do i or dont i own land i bought & paid for from Anshe Chung

As has already been pointed out several times in this thread, the only 'people' who can be said to truely 'own' anything in SL are LL. The rest of us are just leasing it, trusting LL to honour such obligations as have been stated in the last issue of the TOS. We've all had the TOS dialog when we've logged in, and we've all said OK or we wouldnt be here. How many read it?

TRUST is the magic word here. LL could pull the plug tomorrow. OR change all the rules. Its 'their' software after all.

In RL I have the deeds to my house, or at least have access to them. They clearly state I OWN title to the land and buildings. (They also state that I cant keep chickens or coney but thats a different thread altogether )

BUT the goverment could revoke that title at any time. I TRUST them not to.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but In SL there is no 'physical' proof of ownership of anything. Yes I can pay L$ for an Object and have that object turn up in my inventory but thats still at the whim of LL.


If I'm too far off topic I apologise.

I think you are trying to demonstrate , finn, that a renter on these terms pays less rent per meter than an owner would pay in tier.

I would like to show you that this is incorrect, if properly calculated from the figures you give.

You are forgetting the free 512m which the mainland premium subscriber gets, in return for a subscription which is effectively free because it is returned to him in Lindens. He also can easily get another 10% land area at no cost via group ownership. So buying on the mainland $25 tier easily gets you roughly (4096+512)*1.1 = 5069. Cheaper if you can subscribe for longer than monthly.

And don't forget that whilst the renter pays his landlord $25 for the 5120m tier she pays to LL, what she actually pays out is only $US200*5120/65536 which is US$15.6.

So if the landlord does share any of her tier discount with her tenant on these figures we can calculate what it is as follows. They pay her 5069/5120 ie 99.00% of what they would pay the Lindens. In fact then, we see that she keeps almost the whole US$15.6 to herself, and shares only 16cents (1%) of this advantage with her tenant.

I am not claiming there is anything wrong or dishonest about this business. Simply showing that your apparent claim of financial advantage to the tenant in tier charges is not correct - charges are effectively the same based on your figures, finn. By paying premium subscription quarterly the mainland owner can get well ahead. Depending on the exchange rate of course, but that is currently moving in a direction well to his further advantage.

This is rubbish, and philosophical nitpicking. In a virtual world the defined language normally uses, for convenience, metaphor in relation to things we know. The creator of the virtual world defines the language to be used in relation to objects and actions having significance to the system and in the GUI. LL have clearly laid down the meaning to be given to "land ownership" by incorporating it into the GUI and its dialogues, as is their right as world creator. This definition involves the ownership being registered on their servers and being determinable by querying them, it involves this ownership being transferable without manual intervention by communicating with the servers by clicking on boxes in the GUI. It is such that no-one but the inevitably all-powerful world-creator is able to disposses the server-registered "owner". Certainly no other resident can do so.

No other use of the words is either approved by the world-creator, nor has any technical meaning in the context of the servers and their software.

In my view there can be no possible valid reason or justification for any resident to attempt to subvert that meaning and that language. I see clearly that those doing this have huge financial advantage to gain by doing so, and I sadly conclude that therefore the reason for them doing it, despite their denials, is precisely that, and no other.

The only defense they can put forward is a pathetic pretence that the language we use is directly and independently determinable from, and referable to, the language we use for apparently similar actions in the real world, as though its meaning was open to negotiation, discussion and argument. It is not. It is a locally determined metaphor, arbitrarily chosen for convenience by the world-creator to facilitate dealing with entirely fictional objects and situations created by his software.

We all know that in a real world sense we own nothing in SL, we rent nothing in SL. Indeed there is nothing real there to own or rent, and the TOS underlines the zero value of this nothing. The words are used inworld by LL and hence by us, as a convenient metaphor. Appealing to the real world uses of the words to argue with LL over their in-world meaning is nonsense.

These specious pseudo-philosophical attempts to argue the terminology are either vague and woolly thinking, or a deliberate mask for unbridled self-interest.

I have my opinion which.

The definition of ownership is not the issue. The issue is getting potential buyers to understand what they are buying and how they can sell it. It's about being fair and not making people unhappy down the road.

Ellie, I was comparing land in private islands. I was simply pointing out there is a difference between renting or buying a deed, or whatever term you prefer to use.

For people moving once per month, renting is probably a better option; these people also tend to make significant loss on maingrid when they need to dump their old land to buy the new

Go to ANY private island where land has been deeded to a group. It says "owner: "group name"". Is the land really owned by that group? I do not see why just because lindenlab has chosen to use the word" own" nobody else could use it ( I got the impression you indicated that ). I do not see it would become any more clear if one made up a word of one own " If you buey land here you do öwn it yes, in difference from maingrid where you buy land and own it"

In a similar way that lindenlab explain what they mean with own, which we can agree is an ownership with terms; land in private islands has terms also

I beg to differ. The root problems are the definitions and how some people choose to use them. If someone says something is green when its really red a lot of people get hurt at the next set of traffic lights.

I'm sorry but I was referring to the problem associated with this particular thread. Of course there may also be other problems, but I was addressing the concerns of the Original Poster and others in the same situation. Your definition may indeed be correct but determining this would not solve the issue at hand.

finn
these people also tend to make significant loss on maingrid when they need to dump their old land to buy the new
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How can you make this assumption? I have owned several pieces of land on the mainland, all of which I sold for a profit, and wasn't ripped off by someone only wanting to give me half of what I paid for it. I would suggest the majority sell their land at profit or near cost price.

Alexa

Well Alexa, maybe you have not feel the urge to sell within 2h. I was talking about people who are in big hurry to sell.

Why do I know this? Because my work is pretty much to read the land for sale list. I see lots that has been for sale, beeing resold for way less; often named " Need to move, priced to sell and tiering down" etc

Back when Lindenlab suddenly flooded grid with land, at the time I had decided to move, I also made a huge loss. Land I had paid for 8000 Linden dollars/ 1024sqm, was suddenly worth 3000. having like 30000sqm, you can calculate....

But this is true of Dreamland as well. When my tier was coming up and I decided to move a week before, I had the hardest time trying to sell my land. Add to the fact that every time I explained to the potential buyer that they had to make a group and I had to wait for Anshe to transfer it, it made it many times harder.

So I ended up taking a 50% loss, just like Anshe said, she bought it back at less than cost.

So Finn, what is your point as regard to this thread? The Original Posters and others in similar situations need to know up front what they are getting in to and the associated difficulties.

I repeat, these sims are wonderful for the people who made informed choices. But in order to make informed choices, all potential buyers need to be aware of the differences. And for those who don't want to sit on a pile of Lindens that they may or may not get back in it's entirety, renting with the same advantages, at the same tier without the up front fees might be the best choice. Because when it boils down, they are the same thing.

The point was with this post that the original poster did not even try to sell it , but wanted to get rid of i fast. Ppl ask for land and ppl want to sell, we try to match them up. I was comparing to mainland because also there if you need to sell fast you will most likely take a loss.

As with everything in this life, one should look into things before making decissions. There is in dreamland a rent option also, so if one think that is more suitable one should choose that. I guess similar to in RL; should I take the taxi and pay 60 dollars or wait 15 minutes for the bus and pay 10 dollars. One cannot take the taxi and then be mad at the cab driver he charge 60 dollars and not 10.

When I "bought" my land from Nexus, I was not told that they would buy back my land for full price whenever I wanted out.

So I didn't expect them to!

I was also not told that they would NOT buy back my land for full price whenever I wanted out. Nor would I expect them to!

You just wouldn't expect that, see?

You don't expect when you buy land from anybody else; nowhere in the game do you expect that. When you buy from the Lindens or from a neighbor, you don't expect just to be able to make them buy it back when you want to move, or if you change your mind.

Nobody reasonably expects that. I expect that is why Nexus didn't put in writing anywhere, "If you want to sell your land, we will not automatically buy it back at full price whenever you want to move."

That is what is good about RENTING. With renting, you can move whenever you want, and you take less of a loss - just your paid-up-front rent.

BUT - in renting, the landlords ALSO don't state in writing, "If you want to move and you have paid up for a week or a month in advance, we will not automatically refund you your paid in advance rent."

Some things are just understood, and people wouldn't expect them to do things like that.

But if we're going to expect "sellers" to put in a clause about not automatically buying back land whenever you want to move, and hold them to that standard, then we have to expect the landlords to put in a similar phrase mentioning that they won't refund your paid rent at the drop of a hat you don't plan to use just because you want it back. (And taken further, we would have to expect everyone selling any land in any way to make it specifically clear that they won't buy it back whenever the buyer wishes them to.)

So if people are going to accuse "sellers" of being misleading in this way, they need to accuse landlords who rent of being misleading in the same way. And probably all the rest of us, too, who sell land at all.

coco

And that is why the taxi has the rates clearly on the side. It's funny that you use that analogy. In my town the taxi's all charge the same. The rent in Dreamland is somewhat higher than the rent in other Private Sims. The private sims that do not require the upfront fee charge just the tier. So renting in Dreamland is not the same option.

Finn, I see we are in agreement that people need to be informed. This is a good thing. I don't think anyone here can argue this point.

Are you saying it costs more to rent in Dreamland than elsewhere?

And that because businesses aren't forced by LL law to charge the exact same rates that they aren't offering the same option?

It is the same option, just like buying and wearing a dress is the same option. It just costs more in some places and less in others, just like some dresses cost more, and some less.

coco

No, because landlords who rent, rent. They don't rent and advertise it as selling.

You yourself keep making the distinction - by adding quotation marks around the terms.

It IS selling.

The only difference is that technically, you have to trust them, because they could poof and abscond with the money and the land would poof, too.

(Course LL could do that, too.)

Here, without the quotations:

It is not renting. I am not renting from Nexus Nash. I have BOUGHT land from Nexus Nash, and I pay TIER to Nexus Nash.

I can RESELL that property any time I want, for whatever amount I can get, and keep the money. Just like I can with my land I own in Rosieri.

If I were renting, I could not resell that land. Because I would not OWN that land.

coco

I disagree, and I rent on Ansheland.

You are very unlikely to turn a profit if you sell. Why would a prospective tenant buy from you, where you make a profit, when Nexus can easily beat that price?

Now, that said, does Nexus own that sim? Does he get the buy and sell options? Yes. Do you? No.

So yes, by the LL definition, he does own it, just as many of us own land on the main grid, per the LL definition, so - how can he own the WHOLE sim, and you own part of it too? Because LL views him as the lessee for the entire sim, you technically do not own it, regardless of any agreement you made with Nexus - you lease it.

By "LL definition" - I mean where one has access to the Buy and Sell options for that land.

Did you know that LL didn't even foresee that people would be "selling" land in this manner? When they added the ability to deed a section of a private sim to a group, they overlooked that possibility, and this very argument is a by-product of that oversight. They even removed the ability to advertise it as "for sale" in the Find menu. What does that tell you?

They have plans to give us REAL tools for just that in the future. Right now though, it's just a hole that some sharp individuals saw and are using to their advantage.

Until we can use the LL buy and sell features under the About Land interface, it is NOT buying and selling - it's marketspeak.

I explained in that other thread - the one with the poll about the 10% discount - all about how these sims get established, just like any other Sims do, so it's not a matter of Nexus always being able to set his own price and beat you out. Go check that other thread and read what I say in it!

Yes, I know that LL didn't forsee this, and I guess they are planning to fix it.

None of that semantics stuff makes any difference:

If I buy the land from Nexus, I can resell it. Just like the land I buy anywhere! (Where anybody can beat my price, by the way - but read that other thread!)

If I rent the land from Nexus, I can't resell it.

That crucial difference trumps any bickering over which words to use. They are just clearly two entirely different things.

coco

P.S. As an aside, just like in the real world, and anywhere, I bought instead of renting because I planned to be there a long time.

If I rented that same amount of long time, I would overall lose much more money, with no investment.

I contend that those who are trying to prove that they "own" this land are the ones engaging in semantics. The rest of us are looking at this quite literally.

You are locked out from the buy and sell functions. Therefore you do not own it. You must have your landlord sell it, or mickey mouse with giving up a group you may not wish to give up. Even then, the landlords recommend you invlove them, so they can talk to the newcomer. The very fact that you have a sim landlord speaks to the fact that you are simply in possession of a glorified lease, that's been adorned with marketspeak.

Coco, I was using Finn's analogy, not my own. Yes it cost more to rent in Dreamland. Go to the website. For 16k sqm you would pay the equivalent of somewhere around $100 a month. Whereas renting on Hiro Queso's sims and several others, the same amount is $75 a month.

I'm not saying anyone should be forced to do anything hon, just educating everyone. It seems you are even learning since you didn't seem to be aware that it costs more to rent at Dreamland.

I think this has been a very good thread.

Coco, here's the thing, I am paying the same tier you are paying. I am not losing out over time. That is what we are saying here. We, who are renting at the tier price are actually saving money. When I left Dreamland, after selling at a loss, I had a bankroll of money and was still paying the same tier.

I'm sorry you didn't know this. Hugs.

I refunded 6 months of prepaid rent just last night. Due to a breakup the person wanted to move on and I just think it is good Customer Service to do such things.

As for the land Kismet bought I do think there are a few things that didnt happen that should have and because she lived there just a short timeif it were me she would never have seen fit to post here about this. She claimed she never received rental card from the employee and from what I have read he is not sure about it. She had to wait over a week for the land she had paid for. Is this right or wrong I dont know but I do know what I would have done.

No, I wasn't aware it costs more to live in Dreamland, if it does, but then, I never shopped for land there, or anywhere else. When I rented, I rented in the cheapest place I could find. It doesn't surprise me that different places to rent have different prices, or that different places to buy have different prices.

But you know, what I am saying is that we do get the choice - to rent, or to buy, from Nexus. Anyone who is insisting that I am only renting from Nexus - well, what can I say.

And I can certainly understand why one person would reason as you did, and make a different choice for themselves. But I reasoned the way I did, and made the choice I think is best for myself. Places are different, you know. I LIKE Azure Islands. You could show me a place where I could "buy" for less, and I would still choose Azure Islands.

coco

I am glad we are in agreement, making informed choices is for the best and as long as you were informed and made that choice, it's all good. It's when all the information isn't readily available that is the problem.

Also I just have to point out that I am not losing out over time as you stated in your previous post. You could have the same lot in Hiro Queso's sims and others like it without spending any money, so I guess it is buying for less. If to use your terminilogy, I guess I did buy from Hiro Queso, he just didn't charge me anything.

Well, yes, Alliez, there are conditions like that, and each owner gets to decide what is the best way to go about customer service.

I am saying that these people are not trying to bamboozle anyone because they don't have stated on notecards: "We will not buy this land back from you at full price if you change your mind or want to move someday."

Or maybe some of them do have that on their notecards, or plan to add it; I don't know. My point is, I never even would expect to have it refunded. And when I moved out of my rental place, I didn't ask for the money I had already paid to be refunded. If there had been something like the situation above, with the huge break-up and the pre-paid rent, then yes, I would have asked if I couldn't maybe have some of that money back, since after all, the place would surely rent out within six months.

And I would think a nice landlord, like yourself, would probably make some sort of arrangement with me (though not necessarily as generous as yours, to take into account the place might remain empty some time, and I would also feel bad cause there the landlord was expecting to have that place rented for six months, and now it would be empty).

I just wouldn't feel MISLED if that weren't the case. And in the case of "buying" the property, I would feel pretty darn good, if I had to sell out, or couldn't get my original purchase price, if Nexus refunded part of it. I sure wouldn't expect that he HAD to, though. That just isn't part of the buying deal.

Otherwise it would read: "You are buying this and it is yours, within technical game constraints, but you aren't really buying it, or taking any risk with it, because you can resell it at a profit if you like, and if you don't, we'll be happy to rebuy it from you at what you paid for it - just ask."

The person who makes that arrangement may get a lot of customers, but also may go under and not be able to offer anybody anything at all.

coco