Don't expect any help from M.

They are already creeping out from under the stones... The next one will be Snowflake I bet!

One thing you didn't put in your equation, the intangibles. LL has destroyed much trust and good will with this proposal and how it has been handled. Even back tracking on it will not recover much of that.

You are totally right.

They Pee'd in my kool-aid and now i can't drink it anymore and look at LL with way less faith than i had before Openspace Policy change announcement.

It is funny how now i do not trust them, but my only option for my SL life is to stay invested. Even if it means reducing the investment and going from an Island Estate to a Mainland sim.

Yes - absolutely - I agree with you totally. It is a business risk.

Thing is, the same level of upset has happened whenever LL have made a change like this - sims used to cost about $300, then $700, then $1200, then $1700 and all of these changes caused uproars, but none so much as the then sudden drop back down to $1000. But that last change resulted in... oh, maybe 10,000 sims being bought, more maybe? Then you also had all of the tier changes for private sims.

Lots of chatter resulted from policies on Ageplay, casinos and banking - all caused furores, riots and much discontent.

None of these changes had any long term impact on the remorseless growth and popularity of SL.

All LL need to look at is this:

http://taterunino.net/last60days400.png

And the rapid recovery of the $millions that were invested in 1999 (and frankly, initially invested at great risk).

Funnily enough, many people are now suggesting that voids should be charged on an "as used basis" - i.e. - pay per script. One of the very first riots was caused (if my memory serves correctly) by the imposition of "prim taxes" - pay per rez... and something similar happened with texture upload charging. This has all happened before, many times.

The other part of the equation is that we get to see a TINY amount of the economic analyses of SL, and, well, none of the actual business modelling. LL didn't just decide to do this on a whim. There is risk, but I suspect it either will not be realised as a threat to the business, or if it looks like it might be, that LL can easily react to it - they have the numbers.

1 Pathetic response from Mark in 4 days through his publicist?? Way to show how you're not in touch with what is going on inside SL and it's residents!! With inept leadership like that you never stood a chance making good decisions Jack. Will somebody please tell me how many OS sims are on the grid? If there are only 5000 mainland regions and let's say 10000 to 15000 OS sims that is a major section of the SL population that this will affect. Doesn't take a genius which apparently Mark is not to realize this is one of the biggest impacts any policy change has ever had on SL residents. Why is it Mark that you treat it so callously? Like it is just a drop in the bucket and won't have a tsunami effect. Mark try ordering up an oxygen tank and spend some time breathing deeply as this may improve your malfunctioning thought process. Please Mark lets really be clear you made this decision to make more money for LL not to ensure an optimal SL experience for ALL Residents. Quit the lies and the BS and find some balls to speak straight!!!

The estimates I have seen were 13,000 OS on the grid, before this started.

They just don't get the fact that this is tearing the heart and soul out of SL. For a lot of things in SL, you need a way to provide expanse without so much expense. Communities that need a lot of area (like the sailing, flying, and rp communities) are getting gutted by this decision. I was planning out a new series of scifi themed sims that would be unlike anything currently on SL, but now I no longer have enough faith in LL to continue with the project. Earlier in the week, I was making some offers on estates, but after this announcement, I wouldn't take a free sim with the transfer fee and a month of tier paid for. It's just not worth the risk anymore. I'll keep the sim that I have, but the planned expansion and other planned areas are completely off the table until LL can do something to restore a little bit of faith.

It is estimated that almost 50% of the 27,000 private estates are openspaces, every single one of them is owned by someone in the other 50%. This is not a small part of their service, hence why this is the biggest outcry ever.

The question would be what fraction of LL's *profits* come from OS regions. Not revenues.

It's funny how everybody's on about how much *revenue* it represents. But if they cost more to run overall than they bring in, it's a losing proposition.

Costing and charging computing services is a black art...I used to do it professionally.

How would they cost more to run than they bring in? Support issues? They are on certain hardware, LL have set that model, they priced it, they sold it, they gleefully celebrated it in July.

Yes Maggie, I think many of us realise that there could be a real cost/benefit issue at stake for LL; but for many of us that is not the issue we come here to debate...

The issue, for me at least, is: can LL get away with pulling the rug under a major segment of their customer base without negotiating a fair and respectable transition to a new pricing scheme!
And 2 months grace is not the issue either, for those of us who will have to abandon our open-spaces (for obvious reasons beaten to death already in this forum), it doesn't really matter if it's 2 weeks or 2 months or whatever.
I'm not asking LL do drop justified increases, I'm asking for an acceptable transition!

My suggestion is (excuse me for repeating this):
either:
1) LL grandfathers the existing open-spaces without any restrictions but those already in effect, as long as they belong to the original owner.
or:
2) LL refunds the 250US$ to all owners with 1, 2 or 3 open-spaces, that do not want to keep them.
LL gives the option of a free conversion of 4 open-spaces to a full sim, to those who want it - otherwise they receive a refund too.
(Or some feasible combination of both)

Yes, this is kind of x-posted, but I'm not sure where to put what, these days.

I'm confused, but perhaps I needn't be. Since I'm about to be charged for overusing sims that I don't currently overuse by any stretch of the imagination, does that mean it's ok to go ahead and max out my usage in my void sims?

I don't mean to suggest that everyone who has a void sim should do this, because that would be too much like some kind of coordinated protest. Instead I've decided to set fire to my sims (Lovelace Liberty & Caledon Primverness) using freely copiable fire balls, instead of making content.

Which...y'all Linden's might have noticed...was (nee' is) making money for you. I have the luxury of giving away my content, which means it's gravy for Linden Lab, and in return, you raise my rent 67%.

So, perhaps maxing out your own usage of your void sims would be a good way to live up to Linden's expectations. Sorry Desmond - you're the greatest guy I know in SecondLife (or even First Life, for that matter), and I hope this doesn't cause you more problems, but I figure that if I'm getting charged for using something THAT I'M NOT ACTUALLY USING...then maybe I should go ahead and use it.

Now...where did I put that physics-enabled temp rezzer?

Don't boycott. That just gives back cycles and prims you're paying for, and are going to be paying more for. Use all the prims and cycles you can. Drop by my sims to snag the copiable fire balls and set fire to your own content. Send a message.

...And, what exactly makes you so sure every sim owner fits that description?

Amazingly enough, it is *not* necessary to be running the latest bleeding-edge gaming-system hardware to enjoy SL. *I* sure don't have a dual-core PC or a pair of top-end graphics cards, and this PC hasn't been significantly upgraded (aside from a replacement power supply and a larger hard drive) in at least 2 years, probably more like three.

No, you most certainly are not alone.

QFT

You are not.. I will not abandon my customers but I have totally lost trust on LL and the people running it.

.d

I accept your point.

However, I am yet to be convinced that thousands will become "homeless" as a result of this tier increase. If the extra $50 per month is going to make thousands of people homeless, then I humbly suggest that the $75 per month being paid now could probably be used more productively on food, water, electricity and heating. If SL comes as priority before these things, including shelter, then I am completely at a loss, and accept that the original point that was being made is totally beyond my capability to grasp.

Rudolph there's a limit for everything. You set aside money for food, bills, clothing then you have disposable income. That disposable income has a limit, you can't keep squeezing more out of it. A 67% increase on any bill will have people questioning that product. Someone may decide $100 a month is fine for Second Life, but anything over that is irresponsible and what's to say they wouldn't put the bill up again, it's simply not the sort of price rise that is sensible to most people.

You're talking SL homeless right? People aren't talking RL homeless.

I was responding to a post that said "the fuss is just about a 66% price raise that will make thousands homeless". I took this to mean that 'thousands' of people that own OSRs will now have to make a choice between:

A. Paying $125 USD per month for an OSR instead of $75 per month until their finances are so exhausted by the $50 per month extra stretch that they will then somehow (undefined) become homeless

and

B. Deciding that actually $75 USD per month gets you 16,000 sq m of mainland with the same amount of prim as an OSR, so no real change there at all

and

C. Doing something else with the $75 USD per month

...but that for some reason, these hoardes of thousands of people will be compelled (by I really don't know what) to choose option A and force themselves to become homeless. I would have thought that if things were that bad, you could probably sell your PC and stop paying for an internet connection in order to reign in the finances a bit and prioritise funds on shelter and utility bills, etc. before reaching the point of homelessness, probably a good idea anyway what with the credit crunch and all.

But if it is actually the case that there are thousands of people out there, literally on the breadline, that will be forced into abject poverty because of LL's policy decision on OSR tier rates, then I think a proper longitudinal study should be done on the matter, as it sounds really quite serious.

In the meantime, perhaps we should set up some sort of charitable foundation to provide support for these poor people, or maybe lobby our national governments to impose a new tax on all those fortunate people that don't have the burden of owning OSRs, in order to provide a sort of OSR welfare safety net for those that are compelled to keep their OSRs?

Oh come off it Rudy. Anyone with any sense would understand that "Homeless" in this context applies to Second Life and not the real world.

What Chris said.

*No one* -- except you, Rudolph -- is suggesting that the increased sim fees are going to result in *real-life* homelessness for suddenly-impoverished SL *users*. How in the world you jumped to that bizarre conclusion is quite beyond me, and I can't help but suspect you're *deliberately* misinterpreting the point just to kick the proverbial anthill.

Everyone -- again, except you -- understood the remarks about "homelessness" to mean that thousands of *avatars* would become homeless *within Second Life*, as the owners of the sims those users have been residing on decide they've had enough of being jerked around by Linden Labs and start shutting down or abandoning their sims.

For many of those sim owners, it *isn't* just a matter of a "mere" extra $50/month. The owner of the area I reside in, for example, has FOUR OpenSpace sims -- none of which, as far as I know, contain anything more than a lot of water and a couple of islands with low-impact residences that can't even be using a quarter of the prim allowance, and which rarely have more than 2-3 avatars walking around at any given time. So for her, this will be a jump of $200 a month to keep her area running, and that's a significant hit on most people's budget no matter *how* you slice it.

And it isn't just the money; it's also the uncertainty of wondering when the other shoe is going to drop -- the other shoe, in this case, being an equally rapacious boost in the rates for full sims whenever Linden Labs needs to placate the shareholders again. (After all, a full sim is superior to four OpenSpace sims in terms of performance and prim count, so a full sim is "obviously" more valuable, so why *shouldn't* it cost more than the $500/month those four "inferior" OpenSpaces would cost?) In the case of our group, a $200/month increase to cover the jump in the four OpenSpace sims *might* be survivable -- but when the other shoe drops and the Labs decide to apply a similar price hike to the five full sims that also make up the estate, that extra $1000/month *will* kill the group, because now we *will* be talking about a sim owner having to make a serious choice between continuing to finance her Second Life at the expense of her First Life.

"Homeless" is an extremely emotive word, and it is being used, in the context of this thread, to whip up totally unjustifiable concern at LL's policy decision, which, I am very sure you will find will have virtually no impact at all on anyone, including on the virtual world of SL.

I think the guys at The Big Issue (http://www.bigissue.org.uk/cgi-bin/foundation/index.html), would be totally shocked at the use of "homeless" in this thread, which, in any event, is something that will not happen, and, if it does, should more properly be described as:

"some fairly affluent people might need to make some personal choices about what kind of server space they rent in order to create and use virtual content from the comfort of their home, but in any event, those choices will not result in those fairly affluent people doing anything significantly different to what they do now, and that LL's policy decision to increase its charges for one aspect of its services will have, on a practical level, a minimal impact on anyone's life"

If you disagree with this, I would welcome any sort of explanation that I can relay to the actual homeless people that I sometimes see at London St Pancras railway station, when I return from Paris in my first class carriage where I was previously drinking champagne.

Hey Ciaran you make an interesting point and it certainly is of no help if people become hysterical over this..however i would just say its a sign of how many people care about SL and thats no bad thing.
Anyway moving on no company worth thier salt has increased prices by 66% without any kind of grandfathering in place before that im aware of.
You are correct in your assumption that yes if you can afford 75usd a month then why not 125usd a month but i feel the point here is that 75usd a month to mess about online in whatever way people see fit is already on the edge of reasonable expenditure for a hobby and raising the price will just leave many feeling why bother when we all have bills to pay and food to buy etc.

Also it makes the current OS not the most economic solution when you compare resources supplied for that cost.
I could have 1/4 of a Full SIM for the same cost i pay now for my OS and get all the prims without any kind of vague message about "proper use" hanging over me. People are annoyed because many moved from 1/4 SIMs already and now feel the only option is to move back or simply abandon land ownership.
This announcement has already damaged SL on many levels its hit land owners the hardest , educational SIMs with tight budgets have the highest of all increases to pay and i fear it will destroy many of these projects. Then ofcourse there as those who rent from the land owners and small business that found OS to be the most viable option.

The thing i hate to see most from all of this is users of SL pointing the finger or fighting amongst themselves ofcourse we all have differing opinions and outlooks and we dont have to agree but lets all try remember that it is LL's short sightedness and poor communication that has lead to this.
People were not "abusing" OS willingly they were just in the dark about what proper use was. Lets not forget that LL themselves have built numerous OS that do not constitute parks, trees and water so that model for use is moot as are the claims that other uses were "unforeseen".

So maybe you can empathise a little more and see that there is no smoke without fire people are quite rightly contesting this decision because in anyone with a modicum of understanding of SL and sanity in general it makes no business sense whatsoever and has become LL's worst PR disaster ..so far.

Either you've misread my post or I haven't explained myself clearly. I wasn't saying if you can afford $75 then $125 is fine, I think Rudolph made that point, my point was quite the opposite

My point was that $100 might be somone's limit on this form of entertainment, heck $75 might be and less, people have different limits. Putting the price up 67% in any business is going to cause unrest, some people simply won't put that sort of extra money into their home entertainment.

I am very much contesting this decision.

Of course I am not suggesting that the OSR tier increase will make people homeless. It is a totally ridiculous notion. I view SL as largely an entertainment platform, and one that requires quite a lot of personal resource to support, and in this context, an extra $10 per week is next to nothing - a fairly average bottle of wine maybe?

But now you are saying that there are people that can afford FOUR open sims. How many OSRs does one person need, really? That is sounding more like a business, and an IT business, which is widely known to be an incredibly risky area to put personal resources into.

I absolutely accept your point about when "the other shoe drops", this is the real issue.

Instead of people complaining about the OSR tier increase, I would strongly suggest that any action that residents might take should focus on encouraging LL to put in place a price promise for the future, for all of its services, with an extended period of notice for any future changes (two months is quite good for LL to be honest, but six months would be great). A model that is comparable to say, mobile phone rental, with a 12 month contract, would probably be quite equitable. This would also clear up the whole issue of an unbalanced market where now some people have fully functional Class 5 sims at grandfathered $195 USD per month, and some people will be paying $156 USD (with VAT) for a laggy quarter prim OSR.

The best thing you could tell them is "Quit doing drugs/drinking and get a job." That will help their living in the railway station more than anything.