Official New Tier Proposal

[Rosie Gray]

I am truly amazed, befuddled, flabbergasted, god smacked, baffled, and any other words I can come up with to describe the resistance the new tier proposal is being subjected to.

As it is now we have approximately 55 citizens with maybe a dozen or so being active and in-world a decent amount of time.

Me too Trebor, but I've come to see that just about ANYTHING that anyone wants to do to actually CHANGE and IMPROVE the CDS is met this way. There is too much talk, too much caution, and too many people who aren't active in-world and specifically not active within the CDS sims that want to maintain control. That's how I see this anyway.

There is a difference between being cautious and planning for the future, and being completely stagnant. That's where we are now.

[Sudane Erato]

Trebor, for the life of me I cannot understand what the community purchase price of each sim, and the subsequent sale price of parcels to residents, has to do with a discussion of tier. You yourself have acknowledged in other posts that the discussions should be separate. I know you feel emotional about this subject, but for the sake of others who are trying to understand the issues here, can we not confine that topic to a different time?

The other point I’d like to bring up is the fact that August 2008 is the first month that the financial statements of the C.D.S. were made available for public viewing. I don’t know how it was done before August 2008.

Since April 2005 (the month that NFS was purchased) there has been a monthly report of our finances published... forgive me for being rather proud of this fact. Of course, the website did not exist then, and I do not recall how that report was distributed. I think that for many months it was available on the wiki we used to have... Aliasi or Claude may recall. I've been working on a long term project (originally for the archive project that Publius was doing) to make uniform those reports and place them in an easily accessible place, which I am close to doing. Anyone who wishes to see any report since April 2005 should ask me for it... I'll be more than happy to provide them.

Since August 2008, through thick and very little thin, the C.D.S. has continued to amass an impressive amount of funds which currently totals as of the April 2011 financial statement, US$14,069.40, that’s 13 months of reserves for all 5 sims at 0% occupancy. For an estate that touts itself as not being a for profit entity it sure has a considerable amount of profit.

Again and again there is expressed by many this sense of "sin" of accumulating "too much" money. May I offer an alternate point of view? Having ample cash reserves gives an entity such as our community strength. It gives us the flexibility to embark on one-time expenditures... investments in the community... which if we were "cash poor" we would have to borrow. Investments in the community might include the cash purchase of new sims or a project-based investment in *professional* promotional services which could do more than anything else to expand our population and our recognition in the larger SL community, indeed, even in the RL world! I have said over and over again til I am blue in the face that the problem is NOT that we are collecting too much in tiers (others in this thread have testified that our tier rates are in a middle zone), but rather that we are not spending enough! We should use our reserves to invest in the long term future of our community and not squander it by subsidizing resident tiers.

As to the likelihood of losing money under this proposal, I again point you to this simple chart that I did some weeks ago:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreads ... utput=html

As per discussion earlier in this thread, it is not at all certain that lowering tier will increase our occupancy rate. The chart simply assumes the same occupancy with the various lower rates discussed in the RA, certainly a highly possible and reasonable assumption.

Sudane.............................

[Moonrise Azalee]

I apologize for bringing up the purchase price.
But is it possible at all that any or that revenue is FROM purchases, and not just tiers?
I guess what I'm saying, is that I don't think a lower tier fee will bring in new people.

I think that making that tier fee easy to find will encourage new people, as for myself, as a seasoned land 'owner' and tenant, it was not being able to find it that put me off. Once I DID find it, I was relieved to see the tiers were well priced.

I also agree with Sudane that having that money is a great safety net. It also can be used for maybe upgrading existing buildings, creating beautiful spaces, maybe even a new Sim. Having an excess is a great way to ensure that we can go forward. If tiers are to be lowered, then I think looking at popular areas to live, and comparing their tier fees is the best thing to do. I don't think they need to be lowered very much.

*And Sudane, that document is quite scary.
As I said, most people can't even find the tier fee when browsing land, so I don't think the current price has anything to do with that. And looking at your document, if the trend continues, lowering tier fees will put us even more in the red.*

(I also like what Rosie said about making the purchase price include a month of tier.
If we have such a surplus, than rather than lowering the tier fees, giving a move in bonus would be great, and I realize that is best left for another discussion.)

[Rose Springvale]

Trebor, thank you for all your hard work and research. I agree, i don't know what all the resistance is about. I am sorry to say you are not the first person to feel the frustration of working with CDS on these matters.

Sudane has kept and reported all the information over the years.. most of it you can find if you dig back in the forums. You've got the bulk of it though. Her job is largely thankless, but she has diligently and consistently reported her information in a format that works for her. We don't ..all agree with her conclusions, but the numbers are there for us to argue about.

New sims in Second life sold for 1800 usd when CN, AM and probably LA were brought on line. I don't think all of our sims were purchased as new sims, but i'm pretty sure at least CN was, which addresses what seems like exhorbitant pricing at the time, if they cost what they cost now. No reason to worry too much about that. There are also two other points in history which tried to deal with some of the issues: In November 2008 to February 2009, the then Chancellor Jamie Palisades brought a plan to reduce land surplus to the RA. After much thrashing about, it was agreed that we could sell repossessed land in CDS for $0, so long as we collected two months tier up front. My recollection is foggy and i'm travelling so i don't have all my records with me, but i think we sold 22 parcels at that time. LA has been plagued by being popular with individuals who start projects, are not happy with the results and then leave... generally abandoning the land. ONLY during that three month period, and the more recent arbitrary pricing that the current chancellor has instituted, has land sold for anything other than the current list prices, as far as i know. (For those who are new, i was Deputy Chancellor in charge of land sales then, and it was my job to know.)

There was also a no cost land transfer and tier concession of 50% of the tier listed for six months for commercial land designated as available for such treatment by the chancellor. A few businesses availed themselves of the opportunity, but i don't think any of them stayed beyond the initial term, with the exception of Sonja's parcel in NFS.

The biggest problem i have with this whole scenario is the $14000 reserve. Folks, we are not growing. We are not buying sims. We don't seem to have any interest in investing in things that make the sims more fun for the people who use them... see the arguments on water sims, sandboxes and expansion of the schloss elsewhere in these forums. What big project is it that you all anticipate will come along from Second Life?? Some have indicated that the Al Andalus project was something we couldn't have done without the reserves, yet... the numbers speak for themselves. Al Andalus cost CDS nothing.

Personally, i don't care if the tier remains the same, having divested myself of most of my land. (I did keep it for several months hoping something would come of campaign promises, but finally gave up. It would not be a bad idea for someone in CDS to care about citizen RETENTION as well as bringing in new folks.) What i do care about is that CDS have a plan that addresses SPENDING that money, even it if is just to pay builders, pay accountants, or maybe return some of it to the citizens who made it grow. It is a sad thing to see a community that grew to what it was based on the blood, sweat, tears and VOLUNTEER hours of teaching, building and holding events now become a place that pays for everything, but i personally would rather see that than the growing balance in an account that someday someone will have to deal with. In the unhappy event that anything ever happens to Sudane, are you all going to be happy making a $14000 + gift to her estate??

[Beathan]

Just to clarify my position -- I am not opposed to reducing tier, I am rather skeptical that reducing tier will have any positive effect on the CDS or immigration to the CDS. To me, the movement to reduce tier is harmful because it is a distraction from real actions, changes, or proposals that are more likely to produce a benefit to the CDS.

I am concerned that tier modification is a sideshow distracting us from the real issues, with the secondary effect of reducing revenue which would be better spent on real change and projects.

Beathan

[Rosie Gray]

For my part, I just don't see the point in continuing to make more reserves. I can really appreciate that it's good, even fantastic to have a healthy backup fund in the event that we need it, but $14,000 is just huge. Maybe reducing tier a bit would help bring more people, and perhaps finding some other way to use some of the funds to bring new people - and as Rose pointed out - retain people could be found as well.

It's also a good point that Rose made about what would happen if something put Sudane out of commission. Sudane, I really, really hope nothing like that scenario ever comes about, but it is of course a possibility and should be considered. I have no idea if it has been addressed or not. I apologize if that is off topic and if it makes anyone uncomfortable (especially Sudane).

[Moonrise Azalee]

I was just browsing through the forum re: sim ideas etc. (which I posted in)
Some of those ideas were fantastic.
What about following through with some of those expansions/rebuilding of NFS, and some of those other fantastic ideas.
After those expenses are all said and done, then look at the tier fees again and see what there is to work with.
I'm not sure what sort of cost there is associated with redesigning land etc, improving some of the older builds, but wouldn't it make sense to start on one of those projects, and then review what sort of surplus there is?
The CDS region is great, but there really isn't anything to 'do'.
Rose says:

We don't seem to have any interest in investing in things that make the sims more fun for the people who use them... see the arguments on water sims, sandboxes and expansion of the schloss elsewhere in these forums.

That's just sad. Really sad.
It also makes me think that maybe these forums should be private to those not registered, because the signs in CDS bring you to the main site, which brings you to here, and reading this sort of thing is kind of deflating.

[Trebor Warcliffe]

I go to work for eight hours and come home and I have five responses to my latest posting, HOOORAH!!! Now it's 2am on Tuesday and I am actually posting this on the forum. Rosie, you and I are shipmates on the USS No Where Fast. No matter how much time, effort, and hard work we put into something it never reaches past the point of discussion. In the year I’ve been a citizen of the C.D.S. I’ve witnessed and experienced firsthand this situation. When I think about it, the song Whipping Post from the Allman Brothers Band comes to mind. It’s like “ok how many times am I going to subject myself to the whipping post before I say enough, I’m done?” If you read older forum postings you will see that unfortunately for the C.D.S. this has happened; the loss of good, hard working, in-world, active citizens who have volunteered countless hours of their time and contributed real-life money on a monthly basis through citizenship, that have basically said “that’s it, I’m done, I’m tired, I’m beaten, I’ve had all I can take.” Myself, I’ve been accused directly to my face of being an alt of Rose Springvale and I heard through the grapevine that when I first arrived in the C.D.S. some thought I might be an alt of Arrias Ahern, at least I think that was his name. Thankfully, I can say that I’ve never been attacked personally by anyone in-world or in the forums as many of my predecessors have been subjected to. One reason may be that I refuse to engage in attacks against anyone whether I like them or not. I may not agree with someone’s opinions or statements but I will always respect each and every one of my fellow citizens in the C.D.S. For some citizens, past and present, I have nothing but respect and admiration for what they’ve contributed/accomplished in the C.D.S. Sudane, you are one of these people. I may not agree with you on certain points and I will let it known if I don’t but I will never disrespect you as an individual, saying that I will now address your response to my previous posting.

Sudane Erato wrote: Trebor, for the life of me I cannot understand what the community purchase price of each sim, and the subsequent sale price of parcels to residents, has to do with a discussion of tier. You yourself have acknowledged in other posts that the discussions should be separate. I know you feel emotional about this subject, but for the sake of others who are trying to understand the issues here, can we not confine that topic to a different time?

It is not uncommon for issues to be intertwined so to speak. Rosie Gray stated in a previous posting, “I wouldn't want to see these reserves drained substantially, but I do question why there is such a huge reserve. “ Whether we like it or not some issues are connected. How did we amass over US$14,000 in reserves, by the collection of tier and the original sale and subsequent sales of parcels. Yes it is an issue that should be addressed in a separate forum posting but in order for me to answer Rosie’s question correctly I had to explain it.

My statement, “I don’t know how it was done before August 2008,” is not an accusation or a suggestion of any hanky panky. It is a simple statement that through all my research and readings I didn’t see how the financial statements were handled before August of 2008. My emphasis was that from the beginnings of the C.D.S. until the first financial statement was presented on the web portal, the C.D.S. had already amassed over $6,000 in reserves.

Sudane Erato wrote: Again and again there is expressed by many this sense of "sin" of accumulating "too much" money. May I offer an alternate point of view? Having ample cash reserves gives an entity such as our community strength. It gives us the flexibility to embark on one-time expenditures... investments in the community... which if we were "cash poor" we would have to borrow. Investments in the community might include the cash purchase of new sims or a project-based investment in *professional* promotional services which could do more than anything else to expand our population and our recognition in the larger SL community, indeed, even in the RL world! I have said over and over again til I am blue in the face that the problem is NOT that we are collecting too much in tiers (others in this thread have testified that our tier rates are in a middle zone), but rather that we are not spending enough! We should use our reserves to invest in the long term future of our community and not squander it by subsidizing resident tiers.

So is the question, how much is too much, when it comes to our accumulation of money? If it is than I direct everyone’s attention to the C.D.S. Code of Laws.

NL 4-6 Financial Reserves Act

The city shall move 1 month’s tier in USD to a separate line item (reserve account), and make those funds unavailable for other use.
Funds in the account shall be distributed at the discretion of the RA to pay recurring expenses in the event of a sudden and unexpected drop in $USD income.
The city shall augment this account as funds are available until it contains enough funds to pay all recurring city expenses for a period of two months absent other income.

Passed 8 February 2006

Based on the last financial statement posted on the web portal two months of tier cost and all other expenses would be $2,495.18 I have no problem with the alternate point of view that you present here. I have to give props to Rose at this point. Her response to your alternate point of view nails it on the head.

Rose Springvale wrote: The biggest problem i have with this whole scenario is the $14000 reserve. Folks, we are not growing. We are not buying sims. We don't seem to have any interest in investing in things that make the sims more fun for the people who use them... see the arguments on water sims, sandboxes and expansion of the schloss elsewhere in these forums. What big project is it that you all anticipate will come along from Second Life??

Once again I will reiterate the fact that I have brought up the point of investing in the long-term future of our community. I do not feel lowering tier is a form of subsidizing resident tiers. Some in the forums keep harping on the point that lowering tier isn’t a guarantee our population will increase. That’s correct, it isn’t a guarantee and it isn’t the only thing we need to do. I’ve also mentioned setting up a few embassies in popular estates such as Caledon and New Toulouse, setting up some press releases or writing up some actual points of interest news articles, running advertisements on some of the more popular forms of media on the grid. So please quit trying to pigeonhole me into just wanting to lower tier, my plans are much larger than just that one issue. Obviously what we are currently doing isn’t working as is apparent by the mass exodus of citizens.

Moonrise Azalee, though we haven’t met in-world yet I will say that it is a pleasure to make your acquaintance. My one year anniversary in the C.D.S. was June 16th. Unlike you and Rosie, who joined the C.D.S. June 6th of last year, all but 3 weeks of my Second Life experience has been in the C.D.S. While I can’t speak for anyone but myself I do feel that some of my fellow citizens are encouraged by new citizens that agree that bringing a positive attitude to the table, making improvements, progress, and moving forward isn’t something to be frowned upon and is in fact a good thing. I look forward to working alongside you in taking the C.D.S. to the next level. Now I will take the time to respond to some of your postings.

If you haven’t read my report that I have provided a link to at the beginning of the post I ask that you take an hour or two and please do read it. I’ve presented comparisons of tier using the following estates or areas: Linden Labs Mainland, Linden Lab Private Region, Azure Islands, Nova Islands, Caledon, Fruit Island, Zoha Islands, Solace Beach Estates, RGF Estates Inc, Fantasy World Estates, Dreamland Sims, Italy Real Estate, New Toulouse, Hivoa Holdings, Kendalwood Virtual Estates, and Bell Estates. I think you will find the information provided quite informative. If you are having trouble viewing it than please let me know and I will email you a personal copy.

Moonrise Azalee wrote: 1)As it stands right now, the majority of parcels don't have a tier amount even on them, so this is not as likely to draw in new occupants. In order to even know what the tier is, one needs to go here, and go there, and click this, and click that, and in fact, as someone who runs quite a few websites, I would look at that round-the-bush access to info and worry that perhaps the community was not very up to date, and prefer to put my money elsewhere. As I mentioned, with the high purchase price, one would assume the tier is also high and possibly not even look further.

I strongly agree with your views here. I experienced the same problem when I started exploring the C.D.S. late May of last year. I was happy though that there was an actual website to go and explore. I’m sure when the web portal was first developed and brought online it was a major improvement on how things were done previously.

Moonrise Azalee wrote: Top notch site, up to date easy to access information, move-in bonuses, and constant monitoring of lag-causing items. That's what kind of stuff we have to compete with these days in Second Life.

Yes it is but unfortunately with the few amount of active citizens we have it makes it very difficult to get things done as you have been witnessing.

Rose Springvale you are another individual I have nothing but respect and admiration for what you’ve contributed/accomplished in the C.D.S. and whatever your detractors may say about you they can’t deny all you’ve done in and for the C.D.S. In regards to your response to my post, thank you for providing some clarification on the original purchases of the sims and other attempts in the past of addressing land issues.

Beathan, thank you for your contributions to my postings and say I found your post on your experience in land sales informative. Currently though we’re not addressing that issue in this thread and Chancellor Tor is making an effort to selling our land at more competitive rates. I do ask for one clarification, when you mention the word sim, as in “I think the critical point is to make more sims interested in the CDS” you are using the word sim to mean an individual right, or a person?

Beathan wrote: Based on that, I have changed my opinion about changing our pricing or tier structures and now agree with Sudane that we should not do so. If we are to adjust pricing or tier, I would favor raising, rather than lowering, them and using the funds realized as a result in a community building or sim beautification project or a publicity campaign.

Raising tier? Really? We don’t need to raise funds Beathan we already have $14,000 that we can use a little bit of responsibly to help our community.

Beathan wrote: I would like to propose something which is the converse of Sudane's circuit-breaker proposal on the tier reduction. I would propose setting occupancy goals which, if met, would then trigger a tier reduction (so, if the occupancy rate does not increase, tier does not decrease; however, I do not have a recommendation on whether we should have triggered tier increases if occupancy decreases -- either before or after an initial goal is met).

From all of my research I can’t find any solid information that the C.D.S. has suffered from as low of an occupancy rating as it is currently under. I’ve come to this conclusion through two ways. The first is the financial statements Sudane began posting on the web portal. Nowhere in the financial statements does a significant decrease in tier revenue present itself in a consistent basis. I don’t suspect the occupancy rate in December 2010 was truly as low as the tier revenue for that month. I say that because in January 2011 our tier revenue was over US$1,700 which I feel was probably a result of tier being paid late or if I remember correctly a possible change in collection practices to the 15th of each month. Your proposal is a wait and see proposal where mine is a pro active proposal. Yes we do have the funds to wait and see what happens but I don’t think the majority of us want to wait and see. We want action and we want results.

Beathan wrote: Just to clarify my position -- I am not opposed to reducing tier, I am rather skeptical that reducing tier will have any positive effect on the CDS or immigration to the CDS. To me, the movement to reduce tier is harmful because it is a distraction from real actions, changes, or proposals that are more likely to produce a benefit to the CDS.

I am concerned that tier modification is a sideshow distracting us from the real issues, with the secondary effect of reducing revenue which would be better spent on real change and projects.

Please bring to the table your ideas for real action, changes and proposals that whether or not we do lower the tier, will produce a benefit to the C.D.S. As I have explained earlier, the situation in the C.D.S. goes beyond just the tier issue and any positive contributions that will benefit our community are strongly encouraged to be shared.

Moonrise Azalee wrote: I was just browsing through the forum re: sim ideas etc. (which I posted in)
Some of those ideas were fantastic. What about following through with some of those expansions/rebuilding of NFS, and some of those other fantastic ideas. After those expenses are all said and done, then look at the tier fees again and see what there is to work with.
I'm not sure what sort of cost there is associated with redesigning land etc, improving some of the older builds, but wouldn't it make sense to start on one of those projects, and then review what sort of surplus there is? The CDS region is great, but there really isn't anything to 'do'.

Moonrise, yes some of those ideas are fantastic and I know that there are even more fantastic ideas amongst our citizenship that has yet been brought to the table. That is another reason I found the C.D.S. such an interesting estate we are not confined to a one theme estate. Caledon is an awesome estate but it is only a Steam Punk Victorian Estate. Right now the C.D.S. isn’t a Bavarian estate or a Roman or Greek Estate or an Alpine estate and no matter what type of awesome and cool themed sims we bring online into the C.D.S. the C.D.S. we always be Second Life’s oldest democratically ran estate. That is our essence, our backbone, our “it” factor. Everything we do moving forward increases that essence, backbone, and “it” factor.

In my opinion though we have to take care of what we have now before we start any expansions. With our current vacancy rate we have the opportunity of gaining quite a few new citizens who see the beautiful prospects we have in the C.D.S. Citizens we hope will be active, in-world, and willing to contribute their time and hard work just as our forefathers have done.

So here’s what I’ve come up with and I’ll reiterate this is not the only thing the C.D.S. needs to do, we need marketing, promotional ideas, incorporating Hippo in-world completely etc., etc., but I do feel this will be an aggressive yet responsible step forward. Let’s reduce the tier to the 75% occupancy rate. I credit Moonrise for planting the seeds for this next one. Let’s place all available parcels up for sale for the cost of one month’s tier, that’s it. No sale price plus one month’s tier, no sale price plus the remaining days of the month free, just plain and simple you want to buy a parcel pay one month’s tier and your next month’s tier isn’t due until 30 days later. I do need to remind everyone that any new sims we bring online will not be the same tier of the original 5. Most likely any new sims will have a higher rate than my current proposals. Honestly I haven’t had the time to calculate the ratio of public land to private land and single prim sims to double prim sims that will be needed to maintain the same rates for the new sims we bring online. The two main challenges in developing my tier proposal was a consistent tier across all sims and double prim sims being double the tier rate of single prim sims.

In closing my wife has given me a honey-do list that I need to tend to. I am taking a sabbatical from the forums and from Second Life until after 4pm EST on Thursday 06/23/11. I’m looking forward to exploring the Second Life 8th Birthday Celebration and what awaits me when I return to the forum. Thank you and good night.

Trebor Warcliffe

[Sudane Erato]

I credit Moonrise for planting the seeds for this next one. Let’s place all available parcels up for sale for the cost of one month’s tier, that’s it. No sale price plus one month’s tier, no sale price plus the remaining days of the month free, just plain and simple you want to buy a parcel pay one month’s tier and your next month’s tier isn’t due until 30 days later.

I like that idea too, but let me explain how it would work, using the Hippo system, and we can see if everyone agrees with the implications.

All parcels for sale would be set for sale for zero L$s. Anyone could come along and buy the land. But, we would make it very clear in a sign or message or in the parcel description that the sale was not complete until you paid the Hippo sign (changing it, of course, from "For Sale" to its tiny "T"). Our sim caretakers could survey the sims on a regular basis and report any purchased parcels which still had signs that said for sale. Rudeen would then have to re-possess those parcels.

In essence, then, the parcels would be sold "for free". In general I'm not against this, with 2 provisos. (1) Those people who have indeed bought their parcels may feel this is unfair that new residents get their parcels for free. (2) Should we ever wish to add new sims to the CDS, we will then be required to pay for them from the reserves, since no sale price will come in to recoup the purchase price (which is how the sale prices were arrived at originally). If all new sim purchases will rely on the reserves, we may see the sinfully high level of the reserves in a new light.

An alternative management process, which would not change the fact that the parcels are sold for free, might be to set all parcels for sale for L$10,000,000, with a note about what the actual deal is and the suggestion that you contact a designated person (like the Chancellor) if you wish to buy. That would reduce the number of purchasers with no intent to pay tier, but add to the work of the land manager. That manager would, of course, change the purchase price to zero.

If we do this, the Hippo sign itself advertises the tier amount. Some have reported that the Hippo sign is NOT telling them the amount of their own tier when it comes time to pay, and this is a problem which will have to be addressed. It's great to have a tier collection box, but useless if you don't know how much to pay.

Sudane..........................

[Rose Springvale]

It is better not to set land to $0 L on the sl grid unless you set the buyer to a specific person. There are still bots in SL that are set to buy land from the unwary who set it for 0 and automatically take over. A better practice is to set each parcel for the one month tier purchase price. Making clear on land parcels that tier is due at the meter is the standard practice in most of Second life.

Trebor, you are doing a great job. Thanks for not being bullied.

This is, btw, the exact system Jamie and i tried to make standard in CDS over a year ago... only then the RA required two months tier. The successor RA did not take up the charge, and so the CDS returned to the prior system and we all see the results.

I also agree 100% that tier and reserves are inextricably interwoven and reject Sudane's contention that they are not. Emotionally or otherwise... this is an issue that must be dealt with. We can't have a self run government when all the safety valves are placed in the hands of unelected individuals. Communities such as ours are built on trust, and trust is evidenced by institutions... not who is buddies with whom.

[Beathan]

Trebor --

By "sim" I mean an individual SL avatar.

I find the substantive ideas in your proposal, other than the tier increase, worthwhile and worth pursuing in their entirety and immediately. I have little to add in the way of activities (I am not a social doyenne, and am utterly depressed by Rose's apparent demoralization for that reason). I have proposed a mechanism for increasing virtual diplomacy and partnership with other communities. Other than that, I don't have much in the way of my own proposals.

I would certainly support funding a much broader range of outreach programs than we have, even if it reduces our reserve. However, I would not want to spend down reserves without a plan. Before committing the old-money sin of spending capital, we should have a set reserve that we will not dip into and we should also have specific other amounts set aside from that for other contingencies or longterm plans. Unlike RL ventures, we don't have access to credit, venture capital, or insurance -- so our reserves must serve these functions and allow us to respond to opportunities and losses with our own resources. Unlike RL governments, we do not have taxation or traditional fees and cannot seek credit through public bond measures to cover budget-busts. We should anticipate the cost of such events, even if they appear unlikely, and preserve reserve amounts to cover them. (In fact, we should probably estimate the cost and then reserve double that amount because, in my experience in RL, expansion or loss usually costs much more than the worst-case preloss estimate.) Thus, we should consciously set and maintain: 1. a general reserve (probably no less than one-year's operating expenses, assuming no revenue); 2. a rainy-day reserve to be accessed to eke out the budget through some formal process but with a goal of generally maintaining it as a healthy level; 3. the equivalent of a self-insurance reserve (possibly in combination with other SL organizations to create a self-insurance pool); and 4. a growing expansion or special project fund -- call it a sunny-day fund -- which can either be earmarked for some particular event or provide a funding source to tap to meet new opportunities or fund new ideas and development when they arise.

I think that, when we consciously value all these items, $14,000 will seem like a more realistic reserve amount (although my hunch is that it will still be a little high (say $3,000 gen reserve; $500 rainy day fund; $5,000 insurance fund; leaving $5,500 sunny-day fund, which seems like an amount that makes the sunny-day fund ripe to use for some special project)).

Beathan

[FernLeissa]

I support implementing the following tier rate reductions, suggested by Trebor on June 16th 2011:

US$ 3.25 per 512 sq Neufreistadt and Colonia Nova
US$ 6.50 per 512 sq Alpine Meadows and Locus Amoenus
US$ 10.12 per 512 sq Monastery

These reductions are based on a breakeven point of 81 % occupancy. I know that many are concerned about the vacancy rate and our ability to achieve 81% occupancy. Others have argued that it has not been demonstrated that reducing tier will bring in more people. These are both important points, but I do not believe that we can reason our way to certainty on either.

On the other hand, we have clearly met and greatly exceeded the reserve requirements of NL 4-6, which requires a reserve of 1 month’s tier and if possible two months reserve for recurring expenses. The good fortune of having funds greatly exceeding our reserve requirements gives us the ability to innovate and experiment with ways to re-grow our community. The risks of experimenting with tier reduction are possible to consider because of this surplus. Upgrading our builds and landscapes is possible because of these funds. Hosting different kinds of events is possible because of these funds. Purchasing new sims is possible because of these funds.

I have not worried about the demise of Sudane (I have gone to the temples of Diana and Minerva to ask these gods to grant her eternal life… just to make sure). I am worried about the demise of C.D.S. We can’t run much longer on the accomplishments of the past. The C.D.S. is currently in our care. We need to bring our energy and our imagination and get moving. I am not sure what will work, but I am virtually certain (no pun intended) that sitting here, guarding the status quo will do us in.

Also, somewhere in this tier reduction discussion we have lost the idea that this was also meant to benefit existing CDS citizens. In fact the discussion began with several citizens saying they would like to buy more land here but found both the cost of the land and the tier high, relative to what they could purchase elsewhere.

Fern

[Rosie Gray]

I support implementing the following tier rate reductions, suggested by Trebor on June 16th 2011:

US$ 3.25 per 512 sq Neufreistadt and Colonia Nova
US$ 6.50 per 512 sq Alpine Meadows and Locus Amoenus
US$ 10.12 per 512 sq Monastery

I also support these tier reduction suggestions. Let's get past this point and start implementing some of the other ideas as well.

[Moonrise Azalee]

I support implementing the following tier rate reductions, suggested by Trebor on June 16th 2011:

US$ 3.25 per 512 sq Neufreistadt and Colonia Nova
US$ 6.50 per 512 sq Alpine Meadows and Locus Amoenus
US$ 10.12 per 512 sq Monastery

Is this tier? Or purchase price?

Right now, Tor has re-set the prices of some of these areas already. Currently, Monastery is 4500 for 512 m2. $8.8/sqm

I find the previous suggestion, purchase price at one months tier, to be fair and reasonable and far more likely to draw in new tenants.
Also, after reading through the documents provided, and really thinking about the large reserve of funds, I will go on record as saying I am in favour of a tier reduction.

One thing I noticed is that there is a parcel, in CN, that has only 84 prims available and is selling for 18,000 L! The old AK Creations site.
I think we really need to comb through these and fix these.
Right now, a person comes to CDS, and sees a rather ludicrous scattering of odd prices all over the place.
Perhaps the people selling their properties can have them bought out by CDS (if they are overpriced) and just get it re-set.

Sudane- I havent ever set up Hippo myself, but I don't understand why the pricing issue is so complicated. Not meaning that YOU are making it complicated, but just not understanding why there isnt a simpler way.

Is there not just a way to change the purchase price to the cost of one month's tier (heck, if I could, I would go to each property and re-write the info on it)
And set the meter to not accept tier for one month after payment?
I've used rental boxes that allow me to pay more than a month at a time, as well as many other options. Lionheart for example (sorry to keep bringing them up, but ive been a long time resident, lol) you pay your 'set up' fee and then when next tier is due, you get a reminder message saying to pay, and you go to your box and pay.

Also, Trebor, thank you very much for taking so much time to work on this and helping it to make sense.

Of course I'd like lower tier fees, though im selling my monastery and will be sticking to just NFS (I want to see if anything changes in any other areas in CDS and maybe i'll buy there in the future), but I just REALLY wanted to see some of the other changes and wasn't sure what kind of costs would be involved.

[Sudane Erato]

Is there not just a way to change the purchase price to the cost of one month's tier (heck, if I could, I would go to each property and re-write the info on it) And set the meter to not accept tier for one month after payment? I've used rental boxes that allow me to pay more than a month at a time, as well as many other options. Lionheart for example (sorry to keep bringing them up, but ive been a long time resident, lol) you pay your 'set up' fee and then when next tier is due, you get a reminder message saying to pay, and you go to your box and pay.

I am NOT an expert by any means on the Hippo system. I'm using it in New England for rentals, and here we are using it for tier. If any of my understandings of how it works are wrong, I will be HAPPY to be set straight.

The Hippo system has no direct connection with the land, except to count prims on the parcel it sits on (a feature we can't use). It simply accepts payments, counts how long since its been that you've paid, and reminds you to pay again. So.... There is no way to have the Hippo box sell you the parcel, or even know that the parcel has been bought.

OK, so we've set all the parcels for one month's tier purchase price. That would be fine. A new owner buys the parcel. The Hippo box on the parcel (actually, next to the parcel) still says "For Sale". It doesn't know that the parcel was sold. The only way for the "free month tier" to happen next would be for a Hippo administrator to log into the Hippo site and set the tenancy paid for a month... something I think they can do (not totally sure). Once that is done, then, yes, the Hippo box will no longer say "For Sale", and the new owner will be OK for a month. Mind you, the new owner will never have used the Hippo box there, so they may have no awareness of all this, and they'll have to be contacted and educated.

So... yes... we could do that. I hope someone volunteers to be the administrator of all that.

Sudane.........................................