be done completely absent any involvement of Linden Lab, and if possible, without their being aware of or in any way capable of influencing those actions.

I wish you the best of luck ... and I too will be interested to see where your group proceeds.

[Mistletoe Ethaniel]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Here BTW is the best SL business advice all in one place I have found:

 

http://mistletoeethaniel.wordpress.com/how-to-do-stuff/sl-business/

 

This article in particular:

 

http://mistletoeethaniel.wordpress.com/2010/07/28/ten-ways-to-jump-start-stagnant-sales/

---

*blush*

You are too kind.  Thank you.

I myself recommend the best blog full of business advice that I have ever found:

http://xdfusion.wordpress.com/

[Parrish Ashbourne]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

I see merchants as being on a continuum between those who do not need to make any income from producing content and therefore do not need to place any value on their time,  and those who make all their income from producing content and must therefore ask fair value for their time. Everyone is on this continuum somewhere.  And where you are does not mean you have superior or inferior quality of merchandise or customer service, or are in some way morally superior to those in other locations on the continuum.

However, those at either poles not only have very different goals and strategies, but conflicting ones.  For example, those who have plenty of free time and/or no need for SL income, can afford to earn nothing for their time and can charge very little or nothing for their products, which has driven prices down. This is good for customers, but not good for those who do need their SL income -- often because it is the only earning option left to them --  and must earn something for their time.  

 

Therefore I don't see any way for those at opposite ends of the continuum to make common cause.

---

Couldn't agree with this more, I just finally gave up on SL after some one who got a free sim from LL (from LEA) for a year, started pumping tons (as in 24 pages on the market place) of free, high quality, full perm items, I can't compete with that and pay for land let alone feed my self.

Add to that LL talking about having Premium subscribers scavenger hunts, this year.   I just can't see LL running that in a way that will benifet merchants. 

It's quite clear what LL thinks of merchants, but we just keep pretending it's going to get better because we all have an idea of what we want SL to be, or we depend on it for RL income.  As the old saying goes "never put all your eggs in one roller coster."  

 

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Parrish Ashbourne wrote:

 

It's quite clear what LL thinks of merchants, but we just keep pretending it's going to get better because we all have an idea of what we want SL to be, or we depend on it for RL income. 

As the old saying goes "never put all your eggs in one roller coster."  

 

---

(Emphasis mine)

In my opinion, at this point, anyone who makes most or all of their RL income from online venues, including SL, would be wise to diversify into at least one other venue.  Several regular posters have indicated they have done so.

I recall the "Great Merchant Exodus of 2010," many/most of these merchants owning large, well-known businesses, to InWorldz as a result of a change in LL's TOS re: only being able to upload to one's desktop items one created 100% themselves; a change from formerly being able to upload full perm items ie. various components purchased for one's creations.  There was even a program sold on the MP to facilitate this: Second Inventory, which has since changed its name to Stored Inventory.

Merchants were rushing to upload all their creations prior to the deadline.  For many merchants this was the last straw in dealing with LL and they left SL altogether.  Others set up their businesses in IW while still maintaining their SL presence as a hedge for whatever might happen in the future.  

Never having been one to predict the demise of SL, and continuing to love what SL offers despite my disagreement with some of LL's decisions, I do think the "Never put all of one's eggs in one basket...or rollercoaster" is a wise idea at this point.

[Spica Inventor]

"Personally, I don't see lower prices as a big problem, as long as government doesn't get involved. In the case of the depression, government put price controls into place, which made it unprofitable for things to be produced, hence causing the shortages. It was government's direct involvement that created the problems. In the case of SL, it is LL's direct involvement in promoting freebies and cheapies on the MP that causes the prices to go down to unprofitable levels. This, inturn, causes merchants to go out of business, which will eventually cause a shortage in quality goods. This lowers the value of all things in SL, especially the land to put those quality items on".

But L.L. is trying to pump prices up not down. And L.L. never has been a fan of 'freebies' in reality. Again you are being used as a dupe for their deceptive P.R. campaigns. I would agree that a Libertarian type of economy in S.L. would be the best for growth enhancement, (particularly when LL is the government), but in the real world one extreme is just as bad as the next. Marxism/Austrian School both equally poor for economic wellbeing and growth, and both just as extreme (and one dimensional). Some would still say correctly that it was the lack of government involvement and care for (particularly where it came to the vast majority who resided on the bottom of the economic spectrum in the U.S. economy up until 1933 that caused most of the problems with the seemingly perpetually unbalanced sinking economy. ;-)

"Competition is great for every1. The customers get cheaper prices, more to choose from, and the quality  continues to rise. For the merchants, it makes them have to constantly improve and put out new products. The result of LL promoting cheap products is that innovation slows, as no producers will ever recover the cost of the time it takes to innovate".

A case and point of one dimensional thinking and philosophy. (People aren't going to spend more in SL if prices are higher, in fact they will and do end up spending less and leaving the game as a consequence, both merchants and consumers). (A persons budget doesn't increase if your prices increase, it's a 'real' demand issue. ). ;-)

Keeping SL a place for the rich and greedy by pumping prices up and deceptive marketing practices is what is truely is killing SL. ;-)

 

[Medhue Simoni]

---

Spica Inventor wrote:

"Personally, I don't see lower prices as a big problem, as long as government doesn't get involved. In the case of the depression, government put price controls into place, which made it unprofitable for things to be produced, hence causing the shortages. It was government's direct involvement that created the problems. In the case of SL, it is LL's direct involvement in promoting freebies and cheapies on the MP that causes the prices to go down to unprofitable levels. This, inturn, causes merchants to go out of business, which will eventually cause a shortage in quality goods. This lowers the value of all things in SL, especially the land to put those quality items on".

But L.L. is trying to pump prices up not down. And L.L. never has been a fan of 'freebies' in reality. Again you are being used as a dupe for their deceptive P.R. campaigns. I would agree that a Libertarian type of economy in S.L. would be the best for growth enhancement, (particularly when LL is the government), but in the real world one extreme is just as bad as the next. Marxism/Austrian School both equally poor for economic wellbeing and growth, and both just as extreme (and one dimensional). Some would still say correctly that it was the lack of government involvement and care for (particularly where it came to the vast majority who resided on the bottom of the economic spectrum in the U.S. economy up until 1933 that caused most of the problems with the seemingly perpetually unbalanced sinking economy. ;-)

"Competition is great for every1. The customers get cheaper prices, more to choose from, and the quality  continues to rise. For the merchants, it makes them have to constantly improve and put out new products. The result of LL promoting cheap products is that innovation slows, as no producers will ever recover the cost of the time it takes to innovate".

A case and point of one dimensional thinking and philosophy. (People aren't going to spend more in SL if prices are higher, in fact they will and do end up spending less and leaving the game as a consequence, both merchants and consumers). (A persons budget doesn't increase if your prices increase, it's a 'real' demand issue. ). ;-)

Keeping SL a place for the rich and greedy by pumping prices up and deceptive marketing practices is what is truely is killing SL. ;-)

 

---

Well, I think we are looking at 2 different worlds. Maybe we are in 2 different markets that have opposite problems. I've tried to evaluate the whole of our marketplace, but I might be missing something. Overall tho, I don't think I'm wrong here, and I do think you might need to look more broadly at the whole market in SL. When you click on almost any category on the MP, and every single item is 1 linden, or most are, than some1 purposely made the algorythm that way, as it would never be a prefered result for any1 wanting to make money.

I also think you misinterpret my statement. I never implied that LL should only promote expensive things. I want them to act as any proper business person and rank things to maximize their own profits. This doesn't mean pushing the most expensive to the top, as that is not likely to maximize their profits as a general policy. Plus, all some1 needs to do to find cheap items is to change the Sort By option. This is why it makes no sense to allow all those cheap items in the default Sort By: Relevance. People can easily find cheap, and it doesn't make sense to make an algorythm that accomplishes the same results.

As for the Free Market philosophy being extreme, I'd emplore you to look around you in your daily life and see which kind of transactions bring you the best outcome. Most of our big transactions in RL are monopolized to a few businesses, and they all give us crappy service, in 1 way or another. Almost every single transaction that I engage in that is not monopolized, I have as good an experience with as I could ever expect, or I'd not engage in it. That's the difference tho, I have that choice, and can goto another supplier. 1 can even say that all those aren't really free markets, cause those businesses still have to deal with different taxes, and the worst tax of all, the income taxes that their employees have to pay. Patents also are outside of the Libertarian philosophy and a huge part of limiting markets. If all these restrictions to the free market were out of the way, I'd have a thousand times more options for every single item I pay for. I say this because all the restrictions that keep competition out would be out of the way and unemployment would never be an issue, as any1 could start a business and compete with any1 else. I'd get cheap prices and more options than I could ever need. If some diner was not clean, I'd choose another. I don't need gov to tell me if the diner is clean or not. Every single person would be the regulator and tell their friends about bad products, unsafe places, food, or bad service. I'd rather have a thousand inspectors rather than 1, that any1 can pay off.

[Knowl Paine]

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

Awesome surname, didn't know that one was avaialble!

---

 

 

 

 

Last Name     Usage Count     Days Active     Reg per Days Active     Research     Status

 

 

Villa                          184                     11                          16.7                           -                 heritage

 

 

 

 

http://slnamewatch.com/index.php?action=list_records&status_filter=all&sort_order=ASC&order_by=last_name

[Amethyst Jetaime]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

 

Let's imagine there is a massive disaster, and thousands of people are in need of water and gas. Because these items are in short supply, the price would naturally go up. Contrary to popular belief, this is a very good thing. If the prices were kept lower, artificially, then there would quickly be no water or gas for any1. The fact that the price rises makes every1 evaluate how badly they need those items, leaving more supply for those that really need it.

Lets imagine that some merchant decides that he wants to go down to the disaster area and sell water at 10 times the normal price. If government stops him or procecute people for doing so, then there will be less supply for people that need it. If governement doesn't step in, other merchants will see the profitablity and also bring water to sell. Very soon after the disaster, because all those merchants saw the profitablity, the prices will come down to normal levels quickly and the supply will be abundant for any1 that really needs it. Like I said, if government gets involved, they prevent the fix, and every1 is hurt.

---

The best argument yet for some regulation of the market.  In this example what of all the people that die of thirst because they can't afford the higher cost of the gougers?  Guess that's ok

In this example it is indeed the purpose of the goverment and its moral responsiblity to step in and assure each person receives the minimum water necessary to survive, even if that means confiscating water and putting sharp controls on those distributing it..  After that if there is more water to be had, then let them charge what the market will bear.  But don't allow people to die just to have a free market.

[Medhue Simoni]

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

 

Let's imagine there is a massive disaster, and thousands of people are in need of water and gas. Because these items are in short supply, the price would naturally go up. Contrary to popular belief, this is a very good thing. If the prices were kept lower, artificially, then there would quickly be no water or gas for any1. The fact that the price rises makes every1 evaluate how badly they need those items, leaving more supply for those that really need it.

Lets imagine that some merchant decides that he wants to go down to the disaster area and sell water at 10 times the normal price. If government stops him or procecute people for doing so, then there will be less supply for people that need it. If governement doesn't step in, other merchants will see the profitablity and also bring water to sell. Very soon after the disaster, because all those merchants saw the profitablity, the prices will come down to normal levels quickly and the supply will be abundant for any1 that really needs it. Like I said, if government gets involved, they prevent the fix, and every1 is hurt.

---

The best argument yet for some regulation of the market.  In this example what of all the people that die of thirst because they can't afford the higher cost of the gougers?  Guess that's ok

In this example it is indeed the purpose of the goverment and its moral responsiblity to step in and assure each person receives the minimum water necessary to survive, even if that means confiscating water and putting sharp controls on those distributing it..  After that if there is more water to be had, then let them charge what the market will bear.  But don't allow people to die just to have a free market.

---

People die because government intervenes, not the other way around. When gov intervenes, there will be guaranteed shortages. Government also wastes half the donations that generous people give to help the victims, and the directly injure, shoot and kill innocent people just trying to survive the tragedy. Oh, wait, nobody hears about that stuff, unless you actually live thru it or research it. Don't rely on your TV to give you real facts. Yes, government agencies do save some lives, but a private business, paid for with the donations, would do a much better job, and they wouldn't end up killing any1. Even before the tragedy, if people were not paying out the ashes for government waste, they would have the money to stock up on essentials, in case of an emergency. Yet, the news will label these preppers as crazy people, which creates a stigma around prepping, killing even more people. Again, government amounts to force and violence. They are never the solution, and always the problem. If you are going to get your information from the TV, which is simply a propaganda machine, then you will always be mislead.

People act quickly, and government responds about as slow as molasses. Prices would never be extremely high for more than a couple of days, because every day people would respond immediately, unless the gov stops them, or they actually think government will take care of the people. If government was not part of the picture at all, then every day people would know to rush down to help their fellow man. Plus, they would have the funds to help, as the fruits of their labour would not be stolen from them.

[Luna Bliss]

Medhue there just simply can't be the freedom without governance in society that you wish for - it will not work because those with the most money always skew things to their advantage and exploit others for their own gain. Right now those with the most money have managed to buy off government to exploit everyone else and so government is not working for the people as it should be, but if government was gone they would just exploit those with less money directly. There has to be some kind of regulation in life, and the solution is not to do away with government, it is for us to influence government to regulate for all people instead of only for those at the top.

You seem like a fair person, and I imagine you would make an attempt not to exploit others working for you (and in the complex society we have today work is organized so that we have large companies and employees - most are not single entrepreneurs), but many business owners do not see anything wrong with squeezing the little guy in their company for all they can get. Even if that is not your motive, it's very hard to maintain empathy for others - I would not even trust myself (having majored in Psyc and Social Work and so trained to see others needs) to see all the specific concerns of those who might be working for me. I would rather a group of workers meet and explain it to me, for negotions to occur, and for some kind of governance to be in effect from an agency above me who has studied the matter and received input from everyone involved.

Power corrupts, and once again if those in power can't buy off government they would find a way to exploit people directly. The solution is not to get rid of governement but for us to take back our own slice of power in government and make it work in a fairer way. Demonizing the government and focusing on divisive right/left, governement/no government, conservative/liberal arguments only obscures the discovery of solutions - it's much easier to just blame something as opposed to the complexity and hard work of sorting it all out.

[Medhue Simoni]

I appreciate the reasoned response Luna. What is most frustrating is people thinking they sit on some high horse and that anything outside the norm is crazy.

I'm not saying that we should demand no government tomorrow. There are many levels to government, and I see the Federal government as the largest evil at the moment. We'd still have our local governments, and likely will always have some form of that. There is no service that the federal government does, outside of the military, that could not be handled locally, where the people would have more influence than big corporations.

When you speak of these large entities corrupting government, I think you have to consider that these entities only exist because of government. Without the protection of the government, and their bailouts, these large entities could never compete in a truly Free Market, which is why they corrupt the government. Few corporation would ever get large enough to have any big influence at all on any person. In a truly Free Market, it is the consumer that is king, not the corporation. The business is subject to the will of the consumer.

Of course, I could go on and on about this stuff, but I like to stay within the confines of a philosophical and moral basis, and then apply those to any situation 1 might encounter. What I think some are missing is that moral compass, or it has been twisted. Some1 more left leaning actually thinks they are being moral when they advocate for socialist programs to help the poor, but IMHO they are leap frogging over the immorality of theft. They may think that some people commit their own immoralities to acquire their massive wealth, but instead of stealing the money back from them, I feel we should take away the vehicle from which they commit those immoralities, instead of committing our own. If we take away the vehicle, then every1 benefits and we don't have to choose who to steal from, and who should benefit from the theft.

You say that it is the left/rgiht paradyme that prevents real solutions, but I see this as applied wrongly. IMHO, it is the use of force or violence that prevents the real solutions. When violence become part of the solution, negotiations have been abandoned. If we except that both sides must never use force or violence as part of the solution, than real solutions can be worked out. The Free Market is that vehicle of non-violent exchange. Each engages in the exchange willingly, and both benefit in some way, or the exchange would never happen. I do bash socialism because all of it's solutions require the threat of force to be implemented.

As far as exploitation, I don't see it, other than corporations that, again benefit from the corruption. An employer and an employee are engaging in an even exchange which both agree to. Sure, the employer doesn't have to except an employees terms, but neither does the employee. It is only when government limits the market that the employee is at a disadvantage. The employer always has some advantage because, for whatever reason, they acquired the capital to invest in the business to make the production of the product happen. This is a reasonable advantage, especially if they worked hard all their life to save that capital up. An employee could do the same things, if it were not for all the regulations that government puts in their way to keep that from happening.

[Amethyst Jetaime]

Actually you are wrong. I have experience conditions like this. Your theory looks good on paper but doesn't have much basis in reality.

We had a direct hit from a hurricane here a few years ago and lost all our utilities for weeks, including water because all the pumps were damaged and so was the water treatment plant. Other sources of water such as ponds and streams in the area were severely polluted and unfit to drink even if boiled, due to contamination of things such as chemicals from spills etc.

Roads were clogged by fallen trees and debris as well as downed power lines and things making transportation to and from the area extremely difficult if not impossible in some areas.  This was the situation for 100 miles, 

Gas was in extremely short supply too as stations quickly ran out to of gas and new gas supplies couldn't be trucked in. Even emergency generators ran out of fuel and fell silent after a period of time.  Perishable foods quickly spoiled everywhere.  There was no refrigeration and no ice for hundreds of miles.  Non perishable foods disappeared from store shelves over night

Things were so bad that businesses could open so most people were out of work and out of a pay check for a few weeks.

Luckily I had filled every container that we had in the house with water and had stocked plenty of non perishable food prior to the hurricane.  However most people as usual didn't think it would be bad as this is a rare occurance in this area and so they were not prepared.  They had to buy their water and food at a high price from gougers  If they were living paycheck to paycheck they ran out of money long before things were restored.  Even the gougers ran out of stuff to sell evenutally.

If the government hadn't stepped in and brought in large water tanks and emergency supplies of such things as baby formula and food, many people would have perished because they didn't have the money to pay the gougers to buy what little food and water there was. WIthout enough water to drink and maintain at least a minimum standard of hygiene, diseases would have been rampant and even more people would have become sick and died.

[Toysoldier Thor]

Thanks amethyst and luna for also speaking up to tell medhue that his never ending ultra right wing libertarian government is evil and corporations are angels beliefs are straight out wrong and only mskes srnse in the theoretical minds of these kinds of extremeists.

 

I really wished medhues ultra right wing political ramblings would stop as it falls far outside this thread and it borders on the edge of ensighting political debate on a virtual world commerce thread.

 

Medhue... Pleasr stop your extremeist political prptions. Its wring in so many ways.

 

Sorry I am on a smart phone

[Medhue Simoni]

Toy, you don't run the show here, and you have no place telling me what to do. Maybe, if you had morals, you would not think you could tell others what to do. You obviously believe that force is a valid solutions, and reason has no place. Who is the one that is being evil here? You should actually read what I post instead of assuming that you understand me. At least, give people that courtesy. I also thought you were done with this conversation. Show me where the TOS says we are not allowed to "ensighting political debate on a virtual world commerce thread". If it were up to you, I'd probably be arrested for using reason.

---

[Medhue Simoni]

People assume that it is governments job to help in your situation, so this is not an example that refutes mine. Plus, as you haven't explained where this incident occured, I can't refute anything that you say, nor can I investigate it to show you where the government intervened. Please explain the incident so that I can make a proper rebutal.

[Madeliefste Oh]

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

 

 

I really wished medhues ultra right wing political ramblings would stop as it falls far outside this thread and it borders on the edge of ensighting political debate on a virtual world commerce thread.

 

 

---

I agree. I think it makes no sense at all to use the frame of the rl economy as a matrix to look at the SL economy.

Avatars are immortals, they don't need water of food to survive, food is just for playing. They don't need a house to shelter of a bed to sleep, and when they have it's just for playing.

Prims are free and endless available, other then production materials in rl. A golden ring in rl has at least the value of the gold it is made of. In SL the price of gold or silver or tin is exactly the same: 10L upload costs for the texture.

In rl things are running out, not in SL. The number of copies you can sell is endless, and the total number of available goods keeps growing and growing.

And besides that all you are not in a construction where people have equal right to vote who rules the world. We, residents are in relation to Linden Lab, as the people are to the gods. The concept of the world in their hands and you depend on them for very single cube you rez.

You could not vote for Linden X who planned to change in world search, or Linden Y who was against. The gods just reshape the world to the format that fits them the best, and you just have to deal with it. No matter how much you pray or beg or turn your back against the gods, their will be done.

Say 'Amen' or leave, alternatives are not invented yet.