Shamu, I think your post is very astute and contains a number of interesting points. I fundamentally agree with you but want to comment on a few points.
Shamu077 Wrote:I have never seen any of the KittyCats owners ever express any concern about the oversupply of KittyCats (live or boxes).
I have heard a KittyCats owner express the opinion that the secondary market was a kind of large unmanageable thing that was hard to deal with and over which she felt she had limited control. I think they know what's going on but always err on the side of caution in terms of intervention, and as you say, there are ways in which intervening may not be in their immediate interest.
Shamu Wrote:As long as they continue to sell their SE cats for $790 with new Lindens during the Fall to Spring selling season, and attract enough new people to KC to keep buying starters, kibble, milk, and accessories with new Lindens, their business model is intact.
However, the menagerie represents nothing but a loss to the owners. Even though you get $20L per cat, that can only be used to by more KC items, it still represents lost sales of new Lindens to them. If they wanted to increase their profits, they would cut the credit to $10L per cat, not increase it as everyone proposes here.
Yes. This is surely true. In previous posts on this subject I have frankly asked them to look at their spreadsheets and see if they could see their way to increasing the menagerie payout even though - yes - it represents a direct cut in profits. It is an audacious thing to ask them and I doubt they would do it, but who knows, we can ask.
Shamu Wrote:As far as using $K to buy the SE cats, well that isn't going to happen. That $790 per SE is in new Lindens, and they are not going to lose those sales to $K, which represent nothing to them. BTW the actual SE cat costs about $600 after you subtract the food and vitamins in each package. So at $20L per menagerie cat, that is 30 cats for a SE cat. They are still not going to lose those sales to the worthless (to KC) $K.
I don't think they would lose any sales. I have never seen anything which suggested to me that adding more Limited Edition cats would dampen the sales for other LE cats. In other words, I don't think the LE appetite is saturated. I agree that it would not profit them directly in New Lindens; it would be something that they were doing JUST to help the market.
Shamu Wrote:Now if you could convince the owners that increasing the incentives to menagerie cats will save their business from eventual failure, they might consider something. But why has there been no new menagerie special cats, or new traits for the last three years? Because, I think, there has been no reason for them to do so.
I think that they are reasonable people and might be persuaded to pitch in the extra effort - and it would be extra effort on their part - to help the market. It would be a gift. You're right that they have no real reason to do this. I suspect that their business is quite healthy. I really don't know why there have been no new menagerie cats in 3 years. Perhaps they are looking at data which shows them that not many people have collected them ALL and therefore they don't feel that the appetite for tigers has waned. (I think it has. The price for tigers has declined on the secondary market.) I suspect - in the absence of any data at all - in other words, pure and rampant speculation - that they may have target numbers for the tigers that have not yet been hit.
Shamu Wrote:Large breeders are dropping out or cutting back more this year than ever, and that means less food and milk sales to KC. Until KC is concerned that losing the large breeders will affect their bottom line, I would not look for menagerie incentives.
I don't know if this statement is really true. I don't know if there are any statistics for it. There is something in every business called "Churn", which is the rate at which old customers drop out and are replaced by new customers. In some industries - like the wedding industry - one expects, even hopes for 100% churn. You get married once is the ideal. Repeat business is brought in by recommendations, family and friends, but you just don't get repeat customers and everybody is fine with that. However, if a restaurant had 100% churn - no repeat customers - it would signal total failure to the world. All businesses must mind their churn. KittyCatS is quite adept at churn - they bring in a new batch of breeders with every Firestorm Cat and Advent Calendar and probably to a lesser degree with the regular LE collections and participating in various SL events. But there is a new batch of breeders every year. Are older ones retiring faster? I really don't know.
Shamu Wrote:Will the small breeders menagerie their cats for food and special cats if they can get a mega tiger for say 100 cats, not the 350 needed now? Well maybe, once they get 100 cats they cant give away. But then the value of all tigers will decrease dramatically.
I do not think that KittyCats should ever EVER EVER change the price on the Tigers. I think that price is and should be set in stone or the world would shriek. I think that adding new LEs that would cost less for limited times should be an entirely separate initiative. Your own suggestion for 30 cats as being comparable to the other LEs seems very reasonable to me, but I think the tigers are a thing on their own, and that there is not a reason that the 2 things need be conflated.
To repeat, I think your analysis of the dynamics and costs is spot on. I am perhaps more optimistic than you about HQ doing something. I could be proved wrong.
