Well done with the changes. Those who are angry just because it puts them in lower leagues don't understand that they'll make way more money if the game is a big success.
And for the game to be a success it needs a sound economy.
Also, they currently reach high leagues just because of inactive players.
No you are completely wrong, If we decide to race cars and you have a $130,000 car and I have a $5,000 car you should win the race, skill in driving might give me a chance to win though. This problem shouldn't exist because spending more money on cards should by its very nature give you an advantage. By putting in barriers to ensure this happens just hurts the game long term. It shouldn't be in your face you need to spend x amount to get to y, it should be more subtly than that, a natural resistance that compels you to spend rather than absolutely requires it. In any case why do this when there are other ways to achieve the same goal and not upset players? it makes no sense. Also your assumption that players will return seems problematic to me, I don't see this change as a compelling reason tbh.
Although I like how you think in terms of free market, and would follow the same logic in life, it can't apply to splinterlands.
Leaving the system open just allows grinders to invest very little, get huge rewards, and dump them all on the market.
Other players who are less active or invested a lot have now a bad ROI. You could say they just need to play more, but again, this isn't free market capitalism, it's just a game where you also want lazy people to have fun.
Without them there will be a big loser that will eventually leave.
As for other solutions that achieve the same result, I never heard any. It is definitely possible that there is a better solution, feel free to explain if you want.
Your $90,000 Skyline could roast my $400,000 Bentley tho.
Ok, I don't know, maybe you're right.
But I think @yabapmatt thought about that more than you.