Apartments need Rent

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vahlnir

https://media.giphy.com/media/13GaHvHijqFS0M/giphy.gif

---

Yes they are serious which why I am adding this too my list of 1000 stupid ideas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Why not both?

---

You seemed to be of a mind to punish apartment owners.

What happens when you fail to pay rent? They don't demo. Houses do though.

a game that profits off this many players should be able to accommodate all said players, aka there should be enough hosing to go around for anyone seeking (kind of like the real world, if we need more we build them.)

Don't try to come up with more systems to punish those that got lucky enough to win the rigged game that is housing. Put your energy in to blaming square for not providing the adequate servers to house its players. its not just housing its all servers, have you ever had to explain to your new player friend why they cant join your server till 4am? i know i have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

As much as people would hate it, having a rent mechanic would definitely help drain money from the economy, which this game needs badly.

---

I presently have 300M on my main character. For reference sake, I'll up your rent requirement to 100k per week and we'll assume I never earn another cent. Even with those parameters, it would take over 62 years before I ran out of gil.

Needless to say, throwing a glass of water into the ocean would have more of an impact than your proposal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

I presently have 300M on my main character. For reference sake, I'll up your rent requirement to 100k per week and we'll assume I never earn another cent. Even with those parameters, it would take over 62 years before I ran out of gil.

Needless to say, throwing a glass of water into the ocean would have more of an impact than your proposal.

---

Ok, now how much gil does the average apartment dweller have? What about the average player?

If you're in the top 5% (or top 1%) of gil holders.... you're kinda the exception and stuff shouldn't be balanced around you.

And draining gil from the economy isn't about making one huge dent into a pocket book, if done correctly you bleed gil on almost everything and in an amount that makes sense (for example, repair costs should be much more expensive, as should teleport costs).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

You seemed to be of a mind to punish apartment owners.

What happens when you fail to pay rent? They don't demo. Houses do though.

---

Failing to pay rent would get you evicted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Ok, now how much gil does the average apartment dweller have? What about the average player?

If you're in the top 5% (or top 1%) of gil holders.... you're kinda the exception and stuff shouldn't be balanced around you.

And draining gil from the economy isn't about making one huge dent into a pocket book, if done correctly you bleed gil on almost everything and in an amount that makes sense (for example, repair costs should be much more expensive, as should teleport costs).

---

Even someone with just a 10% of my gil count would take years to run out.

Regardless, this whole rent concept would make Apartments less appealing. They're only saving grace is not requiring a constant subscription. It's also a limitless system as the dev team says they can generate more as needed. Considering they've never once had to add additional apartment, it really goes to highlight how little people think of them. Slapping a rent price on Apartments will kill them off entirely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

Even someone with just a 10% of my gil count would take years to run out.

Regardless, this whole rent concept would make Apartments less appealing. They're only saving grace is not requiring a constant subscription. It's also a limitless system as the dev team says they can generate more as needed. Considering they've never once had to add additional apartment, it really goes to highlight how little people think of them. Slapping a rent price on Apartments will kill them off entirely.

---

I made like 300k last night twiddling my thumbs while watching twitch. No joke, with a rent system its simple. The rent either so high it dents pockets or it as no noticable effect..

What's the point of adding rent when there isn't a single server to the best of my knowledge that is 100% out of apartments?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arielen

What's the point of adding rent when there isn't a single server to the best of my knowledge that is 100% out of apartments?

---

There is no point to it and it's not going to happen. What would be nice is a revamp of the apartments so we can buy different size ones but after more than two years since the concept was floated by the director don't think that's ever going to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vahlnir

https://media.giphy.com/media/13GaHvHijqFS0M/giphy.gif

---

Housing system needs some humor I suppose. I'm sure charging rent for apartments when most people don't even want them would go over big with the 14 community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arielen

What's the point of adding rent when there isn't a single server to the best of my knowledge that is 100% out of apartments?

---

Op trying to pass it as gil sink. Which wont work as the cost would have to be affordable to all players. That affordability will kill it as a gil sink.

Gil sinks need to target the wealthiest of players (those with 100mil+) to be able to take the most gil out of the game. Chances are, if someone’s got just an apartment, then they’re not part of that subset of wealthiest players. And if they are part of that subset and JUST have an apartment, they likely won’t want to participate in a gil sink.

Gold sinks in games in general need to be willing/tied to something NEW that players will know they’ll want.

IE a mount, or a minion, or hair, or a barding, or a subscription token. They need to be a LOT - 20mil+.

Targetting apartment owners isnt a gil sink - it’s just petty.

I really dislike the thought of punishing the players for the sins of the game maker...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Besame

I really dislike the thought of punishing the players for the sins of the game maker...

---

Then don't look at WoW.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Then don't look at WoW.....

---

The comment was about SE not any other game, they all have their foibles. I played WoW from Vanilla release for 8 yrs and know it well from those days only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Besame

The comment was about SE not any other game, they all have their foibles. I played WoW from Vanilla release for 8 yrs and know it well.

---

Then you should also know that (for the most part) the SE dev team are leaps and bounds ahead of where the Blizzard dev team currently is.

Idk, first 8 years of wow were still it's glory days.

I'm still tortu... Erm. Playing it 17 years later. Yeah, beta tester. :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Then you should also know that (for the most part) the SE dev team are leaps and bounds ahead of where the Blizzard dev team currently is.

---

Someone who quit WoW around the start of MoP would have no idea what a mess the current game is. Heck, I don't know from personal experience either and I was playing until end of Legion. I do know that one of my friends who also plays this game was a dedicated WoW fanboy (would put a WoW patch ahead of expansion release here) and about 3 months ago went "I can't take this anymore", cancelled his WoW subscription then uninstalled the game.

But then none of that has anything to do with the housing situation here.

Does the game need more gil sinks? Yes. But if the goal is to increase apartment popularity while reducing demand for houses, attaching a gil sink to apartments would be counterproductive because it would only reduce the demand for apartments. Increasing the cost of something already considered less than desirable by many does not make it more desirable.

Gil sinks are not "punishment" and it's ridiculous to refer to them as such. The game gives us gil for playing through most content. We in turn decide how we want to spend it. Either we're willing to pay the price to get the optional item being offered, or we don't. There is no punishment involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Someone who quit WoW around the start of MoP would have no idea what a mess the current game is. Heck, I don't know from personal experience either and I was playing until end of Legion. I do know that one of my friends who also plays this game was a dedicated WoW fanboy (would put a WoW patch ahead of expansion release here) and about 3 months ago went "I can't take this anymore", cancelled his WoW subscription then uninstalled the game.

But then none of that has anything to do with the housing situation here.

Does the game need more gil sinks? Yes. But if the goal is to increase apartment popularity while reducing demand for houses, attaching a gil sink to apartments would be counterproductive because it would only reduce the demand for apartments. Increasing the cost of something already considered less than desirable by many does not make it more desirable.

Gil sinks are not "punishment" and it's ridiculous to refer to them as such. The game gives us gil for playing through most content. We in turn decide how we want to spend it. Either we're willing to pay the price to get the optional item being offered, or we don't. There is no punishment involved.

---

They're punishments when implemented poorly.

I feel rent on apartments is poorly implemented.

They'd have to start charging rent for houses too or it wouldn't be fair.

I, for one, wouldn't pay it on principle, and let my apartment lapse.

If they want to make apartments more attractive, adding balconies or terraces or even penthouses with outdoor areas would be a good start. Price accordingly. I have a ton of outdoor furniture my retainers keep bringing me that I can't use.

I haven't read all of the comments, but some people do know that not all apartments are rented right? You can own an apartment just like a house. Its actually common in many areas with limited space or for wealthy individuals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

They're punishments when implemented poorly.

I feel rent on apartments is poorly implemented.

They'd have to start charging rent for houses too or it wouldn't be fair.

I, for one, wouldn't pay it on principle, and let my apartment lapse.

If they want to make apartments more attractive, adding balconies or terraces or even penthouses with outdoor areas would be a good start. Price accordingly. I have a ton of outdoor furniture my retainers keep bringing me that I can't use.

---

I'd dump my apt before I'd pay rent. I only use it these days as a shop made up for xtra furniture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

They're punishments when implemented poorly.

---

Stop exaggerating in an attempt to push emotional buttons. It is not punishment. No one is being assessed a penalty for any perceived wrong-doing they have engaged in.

The most it would be is poor content design, and that would be a subject for debate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eloah

I haven't read all of the comments, but some people do know that not all apartments are rented right? You can own an apartment just like a house. Its actually common in many areas with limited space or for wealthy individuals.

---

Depending on where you live, they can have different names depending on whether the individual units in the building have separate owners (condominium where I live) or if the entire building is owned by the same person/company renting them to various individuals/families (apartment). If you say apartment in this part of the world, people who grew up here are going to automatically assume the latter.

The name used doesn't really make a different for this discussion, though. The OP was making a suggestion they felt would increase demand for apartments. Responses have shown why it would have the opposite effect.

The country i live in apartments are both bought and rented. People pay millions of kronor for apartments.

And I'm not going for emotional anything. Punishments are meant to be deterrents. Poor money sinks are deterrents. The technical definition is "the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence."

The offense in question here is having money that the OP seems to think having is a bad thing. If they really wanted to sink gillionaires, there's plenty of other ways. But most of them are frugal and won't buy stuff that costs recurrent payment. It's why I even have money in other games. I don't spend it.

Here? I'm broke. Apartment rent would be the last straw for me and housing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

The country i live in apartments are both bought and rented. People pay millions of kronor for apartments.

---

In the US, apartments are rented, condos and town houses are bought - even though they all look like the same from the outside. I imagine it's much the same in Canada as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

And I'm not going for emotional anything. Punishments are meant to be deterrents. Poor money sinks are deterrents. The technical definition is "the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence."

---

Considering that the original suggestion was to also drop the initial cost of the apartment from 500k to 100k and also relaxing the rank requirements (so you can get into it earlier), that extra 400k in rent equates out to 40 weeks difference in rent. Generating 10k gil/week is completely doable and if it forces someone to learn some life skills of budgeting... that's not a bad thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

The offense in question here is having money that the OP seems to think having is a bad thing.

---

In RL it's not necessarily... in an MMO it definitely can be because it leads to price inflation as the MMO economy works vastly different from a real world one (as MMO economies need to balance how much money is generated with how much is deleted to stave off inflation).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

If they really wanted to sink gillionaires, there's plenty of other ways. But most of them are frugal and won't buy stuff that costs recurrent payment.

---

Gil sinks target everyone... not just the rich. The idea is to bleed out money from the entire economy, not just from the top 1%. To attack the gil the rich have, you'd use something else... the problem is that the playerbase (as a whole) does not have enough gil sinks, and housing rent (when combined with other stuff like repair and teleport costs) allow you to bleed out gil from the entire population. Having items like the EVE Online plex that allows for players to convert gil into game time (which is also an item that a player can purchase for RL money and sell on the AH for gil which would transfer the gil from another player) also help with this as you will naturally get the rich to spread their money around... as is enticing them with items to flex how rich they are (like the luxury mounts for example).

But it's not just a single path solution, but a multitude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

The country i live in apartments are both bought and rented. People pay millions of kronor for apartments.

And I'm not going for emotional anything. Punishments are meant to be deterrents. Poor money sinks are deterrents. The technical definition is "the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence."

The offense in question here is having money that the OP seems to think having is a bad thing. If they really wanted to sink gillionaires, there's plenty of other ways. But most of them are frugal and won't buy stuff that costs recurrent payment. It's why I even have money in other games. I don't spend it.

Here? I'm broke. Apartment rent would be the last straw for me and housing.

---

No matter how you want to twist it being asked to pay rent/property tax/homeowner's association fee/etc. is not punishment. Even if a punishment is a type of deterrent, not all deterrents are punishment.

Trying to sink gillionaires won't do much because they just pass their costs onto the players they're selling to so those players pay more to get less.

Those players would be richer if they would stop taking the easy way out by buying from the gillionaires at inflated prices and farming what they need themselves.

Not that I'm in anyway okay with rent on apartments unless there's a much higher rent on houses first but if you can't afford 10k a week, you're just logging in without playing the game. Content (other than PvP and Gold Saucer) is throwing gil at players simply for doing it, challenge logs add more gil on top of that and those amounts add up to a lot more than you need to cover things like repairs and teleport fees. There are a lot of other ways to make gil as well without leveling crafting or gathering.

If having to pay a small amount of rent would be enough to deter you from getting housing in the game, you sound like someone who doesn't care about housing in the first place. That's why deterrents like rent would be a good thing - those who don't care about housing would skip it and leave more available for those who do care. But the deterrent needs to be placed first where the demand is greatest and overwhelming the supply - on houses themselves, not apartments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

The country i live in apartments are both bought and rented. People pay millions of kronor for apartments.

And I'm not going for emotional anything. Punishments are meant to be deterrents. Poor money sinks are deterrents. The technical definition is "the infliction or imposition of a penalty as retribution for an offence."

The offense in question here is having money that the OP seems to think having is a bad thing. If they really wanted to sink gillionaires, there's plenty of other ways. But most of them are frugal and won't buy stuff that costs recurrent payment. It's why I even have money in other games. I don't spend it.

Here? I'm broke. Apartment rent would be the last straw for me and housing.

---

For me, it's not the gil, I have plenty from various duties in game. For me it's the idea that something that was presented as part of the package to play would now be a cost for some imaginary needed gil sink. If I want to use gil, there are plenty of tempting tidbits to spend it on if I have a lazy streak or just don't do dungeons. I know it's difficult when you are new and working to get your char to 80 because the gil you get from quests is a joke. It will get better once you learn to work the features to accumulate wealth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imora

The country i live in apartments are both bought and rented. People pay millions of kronor for apartments.

---

Just seeing you mention kronor I'm gonna jump to conclustion you mean the living mess we have in Sweden (unless you meant Norway or Denmark who also use Kronor).

Millions is not really true everywhere, it's not the norm (speaking of sweden since that's where i live), maybe in larger cities like stockholm, göteborg, malmö etc.
In my city you can of course buy a exclusive 2 room but generally most is 500-900k. I live in a 3 room apartment in a nicer area and payed more than 1m for it but it not standard prices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Then don't look at WoW.....

---

This is irrelevant. We're talking about FFXIV's housing system and your strange fixation with charging rent for apartments. You wouldn't be changing a thing with charging 10k a week. Rich players will be able to afford this without a problem. It's the players who don't have much gil to their names that'd be the most effected, the ones who the apartments are aimed at since it's low cost to open one.

Again, this is not a solution and SE is not going to implement it. Your time and imagination are better spent elsewhere.

Even "poor" players would get 10k by just doing roulettes or selling crap on mb.
it wouldn't make a difference at all, now if we say do 100k a week then maybe but why create a solution to a problem that doesnt even exist in the first place?
This is why I think was his first? (poorly) attempt to make a troll thread since that seems to be the new cool thing to do on this forum recent months.

I hope other people can appreciate the humor that the common online echo out there IRL is abolishing landlords/rent and now seeing people beg for rent in game.

Anyways, don't see the point in adding rent. Players are punished enough for having apartments over houses. I can promise you I'd demolish my house tomorrow if they announced a rent system for my home lol. Honestly I'd rather see apartments be free with a quest/rank then the idea of charging people routinely. I don't see any advantages to it other then replicating RL in some areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sotaris

Even "poor" players would get 10k by just doing roulettes or selling crap on mb.
it wouldn't make a difference at all, now if we say do 100k a week then maybe but why create a solution to a problem that doesnt even exist in the first place?
This is why I think was his first? (poorly) attempt to make a troll thread since that seems to be the new cool thing to do on this forum recent months.

---

Point here is to add in a gil sink to the game where one isn't already existing. With as low as it is on apartments, it sets precedent to do the same for houses, where it can be much higher (especially on the FC houses). If the FC house rent is a lot higher than the house rent (and both higher than the apartment rent) it makes owning and operating a shell FC house that much harder to do because you've got to deal with the rent. Right now, with such a trivial amount on apartments, it basically serves to introduce the gil sink, make apartments a lot easier to get into (lower GC rank and 100k vs 500k initial cost) so (in essence) it's opening them up.

And just because you disagree with the idea doesn't make it a troll thread =)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Point here is to add in a gil sink to the game where one isn't already existing. With as low as it is on apartments, it sets precedent to do the same for houses, where it can be much higher (especially on the FC houses). If the FC house rent is a lot higher than the house rent (and both higher than the apartment rent) it makes owning and operating a shell FC house that much harder to do because you've got to deal with the rent. Right now, with such a trivial amount on apartments, it basically serves to introduce the gil sink, make apartments a lot easier to get into (lower GC rank and 100k vs 500k initial cost) so (in essence) it's opening them up.

And just because you disagree with the idea doesn't make it a troll thread =)

---

You're missing the key factor though - gil sinks can't be too cheap. So it makes ZERO sense to tie it into something already cheap and entrylevel. They need to target the hoarders, and they need to be VOLUNTARY - and tied to something they'll want. Custom mounts (not recolors), minions, barding, glamours, and hair. Otherwise they're not going to work. Apartments are used so little as it is (because they're so small and most people see them as useless (which- they're not? Unless you're crossbreeding.)). Tying it to a gil sink is just going to turn people away even more. With the 10k per week gilsink, apartments would end up being 660k in the first year - a full 160k above where they are right now. Wow... such a gil sink. That's definitely more than a drop in a bucket. /s

You keep coming at this thinking that gil sinks targeting the poorer players are going to work. It's not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkieTea

You're missing the key factor though - gil sinks can't be too cheap.

---

And you're missing another point here: You don't use just ONE gil sink, you use many. This is one of many as FFXIV simply does not have enough gil sinks in the game as it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkieTea

So it makes ZERO sense to tie it into something already cheap and entrylevel. They need to target the hoarders, and they need to be VOLUNTARY - and tied to something they'll want.

---

Not all gil sinks are voluntary... and if you're targeting a hoarder they are not going to voluntarily part with their gil cause they're a... wait for it... hoarder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkieTea

Custom mounts (not recolors), minions, barding, glamours, and hair.

---

Why not all of that with the involuntary gil sinks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkieTea

You keep coming at this thinking that gil sinks targeting the poorer players are going to work. It's not.

---

And how much math has been shown IN THIS THREAD that 10k gil/week IS NOT DIFFICULT TO GET. You say "You keep targeting the poorer players" when it's shown that someone at endgame with a bit of motivation is going to easily earn that much and more gil, so the weekly cost of 10k gil is basically trivial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

And you're missing another point here: You don't use just ONE gil sink, you use many. This is one of many as FFXIV simply does not have enough gil sinks in the game as it is.

Not all gil sinks are voluntary... and if you're targeting a hoarder they are not going to voluntarily part with their gil cause they're a... wait for it... hoarder.

Why not all of that with the involuntary gil sinks?

And how much math has been shown IN THIS THREAD that 10k gil/week IS NOT DIFFICULT TO GET. You say "You keep targeting the poorer players" when it's shown that someone at endgame with a bit of motivation is going to easily earn that much and more gil, so the weekly cost of 10k gil is basically trivial.

---

Because 10k a week does NOTHING. 25m+ or bust - otherwise it's a drop in the bucket and it WON'T WORK.

Also, please pay more attention to what I'm saying.

"Thinking that gilsinks targeting poorer players will work" =/= "You keep targeting poorer players". 10k gil a week is so easy to get that it WILL NOT BE A GIL SINK. It would be the same effectiveness as teleporting everywhere on gil alone would be. You keep contradicting yourself.

Is a rent gilsink going to work? Or is the money so easy to get that it's trivial to poorer players? It CANNOT BE BOTH. That's why this idea won't work. Not even uping it to 100k per week would work because a poorer player earns that in a day doing simple roulettes at endgame. So which is it?

I'm confused on why there's an argument about gil sinks to begin with.

The topic was how to make apartments more appealing to players. Telling them the appeal is, "Because you gotta lose gil somehow" probably wont register well with most people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keramory

I'm confused on why there's an argument about gil sinks to begin with.

The topic was how to make apartments more appealing to players. Telling them the appeal is, "Because you gotta lose gil somehow" probably wont register well with most people.

---

I only piped in because somewhere along the line, Almagnus started talking about gil sinks. Either way, this is unappealing and lacks finesse.

"Hoarders unite!, don't let them take away the right to be rich!" hehe. No Forced Gill Sinks (shoos her troll back under the bridge...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkieTea

I only piped in because somewhere along the line, Almagnus started talking about gil sinks. Either way, this is unappealing and lacks finesse.

---

And if all the houses (and apartments) had rent on them... it would make it significantly more difficult for someone to hoard houses and making it difficult for people in addition to bleeding some gil from the economy. The goal here isn't to drain Lake Powell by blowing up the dam... but to provide another way to redirect some water from the Colorado so that Lake Powell doesn't over flow... akin to having a series of luxury hotels in the area that are consuming the water from the lake and pumping the water out to a nearby city. The problem with MMO economies, however, is that they do not work like the real world one because they are all about currency creation and destruction, with the economy retaining some of the currency and that cycling amongst the playerbase.

But back to rent, several other MMOs do this, and going by IRL, while you don't have rent on most houses (ignoring the housing payment until the load is paid off) you do have maintenance costs... especially when your AC decides to commit sudoku in the middle of a heat wave! =D **cries in sweat**

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

And if all the houses (and apartments) had rent on them... it would make it significantly more difficult for someone to hoard houses and making it difficult for people in addition to bleeding some gil from the economy. The goal here isn't to drain Lake Powell by blowing up the dam... but to provide another way to redirect some water from the Colorado so that Lake Powell doesn't over flow... akin to having a series of luxury hotels in the area that are consuming the water from the lake and pumping the water out to a nearby city. The problem with MMO economies, however, is that they do not work like the real world one because they are all about currency creation and destruction, with the economy retaining some of the currency and that cycling amongst the playerbase.

But back to rent, several other MMOs do this, and going by IRL, while you don't have rent on most houses (ignoring the housing payment until the load is paid off) you do have maintenance costs... especially when your AC decides to commit sudoku in the middle of a heat wave! =D **cries in sweat**

---

Using your analogy - this idea would be akin to diverting nothing but a tiny, tiny, tiny creek (like the kinds you step over with half a step). It's not nearly enough because precipitation would just add that back in anyways. Will lake powell overflow? With the tiny amount being diverted, any big rain shower would send it overflowing.

If you want a weekly gil sink - MAKE luxury hotel. Apartments are not luxury hotels. Make something that COUNTS - because 10k a week, 20k, 30k, 100k, won't do anything. And once you start getting into the prices that WOULD make even a small amount of difference, you'd have to justify it - and apartments don't justify that cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkieTea

Using your analogy - this idea would be akin to diverting nothing but a tiny, tiny, tiny creek (like the kinds you step over with half a step). It's not nearly enough because precipitation would just add that back in anyways. Will lake powell overflow? With the tiny amount being diverted, any big rain shower would send it overflowing.

---

I think it'd do more than you think it would. If you take a set of 90 apartments, that's going to pump out 900k gil/week per ward. With 24 wards across four housing areas (and each ward having two complexes), we're looking at 172,800,000 gil leaving the economy PER WEEK (assuming full apartment occupancy). Yes, the 10k gil/week per player is completely trivial, but when you start looking at the total economic impact, it's actually a lot more than you think it is.

Now if we do the same for houses, and go with X k upkeep per house (and arguably there should be a multiplier for the FC houses) then we are looking at least 5,760 * x gil per week leaving the economy. Or to put it this way, if the housing rent was between 10k to 100k , that would result between 57,600,000 gil/week and 576,000,000 gil/week leaving economy. All you'd need to do to cross the billion gil per week deleted is charge 173,612 gil/week rent on the houses.

I totally get that on a per person level the number is completely trivial, but that's the point of a good gil sink - it's something the average player wouldn't think twice about paying but when it's scaled up across everyone in a system, it actually deletes out quite a bit of gil. In other words, this is how Patreon can make an artist a millionaire in a month.