MH Gil Sink now active

[nasomi]

Sure there's taxes, and as a die hard republican i can't believe i'm about to say this, but they're ok. Everything is cheap enough for me to still have a million gil, great gear on all my jobs, and buying random stuff for fun as well. I can't wait for opaline set... although I hope i can wear it as i'm a boy this time!

[MariyaShidou]

I will grant you that my only real experience with MMOs is this and FFXI but even there they only tax 1 side wether it is the AH or through the Bazaar system. Why is it different here? As far as the retainers are concerned I much prefer them to the mule system in FFXI and I hope we never loose them

1 side tax or 2 sides tax doesn't differ that much, the buyer is the one who bears the tax burden not the seller. What do you think when it happens with 1 side tax for the seller? The seller ram up the price with the tax as mark up, duh.

[KitCat]

This again?

You should know by now that there will always be someone to bitch and moan about something, no matter what it is.

SE could give us free service for life, and I'm sure there's at least one person who'd go doom and gloom on it.

As for the double tax, whatever. There are people with more gil in this game than is even possible to spend. It's not hard to get. A 4k max tax is nothing. If anything it should tax based on % of your total net worth to remove some gil from the economy lol. I'd love to see peoples anger if that happened :/

[Rizon]

You should know by now that there will always be someone to bitch and moan about something, no matter what it is.

SE could give us free service for life, and I'm sure there's at least one person who'd go doom and gloom on it.

As for the double tax, whatever. There are people with more gil in this game than is even possible to spend. It's not hard to get. A 4k max tax is nothing. If anything it should tax based on % of your total net worth to remove some gil from the economy lol. I'd love to see peoples anger if that happened :/

The main objective of my post was to question the fairness of double taxing sales. I personally do not believe that it is. Others don't care. That is fine. But, because I didn't lock step into total approval with the rest. I am getting the Troll treatment. If you would read my previous posts you would find that I have been highly supportive of Yoshida's efforts to repair the game. Having said that I will continue to make posts concerning inequities or problems that I see. In each and everyone of those cases they are my opinions. You do not have to agree with but please respect them as I respect yours

[Scherwiz]

You... he... wha... I... can't. No - no way. You're being sarcastic with that bit right? Right?

I'm just going to bash my head against the wall pretending you didn't make this post.

Right

...

wing

[AlexNiculaie]

You're probably getting more guff for your juvenile attempt at political commentary, rather than your irritation with the feature. As it is, it's not a tax, it's a convenience fee. This is no different than a company offering to deliver an item to your home after you've paid for it. You aren't getting taxed twice then, and you aren't being taxed here. Just skip the feature and you don't have to worry about it. Simple as that.

[Bahn]

You're probably getting more guff for your juvenile attempt at political commentary, rather than your irritation with the feature. As it is, it's not a tax, it's a convenience fee. This is no different than a company offering to deliver an item to your home after you've paid for it. You aren't getting taxed twice then, and you aren't being taxed here. Just skip the feature and you don't have to worry about it. Simple as that.

It's twofold - his juvenile political comment just compounded the complaining he was doing about something that is ultimately, a very small issue in the first place. I do dislike the small fee associated with the direct-buy feature (and I don't remember reading about this fee anywhere, maybe I missed the part of the notes on it), but I pretty much used your logic for it. It's a small fee that makes it easier to get the item - that's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

What makes it even more of what I feel is a non-issue is the fact that it caps to 4,000 gil. If it started to scale based of the price you sold/bought for it, I would've gotten mildly annoyed too, as the "everyone has tons of money, so it doesn't matter" argument I think is rather weak, but the fact that you still pay 4,000 gil even for an item you bought for 10,000,000 gil just makes this whole argument against the fee really, really weak.

[AmyRae]

When did the IRS and the librel Democrats gain controlling interest in SE.

1. Keep your political fantasies out of this.

2. You don't have to pay the fee if you'd rather walk to the retainer yourself (like you always used to do).

[Viridiana]

1 side tax or 2 sides tax doesn't differ that much, the buyer is the one who bears the tax burden not the seller. What do you think when it happens with 1 side tax for the seller? The seller ram up the price with the tax as mark up, duh.

While I do agree with this overall, I'd like to point out that it's actually better (and more logical, besides) to put the delivery fee on the buyer. Increasing fees on the seller causes prices to go up even more than adding a delivery fee does.

[nasomi]

Wait, wait, I tthink I misunderstood this at first. I'm fine with taxes for the convenience of not having to walk to the npc, but if I'm selling something, now I pay tax for the convenience of some lazy asshat not to walk to the retainer? That is rediculious.