EVE Search - Feedback thread about Amarr Citizen 155's last bond

All Channels

Market Discussions

Feedback thread about Amarr Citizen 155's last bond

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tekota legion industries ltd Veni Vidi Vici	Posted - 2009.07.21 15:31:00 - [31] Originally by: Kazzac Elentria Actually given the past dealings with AC, 12b is a drop in the bucket comparatively speaking. He's held more and for longer. The fact that an audit would be forced to view ebank records and this likely violates the terms Ebank has with its employee's makes sense. Its a non issue, its akin to PP asking for 10b after closing up a 120b project. I agree entirely 100% and I make no suggestion or implication of scam in the slightest, I'm quite sure this will turn out to be another succesful venture. I was simply defending the sentiment that we should keep asking questions. Reputation and past experience goes a very very long way in establishing investee confidence and can certainly be a vehicle for offering lower rates of return, but I do not believe it can form an exemption from run of the mill questions that MD are well used to asking - collateral, audit, exit strategy. There may be very good reasons why certain questions are inconsequential or impossible to answer, but there should surely never be grounds, regardless of how much reputation one has, to be flamed for simply asking them?
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2009.07.21 15:35:00 - [32] About the only valid question I could see is "What are you doing with the ISK" And even then, he could tell you he's going to purchase bounty hunters to wrangle every single lost slave in Gallente space and then grind them up to make top shelf Slaver puppy chow.
Zenon Mu Advanced Assemblies and Sciences	Posted - 2009.07.21 15:45:00 - [33] lol all the hate... just stop this elitist ****
Tekota legion industries ltd Veni Vidi Vici	Posted - 2009.07.21 16:21:00 - [34] Actually I disagree on the questions we could ask. In this thread many have been asked and the answers found. We now know more than in the original bond offering thread: Will there be an audit? No (and thanks to this thread we now have a perfectly justifiable reason, rather than "I laugh at audits"). Will there be collateral? No. Is this debt backed by Ebank? No (this thread provides the clarity that was perhaps a little vague and suggestive in the original - ebank will provide it's usual excellent security to the account owner but this is not extended to investors in this debt) Is there an exit / bus strategy? No (linking to an earlier offering with the link "some other information about me" may have implied the same exit strategy exists but this thread has confirmed that no exit strategy exists for this debt) Now none of this is meant as a slight, a slur on the good name or any disrespect to AC. His experience and previous exposure to considerably greater assets both public and through Ebank work add up to make none of the above usual warning flags waft particularly strongly in the wind. But they're questions which MD rightly asks of a great many people, and the moment we routinely stop asking them of established individuals will surely be a dark day. I feel that the op asked in good faith, constructively and politely - the mere fact he asked surely shouldn't be cause for abuse in return?
cosmoray Cosmoray Construction	Posted - 2009.07.21 16:23:00 - [35] Edited by: cosmoray on 21/07/2009 16:24:12 The reason I think there is no need for this thread because the bond SOLD OUT. AC155 knew his market well. He knew that he would get his money on the terms he offered. Remember he chose not to have an audit or do all the other stuff. It was his gamble, not the investors. If it didn't pay off, his rep would have dropped a little. The whole point became academic when he sold his bond. Would I have liked to see more on his launch thread? Yes. Did he need to? no. Bu the time I came on here the bond was sold, so questions didn't matter. I like to have a nice document (I did so clealry on my last one). For new players I would demand a better standard, but then again A_Nobody wouldn't sell out his bond in hours without more info. Most investors invest in the manager, so rep is important.
Tesal	Posted - 2009.07.21 16:53:00 - [36] Originally by: cosmoray Edited by: cosmoray on 21/07/2009 16:24:12 The reason I think there is no need for this thread because the bond SOLD OUT. AC155 knew his market well. He knew that he would get his money on the terms he offered. Remember he chose not to have an audit or do all the other stuff. It was his gamble, not the investors. If it didn't pay off, his rep would have dropped a little. The whole point became academic when he sold his bond. Would I have liked to see more on his launch thread? Yes. Did he need to? no. Bu the time I came on here the bond was sold, so questions didn't matter. I like to have a nice document (I did so clealry on my last one). For new players I would demand a better standard, but then again A_Nobody wouldn't sell out his bond in hours without more info. Most investors invest in the manager, so rep is important. Did't he just default on an EBank loan or am I getting my alts confused? Maybe I am believing lies too. And now he is taking isk from MD sources and sending it to EBank and is very angry. It seems like it could be EBank loan sharking IPO tbh, with Emperor Palpatine using his puppet strings. I guess I might be missing something though. Someone who has better information please confirm my facts. Anyway, now I see half of MD praising this as a good idea. I guess its only a ponzi scheme if you don't pay it back. Meh. If you all want to have secret loan schemes that are not backed by collateral and are not audited, in general I don't think that should be money raised on a public market, it should be a private deal. Thats if you think a market should have rules. Its fairly clear people who in the past advocated strong rules no longer feel that way. What this probably is, is AC running out of cash and using MD as an emergency line of credit. Otherwise, why the hell does he need 12b if its "pocket change". Its not an IPO as such, and it may not be the case that he has enough assets to cover a loss or that he is willing to do so. He should just be up front about it is all. The people covering for this are only shooting themselves in the foot. You guys remind me of the rating agencies for World Com and Enron, "awesome investment, I rate double plus buy on this one, can only go UP". You guys are not doing due diligence, you are acting like ringers. By the way, I will destroy you all.
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2009.07.21 16:58:00 - [37] Many of us separate our corporate responsibilities from our personal ones, so it may come as a surprise to you that quite a few of these market giants are in fact **** poor most of the time because of other terrible habits in game.
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll	Posted - 2009.07.21 16:59:00 - [38] Originally by: Kazzac Elentria Many of us separate our corporate responsibilities from our personal ones, so it may come as a surprise to you that quite a few of these market giants are in fact **** poor most of the time because of other terrible habits in game. i second this!
Tesal	Posted - 2009.07.21 17:05:00 - [39] Originally by: Kazzac Elentria Many of us separate our corporate responsibilities from our personal ones, so it may come as a surprise to you that quite a few of these market giants are in fact **** poor most of the time because of other terrible habits in game. Whose fault is that? And does that support their ability to pay back credit?
Amarr Citizen 155 Tleilex Developments Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.07.21 17:08:00 - [40] Although I don't think this thread deserves anymore attention, I'll go ahead and give it one last post. I never said we couldn't discuss that offering in the offering thread. I said I didn't want to discuss the issues of trust in myself or ebank as you can see by a quote below: "You either trust me (and ebank) with your isk or you don't. This isn't the thread to discuss it in." Simply put. I'm not trying to garner trust from anyone, I'm trying to utilize the trust I have already gained to fill an offering but at the same time the individuals investing have to trust both me and ebank since the isk could be in either place. I don't want any of you to be confused on this next point so I ask that you put on your reading glasses or have your morning coffee first.... I believe there are measures in place to prevent scams or make it easier to catch scammers, or attempted scammers, and these measures should be followed. (especially by newcomers to MD. I'm not trying to pull any elitist flag out of the closet or take advantage of those of you who have to go through the usual processes in order to get funding. My offering was targeted at those that already trust me and that I know would invest in my offerings, period. I'm not starting something new or trying to build any more rep, I'm simply trying to fill my savings accounts so that I can have a rainy day fund should I need it in my manufacturing business. I've been upfront and honest about the isk' use. And to Tesal, you're an idiot and everything you just said is wrong. You do have your alts mixed up. You were only right about one thing, essentially this was a private offering that I used a public forum to run. If I had sent out an evemail I would have forgotten someone so this was the easiest way to handle it. I'm not sorry about the issues people have with it, just something they have to deal with not me. I don't call that elitist attitude I call it being an ass hole, and I've never claimed to be anything but an ass hole. <Amarr's signature>
Kes Lynnair Minmatar Forethought Unchained	Posted - 2009.07.21 17:12:00 - [41] Originally by: cosmoray Don't understand need for this thread. Ricdic previous businesses... Ricdic paid back all investors... Ricdic works for EBANK Ricdic has long history in MD Ricdic has excellent reputation Ricdic IPO's/bonds would always be rated a low risk. At 4% per month (compounded), this is fair value and he clearly sold out his bond due to his rep. Why do you need this thread. OP, you need to understand when some people launch a bond/IPO they do not need to give a full document. People will invest who understand the histroy of the manager. This happenned in this case. I too do not see a problem with this offering.
Miraj Salah	Posted - 2009.07.21 17:25:00 - [42] Originally by: KaarBaak The bit about reputations and their value....that applies equally to auditors as well, correct? Why should I trust an auditor any more than the person offering? Ohhh....that's right. Because auditors are impartial 3d parties. As evidenced by this thread. /sarcasm KB As much as I agree with the sentiment of this thread and like VV's calm detailed analyses, I wouldn't trust him with public money without an audit either, and if there was any suggestion of collusion with someone he'd audited I'd be very wary. I think the auditor system needs to be formalized, they basically have the power influence(within limits) the investment of billions of public ISK, so I think we need to pay more attention to keeping them on the straight and narrow before they start accepting bribes to downplay risk or outright falsify an offering's viability. But that's an issue for another time. Quote: IMO : AC +5 reputation OP -5 reputation Excuse me, I must have missed a step in your logic. Is this about right: VV points out some flaws in the presentation of an offering. VV himself doesn't have an immaculate reputation, so his valid concerns are by association disproved. Thus AC is proven to be beyond reproach due to the graceful way he deflected these concerns, and VV is shown to be a fool for throwing stones from his glass house? Wait... What? Quote: The reason I think there is no need for this thread because the bond SOLD OUT. Its not about this offering per se, more the observation of form. The mentality here seems to AC is one of the trusted, investing in anyone outside the circle is unwise. I'd love to believe every MD offering could be trusted. But seeing that this is a game, where no legal safeguards to insure fair-play, we have a prisoners dilemma. If we fail to trust any investor not already trusted the secondary market will languish. If we blindly invest in every newcomer and old hand alike we will all lose an awful lot of money, again crippling the market. It seems to me the best system is one where we asses investees with more rigour then "Nope, he's never run a profitable IPO, too much risk." The best way is to make sure basic safeguards like auditing and detailed business plans are put forward for public discussion. Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155 An audit would tell you nothing other than the fact that I have 56mill sp's and can fly any amarr ship. Surely it will also reveal the good manufacturing skills as well as a history of making steady profits based on the capital invested, as well as a few vague hints you could break into new markets and increase your profits in tandem with this investment. Im new here so excuse my ignorance, but the only IPO of AC's I could find was his poker thing, and I fail to see how successfully gambling with other peoples money qualifies you carte blanche to request money to "build stuff. Big stuff and small stuff." with no further explanation of experience or plans. Great panache, and enough to be reasonably trusting he wont run off with the money, but showing nothing of his buisiness acumen. TLDR: Whilst im sure AC is good for this debt, asking in this manner may have saved a few hours of writing a decent proposal, but its hardly the mark of a true businessman.
Gabriel Virtus hirr	Posted - 2009.07.21 17:26:00 - [43] Stop feeding the trolls. Audits contain little useful info beyond skills necessary to do the bond. There are too many was to remove characters from accounts or simply not tell about ther accounts. Potential losses by letting new auditors discover market niches outweigh the benefits of one. If you don't like the offer, don't invest. VV - you are such a drama queen. -GV
Kes Lynnair Minmatar Forethought Unchained	Posted - 2009.07.21 17:30:00 - [44] Originally by: Gabriel Virtus Stop feeding the trolls. Audits contain little useful info beyond skills necessary to do the bond. -GV And yet are a requirement for every bond offering except for those who enforce it on others
Tesal	Posted - 2009.07.21 17:36:00 - [45] Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155 And to Tesal, you're an idiot :)
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services Novus Ordo Mundi	Posted - 2009.07.21 17:50:00 - [46] Oh man the epeens in this thread is strong lmao Trinity Corporate Services
Daeva Vios New Eden Credit Bureau	Posted - 2009.07.21 18:02:00 - [47] This thread is trying so hard to be epic. Everyone gets so worked up about this subject. I love it. Financial soap opera in space. This is worth every isk I pay for my PLEXs. What it boils down to is: There's a double standard. Like it or not, it exists and it won't stop existing just because you wish really hard that it would. Proven capable managers are not subjected to scrutiny as intense as unproven newbies because unproven newbies *are not proven*. Does this mean proven capable managers are given access to isk that may not be made available to others? Yes. Does this mean proven capable managers can take more liberties with their proposals? Yes. Their hard work has given them advantages. It's terribly undemocratic and unfair. It may in fact open the way for abuse. It's also a fine example of a working meritocracy. You don't have to participate. ------------------------------------- NECB
Ebolak Vengeance Asset Relocation Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2009.07.21 18:17:00 - [48] Yes there definately is a double standard. [url=]http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1118385[/url] 1. No cries for an audit 2. Absolute faith in Chribba's inability to run away with collateral. 3. No hit by a bus clause when OP and Chribba are walking across the street together. VV you had no issues at all with this one based on reputation. I guess auditors also see an untouchable elite that they are willing to make acceptions for. Note: Im in no way trying to belittle the OP, or Chribba, Im just pointing out that even VV and all the others from this thread that want everyone held to the same level of accountability, can suffer from being starstruck. IF Chribba's reputation ensured the potential success of that offering, then AC's reputation ensures the potential success of this one.
Tesal	Posted - 2009.07.21 18:33:00 - [49] Originally by: Daeva Vios This thread is trying so hard to be epic. Everyone gets so worked up about this subject. I love it. Financial soap opera in space. This is worth every isk I pay for my PLEXs. What it boils down to is: There's a double standard. Like it or not, it exists and it won't stop existing just because you wish really hard that it would. Proven capable managers are not subjected to scrutiny as intense as unproven newbies because unproven newbies *are not proven*. Does this mean proven capable managers are given access to isk that may not be made available to others? Yes. Does this mean proven capable managers can take more liberties with their proposals? Yes. Their hard work has given them advantages. It's terribly undemocratic and unfair. It may in fact open the way for abuse. It's also a fine example of a working meritocracy. You don't have to participate. And some people are proven capable managers until they get into a pinch and start stealing a bit. Then when they need to put out their financials they cook the books a bit, and when they run out of isk and need more they make excuses. This is so audrey bitoni I can't even describe it. I chafe at the idea of an aristocracy.
Kazzac Elentria	Posted - 2009.07.21 18:44:00 - [50] Originally by: Tesal Looks like I made a spread sheet error on Amarr Citizens alts. Got one mixed up, my bad. That's cause I'm the real spartacus
Sir Elliot	Posted - 2009.07.21 19:38:00 - [51] Maybe this thread can be sticky'd too, and after everyone realizes that OP's post is pure fail, OP can claim it was all irony!
SencneS Amarr Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks	Posted - 2009.07.21 19:50:00 - [52] While the intent is ok, it's kind of empty... For a start if I posted I wanted to offer 10b bond with a 3%per month for 3 months I'm sure some people would pay up front sign unseen and without question. Others may question it, demand audits. However like all things in business, there is clearly more demand for well known trustworthy people then not. The Bond was filled with high profile known MDers that clearly trust AC155. Bringing up the fact that there may be a double standing AFTER the bond is filled is..... pointless? If people want to invest in someone because they personally trust that person with it, then they have every right to invest prior to Audit. If I wanted to and AC155 offered another one after this thread, I would STILL invest. Sorry, it's MY ISK MY CHOICE and you can't stop me from investing in someone I trust even if it doesn't conform to the normal IPO standard format.. Amarr for Life
Dzil Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2009.07.21 20:25:00 - [53] Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155 Although I don't think this thread deserves anymore attention, I'll go ahead and give it one last post. I never said we couldn't discuss that offering in the offering thread. I said I didn't want to discuss the issues of trust in myself or ebank as you can see by a quote below: "You either trust me (and ebank) with your isk or you don't. This isn't the thread to discuss it in." Simply put. I'm not trying to garner trust from anyone, I'm trying to utilize the trust I have already gained to fill an offering but at the same time the individuals investing have to trust both me and ebank since the isk could be in either place. I don't want any of you to be confused on this next point so I ask that you put on your reading glasses or have your morning coffee first.... I believe there are measures in place to prevent scams or make it easier to catch scammers, or attempted scammers, and these measures should be followed. (especially by newcomers to MD. I'm not trying to pull any elitist flag out of the closet or take advantage of those of you who have to go through the usual processes in order to get funding. My offering was targeted at those that already trust me and that I know would invest in my offerings, period. I'm not starting something new or trying to build any more rep, I'm simply trying to fill my savings accounts so that I can have a rainy day fund should I need it in my manufacturing business. I've been upfront and honest about the isk' use. AC- Why are you trying so hard to wordsmith this? You said not to discuss your trust (reputation) in the thread. A separate discussion thread was opened where concerned investors could air their thoughts freely without this restriction. Behold, the power of the internet - information wants to be free. /equips reading glasses +5 /read scripture I don't think you're being elitist by offering a semi-public bond where certain affluent individuals are privy to superior information placing them in a better position to bid on this primary offering. I do think you're being elitist by calling people idiots and failures for asking questions on a discussion forum. ---------------------- Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m for 7+ standings ----------------------
Yakumo Smith Gallente No End To Infinity Fleetingly Finite	Posted - 2009.07.21 21:16:00 - [54] CCP ate my post :( TL:DRw (to long didn't rewrite version) AC155 could probably have gotten the funding off board at the drop of a hat. Instead he offered the MD forum a piece of the action. In my opinion, this is good. Don't invest what you can't afford to lose. No matter how many audits and checks are done, the fools in the game will still lose their isk, the smart will only get burned once, the wise will be there to say "told ya so". I suppose this must be my sig. I'll do something cool with it eventually.
Phoebe Halliwel	Posted - 2009.07.21 21:30:00 - [55] Bear with me, first MD forum post... Originally by: SencneS While the intent is ok, it's kind of empty... For a start if I posted I wanted to offer 10b bond with a 3%per month for 3 months I'm sure some people would pay up front sign unseen and without question. Others may question it, demand audits. However like all things in business, there is clearly more demand for well known trustworthy people then not. The Bond was filled with high profile known MDers that clearly trust AC155. Bringing up the fact that there may be a double standing AFTER the bond is filled is..... pointless? If people want to invest in someone because they personally trust that person with it, then they have every right to invest prior to Audit. If I wanted to and AC155 offered another one after this thread, I would STILL invest. Sorry, it's MY ISK MY CHOICE and you can't stop me from investing in someone I trust even if it doesn't conform to the normal IPO standard format.. What you've just described sounds like a private offering to me. Any public offering should be subject to scrutiny and criticism. It's interesting to see the MD elite rushing to defend one of their own en masse. There seems to be too much emphasis on reputation/trust and not enough on security/collateral. There is no exit strategy/disclosure of risks in the offering. That was confirmed here with the following post, but has not been updated into the offering: Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155 There is no hit by a bus strategy. If I die, you lose your isk.... plain and simple. Don't invest what you aren't willing to lose. When I had that hit by a bus strategy in place for that old IPO it was because I had to have it (or felt I had to) in order to get investors. I don't know if I was right or wrong but I did it just the same. Now I feel as though I don't need a hit by a bus strategy for a 12bill investment that pays as much as 4% per month. I would say that if I died and ebank had the funds in my savings account that they could distribute the isk but how would they know who gets what? I guess I could just keep the bond ledger on my thread then if they wanted to they could do so but that would be up to them. The bit that jumps out there is that security is only seen as a means to secure funding, rather than a way to protect investors. I'm sure any number of people will hand in game currency to people they trust, but that's a private agreement rather than a public offering, and should be conducted away from this forum. No one can predict "hit by a bus" possibilities; it seems unfair to investors and pretty bad practice for it not to be a standard consideration. Would Ebank offer this as a loan under those terms? Whether they want to or not, the "high profile known MDers" set an example to people who may be considering investing/creating an offering of their own. If their IPOs don't meet their own standard, criticism should be the response, regardless of past performance. What's worse is the other "high profile known MDers" rallying to post all these justifications. I can see there may not been a need for an audit with a well established character, but a completely unsecured 12b public loan, which could presumably have been raised via Ebank or private parties should draw some discussion, shouldn't it? If anyone else had made this offering it would be considered high risk, and in that light the returns appear, if anything, incredibly low. I don't know how relevent this is, er, but it also seems a slight conflict of interest for an Ebank employee to make an offering which may or may not end up in a high interest Ebank account, from which they will disburse interest to themselves, then to investors... which is then publically defended by various Ebank employees. I would have thought for the purposes of public offerings, Ebank should not be associated with their employees offerings?
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Dark-Rising	Posted - 2009.07.21 22:06:00 - [56] Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 21/07/2009 22:12:33 Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 21/07/2009 22:08:46 Quote: 1. No cries for an audit 2. Absolute faith in Chribba's inability to run away with collateral. 3. No hit by a bus clause when OP and Chribba are walking across the street together Reviewed by Hexxx, 100% collateral deposited, Chribba is the auditor AND securer, "hit by a bus" clause present and with details. Any more questions? BTW Chribba has all the RL interests in keeping his reputation and self advertisement the best possible due to his WEB company, this beats any in game pretended guarantee by far. Quote: There are too many was to remove characters from accounts or simply not tell about ther accounts. Potential losses by letting new auditors discover market niches outweigh the benefits of one. If you don't like the offer, don't invest. VV - you are such a drama queen. Auditing is the best of the limited tools available in a zero security game, like republic is a full of defects solution yet the best available. Edit: it's also quite possible to track rogue accounts, including when bought and sold to other people, in multiple ways. Quote: The Bond was filled with high profile known MDers that clearly trust AC155. Bringing up the fact that there may be a double standing AFTER the bond is filled is..... pointless? You might check the dates. Bond thread: 2009.07.21 04:45:00. This thread: 2009.07.21 06:36:00. Only one deposit before that. Hence the rest of the reply is not correct. PS Ricdic provided for a precedent and proved really no one is "above and beyond". Every future investment will have his shadow hanging nearby, reminding what can happen with AAA+ people. - Auditing and consulting Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
Daeva Vios New Eden Credit Bureau	Posted - 2009.07.21 22:12:00 - [57] Originally by: Tesal Edited by: Tesal on 21/07/2009 18:41:06 And some people are proven capable managers until they get into a pinch and start stealing a bit. Then when they need to put out their financials they cook the books a bit, and when they run out of isk and need more they make excuses. This is so audrey bitoni I can't even describe it. I chafe at the idea of an aristocracy. *edit Looks like I made a spread sheet error on Amarr Citizens alts. Got one mixed up, my bad. You might want to pick up some cream for that chafing. It is an aristocracy in the classic sense of the term. Those who perform the best see an improvement in their reputations which allows their word to carry more weight. The system is inherently unstable, but barring meaningful enforcement there is no way to make it anything different. The fact is, the individuals upon whom the majority depend are depended on for their consistent and proven ability to perform at or above expectations. Is it incestuous? You bet. Are flagrant violations of basic policy overlooked for no reason other than reputation? Absolutely. Is it a perfect system? Not even close. Is it the best system? Probably not. This is the only system thus far that works at all. Quite honestly, you've said nothing that hasn't been said a million times. ------------------------------------- NECB
Miraj Salah	Posted - 2009.07.21 22:15:00 - [58] Quote: If people want to invest in someone because they personally trust that person with it, then they have every right to invest prior to Audit. If I wanted to and AC155 offered another one after this thread, I would STILL invest. ... Sorry, it's MY ISK MY CHOICE and you can't stop me from investing in someone I trust even if it doesn't conform to the normal IPO standard format.. Exactly. There is far more demand for investments then the trusted people can sustain. I have no problem with you investing in someone you see as a wise investment, of course its your choice. I just wish all the people who can earn investment based on thier reputations still apply good business practice, it wont hurt thier investments to include a thorough business plan, but hopefully it will be a good example to others. I think its very important not to drop the substance just because youre trusted enough to do without it. The one and only previous offering he linked to was him playing poker. A cursory look through eve-search revealed nothing else that would qualify him for this endeavour.Given the fact that his last bond didnt demonstrate any knowledge of the markets or the wider game, im sure those who invested did so based on knowledge i dont have, which is fair enough for them, its why im keeping my eyes open and seeing who the people to trust are. But anyone else who doesnt watch this forum like a hawk will be equally unaware of him. How is anyone who doesnt know the ins and outs of every bond over the last few years suposed to tell his 'safe' bond from any bond you'd call unsafe. It was as terse, vague, and frankly indistinguishable from many that have been shot down. I think this is a better example to set then "I laugh at audits" Im sure wed all like to see the secondary market grow past the point where we can count participants on one hand. But that wont happen as long as the only criteria for investment is being trusted. Originally by: Phoebe Halliwel Bear with me, first MD forum post... I don't know how relevent this is, er, but it also seems a slight conflict of interest for an Ebank employee to make an offering which may or may not end up in a high interest Ebank account, from which they will disburse interest to themselves, then to investors... which is then publically defended by various Ebank employees. I would have thought for the purposes of public offerings, Ebank should not be associated with their employees offerings? As far as i know AC is neither a cashier nor involved with the technical side of Ebank, so his use of Ebank to store unused money is above reproach. Besides, thats not an issue for his private finacial activities, as long as he pays the amount agreed to the bondholders you cant fault the implementation. Also, nice name ;) Quote: Those who perform the best see an improvement in their reputations How can people perform when they arent trusted enough to recieve investment? Originally by: Stela'Artois Requesting a bond/loan of 100million... I also have 1 bil isk sitting in an Ebank account Wait... what?
Daeva Vios New Eden Credit Bureau	Posted - 2009.07.21 22:29:00 - [59] Quote: How can people perform when they arent trusted enough to recieve investment? Use the methods that have been established to improve their reputation. There was a very nice thread posted by the OP on the subject. It isn't some exclusive club. Many people who are now considered "MD elite" were relatively fresh meat a year ago. ------------------------------------- NECB
Sugar Jugs Juggalicious	Posted - 2009.07.21 22:43:00 - [60] Couldn't an auditor from within EBank perform the audit? If you don't trust an auditor to either not view or view and keep confidential, information pertaining to the ebank character, well thats not auditor worth auditing anyway. Your reasons for not having an audit are not reasons at all. Manufacturing based activities can be checked by audit, and I'm fairly certain your manufacturing characters aren't all on Ebank character accounts. I concur with the big unruly mob: Stop the elities bs.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.