it sounds like you completely ignored what i said. Its ok, i'm use to it by now.
Actually, I didn't. You quoted my response to you. If I had ignored you, I just wouldn't have said anything at all.
In order to counter what you said, I'd have to compare the number of players that are currently buying rental halters to the number of people that would buy them, and also calculate the amount made through both. Then I'd have to guess the amount made in a player's "expected RO life time" (as you put it) and how many people we would gain in the future, crunch all those numbers, and make a statistical response according to those results after guessing how much WP would sell the permanent halters for. Problem is, I'm not a mathematician. I'm not Inubashiri or some other person who has the ability to make a program and/or graph to display this kind of data, even if those numbers were available.
What I can say is what I've already said. I used to play a game that had a "horse training system." These "rides" started out being available in-game only, they had life spans of a few months, and the horses gave stats to the riders. Once "hatched", these horses had to be trained (they started with only 1's in the stats, but as they're trained, the stats the rider gains raise as they level.) The speed in which a horse leveled depended on how high the level of the person has in the skill in training them. People made a decent amount of in-game money by training them. However, the company that created the game came out with account-bound horses that came with no life span, and didn't need training. Not only did this effectively kill the horse training system, it also was one of the main reasons why that company had to sell the rights to run the game to another company... because they lost money due to imbalance of cash shop items that disrupted the game. But that's beside the point.
You can say I took the high road with my response, or whatever, but I didn't ignore you.