Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

Need p2p drive the L$ down ? I think not.

Ellie Edo
Registered User
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,425
11-24-2005 08:21
I don't actually see why the introduction of point-to-point teleporting (even if free, universal, and with total elimination of telehubs) should force the L$ down, rather than up.

L$ value depends on how much L$ is needed in world. In times of land turmoil more land will be changing hands, and liquid L$ will be needed to facilitate the transfers. Once things are underway we may even find the L$ climbing.

Times of turmoil are times of opportunity, and the land business, at least, may gear up for a while, not down.

Why do so many assume a fall to be inevitable, except for a week or so while people sort their heads out, and start to bring their new strategies online?

For the intelligent newish player, with little investment round his/her neck, this could be a big opportunity.
blaze Spinnaker
1/2 Serious
Join date: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 5,898
11-24-2005 08:44
well, if major players decide to quit the business altogether we could see short to medium term pressures on the L$.

Unfortunately, SL is somewhat sensitive to the price of the L$ and it could the feather that broke the camels back.
_____________________
Taken from The last paragraph on pg. 16 of Cory Ondrejka's paper "Changing Realities: User Creation, Communication, and Innovation in Digital Worlds :

"User-created content takes the idea of leveraging player opinions a step further by allowing them to effectively prototype new ideas and features. Developers can then measure which new concepts most improve the products and incorporate them into the game in future patches."
Ellie Edo
Registered User
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,425
11-24-2005 08:51
From: blaze Spinnaker
well, if major players decide to quit the business altogether....
They may. But if they do, they will create a visible vacuum which may motivate new players to invest and take their place. There are hugely more new players around than ever before, and there is no reason to think them potentially less diligent, inventive, or committed than the old.

These feedbacks are the reason why free market capitalism, for all its faults and (some people think) inequities, does actually work.

Like nature, it's self adjusting, on appropriate timescales. With the ease of injecting RL funds, these timescales have been shortened.
blaze Spinnaker
1/2 Serious
Join date: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 5,898
11-24-2005 08:58
I'm not sure it would be a new user that would step in, but rather an older user more comfortable with what she is getting herself into.

Unfortunately, I suspect all the older users are a tad gun shy at this moment.
_____________________
Taken from The last paragraph on pg. 16 of Cory Ondrejka's paper "Changing Realities: User Creation, Communication, and Innovation in Digital Worlds :

"User-created content takes the idea of leveraging player opinions a step further by allowing them to effectively prototype new ideas and features. Developers can then measure which new concepts most improve the products and incorporate them into the game in future patches."
Shaun Altman
Fund Manager
Join date: 11 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,011
11-24-2005 14:10
From: Ellie Edo
I don't actually see why the introduction of point-to-point teleporting (even if free, universal, and with total elimination of telehubs) should force the L$ down, rather than up.


When you make waves, they tend to spread, and rock a lot of boats. I give the occurance of large land waves, which in turn manifest in the L$ markets, a better than average chance of occuring in the near future. Due to this prediction, I elected to sell a whole lot of L$ in the very recent past, before the rate started sliding much (as we are already seeing, we're at L$260 per dollar already).

Please note that I don't give this occurance a 100% chance, however. There is a large chance that I could also be wrong. :) But a precautionary sell right now while the rate is still high has no downside. At worst, I'll simply get the recent high rate on L$ that I'd have eventually sold anyhow.

From: Ellie Edo

L$ value depends on how much L$ is needed in world. In times of land turmoil more land will be changing hands, and liquid L$ will be needed to facilitate the transfers. Once things are underway we may even find the L$ climbing.


Of course, if there is turmoil and a subsequent L$ crash, it won't last forever. After an L$ depression we have to find it climbing again eventually. History has shown us that when the L$ crashes, LL initiates a corrective economic action such as cutting stipends and the problem corrects shortly after.

From: Ellie Edo

Times of turmoil are times of opportunity, and the land business, at least, may gear up for a while, not down.


I agree, we are likely to see a lot more land on the market soon. There will be opportunity to profit like last time.

From: Ellie Edo

Why do so many assume a fall to be inevitable, except for a week or so while people sort their heads out, and start to bring their new strategies online?


History has shown major L$ depressions to last longer than a week, but I agree that nothing is inevitable. :)

From: Ellie Edo

For the intelligent newish player, with little investment round his/her neck, this could be a big opportunity.


It could be a big opportunity for any player.
_____________________
Regards,
Shaun Altman
Fund Manager
Metaverse Investment Fund
Ellie Edo
Registered User
Join date: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,425
11-24-2005 15:19
From: Shaun Altman
History has shown major L$ depressions to last longer than a week, but I agree that nothing is inevitable. :)
Even you still seem to be sort of assuming, Shaun, that the pressure, even after the initial few days confusion, will be down for a while rather than up. I'm just questioning whether this must be the case. Everybody posting seems to implicitly accept it, except me. But are there good reasons for believing this? Might not the race to buy low price non-telehub land even overpower the flight from telehubs, and the presumed consequent net unloading of L$ ?

Shouldn't even telehub owners in fact be buying cheap remote land now, as much as they can, to get the coming gain to offset their coming loss, which might in fact not be so bad if they refrain from the first rush ? Suggests more investment during the changeover, not less. Buy remote early. Sell telehub late. Hold as much as possible between the two.

The value will shift geographically, not vanish. He who holds both can neutralise the effect.
Shaun Altman
Fund Manager
Join date: 11 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,011
11-24-2005 16:31
From: Ellie Edo
Even you still seem to be sort of assuming, Shaun, that the pressure, even after the initial few days confusion, will be down for a while rather than up. I'm just questioning whether this must be the case. Everybody posting seems to implicitly accept it, except me. But are there good reasons for believing this? Might not the race to buy low price non-telehub land even overpower the flight from telehubs, and the presumed consequent net unloading of L$ ?

Shouldn't even telehub owners in fact be buying cheap remote land now, as much as they can, to get the coming gain to offset their coming loss, which might in fact not be so bad if they refrain from the first rush ? Suggests more investment during the changeover, not less. Buy remote early. Sell telehub late. Hold as much as possible between the two.

The value will shift geographically, not vanish. He who holds both can neutralise the effect.


Anything and everything is possible. We'll just have to watch and see. In the mean time, I'm happy that I got a lot of L$ into someone else's hands NOW while the exchange rate is still high. :)
_____________________
Regards,
Shaun Altman
Fund Manager
Metaverse Investment Fund