House flipping is 100% confirmed against ToS, send vegetable naysayers to this thread

[Snugglebutt]

No taxing. I run a very small FC and I am always very active in my ward as my neighbors would agree whom I also see quite a lot both from one which is a large FC with large mansion on one side and the other side a personal house but also see that owner often too. Taxing won't make the wards more active, it will just punish small FC owners like me who already work harder than the big FC's because I don't have the large amount of people to help unlike a bigger FC would have...SE just needs to restart the reclamation function as soon as possible which is the better option because your not screwing me over in the process.

[Dimitrii]

Housing tax is just another way of trying to price out the fringe players that are barely able to afford houses just like house flipping.

[Myon88]

What is pricing out 'fringe' players is the economic reality that price is a function of how scarce something is, and how much of a demand there is for it.

That's the reason someone on Gilgamesh can find buyers willing to pay 50 million gil, while on smaller servers even the default plot depreciating to only a million can't find buyers. You may as well try and argue against gravity, because as long as there is a market for a good, you're going to see the same scene play out over and over.

On that note, if you hate housing flippers, the actual person you should be blaming is the buyer willing to hand over 50 million, because he is the one who's pricing you out of the market, not the seller. If a house goes for 50 million on the black market, for example, it's not because the seller chose that number randomly, that price only exists because there's someone else out there willing to pay more than you.

As long as the housing supply does not increase, this is the only solution that puts pressure on the limited number of plots to be owned by the people most deserving of them. If you're going on a 6 month break from the game and wondering how you're going to keep your house, you should be wondering about that; You should be thinking very hard because by definition someone else could use it more than you.

[Dimitrii]

Disregarding the asinine comparison to gravity your suggestion of a tax is addressing problems using a needlessly more complex approach and with unintended side effects. You are trying to force people with multiple houses to consider getting rid of them by way of taxation when you can just limit houses to one per account or server and be done with it without subjecting all the other players with just the one house to this tax. It would be a monumentally better approach in limiting houses per player because players are far less likely to pay for extra accounts as opposed to just paying more gil with that tax to keep the houses. I'll ignore your other point about the tax somehow making the districts more lively and bustling as its irrelevant and not our place to set guidelines on how often players should be seen in and utilizing their own estates.

[Myon88]

On the contrary, the beauty of a mechanism like this is that it acts on its own simply by existing.

What most of you seem to advocate is for SE to enforce their price controls manually by actioning the accounts of players found breaking the rules. A solution like that will never be as effective as you hope, as not only does that require manpower, actioning an account is a serious decision for most companies and players have a lot plausible deniability that they can exploit - you will expend a tremendous amount of effort just to nail one person.

Technically this is already the case, we know from E3 about the "No selling for 'exorbitant' prices" stance they are taking now which is basically a price ceiling by proxy. If you look around you though you'll see nothing has changed - even if it scares some sellers into not selling, there being no upkeep required to maintain ownership of a house means they can simply sit on it indefinitely.

Cracking down on grey markets is only half of the solution. Since there is no incentive to release a plot you don't use, other than to be nice, the status quo isn't going to change.

[DroFrehter]

So is it acceptable to resell it for the original value?

[StouterTaru]

So is it acceptable to resell it for the original value?

It's at the whim of the GM, if someone reports it. If there's not in game conversations about it, their hands are tied.

[Warr_of_Lint]

How are people reselling these plots for Gil anyway? Doesn't the 18-72 hour randomized rebuy timer effectively stop the drop, then buy, trading scheme? Or are players selling the whole account or FC for Gil now?

[Myon88]

It's at the whim of the GM, if someone reports it. If there's not in game conversations about it, their hands are tied.

I remember seeing on Reddit sometime last week, someone mentioning that he got reported and actioned despite selling his plot for a pretty low price.

*I found it - https://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/comme...esults_in_ban/
Turns out he sold it for half the original price - not even the original price. I doubt most of you would classify that as 'exorbitant' prior to hearing about this, so it seems to be one of those things where you're indeed at the whims of whichever GM happened to be on call at the time.

[worldofneil]

Doesn't the 18-72 hour randomized rebuy timer effectively stop the drop, then buy, trading scheme?

Sorry, but does exist... I remember seeing a suggestion about something like that, but it never made it into the game. If you relinquish a plot it vanishes straight away and someone can instantly buy it.