Issue with permanent cosmetics

Permanent cosmetics are likely to quickly go under its store value meaning low sales long-term. This will result in less revenue for the playfund so a system needs to be implemented E.G a breakdown system for cosmetics. The community dislikes the idea of loot crates so something unique is needed to combat this future issue.

so you're proposing a feature that allows you a player to destroy the item they purchased from the store? i don't understand how that's beneficial?

Non-limited skins will quickly go under its store value so how do we prevent this? A breakdown system could be used to remove oversupplied skins by allowing the user to craft skins which may not be purchasable. This will help retain prices which is beneficial for the play fund and players will have an opportunity to craft new skins when they feel done with the current cosmetic they own. What I'm trying to say overall, is some sort of system needs to be in place to stop cosmetics being worth 15-20p each. 

But does that really make sense for items that cost $0.99 or ever $1.99? 

Well what other methods are there to keep the value of non-limited items up? Loot crates are the main method but the community dislike them.

Just don't try to make a market for S&box items to make hundreds like csgo :smile:

Items being expensive is important for a successful economy. It would be more beneficial to make the items non-tradeable/ marketable if the items are infinite/cheap. You could just look at the cs2 economy and how that became successful.

Both sides are making valid points. And I partially agree with crazyboys - though from a slightly different angle.

The core issue here isn't just about item prices being too low. It's about decreasing motivation for users to spend money within the platform itself. I'm not just talking about the secondary market, but about the inflow of purchases into the platform, it's like the financial bloodstream.
In my view, the internal flow of purchases is more important. And yes, it does depend on Steam Marketplace prices. If those prices drop too low, users lose incentive to buy anything through the platform directly. This isn't just about some generic live-service economy. It's about the long term sustainability of funding for developers on the platform.
What's frustrating is that many people are criticizing things they don't fully understand - but they are not offering any real alternatives. To be fair, crazyboys did suggest two light non lootbox-based approaches, which I respect.  The discussion feels less like a debate and more like people talking past one another . Anyone who actually understands the problem will realize that what we really need are solid, creative proposals. And I believe Garry and the team are already thinking long and hard about this.

Personally, here’s what I think S&box needs in this context:
A flexible monetization model. S&box isn’t one game - it’s a thousand. A united system based on rare cosmetics probably won't work here. Instead, the platform could benefit from separate micro-economies, where individual games or creators build their own systems, and platform allows to sell items for their games/organizations.
Rewards for participation and engagement, not just price tags. Item crafting or destruction is fine, but it’s not enough. Think seasonal challenges, events with collaborations of S&box organizations or Facepunch and some brand, and progression passes - those can keep people engaged and willing to spend without relying on artificial scarcity.
Built-in support for content creators. The platform should reward quality and originality, not just sell it for limited time. It would be awesome to let players vote on cosmetics on a scale, like TF2 does, run design contests, and reward creators based on success. Make it a social ecosystem for popular creators and modelers, not just a trading economy.