Balanced Budget?
I have long felt that players would benefit by maintaining some spending parity in creating and maintaining their casual leagues.
If I ran a comic book/game store, I would probably at least TRY to create a budget league in which all of the players spent the same amount of money to build their collections. If players started with an M13 core set and then limited their spending (and deck building pool) to maybe an additional $10 a month, play parity could be maintained between the players.
In such a system, players would have to inventory their collections as they were built. It would seem to me, that the emerging technical tools- such as Deckbox- make it much easier for players to inventory their collections. It would be very easy for casual players to build a new Standard collection by maintaining a database of their new card resources on a service such as Deckbox.org and restricting their deck design to the cards they acquired this way.
Obviously, luck would play a larger role in such a setting, but Magic has never been a game in which luck played no role. Nor has it ever been a game of total parity, but a game of design which rewards those who improve their chances through creative and interesting play strategies. When players allow themselves the use of unlimited budgets in deck design in an environment of unexplainable prices and manufactured scarcity, the player experience can be poor. If the players themselves opted to maintain moderate investments that struck the appropriate balance between luck and skill in deck design, the role of money would be dramatically reduced and some integrity could be restored to the game.
Another thing, which I certainly have some experience in, worth exploring is the elimination of the tournament prizes at some events. When I ran my Monday Magic events, we did not have a tournament structure, but instead simply played a few hours of casual anything-goes multiplay games and eventually held a drawing for a booster pack. (Actually, the drawing was eventually replaced by a dice rolling scheme in which the highest roll won the booster pack). My system rewarded participation and play more than merely winning. This project continued until I was unable to finance the boosters for the event. A simple $1.10 per player cover each week for every four players could probably sustain the enterprise indefinitely. The players could opt to get one a booster every four weeks from the money that was collected rather than hold any drawings.
I tend to find that competitive tournament style magic does not necessarily bring out the best in players and that the mistakes which are often made in a game as complex as Magic are less serious when there is no prize at stake.