Ciaran Laval has a good summary of a recent interview with Linden Lab's fearless (and surprisingly burly!) leader in The Irish Times, who takes the time to tell the Times about what the company's doing with Sansar (boilerplate, basically) and to Second Life as well:
The idea is not to replace Second Life or even phase it out, says Altberg, who describes it as “a very healthy virtual world that will be very healthy for a long time to come”. It is celebrating its 14th birthday this summer and continues to have a dedicated team continually improving content and interaction experiences... Altberg says that it will be considerably different from Second Life where users had to pay to own land or have access to a simulator: “We believe this model is too expensive and meanwhile we have this massive GDP, none of which Linden Lab captures.”
Two things: "Very healthy" doesn't quite capture a virtual world that's lost half its annual revenue over the last 6-7 years, or even more key, is continually losing long-existing masterpieces because SL users can't afford to keep them in Second Life. I understand putting on a brave face with the press, but then to talk about Second Life's revenue model being "too expensive" is kinda contradictory, and raises a more important point:
For Second Life to really be healthy, the users not only need innovation with the product (which is great, no doubt), but the revenue model. Maybe read Vektor Linden's thoughts there, and ask for other ideas from the team instead of talking about "too expensive" land tier payments like it's gravity or another inalterable force of nature?