EVE Search - Discussion: Titan BPO Copying

All Channels

Market Discussions

Discussion: Titan BPO Copying

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Block Ukx Forge Laboratories	Posted - 2009.06.25 17:47:00 - [211] Originally by: Kazzac Elentria If refusal to pay divs is done, the BOD could publicly state the location of the POS and prints. In this way they essentially become useless as you'll never be able to make another copy ever again. OK, so he finishes copying, kicks everyone out, destroys the POS, sells and keeps profits. He then installs a new POS to start the new set of copies. How knowing the system location benefits the shareholders? Are you suggesting they blow up every POS in that system?
HawkBlade Minmatar The Higher Standard Virtue of Selfishness	Posted - 2009.06.25 17:50:00 - [212] Originally by: Block Ukx He then installs a new POS to start the new set of copies. How knowing the system location benefits the shareholders? Are you suggesting they blow up every POS in that system? If you know the corp, you don't have to blow up every pos in that system. Just the ones BB would need.
Ray McCormack hirr	Posted - 2009.06.25 17:51:00 - [213] Originally by: Bad Bobby I am asking people to trust me with up to 265 billion with as many controlls in place as we can come up with. The problem is the controls are not up to scratch, they are barely worth the effort. To the four individuals that stepped up to join "the board" I strongly suggest you rethink your position. You are putting your name forward as some level of security when in fact you will have no control over the CEO walking away with everything. Bad Bobby, the only option I can see would be to have the shares spread as thin as possible amongst public investors with a reason to shout and scream at the board and vote no for unlocks. I understand how unattractive this is; but when it comes to 280b in ISK, and considering recent events, I don't think MD should be entertaining something so risky.
Bad Bobby Ugly Toys Zzz	Posted - 2009.06.25 17:53:00 - [214] Originally by: Block Ukx Originally by: Kazzac Elentria If refusal to pay divs is done, the BOD could publicly state the location of the POS and prints. In this way they essentially become useless as you'll never be able to make another copy ever again. OK, so he finishes copying, kicks everyone out, destroys the POS, sells and keeps profits. He then installs a new POS to start the new set of copies. How knowing the system location benefits the shareholders? Are you suggesting they blow up every POS in that system? Would it not have to be a POS under the same corp unless I managed to unlock the BPOs, in which case the whole concept is blown open by my being able to do whatever I like? Clearly, there are ways life could be made hard for me. Clearly, there are a ways to make it difficult for me to scam. We have tried rather hard over the life of this thread to come up with a decent system to deal with the risks as best as we can. I'm still open for further suggestions and revisions of the plan that we have devised. Block, do you have a solution for the problem in mind?
Block Ukx Forge Laboratories	Posted - 2009.06.25 17:55:00 - [215] What happens to locked-BPOs when you refuse to pay the station rental fee?
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2009.06.25 17:56:00 - [216] Originally by: Block Ukx OK, so he finishes copying, kicks everyone out, destroys the POS, sells and keeps profits. He then installs a new POS to start the new set of copies. How knowing the system location benefits the shareholders? Are you suggesting they blow up every POS in that system? For 265b in assets? Yes But Im an ass like that and would spend 50b to grief someone
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2009.06.25 17:59:00 - [217] Originally by: Block Ukx What happens to locked-BPOs when you refuse to pay the station rental fee? Like all assets they go to impounded. However if the CEO or director attempts to pay the station rental fee to get them out of impound it will require that the items be unlocked first. When you go the corporate assets tab and attempt to unlock it will initiate the unlock vote. So essentially the same thing of a stalemate.
Bad Bobby Ugly Toys Zzz	Posted - 2009.06.25 18:00:00 - [218] Originally by: Ray McCormack Originally by: Bad Bobby I am asking people to trust me with up to 265 billion with as many controlls in place as we can come up with. The problem is the controls are not up to scratch, they are barely worth the effort. To the four individuals that stepped up to join "the board" I strongly suggest you rethink your position. You are putting your name forward as some level of security when in fact you will have no control over the CEO walking away with everything. Bad Bobby, the only option I can see would be to have the shares spread as thin as possible amongst public investors with a reason to shout and scream at the board and vote no for unlocks. I understand how unattractive this is; but when it comes to 280b in ISK, and considering recent events, I don't think MD should be entertaining something so risky. The problem with that is it would mean the location of the tower and the BPOs would be public knowledge and this amplifies another of the risks of the operation. Maintaining POS security, defending against frequent have-a-go attacks, shipping from a known location to a known marketplace, all these issues would become much more troublesome. I feel that secrecy of corp and location is the best defence against these issues and I think we would have to rethink the entire enterprise without it. The alternative is to have the POS and product delivery under semi-permanent guard from a heavy fleet, which isn't something that can easily be worked into the profit calculations with any good result.
Ray McCormack hirr	Posted - 2009.06.25 18:07:00 - [219] Originally by: Bad Bobby The problem with that is it would mean the location of the tower and the BPOs would be public knowledge and this amplifies another of the risks of the operation. Maintaining POS security, defending against frequent have-a-go attacks, shipping from a known location to a known marketplace, all these issues would become much more troublesome. I feel that secrecy of corp and location is the best defence against these issues and I think we would have to rethink the entire enterprise without it. The alternative is to have the POS and product delivery under semi-permanent guard from a heavy fleet, which isn't something that can easily be worked into the profit calculations with any good result. The threat of lost profit is less than the threat of total capital loss. Whilst I see you're trying your best to mitigate any risk on any side, there simply is no way to safely secure this - there will always be risk, the most likely of which is complete loss. WTS Tech II Component BPO Sets \| Auction Prowler
HawkBlade Minmatar The Higher Standard Virtue of Selfishness	Posted - 2009.06.25 18:12:00 - [220] Originally by: Ray McCormack To the four individuals that stepped up to join "the board" I strongly suggest you rethink your position. You are putting your name forward as some level of security when in fact you will have no control over the CEO walking away with everything. Thanks Ray. Without you I would have no way of knowing what I am doing. Shall I send you a Tech II cookie in the way of thanks? Now, my security involvement is quite clear. There are potential gaps in game mechanics, there are limited responses. These are being spelled out, identified, and attempts at addressing are taking place. So I've no worries about my level of involvement here. I should add: I'm tangentially connected to another outfit doing the same thing as this IPO. Ray is also connected with that outfit. I am not pushing this IPO on its merits nor should Ray be pooh-poohing the IPO on its merits without disclosing that fact. Bobby just asked me if I wouldn't mind and I said yes... prior to reading this thread. In fact I absolutely insisted that he keep my involvement as simplified, and clear, as possible. If not for the fact that I had to stand up and identify myself I'd be ecstatic to remain anonymous or, at least, greatly downplayed. That being said, I appreciate your comments in all other regards. You are absolutely right in your view of things though your possible solution is either inject more risk into the IPO or simply not have the IPO.
Ray McCormack hirr	Posted - 2009.06.25 18:19:00 - [221] Shar, you realise fully that your half-arsed disclosure is against my express wishes. To even intimate my involvement publicly is extremely disrespectful.
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2009.06.25 18:20:00 - [222] Originally by: Ray McCormack To the four individuals that stepped up to join "the board" I strongly suggest you rethink your position. You are putting your name forward as some level of security when in fact you will have no control over the CEO walking away with everything. I would hope that potential investors would read this thread and understand that the four individuals only exist to help serve a stalemate should the CEO attempt to walk away with the farm.
Bad Bobby Ugly Toys Zzz	Posted - 2009.06.25 18:21:00 - [223] Originally by: HawkBlade That being said, I appreciate your comments in all other regards. You are absolutely right in your view of things though your possible solution is either inject more risk into the IPO or simply not have the IPO. This is basically my thoughts on this. I do understand everyone's concerns and if it were in my power to clear them all up I would. I am prepared to balance various risks to get the best deal for my investors and I do not believe that a public "attack this" sign is the correct balance. If the options are to accept these known risks or have no IPO then that decision will have to be left until the launch where each potential investor can make their own determination on it.
Ray McCormack hirr	Posted - 2009.06.25 18:29:00 - [224] There is an interesting discussion on the forums somewhere here started by Eefrit as to the best effective setup for a board securing a private corporation by lockdown vote. My suggestion would be to read that. All I ask is for you to make the potential investor specifically aware of the risks involved, and that your measures only go part way towards mitigating them. WTS Tech II Component BPO Sets \| Auction Prowler
eVaLF Delivery Luck	Posted - 2009.06.25 19:29:00 - [225] One way to resolve some is make one of the BOD the ceo of the corp as well. Now this would put the CEO into the posistion he could take the BPO's instead, so its really do you trust one of the BOD more than Bad Bobby. Personally I am promising nothing other than I will hold shares and sign in pretty much daily on my accounts. I will be taking these shares and distributing them between my mains so that I catch any votes. ----- POS FUEL DELIVERY & HIGH & LOW SEC FREIGHTER SERVICES
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2009.06.25 19:32:00 - [226] Originally by: eVaLF One way to resolve some is make one of the BOD the ceo of the corp as well. Now this would put the CEO into the posistion he could take the BPO's instead, so its really do you trust one of the BOD more than Bad Bobby. Personally I am promising nothing other than I will hold shares and sign in pretty much daily on my accounts. I will be taking these shares and distributing them between my mains so that I catch any votes. more or less what I plan to do as well. 1 Share to the alt, rest to the main right here. That way I can more or less act in majority on the vote since I log in at least once every 24h and have for the past 3+ years
Bad Bobby Ugly Toys Zzz	Posted - 2009.06.26 06:48:00 - [227] Launch posted here. Discussion can continue in this thread however, unless you feel your comments are needed in the launch thread.
Jin Nib	Posted - 2009.06.26 07:21:00 - [228] From the launch thread it seems like the money from investors will be locked up for at least four months before starting to have any benifit to them. I dont really know why I'm pointing this out except that it makes, one, or maybe just me, hesitate comiting large sums towards the venture. Other then that it does look pretty exciteing. Another thing is that over a year despite the security of your POS, I'd imagine that it could very well be attacked in that time, dampening the year end returns. How well has that been taken into account?
Bad Bobby Ugly Toys Zzz	Posted - 2009.06.26 08:36:00 - [229] Originally by: Jin Nib over a year despite the security of your POS, I'd imagine that it could very well be attacked in that time, dampening the year end returns. How well has that been taken into account? In my time running hi-sec research POSes, over 2 years, I have been through countless wars. I believe I've been through something like 8 wars in the last 8 months. In those 2 years I have had one of my POSes attacked on one occasion and that attack was repelled dispite having 30 Russians knocking on it's shields. In the alliance to which I belong we have lost 2 towers to wars as far as I am aware, one was an offline abandoned tower and the other was poorly fitted and largely undefended. Also I have been involved in the takedown of a number of hi-sec towers myself, so I know what is involved from the attackers point of view. Furthermore I've been involved in many POS defences and takedowns in low-sec and 0.0. So my knowledge of POS warfare in general is pretty good. So I speak from a position of knowledge and confidence when I say that there is a big difference between attacking a hi-sec tower and destroying a hi-sec tower. We are not talking about something that can be attempted by any band of ruffians on a jolly through hi-sec, they need to be organised, well equipped, dedicated and then need to bring considerable numbers. For a group like this to spend it's time popping random hi-sec towers isn't common. The groups like this that do exist tend to attack towers with lots of expensive labs and few defences, there are plenty of towers like this throughout hi-sec, attacking a well armed deathstar with only a small number of labs is far less profitable for them and far less likely. It is entirely possible that the POS will come under a war dec and be attacked at some point, but I think it highly unlikely that any such attack will be a serious threat. If, on the other hand, the identity of the tower/corp is discovered then I could understand some serious forces comming to attack it but that is an entirely difference cirumstance. In the case that the tower is attacked and reinforced, I will be able to bring other forces to defend it. But obviously I am not going to do that unless I consider the threat to be significant and only once the tower is reinforced. Bringing 100 men to defend a lonely hi-sec tower at the first sign of a war-dec would be a little too high profile, considering the need for secrecy here.
Stafen Killer Koalas	Posted - 2009.06.26 15:58:00 - [230] I think BB is not going to be payed enough to stop him running off with the 4 titan BPCs from one 4month copy cycle. His total payment for this enterprise is 6% Total for first 12 months = 120b So his income for one year is 120 * 6% = 7.2b And if he runs off with 4 titan BPC (which he will find very easy to do before anyone notices), he could get 15b * 4 = 60b This for a third of the work he can get 8 times the profit, a very strong motivator to scam. All depends how much BB values his reputation. (Just posting this as it came into my head and I do not think anyone has mentioned it)
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2009.06.26 16:04:00 - [231] Originally by: Stafen I think BB is not going to be payed enough to stop him running off with the 4 titan BPCs from one 4month copy cycle. His total payment for this enterprise is 6% Total for first 12 months = 120b So his income for one year is 120 * 6% = 7.2b And if he runs off with 4 titan BPC (which he will find very easy to do before anyone notices), he could get 15b * 4 = 60b This for a third of the work he can get 8 times the profit, a very strong motivator to scam. All depends how much BB values his reputation. (Just posting this as it came into my head and I do not think anyone has mentioned it) There is the question of scale as well. If he walks with 4 BPCs he'll actually only be netting 52b since his loss of reputation + profit earned is what he'll be trading against it. So the question, as eValF so rightly asked me in another thread, would be how much total assets have you been in control of at any single one time?
Breaker77 Reclamation Industries New Eden Research	Posted - 2009.06.26 16:08:00 - [232] Originally by: Stafen So his income for one year is 120 * 6% = 7.2b If that number is correct why would he want to steal the BPOs and run off with them?? Seriously, 5 minutes of work a month to keep the towers fueled, if that, and maybe 5 minutes of work to move the BPCs and contract them out. I would love to make 7.2 billion ISK a year for only playing 5 minutes a month. IMO the only real problem this might have is boredom. I can just see him forgetting to deliver a BPC and starting a new one after 3 months has passed.
Skarii TuThess Maelstrom Crew	Posted - 2009.06.26 19:58:00 - [233] Originally by: Breaker77 Originally by: Stafen So his income for one year is 120 * 6% = 7.2b If that number is correct why would he want to steal the BPOs and run off with them?? Seriously, 5 minutes of work a month to keep the towers fueled, if that, and maybe 5 minutes of work to move the BPCs and contract them out. I would love to make 7.2 billion ISK a year for only playing 5 minutes a month. IMO the only real problem this might have is boredom. I can just see him forgetting to deliver a BPC and starting a new one after 3 months has passed. I agree - although I'm sure with a 4 month dividend period he'll be getting enough reminders not to forget ;)
cosmoray Cosmoray Construction	Posted - 2009.06.27 03:29:00 - [234] The biggest problem I see investing with trustworthy people is boredom and burnout. At some point people become bored with the game or RL events mean they can't log in and deal with the game. At some point most very long term IPO's need to be handed over, I would say a year so the manager doesn't just quit.
eXistentiA Amarr	Posted - 2009.06.30 15:53:00 - [235] Originally by: Bad Bobby It is entirely possible that the POS will come under a war dec and be attacked at some point, but I think it highly unlikely that any such attack will be a serious threat. If, on the other hand, the identity of the tower/corp is discovered then I could understand some serious forces comming to attack it but that is an entirely difference cirumstance. In the case that the tower is attacked and reinforced, I will be able to bring other forces to defend it. But obviously I am not going to do that unless I consider the threat to be significant and only once the tower is reinforced. Bringing 100 men to defend a lonely hi-sec tower at the first sign of a war-dec would be a little too high profile, considering the need for secrecy here. As an investor i for one would offer assistance in the defence of my investment, and im sure that would be the same for most investors. so if the ** realy did hit the fan im more then confident youd get the support and backing to deal with it ---------- corporate solutions** Professional graphic and webdesigners Free hosting and payments by isk
Scrumpy Joe	Posted - 2009.07.26 11:00:00 - [236] I would like to reserves 2 shares for 2 million Isk.you can reach me in game to verify. thank you
GavinCapacitor	Posted - 2009.07.26 18:19:00 - [237] I've only read through half of this thread, so if I repeat something please excuse me. People seem to be on the fence about doing the ME research. I think it is necessary (will give us an edge) but maybe a compromise is in order, ie. researching ME on one BPO at a time and copying 3. My other question (this might be a bit noob-ish) is are profits split between all investors when any sale is made, or if you invested and got a reserved spot under a certain titan BPO you only see returns when a copy of that BPO sells? ( I wanted in on the avatar BPO when I saw the story, but was just a bit too late)
Breaker77 Gallente Reclamation Industries New Eden Research	Posted - 2009.07.26 19:25:00 - [238] Originally by: GavinCapacitor My other question (this might be a bit noob-ish) is are profits split between all investors when any sale is made, or if you invested and got a reserved spot under a certain titan BPO you only see returns when a copy of that BPO sells? ( I wanted in on the avatar BPO when I saw the story, but was just a bit too late) AFAIK, everyone received dividends no matter what BPC sells. I can't imagine Bad Bobby tracking each and every investor and doing a cash transfer just for the block they invested in for a couple of reasons. 1. Impracticle, it give me a headache just looking as the reservation list, much less thinking about all those transfers and the amount to send. 2. Doing a dividend payout through the corp share system is automatic in splitting up who gets what and how much. Anyone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Bad Bobby Ugly Toys	Posted - 2009.07.27 06:05:00 - [239] Breaker has it right. The blocks are only for the purpose of figuring out how many BPOs we can afford to buy, once the IPO launches every investor will be treated the same and will receive dividends when any profits are made by selling any BPCs. Also, I agree, looking at the reservation list makes my head spin. There is no way I am ever going to attempt a manual dividend on that list, I will be using the in-game share system. The other advantage of the in-game share system is that you can sell your shares on without causing me an additional book-keeping headache.
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2009.07.27 12:24:00 - [240] It might be possible but if LoW exchange virtualized shares work out.... it could solve your headaches right quick.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,09s, ref 20250911/0339
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.