Interesting article on the SL "credit crunch"

credit crunch is a bit of a stretch i think...more like land cost reduction lol

The outrageous land prices in SL have finally settled down... this isn't a problem. Sheesh.

This is just the standard media carp on SL refreshed under the banner of economic crisis. While noting declining land values, premium members, and corporate abandonment of SL (problems that are not new nor derived from the current economic downturn), the useless journo couldn't resist throwing out the quote on users enjoying 'boring' and 'creepy' activities.

there is no credit crunch in sl.

What a poorly written, misleading article.

Interesting how the 'clincher' slam against SL, at the end of the article, is sourced with....drumroll, please: "says PhD student _________ ________"

Sounds pretty authoritative to me!

And this would be different then any other article from most other news sources how?

Who probably posted a survey on the forum as part of his study.

This one has nothing to do with credit. Most other crappy stories at least deal with the subject matter at hand.

Every time I see one of these weird SL articles it reminds me of this old thing.
http://www.tranquileye.com/mirrors/thecorporation/kittyporn/

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponsonby Low
Interesting how the 'clincher' slam against SL, at the end of the article, is sourced with....drumroll, please: "says PhD student _________ ________"





...and got a bunch of snarky replies (we are the snarksperts, aren't we!?!?)

Hence his revenge on us, in that logic-light article.

-----------------
The average price of cyber land has dropped from 12.06 Linden dollars (seven cents) a square metre at its peak in January 2007 to 1.98 Linden dollars (1 cent) last month. While The Sun-Herald obtained price comparisons from net archives, Linden Lab chief Mark Kingdon boasted last week of a record currency trade, saying, "There's no credit crunch in Second Life."
-----------------


If it dropped then why now we pay 66% more?????

I have tiered my land holding down because my RL income has reduced and the British pound has fallen in value against the dollar. The falling pound has had much more of an effect than the imposition of VAT, which there was all tha hoo-haa about some time ago. I trimmed back because I could do so without losing any actual prims from my home, just unused prim allowance.


I think the credit crunch must have hit SL to some extent, especially large landowners. Land can be bought very cheap now but tier prices haven't changed.

1) You're not paying 66% more until July.

2) This is talking about mainland prices for buying land, not island rent.

3) Perhaps you shouldn't have expanded as rapidly.

I don't see the guy who actually invented waves in SL posting about rising rent and unfair competition. But then he only has one island, not five.

1 yes I guess not yet
2 why mainland lowers and openspace rises?
3 yes I shoudnt have trhusted the LL promises acording to the plan I did I could mantain then after the announcement the count didnt come anymore back.

right only 1 land not five but I dont do just waves i do many other things tough.

First, of course, the price of mainland isn't set by Linden Labs, it's set by the people who own the land.

Second, when you rent an OpenSpace you don't get adfarms, landcuts, botfarms, camping holes, spammy clubs, giant toilets, or other mainland nuisances in the parcel next to you.

Third, a big reason for the low price of mainland is the competition from OpenSpaces. They're a more desirable product and they actually cost less per square meter in tier. Even after July the rent on a Homestead region will only pay for the tier on half a region on Mainland.

lol I should have expanded on amainalnd peninsula may be ....

You could always turn 4 of your Openspaces into 750 prim showcases, and keep the old price.

The base land price jumped from 3.0 to 3.5 over Christmas, almost a 20% bump!

The credit crunch is over, long live the land bubble!

Well, maybe.

Though I'm in the same business you're in (admittedly in a very small way only), I don't see the Average Price of Mainland as being of much value as an indicator of the general financial health of Second Life---which, of course, is what that article is trying to claim.

(You may well agree with me on this---I'm just pointing out that the article's premise is very shaky.)

The article tries to imply that the falling price of Mainland 'proves' that Second Life is losing customers. Which is poor logic, since the price of land is demonstrably affected not only by the number of customers (demand), but by the amount of land available (supply). And the supply went up dramatically in 2008, because of the new policy against ad farming (and also by the huge numbers of new islands).

So, yeah: the article's premise is dopey.

The rise and fall of the Second Life land markets is not the interesting story.

The interesting story would examine why any sane person would spend real money doing business with a company that has a history of arbitrariness, and explicitly states in its terms of service that it reserves the right to screw you over with impunity.