Jump to content

It's time we stand up against LL and tell them they need to make SL far for everyone


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2635 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 238
  • Created
  • Last Reply


Ceka Cianci wrote:


Czari Zenovka wrote:


Ceka Cianci wrote:

that's why the whole us and them comparison is silly really..

each place will have it's pro's and cons..and both  sides arguing usually end up using someones else's information to go on to back themselves up about someplace they really don't know much about in person..

really the bottom line is england wanted this awesome land and are just pissed because they messed up and trusted the ones that were left incharge over here..

either way..us first americans..we're pissed at all of you bastages just for showing up LOL

 

As someone with a grandfather who is 1/4 Cherokee I say...

WINNER of the thread goes to Ceka!!!

 

i just want to say..i was just being silly trying to lighten people up in here,,

SL showed me one thing for sure..there are good and bad people all over the world..

i'm very fortunate to have met many of them..

 

 

 

I understand and agree. :)  Just liked your post because sometimes we non-Native Americans need to remind ourselves that we were not the first ones here. (And my grandfather was 1/4 Cherokee...plus a lot of Irish. *Smiles*)

Edit: Clarification

Link to post
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:

There are far too many 'new' posts in this thread for me to bother reading, but I do have a comment about one little sub-topic that's come up...

All you U.S. citizens did 
NOT
free yourselves from British rule, so almost all of you can completely forget that idea. Why do I say that? Because very very very few of you had ancestors in North America at the time. Almost all of you were still over on this side of the pond, as it were. So when you think about the war of independence, remember that your ancestors didn't win it. They lost it 
;)

Have to agree with Charly on this one - speaking personally, the majority of my ancestors are from Ireland.  I'm not going to get into a debate with you because you're too good at it...lol. 

Regardless of where my ancestors were at the time of the Revolutionary War, someone somewhere had the good sense to come to the U.S. *Grins*

Edit: Typo - no caffeine yet today.

OTOH, I'm not spewing Coke on the monitor while reading some of the replies. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites


Deltango Vale wrote:

is a very
. It has offices in Iceland (high costs, high tax), Georgia (low costs, low tax), New York (high costs, high tax), Shanghai (low costs, low tax) and Newcastle (low costs, high tax). It sells its product in the global market at a
. All costs, including sales taxes, are
. (Note, UK prices include VAT, even though it is not marked.)

CCP games sees itself as a global company in a global marketplace with global customers. Linden Lab, on the other hand, sees itself as a California company with US customers. That is one of many reasons why EVE Online is growing rapidly and Second Life is in decline.

Del, if I read the CCP pricing page correctly, VAT is only included in EU prices. (Note the asterisks on this page).

The US cost is $131.40/yr.

The UK price is GBP89.90 ($138, or $6+ higher than the US) and does not seem to include the 20% VAT, which would put the total price at $166.

The EU cost is Euro131.4($174). I don't know what the EU VAT rate is, but it looks like it might be north of the UK's 20%.

By the OP's numbers, LL is charging exactly the VAT for the UK, as $295*1.2=$354.

So, if I'm not reading/calculating wrong, CCP is actually charging a higher price for subscriptions in the UK, if not the EU. LL appears to be charging the same price in both the US and UK, unless the OP meant to say that UK pricing was GPB354.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

Seeing as one of my ancestors signed the Declaration of Independence, I feel safe in saying.. Sod off! Most of the people in my area can claim bloodlines back to the revolution. :matte-motes-wink-tongue:

*Steps behind my bodyguard as I peek around him to respond to Phil*

Link to post
Share on other sites


Deltango Vale wrote:

is a very
. It has offices in Iceland (high costs, high tax), Georgia (low costs, low tax), New York (high costs, high tax), Shanghai (low costs, low tax) and Newcastle (low costs, high tax). It sells its product in the global market at a
. All costs, including sales taxes, are
. (Note, UK prices include VAT, even though it is not marked.)

CCP games sees itself as a global company in a global marketplace with global customers. Linden Lab, on the other hand, sees itself as a California company with US customers. That is one of many reasons why EVE Online is growing rapidly and Second Life is in decline.

I am confused.   I have examined CCP Games' pricing information for Eve Online.

As far as I can understand it, they charge USD $14.95 a month  to customers outside "Europe" (not quite sure what they mean by that, but let's assume the Eurozone and the UK).     That is, about  €11.26 or £9.72.   

They charge Eurozone customers, they say, €14.95 (that is, about US$19,85) including VAT  and they charge UK customers £9.99, or about US$15.37,  plus VAT = £11.99 or about US18.44.

That is, if an American wants to play Eve Online, she pays a total of $14.95 a month.    If someone in the Eurozone wants to play, it costs them $19.85 and if I want to play it costs me $18.44.

This is not charging people a "uniform price," at least not in the sense I understand the term.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

The best source of economic data for SL is Gridsurvey.com. Since Linden Lab's primary income is from land tier, the best proxy for estimating the revenue stream is quantity of estate sims. Before 2008, Linden Lab proudly published quarterly economic data, including Premium Memberships. They stopped publishing data in 2008.

As for CCP Games, information is scarce, but this article provides guidance. Since publication, the subscriber base has increased from 400,000 to 500,000. If so, then CCP Games revenues may have eclipsed LL's revenues of about $75 million annually. The important thing is that CCP revenues are rising and LL revenues are falling (down from a high of roughly $100 million).

Link to post
Share on other sites


Madelaine McMasters wrote:

 I don't know what the EU VAT rate is, but it looks like it might be north of the UK's 20%.


Erm, Europe is NOT one coherent fiscal entity. It makes the USA look politically rational. Well, almost.

For clarification, all of the individual self-ruling countries (and even some of the feisty little parts of countries who like to pretend that they have some sort of independence) in the EU determine for themselves their rates of VAT for varying categories of both goods and services. Note that I said "rates", since there is not even necessarily a single rate of VAT within a territory. When you have watched the courts tied up for years deciding whether a Jaffa Cake is a cake or a biscuit for VAT rating purposes you might get an inkling of how little you understand about VAT, or Europe even.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Charly Muggins wrote:


Madelaine McMasters wrote:

 I don't know what the EU VAT rate is, but it looks like it might be north of the UK's 20%.


Erm, Europe is NOT one coherent fiscal entity. It makes the USA look politically rational. Well, almost.

For clarification, all of the individual self-ruling countries (and even some of the feisty little parts of countries who like to pretend that they have some sort of independence) in the EU determine for themselves their rates of VAT for varying categories of both goods and services. Note that I said "rates", since there is not even necessarily a single rate of VAT within a territory. When you have watched the courts tied up for years deciding whether a
is a
you might get an inkling of how little you understand about VAT, or Europe even.

It's a cake :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crudely, £10 = US$15 = 12 euros. The separate UK price was introduced about a year ago. Before that, UK residents paid in euros. CCP does not add tax to these prices; the tax is included in the price. Yes, the euro price is slightly out of line with UK and US prices, but it has more to do with choosing a psychological price-point base (9.99 v 14.99, one or the other) and fluctuating exchange rates than deliberate price discrimination. I believe CCP anticipated that the euro would approach parity with the US dollar (which it is slowly doing). In which case, I understand why they would have left the euro price unchanged (because it would fall in line with US and UK prices). The goal is broad uniformity, not price discrimination.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How is a price of ~$18.00 "broadly uniform" with $14.95?   Given the choice between paying the two prices for the same product, you would pay the lower one, so would I, and so would anyone in his right mind.

I don't see what currency fluctuations have to do with anything.   I cannot believe that a company of CCP's size and turnover don't know how to use currency options (not options trading, but actually using options for their intended purpose -- that is, in effect, insuring yourself against adverse currency movements).

Link to post
Share on other sites


Deltango Vale wrote:

Crudely, £10 = US$15 = 12 euros. The separate UK price was introduced about a year ago. Before that, UK residents paid in euros. CCP does not add tax to these prices; the tax is included in the price. Yes, the euro price is slightly out of line with UK and US prices, but it has more to do with choosing a psychological price-point base (9.99 v 14.99, one or the other) and fluctuating exchange rates than deliberate price discrimination. I believe CCP anticipated that the euro would approach parity with the US dollar (which it is slowly doing). In which case, I understand why they would have left the euro price unchanged (because it would fall in line with US and UK prices). The goal is broad uniformity, not price discrimination.

My understanding of the VAT laws is that prices HAVE to include VAT - it can't be listed separately by law. So basically, it sure looks like the white knights of Iceland are doing exactly the same thing the evil trolls of San Francisco are doing - charging Europeans about 20% more in order to recover the money they're losing by needing to include VAT in their prices, like any prudently-run business would.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

Seeing as one of my ancestors signed the Declaration of Independence, I feel safe in saying.. Sod off! Most of the people in my area can claim bloodlines back to the revolution. :matte-motes-wink-tongue:

:) But the ancestors of most of today's americans weren't over there at that time. My point is still good :)

Link to post
Share on other sites


Czari Zenovka wrote:


Phil Deakins wrote:

There are far too many 'new' posts in this thread for me to bother reading, but I do have a comment about one little sub-topic that's come up...

All you U.S. citizens did 
NOT
free yourselves from British rule, so almost all of you can completely forget that idea. Why do I say that? Because very very very few of you had ancestors in North America at the time. Almost all of you were still over on this side of the pond, as it were. So when you think about the war of independence, remember that your ancestors didn't win it. They lost it 
;)

Have to agree with Charly on this one - speaking personally, the majority of my ancestors are from Ireland.  I'm not going to get into a debate with you because you're too good at it...lol. 

Regardless of where my ancestors were at the time of the Revolutionary War, someone somewhere had the good sense to come to the U.S. *Grins*

Edit: Typo - no caffeine yet today.

OTOH, I'm not spewing Coke on the monitor while reading some of the replies.
;)

So the majority of your ancestors back then were under British rule, and the few people who were over in North America at the time of the War of Independence won against your ancestors and mine :P Actually we lost intentionally because they were too costly for us, but don't tell them that - they never knew and it's best of it doesn't get out :)

I'm not happy about you not wanting to get into an argument with me though. I like forum arguments - they make it interesting.

Btw, I was watching TV when you IMed. I've IMed back but you'd logged out :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your point that the majority of today's Americans don't have ancestors from this country dating back to revolutionary or pre-revolutionary times is 'still good', at least if the latest census information is correct. Your thesis, in my opinion, is still wrong.

As it happens my tree includes at least one person born on American soil long before any Europeans—or Scandinavians, or Prester John—had visited. There's also one (of British descent) born in Massachusetts almost one hundred years before the Revolution. One who fought at Bunker Hill (on OUR side). One who rode with Light Horse Harry Lee.

That does not make me even one tiny speck more American than anyone else who either grew up here or adopted this country as an adult. We are still we. And in fact we (even if our ancestors might have actually been on the other side at the time or somewhere else entirely) did in fact outlast the world's most formidable army, just because we had the guts to do it. It probably helped that Britain practically committed suicide in the process, ignoring the advice of men of good will while trying to placate a mad king. Nevertheless, beat Britain we did.

I was born and raised and live in California. I'm not positive but I am fairly certain we have the highest percentage of immigrants of any state in the union. I've grown up in that. I've seen the same thing in my life that I've discerned from reading about people elsewhere. The first generation holds tight to their roots, but their kids are Americans.

I live in one of the major agricultural regions of the state and the population here includes a massive number of peope whose parents or grandparents were born in Mexico.  When I do my grocery shopping the week before Thanksgiving I see families who appear to be of Mexican descent buying the same things I am. They'll probably follow the instructions and overcook the turkey (and how American is THAT?) but the point is they are observing the day.They are Americans. WE are Americans.

So Phil, I speak against your thesis. All it takes to be one of us is to say, "I am one of you". We don't really care who your daddy is.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Dillon Levenque wrote:

Your point that the majority of today's Americans don't have ancestors from this country dating back to revolutionary or pre-revolutionary times is 'still good', at least if the latest census information is correct. Your thesis, in my opinion, is still wrong.

As it happens my tree includes at least one person born on American soil long before any Europeans—or Scandinavians, or Prester John—had visited. There's also one (of British descent) born in Massachusetts almost one hundred years before the Revolution. One who fought at Bunker Hill (on OUR side). One who rode with Light Horse Harry Lee.

That does not make me even one tiny speck more American than anyone else who either grew up here or adopted this country as an adult. We are still
we
. And in fact
we
(even if our ancestors might have actually been on the other side at the time or somewhere else entirely) did in fact outlast the world's most formidable army, just because
we
had the guts to do it. It probably helped that Britain practically committed suicide in the process, ignoring the advice of men of good will while trying to placate a mad king. Nevertheless, beat Britain we did.

I was born and raised and live in California. I'm not positive but I am fairly certain we have the highest percentage of immigrants of any state in the union. I've grown up in that. I've seen the same thing in my life that I've discerned from reading about people elsewhere. The first generation holds tight to their roots, but their kids are Americans.

I live in one of the major agricultural regions of the state and the population here includes a massive number of peope whose parents or grandparents were born in Mexico.  When I do my grocery shopping the week before Thanksgiving I see families who appear to be of Mexican descent buying the same things I am. They'll probably follow the instructions and overcook the turkey (and how American is THAT?) but the point is they are observing the day.They are Americans. WE are Americans.

So Phil, I speak against your thesis. All it takes to be one of us is to say, "I am one of you". We don't really care who your daddy is.

i liked a lot of what you said..but just have this tiny little thing that a lot of people forget..

that many see the U.S. as america..

and when you were talking about the people from mexico probably doing american things like burning the turkey like americans would..it would be more like U.S. americans than americans.

i just have to say that mexico is also in america..and it's people are aboriginals of america..

just as the aboriginals in the U.S. and  canada and that canadiens are americans..

 

sorry for sounding all petty on that..i know you were meaning U.S. americans..it's just one of those things that is so hard for me to let go of..

i really don't mean any offense by it..it's something that media and government and many people say..

kind of likepeople get used to saying native american..which comes out to me and saying american american hehehehe

 

anyways i hope i didn't offend..

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Dillon Levenque wrote:

Your point that the majority of today's Americans don't have ancestors from this country dating back to revolutionary or pre-revolutionary times is 'still good', at least if the latest census information is correct. Your thesis, in my opinion, is still wrong.

As it happens my tree includes at least one person born on American soil long before any Europeans—or Scandinavians, or Prester John—had visited. There's also one (of British descent) born in Massachusetts almost one hundred years before the Revolution. One who fought at Bunker Hill (on OUR side). One who rode with Light Horse Harry Lee.

That does not make me even one tiny speck more American than anyone else who either grew up here or adopted this country as an adult. We are still
we
. And in fact
we
(even if our ancestors might have actually been on the other side at the time or somewhere else entirely) did in fact outlast the world's most formidable army, just because
we
had the guts to do it. It probably helped that Britain practically committed suicide in the process, ignoring the advice of men of good will while trying to placate a mad king. Nevertheless, beat Britain we did.

I was born and raised and live in California. I'm not positive but I am fairly certain we have the highest percentage of immigrants of any state in the union. I've grown up in that. I've seen the same thing in my life that I've discerned from reading about people elsewhere. The first generation holds tight to their roots, but their kids are Americans.

I live in one of the major agricultural regions of the state and the population here includes a massive number of peope whose parents or grandparents were born in Mexico.  When I do my grocery shopping the week before Thanksgiving I see families who appear to be of Mexican descent buying the same things I am. They'll probably follow the instructions and overcook the turkey (and how American is THAT?) but the point is they are observing the day.They are Americans. WE are Americans.

So Phil, I speak against your thesis. All it takes to be one of us is to say, "I am one of you". We don't really care who your daddy is.

The point I'm making is that those who say "we did it", who don't have ancestors that actually did do it, or supported those who did it, can't correctly say that "we did it".

An extreme example would be if I moved over there today and tomorrow I said that "we beat you Brits". That would be ridiculous, of course, because there's nothing in me, or my ancestry, that beat the Brits. I say that the same applies to most of today's U.S. Americans, and I believe that's true.

About the line in your family tree that includes native Americans, which I think is what you meant: it depends which native Americans, because I believe that both sides had native Americans fighting with them. Maybe the ones in your family tree were beaten with us Brits :) More likely, though, they weren't involved at all and, if that's the case, you can't say that "we beat you" on the strength of that particular line in your family tree.

However, you can say that "we beat you" on the strength of the other line you mentioned, if I understood that line correctly. But I contend that most of today's U.S. Americans don't have such a family history and, therefore, can't say it with any truth. Many of those were beaten by the Americans, because all their family lines were over here at the time, but still they imagine that they beat the Brits when in fact they lost that war.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Ceka, you did not offend and you're absoulutely right. I was using the term 'American' in the way it is used everywhere else in the world (and for that matter frequently in the USA) as meaning citizens of the US. Shame on me, since I've pointed out to others on this Forum that 'America' includes a whole lot of countries in this hemisphere, not just the United States.

As for that 'native American' thing: I've never bought into that term. If you were born in America you are a native American, just as I am a native Californian because I was born in California. My aboriginal ancestor (at least the one we're sure of) was a Chikasaw Indian, not a Chikasaw Native American. The tribes that have reservations in California call themselves Indians, not native Americans. That whole term is bogus liberal booshwah. I think 'american indian' or even better your 'american aboriginal' is the correct terminology.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We continue to disagree, and there's no point in pursuing the matter. Yes, if you moved here tomorrow and then said "We beat you Brits" to your previous neighbors—or neighbours, in your case—it would be a bit ridiculous.

If you stayed here and raised children and your children said that same thing to their trans-atlantic cousins, there would be nothing ridiculous about it. They'd be right.

Doesn't matter what your daddy did; that was the point I was trying to make. If you're one of us, you're one of us and you get all the historical baggage to go along with it, both good and bad (we scuffle amongst ourselves, as everyone knows).

Link to post
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:


Czari Zenovka wrote:


Phil Deakins wrote:

There are far too many 'new' posts in this thread for me to bother reading, but I do have a comment about one little sub-topic that's come up...

All you U.S. citizens did 
NOT
free yourselves from British rule, so almost all of you can completely forget that idea. Why do I say that? Because very very very few of you had ancestors in North America at the time. Almost all of you were still over on this side of the pond, as it were. So when you think about the war of independence, remember that your ancestors didn't win it. They lost it 
;)

Have to agree with Charly on this one - speaking personally, the majority of my ancestors are from Ireland.  I'm not going to get into a debate with you because you're too good at it...lol. 

Regardless of where my ancestors were at the time of the Revolutionary War, someone somewhere had the good sense to come to the U.S. *Grins*

Edit: Typo - no caffeine yet today.

OTOH, I'm not spewing Coke on the monitor while reading some of the replies.
;)

So the majority of your ancestors back then were under British rule, and the few people who were over in North America at the time of the War of Independence won against your ancestors and mine
:P
Actually we lost intentionally because they were too costly for us, but don't tell them that - they never knew and it's best of it doesn't get out 
:)

I'm not happy about you not wanting to get into an argument with me though. I like forum arguments - they make it interesting.

Btw, I was watching TV when you IMed. I've IMed back but you'd logged out
:(

the revolutionary war  the french were also a help in that victory..

 the war of 1812 kind fo settled many doubts about the U.S. being able to hold their own..

even we were on the side of the british and doing pretty well with brock until he was killed and replaced with a more conservative  general.. which retreated in a key battle leaving tecumseh and his confederate to be slaughtered..the british then losing michigan area i believe it was..which we had a huge part in taking..

so close but yet so far..it would have maybe been a good thing for natives..but we'll never know..

as far as the whole war..it really never ended for us until the last chiricahua surrenderd in september of 1886..

5,000 troops to take in 27 chiricahua..

talk about covering thier butts lol

 

6 still refused.. 3 men and 3 women and fled to the mexico border where mexico troops were waiting for them and shot them down..

on the 8th of september was the begining of the two year lie for chiricahua and 24 years of all chiricahua to live the life of prisonners of war as they were loaded on the trains for florida..women men and children..

not long after the bording schools were made and the children taken..and kill the indian save the child was born..

but that's a whole other story..

 

how you like mah 2 second version of history lol

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...