Welcome to Gaia! :: Ideas for gold sinks.

Maybe if it's a mystery MC and the first one is good to get them salivating then they start throwing Momo's to them.

Not for any reason but to quench my sadistic side.

Why?

Point 1: Gaia Lotto
Sure. I'd participate. It wouldn't be any different than entering the arena, after all. Odds of winning would probably be better, too, since you wouldn't need to know 5390823409239 different people in order to do well.

As for payout, the avatar arena serves as a good parallel: The pot is 50k. The entry is 1k. The average number of entries each week is about 10k. The amount of gold pulled out of the economy is thus about double the payout. Of course, 50k a week is nothing, really, which is why the avatar arena isn't a very good gold sink, but it would be the same situation with a lotto.


Point 2: Gold Sinks as Games & Events
I would say I doubt gaia's going to release mini games that cost gold to play, but we have cards, slots, and fishing, all of which are very popular and require gold to play. The trick is making a game where it's logical that you'd put money down in order to be able to play. It would have been entirely reasonable to do that with pinball, I agree, and made the trade off more item rewards.

Regarding events acting as gold sinks, I've seen mention by a few dev's saying that it's a strong possibility, so I imagine that's something we can expect to see at some point.

And yes, it's more than likely the MMO will function as a gold sink in several ways.


Point 3: Raising the Marketplace Sales Fee
I'm guessing you weren't active on the site before the current marketplace with it's 2% sales fee was implemented, were you? Judging by your user number, I'm going to say you weren't. If that's the case, go take a look at the 1 year price graph on the marketplace landing page, please. Note the dip round about the end of August of last year, and then note the gradual doubling of marketplace total value over the following months. That's not inflation? Kindly clarify what you mean by inflation if that's the case.

Also note that prior to the implementation of the 2% sales fee, prices in the marketplace across the board had been relatively stable for quite some time, with only the most highly sought after items showing any truly noticeable rates of appreciation.

You also seem to be overlooking the fact that it's not even been two weeks since the bag of win was released and then pulled only a little more than a day later. The amount of gold introduced into the economy from that will not disappear overnight, which is what you seem to be expecting. That, to me, reveals an obvious inattentiveness to what's actually been happening in the marketplace. What is that, you ask? Prices on most items have returned to their pre-bag of win levels. If the only items you're using to estimate overall prices are DIs/MCs, then that's a terrible indicator of overall prices in the market, because they are, almost without exception, the only items on the site that will consistently rise in price over time. It's called appreciation, which =/= inflation.

As for the assertion that the 2% sales fee should be increased, shortly before marketplace 3.0 went live and became default, there was a statement made by someone here in site feedback concerning the fee, and it was this: Sellers will raise their prices to compensate for the fee and will not lower them. This was, of course, in relation to limited edition and very rare items, which is what people usually b***h and moan about when they're talking about prices in the marketplace. With very few exceptions, that statement has held true. This means the sales fee does not hurt the sellers. It hurts the buyers, because they are the ones paying it. Since the gold isn't going to reach the seller's coffers anyway, the sellers won't care so long as someone buys what they're selling.

Now could you clarify why you want the sales fee increased, now that you've been posed reasonable arguments against such an action? And keep in mind that the current fee pissed off a great number of people when it was implemented, it pisses people off now, and it will continue to piss people off as long it's present, regardless of whether or not it's raised, lowered, or left untouched.

The lottery idea sounds nice. Second option that is.

The price on games would not go well I think. I had always firmly believed that the vast majority of people who played Gaia games was done to earn more gold than would have been done via posting and polling. I always assumed it was a way for those who weren't good at exchanging (or didn't have the money/time), and those who couldn't do anything Minishop-related to earn a few extra gold above the usual posting and polling.
Knock on a price tag for the games (besides the prerequirements such as rod for fishing, tokens for casino) and you'll probably find a lot of people complaining about their Gaia 'income' dropping dramatically.
But who knows, it might work.

As for raising taxes, attacking those who complained about the initial tax is not the way to go if you want to see people supporting a further increase. It is quite understandable that they would complain. I'm not sure if you pay taxes in real life but an increase in taxes is not good for anyone who has to bear the tax. And unlike in a real economy, Gaia doesn't give the money back through better facilities/welfare/defence/etc. So of course there will be complaints.
An increase in tax may be possible a year or so on; not so soon after the initial tax.
However, how far would such a tax go? 4%? 5%? 10%? The higher the tax goes, the more people will move back into the Exchange rather than use the marketplace.
This could even end with the higher taxes being LESS of a gold sink than the lower taxes due to the reduced amount of people using the marketplace to trade.

Just think about it. If you had a 4mil item that you wanted to sell, would you sell it in the marketplace in which you'd only get 3,840,000g (under a 4% tax system), or would you sell it in the Exchange where you'd most likely get a higher offer? I'd personally choose the latter.
The higher you increase the tax, the greater the amount of higher-priced items that will leave the marketplace and enter the exchange; thus resulting in a loss of a potential gold sink on those items.

Of course this is a broad generalization like any theory/concept/idea is.

Don't you know who I am? I'm Redimus "banned" Prime, boy. I've been here since free robot sex stopped posting in the GD because he was afraid of being Gaia's first original meme.



Did I say inflation was over? No. I said it slowed and in SOME cases has decreased for various limited edition items.



Prove it.

You can't because the old market didn't have those user friendly graphs and charts.

Inflation is a natural occurrence as the number of users increases and thus so does gold generation and since the tax was implemented there has also been an influx of members signing up, events which are HUGE economy stimulants, and a parade of cash shop items which are mini events in and of themselves. Of course the gold revenue is up, theres alot more gold and a helluvalot more to spend it on.



Bullshit. I'm not expecting a damn thing.

and appreciation on this level is ridiculous. It IS inflation of the worst kind. You can't judge the value of gold based on the prices of commons.

Look at uncommons and ticket bought items. They are up to an astronomical level and have been since the bag. Look it up yourself. Both of these being good indicators since for some reason you seem to be under the impression the price for past MCs is SUPPOSED to shoot up 20k in two days.



Now you've made the mistake of not factoring in the "appreciation" curve yourself and the fact that unless you're the only person left on the site with the item, its still a competitive market.

Which is going to sell faster, the fire gauntlet who's price involved calculating in the 2% tax, or the gauntlet who's seller saw what that first gauntlet was selling for and was priced for less?

The only reason prices for old MCs and event items has risen is SOLEY due to the normal process of things. The 2% tax is a NONFACTOR when figuring the price for selling anything.



It only pisses you off because you WANT to be pissed off. You've fooled yourself into thinking every seller on the market place has conspired to make sure the tax punishes only the buyers and have committed to blinding yourself to the natural fact that all but the most rarest of items will ignore the petty tax in the presence of the more pressing issue that is the competition of other sellers. The only prices the 2% tax might affect is items so rare there are no other sellers, in which case the seller will pump every single gold he possibly can out of you anyway. Including removing the item from the marketplace and trading privately if need be.

I've heard these arguments before and they're not intelligent or reasonable. Its just what ignorant users need to tell themselves when they sell an item and see a tiny piece of gold taken directly out as a result.

I pictured the lottery ending and some one's ticket turning golden with a description change to reflect their success.

No parade, no floats, just a new lottery starts and the winner quietly cashes in for their prize.

....Actually you gave the best argument I've ever heard.

No attempts at pretending like you're some kind of professional on fake economies, no blind assertions towards anything, no marketplace screen shot meant to prove your point when all it really proves is that the new market is alot more user friendly.

Just good, honest, "MAH GOLDS!".

To which I would just like to reply: Maybe you could put up a sign in your shop encouraging patrons to buy from you through private trade so the tax isn't an issue?

Or making it a habit to PM sellers yourself and offer a decent price so they don't have to deal with it.