Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ji Sama
Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 22:32:00 -
[121]
It shouldn't matter who the question comes from. A legit and valid question is a legit and valid question, no matter who asks it.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 22:37:00 -
[122]
Originally by: cosmoray One of things investors (like myself, BB, Kwint, Shar) do is to try and ask the hardest questions and hassle the players involved to look for character and how they handle themselves with pressure. Varo has answered most questions (not great at first IMO), but is adapting to changes in the bond which is commendable.
I don¦t take things personally, cosmo. This is business and a negotiation process. Compromise is the name of the game. :) Ultimately I want a win-win situation where LoW and his existing shareholders benefit, the new investors benefit and I benefit. There are now other parties with a vested interest in the success of this offering, such as Grendell, Ji and Raw - all of whom have been more than helpful to me. Ji and Raw volunteered their assistance with no prompting on my part - and I value that.
|
Hippopotamus Rex
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 23:10:00 -
[123]
Varo, I think you should consider equity financing for part of this. (Although, perhaps you already have and you don't like the numbers).
If you were to finance the unsecured part with equity, you could still retain a majority stake in it, you can offer a higher rate of return without personally obligating yourself to pay that return, it would offer you more options to working out a deal with Raw and Ji, and this is just my personal opinion, but I think the potentially higher rate of return would buy you some relaxation on the governance regulations.
I also think this structure would be more complex, but also more realistic (RL), and I'm going out on a limb here, but I think you might like that.
Anyways, I don't want to clog up the forum with unwanted advice (anymore than I already have), but if you were interested, mail me in game and I'll send you something a little more specific that I've been thinking about, which you could use, modify or ignore - no strings.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 23:37:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Hippopotamus Rex Varo, I think you should consider equity financing for part of this.
I also think this structure would be more complex, but also more realistic (RL), and I'm going out on a limb here, but I think you might like that.
Anyways, I don't want to clog up the forum with unwanted advice (anymore than I already have), but if you were interested, mail me in game and I'll send you something a little more specific that I've been thinking about, which you could use, modify or ignore - no strings.
All advice is welcome, thank you. Yes, I did consider equity financing, and certainly I¦m more than comfortable dealing with complexity. I chose not to because a bond seemed simplest to implement here. We¦re quite a way down the road now, so I¦d rather not muddy the waters quite honestly. Nevertheless, I will drop you a line. I¦m interested in hearing your views.
|
RAW23
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 23:44:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Ji Sama It shouldn't matter who the question comes from. A legit and valid question is a legit and valid question, no matter who asks it.
True. The questions should be answered. But this doesn't make the hypocrisy of the questioner any less grating.
I believe I answered the questions aimed at the value of my word and the possibility of me helping Varo scam adequately by removing that possibility by putting my money where my mouth was. Having done so, I believe I was then freed to say what I thought about one of the questioners.
|
Ji Sama
Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 23:51:00 -
[126]
Originally by: RAW23
Originally by: Ji Sama It shouldn't matter who the question comes from. A legit and valid question is a legit and valid question, no matter who asks it.
True. The questions should be answered. But this doesn't make the hypocrisy of the questioner any less grating.
I believe I answered the questions aimed at the value of my word and the possibility of me helping Varo scam adequately by removing that possibility by putting my money where my mouth was. Having done so, I believe I was then freed to say what I thought about one of the questioners.
That is also true :)
|
Selene D'Celeste
Caldari The D'Celeste Trading Company ISK Six
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 00:49:00 -
[127]
I'm going to need to go over details with Grendell and LoW before anything involving me even becomes an option (I super skimmed this thread too). So don't drag me into this prematurely.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 01:25:00 -
[128]
Originally by: cosmoray I would ask that a third person is added as it requires 2 people to unlock BPO's. Add a 3rd person to hold shares and I think that is enough to cover the secured loan part.
I would suggest that myself and Bad Bobby don't have involvement in this as we are tied up in TITANS4U. Selene, VV or others would be acceptable in my mind.
On the assumption that Grendell and LoW are two of the trustees, I have asked a third person - not one of the names you mentioned - if he would be willing to hold shares. I¦ll wait for a yay or nay from him before advising you.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 01:40:00 -
[129]
Quote:
I'm going to need to go over details with Grendell and LoW before anything involving me even becomes an option (I super skimmed this thread too). So don't drag me into this prematurely.
Same.
- Auditing and consulting
Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Claire Voyant
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 05:08:00 -
[130]
The discussion up to this point has been entertaining, but somebody needs to point out that this is an investment in a business--a business that sells dreadnaught BPC packages for 389 million while dreads are selling for about 100m over fraud prices. How can this be sustainable?
|
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 05:21:00 -
[131]
Edited by: LaVista Vista on 15/01/2010 05:21:21
Originally by: Bad Bobby
Grendell + Bus = Bad
Fix that and then we're golden.
Hey!
I know high-school algebra. I can fix that!
Grendell = Bad - Bus
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 05:24:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Claire Voyant The discussion up to this point has been entertaining, but somebody needs to point out that this is an investment in a business--a business that sells dreadnaught BPC packages for 389 million while dreads are selling for about 100m over fraud prices. How can this be sustainable?
You'd be surprised.
I have seen waaaay too many ventures, which rely on seemingly rather unsustainable prices. But guess what, actually still work 6 months later.
That's not to say this will work. It's more that I think your argument is slightly weak and based on the idea that it's not possible to sell stupidly overpriced items to stupid people on a regular basis. Because that's certainly possible.
|
Bad Bobby
The Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 07:38:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Claire Voyant The discussion up to this point has been entertaining, but somebody needs to point out that this is an investment in a business--a business that sells dreadnaught BPC packages for 389 million while dreads are selling for about 100m over fraud prices. How can this be sustainable?
I don't believe that is their only income source. So even if the market for overpriced BPC packages was to dry up they still won't be passing the collection bowl straight away.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 15:43:00 -
[134]
A couple of updates.
LadyOfWrath has confirmed to me that the one other member of staff of the venture has agreed to stay on.
Magnu Stormhawk has agreed to prepare monthly accounts for the venture. The accounts will be prepared in accordance with accounting standards and will be published.
My opening post will be edited accordingly.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 18:53:00 -
[135]
SetraDark has agreed to be the third trustee. In the event that his duties in a liquidation require significant effort, he will receive a reasonable payment for that effort. This is to cover the eventuality that Grendell is busy and requires significant assistance from Setra.
|
SetrakDark
Caldari DarkCorp Technology and Finance
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 18:57:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Varo Jan SetraDark has agreed to be the third trustee. In the event that his duties in a liquidation require significant effort, he will receive a reasonable payment for that effort. This is to cover the eventuality that Grendell is busy and requires significant assistance from Setra.
Confirming that I am happy to accept the responsibilities of being the third trustee.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 20:01:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Bad Bobby
Originally by: Varo Jan Confirming that I¦ve discussed Ji¦s offer with him in-game and have accepted it. I¦ve not been able to finalise matters with Raw yet.
So, as things stand, we have: 125B secured by locked down BPOs 25B collateral provided by Ji Sama in the form of blue chip stocks which will be held by a trusted third party. Those stocks are, I believe, readily tradeable at full value.
Is there a consensus that 150B out of 175B is now adequately secured?
Grendell + Bus = Bad
Fix that and then we're golden.
Fixed.
I¦ve amended my opening two posts to reflect the current situation.
I¦d now like to proceed to the reservations stage. I suggest I take reservations in this thread to provide continuity. People OK with that?
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.15 21:30:00 -
[138]
Originally by: Phoebe Halliwel Will existing One Stop Investors have any priority in reserving bonds? LoW is stating in the One Stop thread "All Investors will be paid following the closing of this sale." Which suggests current investors will have to use new funds to invest here as they will be paid out by LoW after the sale is completed. I know that's more of a question for LoW but may also affect you if existing investors are unable to reinvest due to the transfer process.
I¦ve reached an agreement in principle with LadyOfWrath which will allow his existing shareholders to effectively exchange their shares for my bonds, should they wish to do so. Exact details of the process have yet to be finalised.
That being the case, I will give existing One Stop investors priority in reserving bonds.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 05:17:00 -
[139]
Now open for reservations.
|
tehsuxOr
Poor Old Ornery nOObs
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 09:08:00 -
[140]
1b for me
|
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.16 18:46:00 -
[141]
On reflection and under advisement, I¦ve decided to open a new thread for reservations. It will be posted shortly.
Please note that I have also reduced the minimum buy in from 1B to 500m, and made a few clarifications in the new posts.
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2010.01.17 10:19:00 -
[142]
Originally by: Ji Sama He, ye she was the external auditor who quit because of the sheer **** ebank was in :p
The level of fail in this statement is only matched by it's Orwellian nature. Of course if you were aiming at irony or humor... you hit it dead on. I marked the inaccuracies for you. PS: Not an external auditor. Long-term Early Member of the Board of Directors who guided things into the crapper that became EBank. Quit on the day that Ric ran. Whiney noises about quitting but still collecting pay is not quitting. Furthermore, withholding the reasons for any concerns from the public makes Selene culpable in the mess and any cover up of the mess. In essence, Selene was just as asleep at the EBank steering wheel as any other long-term leech... err... paid director. PSS: Nothing against Selene personally but history should at least be somewhat factual. Not this post-facto marketing revisionism crap is spewing forth from people who are as culpable as any involved.
My old mercenary(PVP) corp is recruiting again. Would you believe I'm giving them my signature block for free? |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.01.17 11:45:00 -
[143]
Shar is back!
I was getting seriously preoccupied, expecially after RAW23's announcement to "retire".
If you noticed, anyone with an IQ > 40 or an honesty > 3 (of 10) or without a patience of a saint are quitting MD because it turned to be a mindless cesspool, including resident scammers trying to spread relativism in the poor people who don't suck (yet).
- Auditing and consulting
Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Marcus Baltar
|
Posted - 2010.01.17 12:06:00 -
[144]
Apologies if I missed it, but have these following things been answered?
Originally by: Varo Jan The businesses currently generate profits in excess of ten billion ISK monthly.
Quoted from here. The reports by LOW do not seem to reflect this, as they only report variable increases in NAV.
Originally by: Varo Jan I¦ve reached an agreement in principle with LadyOfWrath which will allow his existing shareholders to effectively exchange their shares for my bonds, should they wish to do so. Exact details of the process have yet to be finalised.
Quoted from here. How can existing shareholders not have to hand over a doubling (or more or less) of the investment/exposure, before getting some of it back? Also, what is the actual worth of One Stop shares before the offering, and after?
Originally by: LadyOfWrath I have listed the remainder of my stocks for sale via my stock market on my website. I am selling them to repay the 18b bond I have open and to raise ISK to purchase a T2 BPO offered to me from a friend.
This will make this IPO 100% public and allow me to invest more of my personal funds into my T2 project. Also decided to reactivate my alt to do some more pvping. The IPO will still be run as normal and the current vote will last through 1 Feb 09. So based on what people vote for is where the IPO will go over the next few months.
and Originally by: LadyOfWrath All stocks have been reserved pending payment. Stocks held for 48 hours at request.
Quoted from here and here. LoW's Stock Market and Stock Ledger do not seem to show these posts? --
|
Ji Sama
Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll
|
Posted - 2010.01.17 12:23:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Ji Sama He, ye she was the external auditor who quit because of the sheer **** ebank was in :p
The level of fail in this statement is only matched by it's Orwellian nature. Of course if you were aiming at irony or humor... you hit it dead on. I marked the inaccuracies for you. PS: Not an external auditor. Long-term Early Member of the Board of Directors who guided things into the crapper that became EBank. Quit on the day that Ric ran. Whiney noises about quitting but still collecting pay is not quitting. Furthermore, withholding the reasons for any concerns from the public makes Selene culpable in the mess and any cover up of the mess. In essence, Selene was just as asleep at the EBank steering wheel as any other long-term leech... err... paid director. PSS: Nothing against Selene personally but history should at least be somewhat factual. Not this post-facto marketing revisionism crap is spewing forth from people who are as culpable as any involved.
I was being ironic :(
Oh and HI SHAR :D You have been missed!
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.17 15:58:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Marcus Baltar Apologies if I missed it, but have these following things been answered?
Originally by: Varo Jan The businesses currently generate profits in excess of ten billion ISK monthly.
Quoted from here. The reports by LOW do not seem to reflect this, as they only report variable increases in NAV.
The numbers provided to me indicate that profits for *all* operations are in a range of 9.5B to 11B, hence the 10B. My objective will be to increase that average by a number of means.
Quote: How can existing shareholders not have to hand over a doubling (or more or less) of the investment/exposure, before getting some of it back? Also, what is the actual worth of One Stop shares before the offering, and after?
Marcus, would you mind waiting on an answer to the exchange process until LoW and I sort out the mechanics, please? The basic premise is to allow investors with funds tied up in LoW¦s operation to invest some/all of that in mine, should they wish to do so. Current mechanics do not provide for that.
Quoting LoW¦s site, "Current Share Value: $40,708,951.02" The new entity will not have public shares. The offering is for a fixed rate bond, not shares.
Quote: Quoted from here and here. LoW's Stock Market and Stock Ledger do not seem to show these posts?
Could I suggest you address those questions directly to LoW in his thread? I can¦t answer for him.
|
Varo Jan
Caravanserai Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.01.17 22:25:00 -
[147]
Originally by: cosmoray
Originally by: Varo Jan
Originally by: cosmoray Are you issuing shares from a holding corp to cover the 150B?
With 300 bonds its very difficult to effect manual payments, and bond trading and share transfer becomes down to a manual ledger.
I plan to follow the same process as LOW. Investor details will be maintained on the existing website. I¦m building a spreadsheet now as reservations are made, so the calculation per se is not an issue. Assuming the spread of investments follows what we¦ve seen so far with reservations, I could end up with 60 manual transactions to be processed. Doing that once a month is not a problem for me.
IMO that process is not as secure as having a holding corp and paying dividends, and shares are easily transferable. It didn't matter previously about the website as LOW wasn't paying dividends but building up NAV.
Two bad things can go wrong:
1. You make mistakes, and pay the wrong people (it is easy I have done it) 2. What happened if you scammed and wiped the database. This is what happened with DBANK.
A bank database is very different. It contains variable balances for each customer (9000 in the case of EBank), and possibly varying interest rates for different accounts. This is a simple list of individuals (possibly 60) who will be paid precisely the same amount each month. The only changes to the list over the life of the bond will be when a bond holder sells his bond.
The list will be in the MD bond thread, on the website and on my spreadsheet. I will post the final list in a new post, so there will always be an Eve Search record of the original holders. Sellers have to post in the thread, so again, there will always be a record of those transactions.
In short, I don¦t believe the comparison to a bank database is appropriate.
Regarding your other point about making mistakes, I consider that most unlikely - but then I know me. You don¦t. :) If it were to happen, there¦s no question that if the wrong recipient refused to return the money, I would be liable and I would pay out of my own pocket.
Quote: Now if there are actual shares, Grendell and the trustees and can easily liquidate the assets and announce a share re-purchase. This can't be done if there is no database.
I am not implying that you will SCAM (far from it), I am just pointing out what is safest for investors. As you have decided to have trustees to make the bond VERY SAFE, you should make the share handling system equally as safe.
I have this clause in my thread: "In the event that interest payments are not made in full for three consecutive months, including making up previous shortfalls, Grendell will liquidate the corporations and repay investors." The wording was agreed with Grendell to ensure clarity.
The trustees will hold the shares, so I cannot use shares in the existing corporations. Grendell will be CEO. That means I would have to open a new corporation and transfer 6B each month to it to effect bond interest payments. In theory, that is insecure because it provides me with the opportunity to run off with the full amount and not pay investors. Also, it would mean I would need to have the accountant verify payments from that other corporation, instead of simply reviewing transactions from an existing wallet.
I hope that explains my thinking a bit more. Please let me know if you¦d like any further clarifications.
|
Marcus Baltar
|
Posted - 2010.01.18 12:16:00 -
[148]
I ask in this thread as it seems these questions are to do with "[Bond] One Stop Buyout - Discussion Phase" but the questions are repeated in this thread. Originally by: Varo Jan
Quote: How can existing shareholders not have to hand over a doubling (or more or less) of the investment/exposure, before getting some of it back? Also, what is the actual worth of One Stop shares before the offering, and after?
Marcus, would you mind waiting on an answer to the exchange process until LoW and I sort out the mechanics, please? The basic premise is to allow investors with funds tied up in LoW¦s operation to invest some/all of that in mine, should they wish to do so. Current mechanics do not provide for that.
Quoting LoW¦s site, "Current Share Value: $40,708,951.02" The new entity will not have public shares. The offering is for a fixed rate bond, not shares.
Quote: Quoted from here and here. LoW's Stock Market and Stock Ledger do not seem to show these posts?
Could I suggest you address those questions directly to LoW in his thread? I can¦t answer for him.
This seems like a "hostile takeover" and forced buyback combined (at a currently undecided amount, possibly "just shy of 47m per stock"). As I understood it One Stop is 100% owned by the shareholders and they have not been asked.
The 150 billion ISK you are raising to buy One Stop is below the last NAV of 151,722,260,440.67 ISK (and well below the NAV based on the above buyback NAV of 174,796,300,000 ISK). Someone seems to have some differing figures?
Also, this thread stated the bond is fully secured, but a 5% fee ("5% of the then current NAV") will be charged for liquidation meaning it will only be 95% secured? At the start the variable priced collateral is worth 152 billion ISK, meaning only worth 144.4 billion ISK in returned investments on a successful liquidation. If it's value increases (BPO value increases), or decreases (shares scam/complete, BPO value decrease), does that mean the rate of cover changes too? What about discounts on collateral values to aid reasonable sales time if necessary?
This collateral also needs to cover three months dividends if necessary ("including making up previous shortfalls"), or another 18 billion ISK, too.
Saying all that, I would probably like to reserve 1 bond, but would like to know what my One Stop shares are worth first. --
|
RAW23
|
Posted - 2010.01.18 12:32:00 -
[149]
Edited by: RAW23 on 18/01/2010 12:33:48
Originally by: Marcus Baltar
The 150 billion ISK you are raising to buy One Stop is below the last NAV of 151,722,260,440.67 ISK (and well below the NAV based on the above buyback NAV of 174,796,300,000 ISK). Someone seems to have some differing figures?
Varo is publicly raising 150bil for the 100% secured portion of the bond but the total value of the bond is 175bil, including a 25 billion unsecured portion that I have bought.
Quote:
This collateral also needs to cover three months dividends if necessary ("including making up previous shortfalls"), or another 18 billion ISK, too.
I had offered to guarantee the 3 months' interest myself in the event of a scam or default (with my word, rather than collateral) but was shouted down by a few commentators earlier in this discussion thread who thought my offer looked "dodgy". In any case, do 100% collateralised loans or bonds normally provide interest cover? I don't think I have seen such a provision before, but may be wrong. Obviously, it would be a bonus to have this covered as well as the investment capital as I'm sure investors would love to have their profits guaranteed as well as their initial stake but, as I say, I don't think I have seen that degree of security offered before and if fully collateralised cover were to be offered for this as well then the bond would probably warrant a lower interest rate.
|
Ji Sama
Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries
|
Posted - 2010.01.18 13:08:00 -
[150]
Well Grendels 5% fee worries me aswell :( It isn't the custom here in MD imo...
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |