Jump to content

Am I not allowed to put my items inworld cheaper than the mp price?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1015 days.

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

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

see here:  

Excellent and long overdue clarification. Anything that gets people shopping in world is a win in my book.

I think this statement is key to understanding the issue!

Posted Images

Correct, that is not allowed.

I suppose you actually could have different prices if your MP and inworld stores were owned by different alts... That would be an interesting case. ;)

Another possible workaround is to make the MP package just different enough from the inworld one you can claim it's not the same one...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Long long ago, one of the marketplace team, I think Pink, said prices could be raised on the MP to offset commission -- 5 %. But nothing was put in writing, and I don't think there is anyone on the team now who remembers it. I never (intentionally) have lower prices on MP because I like for people to buy there as much as inworld, there are advantages to both.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That not cheaper inworld has been part of the marketplace terms from the beginning.  I haven't checked the rules lately but suspect it still is the same. 

 

ACTUALLY looking at the listing guidelines just now, I can't find a reference to that long-standing "rule".  BUT if they took your product off, then I guess it is still in effect. Here is the listing practices page I looked at: 

 

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/listing_guidelines#listing-guidelines

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet, having lower prices for products when you come into the store is a frequently used tactic in real life.

It is incentive for people to visit your RL/Inworld store to get savings, and to check out other products you might have.

It's not illegal in RL , so why should it be in SL.

Just like someone might save money on Amazon (the reverse), instead of buying it at a brick and mortar store, why would it matter in SL?

Who's going to police this anyway, or report you, other than a disgruntled customer or competitor? Who else would even care?

If it was a concern, they could contact you inworld or in IM and you could rectify the situation. Delisting something without context or even warning assumes you are doing something criminal, rather than a 'mistake'.

Also who's to judge that the product inworld is the same as the MP?
Perhaps for safety,  you need to make a separate product for inworld purchases, and another listing for MP.

"Cube: Instore Edition : $95L" "Cube: (on SLMP) $100L"

That being said, I see people giving and advertising discounts for buying the product inworld at their store, and as far as I knew was a legal practice. I haven't done that myself inworld, but I don't see a problem saving money by buying inworld.

Hell, I'd almost prefer paying more on the MP anyway, for the guarantee of updates and redeliver options.

SL can be a weird place, with both sides going outside the ethical lines whenever it suits them, and without much common sense applied to their practices or regulations.


Chic Aeon wrote:

That not cheaper inworld has been part of the marketplace terms from the beginning.  I haven't checked the rules lately but suspect it still is the same. 

 

ACTUALLY looking at the listing guidelines just now, I can't find a reference to that long-standing "rule".  BUT if they took your product off, then I guess it is still in effect. Here is the listing practices page I looked at: 

 

 

 

 

You would think that 'technically' that a product sold inworld is not a 'listing' nor a 'marketplace listing' and therefore should be treated quite differently.

Its a product sitting on land inworld, and therefore should not be subject to MP listing guidelines.

In fact, I would like it to be 2 separate entities, and treated as such.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its at the bottom of the page :

 'Anti-Competitive or Abusive Behavior. Examples include, but are not limited to:

     inflating prices on the SL Marketplace, in comparison to in-world or other e-commerce sites,'

Back in the real world we got around having 'totes legit lowest price anywhere' for certain 'chains'

by making sure there was enough of a tiny difference on what they stocked compared to any one else.

And some of those differences were microscopic.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's because of that listing items on the MP is totally free. There is only the 5 % commission fee on sales. Operating the MP costs money though. You could just set prices on the MP a thousand times higher than in-world, with a slurl to the item in-world costing 1000 times less. The MP would be just an advertising platform for free then, because nobody would pay 1000 times more.
No MP sales, no money for LL.

1000 times more sounds like an exaggerated example? Indeed, but I'm sure that's what would happen if the inflated price rule wouldn't be in place.

The alternatives would be LL charges commission fees on in-world sales as well, or charging a fee for MP listings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

entity0x wrote:

Hell, I'd almost prefer paying more on the MP anyway, for the guarantee of updates and redeliver options.

Are you referring to some fantasy redelivery option for customers that doesn't exist or are you saying as a customer, you'd rather pay more for the same product on MP *if* there were a redelivery option?

There's NEVER a guarantee of updates, if you're referring to the product of course and not the same fantasy updates to MP, those don't happen either.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


lucagrabacr wrote:

One of my listings just got unlisted for "inflating listing prices". I have items in my inworld store 5L cheaper than they are on the MP, is that not allowed?

Look on the bright side, three good things came of this:-

  1. Whoever spotted it actually understood the rules and flagged it correctly
  2. The LL staff member *appeared* to understand the rules and de-listed it correctly
  3. You won't lose much by listing it at the same price

From my empirical evidence, 1. and 2. have been shown to be rarely the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites


arton Rotaru wrote:

It's because of that listing items on the MP is totally free. There is only the 5 % commission fee on sales. Operating the MP costs money though. You could just set prices on the MP a thousand times higher than in-world, with a slurl to the item in-world costing 1000 times less. The MP would be just an advertising platform for free then, because nobody would pay 1000 times more.

No MP sales, no money for LL.

1000 times more sounds like an exaggerated example? Indeed, but I'm sure that's what would happen if the inflated price rule wouldn't be in place.

The alternatives would be LL charges commission fees on in-world sales as well, or charging a fee for MP listings.

Inflating prices and 'price gouging' is more commonly associated with things like water, medicine and food. In a disaster situation, it is looked down upon to do so on necessary items. They are 'exploiting' people for their own benefit, and is either fair or unfair, depending on how you look at it, your country of origin, and the kind of economy you have.

Yet here we are in allegedly a free market system, where the price is set by competition (if products are similar) and the price is set by what the market can bare. Maybe you are from a Communist country where this wouldn't apply and WOULD be considered unethical.

LL Listings being free is irrelevant. They're not free. We pay for them with blood, sweat, tears and hard work, and upload OUR CONTENT at pennies on the dollar that SL and fellow users get to use. Some older SL'ers create sims that create CONTENT that LL did not create, and contribute also to SL's success at literal pennies on the dollar.

And yes, your example is respectfully quite ridiculous - the most observed things I have seen have been 10% discounts on purchases inworld, not 1000% markups. Even then , who would care? Isn't it about what the market can bear? Yes there would be examples of ripoffs, so quote an example.

All I read here is rhetoric, and arguments made without any supporting examples or statements.

I also believe there is enough safeguards and policing in place, that if there was an extreme ripoff going down, the account(s) involved would surely get dealt with.


mikka Luik wrote:

Its at the bottom of the page :

 '
Anti-Competitive or Abusive Behavior
. Examples include, but are not limited to:

     inflating prices on the SL Marketplace, in comparison to in-world or other e-commerce sites,'

Back in the real world we got around having 'totes legit lowest price anywhere' for certain 'chains'

by making sure there was enough of a tiny difference on what they stocked compared to any one else.

And some of those differences were microscopic.

 

 

Thanks for reposting what I have already read myself and understand, but the phrase is ambiguous, especially since you have not supplied any context or examples.

How can I inflate my own prices against myself? How is offering a discount for my own products (which only competes with itself anyway) be abusive?  to who?

Is it abusive for one store in RL offer a product for $10 less than the store you bought the same product from? Is it abusive or inflating prices if you bought a product from a store, then the next day it went on sale for $10 less? Who are you to dictate what the market price can bear, and how?

Perhaps instead of regurgitating and copying/pasting a phrase from a TOS page, that you provide examples to support your argument.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites


entity0x wrote:

Perhaps instead of regurgitating and copying/pasting a phrase from a TOS page, that you provide examples to support your argument.


Those are the rules that you agree to when you choose to use the system that has been provided.  There really isn't an argument to be had.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Linden Labs has not provided an example of what you quote. Do you have examples that can be verified?

Once again, just because I converse about a topic, doesn' t mean I do it myself, agree or disagree with it.

I just find it ambiguous and in my opinon IS NOT, and SHOULD not be against TOS to do so, as we see it commonly in RL marketing practice.

We also see this widespread through the Inworld markets, BY TOP AND ESTABLISHED SELLERS, and advertised on their store pages that there are discounts on items should customers buy the same product in-world.

 

If you make a statement, support it with WHY and give examples. Quoting an ambiguous string from a TOS does not clarify anything, and I seem to be the only one providing context as to what it means.

If you disagree, then reply, if you just want to copy and paste, I personally don't need that as I am very familiar with policies and TOS's because I actually read them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You've been directed to the MP listing rules, I don't see what's so hard about understanding them, they're pretty clear and unambiguous.

You don't have to agree to them if you choose NOT to list, that's the simplicity of it, you can argue all you like here, your disagreement is with LL.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Sassy Romano wrote:

You've been directed to the MP listing rules, I don't see what's so hard about understanding them, they're pretty clear and unambiguous.

You don't have to agree to them if you choose NOT to list, that's the simplicity of it, you can argue all you like here, your disagreement is with LL.

Now you're falling back to generalist statements, now including in your statement the ENTIRETY of the listing rules, because you have no real support for a counterargument, opinion, or examples.

Instead of regurgitating lines that many of us have already read, explain how many of the top sellers in SL get away with having higher prices on the SLMP, and offer discounts for those who buy the same products should they purchase them from their inworld stores.

You'd also have to address why 'sales' would be valid, as someone could also claim that they are being abusive in their pricing, and 'inflating' prices on SLMP. You probably don't even understand the concept about what "inflating prices" means, especially when it comes to being competitive.

Or just be your lazy self and just post without any supporting statements, as usual.

Some of you are such experts at this TOS thing, but you can never actually supply an example or 'what if' so others here can learn and understand better, and avoid any of the mistakes made and consequences as stated by the OP.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no interest in other sellers, I can read the rules and i'm sure you can.  It REALLY is that simple.

I don't have to make any statements for the sake of arguing when you're just trying to be confrontational.  The rules are listed for all to follow, it's up to LL to enforce, go flag all the listings fo the merchants who are being flagrant with the rules if it makes you happy, it's not my fight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I'm with Sassy here. I don't want to repeat myself why this rule is in place.

Just a few things.

No, I'm not from a communist country.

No, the 1000 times example isn't ridiculous, because only the rule prevents people from doing so.

Listing items are free.
You don't even have to upload anything, because you can build with stuff which is freely available in-world already, and put them up for sale. It's your choice to upload things. As it's your choice participating on the Second Life Marketplace.

Don't like the rules, don't play the game. It's simple as that. I have even mentioned the alternatives Linden Lab could do. Maybe you like those better, than Sansar might be more suitable for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WIth all due respect, this isn't about me, this is about discussing what anti-competitive behaviour actually is, and why I don't believe the OP (or many top sellers who do it daily) are in contravention of this.

Also any definition of 'inflating prices" does not describe what the OP (or many top sellers do daily) either, or how/why it is anti-competitive in any way and with whom? themselves?

Perhaps we will now need Dakota Linden to clarify what this means and give examples, and/or improve the wording in the listing to clearly describe what they mean, since both definitions provided do not cover this action in SL at all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


entity0x wrote:

WIth all due respect, this isn't about me, this is about discussing what anti-competitive behaviour actually is, and why I don't believe the OP (or many top sellers who do it daily) are in contravention of this.

Also any definition of 'inflating prices" does not describe what the OP (or many top sellers do daily) either, or how/why it is anti-competitive in any way and with whom? themselves?

Perhaps we will now need Dakota Linden to clarify what this means and give examples, and/or improve the wording in the listing to clearly describe what they mean, since both definitions provided do not cover this action in SL at all.

 

Do you *really* need the concept of one price is higher than the other explaining to you... if so...how slowly?  The bullet point states it quite clearly, take it up with LL if you need someone to explain it more.

"Anti-Competitive or Abusive Behavior. Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • inflating prices on the SL Marketplace, in comparison to in-world or other e-commerce sites,"
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

By your logic, then an inworld 'discount' or 'sale' is anti-competitive (against noone), and is now 'inflating' a price on the SLMP.

This means LL would need to automatically delist thousands of products today who are doing this now.

If anything this needs to be looked at, as I simply don't see the harm to anyone to do this, as this is a regular practice in RL, and done without any malicious intent, but as incentives for people to shop inworld.

So either LL needs to change the guidelines, clarify the guidelines, or ban a whole swath of products instead of picking on tiny little stores (that probably did it by accident or ignorance) yet ignoring the top (and huge sellers) who are doing it today.

If you didn't want to converse about this, then you didnt need to reply at all.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


entity0x wrote:

By your logic, then an inworld 'discount' or 'sale' is anti-competitive (against noone), and is now 'inflating' a price on the SLMP.

This means LL would need to automatically delist thousands of products today who are doing this now.


Applying their rule as it stands, you may feel that would meet the requirement, if that's the case, I suggest that you go and flag all those items in the sales where the same discount is not applied to MP.

I'll remind you yet again, this is not my rule, it's not my fight, read the rules and interpret as you wish.

At this point, i'm done because you're trying to argue with me and i'm really not interested.  The rules are present for all.  Done!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My argument is not actually with you, and never is. I'm arguing about the meaning and application and understanding of this line in the guidelines, and I why I believe it doesn't cover what the OP states.

We can agree and disagree, but this is not personal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a sale going for over a week now and I made sure to change all the prices on the marketplace to match in world because I didnt want to go against TOS but your right I see other stores have in world sales all the time and not change anything on the marketplace. It might just be a weekend thing but still its going against TOS

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1015 days.

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...