Linden Lab is Destroying the Economy

Oh No You Didn't.

You Better Don't.




hhahahahahaah.. Silly Rabbit. Tricks are made for kids...

It does not matter, if I lose my stipend and the Linden increases in value. You would be profiting from my loss. I point out that Linden Labs has no obligation to keep the value of the linden high. They have a contract with me to provide me stipend. It is part of my membership at the time I paid Linden Labs.

If I lose my stipend, I lose money. Giving up about $1.50 a week for nothing in return is a form of support. A support of a higher Linden which I point out will turn inflation into destructive deflation.
You want me to lose my stipend something that was paid for to increase your profit. It would only help me in the smallest ways by possibly lower prices but don't expect that to happen Thus losing my stipend is directly supporting you sir!

The current state of the Lindex is a symptom of a problem(s), it is not he problem itself. "Fixing' it will not solve the problem. You don't cure a disease by treating the symptom. Fix it all you want, it won't alter the fact that supply of L$ exceeds demand.

You keep saying this, and you ignore everyone who's taken the time to point out, that IF stipends were reduced/elimated, LL would most likely honour all current agreements. You have an agreement with them for a fixed period, once that ends they are more than free to offer you a new deal. In other words, you will get what you paid for.

Oh I just dont want Linden Labs to forget about our contract. Also I will drop their premium account if the stipend is dropped and not replaced. It would just not be worth the cost. I see mainland areas full of abandond land that nobody will be willing to buy and pay tier to keep. Renting land would be cheaper but it can not be done on the mainland like the islands. Of course maybe the land will be mostly owned by a few with their own private reasons to keep land like Goreans or Furries. Ten Dollars a month for a Five dollar a month rental is not worth it!

And as I said, they probably won't, so I wouldn't fear.



If they don't add value to it in some other way, or there's no value for you, fair enough. Totally reasonable.

Firstly Ill put this into retrospect LL is not destroying the economy. Greedy Little people are that have no one's interest other then their own profit in mind. Getting rid of the stipend would do nothing but hurt people. As i state time and time again you cant expect people to have to pay USD for everything. Them buying gadgets is a right not a luxury its a luxury for you to get the money they pay for it. Most people arnt going to fork out the real life currency to do any of this. Its an uncontrolled economy based off greed simply put we have to deal with human nature here. They want fast cash to cover tier so L goes down. Its nothing to do with supply vs demand. Its not like its setting there b4 they decide to put it down and people arnt buying it. These people are putting in L at a lower rate right off the bat not even waiting for it to sell and the people putting in Tons and Tons of L while doing this are the problem. Supply can increase without lowering the value but it is up to the people selling it to decide that if they wanna be greedy and look for a fast break because they simply got in over their heads with tier and stuff then to bad for them let them whine. Another problem is that LL gives a break when people buy more L. You buy more its at a lower rate. Keeping it the same rate would help stop this.

There are more pieces to it then people wanna say and none of them have to do with introducing new L into the economy. Simply put if you dont have the cash to back up your tier fee's in the first place mabye its time to lower your tier fee's. You should not be relying on SL as you main source of income. And thats the problem with alot of people in SL is they are here to make money by any means. I sell stuff im not gunna up my prices simply because more people are likely to buy it if the price stays the same. I put my L back into the economy by either 1 helping out newbies or 2 giving it out as a prize or by buying stuff for myself. I dont cash out at some rediculously lower value.

It almost seems like these people do it on purpose. Its like sell L at a low value then come run on the forums and yell the Sky is falling. Im not an economist but i have been in SL for close to a year and simply put people are the problem. Not the system but the people. I wont blame LL at all it was a good idea that gave us freedom but a few people decide to abuse it. Mabye they need a reward/punishment system? If you sell your L at a higher value they lower the cut they take from the sale by so much. If you sell at a lower rate they take a bigger chunk. Mabye it'd discourage people (somehow doubt it). Simply put we pay 10 usd a month. 5 usd of that goes to stipends although with the current value of L we get about ... a 1.54 usd oversite per month. We currently get 6.54 usd worth of L for 5 usd. Where we should be getting 1.25 usd worth of L a week for 4 weeks. Its simple its easy its clean and it takes some L coming into the economy out. Its the easiest way to even see if the supply end is the problem they cut out dwell developer incentives and ratings bonuses over the last year did it spike L value at all?

The answer there is No it didnt. You know why because it never had to do with supply vs demand we didnt see L go up with the cuttings of ratings when GOM was still around when you could get over 1000L per week because of ratings. Didnt see it jump up with dwell getting cut down and now going bye bye or by the loss of developer incentives. I dunno where people get the idea that cutting the stipend is going to spike the economy. It wont.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

More power to the Capitalist... Time for you to switch teams.

No thank you, I still have a soul and wish to keep it.

Interesting post and thanks for the insight. I dont' agree. Here's why.

LL freezing the value of the L$ wouldn't be artificially keeping the currency at a given level. They'd be proactionary keeping the L$ at a viable level. The value then of the L$ would depend not on artifical "market" prices created by a no-value-center public... but rather by the RL value of the US$.

If LL were to freeze the value of the L$ and prohibit (on cost of ban) selling the L$ offline, that would go a long way toward stabilizing the economy... instantly.

Even if they didn't make it illegal to sell offline.. why would people go to Ebay to sell L$ at 300/$1 when they could sell on LindeX at 250/$1. Oh, I have no doubt a few would do so. There's always someone who loves anarchy for the sake of it. But that wouldn't stop the very convenient and instant purchase of L$ through LindeX. A relatively small percentage of buyers would go to Ebay to purchase L$ when all they have to do is click the blue $ at the top of the screen to do so. People often pay extra for convenience.

Bottom line: the current system is, as you pointed out, causing hyper-inflation. If people just paid a few $ a month to play, that probably wouldn't be a problem. But they're not... they're paying HUNDREDS of dollars a month, and they have to recoup that expense. If they cannot recoup that expense because the L$ system is collapsing, then they will start closing lands. If they cannot sell and make a profit, they will start closing shops.

What will that mean for LL in the long run? When one is balancing on a tightrope, a slip either direction can spell disaster. They could of course make it through to the other side. But there is always that factor of looming competition. Linden Lab isn't the only company in the world capable of putting together a 3D virtual environment... and you can bet your boots there are development companies already out there watching exactly what LL does and noting their mistakes. It's the IBM philosophy that worked for years: let the competition make the mistakes, learn from those mistakes, then take over the market.

So anything LL does which negatively impacts their system on a significant basis can be self-destructive at this point. And the hyper-inflation of the L$ is possibly one of those things that could do it.

The odd thing is that I and others have been calling for a set-rate stabilized L$ that fluxuates only as the US$ fluxuates... and oh no! Can't have that! That would be terrible!

So instead they settle on a system that is proven to not work and that is causing hyperinflation. Kinda like someone prefering to stay sick rather than try a different medicine.

Hear hear Doc. But hey, don't say this too loudly. Common sense is very unpopular around here.

You're absolutely right. And that's part of it. It will do no good to stabilize the value of the L$ while continuing to weekly flood the system with new, unearned L$.

People scream every time someone mentions cutting stippends to freebie users. Let 'em scream. It's a position of selfishness. In the real world people WORK for their funds. Sorry to take a hard nose attitude here, but I don't see that people who work hard for their L$ (or who pay for them by working hard in RL) should suffer because other users scream for free money.

Consider: 50L a week costs about 16 cents. Are we to believe that anyone out there can't spend 16 cents a week if they want L$ so badly? Hardly. They could buy an entire months' worth of L$ for a buck. They blow more than that on a soda at Quick Trip.

So as vastly unpopular as that stance may be, it's a realistic stance. LL cannot improve the economy by weekly continuing to flood it with L$. They would have to do more than just control the sale value of the L$.

However, as far as "A fixed price system would fail miserably as it would take too long to sell $L."...can't agree there. People buy L$ no matter how much they cost. From a buyers perspective... if L$ are 300/$1 or 250/$1... they're still going to buy.

Shout louder. I can't quite hear you.

Hey, I appreciate this is your viewpoint... but no matter how big you print it, it's not going to be any more accurate.

That may be your stance. Fine. Don't buy L$. No skin off my nose.

First of all, merchants are not "taking money out of your pocket". They are providing a fair product for a fair exchange of value. What you're insisting on is that LL constantly put L$ in your pocket for doing nothing. For the record, being a "content provider" is not a reason for getting free L$. We're ALL content providers. To expect to be paid because you actually participate in the game is... well... lol. That's all been pointed out before. No sense re-hashing it.

That's the basic stipend you're talking about. I pay for my stipend as part of the premium account fee, so it's not free and it's not welfare either.



Except now you have to have a $25 balance in your account, and most people who don't treat SL as a business won't want to tie that amount of cash up in something. That's the reality, not the price of a soda.



Except the figures are completely and utterly off. Remember that basic stipends only get paid if you log in - and as the majority of accounts don't log in, I'd guess that there's a fraction of the money certain individuals claim enter the economy each month 'freely' actually realisticly there. Remember also the sinks - a classified advert of L$50,000 a week is 1000 basic stipends killed straight away; do a quick total up of how much is spent on classifieds each week and then tell me there aren't major sinks?



Not at all. It's just queued up, so that when the 10 people in front of you have all sold their money, yours sells, and then there might be 50 people in front of them before theirs sells. The problem is caused by big players putting millions at a time up on Lindex and lowering the value because they need a quick sale to reach their tier payments which are due.

Stop attacking stipends, and attack the real problem - people who need to cash out large amounts in a hurry, undercutting each other to ensure they still make some kind of profit, with no regard to the regular user.

I wish some of them would just up and leave, and let those of us who are able to keep things in perspective to carry on playing our game and have fun.

Second Life needs players. It does not need businesses.

Lewis

Oh, and demanding L$ for doing absolutely nothing isn't greedy?

In other words, some spend 8 hours a day working their merchant concern, for which they expect fair return on investment, and others go around to parties and get paid for cybering... and the merchants arethe greedy ones? I don't think so Tim.

No. Let's state it here: There is nothing wrong with working to make an honest buck. Second Life is an economy-based system. Scream about it all ya want, that's the facts. People make livings on Second Life. For some people, it is their sole source of income. They are not being greedy. They're paying their RL rent, utility bills, feeding their family, putting gas in the car... just like you do. They are no more greedy than you are when you reach out and take your paycheck each week.

Now you can feel that LL should give out free stipends all you want. I'll support your right to your opinion. But in turn, don't you think some respect is due for those who actually work to earn their L$ rather than playing the "gimme gimme" game?

My stipend goes towards uploading textures and buying things from other players in order to complete my in-world experience, which provides entertainment to other players.

It's also part of the premium account package which I pay for.

So it's not free money for doing nothing. Rather than running straight to Lindex to make some money, I'm contributing to improving the in-world experience for those who come by the land that I am also paying for.

Actually not everyone is a content provider. The vast majority of people are not content providers in marketable terms.

Lewis

Ranma, I just figured out something. You're a premium user? You're paying for your membership. Then why are you shouting? No one is talking about eliminating stipends for paying users. The discussion all over the boards is eliminating stipends for non paying users. So relax.

How are you folks missing the fact that the stippend discussions are about non-paying users?

I don't believe LL has said anything about cutting stippends for Premium users. If they did, they'd loose every non-landholding premium user they have. It's part of the contact dude.

As far as content provider, it can be read on these forums that "I'm a content provider because I chat and visit and dance at clubs. My av is part of the content". That's the general philosophy. So in truth, everyone provides some content. That's the argument many use for justifying their free 50L per week. And it's just a bogus argument.

I've actually not seen any differentiation in any of the discussions about free v paying stipends. I just hear 'stipendz r teH eb1L' thrown out from the same tired old hasbeens.

Lewis

Well, I won't argue with the basic premise that SL wouldn't be more fun if it weren't for "businesses". However, it is what it is and to ignore or deny that fact is a dead end road. I can guarantee you that if it weren't for busiensses, we'd see about 100 sims on the grid instead of 1000.

I see people keep griping about the "business" end of SL and they badmouth the merchants and landowners. C'mon. The whole world is operated on an economic level. They're looking for a Utopia where everyone just is oh so nice and gives away things and just has fun.

Well, there are a LOT of people on SL who have fun managing land and merchanting. And there are a LOT of people on SL who have a lot of fun because of those land barons and merchants. So people can whine about it all they want, but that is how SL is built. If you don't like it... buy a sim yourself and forbid all economy, and swallow the US$3,500 first-year fees. You can afford it, right?

[edit: I don't mean the "you" as singular.. but "you" plural refering to population. I need to break that "you" habit of writing. LOL]

Not exactly true.

Personally? I'm all for everyone getting L$50 a week... and premium getting an extra 512sqm land allocation instead of stipend.

If owning land isn't important... quit being premium and buy your stipends off the lindex.

If owning land IS important... rent out your extra 512sqm of land to a non-premum and charge'm. Probably won't get L$500 a week but you'll get something.

(How many new threads does L&E need on this topic a day anyway?)

Wayfinder- thats exactly what the troll and parasite want.

I can agree to Jopsy's solution. I'd be getting my full premium fee's worth, and could rent out. Combined with my partner's extra bonus, we could rent a 1024 out without affecting our teir.

LOL you're so right. You'd think with all the L$ posts and complaints, someone at LL would start listening.

Regarding dropping the premium and allowing an extra 512 (for 1024m) to Premium users, here's why that won't happen:

Because L$ cost LL nothing to "print" (at least, not in the immediate view. In the long run of course, it's likely to cost them plenty). But land on the other hand, costs LL in server space, operational time and maintenance.

So it might seem nice up front and a lot of Premium users might even be willing to accept an extra 512m of land and have weekly stipends drop to 250... but all things considered, from LL's side that's just not likely to happen.

My solution to all this mess would be multi-fold:

* Set the L$ market to a stabilized L250/$1. (I don't believe off-world sales would cause a problem with this, but if LL were paranoid about it, then they could simply make it against TOS to trade L$ offworld).

* Eliminate stipends for non-paying users.

* Change the free memberships to a 30 day free trial and start a $12 a year membership fee (a buck a month? Anyone can afford that) and offer a L50 weekly stipend to those that sign up.

* Set up some L$ sinks that are immediately applicable and work, such as a "sales tax" that is added to the purchase cost of all sales, or a weekly "food requirement". Such things can be easily adjusted as the economy requires -- although to be bluntly honest, considering what I've seen of management so far I'd have questions as to whether LL would have the skills to administer such a powerful sink in a balanced and beneficial manner.

* Start listening to alternatives when something is obviously going terribly wrong instead of forging ahead like a bull in a china shop.

That's about all I could think of for now. I do think it would be kewl for LL to offer an extra 512 of land in exchange for L250 a week (effectively cutting Premium stipends by half). Giving people a workable chunk of land rather than a 512 might even stimulate the economy a bit.

(disclaimer: It's 7:30 in the morning, I had insomnia last night and am functioning on 2 hours sleep, so I reserve the right to add to/alter any of this via future message. basically: a right to change my mind once I've woken up a bit clause.). But I think the above is basically pretty sound and workable.

IN FACT I WOULD EVEN CHALLENGE LINDEN LAB: Since LindeX is obviously not working, try this method. Prove me wrong. I dare ya.

At the very least it would be an interesting experiment to see what if. I believe these concepts would work. It's worth a shot.

Right, actually i have been thinking for a time, what could LL give instead of L$500 stipend.
It must be something that will cost 0 to LL and has a value for the residents. So; cant be land. But maybe somethjing else... but what?