Traders and economy.

[Odynn 2,248]

29 minutes ago, GoldFever said:

Traders are a smoke screen for the real issue in my view--deed costs.

 

There is so much empty land right now everywhere that who cares if someone wants a huge deed for just a few silver a month (or even free).  Use a mechanism that you reset your deed life by actually logging deed citizens in or something like that.  Since it seems that deed costs fund the "free money pool" so that one can have traders to offset deed costs, just get rid of the high deed costs and be done with it. 

 

Well, tbh, something like that would be perfect, not that I see it coming ingame anytimes soon. The whole pay for the land and then pay for the upkeep is silly, you either buy your house (and land) or rent it in RL, not both.

 

The suggestion is to simulate some small interaction and selling things (which is a bit more rewarding for new and old players alike) to fund the game... rather than just log in every X days.

 

30 minutes ago, Etherdrifter said:

<insert everything said that is completely off>

 

Traders get a share of what you buy from them on most trader items (like 25% minus trader taxes if set) which you can instantly drain back.

Traders then get a share of the kingdom funds, which is nowadays ridiculous. I have no idea where you are finding that 5s value, so either you skim through the thread and specially the explanation with values (i wrote that one for you man, that's sad you didn't even read it ) :

Spoiler

 

 or you are making the values up. On deliverance, once again not having traders on others servers and/or planning to farm them there, last month traders yield an average of 2s60 on a minimum size deed (1s) which means only 1s60 of benefits... and i do not have minimum size deeds like many others who bought traders to reduce their upkeep (and maybe have some spare).

 

Your view of the traders (you are not the only one here anyway) is horribly biased and you fail to see that specially when you say 

1 hour ago, Etherdrifter said:

that such a return on investment should not encourage "trader farms" from cropping up and it shouldn't shaft others who forage/botanise for some extra copper/silver.

knowing anyone benefiting from the free coins drop (and specially forage/botanise due to its imbalanced) are shafting those who bought traders and are not even farming them.

[Finnn 3,298]

What CCAB needs is an economist to get things right.

[Darmalus 631]

55 minutes ago, Odynn said:

 

Well, tbh, something like that would be perfect, not that I see it coming ingame anytimes soon. The whole pay for the land and then pay for the upkeep is silly, you either buy your house (and land) or rent it in RL, not both.

Are property taxes not a thing where you live? I can buy land but if I don't pay my taxes on it the government takes it back.

[Hailene 362]

14 hours ago, Fairyshine said:

 They would also be reluctant to pay a little more for bulk stuff and would rather see if they can get it cheaper or delivered for free, or make it themselves and not bother buying from others trying to sell bulk stuff.

 

So given between the two alternatives, giving the money directly to trader owners ( primarily veteran players) and hoping they trick down SOME portion of the money is somehow better than giving the money directly to those same low skilled players?

 

I wonder which one gets more money into the hands of new players?

 

14 hours ago, Fairyshine said:

 Selling tools or imps or mats to people who foraged the money is perhaps a way of getting the money back you used to get from the trader, but doing those things all day every day quickly feels like a job instead of a relaxing game.  

 

So you're saying doing in-game activities by "selling tools or imps or mats to people" feels like work...and you would prefer to get free silver you could enjoy instead?

 

You want to enjoy the game without having to work to get things? Seriously?

 

3 hours ago, Odynn said:

. How many newbie friendly deeds have been paid and powered by them. How many people had the time to help others because they didn't had to work their assess off to pay for the upkeep.

 

What percentage of money from traders eventually ended up in newbie hands?

 

Now what percentage of money made from foraging and botonzing goes into newbie hands?

 

Thanks.

[Tpikol 1,057]

21 minutes ago, Hailene said:

What percentage of money from traders eventually ended up in newbie hands?

most of it,when i was a newbie people ordered things like 200k dirt, 2k support beams,tons of insane amount of bricks and stuff that youll never see today.making money was easier and they spent it easier.

21 minutes ago, Hailene said:

Now what percentage of money made from foraging and botonzing goes into newbie hands?

 

Thanks.

1%?

[Etherdrifter 2,512]

On 09/06/2017 at 8:18 PM, Odynn said:

 except it's capped at 5s per trader

 

 

I was assuming your notion was implemented

 

So a trader is capped at 5s per month, that's 60s per year.  Sorry if I wasn't clear.

 

Also I wasn't aware you got a percentage of cash shop goods purchased at the trader, that's actually not too bad then.  All that really needs changing is the silver going directly into the owner's account rather than them having to drain the trader (thus turning it into a real gain for the trader owner and not a discount for purchasing at a player owned trader).

[Hailene 362]

40 minutes ago, Tpikol said:

1%?

 

So who is getting all the money from foraging? Is it the vets? If so, why are they complaining about traders getting nerfed if they're getting all the money?

 

Is it the newbies? If so, then the system is working as intended.

[Finnn 3,298]

It's possible that traders are working as intended by CCAB, just whole mechanic behind hem isn't exactly.. out there and known by players to properly maximize profits from them.

WU code can't show all the hidden cards, some mechanics are still exclusive to WO code.(even if that's usually rare)

[Tpikol 1,057]

57 minutes ago, Hailene said:

 

So who is getting all the money from foraging? Is it the vets? If so, why are they complaining about traders getting nerfed if they're getting all the money?

 

Is it the newbies? If so, then the system is working as intended.

because the people complaining are not the same as the people abusing the system. do you think veterans players are just single minded entity?

Edited June 10, 2017 by Tpikol

[Hailene 362]

4 minutes ago, Tpikol said:

because the people complaining are not the same as the people abusing the system. do you think veterans players are just single minded entity?

 

So what exactly are the purpose of traders? It is basically to hand out free money to people to subsidize their playing by not having them actually work?

 

I'm still puzzled how actually earning the coin to do unnecessary things (big deeds, buying bulk items, buying other items) is somehow a good design choice.

 

Is it used to "stimulate" the economy? What are the foragers doing with the money? Are they burying it in secret caves? Shooting it to the moon? Melting it down and using it for silverware?

[Odynn 2,248]

2 hours ago, Hailene said:

Now what percentage of money made from foraging and botonzing goes into newbie hands?

 

Honestly, probably not that much since you gain more coins when you can do a lot of actions, so higher skilled players will get the motherload (some reported as high as 1g per month and I have no reason to doubt them)... while newbies might get the odd 20c here and there.

 

2 hours ago, Hailene said:

What percentage of money from traders eventually ended up in newbie hands?

 

Right now, nothing, before depends if you consider direct silvers or tools, enchants, housing, helping them to find their corpses, a spot... whatever that they will now have to pay for.

 

22 minutes ago, Hailene said:

So what exactly are the purpose of traders? It is basically to hand out free money to people to subsidize their playing by not having them actually work?

 

Hrm, you need to work or pay first hand to get one, then place it on a deed and then yes, for as little work as forage or botanizing you will get less coins from a trader.

 

25 minutes ago, Hailene said:

Is it used to "stimulate" the economy? What are the foragers doing with the money? Are they burying it in secret caves? Shooting it to the moon? Melting it down and using it for silverware?

 

Don't forget the reselling option or you know the whole :

26 minutes ago, Hailene said:

I'm still puzzled how actually earning the coin to do unnecessary things (big deeds, buying bulk items, buying other items) is somehow a good design choice.

which is what any kind of free coins distribution is... without the injury of having to buy the trader first hand... so instead of hated only one, you should also hate all of them... you know... just to be fair...

[Hailene 362]

2 minutes ago, Odynn said:

Honestly, probably not that much since you gain more coins when you can do a lot of actions, so higher skilled players will get the motherload (some reported as high as 1g per month and I have no reason to doubt them)... while newbies might get the odd 20c here and there.

 

If foraging is so lucrative, why don't all the people with traders do it? Unless the pay back for it is pretty awful and not worthwhile and only people who absolutely have to do it or have little means to make money do it?

 

It's either an act of desperation (most newbies) or easy money (if so, then go out and forage all day and make your 1g).

 

4 minutes ago, Odynn said:

Right now, nothing, before depends if you consider direct silvers or tools, enchants, housing, helping them to find their corpses, a spot... whatever that they will now have to pay for.

 

So you're either going to have newbies rely on the charity of other players as opposed to earning their own money and being able pick and choose what they want to buy? I know if I was a newbie which option I'd pick.

 

4 minutes ago, Odynn said:

Hrm, you need to work or pay first hand to get one, then place it on a deed and then yes, for as little work as forage or botanizing you will get less coins from a trader.

 

Then go forage and botonize if it's so profitable? I don't understand.

 

5 minutes ago, Odynn said:

which is what any kind of free coins distribution is... without the injury of having to buy the trader first hand... so instead of hated only one, you should also hate all of them... you know... just to be fair...

 

I hate traders because a person shells out 40s (net) to buy a trader and basically with absolutely minimal effort (a handful a minutes a month if you set it up right) gets free money.

 

As opposed to the people who have to spend hours every month to get the same amount of money.

 

It's the difference between someone walking to their mailbox to get a free check and someone who has to work 8 hours a day to earn their paycheck. Even if both people walk home with the same amount of money at the end of the day, one has definitely worked harder for it.

[Hailene 362]

2 minutes ago, Odynn said:

Honestly, probably not that much since you gain more coins when you can do a lot of actions, so higher skilled players will get the motherload (some reported as high as 1g per month and I have no reason to doubt them)... while newbies might get the odd 20c here and there.

 

If foraging is so lucrative, why don't all the people with traders do it? Unless the pay back for it is pretty awful and not worthwhile and only people who absolutely have to do it or have little means to make money do it?

 

It's either an act of desperation (most newbies) or easy money (if so, then go out and forage all day and make your 1g).

 

4 minutes ago, Odynn said:

Right now, nothing, before depends if you consider direct silvers or tools, enchants, housing, helping them to find their corpses, a spot... whatever that they will now have to pay for.

 

So you're either going to have newbies rely on the charity of other players as opposed to earning their own money and being able pick and choose what they want to buy? I know if I was a newbie which option I'd pick.

 

4 minutes ago, Odynn said:

Hrm, you need to work or pay first hand to get one, then place it on a deed and then yes, for as little work as forage or botanizing you will get less coins from a trader.

 

Then go forage and botonize if it's so profitable? I don't understand.

 

5 minutes ago, Odynn said:

which is what any kind of free coins distribution is... without the injury of having to buy the trader first hand... so instead of hated only one, you should also hate all of them... you know... just to be fair...

 

I hate traders because a person shells out 40s (net) to buy a trader and basically with absolutely minimal effort (a handful a minutes a month if you set it up right) gets free money.

 

As opposed to the people who have to spend hours every month to get the same amount of money.

 

It's the difference between someone walking to their mailbox to get a free check and someone who has to work 8 hours a day to earn their paycheck. Even if both people walk home with the same amount of money at the end of the day, one has definitely worked harder for it.

[Odynn 2,248]

7 minutes ago, Hailene said:

It's the difference between someone walking to their mailbox to get a free check and someone who has to work 8 hours a day to earn their paycheck. Even if both people walk home with the same amount of money at the end of the day, one has definitely worked harder for it.

 

With that mindset of yours, you could also call people getting more free coins than their upkeep leeches. Afterall, they are not working and paying into the funds for it, right?

 

8 minutes ago, Hailene said:

If foraging is so lucrative, why don't all the people with traders do it? Unless the pay back for it is pretty awful and not worthwhile and only people who absolutely have to do it or have little means to make money do it?

 

Hrm, why because of a large nerf, should everyone be forced into the only path giving coins and whoever is able to run as many clients as they can to forage / botanise get the money? That kind of reasoning is usually the first step to get bots in a game... and once again helps no one.

 

16 minutes ago, Hailene said:

I hate traders because a person shells out 40s (net) to buy a trader and basically with absolutely minimal effort (a handful a minutes a month if you set it up right) gets free money.

 

At the current rate, you only get free money after something like 3 years by keeping the ratio properly and being online next to it all the time, so yes, i believe it's worth all your hatred and potential ignorance on how badly they are doing right now.

 

You also fail to see that if they are tweak to pay back upkeep properly and only upkeep there would be none of the abuse you are so angry against, nothing preventing anyone from owning one and then do whatever they want... be it helping others, getting their knee into the grass to look for more coins, go hunting, or avoid that cesspool the community and economy is becoming.

[Hailene 362]

3 minutes ago, Odynn said:

With that mindset of yours, you could also call people getting more free coins than their upkeep leeches. Afterall, they are not working and paying into the funds for it, right?

That isn't my argument. Don't try to twist it.

 

The point I was making that people working for coins should be rewarded. The work to reward ratio on traders is skewed way too far relative to every other method of makign moeny.

 

5 minutes ago, Odynn said:

Hrm, why because of a large nerf, should everyone be forced into the only path giving coins and whoever is able to run as many clients as they can to forage / botanise get the money? That kind of reasoning is usually the first step to get bots in a game... and once again helps no one.

 

Honestly, if someone can have 10 or more clients combing over different grass all over the server, then more power to them. I would never bother doing it, but that's a crazy amount of work on their part and they should be compensated accordingly.

 

7 minutes ago, Odynn said:

At the current rate, you only get free money after something like 3 years by keeping the ratio properly and being online next to it all the time, so yes, i believe it's worth all your hatred and potential ignorance on how badly they are doing right now.

 

Honestly, the possibility of breaking even on a trader that's not actually trading with other players is already bad enough in my opinion. Reducing the time period would be a step in the wrong direction.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 

TLDR: If you want money in the game, go play the game. Go craft or explore or kill or do odd jobs.

 

If playing the game seems like "work" or "too much of a bother" then the game has probably lost its spark for you. Having the rest of the community subsidize players for not playing the game is insanity.

[Fairyshine 3,183]

29 minutes ago, Hailene said:

 

If playing the game seems like "work" or "too much of a bother" then the game has probably lost its spark for you. Having the rest of the community subsidize players for not playing the game is insanity.

 

So your suggestion is to just say "the game lost its spark" and then what? Not make a suggestion but instead just leave Wurm?  Every time someone leaves the game because it "lost its spark", less money is spent in the shop which leads to less money to forage and less for the traders.  

 

I guess, according to you, this is a good thing though.  It will solve many of the things you seem to have an issue with:

 

1. There will be less "whiny" people asking for a rebalance or splitting of the money pools.

2. There will be fewer people with those unnecessary larger deeds.  People will resize smaller or just pop the deeds and leave. Again, it is is beyond dispute that this is happening already, because, well, it IS happening.

3. There will be fewer pockets of land kept for community benefit, like noobie academies (remember those? Free deeds maintained for the benefit of teaching noobies how the game works, and setting them off in the wide world with a basic set of skills, a speedy horse and a few good names on their friends list.)  

4. I guess the days of free imps and high priced bulk goods will be just a fond memory, but it will solve your other pet hate namely getting something for little work (because noobies will be lucky to get anything for free.  But from what you say, it is a good thing that  noobies will learn the value of hard work in exchange for some coin, which, like you said, is a valuable life lesson!  Especially since games will thrive if they continually require working for long hours to earn some coin in game.  I guess that is why we have such an influx and retention of noobies all the time...)

 

Traders did not "pay people NOT to play the game", it actually supported people to play other aspects of the game.  In many instances, these things benefited many others in the community.  I respect your opinion, and it is your right to live on a  tiny deed and just buy the minimum bare essentials, and work hard for every coin you get.  I take my hat off to you.  However, many people play Wurm in a different manner than you.  Many people are thankful some people will maintain community beneficial service type deeds (inns, academies, community event type deeds) or large tunnels and mines open to the public (protected by deeds).  Not everyone is as hard core as everyone else.  Perhaps there is a middle ground to be found, instead of people just aiming to destroy other people's requests in a blanket argument because they dare to play the game in a different manner than you do, and then told to just admit that Wurm as a game "lost its spark", if they don't come around to your point of view.

[Hailene 362]

28 minutes ago, Fairyshine said:

So your suggestion is to just say "the game lost its spark" and then what? Not make a suggestion but instead just leave Wurm?  Every time someone leaves the game because it "lost its spark", less money is spent in the shop which leads to less money to forage and less for the traders.  

 

That is the way of games. People move on. If you're not having fun with a game and fundamentally a game is sound, then you move on.

 

Not all relationships that break up are for bad reasons.

 

30 minutes ago, Fairyshine said:

Not everyone is as hard core as everyone else

 

Wurm has plenty of styles for people of all different abilities and means.

You want to be hardcore, have 15 deeds, 25 alts, and own a third of the server? Great! Be expected to pay out.

 

Have less time or drive to do that? That's okay. You can have a nice 3s deed with plenty of room and a priest alt.

 

Have no money to play? That's okay. If you work hard you can get enough for your premium and share a deed with a friend.

 

If you want more, play/work more. If you don't or can't do it, then accept less.

 

33 minutes ago, Fairyshine said:

2. There will be fewer people with those unnecessary larger deeds.  People will resize smaller or just pop the deeds and leave. Again, it is is beyond dispute that this is happening already, because, well, it IS happening.

 

As opposed to what? Using free trader money to maintain the deed? Yeah.

 

33 minutes ago, Fairyshine said:

Free deeds maintained for the benefit of teaching noobies how the game works, and setting them off in the wide world with a basic set of skills, a speedy horse and a few good names on their friends list.)  

 

If we need free academy deeds or anything like that, then there is a much better way to go about this. Having deeds managed by trusted players but being upkeep free would be better. It means that all the money (that would have been spent on upkeep) is being used to help newbies. And not veterans with their 15s monster deeds. Or the veterans with 4-5 little deeds floating around...just because.

 

35 minutes ago, Fairyshine said:

 (because noobies will be lucky to get anything for free.

 

Newbies don't need to get free goods. They have a way of getting their own coin. They don't need to beg or hope someone will be kind enough to pass them a tool. They can confidentially hunt for and bargain for the goods and services they want or need.

 

And on a side note, I do free help and services for new characters regularly.

[Etherdrifter 2,512]

Ah?

 

Let me lay out the facts so far.

 

Traders were previously abused terribly and used as gold farms.

 

Players complained, the Devs looked at it and considered that system as too broken.

 

Traders were nerfed into the ground with the promise of a rework that never came.

 

Free coin systems were added.

 

So far so good.  Now there is laid out a proposed change that would nerf all free coin methods for all players with the intent of giving free coins to players who make an initial investment (the ones asking are those who made that initial investment).

 

The argument against is that it would be a heavy nerf to all players who don't own a trader and it would restart gold farming abuse.  The arguments for is that they would help support large deeds (not something I am personally in favour of as some large deeds destroy vibrant communities) and community assets and that players who invested in then deserve something in return.  An argument to counter this last point is the fountain pan precedent.

 

Overall the argument against re-buffing traders holds more weight so far because such a buff would necessitate nerfing many players for the benefit of a few.  A situation any Dev would avoid where possible as the backlash has the potential to be a pr disaster.

[Odynn 2,248]

31 minutes ago, Etherdrifter said:

The argument against is that it would be a heavy nerf to all players who don't own a trader and it would restart gold farming abuse.

 

ugh, something tells me you didn't read a thing, how is making deed upkeep cheaper (or free depending on the month, ratio, moon phase) a gold farming abuse? basic maths : IF your trader income IS your upkeep per month, you make no benefits. You cannot farm nothing.

 

33 minutes ago, Etherdrifter said:

Overall the argument against re-buffing traders holds more weight so far because such a buff would necessitate nerfing many players for the benefit of a few.

 

hmmmm... nope, who would that nerf? players who still operate traders farm, yah, for sure, since their income will be reduced with the change mentionned in the OP, traders will get more in line with the deeds they are attached too (even if it's a 3s month deed) and only a few will see a boost in their cash flow, it will remain mostly the same for everyone else.

[Hailene 362]

1 minute ago, Odynn said:

hmmmm... nope, who would that nerf? players who still operate traders farm, yah, for sure, since their income will be reduced with the change mentionned in the OP, traders will get more in line with the deeds they are attached too (even if it's a 3s month deed) and only a few will see a boost in their cash flow, it will remain mostly the same for everyone else.

 

So is there any particular reason why any given player should be given a 30-50% discount on their deed? What makes them so special?

 

Why are we paying people to not do in-game actions?

[Etherdrifter 2,512]

Oversimplified model:

 

Total silver in coffers per month = 20

 

Currently, anyone can get that via hard work.

 

New system

 

Total silver in coffers = 10

Total silver going to traders = 10

 

10 silver ring fenced for trader owners and removed from economy as deed upkeep.

 

Smaller pool for forage/botanise users = nerf

 

 

[Fairyshine 3,183]

16 minutes ago, Etherdrifter said:

 

Players complained, the Devs looked at it and considered that system as too broken.

 

Traders were nerfed into the ground with the promise of a rework that never came.

 

 

 

 Yes, one day (TM).

2 minutes ago, Etherdrifter said:

Oversimplified model:

 

Total silver in coffers per month = 20

 

Currently, anyone can get that via hard work.

 

New system

 

Total silver in coffers = 10

Total silver going to traders = 10

 

10 silver ring fenced for trader owners and removed from economy as deed upkeep.

 

Smaller pool for forage/botanise users = nerf

 

 

 

Both sides have valid points here.

 

Firstly, "farming gold" by using an army of alts  to forage would also be a hard core person's take on the change in game mechanics, once again, leaving the coffers empty for the noobies wanting a few coins.  

 

Secondly, if you split the pool and retain some of the players who consistently inject money into the game via purchasing silver via the game shop, you have a better chance of actually getting a few coins back to those who forage for coins.

 

18 minutes ago, Hailene said:

Wurm has plenty of styles for people of all different abilities and means.

 

This is the crux of the matter.  

 

1 minute ago, Hailene said:

 

What makes them so special?  Why are we paying people to not do in-game actions?

 

What do you see as in-game actions?  I mean, why are only digging and foraging and hunting giving coins?  Why not riding x amount of tiles on your cart? (I am almost always on my cart, why aren't I given the option to get some coin for doing that in-game action?)  Why don't I have the option of getting a coin when I farm?  Why don't I get it for spinning a string of cotton?  Why don't I get it for grooming my horse or breeding my bison or milking the cows or emoting another player?   Also, why should some people get a rare they can sell for heaps of money when I don't have that?  What makes them so special that they get the successful rare roll or dig up the rare bone and I didn't?  Why are we paying people to just do certain in-game actions?  Devs can decide to attach monetary value to certain game actions and some game mechanics.  

 

TL:DR

I think devs can look at this matter and get some middle ground where people who have traders can get some deed upkeep out of it without breaking other money systems introduced. +1 to the OP for a reasoned and balanced point of view on this highly contentious matter. What is happening here is a suggestion thread to have this looked at.  It will spark some other ideas which may be useful as well.  

[Etherdrifter 2,512]

I don't quite follow your logic fairy.   Are you implying that giving certain players discounts on large deeds would increase player retention and increase the amount of silver in the pool as a result?

[Hailene 362]

24 minutes ago, Fairyshine said:

Why are we paying people to just do certain in-game actions?  Devs can decide to attach monetary value to certain game actions and some game mechanics.  

 

Because the actions that the actions focus (foraging, hunting, burying) are going to be primarily done by newer players. Sure, there are some random higher skilled players who will do these actions (sometimes a lot) but look at a percentage of the actions done by newbies vs veterans and you'll see the actions they've done are skewed to newer players. And for good reason.

 

27 minutes ago, Fairyshine said:

I think devs can look at this matter and get some middle ground where people who have traders can get some deed upkeep out of it

 

Why do you feel entitled to getting your upkeep paid for? Did you win the lottery or something?

[Fairyshine 3,183]

1 minute ago, Etherdrifter said:

I don't quite follow your logic fairy.   Are you implying that giving certain players discounts on large deeds would increase player retention and increase the amount of silver in the pool as a result?

 

Nope, I am saying retaining players who regularly inject money into the game via the shop will increase the pool of silver as a result. The devs can look at the purchases via game shop, and see who buys their silver there and then do a profile of which types of deeds they own and what game style they play. If you own a small deed and always just forage to get your upkeep, you are effectively relying in the people who routinely pay for silver via the game shop to provide the money for you to be dropped in the grass for you to pay for your deed.  If you just get silvers from other players by selling stuff or imps or mats, you are essentially relying on the people who routinely buy silver via the game shop to inject the money back into the game.  It does not matter if you own a small deed and get it paid for with in game silvers or a large deed and get it paid via in game silvers, somewhere someone had to pay for those silvers via the game shop. If you are a player with a small deed and inject money into the game via the game shop, you are actually doing more for the long term survival of the game than a person with a huge deed who just sell mats and imps and bulks and never inject money back via the game shop.  Circulating silvers in game is not the crux here.  It is the fact that people inject money into the game buying either premium or silver to pay for deed upkeep, through the shop whose game style are most supportive of the survival of this game.  Why?  Because they subsidize everyone else.  Perhaps if we are honest we should say that the game style of those people are the style the devs need to look at and promote.  I don't have all the facts, I just know a few people in this game.  I can say from experience that those who invested in traders to help them pay for their deed upkeep, are also those who more routinely buy silvers from the game shop, but I may be wrong.  They will still buy those silvers no traders no longer support their deed upkeep, but they will be less inclined to share it around to others in game as there really is not that much to go around.  If they happen to be those who form the bulk of the clients who purchase silver through the game shop, obviously, they should be retained.  The devs are in the best position to look at all the facts to make decisions, so continually speculating here on forums really is not going to do much to change their minds, except to state the obvious:  Retention of players who are willing to spend real life money on this game is beneficial for every player.