Premium reservations: In case you missed the news post.

[Chase01]

On 4/18/2017 at 4:08 AM, Phil Deakins said:

Definitely. If something that's for sale only at an event is good enough, then it will be for sale after the event. If it's not for sale after the event, then it isn't good enough to sell alongside other items. People don't put time and effort into creating something good, only to shelve it after a few sales.

As for unique colours, well... purleeeeze. Who in their right mind would be interrested in that? But again, if the colour is so desirable, then it won't be shelved after the event and, if it is shelved, it isn't very good.

To sum up my opinion, any creator who is genuinely only going to sell an item at an event, and after that it's not for sale anywhere, is taking people for a ride. S/he is taking advantage of people's gullibility, having them think that they are buying something worthwhile, when they are not. It's common sense 101.

Phil this is my last time posting on this direct to you because this is going no where. This is for me where you got off track and made some very bold statements. My posts since then were initiated by your statement made here. (see above).

"Who in their right mind would be interested in an exclusive color" ? What you should have said was ... I'd have no interest in an exclusive color ... That would have been completely on point.

There are a lot of people that have an interest in it and I have already pointed out some of the reasons why. You're also eluding too people being "gullible" if they were to buy an exclusive item. That is a very broad and an insulting statement IMO.

You said the vendor is taking them for a ride into thinking they are buying something valuable. Who are you to say what is valuable to anyone else. Just a little while ago a mesh body wasn't a "valuable" thing for you to have. So I guess by that statement anyone who had it before you was to some extent "gullible."

I know what the thread is about. Its regarding the feature change and access to a full sim. If you had a clue about events you'd know that its a a common issue all month long at major shopping events. But call it what you will Phil ...

[Phil Deakins]

Alright, Chase. I stand by everything I wrote in the posts, whether you approve of it or not. If you feel insulted, I'm sorry that you feel insulted, but not that I wrote what I wrote, because I firmly believe that what I've written is correct, and I don't believe I got off track anywhere. How could I, when I was responding precisely to what had already been posted? The ones who got off track were perhaps those who imagined that this was "an events thread"

 

8 minutes ago, Chase01 said:

There are a lot of people that have an interest in it and I have already pointed out some of the reasons why.

I won't go through your post in detail, since you seem to want this discussion to end, so I'll just reply to that one sentence. You don't need to tell me that a lot of people are interested in it, or why. I know that. But, as I said in the last post, it is not a valid reason to find fault with the new system - imo. The new system isn't about shopping or events. It's about avatars in sims. And bear in mind that, although, as you said, a lot of people are interested enough that they can't wait to get into a new shopping event, they pale into insignificance when compared to the vast majority of users who aren't quite that serious about it.

I'll leave it there.

[Lexbot Sinister]

2 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

It's not just my personal opinion, Chase. What I've said is general common sense.

Actually, that is exactly all it is, just a personal opinion of what makes sense to you.

General common sense is recognizing the psychological aspects when seeing patterns emerge.

 

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

The new system isn't about shopping or events. It's about avatars in sims.

No, we are actually discussing avatars on full sims, which covers a couple of scenarios but the most often encountered currently being full shopping sims. This one is the one reoccurring on a very regular basis, in the same sims, over and over. 

There are of course other cases, like (but not limited to) :

1. Mainland sims full of bots, so the property owner can't enter

2. Live events like music or other performances where the audience gets very limited

3. Clubs and hangouts running occasionally at full capacity (mainland mostly)

4. Live gatherings with prominent speakers

5. Full homesteads

 

In these cases, the added capacity can come in handy. In the case of mainland property, it will only help if you are also premium, and not a basic account renter, since then you are not more privileged than a bot. So it's not entirely without merit, but still very little reason to make it premium account only. Parcel owners should always be given priority to enter their own property.

 

Then there's full sims, that are not running on full capacity, but simply get full:

1. Shopping events       that have capped the number of visitors below the region maximum

2. Roleplay sims           that have capped the number of visitors below the region maximum

3. Clubs and hangouts  that have capped the number of visitors below the region maximum

 

These actually don't benefit from the added capacity at all, because they don't use a sims full capacity to begin with. For those, the sim being full is still as much of a problem as before, but now they also have a VIP line to worry about, and how their regular customers might never be able to enter no matter how long they wait, unless they become premium. That premium account is just less money the shoppers can spend on products, donations and tips.

It is obvious that LL rather prefers the money for premiums to go directly to them, instead of being sieved through content creators first, to later arrive as tier for sims. It's at the expense of the content creators and sim owners though, that can not turn the VIP line off, and who's customers LL is urging to pay up, or not get to enter the sim at all.

 

As far as it comes to avatars that never go to foreverfull sims (the ones with "common sense" i suppose) this discussion was never about them, because they are just not a factor. It's much harder to recognize a problem that doesn't happen to you, but it doesn't mean the problem isn't real for others.

 

 

 

[Qie Niangao]

17 minutes ago, Lexbot Sinister said:

Then there's full sims, that are not running on full capacity, but simply get full:

1. Shopping events       that have capped the number of visitors below the region maximum

2. Roleplay sims           that have capped the number of visitors below the region maximum

3. Clubs and hangouts  that have capped the number of visitors below the region maximum

These actually don't benefit from the added capacity at all, because they don't use a sims full capacity to begin with. For those, the sim being full is still as much of a problem as before, but now they also have a VIP line to worry about, and how their regular customers might never be able to enter no matter how long they wait, unless they become premium. That premium account is just less money the shoppers can spend on products, donations and tips.

If this thread has exhausted the "max capacity event", these managed-capacity cases remain. And these particularly suggest that the Premium bonus capacity might be better granted at the option of the sim owner.

It's really not cut-and-dried that every Premium has less money available to spend than if they weren't paying the Premium fees. It's true that even on the annual plan, some of the fee isn't returned in the form of stipends, but still, some members having paid for Premium will spend more; some regions will benefit from Premium visitors with stipends to spend, while other regions can already count on visitors to spend much more than that.

Hence, the sim owner might want to decide whether the "reserved 10%" is beneficial to them. As it stands, the Lab has decided that uniform application of this benefit to Premium members is more important.

[LittleMe Jewell]

1 hour ago, Lexbot Sinister said:

That premium account is just less money the shoppers can spend on products, donations and tips.

Only by a tiny bit.  If the $72 annual premium fee was used to buy L$, you'd get roughly L$18,114 (assuming 250 L$ per US $1).  If you buy a premium membership instead, you'll get L$15,600 in stipends from LL in that year.  That amounts to L$2,514 less yearly, but that is only about L$48 per week, which is roughly 20 cents. 

[Theresa Tennyson]

1 hour ago, Lexbot Sinister said:

It is obvious that LL rather prefers the money for premiums to go directly to them, instead of being sieved through content creators first, to later arrive as tier for sims. It's at the expense of the content creators and sim owners though, that can not turn the VIP line off, and who's customers LL is urging to pay up, or not get to enter the sim at all.

Here's the problem that this statement suggests you don't understand --

Linden Lab only makes money when people pay for Lindens or pay tier with cash. A highly successful landlord or merchant is actually a net money loss, because Lindens are convertible and they take out more money than they put in. They're only supportable because their presence inspires people to buy Lindens with cash, but this isn't guaranteed income.

[Phil Deakins]

1 hour ago, Lexbot Sinister said:

Actually, that is exactly all it is, just a personal opinion of what makes sense to you.

That's just your opinion. What I've written in my posts is general common sense. For instance, it's common sense that, if you can't into an event to buy from it, you can buy after the event is finished. It's not opinion. It's straight forward common sense, whether it appeals to you or not.

General common sense is recognizing the psychological aspects when seeing patterns emerge.

If I knew what you meant by that, I might agree but, since it's a bit obscure, at least to me, I can neither agree not disagree.

No, we are actually discussing avatars on full sims, which covers a couple of scenarios but the most often encountered currently being full shopping sims. This one is the one reoccurring on a very regular basis, in the same sims, over and over. 

We're not even discussing "avatars on full sims". We're discussing avatars and almost full sims. So, like I said, but you wrongly objected to, we are discussing avatars and sims. That's what this thread is about. Some people chose to discuss what happens when it's a shopping event, and that's fine, because that's what I'm replying to as well, even though it's merely an example of what might happen. So I don't see what your point is.

 

There are of course other cases, like (but not limited to) :

1. Mainland sims full of bots, so the property owner can't enter

2. Live events like music or other performances where the audience gets very limited

3. Clubs and hangouts running occasionally at full capacity (mainland mostly)

4. Live gatherings with prominent speakers

5. Full homesteads

In these cases, the added capacity can come in handy. In the case of mainland property, it will only help if you are also premium, and not a basic account renter, since then you are not more privileged than a bot. So it's not entirely without merit, but still very little reason to make it premium account only. Parcel owners should always be given priority to enter their own property.

That's something different to the shopping events, and doesn't concern me or anything I've written.

 

Then there's full sims, that are not running on full capacity, but simply get full:

1. Shopping events       that have capped the number of visitors below the region maximum

2. Roleplay sims           that have capped the number of visitors below the region maximum

3. Clubs and hangouts  that have capped the number of visitors below the region maximum

These actually don't benefit from the added capacity at all, because they don't use a sims full capacity to begin with. For those, the sim being full is still as much of a problem as before, but now they also have a VIP line to worry about, and how their regular customers might never be able to enter no matter how long they wait, unless they become premium. That premium account is just less money the shoppers can spend on products, donations and tips.

It is obvious that LL rather prefers the money for premiums to go directly to them, instead of being sieved through content creators first, to later arrive as tier for sims. It's at the expense of the content creators and sim owners though, that can not turn the VIP line off, and who's customers LL is urging to pay up, or not get to enter the sim at all.

Again, that's something different to the shopping events, and doesn't concern me or anything I've written.

I don't know why you wrote those 2 sections as a response to me, but it seems that you thought they were something to do with what I'd written. They weren't.

 

As far as it comes to avatars that never go to foreverfull sims (the ones with "common sense" i suppose) this discussion was never about them, because they are just not a factor. It's much harder to recognize a problem that doesn't happen to you, but it doesn't mean the problem isn't real for others.

I think that was a response to me saying that the vast majority of users aren't people who just can't wait to get into full shopping events. I haven't denied that there's a problem for those who really can't wait to get into a shopping event. Everything I've written explains that it doesn't really matter, and all they have to do is have a bit of patience and they'll get what they want. I've said that the problem that those comparitively few people face isn't a valid reason to find fault with the new system. That part is my opinion, of course, and I said so.

 

Edited April 19, 2017 by Phil Deakins

[Qie Niangao]

34 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Here's the problem that this statement suggests you don't understand --

Linden Lab only makes money when people pay for Lindens or pay tier with cash. A highly successful landlord or merchant is actually a net money loss, because Lindens are convertible and they take out more money than they put in. They're only supportable because their presence inspires people to buy Lindens with cash, but this isn't guaranteed income.

Most L$s are bought from other residents on the Lindex. It's good for the Lab when L$ demand is high because Supply Linden does sell new L$s on the Lindex to make up for currency consumed by various sinks. That is, buying L$s does very indirectly generate some income for the Lab, but it's far from one-to-one.

Also, even the most successful landlords still get to keep only a small share of the rent they collect, the rest going directly to pay tier & fees to the Lab. As individuals, the landlords must exchange L$s for US$ to pay fees directly to the Lab. (That's in contrast to merchants who generally keep most of the proceeds when they cash out.)

EDIT: Forgot to mention, though, that the Lab also isn't making a ton of profit from Premium fees. As noted, a big share of Premium fees are converted into L$ stipends -- which again isn't anything like one-to-one cost for the Lab, but the stipend source surely replaces some Lindex purchases that would otherwise require minting new L$s. I think the Premium program is really most valuable to the Lab for improving long-term retention of residents, both as customers and as "critical mass" of grid denizens.

Edited April 19, 2017 by Qie Niangao

[Theresa Tennyson]

39 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Most L$s are bought from other residents on the Lindex. It's good for the Lab when L$ demand is high because Supply Linden does sell new L$s on the Lindex to make up for currency consumed by various sinks. That is, buying L$s does very indirectly generate some income for the Lab, but it's far from one-to-one.

 

The average person goes to buy Lindens - what do they do?

1) Send Linden Lab a certain amount of legal currency.

2) Linden Lab gives them the use of a certain amount of tokens. This is described as an amount based on an exchange rate,  minus a fee.

3) Linden Lab, as they're playing the game that they're some sort of actual currency market, then gives another person a non-negotiable credit described as an amount of US currency in exchange for deleting a certain number of that person's tokens.

4) Linden Lab and only Linden Lab will then either:

4a): Accept this credit as the equivalent of US currency for certain fees it would otherwise charge legal currency for.

or

4b): Pay that person an amount of US currency in exchange for reducing the amount of this credit.

The world outside of Second Life cares only about point 1 and point 4b. Point 1 is the only real income Linden Lab has in this process; point 4b is an expense. Point 4a is a reduction in potential income from other sources (i.e. tier payments) for Linden Lab that they'd use to meet operating expenses.

[Klytyna]

24 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Point 4a is a reduction in potential income from other sources (i.e. tier payments) for Linden Lab that they'd use to meet operating expenses.

 

Completely WRONG. LL still get US$ for the tier, it's just that the US$ come from the person buying 'tokens' on the exchange rather than from the person selling 'tokens' on the exchange. You scored 0/10 on basic math comprehension on your own example. Must try very much harder. Well done..
 

[Bitsy Buccaneer]

5 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

If an item really is that good, it's going to be sold after the event. Creators are in it for money, after all, and buyers only need to have a little patience.

Can you prove either of those claims, Phil?

Many creators offer high quality, desireable exclusives for an event and don't sell them later. I would guess that they generally make enough of a profit during the event to justify their time and then benefit from the exposure. It seems to be good advertising.

Maybe it was different in the boom years, but nowadays I'd wager that the majority of creators do so because they like to create and they like to share what they've made with others. Not all decisions will be seen in terms of maximising profits to their utmost.

[Theresa Tennyson]

1 minute ago, Klytyna said:

 

Completely WRONG. LL still get US$ for the tier, it's just that the US$ come from the person buying 'tokens' on the exchange rather than from the person selling 'tokens' on the exchange. You scored 0/10 on basic math comprehension on your own example. Must try very much harder. Well done..
 

By that logic I pay a portion of your salary because at some point I paid someone currency that, through some Byzantine exchange of funds across borders, ended up in your pocket.

So...

FIRED!

[Klytyna]

18 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

By that logic I pay a portion of your salary because at some point I paid someone currency that, through some Byzantine exchange of funds across borders, ended up in your pocket.

That's what we call "the economy". This has been a basic and commonly accepted thing by most of the human race since the invention of 'medium of exchange tokens" or as we usually say today "money".  It's good to see that you have finally caught up with an idea that the rest of the human race has been using on a regular basis for the last 3-4000 years. Well done...
 

[Theresa Tennyson]

1 minute ago, Klytyna said:

That's what we call "the economy". This has been a basic and commonly accepted thing by most of the human race since the invention of 'medium of exchange tokens" or as we usually say today "money".  It's good to see that you have finally caught up with an idea that the rest of the human race has been using on a regular basis for the last 3-4000 years. Well done...
 

So, just to confirm - you are my employee?

[Love Zhaoying]

26 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

So, just to confirm - you are my employee?

You the boss of her! =^^=

[Phil Deakins]

50 minutes ago, Bitsy Buccaneer said:

Can you prove either of those claims, Phil?

Many creators offer high quality, desireable exclusives for an event and don't sell them later. I would guess that they generally make enough of a profit during the event to justify their time and then benefit from the exposure. It seems to be good advertising.

Maybe it was different in the boom years, but nowadays I'd wager that the majority of creators do so because they like to create and they like to share what they've made with others. Not all decisions will be seen in terms of maximising profits to their utmost.

I can't actually prove either of the claims, no. But let me put the question back to you   Can you prove that either claim in untrue?

Obviously, I can't deny what you say about many creators making high quality event-only items, I would question the word 'many' though, and I would also question the 'high quality' and 'event only' claims. I wouldn't question an event-only colour though, because that's totally different, as would be a high quality, event only, item that's just a variation of a store item.

I think that just about all creators, create(d) for the pleasure of creating and, of course, they like other people to like what they've created. But the bigger stores are in it primarily for the money. Yes, they started creating and selling for the pleasure of it, but when stores grow to making sigificant money every month, then the mind changes somewhat, and the earnings become the focus. I know that from experience. I can't claim that everyone is the same as me in that respect, but I can claim, with a degree of certainty, that I am a natural human, with natural human instincts, just like everyone else, and we all tend to react to things in very similar ways. For instance, if making a new hair every month brings in US$10,000 every month, then, almost without exception, each of us would make a new hair every month, even though when we started we made hair mainly for the pleasure of it. As far as I know, the new fashion items that some people want to get hold of as soon as possible are from well-established, and well-known stores/creators. That type of business is in it primarily for the money, even though it started out just for the pleasure of doing it - hoping to make enough to cover the tier

[Lexbot Sinister]

3 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Here's the problem that this statement suggests you don't understand --

Linden Lab only makes money when people pay for Lindens or pay tier with cash. A highly successful landlord or merchant is actually a net money loss, because Lindens are convertible and they take out more money than they put in. They're only supportable because their presence inspires people to buy Lindens with cash, but this isn't guaranteed income.

I think you don't understand.

A highly successful landlord or merchant is always a net money gain for LL, because tier and L$ are always paid for with real life currency. The only way to take out more money than you put in, is if other people are paying you with L$ they have bought. LL doesn't buy L$ - they only sell it occasionally, with Supply Linden. You can only withdraw money from SL as long someone else has bought your L$. Minus fees and the L$ sinks, LL can never lose any money in that transaction. They don't pay any merchants or successful landlords, they skim their profits with fees, tier and L$ sinks.

The only plausible scenario where LL could lose some money is if they mess up with Supply Linden.

 

There has been rumors circulating that LL perhaps also buys L$ on certain occasions to keep the value stable, but it's a rumor, and completely unconfirmed.

I don't think it's a good discussion to have here though, whether LL is or is not manipulating the L$ Market.

[Lexbot Sinister]

7 hours ago, Rhonda Huntress said:

Shopping aren't the only events, BTW.  Hasn't anyone been to a music event where they set up across sim boarders in order to let more people attend at once?

Actually i haven't! I feel like i've missed out on that entire scene. I have no experience thereof.

I think the scenario there is a little different, people come in and stay for the whole event, right? So it's not people leaving and coming constantly.

 

[Aislin Ceawlin]

I'm just going to jump in here and say that the important thing is that, clearly, no one heard me say BREEDABLE SHOES, they EXISTED! Pffft.

[Qie Niangao]

2 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

The average person goes to buy Lindens - what do they do?

1) Send Linden Lab a certain amount of legal currency.

2) Linden Lab gives them the use of a certain amount of tokens. This is described as an amount based on an exchange rate,  minus a fee.

3) Linden Lab, as they're playing the game that they're some sort of actual currency market, then gives another person a non-negotiable credit described as an amount of US currency in exchange for deleting a certain number of that person's tokens.

4) Linden Lab and only Linden Lab will then either:

4a): Accept this credit as the equivalent of US currency for certain fees it would otherwise charge legal currency for.

or

4b): Pay that person an amount of US currency in exchange for reducing the amount of this credit.

The world outside of Second Life cares only about point 1 and point 4b. Point 1 is the only real income Linden Lab has in this process; point 4b is an expense. Point 4a is a reduction in potential income from other sources (i.e. tier payments) for Linden Lab that they'd use to meet operating expenses.

Okay, for the nonce we can skip the details of the exchange, but #4 is not Linden Lab's choice -- they don't determine that the credit recipient even has any fees to be paid back to the Lab -- that's up to the recipient. In fact, it's just a convenience that the Lab allows account fees (tier, etc.) to be paid that way, rather than having to be cashed out through 4b, fees paid, and accepted only as cold hard US$ cash on the barrel head.

So, Lindex profit (as opposed to Land tier and other profit sources) is the difference between #1 and all of #4 -- and there just ain't all that much difference. Most of that difference is the fee mentioned in #2 and another fee that happens at #4b... and every once in a while some of those #3 tokens minted by Supply Linden because nobody else is willing to trade theirs at the target exchange rate.

Landlords pay a lot of tier. They hope to get enough L$s from renters to cover that tier (#4a) and sometimes a little extra to take out (#4b), but they're mostly just complicated conduits for conveying renters' US$s to the Lab.

[Theresa Tennyson]

7 minutes ago, Lexbot Sinister said:

I think you don't understand.

A highly successful landlord or merchant is always a net money gain for LL, because tier and L$ are always paid for with real life currency. The only way to take out more money than you put in, is if other people are paying you with L$ they have bought. LL doesn't buy L$ - they only sell it occasionally, with Supply Linden. You can only withdraw money from SL as long someone else has bought your L$. Minus fees and the L$ sinks, LL can never lose any money in that transaction. They don't pay any merchants or successful landlords, they skim their profits with fees, tier and L$ sinks.

.

Tier isn't always paid for with real life currency, it can be payed with "US dollar balance" - Lindens that are converted to a credit. Essentially it's saying, "We aren't going to collect real-life currency from you for the operation of your regions due to the amount of Lindens you've converted." 

Lindens are not money. If you can walk into a real-life store and buy something with them or pay your rent on your real-life apartment, I'll stand corrected. In fact, you can't even use your "US dollar balance" anywhere other than Second Life.

Linden Lab does pay merchants, because their Second Life "income" isn't currency and they can't do anything with it outside of Second Life without it, so they need to request a payment in actual currency. The TOS that everyone signed states that Linden Lab doesn't have to give them anything though. They aren't skimming anything because there's nothing of real value to skim.

The individual creator who withdraws currency from Second Life is an expense. The total financial traffic they're involved in represents a slight overall profit only because of fees.

[Lexbot Sinister]

I'm having a hard time to take you seriously, if you really believe that LL is paying merchants out of pocket.

 

Daymn, where is MY handout??

[Phil Deakins]

26 minutes ago, Lexbot Sinister said:

I'm having a hard time to take you seriously,

says the girl with pink ears growing out of her head

 

(just my little joke. don't take it seriously)

[Bitsy Buccaneer]

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

I can't actually prove either of the claims, no. But let me put the question back to you   Can you prove that either claim in untrue?

Obviously, I can't deny what you say about many creators making high quality event-only items, I would question the word 'many' though, and I would also question the 'high quality' and 'event only' claims. I wouldn't question an event-only colour though, because that's totally different, as would be a high quality, event only, item that's just a variation of a store item.

I'm fond of the Genre event and they ask for new, exclusive items so I own several which would qualify. My avatar is currently wearing a poncho from the Mongolian round. It came with five or six different prints in a texture-change HUD. A friend complimented it a few days ago, so I'm not alone in liking it. It was L$100 (another Genre requirement) and I'm very glad I bought it.

The same poncho base is offered in the store in plain knit fabrics. I don't know the price but it's nowhere near as interesting IMO. The base was re-used, but the texturing wasn't. Are you going to get so picky with your words again that you find a loophole to sneak through because it wasn't completely unique?

I also have a cool Mongolian spiked fiddle from that round. I like the Genre event because it inspires creators to make things they wouldn't normally and also makes it easier for people like me who aren't avid shoppers to find them if we're interested.

My best serious pirating trousers came from a gacha event. They were commons, so it wasn't hard or expensive to get the 3 colours I wanted.

My favourite hair was from an event. There was time pressure in deciding to buy it, but I don't remember if that was due to it being an event-only exclusive or if it was discounted for the event.

And that's from someone who isn't much of a shopper.

For successful creators who, by all appearances, love to create and share and aren't limited to a focus on earnings, I put forward Ivey Deschanel (Sn@tch, who made the Mongolian poncho), forum regular Pixieplum Flanagan (Baby Monkey), Xzavia Yifu (Timeless Textures), Gerard Tunwarm (Texture Me True), Kushi Vyper (Kushi's Textures), Tiffy Vella (Eclectica Jewelry) and Poulet Koencamp (PurpleMoon Creations). There will be plenty more, these are just a few who came to mind straight away.

Quote

I think that just about all creators, create(d) for the pleasure of creating and, of course, they like other people to like what they've created. But the bigger stores are in it primarily for the money. Yes, they started creating and selling for the pleasure of it, but when stores grow to making sigificant money every month, then the mind changes somewhat, and the earnings become the focus. I know that from experience. I can't claim that everyone is the same as me in that respect, but I can claim, with a degree of certainty, that I am a natural human, with natural human instincts, just like everyone else, and we all tend to react to things in very similar ways.

Phil, do you not realise how often others in the forum point out the ways in which your thinking and reactions aren't representative of the norm? Or do you just ignore that in order to proceed with your argument?

Perhaps your creation became focused on making money, Phil. Maybe that was even the norm once upon a time. But today there are plenty of people in SL who earn enough to meet their monetary needs (whether it's tier or a RL income) and still have some creative energy left over to make something special for an event, promotion or gift.

Now if you want to skirt around this by saying it's below your threshold for 'many', give me a number and I'll head over to the fashion forum to ask for suggestions and see if we can't beat it.

[Theresa Tennyson]

41 minutes ago, Lexbot Sinister said:

I'm having a hard time to take you seriously, if you really believe that LL is paying merchants out of pocket.

 

Daymn, where is MY handout??

All right - tell me where does the money (REAL money) come the merchants cash out come from then?