New Vendors

popps

Maximus_Neximus said:

This was one of the things posted in the most recent newsletter:

2. Can we have a vendor that does not charge by the hour?

Yes we can come up with an additional vendor that doesn't charge by the hour but instead takes up house storage and charges a commission percentage only when the item is sold. This type of vendor will be in addition to the original style of vendor.

I just want to say, THANK YOU! Please make this a reasonable commission that isn't just focused on taxing the super rich. This could help bring back some regularly stocked player vendors.

Also, consider each item not taking up one full storage slot. I imagine a good number of people will switch to this new vendor. It'd be rough for a player who runs a vendor mall to maintain their one house when it's filled up by players selling items.

Personally, instead, I would like to see THE OPPOSITE....

That is, even if sold at the UO Store for real money, a Vendor that :

- Did NOT take up House Storage at all;

- Could be ALSO placed on Private (not Public) players' Homes on the door steps;

- I am OK with a reasonable, ACCEPTABLE commission charge only when the item is indeed sold.

For such a Vendor, I would have no problem to spend real money at the UO Store of course, if reasonably priced....

We need game additions that do NOT force "more" stress on Houses Storage capacity and, I think, a Vendor that took up House Storage would NOT be players' friendly but, instead, cause more stress on the already difficuly handling of houses' storage capacity....

We need MORE space for storage, not vendors reducing it...

That is at least how I see it.

Drowy

Its an additional Vendor, so I dont see why it could cause more stress with house storage. You can still use the old vendor. The new vendor will be helpful for low populated shards and we are looking forward for this one to come.

Hermione

I will make assumptions that with the new vendor, each item would actually need to take up more than 1 house storage slot, or Mervyn’s theory of people filling up vendors with non desirables or placing items at unreasonable prices and impeding searches would run true.

Uriah_Heep

You used the M word...

Fortis

half stuff should drop shard bound so people will not bring all to atlantic....

Sliss

Hermione said:

I will make assumptions that with the new vendor, each item would actually need to take up more than 1 house storage slot, or Mervyn’s theory of people filling up vendors with non desirables or placing items at unreasonable prices and impeding searches would run true.

How?? Why would anyone store anything on the vendor if it's taking the same number of slots as using regular storage?

Trismegistos

Allow one or two for each friend or co-owner of a house. And let their storage count adds to house item count or a percantage e. G. 50%

Hermione

Sliss said:

Hermione said:

I will make assumptions that with the new vendor, each item would actually need to take up more than 1 house storage slot, or Mervyn’s theory of people filling up vendors with non desirables or placing items at unreasonable prices and impeding searches would run true.

How?? Why would anyone store anything on the vendor if it's taking the same number of slots as using regular storage?

I don't know about you, but if there was no daily fee, I would just throw pretty much everything I have on a vendor (at a highish price) until i reach max storage on the offchance someone purchases. Because.. well why not? Nothing to lose

And even if put something on at a reasonable price, if the value goes down, i would just not bother to adjust my prices as there's no daily fee.

JollyJade

Hermione said:I would just throw pretty much everything I have on a vendor (at a highish price) until i reach max storage on the offchance someone purchases. Because.. well why not? Nothing to lose

Until you realize you forgot to set an price for item #1431 and someone found it..

popps

Trismegistos said:

Allow one or two for each friend or co-owner of a house. And let their storage count adds to house item count or a percantage e. G. 50%

@Trismegistos

Uhu ?

That is a novelty to me...

Friends and co-owners of a House "increase" the storage counts for that House for being a friend or a co-owner to that given House ?

Is that a "per friend/co-owner account" thing or a per "character" friend/co-owner thing ?

Trismegistos

what's todo against abusing the new vendors to increase the storage space of the house.

On the other hand you will give friends access to new vendors in your home.

a-let owners, Co owner and friends of the house the ability to place/rent a new vendor.

B-decrease the max house storage with the amount of items you can put inside thoose vendors. Like the steward seed.

C-125 items is a lot, so let's say 50% of 125 or

D-the new vendor can hold  only max 50 or 75 items

That was my idea.

Captain_Lucky

People can put insane prices on things they *think* is in storage but I still might buy it if I want it :P

Uriah_Heep

lol

Fenriswolf

I came back to the game recently and started a vendor up until I realised that nothing sold very quickly and it was actually costing me gold to keep the vendor so I rapidly removed him. This was especially so with costly items, it was easier to advertise in general chat and sell things like that. What shop in real life pays its employees a daily % of the price of the items in the store to function? 
This is capitalism, and it should work like that in UO. The vendors should be minimum wage employees of the house they are hosted in. If they don't want to accept low pay then replace them with vendor machines :-) 

Bottom line is that vendors are paid too much for what they are selling. Simplest solution is to change what the vendor earns regardless of the value of the items on the vendor. Im pretty sure a Lamborghini salesman doesn't get 25% of each of his sales....
But yes they should take up storage. 

Anyone that cant manage with the storage currently available is just hoarding, then then again, they should be given the option of storing more items if they want to. So maybe introduce items into the UO store that can keep increasing house storage, or even add items as a mega rare boss drop that increases house storage. Or change certain items in houses so they don't count towards storage for the house... 

Lots of options but the bottom line is that vendors cost too much in the current climate within Ultima Online, and it is detrimental to the game

Maximus_Neximus

Fenriswolf said:

Anyone that cant manage with the storage currently available is just hoarding, then then again, they should be given the option of storing more items if they want to. So maybe introduce items into the UO store that can keep increasing house storage, or even add items as a mega rare boss drop that increases house storage. Or change certain items in houses so they don't count towards storage for the house... 

Lots of options but the bottom line is that vendors cost too much in the current climate within Ultima Online, and it is detrimental to the game

While same may be hoarding, not everyone is. Some people really enjoy decorating extravagant houses or have museums of collections. Me personally, I have hoarded a bit. But now that they've updated the cleanup points, a LOT of it will finally be trashed.

My house is in Fel however, so I won't house vendors meaning I'm not worried about the storage for myself. But what about those who run a decorated vendor house? With one house per account, it isn't like someone can just have a vendor only house while maintaining a deco/museum playing style.

Regardless of that, I am fully in the same spot as you in that I can't afford vendor fees for my items. I sell them on forums or spam in chat because of that. By giving us a vendor that charges a 5% or so fee at the time of sale, it will allow for everyone to be able to sell items to earn some gold without going bankrupt in the process.

Sliss

Hermione said:

Sliss said:

Hermione said:

I will make assumptions that with the new vendor, each item would actually need to take up more than 1 house storage slot, or Mervyn’s theory of people filling up vendors with non desirables or placing items at unreasonable prices and impeding searches would run true.

How?? Why would anyone store anything on the vendor if it's taking the same number of slots as using regular storage?

I don't know about you, but if there was no daily fee, I would just throw pretty much everything I have on a vendor (at a highish price) until i reach max storage on the offchance someone purchases. Because.. well why not? Nothing to lose

And even if put something on at a reasonable price, if the value goes down, i would just not bother to adjust my prices as there's no daily fee.

Nothing to lose? How about your time? Most people have better things to do than spend many hours putting things on the vendor and pricing them on an off chance someone is blind and pays an inflated price. And if you do have the time and desire - there is really no loss. Vendor search is robust enough to filter out overpriced stuff.

Tanager

I would assume the fee would be charged at the time you put the item on the vendor. Otherwise, the game would have no way of ensuring that the funds are available later when the item is actually purchased. I would like to see players get that fee back if they remove the item, but I don't expect it any more than I expect to get fees back from our current vendors.

With that logic in mind, I am fine with these vendors needing house storage like stewards do, and charging their fee up front. It is the only way to prevent people abusing them for storage. Why do I care about people abusing them for storage? Because there are already houses with 50 vendors storing BODs, and storing equiped gear causing enough lag to effect even my PC.

I am really looking forward to the new vendor style option. The people who don't like it do not need to change a single thing they do currently.

Bilbo

@Tanager if the fee was %25 that fee would be taken out at time of sell so an item for 100 gold would only deposit 75 gold into the vendor and the system would keep the 25 gold for the fee.  I do not get why you would even think the gold would not be there at the time of the sell.

Tim

Bilbo said:

@ Tanager if the fee was %25 that fee would be taken out at time of sell so an item for 100 gold would only deposit 75 gold into the vendor and the system would keep the 25 gold for the fee.  I do not get why you would even think the gold would not be there at the time of the sell.

Same though process as duties are paid by the company of origin not a tax on the person who finally buys the item. 

Bilbo

Tim said:

Bilbo said:

@ Tanager if the fee was %25 that fee would be taken out at time of sell so an item for 100 gold would only deposit 75 gold into the vendor and the system would keep the 25 gold for the fee.  I do not get why you would even think the gold would not be there at the time of the sell.

Same though process as duties are paid by the company of origin not a tax on the person who finally buys the item. 

How do you get that the buyer is being taxed?  The cost of the item is 100 gold that was set by the seller, the buyer pays 100 gold and gets the product, the vendor collects 100 gold and deposits 75 gold into its pocket (profit) and deposits 25 gold into the systems pocket (fee).  The seller only keeps 75 gold and pays a fee to the system of 25 gold when the item sells.  No where in this transaction does the buyer pay anything but the asking price.
The seller did not ask 75 for the product and the system did not add a 25 gold tax to the product.

Tim

If the seller wants to receive 75 he prices at 100 if he wants 100 the price is 125. Just because it isn’t added at the till doesn’t mean it isn’t taxed. 
There are places where the price on the shelf is what you pay. Taxes may or may not be showed on the receipt. 

Maximus_Neximus

Tim said:

If the seller wants to receive 75 he prices at 100 if he wants 100 the price is 125. Just because it isn’t added at the till doesn’t mean it isn’t taxed. 
There are places where the price on the shelf is what you pay. Taxes may or may not be showed on the receipt. 

It'd actually cost 134 to make 100 (if a ludicrous 25% tax), but your point is made.

I'm against the fee being taken when the vendor is placed. What if I want to lower the price of the item so it sells? I'm then charged twice unless a new way to change prices is introduced. With that in mind, if you could single click to get a menu with options to set a new price or retrieves the item(charging the fee), I'd be ok with it. Although that wouldn't allow for re-organizing a vendors backpack, so it would need some more thought put into it.

Tanager

That is how it works now. I put an item on the vendor, it sits a few days and charges me fees. If I take the item off, and reprice it - I do NOT get any of that fee back. I would be happy if the new system worked differently, but I am not expecting it to, and I am not going to be upset if I don't get something I am not expecting.

Uriah_Heep

Time will tell, it's all vaporware right now anyway...  

Cookie

I personally would like to put Vendors up in Felucca.

Sales would be slower of course, that is fine, but just like Low Population shards, this new vendor concept would help us have vendors, and create an economy in these areas, in places it has been dying because it is not worth it to run them.

Bilbo

Tim said:

If the seller wants to receive 75 he prices at 100 if he wants 100 the price is 125. Just because it isn’t added at the till doesn’t mean it isn’t taxed. 
There are places where the price on the shelf is what you pay. Taxes may or may not be showed on the receipt. 

That is how real business works, a seller wants to get x amount for his/her product but must pay FEES before it can be placed on a shelf (vendor) so he/she always jacks up the price to cover those fees.  A tax is added on at the time the buyer buys something so lets say %25 tax and the selling price is 100 that means the buyer would pay 125 total. Fees usually allow for overhead, wages, costs, and markup. 

Tim

Bilbo said:

Tim said:

If the seller wants to receive 75 he prices at 100 if he wants 100 the price is 125. Just because it isn’t added at the till doesn’t mean it isn’t taxed. 
There are places where the price on the shelf is what you pay. Taxes may or may not be showed on the receipt. 

That is how real business works, a seller wants to get x amount for his/her product but must pay FEES before it can be placed on a shelf (vendor) so he/she always jacks up the price to cover those fees.  A tax is added on at the time the buyer buys something so lets say %25 tax and the selling price is 100 that means the buyer would pay 125 total. Fees usually allow for overhead, wages, costs, and markup. 

Depending on your local laws and accounting practices much of what you call "fees" are or included one form of tax or another. For example property tax or payroll tax on the wages. The tax added at the cash register that you are referring to is commonly call "sales tax", "value added tax" or "GST" depending on you location. Some countries require the price of an item to show all taxes included others don't.  All of which is way off topic.

Note I call any non optional "FEE" you pay to any level of government a tax and no I am not against taxes they are necessary much like prostate exams.

Maximus_Neximus

Bilbo said:

Tim said:

If the seller wants to receive 75 he prices at 100 if he wants 100 the price is 125. Just because it isn’t added at the till doesn’t mean it isn’t taxed. 
There are places where the price on the shelf is what you pay. Taxes may or may not be showed on the receipt. 

That is how real business works, a seller wants to get x amount for his/her product but must pay FEES before it can be placed on a shelf (vendor) so he/she always jacks up the price to cover those fees.  A tax is added on at the time the buyer buys something so lets say %25 tax and the selling price is 100 that means the buyer would pay 125 total. Fees usually allow for overhead, wages, costs, and markup. 

I just want to request you stop using a 25% tax for your examples. That’s an absurd number that should not be used. 

Tim

What you want us to use math in a totally off topic and meaningless debate?

Fenriswolf

gotta love the internet, forums gives everyone an opinion no matter what