Cyberland should eliminate the heavy trading fees for selling

While I understand the need to charge fees for buying stock, charging for both buying and selling gets excessive.

Under the current fee schedule, unless you were trading large amounts of shares, it costs you 5% of the total transaction to buy shares and another 5% to sell.

That's 10% you're already down just for being in Cyberland. That ain't chump change.

What do you say, CEO - will you eliminate one of the fee layers?

More Information At: http://www.slsolutions.org/



Hi Jamie,

Thank you for your question, it is a good one and diserves some clarification. In short, no, this won't be happening. The trading service itself costs money to provide and the commissions pay that cost. That said, the breaks on the commissions start at only 1,000 shares traded (bought OR sold) within the last 30 days, and that isn't a large amount at all. If you only owned 100 shares (a drop in the bucket compared with what has already been purchased) and traded them back and forth a few times, you'd hit that. Also, as new companies are listed all of your trading volume in all companies will count.

I do offer ways for any type of investor to realize profits though. The trading fee discounts are intended to cater more to the high volume active traders. But, Cyberland is also a dividend paying stock. The dividends (which are already good but should be increasing in the future when the need to expand inventory is not so great) are intended to cater more to the investor who wants to buy, hold and grow slowly.



-Shaun

Contact me if you're interested in opening a trading exchange with lower fees

I'm interested in how it will sustain itself. Is it a charity or do you intend to work VERY hard, every day?



-Shaun

gom seems to operate by only charging the L$ seller.

GOM also does a lot more volume. So far we've only sold about 74,000 shares of Cyberland stock, and a LOT of those on lower commission levels. If the volume is there in the future to properly sustain the exchange with a less agressive fee schedule I'll definately be looking into changing it. I watch everything very closely. For now though, this is how it's got to be.




-Shaun

Definately interested. I approached the Cyberland exchange about taking my company public, but they were not interested.

I'd definately be willing to be a customer listed on your exchange if you open one. I'd like to take my store, Bergman's Bargains, public.

True. Based on our recent (short) conversation your business seemed to be largely based on content, and I didn't understand a need for IPO and public funding. I didn't count you out though.

If there is a demonstratable need for a large sum of public sector funding along with a reasonably solid plan for turning that into revenue and dividends, please, let's talk some more. If this is the case then listing your company may prove to be a good move for the exchange.



-Shaun

Second Life real estate stock investment is little different than first life stock investment. One needs to do their homework, inquire to obtain answers for their concerns and then choose the investment instrument(s) most compatible with their interests. There's little to be gained by haranging the airwaves about an option that doesn't suit. If one has not done due diligence, one can easily misunderstand the mechanisms and models used by any one investment instrument. One may find that what appears to be a negative charachteristic, is in the final analysis a justified and logical one.

I am a large block stockholder in Cyberland and although it might appear that I am biased, I am merely convinced that the current approach and future goals and mechanisms are proper and in my interest.

Has anyone found any evidence yet that this is NOT a scam?


Are all the details still hidden, except that Shaun simply asks for money in exchange for no collateral or authentic contact information?

Smiley,

As you've probably noted, 80,400 shares (and constantly climbing) already disagree with you. The numbers are beginning to speak for themselves as I've indicated that they would. If investing in Cyberland isn't for you, that's fine! Don't invest! But really, why continue to troll the Cyberland threads?

I mean, are you getting something out of this? Is there nothing better to do? Or is the project simply threatening some vested interest of your own?



-Shaun

Shares of what?

A million or ten million shares of nothing still adds up to a scam when the guy keeping the money takes off.

Well, he owns Cyberland B which owns the land specified on slsolutions.org

However, he can change all this in a flash, so yes, it's all on a trust basis.

Already responded to this, several times. This will be my last response to you in this thread also. If you don't trust me that's fine and I don't want your business, but I just wish you would quit trolling the Cyberland threads.

I do believe at this point with your repeated posts that you've simply got some personal vested interest in SL which publicly owned companies such as this will soon begin to threaten. Either way, you've already made your lack of trust in me, or the exchange, or both quite clear.

Anyone who would like to understand why I won't be responding farther to Smiley, or his points of view, strange as they are, should see this thread!



-Shaun

edit: I think you should know that it seems like there is a semi-direct correlation of your posts to our success. Just about every time you post, someone seems to drop L$10,000+ into my ATM.

Right now:
Land: 59,504m2
Cash: L$484,246
Shares in Circulation: 85,400
Share Liq. Value: L$8.00

When you started (guestimates):
Land: around 25,000m2
Cash: around L$150,000
Shares in Circulation: around 33,000
Share Liq. Value: around L$6.14

If you really want to protect your vested interests in the best way that you can, (as I believe you do) the move is to stop trolling the Cyberland threads ASAP.

As you know, I'm not trolling, I'm asking legitimate questions.

The person hiding behind the fictitious name Shaun Altman just has a huge problem with answering questions.

Or even having questions asked.

I simply want to know - from others - if anyone has found out if there is any sign that the fictitious person, Shaun Altman, has shown any evidence that he or she is NOT trying to steal from people.

So far, there isn't even any evidence that anyone has bought or sold any shares other than the say so of a person who, admittedly, does not actually exist, and who uses a web site created under a fake name, that shows numbers changing but no real proof that the numbers represent anything.

From this, a person using an assumed name, BSing about public trading of his private company on his private exchange, on a website registered under an assumed name, asks that people to hand over their money based on trust.

That's quite a pile of bull to be asking that people hand over money from the top of.


Like someone said. only a chump would invest money in this. There still looks like there is no reason to change that assessment.

You always seem to find some way to drag me back in. I see that you've now stepped up your campaign from rhetoric and slander to direct accusations and insults to investors. I've never actually done this before, but I'm going to go figure out how the AR system works now and AR this post.



-Shaun

smiley, in most countries where this game is being played, our societies where the burden of proof is left to the accuser.

so
1> do you have any proof, mr.smiley?
2> are you misgueded about your entitlement?
or
3> are you a troll?

I haven't said anything that isn't the truth.

If the truth is slander, that is no fault of mine.

actually you haven't said much. but you repeatedly ask accusatory questions with an increasing aggressive tone.

you are asking for proof of innocence, when you should be asking for proof of guilt. so far your only claim can be that you, smiley sneerwell, a fictitious person undermining other players endeavors behind the mask of your own anonymity, do not have enough information to trust or participate in this. you don't have any fair claim to repeatedly demand proof of innocence, especially since you can provide no reason for suspect.

in the meantime, you are creating anxiety amongst those of us who are more trusting, perhaps naive in your opinion, with these repeated posts in the fashion of a belligerent stock basher.

You're actually saying that being suspicious and questioning is naive, which means just the opposite?

I'm not determining guilt. I'm asking for some shred of evidence of legitimacy. Anyone asking for money should should be ready to show that they are legitimate, as that would earn trust. Refusing to show legitimacy, and throwing a tantrum at anyone for asking, would and should lose trust.

I've bought and sold shares. Missed the first round off share offerings, signed up when share liquidation value was slightly above L$6. Though I've still made a L$3k profit from buying and selling, after trading fees, from signup till now.

Don't know if you consider that evidence since I'm not going to, what? Send you screen shots of my SLSolutions account history along with a notarized photocopy of my drivers license. But I imagine if you went to one of the frequent share holders meetings you could talk to quit a few others who have made a profit from buying and selling.

I don't believe this guy has any intention of owning a share, nor any real trust issues. I suspect he's simply someone with a vested personal interest who's trusting me to do exactly what I've said I would which is to invite the world at large to share in the risks and rewards of this SL industury.

Nobody with real issues would go on like this in my opinion, they'd simply decide not to invest.



-Shaun

Why? Are you one of Altman's Alts?

Vested interest? In legitimacy maybe.

You're a broken record Mr Alt: Always have the last word, never with an answer, just accusations.

So lets see you do your trick again.

queue drum roll... get ready for a bud ump bump

Nope. Just a shareholder who has been reading your prattle.