Newsletter #8 - Premium change - 2010-03-30

[DeletedUser]

I find this rather odd...

Because people care about their money more than they do with a april fools joke & a small update.

 

[DeletedUser]

Because people care about their money more than they do with a april fools joke & a small update.

I could be wrong, but I think he was referring to the fact that they are all titled newsletter #8 despite being on different dates and about different things. Also, one of them incorrectly has the year as 2009. I don't believe he was ridiculing us for still talking about the premium change.

 

[DeletedUser]

I could be wrong, but I think she was referring to the fact that they are all titled newsletter #8 despite being on different dates and about different things. Also, one of them incorrectly has the year as 2009.

Correct.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hmm, i didn't even notice the 2009 bit, although they may of been purposely done because of the april fools. As it was actually posted on the 31-3-2010


About the newletter #8 thing, i think they are all counted as the same newsletter if they are all in the same month (they were all in march) -actually no, looking at #1 and #2 they were in the same month.

 

[DeletedUser]

Correct.

Oops, sorry about the missing "s"

 

[CodaAlFine]

The rest of your post was just BS, here is the substance summed up in a nutshell. I like to think I have a knack for explaining things very clearly, but I guess I am kidding myself. I've shot these down repeatedly, but there are clearly a few who just can't understand.

To those people who believe these two excerpts, I recommend a career outside of economics or business (and no Coda, I am not saying they dont have a RIGHT to pursue that career). If you say to an economics professor that a price increase is "just rude", hes going to fail you, or just laugh hysterically.

The second quote is among the most childish and ignorant things I've heard on these forums and explaining to him/her how the world works just would be futile. Read back a few posts for clear rebuttal of the first quote. Sometimes I have the patience for continually breaking things down until 4 year olds can get it, but not today.

well duh, I know all that - it is you who cannot think outside the box, outside of what you have been force fed. You seriously think that "how the world [currently] works" is the only way? The actual best way? Or even a GOOD way?

Economic theory is one thing and actual human existence is quite another altogether. Actually economists have a lot to answer for.

Yes, sadly I understand your arguments only too well - the question is whether you really have any clue what I am trying to get across?

 

[CodaAlFine]

how more proper can you get then a national idealism....

I won't even bother to answer that, you obviously have no capacity or even interest in working out what I am talking about, as shown very clearly in this dogmatic response. You have regurgitated your schooling perfectly. 10 out of 10.

 

[DeletedUser]

well duh, I know all that - it is you who cannot think outside the box, outside of what you have been force fed. You seriously think that "how the world [currently] works" is the only way? The actual best way? Or even a GOOD way?

Economic theory is one thing and actual human existence is quite another altogether. Actually economists have a lot to answer for.

Yes, sadly I understand your arguments only too well - the question is whether you really have any clue what I am trying to get across?

Your very existence is no dependent on whether premium costs $1, $5, $10, or even $20 a month. (Nor is any person's.) I can guarantee you of that. Saying that increasing the price of a premium account on an online game by a few dollars a month could in any way affect a person's existence is provably wrong.

You've now insulted someone for knowing trivial economic theory and applying it to an economic decision. I'm actually rather interested in why you think that the entire theory of economics isn't applicable to this issue here and why you think it is unethical for a company to charge what they want for the entirely unnecessary yet enjoyable service that they provide.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes, sadly I understand your arguments only too well - the question is whether you really have any clue what I am trying to get across?

....big mean company charging what it wants for soemthing you can do without.... oh noes... and you i suppose would sell your car real cheap to a bum so he could sleep in something warm?

 

[CodaAlFine]

Your very existence is no dependent on whether premium costs $1, $5, $10, or even $20 a month. (Nor is any person's.) I can guarantee you of that. Saying that increasing the price of a premium account on an online game by a few dollars a month could in any way affect a person's existence is provably wrong.

You've now insulted someone for knowing trivial economic theory and applying it to an economic decision. I'm actually rather interested in why you think that the entire theory of economics isn't applicable to this issue here and why you think it is unethical for a company to charge what they want for the entirely unnecessary yet enjoyable service that they provide.

I was speaking generally about the connection (or lack of) between economic theory and human existence. It was perhaps badly worded. I was in no way connecting my existence to affordability of premium. What I am saying is that economic theory does regularly fail to factor in any kind of human element. Look at the subprime mortgage disaster in recent years (although there are many other examples to illustrate this point). What they were doing was perfectly sound economically, it was well within "the way the world works" - but was it good? Who did it benefit?

OK fine, ripping people off is in fact "the way the world works" and may make sound economic sense - and yes, law does give companies the right to do it - but that doesn't make it in any way good in a larger sense. It doesn't make it right in a larger sense. It's only right in an economic sense. On a people level it's just plain wrong.

 

[CodaAlFine]

....big mean company charging what it wants for soemthing you can do without.... oh noes... and you i suppose would sell your car real cheap to a bum so he could sleep in something warm?

possibly, if I could afford to, and I thought the person really had no way ahead and was not there by his own doing (eg heroin abuse) - because our system truly does leave some people out in the cold with no way ahead. But unfortunately I don't have a car lol, what a waste of money they are! And ruining the environment along with it...

 

[DeletedUser]

Everyone Can have free premium for 1month when they reach 500points on w50 ?

 

[DeletedUser]

I was speaking generally about the connection (or lack of) between economic theory and human existence. It was perhaps badly worded. I was in no way connecting my existence to affordability of premium. What I am saying is that economic theory does regularly fail to factor in any kind of human element. Look at the subprime mortgage disaster in recent years (although there are many other examples to illustrate this point). What they were doing was perfectly sound economically, it was well within "the way the world works" - but was it good? Who did it benefit?

OK fine, ripping people off is in fact "the way the world works" and may make sound economic sense - and yes, law does give companies the right to do it - but that doesn't make it in any way good in a larger sense. It doesn't make it right in a larger sense. It's only right in an economic sense. On a people level it's just plain wrong.

I think you would be pretty hard pressed to find any worthwhile economist who isn't going to find plenty of economically poor choices with respect to an issue that significantly contributes to a global recession.

To begin with you have not shown how it was acceptable from an economic viewpoint (you can't say that someone is wrong without first stating what they think is right), and secondly you have not shown how the issues in any way relates to this context. (Using another context is acceptable, but you need to find a way to appropriately relate it to the current discussion.)

 

[DeletedUser]

I was speaking generally about the connection (or lack of) between economic theory and human existence. It was perhaps badly worded. I was in no way connecting my existence to affordability of premium. What I am saying is that economic theory does regularly fail to factor in any kind of human element. Look at the subprime mortgage disaster in recent years (although there are many other examples to illustrate this point). What they were doing was perfectly sound economically, it was well within "the way the world works" - but was it good? Who did it benefit?

OK fine, ripping people off is in fact "the way the world works" and may make sound economic sense - and yes, law does give companies the right to do it - but that doesn't make it in any way good in a larger sense. It doesn't make it right in a larger sense. It's only right in an economic sense. On a people level it's just plain wrong.

The notion that tribal wars is ripping people off is your opinion. Personally, I don't think they are even with the new price change. I would rather play this than another MMO game like, say, Warcraft III, and I pay less for tribal wars than I would for that. Tribal wars also gives the option to play for FREE without premium, which is sufficient for a large part of early game. Just because you say it is a rip-off, does not in fact mean it is a rip-off. Nor does me saying it isn't a rip-off mean that it isn't a rip-off.

However, if you originally posted "tribal wars is ripping us off!" I would have left it alone, posting your opinion is what the forum is for. I could see why it wouldn't be worth it to some. It is misrepresentation of economics and accusing TW of being immoral that I have issues with.

Look at the subprime mortgage disaster in recent years (although there are many other examples to illustrate this point). What they were doing was perfectly sound economically, it was well within "the way the world works" - but was it good? Who did it benefit?

Do yourself a favor and stop referencing economic principles until you take some business courses. The mortgage crisis was NOT perfectly sound economically. They lowered approval standards of people's credit history required to get loans, and charged higher interest to those with lousy credit. It was actually horrible economically, since it didn't properly factor in perhaps the most important part of lending money... RISK. It was not "how the world works", hence leading to a downturn unseen in almost a century.

Tribal Wars is not immoral or greedy for charging what it believe's its product to be worth. Many who use premium love to play the game, and paying $6 for a month's worth of entertainment is more than reasonable, especially since it costs them money to maintain. In comparison, I've paid $20 to see a comedy show, and only received 2 hours of entertainment. But even if TW cost NOTHING to maintain, there is something else justifying compensation, and that is their innovation. Someone (or multiple people) came up with a bright idea to make the game and took many, many hours to develop it, and that alone warrants compensation. Your ideals are crooked, you believe everything revolves around the consumer. But it doesn't. It all starts with the seller, as it should.

 

[gamaleden]

i think you are missing something here , we are playing this game not for prizes , we are playing to have fun , without premium we will waste many hours of our life , or will be very lazy to open each village to create troops and restore resources .
by increasing the premium cost without prizes some players may think before wasting their money for game .
i have the money but i don't need to waste it on game, i was buying premium to have fun , now i can't pay all this money at game specially i am playing at three worlds .and have more than 100 vills at each world .

i can use the premium cash to watch 5 new movies at the cinema every month

anyway you can atleast add options at academy to store resources at all the vills at the same time .

 

[2004 Artemis]

anyway you can atleast add options at academy to store resources at all the vills at the same time .

Is that a joke? It exists in the form of the mass store page, accessible from the Academy page.

 

[DeletedUser]

i think you are missing something here , we are playing this game not for prizes , we are playing to have fun , without premium we will waste many hours of our life , or will be very lazy to open each village to create troops and restore resources .
by increasing the premium cost without prizes some players may think before wasting their money for game .
i have the money but i don't need to waste it on game, i was buying premium to have fun , now i can't pay all this money at game specially i am playing at three worlds .and have more than 100 vills at each world .

i can use the premium cash to watch 5 new movies at the cinema every month

anyway you can atleast add options at academy to store resources at all the vills at the same time .

and before the change, you could watch 4 new movies at the cinema each month. Either way, youre gonna run out of movies pretty quickly.

No one forgot that it exists to have fun and raising prices might scare away people. But any business model will show you that theyll still gain money, your argument was squashed like 20 pages ago.

 

[gamaleden]

Is that a joke? It exists in the form of the mass store page, accessible from the Academy page.

if you don't have premium will not find it

and before the change, you could watch 4 new movies at the cinema each month. Either way, youre gonna run out of movies pretty quickly.

i could watch 1 movie before changes .
i was paying 25 EGP now i have to pay 100 EGP .

i talked with the admins and they told me its at the providers hand ,
what if they gave us the way to contact the providers and we talk with them .

 

[DeletedUser]

if you don't have premium will not find it





i could watch 1 movie before changes .
i was paying 25 EGP now i have to pay 100 EGP .

i talked with the admins and they told me its at the providers hand ,
what if they gave us the way to contact the providers and we talk with them .

Good luck

 

[DeletedUser85946]

prices

the price was 25% now its 100% but since i use phone i now have to pay 150% as much.
i am a 14 year old kid i have no job "no duh" i have a phone and i have infinate credite i can use as much as i want but i am not going to pay 2jds which is like 2 punds 2.7 dollars for 6 days!!! of premuim!!! that is not even werth it! i can just go with my freinds to a cafe and play for a few hours and have some fun i play other games that cost nothing! but i still stay here i joined this game for a freinds then i got new freinds then i followed them to other worlds i didn't know about premuim i used free pa and i loved it! so then i wanted to get it then my dad used my phone then he lost it then a guy found it and sent it to my house then i saw the prices!!!!