Money For Nothing ... Please explain why residents should get Stipends, etc.

this is an amazing step you've made dark. i think you are the first person i've read to assert that holding L$ entitles one to LL's premium account revenues.

this would require LL controlling the value of the L$ somehow, like the chinese government, would it not?

Hmm, I'm not quite saying that $L entitles you to all their premium account revenues. I personally think the premium account should be split into two types of premium account. With stipends bundled with land, you can not tell what people are paying for the stipend, and what people are paying for the land. I am saying that they should control the currency value as you suggest. I believe Linden Labs has stated they want to regulate the currency. A regulated currency is in the interest of residents. Linden Labs loses much less with a rapidly changing currency than residents do. Their money isn't given to them in $L.

My question is, if stipends entitles you to buy resident provided goods, why is the revenues from these stipends being added to Linden Labs profits? Why is this revenue not being used for the good of residents who gave the stipend value in the first place? Linden Labs only has a proper claim to it when they provide a sink for $L that they never get $US for. There does not seem to be enough sinks for them to claim all of this money.

I'm not saying use the money to make the market rise uncontrollably. I'm not saying use the money to put extra cash in the sellers hands. I'm saying benefit residents by using these revenues as a tool to balance the economy. Is it easier to put open buy orders that have already been paid for by a paying resident, or is it easier to tell everyone they will get less money this month. Is it easier to decide that you won't take money from the stipend revenues for a month to increase the sinks, or is it easier to tell everyone they will have to pay more for all their services now.

They have revenue made off of resident made products. They should use that money for residents.

Hmm, I'm not quite saying that $L entitles you to all their premium account revenues. I personally think the premium account should be split into two types of premium account. With stipends bundled with land, you can not tell what people are paying for the stipend, and what people are paying for the land. I am saying that they should control the currency value as you suggest. I believe Linden Labs has stated they want to regulate the currency. A regulated currency is in the interest of residents. Linden Labs loses much less with a rapidly changing currency than residents do. Their money isn't given to them in $L.

My question is, if stipends entitles you to buy resident provided goods, why is the revenues from these stipends being added to Linden Labs profits? Why is this revenue not being used for the good of residents who gave the stipend value in the first place? Linden Labs only has a proper claim to it when they provide a sink for $L that they never get $US for. There does not seem to be enough sinks for them to claim all of this money.

I'm not saying use the money to make the market rise uncontrollably. I'm not saying use the money to put extra cash in the sellers hands. I'm saying benefit residents by using these revenues as a tool to balance the economy. Is it easier to put open buy orders that have already been paid for by a paying resident, or is it easier to tell everyone they will get less money this month. Is it easier to decide that you won't take money from the stipend revenues for a month to increase the sinks, or is it easier to tell everyone they will have to pay more for all their services now.

They have revenue made off of resident made products. They should use that money for residents.

Residents make money off the LL platform. Does LL get a part of the profit sharing?

Let me try to put it in a different way. Do you want your real life government to print off money at a profit? Do you want them to just print off new money that will buy them the tanks they want and that new jet fighter they've been drooling over? If part of Linden Lab's profits is from the printing of money, then the currency is being sold at a profit to the money printer.

The point is not that Linden Labs should share their profits. The point is that the printing of a currency should not be a source of profit in the first place.

Yes. Premium members pay monthly fees. L$ stipends are 'printed' and people assume these are payment for the fees. Without L$ sinks, these are diluting the value of the overal L$ pool (L$/US rate). This results in loss of money for the people owning L$. Without sinks, the stipends are largely paid by the community, and relative to the amount of owned/earned L$. Ergo, LL gets part of the profit making, as the stipends seem to be 'paid for' by subscription fees, but are actually paid for by the L$ owners.

BTW, I'm not against stipends. The main function they have, which is redestributing part of the community's wealth back to the poor, and so stimulating economy and making the SL world a better place appeals to me a lot. Enough to take the hit in L$/US rate , although i'd rather pay for it in a more conventional way, and make the SL economy look more stable... = more working sinks.

LL actively buying L$ on the market to compensate the subscription fees would stabilize the economy, but this would stop the social effect of stipends mentioned above.

Actually I beleive the Bonus $450 in stipend a premium account gets over a basic one could be considered money for nothing also, if you consider the 9.95 is primarily the charge for holding the first 512m of land.

But maybe it isnt?

Would it it be possible that LL should seperate the portions of The "Land tier" for that first 512 and the Linden Stipend in your premium account.

It would seem at the moment on a monthly basis you pay $3 a month for that 512m of land.

You also pay $7 a month for that $L2000 in monthly stipend (this number changes with the value of L$)

IF you buy on the year in advance plan - you are either getting the land or part of the money for nothing ..

Would seperating the two allow Linden Labs the choice to get some of that Stipend from the market , rather than printing it? Or would that hurt their proffit unduly?

Also there is definitely those who wouldnt "Buy money" becuase its a game. But they will upgrade to premium account to get a bigger stipend. Would seperating change this perception any?

From the economy's veiw - isnt preferable that a user were to spend $10 a month buying Lindens from other players, that to upgrade to a premium account?


--------------------------------------------------
From reading the thread as its developed I have a question -

Would Linden Labs adding a Direct Sales tax , which they used to make Profit for their company Help or hurt the economy?

Two potential justifications for it -

one -
Many complain that the Land Teir fees are too high. A large portion of teir fees are borne by content creators in order to facilitate having more store space, etc. This in turn drives their prices partly. Since offseting teir has to come before making money for their RL bank accounts.

With the current teir structure the risk is on the content seller - since if they dont sell items then they cant cover teir. The risks could be mitigated a little if teir was lower and a sales Tax added.

Two
Linden Labs has said they would like to flatten the teir structure - basically to make larger land holders pay MORE. The reason for this may mean they arent making the profit they would like on Second Life. Im not calling the company greedy , Im simply stating every business needs to make a certain return. They have salaries to pay, rent to pay, etc.

If they added a sales tax that allowed them to get a portion of the commerce in Second Life it might take some pressure off of getting most of their money off the land market.

Even premium accounts .. Linden Lab gets its money from the Land Market after all.



-------Then again it could be a really bad idea.

I wouldn't mind a higher stipend then L$50/week depending on how often I log into SL.
Takes weeks (if not months) now to save up for an outfit advertised on the forums.

And forget importing any textures - 5 tries at textures and I have to wait until next week to try again.

Rating people? - no way with it costing so much - though it cuts down on triple rating people good or bad.

I'm not saying a huge increase - but just L$100/week would be nice.

I don't sell anything and I'm not looking for a job in SL, so my recourse is to buy L$, which I'd rather not do.

Seems to me we are becoming more and more like THERE.

If there were only some sink that could suck up 7 million L$ a week. Monthly the stipends generate something like 28 Million L$. The wealthy content creators and land owners dump all their L$ into the exchanges at a rate resulting that far out-steps the demand. As this becomes more and more prevelent the lower the value will drop.

Lets say LL did remove the stypend and removed all incentives; that is LL would stop minting $L and handing out L$. All the L$ would eventual end up in the exchanges. The value of the L$ would steadily increase to the point where residents would refuse to buy L$ and would stop playing SL. In a way the exchanges are a sink, they remove money from circulation.

The stypend is like the air pump in a fish tank, it keeps the fish from sufficating. The fish don't care how much air there is as long as they can breath. Trouble is some fish want to sell thier extra air to the other fish, but since the other fish already have some air they aren't interested. Now these fish get it in their heads if they reduce/remove the air supply they could control a comidity. While perfectly true, some fish would sufficate or find other fish tanks. The enviroment would change greatly do to the reduction.


Right now we are living in a bit of a paradox, there is more money per user but the average user has less money then they did a year ago. Where did the money go? The exchanges. Greed is killing SL. Instead of investing their new found riches in SL products, sponsoring events, or re-devopment; they are cashing out.

This debate has become
"Life vs Living"
"Utopia vs Capitalism"