To Linden Labs (Bonds)

What do you think of the Idea of Players Selling Bonds on Land they own? So for instance, a player issues a bond for their plot of land with a yield of 5% or something.
Force all Bonds to Mature in 1/month. The interest and payoff on that bond will be auto deducted weekly from that player's account. If they miss a payment, their land is seized and given to the bond holder.

Example:
=======

Bond Seller
--------------
Owns 1024/plot and issues a Bond for L$1000 + 5% that matures on 2/1/05 or last payment date. Which ever comes first.

Every Tuesday between 1/1/05 and 2/1/05, the Bond Seller will have L$262.5 (L$263 Round) deducted from their account and paid to the Bond Holder.

Example:
--
1/7/05: L$263
1/14/05: L$263
1/21/05: L$262
1/28/05: L$262

This will allow players to use their land as an asset to generate cash. They risk losing their land if they miss a debt payment. The bond holder risks the Seller vanishing and leaving them with a worthless plot that can't be sold for enough to recoup the investment.

There is Risk on Both Sides, yet Reward on Both Sides. Also, allowing the Bonds to be an item which can be traded will allow for Risky or Secure Bonds to be bought and sold like investments. That allows other players to setup a Rating System which rates Bonds. Poorly rated Bonds might command less face value dollars because of the risk. Highly rated bonds might command face value or more. It also allows players too sell bonds they own with the security of the land backing it at anytime they want. Overall, it allows for the creation of a solid economic system in SL in which people can profit and prosper.

There's gotta be more to SL than just creating pretty rainbows. Lets get an economic engine going...

Nice idea, but lets fix existing bugs before developing something new like that please.

Plus pretty rainbows are cool

-AP

I only love your Rainbows Antagonistic ..

What do I think?, you ask?

I think it's a complicated idea that would take a while to implement that has the potential to add a platitude of player disputes with little benefit to the community.

Little benefit to the community of those who don't understand it. Great benefit once players do understand that their land becomes valuable. In a since, their land has a dollar value to it beyond what was paid on it. The player pays back a small percentage in exchange for L$...

There is nothing to dispute if in big red words it says "If you fail to repay the bond, your land will be forfeited". Unless you failed High School, its pretty straight forward. You get X amount of L$ and over a period of time, its repaid..

A smart person could figure out that you could borrow against your expected stipends. If in the example your borrowing L$1000 and have to repay back L$1050 in a month (L$263/wk), and your getting paid L$500 in stipends a week. Then in theory your just getting an advance on your stipends which is secured by your land and the payments are backed by LL.

Its not complex at all, I donno why somebody always responds to my posts about increasing the economic gains for individuals in SL with comments like "I think it's a complicated idea ". Is everybody that uneducated? Does nobody playing this game owe money on a car, credit card, house, etc? Its the same metrix... Your getting cash now, repaying the loan over time, and securing it with land. The good player who repays will enjoy the increase power it gives you. The bad player who doesn't repay their debt will have their land which secured the loan repo'd. Its not a scam, its a clear choice that a person would make and either reap the rewards or suffer consequences of their own actions or inactions.

Lending money against secured land doesn't require anything from the Lindens. Group ownership can secure a lot for a lender until a debt is repaid.

If you want this sort of thing, go do it...

- Ace

I'm talking about securing the land, but not handing over ownership unless a violation occurs. With the system I proposed, there is no need to worry about trusting people. As long as the Bond Issuer repays the debt, they never have to worry about somebody else holding the title to their land. If they miss a debt payment, then ownership is transferred.

What your talking about is transfering ownership 1st, repaying the debt, then getting ownership back. That requires the original land owner to trust somebody else to be an honest broker.

Both scenerios accomplish the same goal. Your's just requires trust, mine is trust free.

I've already issued unsecured bonds in SL. Back when 250L$ = 1.40 USD, I would issue L$13,000 ($72 USD) worth of bonds, which I would repay L$300 per week for 52 weeks (L$15,600 total). I'd then take the $72 USD and buy an annual account, which paid me a stipend of L$500 per week for a year = L$26,000 total.

Subtract off my total payments of L$15,600 and you see that I made a profit of L$10,400 for every bond issuance I had. Not bad for a couple minutes worth of work.

Of course, once the L$ got low enough against the USD, I decided to discontinue the bond issuance because there wasn't enough margin to be worth my while.

~Jaq

The only reason you say that is because mine are profit motivated

-AP

You've got me AP... I drool over your wealth, hard work, and business savvy. If you had stock in your business available in SL, I'd spend every day working to aquire every last share. '

I bow before you..

*giggles*

That was prolly a bit excessive flattery ... and definitely an exaggreration of my accomplishments.

But thanks, I think

-AP

Speaking strictly for myself, I agree with almost any suggestion which enriches the economy of SL

Ah, if we could only get hold of SL's code to make changes as we see fit hehe Then we wouldn't be "accused" of "stealing" LL's valuable (and limited) programming resources to add new nifty features.

Like valid contracts, for instance, and the many other economy-related features (corporations, a stock exchange, etc.) that have been suggested before

More suggestions? Try the SL Feature Voting site

Now your speaking my language...

Okay, If I must. Since I've been called "uneducated" and not a "smart person".

Reasons why this is a bad idea:
1. What good would it be to have an advance on stipends, as you suggest is the main benefit?
The median land owned is 512m, meaning at least half of residents are sitting on 512m or less. The average cost of land is about $4L/m. So they are borrowing 2k at the beginning of the month, then complaining that they can't buy anything after they burn through their money? All it does is shift stipends to a monthly pay process. Why not just then suggest, much more simply, that a person could pay 50L a month to get their stipend monthly?

Or, you get the larger landowners. Say someone owns 10k land, and borrows 40k. What would they then do with the 40k? Buy more land? Invest in a business? What "increased power" you mention do you speak of?

2. A person can already do this with cash through GOM. Buy L$ with cash, sell it back at the end of the month.

3. When I said it was complex, I'm not talking about the concept; I'm talking about implementation. Many things sound easy when they are suggested, but would be difficult to implement. In this case you're modifying the front-end UI, adding a timer system to land, adding a auto-revoke system to land, adding a new database of collateral land and due payments, and the list goes on with things that are not evident unless you know the source code.

4. Linden Lab already has too much on the customer-service platter. You're suggesting adding another thing with land being taken away? And then what? Does it go to re-auction? Are items returned? Is there a grace period? Does the land get released? Can you imagine how many n00bs will squander their loan and whine when their land is taken away?

5. Linden Lab already has said it's not interested in being in the money-business. I would assume this includes secured loans. It's risky to players and it's just not something I'd ever see Linden Lab wanting to deal with.

6. Who determines going rate of the land? Do you assume grid-wide mean? Last sale price? Some other metric?

Seriously, and even if you resolve all these problems, is it really a priority to have this considering all of the other major improvements requested and waiting, like Havok 2, integrated text graphics, vector graphics, voice chat, stability of servers, fixing rating system, adding custom skins to the interface, integrated a web browser and hyperlinks, etc etc etc etc ?

So yes, Alby, I think this idea is completely unfeasable.

Lucky the world doesn't revolve around you. Else 'change' would be a taboo word. Its always easier to stick with the Status-Quo than be the bigger man and blaze a new path which is untried and untested. Don't let fear hold you back.. Take the chance, take the risk. The fence sitters waste time digging graves while the risk takers create a better tomorrow.

Stick with the status-quo and its just a matter of time before the next hot game on the market has all the bells and whistles that SL never took the chance on creating. It seems like LL is just missing the big picture. A Massive Multiplayer game which has a world that allows players to profit in-game and turn that into real cash in the real world will draw in players by the truck load. All somebody needs to print in the news is "John Doe made $10,000 playing Second Life" and this place will be flooded with players. From LL's view point, more players equals more money. And more is always better.... But it pains me to see time and time again the opportunities which are passed up to make everybody rich. If players could start banks and loan out money, they would cash in on interest payments and LL could set themselves up as the Fed selling these banks money. Setup a stock exchange and allow players to collectively form businesses and using banks as they would individuals.. A multiplier effect would generate more cash for the masses... Clubs could hire DJs 24/7 and pay them L$, same with businesses and so.. The options are limit-less.. But what does appear to have a limit is the imagination of those in the drivers seat. Along with the peanut gallery give'm support.

When the peanut galley says stuff like "I'll be glad with the L$ and US$ aren't linked" just goes to show you that the masses are stuck in a world of fairytales and fail to see the importance of the ground they stand on. I don't think your a fool Hiro, I just think you lack the ability to imagine tomorrow. Reminds me of the girl on the Apprentice who didn't get the PinWheel Idea for Levis Jeans until it actually exist.


The empires of the future are the empires of the mind. - Winston Churchill

Here is the classical conflict between two different mentalities and two people I personally respect a lot So I won't take sides, but basically the argument is this:

- Hiro defends "technical stability". There is so much in SL that is "wrong", "badly implemented", or even "completely unexisting", that first LL has to fix all these issues, and only then start thinking about new features/ideas to implement. If they don't take that approach, they may well end with a nifty game with lots of cool features... that don't work... and without any residents (worth of their name) online

- Abby defends "innovation and radical changes" to bring to the online virtual world things that nobody has done before - on the principle that if LL only turns towards the status quo, sooner or later some competitor will implement these features first, and bye bye SL. Coping with change is what makes a company (or even a country...) survive. Stagnation is death.

Hard choices, since both are right!

This means, in an ideal world, with LL having unlimited resources, they would be promoting both approaches at the same time. Since we know that it's utopic to think about that, which should be promoted first? Technical stability or radically new ideas/features that will captivate new players and more interest from the media?

You all know which way Microsoft went, when faced with the same dilemma. On the other hand, after 35 years, Unix is still around. Which way was best?

Unfortunately, and using again the computer industry metaphor, the best approach seems to be doing both - the Apple way. Make things that technically are solid (ie. change the OS to an open-source one). And design them in ways nobody does as well (ie. cool design, perfect integration with lots of gadgets, make them easy to use).

This seems to be the approach that Linden Lab is actually taking. Yes, they're doing both things at the same time. Of course, since their resources are limited - this also means that things will take much longer to be implemented.
Which is risky.

Betting on two different horses is not always a good idea. Both may win, yes, but both may lose as well.

However, if I did prioritize work at Linden Lab, I would do the same - bet on both horses, go the Apple way. The benefits reaped are much higher than just betting on one of them even if takes longer and the risk is higher...

Good one Gwen, you are a goddess.. Betting on both horses at the same time is the best way of keeping on your toes and not getting bogged down in the humdrum of daily crap.

In my eyes, one hand is always creating new features, upgrades, radical ideas, etc... The other hand is taking those new features and ideas and working on supporting it, patching it, or dropping it if it just doesn't work. Believe it or not, I love SL, I see potential out the wazoo... The problem I have is that LL seems too focused on getting all their "I's" dotted and "T's" crossed before moving forward. And such slowness only allows the competition to take what works in LL, add in a ton of new features, and send LL into a declining tailspin they cannot recover from.

Here is a perfect example --- There. Why did so many people come to SL from There? SL is what There could have become. Lack of innovation, motivation, and constant fear that somebody is working on stealing your business is what should keep Phillip up at night. But while LL throws manpower at the 29th bug, they forget that innovation is the fuel for growth. In the last 6 months, what has really changed in SL? And has any of those changes translated into massive influxes of new accounts? If SL is stuck with around 15,000-20,000 members, they should be asking themselves what does it take to get 200,000 members. Because members equal money and I'm sure those LL investors want to see some return on their investment. And to date, I'd have to consider it piss poor. Mitch Kapor should be pounding the table demanding results or refunds.

One side of LL should manage the game and the other side of LL should create innovations in the game which are passed onto the management side to support.

Me, a goddess? Heaven forbid

Philip is a very clever guy. Notice that he's always proclaiming that "Linden Lab is only working to fix bugs, improve stability and make SL run faster". This is because he reads the forums, he looks at the polls, he gets personal IMs and emails, and feedback from Town Hall meetings. Overall, over 90% of the residents prefer bug fixing over new features. And the "new features" are mostly improvements as well and not "radical things" - say, start using Havok 2, allow animations on the face and hands, give us a better interface or a better inventory, etc.

This is solid market assessment - it's always easier to do upselling to an existing customer base (happy residents are willing to tier up, if SL works like they want) than getting more new users.

However, he's not "frozen in time". A few examples come to mind. The announcement of the change in the permission system, to allow Creative Commons-styled copyrights. The Teen Grid. And, in the recent past, things like the Incubator Program or Live Help. And we also know they're tweaking the whole interface...

All those in power should think about why Microsoft is the 800lbs gorilla. Instead of wasting time on making Windows 95 better, they came out with Windows 98. When Win98 started sucking butts, out comes Win2K... Yes they issued patches along the way, but they didn't focus on making the existing software 100%, 90% was good enough to keep the masses happy until the next new verison came out with tons of new bells and whistles..

Don't let today keep you from seeing tomorrow. Innovation is the future. Stagnation is death.

I think you are the one who should take a closer look at Microsoft. The reason they're on top is not their technical expertise, but their marketing expertise -- the first "good" operating system they made was Windows XP, and they already had a monopoly then.

And on specific technical points, Windows 98 is just a better Windows 95 -- Microsoft considers Win95 to be Windows 4.0, while Win98 is Windows 4.1. Windows 2000 has nothing in common with Windows 95 or 98 -- it's based off Windows NT 4, and is a truly awful system for running computer games, as it's designed for server and workstation use.

Gwyn, I also defend innovation. However, I don't see this idea of much of an innovation.
Alby completely ignored my explanation why, and long-windedly proclaimed that it would make everyone in SL tons of cash with no explanation how. (Hyperbole, I know.)

Additionally, Gwyn, I could list a dozen features that SL should add that would be far more useful and potentially easier to implement off the top of my head.

Alby, simply claiming that this is innovation as your explanation for why it is innovation is begging the question. If you legitimately think this is a good idea, then convince me. I'm willing to listen.

Thats just it, you don't get it. You want the 200 page manual on how its all going to work before you begin adding in 2/cents of work. A 10 page overview to start and then you hammer out the details and specifics as you begin working towards the goal you've set is step one. I'm sorry Hiro, I can't answer your question because its impossible. Did Microsoft write up a business plan on how they would go from DOS to WinXP? I don't think so... Gates simply came up with a rough idea on how computers needed an operating system. Once the goal of developing an operating system became the goal, the details fell into place as time went along.

Your vision is to throw out a list of limiting resources and ask somebody to make it work, draft up all the details, and then submit a report so it can be checked and double checked before your willing to put your stamp of approval on it as possible. I'm of the mindset that you 1st acknowledge that what you have now is already obsolete. Then say a) We need to make it better, b) lets brainstorm some ideas, run with it, and see what works and what doesn't. Then take what does work and add to it, improve it, and continue onward in the direction of your goal to make it better.

Does any of this make sense? Any thing is possible. What makes things impossible are people like you who proclaim "X,Y, and Z" can't work, live with what we have, and anybody who proposes that there must be a better way, demand they issue a detailed report on how X,Y, and Z will work before $.02/cents is devoted to trying.

This is what you call innovation Hiro:

Try, Fail.
Try, Fail.
Try, Fail.
Try, Fail.
Try, Fail,
Try, Fail.
Try, Succeed!!!


Just look at the Wright Brothers and how they developed the Airplane. They tried many ideas and methods. Some failed and some worked. They built on their success and dropped what failed. But at all times, they had the goal in mind to make a vehicle which could fly. A systematic process of innovation is why they invented the Airplane. The same method can be applied to SL... The 1-sim/1-server idea is obsolete and its time to redesign to achieve the goals of supporting the masses... I referenced what IBM did for Butterfly.net which falls into the same realm of what SL needs. But you Poo Poo the idea because I didn't use your list of limited choices to answer your question. Yet the answer I gave you shows that what I'm talking about (Clustered Enviroments for supporting thousands of users at once) is a tried, true, and existing method that LL can copy. Yet your still blind to what I'm telling you because if your vision cannot be worked into the equation, it must not be possible. Open your eyes, clustering is viable, better, and possible...

Or better still Alby - just do it - you've been talking about it for months - make it so!


_/_/

Gimme some money and a LL employment contract and its a done deal...

I'm sure Merwan will supply you with as many rainbows and warm fuzzies as needed.

Now get crackin' boy!