Slashdot Mirror


Coldwell Banker To Sell Second Life Properties

Dekortage sends news of what may be a new development in the attempted mainstreaming of Second Life. We've seen plenty of examples of real-world news media, politicos, and PR campaigns setting up in SL. But so far most of this action has been about first-life organizations trying to gain real-world publicity by their forays into SL. CNN is reporting that the real estate firm Coldwell Banker is moving into SL for the purpose of selling and renting in-world properties. From the article: "Coldwell Banker has bought extensive tracts of property on the central 'mainland' of Second Life. (Most companies own 'islands' scattered all over.) It subdivided this digital land into 520 individual houses and living units, half of which it will sell and half it will rent... 'A small number of land barons mostly control real estate in Second Life, and we thought we could bring real estate to the masses,' [a VP explained]."

36 of 175 comments (clear)

  1. Supply and demand by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Has Linden guaranteed in writing that they will never expand the world? If not, then Coldwell Banker buyers are idiots.

    What is to keep Linden from increasing the amount of land? ( They did it back in 2003, IIRC ) Not only would this give them more space for more players, but it decreases the power of land barons. And having a 'new world' to explore would add more interest to the game. Anyone want to be Magellan? Or Columbus? There seems to be no downside for Linden to increase the ammount of land.
    There definitely is a downside to NOT increasing the ammount of land: competition. If SL gets too crowded, that just helps up-and-coming competitors.

    As supply increases, price decreases. There is not even the real-world parallel of "location, location, and location" to uphold property value in Second Life because of teleportation.

    I predict that Coldwell Banker will lose their shirts on this one.

    1. Re:Supply and demand by Lally+Singh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think CW's buying the initial land in order to get the ball rolling on getting themselves involved in the transactional business of real estate on SL. Long after the current stuff is sold off, they want to be the agents you buy virtual real estate from later.

      --
      Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
    2. Re:Supply and demand by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know much about SL, it strikes me as a world where most people have more money than sense.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    3. Re:Supply and demand by Usquebaugh · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hey that reminds me of another world I know.

    4. Re:Supply and demand by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As supply increases, price decreases. There is not even the real-world parallel of "location, location, and location" to uphold property value in Second Life because of teleportation.

      Well, not quite true: it helps to have e.g. a lot of merchants together in one place, as it's a pain to teleport 30 times to look at everyone's goods. So new merchants are going to want to be where the merchants already are. Although I agree you can't use the whole "They ain't makin' any more land" line here, as LL certainly can do that.

      Still, I have to ask, WTF? Don't people play SL to get away from assholes who add no value but take your money ... such as real estate agents?

    5. Re:Supply and demand by rubberchickenboy · · Score: 3, Funny

      I predict that Coldwell Banker will lose their shirts on this one.

      Maybe, but they're only virtual shirts, and they can just rez others.

    6. Re:Supply and demand by paladinrocks · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Am I the only person who doesn't get this? This must be the point in time when I must call myself old. I played MUD games (text-based) online games twenty years ago. I don't understand how a real company buys up land in a world that doesn't even exist, except in an online gaming forum?

    7. Re:Supply and demand by John+Hurliman · · Score: 3, Funny

      In 2003? They increase the amount of land all the time. Every time someone buys a new island the amount of real estate in-world is increased, and the Linden-owned mainland continent grows all the time as well. Around a month ago over 100 new sims were added, and these sims the Coldwell Bankers bought were auctioned off meaning it was fresh mainland additions.

      It's like when a company sells more shares, and all those idiot investors lose their shirts. You should probably get on the phone and tell Coldwell why they are idiots, and how if you were in charge you could save the company. They'll probably hire you on the spot.

    8. Re:Supply and demand by NetSettler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Has Linden guaranteed in writing that they will never expand the world? If not, then Coldwell Banker buyers are idiots.

      Indeed. This is what happened with domain names. They went sky high, then lots of businesses crashed and they increased the number of TLDs, so people who had invested in the land grab didn't always win.

      The other thing is that any theory of scarcity presupposes that Linden will be the only, or at least the winning, item in this area. If someone came along and offered an alternate space, it wouldn't even matter if Linden had put a guarantee in writing... the value could still drop due to ordinary competition. No one has guaranteed Linden a monopoly.

      Cyberspace is big... There's really no reason for there to be a scarcity of real estate. It isn't, after all, real estate. It's contrived. And if the prices go too high, that simple fact should invite competition. A key defining characteristic of real estate is supposed to be that they're not making more of it.

      --

      Kent M Pitman
      Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

    9. Re:Supply and demand by victortyt · · Score: 2, Funny

      buy virtual real estate
      So, is the estate virtual or real?
    10. Re:Supply and demand by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's complex, duh!

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    11. Re:Supply and demand by DaleGlass · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, it's something that will probably stay.

      Imagine you could teleport instantly anywhere. No downsides. You could live in a cabin in the mountains, and instantly appear on a chair in the office. But even then I don't think people would just go live in a random place. If there's nothing but strangers around, you can't look of the window and say "Howdy, neighbour!". Teleporting would still take a conscious action, and suddenly appearing at somebody's house would be a disruptive way of trying to start a conversation (that's something you can do in SL, and which many people hate). Simply seeing somebody nearby is a perfect excuse to start talking, without being disruptive.

    12. Re:Supply and demand by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know much about SL, it strikes me as a world where most people have more money than sense.

      If that's the case then it makes a lot of sense to get into the business of selling things to them.

    13. Re:Supply and demand by IQpierce · · Score: 2, Funny

      Haha, I get it.

      WoW, right?

  2. I wonder... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3, Funny

    If I can get one of those 30 year, first 5 years interest-only subprime mortgages here? Maybe this is the way to "save" the sub-primes - virtual property! After all, it seems that "virtual" clients didn't work to well...

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  3. Re:Whoa Cowboy! by tm2b · · Score: 2, Funny

    You don't understand...

    When you die in New Jersey, you die in real life !

    --
    "It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
  4. Re:WTF is the point of this game? by TorKlingberg · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because when they do, the real world press writes about it.

  5. Re:Whoa Cowboy! by Asztal_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

    No, but you could have your account warned/suspended for abuse(shooting someone can send them flying quite far, depending on how the weapon is made). You can't kill someone, by the way - even if you trapped them in a box or whatever, they can teleport out.

    (PS. If you ever go into the sandboxes in Second Life, you'll see all sorts of other types of abuse too - floating batman cubes/bananaphones which follow you around playing an annoying/catchy* loop, hundreds of stupidly high-detail models just left lying around by their long-gone creators, bendy penises which follow people around annoying them, thousands of physics objects which attempt to waste the simulator's resources, etc.)
    *delete where appropriate

  6. Blurring the line between real and virtual by 2Bits · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When people are too addictive to games such that the line between reality and virtuality is blurred, it starts to get into a dangerous point. Life suddenly becomes all about speculation, nothing is real and no productivity is gained for human societies as a whole.

    It's the worst kind of speculation we can have, worse than speculating on the stock or commodity market. If you buy a bunch of stocks on a company, and if the market crashes, you still own bits of that company, and the company may be just doing well, making a profit every year. If you buy the so-called lands in SL, and if SL were to die, what are you left up with?

    I think this is where gamings are dangerous. And this is an area where I support legislative control. We already have regulations on stock markets, on currency trading, on casino, on auction, on the general trading, etc, we might as well have regulations on the worst kind of speculation: speculation on nothing.

    1. Re:Blurring the line between real and virtual by MaelstromX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your comment makes no sense. Any number of other commodities would lose all their value if suddenly they had no use to people anymore, and it's not a scenario that's unique to imaginary assets. If Second Life "dies" you are left with a valueless property, the same way that an exodus of people and businesses or an environmental disaster might leave real life property worthless.

      A smart investor will not put his money in something that has the risk of becoming valueless. Evidently, Linden has made many people very confident that their world will be not just up and functioning but thriving for a long time to come, and therefore its land has legitimate value in the same way that anything else might.

    2. Re:Blurring the line between real and virtual by Kjella · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think trying to create an economy that allows for proper speculation while at the same time being completely under another company's control, it like asking water not to be wet. While there's clearly a monetary value to virtual items (like selling MMORPG-equipment on ebay), it's temporary. They could change the rules at any time, but that'd destory gameplay so you can be fairly sure the powerful sword you bought today is a powerful sword tomorrow. That predictability is the only thing that gives it value. It's not just a matter of regulating the content itself, SL could do all sorts of tricks like making TARDIS-like housing, choking the amount of new users which would force a price drop, rearrange the map/view/default starting locations to make the "center" be somewhere else, anything and everything. By the time you have it regulated in well enough, it'll be about as fun as investing in the stock market. Take it for what it is, it's basicly an e-penis. As long as you pay more than Joe Average (both for starters and in upkeep), you'll have this fancy thing to show off to your friends. This speculation is in that SL will be the next big e-penis thing and that it'll somehow be a status symbol to show how much money you've wasted on this. How can you possibly regulate the value of a SL property when the only value it has is perception? Might as well try to regulate the market for pet rocks.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:Blurring the line between real and virtual by ThosLives · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If Second Life "dies" you are left with a valueless property, the same way that an exodus of people and businesses or an environmental disaster might leave real life property worthless.

      The only problem there is that real physical property always has some level of intrinsic value simply because it physically exists. Sure, it might not have any people living near it, and it may be somehow polluted or wrecked by natural disaster, but there is always intrinsic value in matter because it is, well, matter.

      This is significantly different than what "virtual property" is, which is really an embodiment of human effort. Basically, I think all "virtual goods" need to be treated as a service, because they are really the result of creative effort or time spent by individuals; there is no other value associated with the virtual items.

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    4. Re:Blurring the line between real and virtual by ThosLives · · Score: 2, Informative

      What I meant by "intrinsic value" is that a house is always a house (assuming it isn't crumbling) despite the fact that it may not be in a nice neighborhood, or even if it doesn't have a high trade value. I think taxes are irrelevant and just confuse the issue because that's a social construct and involves opportunity cost, not intrinsic value.

      Don't confuse "monetary value" with "intrinsic value". Put another way: does a slice of bread have any less nutritional value if it costs $0.05 instead of $1.00? The answer is no. A slice of bread may have a different relative value (based on its monetary price) but a piece of bread is always a piece of bread (until it rots, in which case it is no longer a piece of bread). Simpler still: Does a thing cease to be that thing if its price changes?

      That last question is related most closely to what I mean by 'intrinsic value': It is the property of an object that does not change when its trade value changes.

      For something like virtual "property" there is no intrinsic value, because inherently the thing is entirely trade value: for instance, the amount of time required to obtain the virtual "good" without trading some currency units for it. This is the only value associated with virtual goods because there is no intrinsic value to a store of information. I would give DNA an example of this; the sequence of bases in a molecule of DNA has no intrinsic value, but that base sequence encoded physically as a DNA molecule has intrinsic value because it can direct the creation of other molecules. That is, the "information" itself is not useful, but the physical embodiment of that information is. Everything to-date which is classified as "virtual property" does not, as far as I am aware, have any corresponding physical embodiment which has intrinsic value. It's a subtle difference, but a very important one (consider: a listing of the base sequences of DNA cannot develop into an organism; you have to actually build a physical object with that sequence to do accomplish anything).

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
  7. The real question is . . . by GeneralAntilles · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who the hell actually plays Second Life? I seed tons of stories on /. and digg about it, but out of all the incredibly geeky people I know, none of them plays Second Life (or at least they wont admit to it).

  8. Re:Whoa Cowboy! by rubberchickenboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Can anyone say...... loser?

    The five million people who spend varying amounts of time in Second Life have probably heard the word before. Has it never been applied to you for playing D&D? Well, OK then...

    So what happens if I create a person in SL, have this make pretend person go and get/buy a gun. Next I have this make pretend person go and shoot someone. Does that mean that in _real_life_ I get arrested for murder?

    If you're in areas of Second Life that allow people to be killed (most of the areas don't). So, no, there's no ramifications for killing someone in SL. That doesn't mean there won't be someday. I could see a time where SL avatars' real life owners are sued for the equivalent of Denial of Service attacks.

  9. This made me check my calendar. by fredmosby · · Score: 3, Funny

    The first thing I did after reading the summary was check my calendar. April 1 is still a week away though. Maybe they're just trying to get ahead in the April fools market.

  10. Re:WTF is the point of this game? by I_Love_Pocky! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm convinced that the only people "playing" second life are the people writing these articles. I think that technology columnists are fascinated with the idea of second life, and love to write about it. I can't fault them for that, because the idea does have interesting implications, but I think they do us all a disservice by continually giving attention to a "phenomenon" that no one actually cares about.

    After reading countless articles about this wonderful new world of second life, I decided to check it out. What a piece of bloated crap-ware. I don't think the idea behind second life is worthless, but it's current incarnation is a joke.

    I don't have a PS3, and have no plans currently to purchase one, but I think their new "Home" has a better chance of becoming popular than second life ever will.

  11. Re:Whoa Cowboy! by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 4, Funny

    I take it that SL is just some VR game?

    Some VR game with, apparently, the BEST PRESS AGENT EVAR!

    Seriously, they're in the news every damned day with stories like this. And yet the only people who actually play Second Life are furry pedophile rapists. Well, that might be an exaggeration, but that's the reputation the game has. How the hell do they get all this press? Sexual favors?

  12. Do any of you actually use Second Life? by lewp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do any of you actually spend time in Second Life? I'm not talking just popping in and poking around once in a while (I've done that), I mean you spend significant amounts of time in the world, you've actually invested some time and energy into making your character your own, and maybe you even develop content for it. I'm more interested in people who are more into the actual enjoyment of the world rather than speculators or people strictly trying to sell their wares.

    The reason I ask is because so many companies seem to be on the bandwagon of this thing, but my friends are almost uniformly tech savvy early adopters and I don't know anybody who's ever logged into it other than to check it out and laugh at it. I've got nothing against it, and if anybody uses it I'm not going to laugh at you or anything. I may not see the appeal, but I don't see the appeal of a lot of things the average person likes. I just haven't seen anybody else who really likes it either, and that's made me question its popularity other than as a kind of inside joke.

    I do think it's a great concept, and I'm sure true virtual worlds will be all the rage someday. I'm just suspicious that anybody actually sees this as a good enough implementation to really start spending time there. I've heard the furry community has taken up residence there to some extent, but honestly when I log in I hardly see any concentration of people anywhere, furry or not.

    --
    Game... blouses.
    1. Re:Do any of you actually use Second Life? by Mondo1287 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've seen the press for this roll by for the last couple of years. Finally after seeing this post I said well I better see what all the hype is really about. I, like your friends, installed it and laughed. Anyone remember MTV's Tikki VRML world from about 10 years ago? Well I was instantly reminded of it. Someone at Coldwell must be delusional, or Linden Labs paid them a heafty sum and gave them free land. It's the lamest thing I've ever seen as far as modern content goes. Is this what they mean by Web 2.0? I think I'll be sticking to my first life with the occational raid in World of Warcraft. Who has time for a second life anyway? I just can't believe businesses are pumping money into this, or is it just media fluff? There is just no way this is going to be very profitable for anyone but Linden Labs. Any company looking to diversify into a market like this really ought to consider sticking to the real world.

    2. Re:Do any of you actually use Second Life? by cruachan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's easy to miss the point of Second Life, because the eyecandy is nowhere near the same level as WoW or similar. Graphically it's certainly around desktop game circa 2000 and the Lindons certainly do have a bit of a blind spot about upgrading it - largely because they seem predominantly focused on server-side issues at the moment.

      However SL isn't really a WoW competitor. It's more like IRC in 3D - think of it as a chatroom where you can actually do things with the other people there. And of course virtually *everything* in SL has been constructed by the people in it. True the building tools have limitations and there's vast amounts of crap. but equally there's some very imagenative stuff too. The scripting language is by no means a toy too, even though that has some major flaws.

      It's also an interesting question who does play it. I see several groups :-

      1. Newbies. Vast numbers of people sign on, hang around the public welcome areas briefly, do a little touring then never play it again. It's quite common to see later reactions from them on /. and the like saying 'I looked and the graphics were crap' - which misses the point about SL being a social thing as above.

      2. Wankers. Literally. A friend of mine who owns a SL club believes 50% of signups do nothing else but cybersex fot the first month. I think she's proberbly right.

      3. Designers, Builders, Coders. Although the tools are limited with imagination there's a lot that can be done. SL seems quite a common outlet for amateur designers, coders and 3D artists. It may not be cutting edge, but you tend to get a lot of attention and feedback. If you're a professional coder then SL is well worth a look as it does have potential and some of the Lindons actually hold open office hours so you can talk to the game designers directly if you wish.

      4. Roleplayers. There's large communities of roleplayers - most of whom spend 90% of their time in roleplay sims so will never be encountered by newbies. A quite common scenario is for a group to jointly buy a server, construct an enviroment, then play in that. Sort of like design your own game and play it using SL simply as an environment to do that. Roleplay covers a wide range from extreme characterization to mild 'wouldn't it be nice to live in environment X' types. Tends to be very hardcore players who spend a lot of time in SL.

      5. Social players. Similar to roleplayers in that they have a community of friends but without the roleplay angle. Again these people hardly ever go near the common meeting places so a newbie will never pick up on them. A large part of the 'core' SL players are in this group.

      6. Others - musicians, speculators, educators etc etc

      People can belong to more than one group of course. Myself I am uncertain about the future of SL. Against it it has

      a. Relatively poor graphics
      b. Architecture limitations - the *bloody* asset server is a major pain point. It's not clear how far it can scale. The 50 avs in a sim limit is laughable for example.
      c. It has a certain reputation in some influential quarters
      d. The Lindons appear to be a bunch of bloody hippies :-). Certainly their business methods need to take a step up.

      But for

      a. Because the world is user constructed and designed to be at a fundemental level - and not given, as in WoW or other games, then in theory it can evolve. Games with Everquest, WoW, Eve etc cannot move forward in the same way.
      b. It is one world and not sharded
      c. It does provide enough tools that there is room for professional level interest in it.
      d. It's totally generic
      e. It has an established user base of people with graphic, building and coding skills who can jointly take it forward as the tools and capabilities improve. Real first mover advantage that.

      On balance I think it likely to be here to stay and evolve as the prime metaverse. However I expect it to be the first among many (possibly with interconnections) and remain a minority interest for many years yet. It is worth your time though to look at it on a deeper level than simply 'ooh the graphics are crap' or 'it's just full of wankers'.

    3. Re:Do any of you actually use Second Life? by DaleGlass · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yep, I do.

      I've been using SL for a little more than a year so far. Went there with the explicit idea of that I'd probably script something, as the idea sounded interesting. So I got a SL account, and now it got to the point I pretty much have a monitor dedicated to it.

      I use SL mostly as a glorified chatroom, and don't move around much, primarily hanging around in Luskwood. If you want a concentration of furries then check it out, but have in mind that right now it'll be quite empty, as most of the population is American. There will be a lot more people in a few hours. I'd say the problem with SL is the same as with any IRC server, until you find a place for yourself it's hard to figure out what to do there.

      I also like SL as a base for certain coding ideas. I run a reputation system as an alternative to the one provided by SL, and also do some work on the SL source code. In that sense, SL is appealing because it's already there, so I only have to add my ideas to it, and it offers a large potential user base. I think that SL is appealing for a programmer, builder or artist in that it's a very convenient medium for saying "hey look what I made" and getting a reaction (and perhaps even cash). You see people working on all sorts of interesting stuff.

      So what do I do in SL? I mostly hang around and talk to people. It's a bit nicer than IRC in that you can have a more RL-like conversation. People can easily gather in a group and talk about whatever they want without having to form a separate channel. Sometimes I wander around and check out cool stuff people made. I try building a bit. Sometimes I try playing chess with rather bad results. I script and change the SL client. IMO, SL is a bit overhyped right now, but it's still pretty fun to be in.

  13. Is SL wants it real, then.. lets give them real.. by JackMeyhoff · · Score: 3, Funny

    Virtual World War? Virtual riots? Virtual pillaging? Virtual squatting? Virtual Crime? Lets let the value of land plumet as it would in those real life situation.

    --
    http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
  14. There's also the problem by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of what happens if people stop giving a shit about a given game or perhaps "virtual universe" if you prefer. In the real world, while certain areas may experience a net loss in people, population keeps growing so overall there's more people who are in the market.

    Well games, that's not the case. The player base can leave. UO and EQ are two examples of that happening. Once both were major players, and were able to claim more people playing them than any MMORPG before. Both now have dwindled to be minor players (about 1% marketshare in the case of UO). Thus if one had gotten in at the peak and banked on them continuing to grow, you'd have lost out. WoW is now the big dog by far, shattering every record before it and still growing, but for how long? At some point it will probably be supplanted by something else.

    Thus speculation in game markets doesn't make sense in the same was as real markets. Expansion aside, people can simply move on, and if they do it isn't like they move to a new part of the world, they move to a completely different world (or worlds) with different rules.

    Then, of course, there's always the question of what happens if the company pulls the plug. The servers go off, all of a sudden your investments are worth precisely zero.

  15. Virtual Goods and Virtual Property by hypnotik · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Something always strikes me very odd about conversations about Second Life and their ilk here on Slashdot. Invariably someone decries the concept of buying "virtual goods" and renting "virtual property".

    Let's step back a bit here... What is the difference between "software" and "a virtual shirt", or "digital music"? Are they not both just some pattern of ones and zeros? Sure, a virtual shirt only makes sense in terms of Second Life... But for me this is the same as buying digital music that can be played on some hardware device. Or buying software that can be run on some subset of computers.

    Virtual land... Who would rent "virtual property"? What sense does that make? Perhaps we should ask all those that rent space for web pages?

    That being said, I think Second Life is kinda daft in its implementation, but the concept is very very cool.

    --
    (I was only an egg, but then I cracked)
  16. Re:Ok I dont get it by CronoCloud · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have said this before:

    SL is what the "player" makes of it. It has no goal, other than what you set for yourself.

    Me, I hang with the SL fashionistas. I've done a bit of scripting with gadgets for the SL fashionistas in mind. I wander around and visit interesting places now and then, go listen to music now and then.