Jump to content

Infrastructure Investment Update: Buy/Sell Fee Change and Land Pricing Effective Mar 6, 2023 DISCUSSION


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 413 days.

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

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

$1.49 is more than 10% of $14.50, and also the minimum  maximum transaction fee as of mid 2018. Therefore, each purchase of $14.50 or less would always have a transaction fee of $1.49 since 2018, regardless of the percentage up to and including the current rapacious 10%. 

Percentages? Hmmm.... sixth grade math?

FIFY -You buy $14.50 in L$ at a time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

FIFY -You buy $14.50 in L$ at a time?

$1.49 IS the minimum transaction fee - "Minnie is smaller than Max."

"And also" indicates the clause is the second independent modifier of what is being modified. In this case, $1.49 is what was being modified. It is both more than 10% of $14.50 and also the minimum transaction fee.

Does that help?

And if you click on "buy" in the viewer I believe that the default number of Lindens is 2500, which is well under $14.50 and how a significant number of users buy Lindens.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll make this clearer for you: You can afford to drop that much - period. Month to month, once every few months, once a year ... I. Don't. Care.

You. Can. Afford. It.

Congratulations! Doesn't matter if you had to save a bit/refrain from making smaller purchases or not - you were able to afford plunking that much down on the transaction!

Meanwhile you've got some here who have to budget their bills on less than a thousand a month (less than the $1200 or so Minimum Wage before taxes and such) who manage to actually afford to do tings on here including dumping small amounts into our L$ balances (sometimes over a period of a few months) ....

I'll leave it there and leave this entire thing here as well ... Either you get it or you do not.

Either way? No sympathy from me on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sid Nagy said:
1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Or as always, people just love to complain.

Just like some people paint everything golden when it comes from LL, no questions asked.
 

Thank goodness there's people like you and me, "realists" somewhere on either side of the middle!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

$1.49 IS the minimum transaction fee - "Minnie is smaller than Max."

"And also" indicates the clause is the second independent modifier of what is being modified. In this case, $1.49 is what was being modified. It is both more than 10% of $14.50 and also the minimum transaction fee.

Does that help?

And if you click on "buy" in the viewer I believe that the default number of Lindens is 2500, which is well under $14.50 and how a significant number of users buy Lindens.

 

$1.49 was also the maximum. Minimum =Maximum back then.

Doesn't negate my original statement that the fee increased five to fifty fold (500%-5000%) since 2016.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:
8 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

$1.49 was also the maximum. Minimum =Maximum back then.

 

Yes, it was. But I used is

48 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

 

Maybe that is where reading comprehension and math skills come in handy.

Maybe the problem is, they need to be studying maths instead of just math.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Congratulations! Doesn't matter if you had to save a bit/refrain from making smaller purchases or not - you were able to afford plunking that much down on the transaction!

Meanwhile you've got some here who have to budget their bills on less than a thousand a month (less than the $1200 or so Minimum Wage before taxes and such) who manage to actually afford to do tings on here including dumping small amounts into our L$ balances (sometimes over a period of a few months) ....

Yes, as a result of saving up to be able to take advantage of a better deal. And yes, I have done it on less than 1000 Can$ per month, which is 30% less value then your $1000 US. Spare me the "poor me's".

Save your advice for those who haven't yet come to see that buying in volume saves them money in the end, even if it requires some initial sacrifice.

Quote

 

I'll leave it there and leave this entire thing here as well ... Either you get it or you do not.

Either way? No sympathy from me on this.

 

I get it and you apparently don't but as far as sympathy goes, none expected nor wanted though I do reserve some for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:
24 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Yes, it was. But I used is

 

Goal post shifting and hair splitting.

The past, present, and future all run together a the "Restaurant at the End of the Universe".  It was there long before "He Who Remains" came along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

If you had read what I wrote you would have seen I buy once in a year if not longer. "Just means for me that the amount I buy in bulk, has to last me a year or more."

So, you're basically complaining that the fee now works out to the equivalent of a maximum of $1.25 per month for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a whole lot of scholastic "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" going on here.

The bottom line is that, for some, the fee increase is going to cost them more money, while for others it may not. The degree to which the additional cost -- if it applies to you -- is going to be onerous, or prevent you from spending as much in SL, is going to vary from person to person according to their circumstances and attitude.

None of us is in the position of making a blanket statement about impact of this upon everybody, because it is going to affect everyone differently. And the degree to which it will impact on the SL economy will depend upon the sum total of all of those different responses.

Personally, I'm sorry for those whom this will impact, whether they be creators, landowners, or just residents doing some occasional shopping, because it's unfortunate that their personal enjoyment of the platform is going to be affected. I don't feel the need to apologize for those feelings merely because it's not going to impact everyone, or even most people, very dramatically: there are some it will, and for those people, this will be a real burden, even if it isn't for you, or other people you know.

Edited by Scylla Rhiadra
Grammar. Argh.
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 413 days.

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

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...