Rya Nitely

The most plausible explanation is devaluation. LL increased supply. It is also the simplest explanation. The capital flight theory doesn't make any sense to me. if people are selling assets then someone else must be buying it, so L$ supply and demand would equate, having no effect. It is also not plausible that there are people with huge stashes of saved L$ who are suddenly dumping it on the market. This would need to have been saved over a long period of time to now have the same effect as new L$.

I just finished reading your blog post and the comments. Jack makes a lot of sense. As I have said many times myself, the most plausible explanation for the devaluation of the L$ is that LL increased supply. When you increase the supply of something, and the demand is unchanged you get devaluation. Simple.

Nalates Urriah wrote: I think you are confused. The confusion comes from the sellers and buyers seeing price differently. In the Lindex we can say a seller is selling L$ and buying dollars. If dollars are expensive it takes a lot of L$ to buy one. If a car is expensive we pay lots of dollars to buy it. Our frame of reference is what decides what is expensive and cheap. So, for a L$ seller a price of L$239/$1 is cheaper than paying L$258/$1. But for a L$ buyer a price of L$268/$1 is more expensive than buying L$296/$1. In one case a lower number is better than a higher number while in the opposite case it is reversed and higher is better than lower. (Prices from 7/29/2016 – 8±AM) Until someone is willing to offer L$ below L$258/$1 (bigger number is lower price for L$) or someone is willing to bid more than L$268/$1 (smaller number is a high price) nothing happens, no transactions. I took this from my blog post here: http://blog.nalates.net/2016/07/29/misunderstanding-the-second-life-lindex/ I think it's quite obvious what Kendra meant. I would refer to it as a high exchange rate. It's offering a higher amount of L$ for a dollar. It really doesn't matter how you word it, when it's obvious what is meant. I wouldn't be doing a blog post about this if I was you, because perhaps you are confused, particularly where you say 'nothing happens, no transaction'. Limit sell orders are being filled almost continuously by market buy orders placed inworld. The limit buy orders are a bit slower to be filled as these are filled by market sell orders, and most savvy sellers do not sell at market.

The most likely reason is that the seller of L$ in this case was just not very experienced. Here is the buy side with the same thing happening  An order at 266 or even 267 would do just as well. Not a great loss but unnecessary. Just as an aside and not in response to anyone, an important point that escapes most people is that the limit buy and limit sell orders don't ever need to match for orders to go through, as the limit orders are filled by market buy and market sell orders. Market buy orders are mainly those placed through the inworld viewer, and market sell orders are people who use the basic instant sell (not very smart because they would sell at the top rate on the buy side). Therefore, the buy side in the LindeX does not reflect demand for lindens, as the majority of buy orders comes from inworld viewer orders.

Sadly, I don't. I wish it was. Then it would make it all just a bit of fun - this thread and the others. But this is a real person, and that's sad.

I don't think Second Life has such a great reputation. I think that's why a lot of people don't talk about it. I tell people at work I have a second income, and when they ask what I do, I'm a content creator for games. And then I just change the subject if they push for more information. Some people know it's Second Life, and then they say 'are you still doing that?' and a look of shock follows. Nobody is impressed, except my family recently found out I'm thinking of quitting my rl job to do it, and when I told them how much I make they were very impressed. But I don't volunteer the information. I have found people are not impressed, it's like its for losers. sorry :matte-motes-crying:

entity0x wrote: In fact, some sore loser already 1 starred one of my most popular freebies I really didn't want to get back into this stupid argument again, because you just avoid any questions you can't answer. But try this one - why do you see this customer as a sore loser?

Dear Entity, it's obvious in reading your posts that your main purpose is to stir up reactions....get under people's skin. But you are actually just making the forums more entertaining for a while - until you wear yourself out. But until then keep it coming :smileyvery-happy:

Freebies can also be given out of pure generosity. When a merchant's intent in giving something away free is for this reason only, then it's bad manners to give it a bad review. It was given as a gift. I believe in the old saying 'don't look a gift horse in the mouth'. If you don't like the gift just throw it away quietly or shove it to the back of your closet, like any polite person would do. You chose to take it for free, and nobody forced it on you. The merchant/product does not deserve your bad rating. Personally, I think it makes absolutely no difference to the success of my stores whether I have freebies or not. I do in some stores and not in others, but when I do it's because I'm being generous, and for no other reason. I've been lucky to have received mostly 5 star reviews for my freebies, which is the customer's way of saying thank you - most people in SL are decent.

Linden Lab reserves the right to ban people, and so do many other companies. Do you believe they shouldn't have this right? Please don't say this point is off-topic. You seem to like saying that when you don't have a response. Nothing in this thread has been off-topic, so far. If I start talking about Pokemon Go and how I am now 100 % addicted, this would be off-topic. See the difference? Niantic and Nintendo will also ban people if they abuse the product. Apparently you can cheat, I don't know how and I don't want to know so don't ask me. Off-topic again - see? :smileyhappy: If merchants abused a ban button wouldn't they be harming themselves more than anyone else? Customers can shop elsewhere (unlike with Pokemon Go). If a customer gives a bad rating to an item they probably wouldn't want to shop at that store again anyway. So, if you rate a freebie 1 star ( I don't know why you go around rating freebies instead of just concentrating on your own store - sounds to me like that power trip thing I spoke about earlier) you have here decided that it's a reflection of the quality of the items in that store and you wouldn't go back, right? So, why would you care if you got banned? So, coming back to my first question, why do you believe people shouldn't have the right to ban when so many rl companies do, including LL?

entity0x wrote: I've never had to ban anyone from my marketplace or the lands I've rented so far. Be careful. You only have 50 items, and since your oldest items are 100% mesh I would guess you don't have the years of experience of many others here. I'd be concerned about those 2 freebies you have in your store. But you may be ok for now...you may not have enemies or strong competitors or just irrational customers with obvious personality disorders.....yet. I am so glad I stopped selling freebies. I saw freebies as gifts, and I didn't think people should rate gifts. So I removed my freebies. I'd also like the ability to ban rude and unreasonable people, because I don't want to do business with rude and unreasonable people. Some people seem to get a power kick out of giving items 1 star, and this is particularly easy with freebies because they lose nothing. Wait until you experience this. As for using an alt, if I was banned from a store I most definitely wouldn't want to go back. I would think most people would take the hint and not return. And why would I bother with an alt? What's the point in buying copy only items with an alt if you want it for your main avatar?

Pamela Galli wrote: It still takes 5 days for me. Recently I wrote a ticket asking why, and the answer was "blah blah blah". I don't really care how long it takes, but it is galling that my fees have increased so much that I only process credit twice a month now. I don't expect my process credits to take less than 5 days, although I always hope for a surprise. They have all my information, and I've been processing credit since 2011. I've passively accepted that I'm paying for something I don't get - no other choice. Edit: I just asked my partner, who has the same history as me, and he also waits 5 days and sometimes longer. There must be many more people paying for something that is not being delivered.

Rya Nitely wrote: wherorangi wrote: Rya Nitely wrote: could be, we'll see what happens going forward I does look like it's calmed down for now. yes. We see what happens in a couple of weeks time about if it goes again the way it has the last couple of months then I think those like yourself and others, the merchants, can maybe get better outcomes for yourself by cashing earlier in the month when is less volatile, rather than later And also, if this big seller gets their huge volume out in one hit instead of spreading it through the month, like you said, then it would mean less supply for the rest of the month, and the market should correct itself. Well, the rate looks like it's not correcting. So, again, the only theory that I can find no holes in is that LL increased the supply of L$ and that pushed the rate up. Even if LL says they didn't. It's the only theory that makes sense. If this happens again in a couple of weeks, then it will take the rate up further and it will stay up, and so on and so on. This certainly would be fun for buyers, but why would sellers call it fun? Edit to add: In real world market forums (equity, currency, precious metals) if someone asked the question 'why is this rising?', and a person responded with 'because it's normal...it's supply and demand....that's the way markets behave', that person would very quickly be told off for trolling. And now I'll go back to concentrating on trading shares in gold companies. Now that's fun, rewarding and no mysteries. P.S. I know some people like to feel that they know everything about everything, but I'm not like that. This is one of a very few topics that I voice my views in.

KarenMichelle Lane wrote: Way more fun to play with currecny here and not in the Forex! Ooh, someone who has experience trading currency in the Forex :smileysurprised:. Can you perhaps point me to a floating currency that stayed flat for 4 years? Love to check it out. But seriously, I think wherorangi might have hit on something. Maybe some people are not selling their Lindens regularly through the month like before, but accumulating it and then selling in one hit in the later part of the month. The new process credit fee might have resulted in a change of habit. People are so used to going straight from sell to process credit, or they just don't realise that it isn't selling that incurs the fee but cashing out to Paypal. I know there was some confusion. But if this is the reason, and people are accumulating L$ to save in the process fee, then it's backfiring badly. The only thing is, we do have a steady volume going through every month, so if there is a huge sell off now, then there should be less sell volume going through later. This should cause it to move back, not just a point or two, but closer to where it was.

wherorangi wrote: Rya Nitely wrote: could be, we'll see what happens going forward I does look like it's calmed down for now. yes. We see what happens in a couple of weeks time about if it goes again the way it has the last couple of months then I think those like yourself and others, the merchants, can maybe get better outcomes for yourself by cashing earlier in the month when is less volatile, rather than later And also, if this big seller gets their huge volume out in one hit instead of spreading it through the month, like you said, then it would mean less supply for the rest of the month, and the market should correct itself.

wherorangi wrote: this assumes that the someone(s) are actively manipulating the market what would make more sense is for someone(s) who already have a large regular L$ income(s) to now be passively influencing the market in the latter half of each month whose tier date for a largish number of sims falls in the latter part of the month, and having also received upto 15% tier reduction, assuming that upto half of their sims were not previously grandfathered or atlassed they are not stressing anymore about the 2% or 3% difference in the price they get for their L$ by passively selling in the latter half of the month, the shedloads of L$ they have earned, to pay their tiers they are not stressing anymore bc 3 off 15 still leaves them 12 better off than they were previous a monthly passive selloff which triggers a pile on, instead of the managed selloff across the month that they previously did who would do that ? Someone(s) who think that -2-3 is not worth devoting their time to anymore, given the +12 from spending no time on it at all could be, we'll see what happens going forward I does look like it's calmed down for now.

wherorangi wrote: can see that your exposure is quite well managed. That the number of open positions at any given time (assume what you showed is typical) means you are not reckless and not gambling the house on it. So thats good (: thank you for the reassurance :matte-motes-smile: I joined CommSec in 1997 when it first offered a very basic online service. After my first trade there was no looking back. I traded those dot.com companies in the late 1990s early 2000. I took a bit of a hit when things went bad, but nothing compared to the staggering gains one could make back then. I sold almost everything before the 2007 financial crisis - very lucky, only because I invested in debentures (not the sharemarket) and got burnt when the financial company went bust. This made me super careful and so I pulled out of everything. Most shares in my portfolio are long term investments. As well as being a trader, I think I can call myself a seasoned investor.

I sold at 263 because I didn't understand what was happening. This market had nothing that you could work with to predict price movements. It still doesn't really, although it looks like it's settled. During the recent market fluctuations caused by Brexit I traded gold shares and British bank shares. Here's a small example of my most recent trading activity. I'm not a full time day trader as I also have a normal job and I work in SL. But I am a trader. I make small amounts here and there, some losses as well, I don't always get it right. but overall it works for me. Some shares I keep long term. 

wherorangi wrote: aome of the day traders were into it just to only make $5 or $10 a day profit or less even. Just bc they could and bc they wanted to and was fun for them to try beat the market If this market was tradeable I would be trading it. I'm a trader. :smileytongue:

wherorangi wrote: in terms of forex (and commodities) then the broker aggregates the smaller orders from their clients and places them in a block. No blocks. When i place my relatively small order through Commsec it appears separately in the market. It doesn't go in as part of a block. I can see my order, and I can see where it is in the queue. It's even highlighted for me. I can watch my order going up in the queue, or down as people jump in ahead of me with better offers. And this will tell me if I need to change my bid or wait (it's a shame we can't see our orders in the LindeX market). But there are rules - minimum orders of $500 (even this will apear on its own in the market), and also they won't accept prices too far from the market price. I don't know how it works in New Zealand. I doubt it would be any different to Australia. And yes LL are the stock exchange, broker, Central Bank, government, police, politicians, everything in one. When LL wear the politician hat - you can believe them if you want to :smileywink:.

wherorangi wrote: Rya Nitely wrote: But that's just it, the LindeX volume has been stable for many years, and more importantly demand and supply are neatly met (until this recent 'unusual' behaviour). ... example ... There are no significant amounts of hoarded L$ in SL, no bank acccounts holding large sums. ... this basis of the example, we dont know this for sure what we dont know either is who might have shedloads of USD/L$ balances and is now actively day trading on the Lindex ? what we do know is that up until 31 July 2015 there were large buyers of L$ actively on the Lindex (3rd-party resellers/brokers) what we dont know is did all of those brokers just walk away when their operations were shut down ? Or have some of them since decided recently to come back and get into day trading ? and/or if so has that encouraged other day traders who used to be very active on Lindex back in the day to return also, now that there is margin to made again ? Someone or someones would have to accumulate and hold vast amounts of L$, then create a profitable spread by buying up those top levels, and then dump their load on the market. I don't think it makes financial sense. But maybe. They'd need a level 4 trading limit, and LL would know who they are. So, it would be no mystery to LL what was happening. They'd need to create a decent tradeable buy/sell spread, and as we've seen the spread corrects itself quickly because others start taking advantage, like you said. We did see this happen. To make this financially worthwhile, you'd need large sums of money and extreme patience, because that trading opportuntiy is gone so quickly. But, it's an explanation. There are much easier ways to make money than hoard it as L$ and then dump it on this market. Just buy some good dividend yielding shares in companies. People with large amounts of money know this.

I haven't really thought out the fixed rate idea, so there could be good arguments. I only brought it up because Inworldz has such a simple system. No Market, and when I put in a request to sell, the next day it's in Paypal.

wherorangi wrote: Rya Nitely wrote: I'm not saying we should have trading, because that could get out of control in such a small closed economy, as mentioned earlier. Perhaps it should be like inworldz system, no market, just set prices. Why not? It seems to work there. is about volume. Inworldz, or any other world tbf, doesnt have the volume that SL has But that's just it, the LindeX volume has been stable for many years, and more importantly demand and supply are neatly met (until this recent 'unusual' behaviour). There is a good reason why demand and supply are stable - just use this as an example. Someone wants to buy a mesh body, they bring in US$ to buy L$. The mesh body merchant gets that L$ and then sells it for US$, that US goes out again to Paypal or tier. It equals itself out. Someone wants to sell land, the buyer bring in US$ to buy that land, then the seller sells it for $US and it flows out again - either as tier or to Paypal. There are no significant amounts of hoarded L$ in SL, no bank acccounts holding large sums. What comes in goes out again, and things remain stable. Volume is stable because the user base is stable. Demand and supply are stable because what comes in goes out again - it's equal.

wherorangi wrote: the way the RL currency market works is that the buyers and sellers are brokers as ordinary customers we buy off the brokers, and sell thru them we dont get to trade on our own account on the RL market unless we are a registered money broker, which we can become if we can show the exchange operator (and RL regulators) that we are provably sufficiently wealthy to pay our bills on time this is the difference between SL and RL currency exchanges. There are no brokers on Lindex anymore. Used to be until LL killed the 3rd-party exchange operators (brokers)In RL In RL I buy and sell through a broker, Commonwealth Securities (or CommSec). I pay them a fee to buy and sell. It's not complicated, just need to register and give them your bank account details, just like when you register with Paypal. I pay my broker a fee whenever I buy and sell, just like I pay a fee to LL when I sell Lindens. In that sense, LL is sort of acting as a broker, aren't they? Edit to add: With online trading it's very simple. Brokers don't play a big role. You buy and sell through them, but you have full control, and can make the instant decisions yourself, on a live market.

I'm not saying we should have trading, because that could get out of control in such a small closed economy, as mentioned earlier. Perhaps it should be like inworldz system, no market, just set prices. Why not? It seems to work there.