Open Spaces Announcement & Talk with M and Jack Linden

In the same way that a WoW character may just be data on a server somewhere, when you've spent many hours and a lot of money/effort building them up to be the highly skilled level 70 character with epic armour and all the bells and whistles, you cannot measure the emotional attachment that people make with their digital alter egos. I remember feeling really sad when Sims Online finally closed down, even though I'd hardly played it for the last 6 months; my pixellated self was dead, and that was the end of it. Snatching away someone's dream that they've built up in SL by pricing it out of their reach, after they've finally gotten enough resources together to get it going, is a big hurt that a lot of people who, in good faith, got hold of an opensim, may never recover from.

Strange how *that* never got a mention on the blog...

Maybe Jack and M are two of those that 'departed', hence the lack of responses.

That would be a 100% increase. That's a lot to absorb in 2 months.

I believe that before - when they did the price increase and then ended up grandfathering us, that they agreed to give us a 90 day notice before removing the grandfathering. But I would have to see if that announcement still exists to be sure (since it was over 2 years ago and my memory is not what it used to be).

Firelight

....

Just as in real life housing rental you are subject to rental increases unless you
live in a rent controlled area. I see no rent control here.

This has created a lot of emotion either good or bad. I must say in my existence here
I have never seen user input at this level.

$195 to $295 is 50%. 100% would move the price to $395. Adjusting the price by the same percent as the grandfathered OS sims would take it to $495. Any of those would be extremely stupid, but that doesn't mean it won't happen.

As regards Zeebster's quoted chat, I just wanted to clarify that the product we are now calling Openspaces, with its limitations on agents and prims, is *not* for living in. It is very definitely for open areas used for scenery as per the recent knowledgebase article that M linked to in his blog post.

If you have an Openspace now, and you're still not sure whether it classes as Openspace or Homestead after the announcement, please file a support ticket so that we can take a look.

And here the lies begin already...IF we were "residents", you wouldn't be treating us like that. You would show some respect...some common sense...some business ethics...but none of that is apparent in what you say following your paraphrase of McCain's "My Friends".



Not true, or you have not been listening.

What you have done is avoided the obvious solution (deliver what you have sold, and what we agreed to buy from you, and you agreed to deliver).

You also avoided the obvious solution for the future handling of OpenSpaces.

The best that can be said about this announcement is that LL is going in the right direction, but taking the wrong steps in attempting to get there, and putting up unnecessary roadblocks to itself.

What can *not* be said is that LL will regain stature with us paying customers.




The relative failure of that original product said enough about it's features (or rather: lack of features). It was overpriced for what it offered, so there were hardly any takers.

When a product does not sell (well enough), there is a reason for that, and usually the reason lies within the product. Not the customer (ok, "stinginess" aka "price/benefit awareness" could be considered a customer-flaw from a business POV. What we are left with is the impression that you are taking this view).



Lest we get into the habit of re-writing history, let's remember that "*Upgraded* Openspaces was wildly popular". Not OpenSpaces.

These were the features that made "OpenSpaces V2.0" wildly successful (in descending order of importance going by feedback from my customers):

- Privacy (could be placed anywhere as isolated regions, thus offering the only level of actual privacy SL offers);

- Increased Prim-count (enabling residents to have both a homestead and landscaping; not having to decide between either. A homestead is not a home if it has no landscape.);

- Increased Prim-count (enabling residents to be creative with the landscape, and/or the interaction of landscape and residence);

- Relative Affordability for the resident (and I suspect that this is the actual issue where you are hurting from your decision to make the OpenSpace product useful. Compared to both Mainland and property on private estates "OS v2" offered more benefit per buck for a certain clientele, especially the clientele that uses SL as "*my* slice of Utopia, *my* way". Renting out your estate can be frustrating, and often is, but that was one of the aspect of this business I looked forward to every morning: to discuss ideas, come up with how-to's, watch ideas take shape, be part of that creative process, .... now mostly gone. Just a personal note of sadness.);

- Relative Affordability for the Estate Owner (I know that I'm not the only estate owner who has set aside (at least) one OS v2 as her personal sandbox, to test concepts, to develop terrain ideas, to showcase ideas, to play with terrain textures, to use as a safe place for customers to experiment with terraforming tools and/or land- and estate-options, ... . All things that cannot be done on mainland, and can't or shouldn't be done in private regions shared with many customers. US$125/month is too much of an expense that would have to be covered through tier-income from "regular uses" of themed or non-themed full sims, both of which have taken a serious hit in occupancy with the emergence of "OS v2". If I were in your position, M, I would be *very* worried about the sheer number of estates being put up for sale almost every day (and to be abandoned if no sucker steps in), given that private estates make up the majority of what SL is, with mainland not even being a close contender (McCain had more of a lead on Obama than mainland has on private estates currently). It doesn't take a spreadsheet to figure out where your revenue comes from / will fall short if you go down your current path; yet your amended (..*cough*...) policies seem to be based on blissful ignorance of this very obvious fact);




Maybe you have been listening, but you sure haven't heard us.

WRONG!
The original OS product was too expensive to begin with, given the benefits it offered.
OS v2 ameliorated that situation to a certain degree, with some caveats.

OS v2 used as a void (that is: enough prims to actually sponsor events involving primmy objects like yachts or spaceships that don't look like elementary-school-exercises in basic geometry, or what have you.... , or to provide "mere landscape" adjacent to a full sim so that you could actually create a landscape that doesn't look like a post-apocalyptical digital wasteland (my apologies to the fans of that meme, but most people don't feel comfortable with that), but an actual expansion of a themed (full) sim is too expensive at US$75/month. US$95 makes it prohibitive. I can create more landscape on a 1,024sqm plot on a full sim at much less the cost than that, and people appreciate it. So why should I as an estate owner spend that much money for mere decoration when I can provide more decoration by setting aside a mere 10% of a full sim?

As you have no doubt noticed, but chosen to ignore, the US$75 tier level, combined with the willingness of estate owners to do business in creative ways, was at the top end of what you sold us as Homesteads, aka OpenSpaces, aka OS v2 (before you decided to pull the rug and re-define the product you were so eager to sell us in the months past by playing word games on us that will cost us (and, in the end: you) dearly).

A Void, as you and Jack want us to use OpenSpaces, is worth US$35/month in tier, and US$50 in purchase, at the top end (I'm thinking luxury-resort style estates here). A more realistic pricing would peg it at no more than US$25/month a piece. At that level an estate could actually add that expense to a full sim's plot-tier, and customers would be willing to add that expense to their monthly personal entertainment expenditures.



WRONG!
Again: you may have listened to us, but you sure didn't hear us.

When you doubled the prim-count for an OS, and "dis-connected" them from full sims, you told everyone: "OpenSpaces are *your* personal regions to do with as you want within some technical limits (the prim-count; and BTW: Full Sims have their technical limits, too. Never mind Lindens pointing out to estate owners that even OpenSpaces v1 could be used residentially, a suggestion (*cough*) which many of us estate owners resisted for the very technical reasons both you and Jack cite). You can have privacy, OR you can build a business on an OS, or you can base your Real Estate business on selling OpenSpaces, or...surprise us! Well, guess we *did* surprise you. Which questions your (and Philip's) visionary power. At this point in time it seems that Estate Owners have and had more visionary power than you, Jack, and Philip combined.

Which leads us to a very simple, yet essential question: how come you are not hearing those who take Philip's vision farther than all of you were able to imagine?

Is The Revolution eating it's children (you, Philip, Jack)?

Is the revolutionary (Philip) only good for throwing incendiary devices at the status quo, but lacks the qualities to actually overcome the status quo / develop an alternative? (History suggests so)

And, maybe most crucial: why is the "revolutionary" not able to actucally hear those in whose mandate he claims to act?
History (and that includes business history (yes, trhat means "Linden Lab") is so full of failed visionaries who failed to understand the implications of the revolution they tried to incite that it is vomit-inducing. In that sense LL seems to be poised to be just one more of those who didn't understand what they were doing. With dire consequences for the survivors of their amateurish attempts to create "something new". Never mind those whos' corpses were left along the path as milestones of their "progress".



Given LL's track-record of listening *and hearing* resident's comments and requirements and suggestions, that statement would be breath-taking, if it weren't for this follow-up:



You just put lipstick on a pig.
A pig with Dow-syndrome, no less (my apologies to those who are affected with that; no insult intended; I know that RL-situation first hand).

It's still a pig that doesn't even raise to the level of being a true pig.



Belief and Reality more often part paths than they join. This is a case in point.



- If you consider our input "very, very constructive", why are you ignoring it?

- Why do you the ignore the "very, very constructive" input when it comes to how to improve the client?

- Why do you ignore the "very, very constructive" input when it comes to mainland issues?

- Why do you ignore the "very, very constructive" input when it comes to private estate issues?

- Why do you ignore the "very, very constructive" input when it comes to matters of the first VR-economy?

- Why do you ignore the "very, very constructive" input when it comes to what those who cannot afford the huge up-front and "maintenance" fees want (who are those that the responsible estate owners try to serve in helping them to acquire their very own slice of utopia, according to Philip's often stated, but as-yet unrealized "vision"?

- Why do you ignore the "very, very constructive" input of those who are not "Quereinsteiger" (it's a German word, and I really urge you to look it up and try to understand it's meaning, because (I'm sory to say), at this point in time, it describes you, M, perfectly)?

- Why do you even spend money (in the form of wages, benefits, etc...) on people like you, and Katt (who doesn't know enough about SL and it's technology to realize when an (admittedly pointed) question is not "off the topic", but speaking to the very essence of an official statement, M?

- Why, when you could have all the expertise it takes to make LL and SL an overwhelming success, for free, by just *hearing* what we are *saying* (Estate Owners and "mere residents" alike)? Heck, I have residents on Full Sims who are outraged at how LL treats buyers of OpenSpaces, even though they can't afford even a quarter of an OpenSpace themselves. I know hat you have access to those IM's, and I have been in the DB-business long enough (more than 20 years) to know that, if you were *truly* interested in resident's sentiments, it would take you and your staff less than an hour to find out what your livelihood (us) thinks.




Sure you would.

Because, again, you don't know the facts.

Never mind that the reported "stability" of SL is mostly due to the client's inability to accurately report crashes.

But Hey!..if you own the statistics, you own the truth, no matter, how skewed it is ) (You know, that was when I felt, for the first time, real pain for McCain...the delusion of statistics you base on irrelevant numbers to suit your delusions. It was a very sad moment... why did you have to bring that up again?).



No, you weren't.
Again: learn to *hear* instead of just *listen* what skewed statistics tell you.
You want to end up like McCain, a once-honorouble man who gave up his honor for a shot at power?
As you were....

You want to advance SL, the vison of tens of thousands, *and* your livelihood?
Learn to *hear*.
Don't just "listen".
Learn to Hear.

Don't be just one of a gazillion of Quereinsteigers who ruin what started out as a great vision.



No, you haven't.
If you had, we wouldn't have this "discussion".

You defined a product..you sold the product..you took the money for the product..and then failed to deliver.
That is not "deliver on our promise".
It is the abject opposite of anything worth being labeled a "business relationship" (never mind a "vision".

If there was any vestige of business sense (and that excludes the learned "wisdom" of Quereinsteigers like you, M), you would have done something like this (not discussing details here, just broad outlines):

- you would have maintained the original conditions of OpenSpaces for decorative purposes, but at the prices/fees that would have taken into account the actual cost of the product vs. the subjective value it offers to residents of private estates (US$25/month each to US$35/month each at the extreme end);

- you would have offered the "new" Homestead product right from the start, when LL increased the prim-maximum and loosened restrictions on placement, PLUS improved the product by hosting at most 2 (in words: TWO, AT MOST) homesteads on one core per server (it's been how long since you first learned that residents use things like pose-balls and "showers" and dances and seasonally responsive plants/windows.... ? It's been how long since LL-employees pointed out the potential of residential uses of OpenSpaces even _before_ the upgrade to OS v2? At the very least 9 -10 months according to my sources). It took me less than three months to learn about these things, and I signed up in 2006. Supposedly SL is older than me). Are you actually that clueless, or are you just pretending to be that clueless to keep a straight face (at least virtually, pun intended)?

- the economics of hosting at most two (in words: 2) OpenSpaces/Homesteads per core are pretty simple too; too simple, in fact, to even bother to put out your pocket-calculator; as anyone with a minimum of experience in running a commercial company could have told you: it is better to keep 70% of your customer-base at a 50% reduction in profits per unit sold than realize a 67% profit on a customer base reduced by 50% (IF we want to be optimistic). Even a Quereinsteiger knows that. Why don't you?




So far you have offered a lot of bullshit (well, you *did* say "Thank You" for our candor ).
I'm still waiting for you to show entrepreneurial competence, but I'm not holding my breath.
I will wind down down my estates in the face of your bullshit, since my customers are stretched to their limits already. It's not not much for you, I know that.

But: as there is strength in numbers when things go well, there is force in failure, when leadership fails, too (you do know how to spell "George Walker Bush"?). My estates certainly will not count for much of your revenue. But multiplied by hundreds, if not thousands, from what I hear in private conversations...you better update your resume (by that I mean: delete the paragraph of being LL's CEO, or at least make it sound like you have been railroaded into that job).

Without any intent to be incendiary, inflammatory, insulting, offending... but just speaking from both RL and in in-world experience (and, in spite of your leadership (and Katt's failure to facility much-needed dialogue because of a total lack of understanding the underlying issues (the two of you remind me so much of McCain and Palin, it's not even funny any more), so far,), and, in spite of your leadership still hoping for SL to survive,


ChatNoir

Can you please explain that to me Jack? Thanks...

xxxx: Hello Equinox_Pinion, thank you for contacting us. I may be talking to multiple people at the same time, so please describe your issue in detail, and I will be with you shortly.

Equinox_Pinion: Hi xxxx, i am just writing a note to my OS residents who have a whole OS..my questions is...if someone decides to change to a 750 prims sim and just put a tiki, 10 palms and his dog on it...can a couple live on that sim?

xxxx: They can, as long they don't go over the the allotted number of scripts (which will be determined and announced soon).

2nd post...didnt get an answer yet...could you please answer me Jack?

God... I really can't imagine anyone continuing business with them after this. It would never cross my mind.

The KB article says that if you are using the open space for a rental, that it's a homestead and not an open space (as of Jan 5 anyway). Since you're talking about having rentals, it would seem to be clear that according to the KB article that it's a homestead, not an open space. I realize that the support person you quoted said something different. But we have many examples now of how a KB article has more authority than a support person's statements.

Just an observation.

Firelight

The KB article says that if you are using the open space for a rental, that it's a homestead and not an open space (as of Jan 5 anyway). Since you're talking about having rentals, it would seem to be clear that according to the KB article that it's a homestead, not an open space. I realize that the support person you quoted said something different. But we have many examples now of how a KB article has more authority than a support person's statements.

Just an observation.

Firelight