Just an idea..............

[NightFlyer]

"People at money houses get a "kickback" for some items used by a player that visits the moneyhouse. Why not do the same for ALL other catagories, if you use a book from a bookcase at a skillhouse, the owner of the bookcase gets a simolean. Use a craft bench, use a piano etc etc...the owner gets a simolean and so on and so on. This would be a great way to offset the cost of food for the owners. Just an idea."


Although this might be great for the owners and all I doubt the devs are looking for more ways for sims to generate money. They are, after all, looking at more ways for us to spend RL money with them.

I think any kickbacks generated now (and code doesn't generate any kickbacks, btw) will be done away with if the recent changes are any indication of the furture changes.

Sorry to burst any bubbles. And just my observations.

 

[Keep It Real]

<blockquote><hr>

"People at money houses get a "kickback" for some items used by a player that visits the moneyhouse. Why not do the same for ALL other catagories, if you use a book from a bookcase at a skillhouse, the owner of the bookcase gets a simolean. Use a craft bench, use a piano etc etc...the owner gets a simolean and so on and so on. This would be a great way to offset the cost of food for the owners. Just an idea."


Although this might be great for the owners and all I doubt the devs are looking for more ways for sims to generate money. They are, after all, looking at more ways for us to spend RL money with them.

I think any kickbacks generated now (and code doesn't generate any kickbacks, btw) will be done away with if the recent changes are any indication of the furture changes.

Sorry to burst any bubbles. And just my observations.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah, and they did just lower the cost of the barfett also. Guess it's time to screw over the money houses now and pull the kickbacks from them. Just to be fair mind you.

 

[imported_Gracie Nito]

I doubt seriously the money houses would miss their $1 kickbacks. It doesn't really feed their guests. They have the advantage of earning money while they host. The kickback for being the owner of a pizza table hurt a littel more tho

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Carrie so what you're saying is its ok for the owners of money houses to get a kick back for people using their objects but its not ok for other lot owners to get the same consideration? That to you is fair and a level playing field? What planet are you from? Isnt the point to wiping all the money from everyone so its a level and fair field? Well plus EA wants you to buy money from that but we all know that now. Letting money lots get extra cash for object usage but not allowing other lots to have the same advantage isnt a fair and level playing field.

I agree that if other lots were to get kick backs there would need to be safe gaurds in place as so its not abused. But I do feel if money houses are allowed to still get kick backs then so should other houses, otherwise stop letting money house owners from having an unfair advantage. It costs skill houses and service lots money to feed their guests just as much as it does money lots. Fair is fair!

I never said I wasnt for fixing things so people cant cheat or "exploit". But I do believe if we are going to make this a game where it "HAS to be fair for everyone to play and earn money" than do so! You can not have it both ways, whats fair for one should be fair for all.

You cant tell me that they can't fix this to where its a fair system because that all we hear that they are attempting to do in the first place.

These things need to be addressed and fixed asap. I believe thats what most are saying here, which makes perfect sense to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll repeat what I said here again:

<blockquote><hr>

Absolutely not. Money houses are, by very nature, *for* earning a PROFIT, therefore it is totally understandable that kickbacks would apply there and not anywhere else

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I think it's fair. None of the other categories are set up to earn a profit, with the exception of stores, though through a different mechanism. All the other categories focus on other things besides getting rich sim-wise. Why isn't it a fair and level playing field? Because *anybody* who has becoming wealthy in sim-terms as their primary goal has the option of owning or being a roomie in a money house, or spending as much time as they care to in a money house to earn that money. People who choose to have houses in different categories are supposed to have different primary goals. It's fair in the same vein that having maxed motives and skills on residential lots but not being able to make money is fair. Nobody *has* to pick one category or the other. If the category of house we chose to have or host in was dictated to us, THAT would not be a fair or level playing field, because then not everybody who wanted to get rich could. In the present system, anybody who doesn't want to be a sim-pauper doesn't have to be......that seems pretty fair to me. *shrugs*

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

None of the other categories are set up to earn a profit

[/ QUOTE ]

Where is it written that someone running a skill lot should not be able to make a profit from it?

The tools are there for us to use - buffets can be set to charge, paydoors can be set for entering an area.

It is the players that have chosen not to use them. If when EALand opens, skill lot owners do not attempt to at least recover their costs (making a profit would be more useful to them) then we won't be seeing many skill houses open ....

Its an interesting idea KIR and I like Ronin's suggestion of per skill point.

Polly

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

None of the other categories are set up to earn a profit

[/ QUOTE ]

Where is it written that someone running a skill lot should not be able to make a profit from it?

The tools are there for us to use - buffets can be set to charge, paydoors can be set for entering an area.

It is the players that have chosen not to use them. If when EALand opens, skill lot owners do not attempt to at least recover their costs (making a profit would be more useful to them) then we won't be seeing many skill houses open ....

Its an interesting idea KIR and I like Ronin's suggestion of per skill point.

Polly

[/ QUOTE ]

At least doing it as you say with buffets, pay doors and tip jars would be more of the commumity supporting itself as a whole, rather than EA giving them money through the kickback. What you're referring to is just part of having a thriving economy, which is the point of all this to begin with. Time will tell whether or not the community will support this in the new city or not. Maybe with the top 100 lists gone, and therefore there being no dog-fight for VH and therefore the willingness to give everything away like that, something like this will be more accepted....but it has still not been an accepted practice even after the top 100 list in TC3 was no longer based on VH, it leads me to be a bit skeptical.

That's still not something I'd be fond of, particularly going beyond breaking even to earning a profit, but if it is a function of the community supporting its own economic structure then I could probably live with it as another of the changes made in the spirit of advancing the future of the game.

Somebody else made the observation that it really wouldn't be in EA's best interest to create another way that they give players money when they are already giving weekly allowances, and their goal is going to be toward players buying simoleans from them ultimately....and I see the logic in that, as far as EA's vantage point, so it's likely that most of the discussion, with the exception of this post of Polly's talking about making money through charging other *players* money for food and such, is moot.

The prospect of possibly having to buy simoleans from EA might make sims *more* tight-fisted in being reticent to pay for food, or at least being willing to pay anything higher than cost. Again, time will tell. One thing is for sure, it will definitely be interesting to see how the whole thing plays out....sort of as Niki said once, like a rollercoaster ride.....not for the faint of heart!

 

[Guest]

I think what carrie is trying to say is this:

Money lot=earn money
Skill lot=earn skills
Entertainment lot=entertain people(without earning money)
Etc. Etc. Etc.


Lots are categorized for a reason. I think that is all she is trying to say.

 

[Bindy]

<blockquote><hr>

Absolutely not. Money houses are, by very nature, *for* earning a PROFIT, therefore it is totally understandable that kickbacks would apply there and not anywhere else

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I think it's fair. None of the other categories are set up to earn a profit, with the exception of stores, though through a different mechanism. All the other categories focus on other things besides getting rich sim-wise. Why isn't it a fair and level playing field? Because *anybody* who has becoming wealthy in sim-terms as their primary goal has the option of owning or being a roomie in a money house, or spending as much time as they care to in a money house to earn that money. People who choose to have houses in different categories are supposed to have different primary goals. It's fair in the same vein that having maxed motives and skills on residential lots but not being able to make money is fair. Nobody *has* to pick one category or the other. If the category of house we chose to have or host in was dictated to us, THAT would not be a fair or level playing field, because then not everybody who wanted to get rich could. In the present system, anybody who doesn't want to be a sim-pauper doesn't have to be......that seems pretty fair to me. *shrugs*

[/ QUOTE ]

Well ok Carrie, you have every right to think as you want. I can see there is no getting you to understand what I am trying to say here.

I understand what you're saying about money houses are there to earn money and so forth. But for them to earn extra through usage fees while other lots do not have that luxury is not a fair thing for everyone. I cant explain that any simpler.

No problem though we all have our feelings on the subject, its cool.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

I agree that if other lots were to get kick backs there would need to be safe gaurds in place as so its not abused. But I do feel if money houses are allowed to still get kick backs then so should other houses, otherwise stop letting money house owners from having an unfair advantage. It costs skill houses and service lots money to feed their guests just as much as it does money lots. Fair is fair!

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent plan, solves everything, take away the money house kickback!

 

[Bindy]

<blockquote><hr>

I think what carrie is trying to say is this:

Money lot=earn money
Skill lot=earn skills
Entertainment lot=entertain people(without earning money)
Etc. Etc. Etc.


Lots are categorized for a reason. I think that is all she is trying to say.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I do understand what she is meaning ty.

My point is that having a usage payout for any lot isnt fair if other lots do not recieve the same concideration, is all I was trying to point out. Everyone would feel differently if it were only service lots got a kickback for people using their crafting benches and no other lot got one for usage of their items.

 

[Bindy]

<blockquote><hr>

I doubt seriously the money houses would miss their $1 kickbacks. It doesn't really feed their guests. They have the advantage of earning money while they host. The kickback for being the owner of a pizza table hurt a littel more tho

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

 

[imported_Dali Dalinza]

Well, it occurs that schools are for education but the teachers like to get paychecks just like the working stiffs who work in the salt mine. I understand the reasoning of money houses being for earning money, but what does that have to do with the price of tea paid by hosts in skill houses? (So to speak)

Carrie, your logic would make perfect sense to me if it was suggested that the skill objects pay the skiller. However, we are comparing apples to apples -- hosts in skill houses and hosts in money houses. Hosts need income to afford hosting.

Skill house hosts are at a disadvantage compared to money house hosts, since they can't use a money object while hosting. If anything, because of that, equity would be better served if money objects didn't give a kickback, but skill objects did. (But, I am NOT going to suggest that!)

 

[Bindy]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

I agree that if other lots were to get kick backs there would need to be safe gaurds in place as so its not abused. But I do feel if money houses are allowed to still get kick backs then so should other houses, otherwise stop letting money house owners from having an unfair advantage. It costs skill houses and service lots money to feed their guests just as much as it does money lots. Fair is fair!

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent plan, solves everything, take away the money house kickback!

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree it would be much easier to just take away the lousy $1 kickback than to give it to everyone.

 

[Keep It Real]

*TTL*

I have another idea.....I won't post anymore ideas.

 

[Bindy]

<blockquote><hr>

*TTL*

I have another idea.....I won't post anymore ideas.

[/ QUOTE ]

No KIR your idea was a good one and a valid one too.

 

[Guest]

This woulda been a great idea for the old game, but I have a feeling all the faucets are going to be turned off in EAL. Well, unless you count the ATM as a faucet.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

I think what carrie is trying to say is this:

Money lot=earn money
Skill lot=earn skills
Entertainment lot=entertain people(without earning money)
Etc. Etc. Etc.


Lots are categorized for a reason. I think that is all she is trying to say.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that and that *running* those lots are for the various reasons you listed too. Thinking about it, as far as entertainment lots go, in RL people who own clubs or bars do charge for the drinks and snack food (usually bars and clubs don't have full menus for food), so I suppose if the entertainment lot is a club, and not a game show lot (nobody pays to go on a game show, they get paid if the win prizes right?), or something along those lines, then I'd be willing to pay a 'cover charge' at the door to enter those lots, enough to cover the costs of whatever they put into the bar items or whatever, and make a *slight* profit, but still not get as rich as quick as one can in a money house.

Polly brought up a good point that I conceded to about the economy supporting itself, and as I said, for that reason and that reason only (not for lining the pockets of skill house owners) I'd be more willing (though like I said still not happy) to pay enough for food so that the owner/roomie broke even on the food. I still would not pay enough to give them much of a profit, because I would expect that owner, or roomie to go to money houses to make their money just like everybody else does, including those who live on 'alternate category' lots, since those categories generally wouldn't get enough business to line the pockets of the owner/roomies anyway. EVERYBODY has to skill, so if we tolerate paying a high premium for food, a skill house owner/roomie that hosts alot could get very well off without having to go to a money house. That, IMO diminishes the entire purpose of a designated money category, and therefore isn't right.

It'd be like getting 118% skill speed anywhere so that people didn't have to visit a skill house ever, or the disco equipment working anywhere or love beds working anywhere so that people didn't have to go to an entertainment lot or romance lot to fill those wants/needs. That's the whole reason we have categories vs. one-stop-lots, isn't it?

 

[Guest]

Carrie, there is so much I can say in response to your post, but we'll end up totally derailing this thread, so I'm going to start another discussion thread shortly.

Polly

 

[imported_Shirl1211]

Didn't think about that number of guest. You are absolutely right!!!