I thought it would be useful to start a thread for store owners, to discuss issues with running a store. I would like to kick this off with the post by Maxis Luc on the tso blog. He stated the following: " <font color="blue"> With the dynamic object pricing, it will be easier for stores to make money. Store owners should be able to hire more users to keep the stores open, creating a new user to user job market in the city </font> ." I wonder how other store owners feel about this? This was my reply on the blog " <font color="blue"> For a start dynamic pricing can go up as well as down, much like the stock market, and you can lose as much as you gain, so it isnt really helping stores to make more money. The main issue with your comment though is the user to user job market in stores. I suggest you send an anonymous sim round the stores and ask if you can be a roomie. I can guarantee the resounding answer will be No Thanks. Store owners are a seperate breed of sim, they are commited to their stores and are prepared to spend practically 100% of their sim time running it. They also invariably have multiple accounts to run the store for extra inventory room. Roomies on the other hand see it as an easy way to make some extra money while they go running around the city, because the owner will be keeping the store open for them. (At this point I would like to say that I was fortunate enough to have a roomie who was as commited as I am, but they are very very rare. I am now helping her set up her own store) Roomies will generally throw a bit of stock out and then never be seen again. Store owners cannot afford to give up part of their precious store space to someone who wont commit. If you really see this as a job opportunity for roomies then you need to do something about property limits, because while we are limited to a set number of blocks in a property we wont be prepared to share that space with anyone else." </font> I really do take issue with the statement that dynamic pricing is helping stores make money. Now before I go any further, I actually DO like dynamic pricing but i'll come to my reasons for that in a minute. But for Luc to state that dynamic pricing will help stores is misleading at best. You might make a profit on an item that has increased in value, if you have followed suit and increased the price, but that extra profit dissappears when you restock that item. Prices dont just increase though, they decrease too, and thats when you get the real stinger as you may end up having to sell something at a loss. Larger stores can absorb this loss but for the small undercapitalised store it can be devastating, and will more than likely lead to the closure of that store. Even so , I like dynamic pricing. There is an opportunity to stock up when prices are low and sell when/if they increase, but holding onto that stock while you wait can be an issue for inventory. Also, people have become less 'price resistant' as you just cant count on a price for a specific item anymore. Unless they want to jump from store to store, they are more likely to buy when they see an item at a price they are prepared to pay I really wish though that the retail price would dissapear from objects on sale, you dont see 2 prices on goods when you normally go shopping so why do we have to have it here in EA Land? I think this is more likely to help stores than dynamic pricing ever will. On the subject of roomies, someone posted on the blog an idea for renting out space in a store. I think that would be an excellent idea, and would overcome the issue of the 'invisible roomie' as the owner would be making a real gain from having roomies. As it stands, the owner is the all round loser when it comes to taking on roomies. Its the owner that has put up the money for the property AND the initial investment in stock to get full discount. Roomies come along and ride free on the back of that. If they had to pay a rent on the store space they take up this would then be a great incentive for owners to take on roomies. The issue of property limits would still have be addressed though.