Slashdot Mirror


Virtual Property Investor Recoups Investment

afaik_ianal writes "Remember that guy who bought a virtual island in "Project Entropia" for £13,700? Well BBC is reporting that that he has managed to make his money back in under a year. According to the article, 'He made money by selling land to build virtual homes as well as taxing other gamers to hunt or mine on the island.'"

208 comments

  1. Old proverb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "When (your stupidity) dealt you a lemon, you make lemonade"

  2. Bank loan by ebsf1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hmm...I can see it now. Yes Mr Bank Manager...I'd like a loan to buy an island. Where is it? Well...it's virtual...

    1. Re:Bank loan by shintaro · · Score: 1

      I have unit trusts that are linked to his island. Buy them at makemerich-stupid.com. Buyer gets virtual holiday at virtual island.

    2. Re:Bank loan by lordofthechia · · Score: 3, Funny

      "I'd like a loan to buy an island."

      So do they come to get you in the real world or the online world if you default. Be pretty funny if the bank had its own guild.

      --
      Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
    3. Re:Bank loan by HeroreV · · Score: 1

      It's only a matter of time I suppose. Banks have owned crazier things. A local bank here owns a peach farm, and that's just the beginning.

    4. Re:Bank loan by trentblase · · Score: 1

      Here's your virtual money. 1 million trents. It's tied to the US dollar, but good luck getting anyone to exchange it for you.

    5. Re:Bank loan by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 2

      Hah! We're giving away virtual holidays to any qualified person who is willing to listen to a short 30 minute presentation on virtual condo time sharing. We offer both PK and non-PK condo developments..

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  3. So this proves... by nelomolen · · Score: 5, Funny

    that either this guy is incredibly smart and the people who bought into his virtual property are incredibly stupid, or that he's incredibly stupid and everyone who bought into his virtual property is... well, still incredibly stupid.

    -barton

    1. Re:So this proves... by blew_fantom · · Score: 1

      i second the incredibly stoopid thing. the people who actually bought "land" from this guy i'd say is stoopider than the guy who bought the entire island in the first place.

    2. Re:So this proves... by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The funny thing is, this analysis may apply to the real estate market in the real world, as well.

    3. Re:So this proves... by Phwoar · · Score: 1

      Except, the guy is actually making money off it. It's likely that some of the smaller buyers are making money too, but they're just not well off enough to splash out on a whole island for themselves. It's proved to be a worthwhile investment, so there's not exactly all that much stupidity involved.

    4. Re:So this proves... by John+Miles · · Score: 1

      The funny thing is, this analysis may apply to the real estate market in the real world, as well.

      Not exactly. A $25K/year intern with a warezed copy of 3DSMax can't create a new resort island in the real world.

      --
      Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
    5. Re:So this proves... by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Interesting

      William Gibson noted, "cyberspace is where the bank keeps your money." If one's wealth itself is essentially just bits and consensus, why not the real estate?

      Because you're only a floating point error away from being a billionaire.

    6. Re:So this proves... by utnow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't get how this is stupid...

      I would wager that ALOT of the folks who will end up reading this play these games... WoW, Everquest...etc.

      Do you pay to play these games? yes... you're paying to spend your time to build up repore in an online game and have fun. This is no different.

      Buying a peice of online real-estate is no different than buying software, a database of information (email addresses... phone numbers... businesses...etc)..

      Actually... it's REALLY similar to buying a domain name. How many of you have domain names? (nyposse.net?) ::shrug:: seems like simple economics to me... nothing stupid about it.

    7. Re:So this proves... by Skim123 · · Score: 1
      A little bit from column A, a little bit from column B.

      Things have worth that others ascribe to them. For some reason, folks assign worth to this 'virtual' space, this collection of 1s and 0s, primarily, I assume, because of the expectation that others ascribe similar worths to these 1s and 0s. The problem is, there's really no inherent value to these 1s and 0s, like there is to, say, real estate in the physical world, or ownership in a company that has real assets.

      Therefore, the whole 'value' of these 1s and 0s depends strictly on the false value people give it. Which, since it has no real value, can come crashing down to $0... (i.e., the company hosting this game decides to go out of business...)

      --

      I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.

    8. Re:So this proves... by nelomolen · · Score: 1

      I don't get how this is stupid... there are safer risks someone can take with their money, and ones that don't involve the necessity of earning back the initial investment. not to mention that this guy needs to depend on the long-term success of this game. what if a new game lures away players this december? where does the subscriber base go? so tell me, if his revenue stream disappears, where does his money come from?

      I would wager that ALOT of the folks who will end up reading this play these games... WoW, Everquest...etc. what makes you think someone else won't start doing what this guy did? what makes you think it won't cost more to buy the property the next time around? what makes you think the 'renters' won't be wiser? game publishers already want every cent they can get, don't expect anyone to profit in their universe without them taking a cut.

      Do you pay to play these games? no, i don't.

      Buying a peice of online real-estate is no different than buying software, a database of information (email addresses... phone numbers... businesses...etc).. yeah, it's exactly the same, except for that pesky bit about a third party controlling the universe it exists in. oh yeah, and that nobody in the real world cares if someone mines fake gold on a fake island, but a database of useful data is as good as gold to many businesses. and regarding software: something that drives productivity has tangible value. i suppose if people paid for all of the above to "have a good time", you might be able to justify a comparison, but i don't think anyone laughs joyously when they plop down several hundred dollars to have the latest version of ms windows.

      Actually... it's REALLY similar to buying a domain name. How many of you have domain names? (nyposse.net?) ::shrug:: seems like simple economics to me... nothing stupid about it. my domain names have tangible value in that they redirect to servers accessible by anyone with an Internet connection which provide information and services. i control whether or not this tie exists, and it is possible for me to profit from this, although i do not. this man doesn't control whether or not the game's universe exists, only subscribers to the game can access his island, and if the game publisher would like to quash his ability to profit from this, the EULA likely prevents him any recourse.

    9. Re:So this proves... by vmardian · · Score: 1

      For someone who claims to not play, there is no way for you to be able to assess the actual risk versus reward that the investor subjected himself to. Perhaps, for him, it was a no brainer investment.

      --
      PowerLevel.com - A next generation marketplace for virtual items and services
    10. Re:So this proves... by skingers6894 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually this guy is virtually smart but actually stupid, his buyers are actually stupid and virtually stupid as well. In the virtual world they will be investors but in the actual world they are suckers.

    11. Re:So this proves... by bugg · · Score: 1

      Do you have all of your money under your mattress, or is some of it just ones and zeros in banking software?

      --
      -bugg
    12. Re:So this proves... by StarsAreAlsoFire · · Score: 1

      I bet someone here can point to some PhD thesis (plural of? whatever..) that cover MMROG economic systems :~)

      And I bet those future PhD. economicists are the only ones in their respective classes who will get jobs with their degree straight out of college ;~)

    13. Re:So this proves... by HaggiZ · · Score: 1

      No more stupid than the people in the States that bought shares in WorldCom and Enron, or the people here in Australia that had stock in HIH. It's worth whatever the market and the people within it decide it's worth, no more and no less.

      And if you want to claim that it's "virtual" and thus not "really" worth what it sold for, then don't look too closely at why diamonds are priced as they are.

    14. Re:So this proves... by Jesrad · · Score: 1

      You're only a floating point error away from being a billionaire.
      I'm making this my SecondLife account sigquote.

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
    15. Re:So this proves... by Shipwack · · Score: 1

      No, as the the sigline and Murphy's Rules of Combat state:

      "If it's stupid, but it works, it isn't stupid".

      I'd rather have a stupid plan that made money than a well reasoned plan that lost money.

      That being said, I was betting that he'd lose a ton of cash on this scheme. He was right, I was wrong, he's making the big bucks, and I'm posting on Slashdot from work.

    16. Re:So this proves... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      As someone who does play, and who understands that virtual things can be worth real world $$$, even in a system not set up to let you convert them directly, I still think it was a dumb idea.

      How many MMO's have a long lifetime, or a widespread adoption? Not all of them, not by any stretch.

      The dumbness is not in buying virtual land, it's buying virtual land attached to an unproven game. If they'd folded, he would have owned a lot of nothing, with no legal recourse.

      Kinda like buying a whole lotta waterfront property...You better hope the waterline doesn't move.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    17. Re:So this proves... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still think it was a dumb idea

      It was a risk. That's what investors do -- they weigh risks vs. rewards, and then decide where to put thier money. This investor apparently decided that the risk was worth the reward.

      And he was right.

    18. Re:So this proves... by utnow · · Score: 1

      he's already recouped his investment... anotherwords... he made his money back, and will continue to earn profit on it... where-as you didn't do it and were stupid for not having done it.

      Only a moron points the 'stupid' finger at an idea that worked.

    19. Re:So this proves... by utnow · · Score: 1

      Try to think a bit before you speak...

      there are safer risks someone can take with their money, and ones that don't involve the necessity of earning back the initial investment. not to mention that this guy needs to depend on the long-term success of this game. what if a new game lures away players this december? where does the subscriber base go? so tell me, if his revenue stream disappears, where does his money come from?

      This happens all the time... every time a mall 'dries up' stores move to the next mall. Every time a neighborhood becomes the "old neighborhood" investors move to the next one to develop it. That's just how it happens. It's a risk. You do your research and invest in hopes that you can recoup your investment and make some profit from the deal. It's just business.

      what makes you think someone else won't start doing what this guy did? what makes you think it won't cost more to buy the property the next time around? what makes you think the 'renters' won't be wiser? game publishers already want every cent they can get, don't expect anyone to profit in their universe without them taking a cut.

      There's nothing that says any of this won't happen. That's also business. But that dosen't make any of it stupid. Of course the game-makers would want a cut... kinda like the US wants taxes on EVERY DAMN THING you do within it's borders. They facilitate an environment where those things can take place and want to get paid to continue to do so.

      and regarding software: something that drives productivity has tangible value. i suppose if people paid for all of the above to "have a good time", you might be able to justify a comparison, but i don't think anyone laughs joyously when they plop down several hundred dollars to have the latest version of ms windows.

      Um... games? Nothing productive about them.

      my domain names have tangible value in that they redirect to servers accessible by anyone with an Internet connection which provide information and services. i control whether or not this tie exists, and it is possible for me to profit from this, although i do not. this man doesn't control whether or not the game's universe exists, only subscribers to the game can access his island, and if the game publisher would like to quash his ability to profit from this, the EULA likely prevents him any recourse.

      Your tie to your domain name is controlled by several servers along the way... do you not pay a rental fee every year (or every couple of years) to have this domain name routed to your server? Most individuals with domain names also pay a hosting provider to host the site for the world. Do you know what happens if they remove your harddrive? Gone. In addition to this, only people who can log into the internet can get to it.

      It's all virtual... it's all pretend.

      Oh... except that you're not making money on your domain name investment and he IS making money off of his investment. I guess that makes you the fool.

    20. Re:So this proves... by turnipsatemybaby · · Score: 0

      Bad analogy. The ones and zeros in banking software directly translate to cash you can get from the bank. The digital data is the exact same abstraction of money that a cheque is.

      Virtual islands do not translate to anything in the real world. If the ASP that hosts your island goes belly up, then so does your island.

      There's a big difference between an abstraction of something that exists in the real world, and something that has no real world counterpart.

    21. Re:So this proves... by espo812 · · Score: 1
      Therefore, the whole 'value' of these 1s and 0s depends strictly on the false value people give it.
      The "value" of anything, 1s and 0s included as well as cars and houses, is the value people give it. The 1s and 0s ChoicePoint has are valuable to lots of people, but still are 1s and 0s. The difference is that ChoicePoint's 1s and 0s idealy represent real world phenonema that can be leveraged for real world cash.

      In this game, the 1s and 0s are supposed to mimic property. The reason property is valuable in the real world is because it is rare and desirable (property next to the lake is rare, property with oil is rare, etc.)What's to stop the makers of the game from just adding another really nice island to the game? The possibilities are endless.
      --

      espo
    22. Re:So this proves... by espo812 · · Score: 1
      No more stupid than the people in the States that bought shares in WorldCom and Enron
      Well WorldCom and Enron are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. As such, their stock was finite (i.e. they wern't just inventing shares, there was a limited supply and at one time a high demand - making the stock valuable.) What's to stop the game makers from just adding another nice island? And another, and another - then they aren't rare, leaving the first guy with light pockets while the last guy can buy the same thing for $5.
      And if you want to claim that it's "virtual" and thus not "really" worth what it sold for, then don't look too closely at why diamonds are priced as they are.
      Diamonds are priced the way they are because the De Beers company buys those on the market up, then sells fewer than they buy. The diamonds are expensive because the supply is limited (and the supply is artifically lowered by De Beers) and the demand is high (due to women being suckers.) That said, you can't make gem quality diamonds as easily as generating some more bits to add an island to a game.
      --

      espo
    23. Re:So this proves... by Godeke · · Score: 1

      Actually, "Real" property can go to zero, or even negative value. Having worked with Pollution Insurance as a part of our system for some time, I have read quite a few cases about polluted lands which will cost many times the "value" of the land to rehabilitate the land to the point of usability. Quite often, this discovery is a "surprise" to the current land owner, because of either under documented prior use or nearby impacts.

      Likewise, many "property" items (vehicles, say) have value only based on ready access to other resources. Remove the conditions that make the property valuable (jack the price of fuel high enough, say) and the property has only value as scrap. (And no, that isn't a prediction for the near future, just an example I could think of off the top of my head.)

      Surely virtual property is *by far* more volatile than *any* real world property... but at the core economics there is little difference between virtual property and "investing" in a business that can go bankrupt. Yet people don't seem concerned by stocks (to such a point that some want our nations retirement to be stuff in them) even after repeated exposure to the "you can lose your shirt" world of the stock market. My point is that even "real" property can go under water in some cases.

      --
      Sig under construction since 1998.
    24. Re:So this proves... by MemeRot · · Score: 1

      They'll stop because they're interested in the economics of the game. If costs of virtual real estate get so high they're a deterrent to people playing the game, they'll add more to keep it balanced. If prices fall, maybe they'll raise the water level worldwide to shrink available land.

    25. Re:So this proves... by trentblase · · Score: 1

      Just because he came out on top doesn't mean it wasn't a risky investment. How many other people have done something similar and lost their asses? "anotherwords", just because he's lucky doesn't mean he's smart.

    26. Re:So this proves... by Skim123 · · Score: 1
      Money is all about faith as well, be it hard cold cash or stored as 1s and 0s in the bank. The day that the majority of the world decided that a particular currency is worthless... well, sucks to be holding that currency, be it under the mattress of in a bank.

      But my point was not that 1s and 0s are inherently worthless. They have worth if people ascribe worth to them. The 1s and 0s in a bank have real worth since they represent real money which has (currently) worth in reality. But what worth do the 1s and 0s of a virtual island have?

      --

      I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.

    27. Re:So this proves... by bugg · · Score: 1

      Just to let you know, if everyone wanted their cash from the bank it wouldn't work out. FDIC is in theory there to cover exactly that, but that's taxpayer money, not your money...

      --
      -bugg
    28. Re:So this proves... by utnow · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the 1 in 9 small businesses that succeeded. You know how many businesses were successfull that never were started? Yeah... Enjoy your 9 to 5.

    29. Re:So this proves... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Because you're only a floating point error away from being a billionaire.

      That's why I only buy computers with the Genuine Intel Inside sticker.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  4. An insightful post from the previous /. story by iMaple · · Score: 2, Funny

    http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=132758&c id=11084873

    One of the many similar comments on the older /. story :)

  5. Virtual Property by lukewarmfusion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Virtual Property, eh? Not at all like domain names, right?

    Online "property" has as much value as people are willing to pay for it. This is why we spend thousands of dollars on shiny rocks and metals (to say nothing of the diamond cartel). This is also why we hold onto generally worthless items because of sentimental value. (I had my Chuck Taylor All-Stars for years after they were too worn out to wear).

    So I'm not surprised that this guy is making money. He found something that he expected people would want, and snatched it up so he could be the one to sell it to 'em.

    1. Re:Virtual Property by Saeger · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Unlike in Real Life meatspace, (an instance of) virtual property doesn't have to be scarce, but it's almost always modeled into games that way. It's easy for people to relate to I guess, and allows for status and old-fashioned empire building.

      I'd like to see abundance modeled into more game worlds. I mean there's no good reason (other than familiarity) for virtual realestate to be kept artificially scarce in a game where "space" isn't real -- your 10,000 acre slice of paradise could exist anywhere with multiple doorways between other and a shifting "shared map". Only requires a slight adjustment in thinking to eliminate the old construct.

      At least in SecondLife you can dupe your objects as much as you want (within reason) and even assign to them a GPL-ish license. The realestate situation is a bit more artificially limited though.

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    2. Re:Virtual Property by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      Fuck this place fuckin' SUCKS now--even the editors obviously think it sucks, posting duplicate stories, full of retarded, undue editorialization, idiotic comments moderated to +5 insightful. That fuckin seals it -- I quit. I vow to never read again.

            Ah-hah! You lie. I've seen all sorts of your posts since you said that, you crafty A.C.

    3. Re:Virtual Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're missing the whole point of Slashdot. The reason to read the comments is to see what retarded bullshit the Slashdot lemmings (Slemmings???) spout off about the latest bullshit that the "editors" decide to post. It's like watching a train wreck - so horrible you just can't look away....

      By the way, Slashdot always sucked. It wasn't any better back in the "good old days." Don't let anyone tell you any different.

      (On a side note, the script confirmation word right now is "distress." How fitting.)

    4. Re:Virtual Property by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1

      It takes real life resources such as servers, bandwidth, employees, etc. to create and maintain these virtual worlds. The scarcity may be artifically exaggerated, but it's there and it's real.

      That having been said, I think the whole thing is stupid.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    5. Re:Virtual Property by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      You don't understand scarcity correctly. How "scarce" is land in the US? If you are talking about the middle of North Dakota, not all that scarce. If you are talking about downtown NYC, then it's pretty damn scarce. Even if you could create as much land as you wanted, that wouldn't mean the land would lose it's value. The land near popular destinations would still have value, perhaps not as much value, but it is still scarce. So therefore, even if they had unlimited land there would still be scarcity.

    6. Re:Virtual Property by Walkiry · · Score: 1

      >Even if you could create as much land as you wanted, that wouldn't mean the land would lose it's value.

      This is the virtual space after all, where does it say you have to be limited to the structured 3D of the real world? You can have your 10,000 acre paradise as a simple door off a building in the "very interesting virtual spot" for example, one click and bam! Your visitors are in paradise.

      --
      ---- Take the Space Quiz!
    7. Re:Virtual Property by StarsAreAlsoFire · · Score: 2, Insightful

      here is my take:

      Land is NOT scarce on this planet. We could all spread out and own a good number of acres --

      world land area: 510.072 million sq km (cia world factbook) = 126 billion acres

      world population: call it 6 billion (CIA says 6.5).

      126E9/6.5E9 = 21 acres per person.

      Game land could be infinite. Nobody would care. The price would be the same.

      People go where the people are. People want to be where 'stuff happens'.

      It is also a transportation issue, of course, just like in real life. Look what the car did for the city in real life! If a game created an instantaneous free transport system (teleport anywhere you want, from anywhere!), as you (i think?) suggest, *AND* infinite land area... THEN I could see scarcity (or lack thereof) becoming an issue.

      Anyway -- this stuff would be fun to model (and get paid to model it, of course ;~) )

      Cheers,

    8. Re:Virtual Property by Surt · · Score: 1

      Actually, virtual property does have to be scarce because it is modeled on real finite hardware. It just doesn't have to be nearly as scarce as it is.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    9. Re:Virtual Property by aerique · · Score: 1

      Not only that but it has to be thought up and created by artists.

      Yes, they could just copy the current island or have some scenery randomly created but that is far from interesting and will lose the game's makers customers.

    10. Re:Virtual Property by cowscows · · Score: 1

      One thing to consider however, is that real land, on the planet Earth, is not all created equal. There are a lot of different factors that make different places more or less desirable for different purposes. I'd gladly give up my 21 acres of nevada desert for a half acre of temperate forest on rolling hills or something. People do generally congregate, but there's usually a reason that people ended up in a particular area in the first place. That spot/area/climate/whatever had some sort of appeal. And it's usually not economically or technically feasible to convert much land into another arbitrary type and replicate that appeal.

      In a virtual world, it's technically possible to manipulate the land in just about any way. Not only can we have infinite land area, but we could have infinite coastline. Or as many islands as we need. Or as many extinct volcano craters as we can use. Your parent post mentioned the game Second Life, which I am familiar with. In that game, the land masses are generally laid out by the developers. And coastal land tends to sell for more than inland properties. The amount of land in that game is artificially limited, probably because it's a big driver of the economy. This has led to a handful of land barons that make the game suck a bit more for people less serious about it, but that's a discussion for another time.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  6. Real Life (TM) by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    All we are is walkon extras in someone else's sim. Reboot yourself!

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Real Life (TM) by BushCheney08 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Reboot yourself!

      I'm trying, but I'm having a hard time getting the paperclip in the hole on my backside. Can you give me a hand?

      --
      Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
    2. Re:Real Life (TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      you must be the worlds biggest tight-arse if you can't get a paper clip up your bum.

    3. Re:Real Life (TM) by deathy_epl+ccs · · Score: 1

      Wow... if you're havin' trouble with a paperclip, you probably really need to look into stress relief.

    4. Re:Real Life (TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watch out! That's not a paperclip!

    5. Re:Real Life (TM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My employees sometimes joke that if I were to eat a penny I'd shit out copper wire......

  7. games of economy by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 0

    Perhaps he should build a pyramid with the money he has made from this scheme?

    1. Re:games of economy by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      Hmm... is there a MMORPG that allows one to enslave other players and put them to work building pyramids?

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    2. Re:games of economy by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 2, Funny

      The scary part is that some percentage of people would actually put up with it and pay a subscription fee for the privilege.

      Call it "stargate - in the beginning" and you would triple the players instantly.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
  8. Clever angle though by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Spending big money does seem silly, but spending a few bucks here and there for a virtual subdivision is perhaps not (eg. a $20 gift to that game-nut pal). What this guy has done is create a service whereby he can onsell his asset at a low price point. Not really that stupid after all.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Clever angle though by ImaLamer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What this guy has done is create a service whereby he can onsell his asset at a low price point. Not really that stupid after all.

      The same rules apply in the virtual world. You've got an area you call your own, the resources on said area are also your own. You could try to get a return on your investment by holding these resources until the time is right to sell, sell off portions of the resource or do nothing and be happy spending money.

      Would you live on a farm that produced no product? If there were natural resources such as gems, petroleum or even attractions like waterfalls wouldn't you be at least thinking about ways to make money on them? Sure, there are some that would let people see the attraction for free, ignore the value of minerals that must be harvested in crude ways or refuse to let people shoot their animals and hook their fish for any reason, especially for money.

      It's exactly like buying an island and turning a third into a resort, a third into destination spots (businesses, pristine land, room for activities) and leaving the remainder to your own enjoyment.

      I mean, this guy does hunt on his own virtual island right?

    2. Re:Clever angle though by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
      I mean, this guy does hunt on his own virtual island right?

      I hope he eats what ke kills.... or does he just put virtual trophies on the virtual walls?

      --
      Engineering is the art of compromise.
  9. Freedom. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Holy freedom Batman! Why can't real life be like that? I guess that's why we have games.

  10. A link from the Past by Hack+Jandy · · Score: 1, Redundant
    1. Re:A link from the Past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot, Zelda's second kingdom.

    2. Re:A link from the Past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A later post was modded up funny. let's get some consistency here, moderators.

  11. Developer's Giddy by cbrhea · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now they can create another virtual island that's even sweeter and sell it for even more money.

    copy virtual_island1 virtual_island2
    print money

    Not a bad deal for the island-buyer either, as long as they've determined the risks, ie. the game's subscriber base withering away.

    1. Re:Developer's Giddy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Now they can create another virtual island that's even sweeter and sell it for even more money.

      copy virtual_island1 virtual_island2
      print money

      The same economics apply here as in reality: if you increase the supply without an increase in demand, the price will go down.
    2. Re:Developer's Giddy by cbrhea · · Score: 1

      The product can keep changing, though. It's easy in a virtual game environment to create the next big fad.

      Give the next coolest island a special trainer that can teach people how to fly, and people will flock to that island, raising the initial sale value.

      Of course the smart buyers will notice this trend and figure out that there may not be a lot of equity in a virtual property that is constantly one-upped.

    3. Re:Developer's Giddy by cbrhea · · Score: 1

      Actually, it appears this has already happened. The developer released a new "island" in the form of a space resort. The space resort features a unique spawning point for new users and lots of other goodies that the first island didn't have.

      ..and get this: the space resort sold for $100,000 USD.

    4. Re:Developer's Giddy by freeweed · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, your idea is PRECISELY how DeBeers makes its money.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  12. Opportunity costs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    So this guy's time and effort are worthless, then? That's not to mention what else he could have done with that money (money market account, CD, etc.).

    1. Re:Opportunity costs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He made his money back in 1 year. I'd like to see you make a 100% profit in 1 year with your alternatives.

    2. Re:Opportunity costs? by afaik_ianal · · Score: 1

      Most people will happily pay good money to play MMORPGs. Sure, he has lost the opportunity cost of having his money invested elsewhere, but will still make that back by the sounds of things.

      Assuming he turns a real profit, we should remember that he has done it while playing a style of game that most people happily pay to play.

      He hasn't lost his entire investment like I think we all assumed he would when we first heard about this last year.

    3. Re:Opportunity Costs? by Kvan · · Score: 1

      The opportunity cost for me sitting around playing games in the evening isn't what I could've made consulting or flipping burgers, because I need time off in order to be able to work my day job. If I could make money doing it, it wouldn't matter how little money it was, it would still be more than my cost (the cost of my equipment and subscription being sunk).

      --

      "A *person* is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."
      - 'K' in Men in Black.

    4. Re:Opportunity Costs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is why you (and the rest of the investment idiots) fail at analysis.

      He now has paid back his investment.

      If he has as good of a year next year as he did this year, he's made 100% gain in 2 years.

      This of course shits on your 5% annual investment. This whole crud about easily earning X money in a year is fucking stupid. He's playing a game, having fun and making massive returns back on his investment.

  13. New investment idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    If anybody missed this opportunity, I have a bridge to sell in Brooklyn, New York. You keep 100% of the toll revenue of thousands of cars daily. Cash only please.

  14. In Virtual Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Virtual investments recoup you!

    Virtually.

  15. Smart Guy by dudeX · · Score: 1

    Obviously this guy understood capitalism and the history of the United States. The US was able to become very profitable because it took land from the Native Americans and did something unheard of to the indigenous poeple; put a value on land.

    Whoever makes a claim to that land is now able to make money by selling parts of it, and collecting revenues and rent from the use of the land. This will definitely enrich the land owner as long he has the threat of force to enforce his terms.

    1. Re:Smart Guy by Flower · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No. This guy understood the phenomenon of the pet rock and the wisdom of "There's a sucker born every minute."

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    2. Re:Smart Guy by TouchyFeely · · Score: 0

      uh.. the reason America became profitable is becuase settlers took the land and did something USEFUL with it - we built factories, mines, businesses, oil wells, farmland, raised cattle etc.

      Then we sold those good and services to other countries. Apart from limited farming, the indians didn't do much of anything commercially productive with it.

      And guess what, the American settlers didnt do anything that hasnt been going on since the dawn of humanity - The stronger, more robust and more advanced societies replace the weaker ones, often by force. It's part of the human condition and it aint gonna change any time soon.

    3. Re:Smart Guy by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Indeed. and a very large part of that strength was sheer numbers. If you want to have an idea of what happens to a society that fails to produce enough new people and instead relies on foreign workers to maintain their standard of living, take a look at france these past few weeks. The US is surely not all that far behind.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    4. Re:Smart Guy by TouchyFeely · · Score: 0

      Mexifornia? Mexazona? I cant wait!

    5. Re:Smart Guy by kd5ujz · · Score: 1

      They may not have done anything commercial with the land, but it was a means of survival. You are born without a dollar, and you die without a dollar. It was how they survived day to day, so it was priceless to them.

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
    6. Re:Smart Guy by TouchyFeely · · Score: 0

      But for the settlers, making the land commericially productive was THEIR means of survival. Whether or not it's morally or ethically ok as judged by our modern society doesn't really change the fact that America was rich in untapped potential and the Indians hadn't utilized it to build empires, raise vast armies, develop science and weapons etc. Thus when the inevitable struggle over Earth's limited resources ensued they were doomed to loose from the start.

      Even the Aztecs, who had vast numbers, a warlike heritage, and considerable wealth were quickly wiped out by just a few hundred Spaniards under Cortez.. they should have killed Cortez outright when they had the chance. Instead they really fucked themselves over by projecting their own expectations and customs onto Cortez, who had little regard for them and their ways. He capitalized on it and managed to bring down an empire of hundreds of thousands with just a few men. Well, that and the fact that the Aztecs were surrounded by hated enemies from theirmany years or wars and sacrificial-slave taking.

    7. Re:Smart Guy by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Based on the numbers, I think we can expect Rhode MexiIsland before either of those.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    8. Re:Smart Guy by iamhassi · · Score: 1
      "Obviously this guy understood capitalism and the history of the United States. The US was able to become very profitable because it took land from the Native Americans and did something unheard of to the indigenous poeple; put a value on land."

      problem with this is that it's completely virtual. The creators of Project Entropia could, at any time, create another, better looking island and cause your island to depreciate, and with no limit to how large this virtual world can be they can make as many islands or space stations or whatever they want forever.

      What if the company goes under, does that mean everyone loses their property and value? Basically they have created a way to make their own money, if this is legit I'm shocked google or microsoft hasnt gotten involved yet if people are really paying as much as they claim. This is a huge risk, I'm quite surprised so many people are willing to spend real money on non-existant property that could disappear forever instantly.... unless somehow they earned the money in the game, then it wouldnt seem so much like real money anymore, you're just playing a game...

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    9. Re:Smart Guy by dudeX · · Score: 1

      At this point, if the company goes under or his land depreciates, the guy in question has already recouped his initial investment,

      But your point on virtualness is correct. Since these bits are virtual, there is no limit to how much land there is, save the limitations of the technology (disk space, etc)

      But as long he can create enough wealth with the current system, he can buy more islands as they pop up, and he will be able to maintain a monopoly of power.

  16. It'd almost be worth buying an acre or two by Flower · · Score: 3, Funny
    just so I could trash the place up and bring the property values down. Cut down some of that scenic view to build my shack, grab some low-res tires to plant some flowers that I can't keep alive alive anyway and play a boombox so I can blast techno/rap/heavy metal gospel across the neighborhood. Mow the lawn? You gotta be kidding me.

    And nobody better be touching my still out in back....

    --
    I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    1. Re:It'd almost be worth buying an acre or two by pastpolls · · Score: 1

      I wonder is there is a homeowners association. Could I move in a trailer and put some virtual cars up on blocks? Can I have my character gain 300 pounds and run around in a "wife beater" and jeans shorts? I may have to start playing these games just to play virtual white trash.

    2. Re:It'd almost be worth buying an acre or two by Allison+Geode · · Score: 1

      then you'd be a griefer.... which raises very good questions: are real white trash the real-world equivilent of griefers?

  17. Re:Wow. by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 3, Funny

    Ahem, this first post land is currently owned by CmdrTaco

    You must pay rent to use this space.

    Forward funds to his account immediately or you will be evicted.

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  18. So... how is this taxed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I assume this is a capital gain. I'd love to see the IRS, or Inland Revenue (they don't say what country the gamer lives in) have a field day with this. It would make a funny court case!

    1. Re:So... how is this taxed? by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 1

      If it works like stock investment you pay taxes once you earn a profit (in Finland at least). Basically, once you cash your holdings (virtual money in this case) the gain/loss is calculated and the gain is then taxed just like any other income.

      That's the theory, anyway.

      --
      .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    2. Re:So... how is this taxed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he lives in Australia

      Pretender, PE player

  19. ISS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Last month, another of Entropia's virtual properties - a virtual space station - sold at auction for £57,000.
    well I can't afford to pay $1M to go to the ISS but I guess I could pay $1K for this, just hope they accept my WTF currency
  20. Glorified Slots machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Project Entropia's fundamental idea is that everything in game has a real-world value. You begin the game with nothing; and must purchase in-game items with real money. Items you use to harvest resources, kill monsters, or any other activity which generates saleable objects in the system decay over time. You give Project Entropia money to buy objects in game, that money flows into MindArk. When you sell an object and withdraw real life cash, that money flows away from MindArk.

    Given that, the Project Entropia system cannot generate rewards greater than the amount of money fed into the system, minus however much MindArk takes off the top.

    You are using a virtual tool that decays, purchased with real money, attempting to generate a positive income in a system already rigged to prevent such a scenario on average. Your tool will break, and you will buy another one, in the hopes of getting that big payoff. It's a gambling system dressed in some livelier colors.

    1. Re:Glorified Slots machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder how many people can use this system to avoid taxes or for money laundering.

    2. Re:Glorified Slots machine by fabs64 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Project Entropia's fundamental idea is that everything in game has a real-world value. You begin the game with nothing; and must purchase in-game items with real money. Items you use to harvest resources, kill monsters, or any other activity which generates saleable objects in the system decay over time. You give Project Entropia money to buy objects in game, that money flows into MindArk. When you sell an object and withdraw real life cash, that money flows away from MindArk. Given that, the Project Entropia system cannot generate rewards greater than the amount of money fed into the system, minus however much MindArk takes off the top. You are using a virtual tool that decays, purchased with real money, attempting to generate a positive income in a system already rigged to prevent such a scenario on average. Your tool will break, and you will buy another one, in the hopes of getting that big payoff. It's a gambling system dressed in some livelier colors.


      You mean... effectively like every capitalistic economy in the world?
    3. Re:Glorified Slots machine by rhetoric · · Score: 1

      It's a gambling system dressed in some livelier colors.

      Yeah and 13yr old kids in Iowa can play too :D

      --

      "where words meet intent, lies rhetoric's lament"
    4. Re:Glorified Slots machine by Pfhreakaz0id · · Score: 1

      Yeah and 13yr old kids in Iowa can play too :D

      yeah, because none of them are playing online poker, I'm sure.

    5. Re:Glorified Slots machine by ad0gg · · Score: 1
      Given that, the Project Entropia system cannot generate rewards greater than the amount of money fed into the system, minus however much MindArk takes off the top.

      Sounds like day trading the stock market. You can't make money unless other people put in money.

      --

      Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

    6. Re:Glorified Slots machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hm, if youre going to make that comparison, then its not limited to "capitalist" economies. Its *every* type of economy. But I know that didnt fit in with your agenda. Hope you experience great properity. Everyone I know that wanders thru life with blinders on always has lots of it! Enjoy.

    7. Re:Glorified Slots machine by Skim123 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Erm, sounds a lot like real life, no? The farmer buys the tractor that decays over time, but during its usable lifetime, he uses it to harvest grain, which he sells to others.

      MindArk's take from the top is no different than the government's take off the top in the form of taxes. That revenue provides services - the servers and code in MindArk's case, roads, schools, a judicial system, and so forth in 'reality.'

      --

      I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.

    8. Re:Glorified Slots machine by rhetoric · · Score: 1

      >>Yeah and 13yr old kids in Iowa can play too :D

      yeah, because none of them are playing online poker, I'm sure.


      LMAO. Point taken. We were both half-joking (I think), but seriously I used to play Project Entropia and there were 13-14yr old rich kids getting their parents to put hundreds even thousands of dollars into this game. I really don't think as many parents would put as much money into it if they knew their kid was playing online poker. Plus online poker sites at least SAY you have to be 18. PE allows 13 and up IIRC.

      --

      "where words meet intent, lies rhetoric's lament"
    9. Re:Glorified Slots machine by r3m0t · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Erm, sounds a lot like real life, no? The farmer buys the tractor that decays over time, but during its usable lifetime, he uses it to harvest grain, which he sells to others.

      Except that this is completely rigged so that you will almost always lose. There is the occasional win (i.e. earning back your money) but this is compensated by other people's losses so that ultimately, MindArk are the only winners.

      The tractor will break down soon. In PE:

      You will keep having to buy new, expensive ammo to keep your gun usable. You even need to repair your gun sometimes. You can also buy bombs to mine precious metals. Your bombs will not find enough precious metals to make them worth buying.

      (...etc...)

    10. Re:Glorified Slots machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That argument is meaninglss, you could make the same argument about federal reserve notes... money isn't just "created" when you profit in any situation, it comes from someone else. Then there is inflation, taxes, etc, etc in the real world.

    11. Re:Glorified Slots machine by woolio · · Score: 1
      must purchase in-game items with real money.


      Gee... The player spents real money to get some virtual "items", tries to "use" these "items" in a way that generates more of them, and then converts these "items" back into cash.

      Well, replace "items" with "chips" and "use" with "gamble".

      Project Entropia sounds a lot like a casino now...
    12. Re:Glorified Slots machine by Jesrad · · Score: 1

      Except that this is completely rigged so that you will almost always lose. ...
      The tractor will break down soon.

      The Sun will break down eventually, I hear.

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
    13. Re:Glorified Slots machine by ScottyB · · Score: 1

      Except the farmer with the tractor makes food, which I can eat to stay alive. The tractor-maker may invent a better tractor, which allows the farmer to make more food, so even though the tractor-maker does not make food, increased productivity still leads to more "wealth" in the form of food. If you include all elements of the system, meaning the sun as well, "wealth" is conserved, but since on Earth we can approximate the sun as infinite, there is always more wealth to be created (not to forget also that there is a bit of an integrating effect since reserves of oil in the ground are really saved-up sun energy).

      However, the virtual character hunting virtual animals cannot feed my real-world belly with those virtual animal burgers. In the end, there's no wealth created inside the game, so it is just like day-trading. It requires more money from outsiders to keep it going, and in the end the company that runs the online game is the only one who will always win (i.e., in gambling terms, the "house"). In the overall context of the real world, the game is a service like any other, and "investors" in virtual property are providing a service to the gamers. In the end, though, the gamers must make their wealth from the real-world before paying it to the service providers.

  21. Just another Luxury by e2d2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This got me to think a bit, how is this any different from buying an over priced pair of shoes? or a nice car that costs $250k USD? Or a diamond necklace that is not truly rare at all? It's an idea that is being sold, and idea that this particular exchange has value. Market value, someone is willing to pay.

    I personally don't see the need or even want in this but it's not my money..

    1. Re:Just another Luxury by G-funk · · Score: 1

      Do you have any idea how many hours with 12 out of 10 hookers you can get with $250k? A ferrari won't make up for being an obese shy balding nerd, but hookers don't care.

      --
      Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    2. Re:Just another Luxury by espo812 · · Score: 1
      how is this any different from buying an over priced pair of shoes? or a nice car that costs $250k USD? Or a diamond necklace that is not truly rare at all?
      The difference is that the game producers can very easily produce whatever they want in the game. Fancy shoes take raw material (leather, which takes raising a cow and tanning the hide and so on) and manufacturing (a hand craftsman that produces sharp looking shoes) which all takes time. Thus fancy shoes are more rare than a copy and paste action on a pair of shoes in a game. A nice car is more rare than a copy and paste action on a car in a game (Grand Theft Auto generates fancy cars all day if you're in the right part of town.) A diamond necklace is rare because the De Beers company hoards diamonds. Say there are a million gem quality diamonds mined in a year, they buy 800,000 of them and release 250,000 to the market. It doesn't matter that there are 550,000 diamonds out there, YOU can't buy them. So to you they're rare. And because they're rare for you, you'll pay more for them. But Command and Conquer will let me mine all day long, I just have to restart the game.
      --

      espo
    3. Re:Just another Luxury by Clod9 · · Score: 1

      "Market value, someone is willing to pay." There is the difference. Once you buy a pair of shoes or a diamond necklace, it's yours. Nobody else wants it or will pay much for it. But this guy apparently found that this ... nothing ... was eminently salable. It's more like a baseball card than a pair of shoes, there was at least some hope that its value will rise instead of dropping like a stone.

  22. Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by Ogemaniac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and you have "made your money back" instantaneously!

    This guy may have beaten the interest rate on a CD, but a CD doesn't require hundreds of hours of micromanaging, either.

    1. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by John+Meacham · · Score: 1

      but day trading does, and people do that, often loosing a large amount of their investment. So this guy fared pretty well.

      --
      http://notanumber.net/
    2. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by fabs64 · · Score: 1

      Except he still has the virtual "property" you lout, and therefore has effectively doubled his money if the island's market worth is still the same.

    3. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by afabbro · · Score: 1
      Um, no he didn't. He faired rather poorly. First, his money is worth ~3% less today than it was a year ago due to inflation.

      If he'd put the money in a U.S. Treasury bill (aka the risk free rate), he'd have made ~4.125%. So his net gain was 1.125%. THAT is what alternatives should be compared to, because any idiot can do that. Comparing it to what some fool does in day trading is completely specious. -3% vs. 1.125% - it's obvious that "recouping his investment" is a poor decision.

      Of course, he might have (in order of ascending interest rates) a mortgage, car loan, or credit card bill. If he could have paid off 24% credit card debt, then he was really stupid.

      (Of course, presumably he got some pleasure or emotional satisfaction from this endeavor, but as an investment, it was daffy).

      --
      Advice: on VPS providers
    4. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how could he still have the property if he sold parts of it?

    5. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you tighten a large amount of money? You can't. That's why you should have written LOSING. Oh well.

    6. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by tk2x · · Score: 1

      It doesn't say he sold the entire island. It just says he made his money back in less than a year.

      Assuming he still has a large portion of the island, he could make much more.

    7. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by DreadfulGrape · · Score: 1

      You guys are missing the point completely. He didn't "cash out." He stills holds most of his original virtual investment. From the article:

      "We've really only just begun with the estate sales and land management, there is still more room for growth and revenue with the untapped resources surrounding the land."

      So it stands to reason that if he recouped his investment in a year, he could double it (or more) a year from now. Put another way, it's not like buying a house; it's like buying 1000 acres and subdividing to maximize profits.

      --
      sig has been sent away for a few small repairs...
    8. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by fabs64 · · Score: 1

      fine then, doesn't have all but still has enough to keep charging hunting taxes etc.

    9. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by jcr · · Score: 1

      He faired rather poorly.

      Um.. He just hit the break-even point. It's all profit from here on. The overall ROI remains to be seen.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    10. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You overlook that he still has the island.

      In more fair terms, he's doubled his money.

    11. Re:Uhh, put in in the bank at zero interest by afabbro · · Score: 1
      Um.. He just hit the break-even point. It's all profit from here on.

      No, he didn't. Go back and read what I wrote, especially the "his money is worth ~3% less today than it was a year ago due to inflation" part.

      --
      Advice: on VPS providers
  23. Error by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We're sorry, but the person who posted this comment neglected to pay for comment space.

    His/Her comment will not be displayed.

  24. haha! by stagl · · Score: 1, Redundant

    everyone thinks they know everything, as long as they are behind a computer. i just scanned the old article and ran across this!

    --

    R.I.P.
    1. Re:haha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you're the third poster I've seen so far that's found that message. Congrats.

  25. Time involved? by jebiester · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It would be interesting to find out how much time he spent selling his sub-divisions or enforcing his taxes. If this took the equivalent of a full time job or a lot of time, he hasn't necessarily made any money back, just earned a small wage as well as loosing part of his initial investment in the sales.

    1. Re:Time involved? by Flower · · Score: 1

      Having never played the game I can't say but I wouldn't be surprised, if the developers thought it out, that he could script the taxation. Go onto island aim gun and shoot, then get a pop-up window stating how many PEDs it's going to cost to bag the animal. I could see mining done the same way. The actual selling of property I would see as wanting to keep as a manual process allowing the option to maximize profit and have some fun bargining with the other players.

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
    2. Re:Time involved? by SsShane · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For someone to invest so much money, he probably enjoyed every minute of it.

    3. Re:Time involved? by mincognito · · Score: 1

      When your decisions effect your real life (i.e. your income) it is no longer a game.

    4. Re:Time involved? by nwanua · · Score: 1

      Let's say he worked full time at a real job (tm), and spent his evening hours selling and taxing. If this was the case, he's earned money while most of us wasted that time watching TV, posting to slashdot (e.g. me :-), or some doing some such activity. I'd love to be making 24 grand USD in my spare time. On top of that, this income isn't taxed in the real world (or is it?)

    5. Re:Time involved? by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      When your decisions effect your real life (i.e. your income) it is no longer a game.

      Sure, but one can enjoy things even if they aren't games.

    6. Re:Time involved? by r3m0t · · Score: 1

      Project Entropia tax your money going out with a flat fare + a percentage fee. I doubt the Inland Revenue/tax collectors will tax this until more than one person is able to make a profit.

    7. Re:Time involved? by khallow · · Score: 1
      When your decisions effect your real life (i.e. your income) it is no longer a game.

      No, otherwise there would be no such things as games. I prefer the mathematical point of view which doesn't make such a distinction.

    8. Re:Time involved? by Blikkie · · Score: 1

      Actually I do play this game (and happen to like it thankyouverymuch) and I can tell you that taxing goes completely automatic. They just get a popup box with anouncement that they have made 500 PEDs or something that day.

      The owner of the island has spent some thousands of dollars to lure new and attactive animals to the island though that are fun to hunt for high-level characters.

      For normal players there is hardly any difference between Project Entropia and any other MMORPG. You pay an amount of money each month (some $15 will) do, and in exchange for that you can hunt mine, tailor and colour and generally have fun in a virtual casino annex chatroom. If you want to get very good very fast you can spend a lot of money buying skills, elite guns and other elite stuff, but this isn't much different from buying a high level WoW char on eBay.

      Project Entropia is just like the real economy. In the end value is determined by the price people are willing to pay for a product.

      Over the last few months since I started I have deposited $60. If I sold all I owned to the game I'd get back some $40. If i tried to sell all items and skills to player characters I'd probably break even because there is usually a difference between Trade Terminal value (the price you can sell a product for to MindArk) and marketvalue. Just like real economy, very fascinating.

    9. Re:Time involved? by iamhassi · · Score: 1
      "It would be interesting to find out how much time he spent selling his sub-divisions or enforcing his taxes. If this took the equivalent of a full time job or a lot of time, he hasn't necessarily made any money back..."

      Not really, depends on what he would have been doing instead. If he would have been using that time just playing some other game anyway then he has made his money back.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  26. Silly me... by Hosiah · · Score: 1

    All this time I thought playing video games was about having fun and getting a high score!

  27. the greater fools by vykor · · Score: 1

    Ah, the greater fool theory of investment in action. "No matter how much I pay for this, a greater fool than I will pay even more."

    Or several greater fools, in this case.

  28. but by bLindmOnkey · · Score: 1

    think about this for a second. This guy invested $13000 and made it back in a year. So after a year or so he has not gained any profit. In a year you could have a job making $13000 profit. Sure maybe next year he'll have made 13000, but this is just breaking even. No big deal.

    1. Re:but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a) 13k english pound is significantly more than 13k USD

      b) if he has 13k to spend for such things, he's surely not in trouble of having to work at SlaveMart or McExpoit.

      c) I doubt selling a bit of virtual property is a fulltime job. In fact you can take it as a game (such as everyone hanging around the WoW auction house, have fun and make cash while having fun...)

    2. Re:but by vmardian · · Score: 1

      c) I doubt selling a bit of virtual property is a fulltime job. In fact you can take it as a game (such as everyone hanging around the WoW auction house, have fun and make cash while having fun...)

      I'm certain that, for him, it's a full time job. No one is going to invest that much money and not be completely immersed in the virtual world. He needs to keep on top of everything. That's not to say that it still can't be fun. I bought, traded, and sold EverQuest stuff for five years, both part time and full time, and I had fun.

      --
      PowerLevel.com - A next generation marketplace for virtual items and services
  29. Wal-Mart and McDonald's Pay Better by queenb**ch · · Score: 1

    Basically what you're saying is that this guy worked his a&& off for weeks or months coding this thing before he even brought it on line, and then worked his a&& off managing it for a year. If he's only made $13,000, assuming a 6 month development period, he's been working for a whopping $4.16 per hour.

    Wal-Mart checkers and McDonald's burger flippers make better money.

    2 cents,

    Queen B

    --
    HDGary secures my bank :/
    1. Re:Wal-Mart and McDonald's Pay Better by revmoo · · Score: 1

      Yes, but think about how this will enrich his resume(rolls eyes) :)

      --
      I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
    2. Re:Wal-Mart and McDonald's Pay Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's assuming he's not doing some actual work aside from just running his little island. He could manage a site, work from home, any number of things, and the fact that he had $13,500 lying around gives one the impression that maybe he has some form of inheritance. His one investment is being pretty quickly earned back in addition to whatever other income he may have.

  30. Advice.... by greenguy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Everyone always told me to invest in land, because "they're not making any more of it!"

    Little did everyone know....

    --
    What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
  31. like .com stock by chandoni · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of the time I bought into the slashdot IPO.

  32. Kind of like the US Federal Reserve by Scott7477 · · Score: 1

    I haven't read the terms of use of this MMORPG, but I wonder what guarantees these buyers have that the game sysadmins won't decide to create another virtual island and sell it to someone else, devaluing the pre-existing virtual properties? When central banks see times getting tough, the temptation to just print money has proved irresistible in the past.

    --
    "Lack of technical competence coupled with the arrogance of power, as usual, leads to no good end."
    1. Re:Kind of like the US Federal Reserve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the company's desire to stay afloat. If they were to simply create more virtual islands, the trust people put in the company would be broken, and they'd lose money in the long run.

      What they must do now is continue providing original ideas for people to buy, like the space station that sold recently. There can only be one of each.

  33. Virtual island? pssshhhht that's nothing. by pestilence4hr · · Score: 1

    This guy bought a space station, and wants to make it a disco. And it only cost him a cool $100 grand.

  34. Re:Virtual island? pssshhhht that's nothing. by pestilence4hr · · Score: 1

    I swear I hit "preview". Here's the link

  35. Opportunity Costs? by scishop · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So he managed to regain his investment, but what could he have made with his time and money if spent elsewhere. In a CD the money would have easily been earning 5% annually and could have potentially returned much more if put into more risky investments. More importantly what could he have earned if he spent his time working at some other occupation instead of hyping his real estate? You can easily earn over £13,700 working a real job in a year. Opportunity costs are the name to the game here.

  36. It takes guts by Argonne · · Score: 0

    Project Entropia? It takes guts to make up something that sounds like a paradise of entrails. I guess "The Intestinet" was already taken.

  37. All your virtual items are belong to us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the "Project Entropia Conditions of Use":

    As part of your interactions with the System, you may acquire, create, design, or modify Virtual items, but you agree that you will not gain any ownership interest whatsoever in any Virtual item, and you hereby assign to MindArk all of your rights, title and interest in any such Virtual item.

    From the sound of it, the user doesn't own anything... I wish I could sell nothing for $100,000.

  38. And then there's the space station... by jpellino · · Score: 1

    Jon Jakobs just bought the virtual space station for $100G, he's going to turn it into a cross between Jurassic Park and a disco.

    As Dave Barry is so fond of saying, I am not making this up.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    1. Re:And then there's the space station... by 6ame633k · · Score: 1

      Space Station you say!! I don't think I can afford the price tag for the entire space station - but maybe they will let me sleep in the engine room where they store supplies of astronaut ice cream and fuel crystals - I could sleep on the boxes as long as I have my own bathroom.

      --
      You had me at merlot
  39. Speaking of which... by ScaryMonkey · · Score: 1

    I've got some "virtual property" to sell you! I'm giving you a chance to invest early, too, because the property is so exclusive that right now it exists only in my own mind! Strike while the iron is hot! And, I'm willing to let you have it at BARGAIN BASEMENT prices! Checks and credit cards accepted.

  40. Where will it end? by click2005 · · Score: 0

    Advertising the virtual land when they sell other real estate that devalues his? Will he put Google adwords billboards on the land? How about branded game items? I hear JCB is doing a great deal on virtual backhoes. . But I guess at the end of the day buying virtual land is no different to buying virtual music like mp3s.

    --
    I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
  41. kinda dumb? by digitallysick · · Score: 1

    i guess he made his money back, must be a popular game, with alot of people that dont get laid playing it to the extent that they would actually "pay" to do anything on a game?? lol

  42. Really depends on the source of earnings. by krunk4ever · · Score: 1

    I don't agree with your analogy at all, especially comparing it to a CD. What's hard to say is how much of the initial investment was "resold" and how much of the the earnings were from taxes and fees that he's collected. If 100% of his earnings came by reselling property, then I'd agree this was a pretty poor investment. It's like buy $26k of stock and reselling the stock for $26k a year later. Practically no earnings.

    However, if only 50% of his earnings came from reselling property, and the other 50% came from taxes and fees he's charging people, then I'd say he fared quite well. That means he still has 50% of virtual property left (or even more, depending on how he much he's reselling property for) and it also means for a 50% return on his investment. Tell me another investment that'll give you 50% return in just 1 year. And this 50% return will probably carry year over year.

  43. It looks like . . . by MexicanMenace · · Score: 1
    you're trying to reboot yourself.

    What kind of help would you like?

    • A mirror
    • A visit from AWESOM-O
  44. hmm by DaveJay · · Score: 1

    Some people are saying "the people in the game paying for space on the island are incredibly stupid", but I say bravo to all of them; he paid a lot of money for the opportunity to create something other people would enjoy, and in so doing added enough value to make his money back (and presumably a profit).

  45. Stock market anyone... by GumphMaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Many have scoffed that this individual paid good money for nothing tangible, and then sold it on to others who also got nothing tangible. This is neither innovative nor new. The currency or futures/options trading markets have been doing this for years. The stock exchange companies even make a cut of each trade---a profit from the intangible profits made from trading virtual or as-yet-non-existant goods.

    --
    Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
    1. Re:Stock market anyone... by espo812 · · Score: 1
      The currency or futures/options trading markets have been doing this for years.
      Yea, but in the US these markets are regulated. Therefore, the companies can't just produce stock out of nothing. Therefore the stock is rare, and if demand is higher than the supply, the stock has a positive value.

      Contrast this with the game. The game designers can pump out islands as fast as they can hit copy and paste. There's no regulation to stop them from just adding another island, and another island, as long as they want. Sure, this guy paid thousands of dollars for his island. After the game produces enough islands for everyone that wants one, the price could be down to a dollar an island.
      --

      espo
  46. Re:Virtual Property -- Supply and Demand by joecode · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not so. The domain name space is stricly limited. But there is an unlimited supply of virtual reality. Therefore: It's just a pyramid scheme in disguise.

  47. The real measure...$$$/h by Ogemaniac · · Score: 1

    Let's add up the total value of the money he has brought in and the value of what he currently owns, subtract off what he paid, and then divide by the number of hours he spent managing this whole business.

    I am sure we are talking nickels and dimes.

    1. Re:The real measure...$$$/h by Antifuse · · Score: 1

      That implies that he considers his game time to be "work" - if he's doing it for the sheer joy and fun of it, then really it's like getting paid to play video games.

  48. Action winner? by coolidk · · Score: 0

    FTA While the real housing market may be somewhat static, the one in the virtual world is booming, said the space station action winner, gamer Jon Jacobs, AKA Neverdie. I want to be an action winner, what do I do?

  49. Interview with the investor by vmardian · · Score: 3, Informative
    --
    PowerLevel.com - A next generation marketplace for virtual items and services
  50. centralised standard patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There really needs to be a massive overhaul of the patents issue. Realistically many science institutions in third world countries dont pay the licensing fees anyway for the use of the information. The real effect is that it stifles many science projects in the first world and the countries like india and china are catching up or overtaking the first world and its all because the greed in the first world is horrific.

  51. LOL by Bahwoot · · Score: 1

    This is the latest form of chain pyramid money making scam. If you bought into this you are the perfect dumbass that the developers want. 100,000 coconut carving monkeys, only 10 gets to taste the coco. GOOD LUCK!

  52. This is NOT land by karzan · · Score: 1

    Land is a very special kind of thing--good, useful land is in strictly limited supply, and all other economic activity depends on it. It is a very real, very necessary thing that is expensive because the kind of land needed by each particular economic activity is quite scarce (for example, the particular strip of land needed to build a road, or fertile land to grow food)

    This, however, is just some bits of code created by programmers working in an office somewhere. They can, and will, create almost infinitely more. It is not scarce except that it is artificially made scarce by programmers.

    I think the confusion here comes from the fact that land is the metaphor being used here, when what is really for sale is a 'game object', which is the same as if I created a big online game of marbles, and I decided to make a few really pretty marbles, and then people who played the game started selling them to each other for lots of money. It is exactly the same, it's just something some programmer made and can make infinitely more of. And in this case it's called 'virtual property' or whatever, but it's no different.

  53. Now there's a property Crash waiting to happen.... by RationalRoot · · Score: 1

    And can you get Insurance on your Virtual Home ?
    Would the insurance exclude "Acts of root" ?
    D

    --
    http://davesboat.blogspot.com/
  54. Then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He went to bankok and bought a bj for $18000 but he made it back in under a year...

  55. Maybe that's why they don't use floats by jfoust2 · · Score: 1

    And I believe Gibson was recapitulating Barlow, who said cyberspace is where you are when you're on the phone.

    --
    Curator of the Jefferson Computer Museum http://www.threedee.com/jcm
  56. Pennies at best by Ogemaniac · · Score: 1

    This is dwarfed by the enjoyed by his enjoyment of the game, I hope, or he is really wasting his time.

    No one but the poorest of the poor Chinese would attempt to do this as a way to make money.

  57. In Korea... by rbrewer123 · · Score: 1

    only old people buy real property!

  58. Just like real life. by tentimestwenty · · Score: 1

    The economy cannot generate rewards greater than the amount of money in the system (money=natural resources), minus however much gets taken off the top (one-way conversions such as burning oil). You are using a tool that decays, in a system already rigged to prevent any net growth. Your tool will break, and you will buy another one, in the hopes of getting the big payoff. It's a gambling system dressed in some livelier colors.

  59. more info by Elea1983 · · Score: 1

    Anyone that wants more info about this "Treasure Island" and about the guy that bought it should visit this site: http://www.twarriors.com/ti/. He currently makes about 50$ in taxes/day, and he gets them automaticly when people hunt/mine,... on his land ;) 50$/day=1500/month Not bad for virtually no work.

  60. Today's Youth by rbrewer123 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Johnny: Mommy, when I grow up I want to be a virtual real estate tycoon and make lots of money!

    Mom: Ok Johnny, but if you want to be successful you'll have to spend a lot of time playing your online games, and you might even need to skip some classes.

    Johnny: I'm willing to make the sacrifices!

  61. Sure, he bought an island by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1
    Remember that guy who bought a virtual island in "Project Entropia" for £13,700

    Sure, he bought a virtual island in cyberspace. But in the real world, he lives with a roommate in a U-Stor It room.

  62. And yet.. by Blade80 · · Score: 0

    After all this publicity they still only have 400,000 acounts.

  63. Offtopic? I don't think so; mod parent up! by Mille+Mots · · Score: 1
    It seems apparent, to me at least, that the moderator who scored this one Offtopic didn't read the whole post.

    While I agree that it's lengthy, the story is most definitely on topic...virtual markets, virtual values, the eventual crash. The moral is not limited to Project Entropia, however, but can be extrapolated into just about any Western style market...arbitrage, stocks, bonds, etc.

    If I had the mod points, I'd call it Insightful.

  64. Everything? by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 1

    When you think about it, what is it really that makes our "reality" something better than "virtual"? For all we know, we could just be A.I.'s in some simulation. It's not unreasonable to believe that computer power will continue to increase at the incredible rates they have until now. Wouldn't the ultimate game be populated by Artificial Intelligences whose only inputs and outputs are within the simulation itself, making it their reality? I have to admit, being a god in a realistic simulation is something I expect from games within my lifetime.

    1. Re:Everything? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm a bit of a skeptic about the more utopian angle about virtuality. I remember calling the whole wave of thinking about virtuality back in the 90's the ultimate version of "white flight." In fact, much of the work in cognition in the past 10 years or so has been to show just how important our bodies are to our thinking, to our experience.

      Instead of seeing the virtual as a replacement for the physical, I see it as an augmentation and a way of creating changes and new relations in "the real".

  65. Calm down everyone by David_Shultz · · Score: 2, Insightful
    This is nothing to get worked up about. Just like any scenario in which money is traded between players based on some set of rules, someone has to come out on top, or else no one would play it. Like any casino game (or lottery), someone is bound to win (of course the house always wins.)

    You have to wonder whether "Deathifier" is as intelligent as so many people on this website are suggesting, or whether he A) was one of the lucky ones or B)simply worked alot harder than the other people to sell his property. This second option makes alot of sense, and is supported by his commitment that was demonstrated by his willingness to make such a large investment. Could you imagine paying that much and NOT making it back?

    However, if his goal was making money, then this probably was not a good (intelligent?) way to go. He worked for a year -in order to make his money back. Is there a guarantee he will see much more profit coming off of that? Not likely, given that he made his money by selling his land away. Overall, he could've done better flipping burgers for a few months.

  66. Cut him some slack... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Ease off his nuts already. Not only did he make a gutsy move a year ago, when (nearly) everyone slammed him for flushing his money - but now that he's proven it was a winning investment, he gets slammed again.

    What everyone is failing to mention is that this land will continue to produce $20,000+ per year, which he can bank, or sell the deed to it for $50k or more.

    That's $50,000 pure profit, from playing a game he obviously enjoys. The dude has a PhD - that's no coincidence.

  67. PT Barnum thanks you by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    Looks like there are more than a few suckers born every minute.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  68. All ownership is virtual by coldtone · · Score: 1

    Is it really such a big leap from government selling you land and a company selling you a portion a memory. With a land purchase from a government you are entering a contract with them, the government can change its mind and take back the land, the government can fall and you land claim is null.

    Now companies go under way more often then governments, but governments do go under, and land claims are invalidated. But it is similar.

  69. location location location by toiletmonster · · Score: 1

    But there is value in location. Would you rather live in ANWR or New York City?

    Unless you can teleport easily. I haven't played the game.

  70. Re:Offtopic? I don't think so; mod parent up! by GuyFawkes · · Score: 1

    You expect moderators to read anything except the subject????

    If anyone asks you to explain why slashdot is now a steaming pile of crap instead of the hugely interesting site that it used to be, just point them at the moderators....

    same as wikipedia territory stamping where a determined clueless loon will drive off a world reknowned expert in any given field, which, hypocritically, slashdotters will bemoan...

    I think the goat story is brilliant for exactly the reasons you mention, you can apply it to so much of modern life, and the fact is mere substitution of "goats" for "entropia" or "stock market" should not be sufficient to make something eminently sensible suddenly seem eminently stupid, if it does then you need to seriously question the validity of the eminently sensible rationale.

    --
    http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
  71. The Australian Tax Office will be interested, then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And, IIRC, the ATO has plenty of precedents for rulings that would apply here. It may be virtual property, but the time & effort he's put into it would probably be viewed as 'work', by which he 'earned' the income... in the same way as any other real estate you own. You pay tax on rent, you claim deductions for expenses, etc. Although I wouldn't think he'd have too many expenses - still, being able to put a deduction on your tax return for 'MMORPG monthly access fees' would be almost worth paying the extra tax! :-D

    If he sells the entire island, I would think it would fall under the normal investment rules, where you pay tax on the capital gain.

    The ATO can be surprisingly flexible when it comes to creative ways to take money off you... :-P

    Disclaimer: I might have no clue, so don't take my word on it!

  72. Not off topic. Actually read posts, lazy mods. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it clever and relevent to the topic/story.

  73. got it in... by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

    Now help me get it out!!!