Why would they give away $2300?

To keep the business model alive. There aren't enough users to fill the worlds (you must at least agree with that right mike? You are a sensible guy).  Technically it is not $2,300.  It is likely to be less that they are giving away.

This happens every November.  But, in the last 7 days, 18 worlds have filled.  I wouldn't say they aren't enough users.  I'd say there are worlds that aren't attractive enough to draw them in.

Parks had 5 openings and filled in three days.

7mickey7 has 6 openings and still has 6 two weeks later.

Addicted users is current idle and needs your help!  Sign up today!

Mike: exactly my point. Let's kill Ryan. It is not attractive. You are a smart guy: come up with a proposal for doing it.

For the worlds that chronically have a high number of openings from season to season, you have to ask a couple of questions: 

1)  Why do they have so many openings?
2)  What is the commissioners of these worlds doing to try to reduce the annual turnover, i.e. attract owners who will tend to stick around and not be "one and done's"?
3)  How active is the commish with respect to recruiting?

It's been said before by others, and I'll reiterate it again: good worlds have no problems filling.  They generally have low turnover, they have very active commissioners who do a good job in recruiting committed new owners, and they sometimes have a waiting list of owners wanting to join.  Bad worlds tend to have high turnover, commissioners who are there in name only but don't really do anything, and they take forever to fill.

Posted by job314 on 11/18/2011 9:09:00 PM (view original):
Mike: exactly my point. Let's kill Ryan. It is not attractive. You are a smart guy: come up with a proposal for doing it.

Why kill it?   If owners want to wait, let them wait.  If they want to leave, they can leave.    Again, why should WifS give away credits to kill it?

We have exceeded critical mass - I feel like an economist in 2005 trying to explain to people that 20% year over year real estate growth is not sustainable. Sometimes we have to make tough decisions now to perpetuate sustainability in the future.

Then you're not familiar with the ebb and flow of HBD.   This happens every year when MLB is over. 

As for killing a world, what do you think that would accomplish?

Again sometimes we have to make tough decisions now to perpetuate sustainability for the future. We are dealing with an oversold situation here.

Many different types of businesses give away things for free in the hopes of increasing future sales or correcting a flaw in their business model. Airlines give away free flights when overselling a plane; car dealers offer rebates to move overstocked product; apartments offer 3 months free rent for a 12 month lease; restaurants give free apps hoping to sell more profitable entrees, just to name a few. I ask Mike, why would this concept be so hard to imagine for WIS?

As for what killing a world would accomplish: I'm sure you have taken an economics class; it's all about supply and demand. Reduced supply: increases demand. This isn't about ebb and flow blips throughout the year, it is a greater issue of the long term impacts on the product.

I guess we seem to be seeing two different things.  I see a lag in HBD ownership.   It happens every year at the same time.   It's not a Doomsday scenario.   It's like birds flying south for the winter.   You don't bemoan the lack of birds in North Dakota in the winter, you just wait for them to return.  

Giveaways do not work in HBD.   Owners who don't pay for their teams tend to care less about them.   One owner can affect the balance of the entire world.  You can probably apply it to a child who has to do a set of chores before his parents buy him a toy as opposed to the one who points, says "I want that" and watches mommy buy it.   Something "earned" is always cared for in a better manner.

As for supply/demand, please see my first sentence.   Short demand now does not equal short demand next week. 

I'm not opposed to shutting down troubled worlds.   The only legit reason I've seen so far is mine.   So n00bs won't join a crap world, have a bad experience and never play HBD again.    But that's no reason to reward the owners who helped create the bad world with credits.  

Posted by job314 on 11/18/2011 5:22:00 PM (view original):
To keep the business model alive. There aren't enough users to fill the worlds (you must at least agree with that right mike? You are a sensible guy).  Technically it is not $2,300.  It is likely to be less that they are giving away.

How does giving those users $100 credits solve anything?  If I got a $100 credit, I would just buy a 4-pack and use that towards my other teams.  A 4-pack I would have been buying with my own money anyway.  All this suggestion does is reduce the revenue stream for WIS.  Not sure what that does other than benefit the 23 owners getting the credits.  Doesn't solve a damn thing.

Posted by job314 on 11/19/2011 10:28:00 AM (view original):
Again sometimes we have to make tough decisions now to perpetuate sustainability for the future. We are dealing with an oversold situation here.

Many different types of businesses give away things for free in the hopes of increasing future sales or correcting a flaw in their business model. Airlines give away free flights when overselling a plane; car dealers offer rebates to move overstocked product; apartments offer 3 months free rent for a 12 month lease; restaurants give free apps hoping to sell more profitable entrees, just to name a few. I ask Mike, why would this concept be so hard to imagine for WIS?

As for what killing a world would accomplish: I'm sure you have taken an economics class; it's all about supply and demand. Reduced supply: increases demand. This isn't about ebb and flow blips throughout the year, it is a greater issue of the long term impacts on the product.

Rather than reduce supply, why not increase demand buy expanding the user base?  It's generally acknowledged that Fox (owners if WIS) or promoting their own product.

You don't bemoan the lack of birds in North Dakota in the winter, you just wait for them to return.   

Great line! 

LOL