The Question LL Asks

And this is off base? Not so?

Please, explain to me what new and useful tools are we talking about? I think I must have missed the new tools in all the fees.

*adds "including the Lindens," to the last sentence*

Seriously? You see NO possibility of reasoned, logical criticism of LL decisions? You believe that ANY criticism is proof of childishness, irrationality, etc.?

Peggy,

You're right...LL wants the platform to be WIDELY used. They call it "use cases". They want corporations to use it for business. They want universities to use it for classes. They want individuals to use it for fun.

The problem is that SL is not well suited to many of their desired "use cases". It's a poor platform for real world advertising and shopping. It's not secure enough for sensitive business data. It's not scalable enough for hundreds or thousands of people at a time to attend a class or an event.

SL is an entertainment platform. Until LL can see that, and concentrate on it, they will keep making decisions that harm its entertainment potential in favor of mythical "future users".

/me seconds that request

I agree 100%. All these pipe dreams of executives being willing to look like cartoon characters and hold virtual meetings in SL, of major corporations buying (and maintaining!) thousands of islands to advertise their products, of Facebook/Twitter fans suddenly deciding they want to spend money to be alone in a huge landscape, in violation of every impulse they've ever had----this is all the acme of short-sighted misreading of what SL is.

There are billions of dollars of potential profit being ignored by LL.

And those dollars lie in the discretionary/entertainment budgets of millions of people who would ADORE SL...if only they knew it existed.

That is very similar to my thinking too. Except I don't see how it harms the entertainment value. Not yet, at least. Is it going to cost us more? I think it will........but how much or is that cost going to run us off? I don't know. I do know what I'm willing to pay and if or when that is exceeded I'm gone. This is not a plaform/game we control. We take what we are given (or sold) and enjoy or not........it's our choice. No amount of trying to figure out what LL is going to do next is going to change that. But I do not believe LL totally discounts our input.........but they sure don't cater to it either.

More Predictable Experience, More Predictable Experience, More Predictable Experience.......

Every reputable business school makes "assessments about [the] wisdom" of decisions made by businesses---and very few of those making the assessments served on the boards of the businesses in question.

The assumptions and analyses made by reputable business writers and academics may be said to be 'subjective'....how could they be otherwise? Yet most people seem to believe that such analyses are useful and important in the training of MBAs and other professionals.

The claim that no one may comment on, or analyze, or express opinions about, the decisions made by some particular business, without having been a part of that business themselves, seems to fly in the face of common sense.

I'll add that in the last sentence, too.

I can only submit my perception of the tools.

But wasn't the Zindra move, to prepare to move in a different type population? more or less? Doesn't moving in new population help business owners? as well as people who use it socially? more people to talk to?

They were pressured to deal with the bot/camping situation. Sort of cleaned that up. It certainly took some pressure off my business, as far as constant traffic woes.

They were pressured to do something about Xstreet. They've worked on one aspect of it. My perception is that it is going to be a huge benefit to any size business owner.

They're doing some mass marketing for business promotions and Xstreet - about time - I don't care if it is for their cronies or not. It reminds people to shop and explore....and that trickles down.

There's that Nebraska thing. Surely one or two of the people who become familiar with SL by using that....will decide they want to be a Harley-Riding Vampire Ferret, and might wander into a club or two, and need some new leather.

They just introduced the plans for the homes to be offered. I'm not sure if it's directed to the right group...but it's something.

They've got a pretty good promotion going on for Winterfest. Anyone who had their ass in gear, could have tried out for that. (I didn't)

They were popping into the blogoforumthingyrama, and chatting with people. Until the people became abusive, and scared them off.

Shall I go on? Or do you want to debate those first?

Apologies; I'd missed this earlier. I agree with you!

actually I agree with you in principal, but "bottom line" is more than just "make profits" it's also the ability to continue under their current strategy.... to that end I think they are over focused on the PR end of business, and things like technical limits, usability, and scalability are being under represented. their pattern of business sniping looks more like quick fix patches (in the corporate sense) to bolster that lack in my opinion.

in effect I'm saying something very similar to what you intend. that being, that their fee increases, and takeover processes are not well thought and and don't seem to reflect any base resource cost increases for them. I just disagree about the why. I see it as "oops, we're losing money because we're ignoring core platform refinement/expansion/advancement so lets soak up some money to cover that"

further I imagine they have no qualms about it because the view the majority of the user base as freebie accounts only good for testing and generating ideas for them. what I don't think they realize is that their paying user base are the only ones affected by it, and some of those are slowly being driven down to that freeebie level, so that in the end, I predict, they'll lose more than they gain with that mindset.... time will tell.

I'm not saying you don't have a right to question. I'm just saying that you are stating things and positions, goals, direction taken my LL as facts.........they are not. You're basing your goals for LL as better without even knowing what LL's goals are. You say LL's rush toward corpoartions is the wrong direction (which, by the way, I think so too) but we don't even know how LL intends to get there...........they may have a plan to get to that objective that we haven't a clue about.

These threads are actually fun to read and even join in on. But, every time someone counters one of your assertions with equally as valid opinions (notice the lack of the word "fact). You fall back on "established" thought of the paat. Maybe that's what puts me at odds with you.........ESTABLISHED thinking. If LL followed established thinking they would be nothing more than another MMORG (or non existant). We don't know how LL intends to get where they want......all we know is they are attempting something new. It may work beyond out wildest imaginations..........or fail miserably. I happen to think it will not work like LL wants.....but it won't fail either.

I basically agree; I just think LL is putting too much energy into the 'hey, some Residents have done well selling 512s and/or small prefabs---let's move in on that' and too little energy and emphasis on supporting new registrants with actual information/support that they want and need to get through those first overwhelming hours.

The idea of land and a house isn't bad...it's just that it's not the first or primary need of most new people. And my contention is that LL is ignoring this rather obvious fact in their enthusiasm for taking over an existing business niche.

Well, I can't judge from any private emails or private messages they are getting....but if I base it on the blogoforumthingyrama.....on a scale from 1 to 10...10 being NO possibility of logic and reason....I'll rate it an 8.325

I think that fair-minded readers will have noticed that I state my opinions as being my own, well, opinions--not as 'fact'. (Can you quote something I've written about LL goals that purports to be a 'fact' about their goals, rather than an observation I've made about their goals?)





I'm not sure I know what you mean, here (even though I'm assuming 'paat' was a typo for 'past', I still am not clear on what you're claiming). Could you quote an example?

Okay.

My point is that it's counterproductive for a business to simply assume that all criticism is irrational and childish.

The business loses valuable information by making such an assumption.

Well, if you read some of the responses over there, and the general tone....it's safe to assume. There are times when it must seem absolutely laughable to a corporation that size.

I can see exactly why LL imposed the restrictions on those 512 meter lots. The "First Land" program was in full swing when I first became a premium......it was, in fact, the hook that got me to go premium in the first place. There were many others just like me who took the land and stayed.......basically it was an excellent program for premium upgrades. But, when they also decided to open the flood gates to basic, free accounts with literally no restraints on the number of accounts anyone could have they also had to not limit the premium accounts...........which many soon found to be a profitable way to get land cheap and sell it high. First Land flipping was rampant for quite a while.........the solution LL took was to discontinue the First Land program entirely.

And now they are resurrecting the program with restrictions that will prevent the abuse that the program had in the past. It's not a bad idea at all. It was a successful program a few years ago and it might be just as successful this time...maybe even more so in the long run with the ability to flip the land taken away.

First Land was before my time, so I hadn't made this connection. Interesting perspective; I do like the idea of LL learning from past mistakes.

Okay.........I left out the part of "you" to mean the "collective you".......the folks who do state opinions as facts in this type of thread. I think you've been more than reasonable with your posts and counter posts. I'm sorry I did not make that clear ( I tried in my earlier post).

Here is specifically what I was referring to:

"Every reputable business school makes "assessments about [the] wisdom" of decisions made by businesses---and very few of those making the assessments served on the boards of the businesses in question."

Equating real life to SL. As if anyone thinks LL is attempting to be "mainstream" in anything Second Life. The only mainstream part of SL is they need to make real money to continue in whatever it is they are struggling to do.

You make some very convincing points.

You have to wonder: if they're so intent on taking actions based on "oops, we're losing money because we're ignoring core platform refinement/expansion/advancement so lets soak up some money to cover that" when they're not even a publicly-traded corporate entity, what would they be like if they WERE trying to please shareholders (who are notoriously focused on short-term gains)?

So, by your decree, all non-profit businesses are now declared "hobbies"? Hmm. Someone better phone the Salvation Army, Red Cross, United Way, et cetera. Be sure to tell them to sit down first; I think they are in for a shocker with that. <.<

As for the rest, LL has gone from the innovation phase to the profiteering phase. It is a typical playbook that is repeated all over the world every day. It is why the vast majority of businesses ultimately fail, because the model is self-defeating.

I've run into it in the past with people coming to me to get me to sign onto their "get rich quick" schemes. The whole point is to do as little work themselves as possible, and reap the rewards of selling it. They aren't usually very interested in the subject matter and purpose of their idea, just making it and cashing in when Google/Yahoo/Microsoft/Moneybags, Inc. buys them out.

LL has had a longer run in the innovation department than most, and I think that, perhaps some of the original people still cared about the ideals it represented, but they are slowly being replaced by the profiteer drones. In the end, they will end up poisoning the well to the point where it cannot sustain them anymore, and will eventually wither and die. Another well-developed and run VW will hasten that end, too.

I appreciate that.^_^




Ah. No. In the sentence you quote, I was responding to an earlier post (#25) in which you said "Seems every thread with LL's bottom line as the main topic makes statements about how poorly they are at assessing what their goals are...........that, is extremely subjective and presumptuous. You (nor anyone else on this forum) are privey to LL's business model or plan."

I was saying that many people (business writers, professors in business schools, etc.) DO make assessments and analyses of the goals of various business entities without being 'privy to the business model' of those businesses.

I wasn't making any analogies or equating anything to anything else. I was saying that it is accepted practice to analyze business decisions without being privy to proprietary information.

Could you explain your reasoning?