EVE Search - Audits 001 - come and get it

All Channels

Market Discussions

Audits 001 - come and get it

» 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)
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.13 08:28:00 - [1] Number of small bond proposals reaching MD has grown, but activity of auditors has declined. We need a new batch of MD auditors, and this project should hopefully be the solution. Before you read any further, be sure that you are familiar with the principles of auditing, and api keys, as laid out in KazuoÆs resource thread: Audits 101 This initiative is intended as a service to people that launch a minor bond here on Market Discussion forum. Currently we are lacking experinced auditors on MD. We have VV and Kazuo in activity, Sharl and Brock Nelson not so much. For those that are launching large industrial bonds, they should certainly request full audit service from either VV or Kazuo. However, the typical smallish trade bonds could be accompagnied by a limited auditing scheme. Just getting confirmation of some basic facts is valuable info for a potential investor, namely: * Trade skills * NAV (as precisely as relevant) * Trade activities For someone launching a small trade bond, this kind of info could easily be confirmed by giving your api key to an auditor. So to get down to business: Are you qualified to check a colleague launching a bond with a limited audit, then volunteer right here, right now! This is the way we can commence hatching a new generation of uber-auditers. A limited audit as outlined should be possible to do in half an hour, you can surely spend that time at least once per month as a community service. To the hopeful entrepeneur: contact 2 of these volunteers, give them your api ket to check some basic facts - it will only do you good. The auditor is not in a position to harm you, and will only publish the information that you ask for. The price for the audit will be 0.01 isk. I will keep the list updated.
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.13 08:29:00 - [2] 0.01 auditing volunteers û each person on the list has agreed to do at least one limited audit per month for free: Ji Sama Dretzle Omega (Setrakdark û awaiting confirmation) (Mikael Genexi û awaiting confirmation) (Aluin Chaput û awaiting confirmation)
Charles Swann	Posted - 2009.11.13 08:57:00 - [3] Edited by: Charles Swann on 13/11/2009 09:00:23 If anyone would like to learn more about audits (how to do an audit, limitations of audits, how to trick auditors, etc.) feel free to toss me an evemail in-game (if there's sufficient interest, I might compile some sort of guide). Originally by: Cista2 To the hopeful entrepeneur: contact 2 of these volunteers, give them your api ket to check some basic facts - it will only do you good. The auditor is not in a position to harm you, and will only publish the information that you ask for. The price for the audit will be 0.01 isk. The auditor is of course in a position to harm you as he knows about your business & character details, claiming otherwise is plain misinformation. Don't forget that using this scheme you will have to trust both auditors with more-or-less all your ingame information. Does the underlined part mean that auditors will only confirm/deny exactly the information the customer asks for? If I would ask you to verify my trade skills and would have a known corp thief on my account, would you withhold that information as I didn't ask you to verify may characters' general integrity? edit: Cista2, you can of course add me to this list; if anyone wants to get audited by me (and thinks his investors will like this), I will happily do so.
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.13 09:03:00 - [4] Originally by: Charles Swann The auditor is of course in a position to harm you as he knows about your business & character details, claiming otherwise is plain misinformation. ..... Does the underlined part mean that auditors will only confirm/deny exactly the information the customer asks for? If I would ask you to verify my trade skills and would have a known corp thief on my account, would you withhold that information as I didn't ask you to verify may characters' general integrity? [/list] Yes, edited a bit in both points.
Roguehalo	Posted - 2009.11.13 10:13:00 - [5] Originally by: Charles Swann (if there's sufficient interest, I might compile some sort of guide) I would be very interested to see such a guide. In fact if I had a nice guide to work from I would be happy to volunteer to give a free audit each month for a starter bond/ipo.
Varo Jan Minmatar	Posted - 2009.11.13 10:14:00 - [6] I¦d be happy to volunteer my services. And yes, I am qualified. I¦ve done a few internal corp audits, and my background is financial management & consulting.
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles	Posted - 2009.11.13 10:45:00 - [7] Originally by: Roguehalo Originally by: Charles Swann (if there's sufficient interest, I might compile some sort of guide) I would be very interested to see such a guide. In fact if I had a nice guide to work from I would be happy to volunteer to give a free audit each month for a starter bond/ipo. The short version: agree with the CEO on the details that need to be confirmed, then use whatever tools you have at your disposal to do so. If you have any concerns or doubts, talk about them in private and try to reach some sort of understanding before making a public post. --- 34.4:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule
Leana Darkrider Minmatar Creatio -ex- nihilo The Donkey Rollers	Posted - 2009.11.13 11:08:00 - [8] You can add me to the list ______________________________________ If only EVE could cook, if only....
InUrJita CheckinUrPrice	Posted - 2009.11.13 12:33:00 - [9] I'll volunteer as well. Excellent idea!
Dzil Caldari United Kings Holdings	Posted - 2009.11.13 13:04:00 - [10] Now, this is what I like to see. As I stated in another thread, most of the "MD Elite" achieved that status by doing more than just borrowing money, but also contributing back to the game/market in some way. Please add me to the list of Pro Bona auditors. I don't see myself doing this full time, but I can do a quick 15 minute fact check if it helps give a new guy somewhere to stand, or validate another's audit. Please note I reserve the right to turn down requests if I don't see myself able to turn them around in a timely manner. RL comes first and all that. Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m
RAW23	Posted - 2009.11.13 13:09:00 - [11] Sign me up. I'm happy to do one per month.
Leana Darkrider Minmatar Creatio -ex- nihilo The Donkey Rollers	Posted - 2009.11.13 13:16:00 - [12] Originally by: Dzil Please note I reserve the right to turn down requests if I don't see myself able to turn them around in a timely manner. RL comes first and all that. This ^^ pls add that note for me aswell ______________________________________ If only EVE could cook, if only....
Kalrand Charles Ponzi School of Business GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.11.13 13:30:00 - [13] I would always poke through one, if people wanted. Also, with this caveat. Originally by: Dzil Please note I reserve the right to turn down requests if I don't see myself able to turn them around in a timely manner. RL comes first and all that.
Dzil Caldari United Kings Holdings	Posted - 2009.11.13 13:46:00 - [14] Originally by: Charles Swann Does the underlined part mean that auditors will only confirm/deny exactly the information the customer asks for? If I would ask you to verify my trade skills and would have a known corp thief on my account, would you withhold that information as I didn't ask you to verify may characters' general integrity? Five minute post rule wins again. This is an interesting point. My recommendation would be some standardized format, wherein if someone does not request information around, say, character background - you could either list that bullet as "not requested" or "omitted by request". This fulfills your obligation to deliver auditing only on those items requested, while not leaving you holding a smoking gun if things go pear shaped. Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.13 13:58:00 - [15] Edited by: Cista2 on 13/11/2009 14:00:02 Originally by: Dzil My recommendation would be some standardized format, wherein if someone does not request information around, say, character background - you could either list that bullet as "not requested" or "omitted by request". This fulfills your obligation to deliver auditing only on those items requested, while not leaving you holding a smoking gun if things go pear shaped. This dilemma has been discussed in depth recently. I am not sure if a standard protokol should be set, let me hear more opinions. Edit: but I'd be surprised if someone with a known scammer character would dare to hand over his api key to us...?
SetrakDark Caldari DarkCorp Technology and Finance	Posted - 2009.11.13 14:03:00 - [16] Perhaps a broad outline of our major trade areas for added comfort? I trade strictly in minerals and faction ships, and although I would try my best, I would feel more comfortable not doing audits of people who trade a larger portion of their pool in these areas. Definitely open to suggestions and refinement.
Dzil Caldari United Kings Holdings	Posted - 2009.11.13 14:07:00 - [17] Originally by: SetrakDark Perhaps a broad outline of our major trade areas for added comfort? I trade strictly in minerals and faction ships, and although I would try my best, I would feel more comfortable not doing audits of people who trade a larger portion of their pool in these areas. Definitely open to suggestions and refinement. This could again be an area where the bond holder opts to give or hide information. Knowing what markets he trades in ahead of time might excuse poorer performance if, for example, that market takes a huge unexpected dive. On the other hand, more specialized markets can be disrupted by wealthy enough players with a grudge. Dzil's Corp Sales - 200m
Dretzle Omega Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.11.13 14:37:00 - [18] Edited by: Dretzle Omega on 13/11/2009 14:37:57 Originally by: Charles Swann If I would ask you to verify my trade skills and would have a known corp thief on my account, would you withhold that information as I didn't ask you to verify may characters' general integrity? This is a good point. Myself, for example, even during a short, limited audit, if I noticed anything glaring, like a known scammer or corp thief, you bet your life I'd report that, even though character integrity was not asked to be verified. I might not look for it, but I might notice it as I check the facts I was asked to verify. So it would be good for investors beforehand to be aware of the personality of the auditor. Perhaps just a chat with them beforehand to see where they stand on issues such as this, or other ethical thoughts. The only reason I trusted VV with my audit is because I observed his forum activity for some time and gained, hopefully, a general sense of VV's morals and personality.
Varo Jan Minmatar	Posted - 2009.11.13 14:38:00 - [19] Originally by: Cista2 Originally by: Dzil My recommendation would be some standardized format, wherein if someone does not request information around, say, character background - you could either list that bullet as "not requested" or "omitted by request". This fulfills your obligation to deliver auditing only on those items requested, while not leaving you holding a smoking gun if things go pear shaped. This dilemma has been discussed in depth recently. I am not sure if a standard protokol should be set, let me hear more opinions. I think a standardised format, or at least a bullet point list of areas to cover makes sense. To start, you need written confirmation that all character accounts, past and present, have been declared. Both API keys, limited and full, are required. The limited allows you to load up Eve Mon, the full gives you access to all financial information. Character Review - confirmation that the character(s) have the necessary skills (Eve Mon) Corp History Review - not sure how much depth is possible here with a limited audit Posting History - limited to some forums (such as character sales) if the posting history is extensive. Financial History - using jEveAssets and EveViewer, for example, so long as corp transactions aren¦t there. 1. Limit to last 1000 transactions - ie current full pull. Otherwise the audit would take longer. 2. Review all suspicious transactions, and interview. 3. Derive asset value from jEveAssets. Some consistency here would be useful - ie assets are valued based on low sell Jita, or some such. 4. Summary of cash in hand, sell orders, buy orders and contracts. 5. ??? There¦s probably more. That ought to be enough for a simple trading operation. The final step would be to review your findings with the individual before posting them.
SetrakDark Caldari DarkCorp Technology and Finance	Posted - 2009.11.13 14:42:00 - [20] I'm fully behind some basic standardization. I'll also volunteer a few hours towards an effort to do so, whatever that may entail.
Varo Jan Minmatar	Posted - 2009.11.13 14:43:00 - [21] Originally by: Dretzle Omega Originally by: Charles Swann If I would ask you to verify my trade skills and would have a known corp thief on my account, would you withhold that information as I didn't ask you to verify may characters' general integrity? This is a good point. Myself, for example, even during a short, limited audit, if I noticed anything glaring, like a known scammer or corp thief, you bet your life I'd report that, even though character integrity was not asked to be verified. I might not look for it, but I might notice it as I check the facts I was asked to verify. It is, or should be, a given that character integrity will be verified, to the extent possible on a limited audit. There¦s no negotiation on that, not in my book anyway.
Dretzle Omega Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.11.13 14:48:00 - [22] Originally by: Varo Jan Originally by: Dretzle Omega Originally by: Charles Swann If I would ask you to verify my trade skills and would have a known corp thief on my account, would you withhold that information as I didn't ask you to verify may characters' general integrity? This is a good point. Myself, for example, even during a short, limited audit, if I noticed anything glaring, like a known scammer or corp thief, you bet your life I'd report that, even though character integrity was not asked to be verified. I might not look for it, but I might notice it as I check the facts I was asked to verify. It is, or should be, a given that character integrity will be verified, to the extent possible on a limited audit. There¦s no negotiation on that, not in my book anyway. Exactly where I stand on the matter. I was just covering my bases that some auditors might think that it is perfectly fine to look at and blind their vision to ONLY the things they were asked to verify. Technically, their being honest and trustworthy, but personally I think you're right.
Varo Jan Minmatar	Posted - 2009.11.13 15:02:00 - [23] Originally by: Dretzle Omega Exactly where I stand on the matter. I was just covering my bases that some auditors might think that it is perfectly fine to look at and blind their vision to ONLY the things they were asked to verify. Technically, their being honest and trustworthy, but personally I think you're right. MD investors are far more interested in character integrity than character competence. Lack of the former almost always means loss of principal, while lack of the latter hopefully only results in loss of interest. Any auditor who turns a blind eye won¦t last long.
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll	Posted - 2009.11.13 15:04:00 - [24] Originally by: Varo Jan Originally by: Dretzle Omega Exactly where I stand on the matter. I was just covering my bases that some auditors might think that it is perfectly fine to look at and blind their vision to ONLY the things they were asked to verify. Technically, their being honest and trustworthy, but personally I think you're right. MD investors are far more interested in character integrity than character competence. Lack of the former almost always means loss of principal, while lack of the latter hopefully only results in loss of interest. Any auditor who turns a blind eye won¦t last long. This tbh!
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.13 15:14:00 - [25] I have edited the OP to say that known scammers will be disclosed by the auditor. I am against making a bullet list of checks that must be performed by any auditor. The idea is actually to have these voluntary audits as easy to do as possible. Let the investee - and his potential investors - ask for what they want. If the investee only wants his skills and recent trade history verified, that's what he will get. If you as auditor feel you should do more, talk with the investee about it in each case.
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll	Posted - 2009.11.13 15:23:00 - [26] Originally by: Cista2 I have edited the OP to say that known scammers will be disclosed by the auditor. I am against making a bullet list of checks that must be performed by any auditor. The idea is actually to have these voluntary audits as easy to do as possible. Let the investee - and his potential investors - ask for what they want. If the investee only wants his skills and recent trade history verified, that's what he will get. If you as auditor feel you should do more, talk with the investee about it in each case. It is up to the individual auditor, but i always run a background check, and always check for sucpicious transactions, and if i find something smelly i will grill the client, and if they cant answer me to my satisfaction i will expose them. But if you are legit, you have nothing to fear, since nothing out of the ordinary should be found. But if you have RMT'ed, been associated with scammers, or have scammed yourself, and i find out; i wont be lenient. If you havent done any of the above, you have my loyalty, and i will report only what asked of me.
Varo Jan Minmatar	Posted - 2009.11.13 15:40:00 - [27] Originally by: Cista2 I am against making a bullet list of checks that must be performed by any auditor. The idea is actually to have these voluntary audits as easy to do as possible. Let the investee - and his potential investors - ask for what they want. If the investee only wants his skills and recent trade history verified, that's what he will get. If you as auditor feel you should do more, talk with the investee about it in each case. Then call them "recommended" checks. Limited or not, the audits must be credible. Any new auditor who posts an "easy" audit will be laughed out of court by investors. And any auditor who makes absolutely no effort to verify character integrity will be ignored. Audits are carried out to directly assist potential investors in decision-making, and indirectly to assist the investee in obtaining funding. It¦s not up to the investee to say "I don¦t want my alts looked at," for example.
Tylwyth Teg Caldari	Posted - 2009.11.13 15:49:00 - [28] I am new the the MD forum and fairly new to the game. I would be glad to help with the audits and do a free one each month. Being an auditor may help me understand better which investments are good and such as well. However, I know I am a fairly new character from a small corp and have yet to make an impact on the market or even post, but if I can help mitigate the damage scammers cause this will be a good thing for me personally as I can safely start my career as an investor and a trader. Full disclosure statement: This is an industrial and research character, and I invent and build a few tech 2 items. I also dabble in the markets, but my capitalization is very small right now. I am a small fry in a big pond. I am a computer programmer by day and a mathematician by heart. One question to all the auditors out there: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who watches those who watch?) That is to say, can we trust the auditors?
Dretzle Omega Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.11.13 16:06:00 - [29] Originally by: Tylwyth Teg I am a computer programmer by day and a mathematician by heart. I'm beginning to think that only computer programmers and IT peeps are the ones that play Eve. Heh. Originally by: Tylwyth Teg One question to all the auditors out there: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who watches those who watch?) That is to say, can we trust the auditors? Very good point. I mentioned this to Cista, as well. I believe that's why there is to be two of these auditors on any bond/IPO requested. Should there be a channel for investors/investees to go to look for auditors? Or should I finally just join the scc-lounge after all?
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.13 16:23:00 - [30] Edited by: Cista2 on 13/11/2009 16:25:07 Originally by: Varo Jan Any new auditor who posts an "easy" audit will be laughed out of court by investors. And any auditor who makes absolutely no effort to verify character integrity will be ignored. You are repeating what VV has been saying all along. We do have these two very good auditors active that do immaculate audits. They get 50 mil to 100 mil per audit. But nobody else wants to do audits, because it is too much effort for too small a fee. This initiative is necessary as a way to get more people initiated in the auditing business. The audits that are done voluntary have to be kept very simple. As long as everybody knows that a prori, noone is going to be ridiculed. You are pushing in the direction that every audit should be a full audit, and this is a discussion we have had before here. You are welcome to offer investee's to do a full audit after your own principles, but you cannot demand that from other volunteers. Edit: PS Things like character / corp history, forum posting history, contract history, those elements are public and can be looked into by the investors themselves if they are sceptical. No need to burden a 0.01 auditor with that.
Breaker77 Gallente	Posted - 2009.11.13 16:38:00 - [31] Quote: I would always poke through one, if people wanted. Also, with this caveat. Originally by: Dzil Please note I reserve the right to turn down requests if I don't see myself able to turn them around in a timely manner. RL comes first and all that. Ditto if anyone is interested.
SetrakDark Caldari DarkCorp Technology and Finance	Posted - 2009.11.13 16:41:00 - [32] Originally by: Cista2 Edit: PS Things like character / corp history, forum posting history, contract history, those elements are public and can be looked into by the investors themselves if they are sceptical. No need to burden a 0.01 auditor with that. That's a really good point. A lot of the valid concern with auditing has been about investors using them as an approval without even reading the contents. I'm all for restricting a standard audit to that which an investor cannot do on their own. Of course, you are welcome to do more if you want.
Andron Blaxcor	Posted - 2009.11.13 17:02:00 - [33] I'm willing to put in time for a small commitment each month. I have no experience of actually performing an audit. I mean this more in a technical sense of using the API OOG programs and the like, I feel confident I could make sense of someone's trading habits and checking someone's skills on EVEmon is incredibly straight forward. Again, as stated by others, I reserve the right to refuse to start an audit I don't think I could make a decent job of in a reasonable time. Given the fact that this is designed to attract new auditors, would working in pairs be a reasonable thing to do? It would give everyone somebody else to directly compare their results to and discuss if/why they missed anything, making learning the trade a lot quicker. Also, two auditors in parallel are less likely to miss stuff and so should be more reliable. With regards to what the audits should contain, I agree with those pushing for an audit-lite. Key points I feel are: 1) Has the skills claimed 2) Appears to performing the activities stated in a way that looks plausibly profitable 3) No suspicious money transfers to/from undeclared alts. 4) Mains and alts don't appear to have been used in scams previously. Other aspects like whether the character s bought and corp history is available publicly and, as these audits are designed to be bare-bones I don't think the auditors should make up for any laziness on the part of the investor. Btw, I think this a great idea and a brilliant way of dealing with the influx of loans too small for a full-blown audit we've been seeing. Good work.
Varo Jan Minmatar	Posted - 2009.11.13 17:06:00 - [34] Originally by: Cista2 You are pushing in the direction that every audit should be a full audit, and this is a discussion we have had before here. You are welcome to offer investee's to do a full audit after your own principles, but you cannot demand that from other volunteers. No, I am not. Please don¦t put words into my mouth. I am saying there are areas that could be simplified, areas that would not be covered 100% - and those shortcuts would be disclosed to investors, obviously. However, there are certain fundamental areas that you cannot afford to compromise on. Quote: Things like character / corp history, forum posting history, contract history, those elements are public and can be looked into by the investors themselves if they are sceptical. No need to burden a 0.01 auditor with that. True for the main, not true if any alts are not disclosed publically, which can be acceptable. In those cases, the auditor would have to do the work.
Tylwyth Teg Caldari	Posted - 2009.11.13 17:20:00 - [35] Originally by: Andron Blaxcor Given the fact that this is designed to attract new auditors, would working in pairs be a reasonable thing to do? It would give everyone somebody else to directly compare their results to and discuss if/why they missed anything, making learning the trade a lot quicker. Also, two auditors in parallel are less likely to miss stuff and so should be more reliable. I think that this is a bad idea. Audits should always be independent. If you have 2 auditors working together, there is a lessened chance of missing something, however this also heightens the chance of collusion, whether accidental or voluntary. This also heightens the chance of both auditors making the same mistakes especially if they vet their official audit responses against each other. In my opinion, both of the .01 ISK auditors should be unaware of the other's presence. That is to say until they see each other's posts they should not know who the other auditor is.
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.13 17:44:00 - [36] Originally by: Tylwyth Teg Audits should always be independent. If you have 2 auditors working together, there is a lessened chance of missing something, however this also heightens the chance of collusion, whether accidental or voluntary. I rather like that idea though. If we are accepting even quite new players as one of the 2, then it might be good for the 2 to have a chat before the results are published. The object is also to train the auditor, so a new auditor should not fear discredit. Also, investors must never forget that the audits, however perfunctory, are not an endorsement of the project.
Dretzle Omega Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.11.13 17:59:00 - [37] Originally by: Cista2 Originally by: Tylwyth Teg Audits should always be independent. If you have 2 auditors working together, there is a lessened chance of missing something, however this also heightens the chance of collusion, whether accidental or voluntary. I rather like that idea though. If we are accepting even quite new players as one of the 2, then it might be good for the 2 to have a chat before the results are published. The object is also to train the auditor, so a new auditor should not fear discredit. Also, investors must never forget that the audits, however perfunctory, are not an endorsement of the project. I agree that the auditors should work independently. The point of having 2 is to limit the problems with trust. 2 independent audits by relative unknowns like myself is a lot more trustworthy than 1. The whole point is that is lessens the possibility of collaberating for scams, or either just to miss something important. If there needs to be any training, a third person could act in an advisory role only (no need for the API keys, just advising on what to look for).
Charles Swann	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:12:00 - [38] people are actually taking this thread seriously?!? omfg... at least we now have a complete list of MD wannabes perhaps I should biomass this character, my concept of "educated trolling" does not work out at all (and I really dislike the in-your-face version) ... writing a guide for clueless auditors/scammers was meant to be an effing threat to MD - if you seriously need a guide you should not do audits in the first place/are an incompetent scammer that would have deserved to get caught, anyways. ... and apparently not even Cista2 got why I was talking about 720 flashbacks the other day (that idea surfaces every few months, linking to the posting history of 720 was just my way of saying "I, too, don't like the ways of Cista2, be careful") /facepalm nervous breakdown ... yes, you can have my stuff - but it's only one Impairor located in pr-8
Dretzle Omega Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:37:00 - [39] Originally by: Charles Swann people are actually taking this thread seriously?!? There's really no harm in saying "sure, I'll audit if I'm wanted". If investees and/or investors don't want said auditors (me, Ji Sama, Roguehalo, etc and so forth) then we don't audit and go about our happy lives. Originally by: Charles Swann omfg... at least we now have a complete list of MD wannabes For goodness sakes, no!
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.13 18:44:00 - [40] Edited by: Cista2 on 13/11/2009 18:45:46 Originally by: Charles Swann my concept of "educated trolling" does not work out at all (and I really dislike the in-your-face version) ... Yeah you are really much too nice a person to be trolling.
Cheeba Don Fusion Enterprises Ltd Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.11.13 19:02:00 - [41] I like this idea, good move to get secure auditing procedures rolling again. Recently MD has been a mess of unchecked mini ipos etc etc. Been a while since Ive seen a large and well audited proposal to be proposed on these forums. --------- oOk!
Drab Cane Carbenadium Industries	Posted - 2009.11.13 19:48:00 - [42] Cista2, good luck with this. Having a standard template is a fantastic idea. It would be a huge benefit for both your auditors and the IPO/bond managers. Such a template should list the minimum items that every audit will cover. Make it available publicly so everyone knows what is expected from the audit and what isn't included in the audit. As you said, it shouldn't limit the auditor, but serve as a starting point. ----------------------------------------------- - Who Dares, Wins
Mikael Genexi Gallente Product Number 3	Posted - 2009.11.13 20:00:00 - [43] I'm going to take my name off the list for now until I feel I have a better grasp of the programs that use APIs. While I think getting more people to do audits is a good idea, I also think that unless controls are in place, the whole concept of an audit could become easily tainted through abuse.
Fleshbot	Posted - 2009.11.13 20:14:00 - [44] I haven't gone though all the comments but I see and issue right now. 1) I put up two alts who volunteer to do audits 2) A third alt puts up a bond 3) The third alt ask for an a audit from the first two alts 4) Scam, burn all three, and repeat. I'd suggest that the new auditors are randomly selected from the available pool. Maybe someone requests an audit and you (Cista2) randomly select two of the auditors?* In either case add me to the list. Also what happens in one declines or just doesn't do it? Is a third asked?
Andron Blaxcor	Posted - 2009.11.13 20:15:00 - [45] Originally by: Tylwyth Teg Originally by: Andron Blaxcor Given the fact that this is designed to attract new auditors, would working in pairs be a reasonable thing to do? It would give everyone somebody else to directly compare their results to and discuss if/why they missed anything, making learning the trade a lot quicker. Also, two auditors in parallel are less likely to miss stuff and so should be more reliable. I think that this is a bad idea. Audits should always be independent. If you have 2 auditors working together, there is a lessened chance of missing something, however this also heightens the chance of collusion, whether accidental or voluntary. This also heightens the chance of both auditors making the same mistakes especially if they vet their official audit responses against each other. In my opinion, both of the .01 ISK auditors should be unaware of the other's presence. That is to say until they see each other's posts they should not know who the other auditor is. Ah, sorry, I may not have made myself clear. I meant two auditors working in parallel, as in, moving in the same direction but isolated. I was envisaging them working separately but then comparing results at the end when they post. This would allow for learning after the event. Making sure auditors don't know each other has some advantages and disadvantages, but I was thinking they should be independent. Originally by: Charles Swann people are actually taking this thread seriously?!? Shocked omfg... at least we now have a complete list of MD wannabes perhaps I should biomass this character, my concept of "educated trolling" does not work out at all (and I really dislike the in-your-face version) ... writing a guide for clueless auditors/scammers was meant to be an effing threat to MD - if you seriously need a guide you should not do audits in the first place/are an incompetent scammer that would have deserved to get caught, anyways. Well, that's an interesting tirade. Personally, I've seen MD struggling for weeks under a raft of new proposals and a lack of auditors. The ideas seen in this post have limitations but it seems to be one of the better solutions and, more to the point, actually looks like it might be put into practice. So, speaking personally, felt it was worth a shot to improve the community. If you have a better suggestion please let us know. And your first post was a poor attempt at trolling, I take it you were being sarcastic in it? But when it's indistinguishable from an opinion someone might genuinely hold, nobody notices the sarcasm.
Dretzle Omega Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.11.13 20:46:00 - [46] Originally by: Fleshbot I haven't gone though all the comments but I see and issue right now. 1) I put up two alts who volunteer to do audits 2) A third alt puts up a bond 3) The third alt ask for an a audit from the first two alts 4) Scam, burn all three, and repeat. I'd suggest that the new auditors are randomly selected from the available pool. Maybe someone requests an audit and you (Cista2) randomly select two of the auditors?* In either case add me to the list. Also what happens in one declines or just doesn't do it? Is a third asked? That's a very real threat, and I personally wouldn't put trust in the auditors if I've never seen a post or anything from them before. I think this would be more for the "knowns" to "relatively unknown", but not for the "completely unknowns", if that makes any sense. Originally by: Andron Blaxcor I was envisaging them working separately but then comparing results at the end when they post. This would allow for learning after the event. After the the final results, and the two have made their posts, then they can look back and compare results. This would be in the interest of learning for future audits. Collaborating for the current audit before you present your final results wouldn't be good, though.
Fleshbot	Posted - 2009.11.13 20:49:00 - [47] Originally by: Dretzle Omega Very good point. I mentioned this to Cista, as well. I believe that's why there is to be two of these auditors on any bond/IPO requested. Again with the clearing house idea, maybe the auditors should not be releasing the reports on the forums but first send a copy to someone (Cista2?) who than approves them for posting? This would prevent lazy/scammy auditor A from just waiting until auditor B posts and then coping what was said. As another deterrent to scammers how about a holding fee for the service. $50 million isk to request an audit and if there are no red flags (undeclared alts, known scammers, etc.) you get the money back. If there are you forfeit the isk. As an aside when I audit I usually ask for certain things, alts, area of trade/manufacturing, when they started playing, etc. This puts the pressure on them to be honest up front lest I find something they were trying to hide, rather than making me hunt for it. And if they blatantly lie about it that sends up a flag. (mistakes are okay, "1/2009 vs 12/2008" but lies are not, "10/2009 vs 8/2006"). Lastly, I've had some luck in picking up investments by simply asking to do the audit myself. If you see a 500M bond and are interested, ask if you can do the audit. If it looks good, buy out as much as you can/want. Since many of these bonds are being unfilled, honest IPO/Bond managers will be willing to trust you for the ISK.
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.13 21:10:00 - [48] Originally by: Fleshbot 1) I put up two alts who volunteer to do audits 2) A third alt puts up a bond 3) The third alt ask for an a audit from the first two alts 4) Scam, burn all three, and repeat. I'd suggest that the new auditors are randomly selected from the available pool. Maybe someone requests an audit and you (Cista2) randomly select two of the auditors?* In either case add me to the list. Also what happens in one declines or just doesn't do it? Is a third asked? I don't see a big problem. (Almost) all the names on the list are known from the forum. If an unknown person were to be audited by two completely unknowns, I don't think it would help the investee much. I would like to leave the decisions up to the investee. After all, it's their bond. What will happen is that when the small bond is announced, people will now ask them to get a 001 audit. If they have some sense they will try to get auditors that are already known. If one fails, they will get another. That is, if they see any benefit from it. And I would leave that to the investee, rather than us establishing some intricate scheme for how everything must be done.
Vasta Magna	Posted - 2009.11.13 22:54:00 - [49] I think the need for limited audit function and for a few new auditors is clear. To that extent I hope you are successful. Now let me say a bunch of negative stuff Because trust is the whole purpose of an audit, if you are using (relative) unknowns you are handicapped from the start. I think it would need to be very, very limited. The most basic of fact checking. Even things you have included as basic aren't necessarily. * NAV (as precisely as relevant) * Trade activities I'm sure many who've used the programs available (EMMA, jeve, Income Analyzer, etc) will agree they are finicky creatures. Determining NAV can be more art than science. With trade activities, some are straightforward, but some schemes may require significant player skill to provide so much as simple verification. Even answering the question "do they have the skills to do it?" could potentially require a lot from new-ish players (or old players new to the market, to industry, whatever). If you haven't done it yourself, do you really know what's involved? There are many different types of trust all in play at once. Trust in a basic sense, trust in technical competence, trust in the player's level of knowledge. Even when you get past all that, you're left with the fact that it's only useful for small bonds. Just personal opinion, but I think they're mostly rubbish. 90% of them are either pointless because the debtor could do it almost as fast the hard way, or because the numbers are so small that even an insane interest rate offers nothing of value to the investor in absolute terms. My .02 ISK.
Breaker77 Gallente	Posted - 2009.11.13 23:03:00 - [50] Originally by: Vasta Magna Because trust is the whole purpose of an audit, if you are using (relative) unknowns you are handicapped from the start. I think it would need to be very, very limited. The most basic of fact checking. Well even with just the limited API you can check skills, characters on that account, and ISK on the personal wallet. That information along with checking EVE Search and the contract history against those characters will reveal quite a bit of info. Now if someone is looking to expand their capital production then the full API is needed to verify that they have the BPOs they state to have, or a trader wanting to expand would need a Full API to verify that they have been trading.
Dagny Bronstein	Posted - 2009.11.13 23:19:00 - [51] Originally by: Breaker77 Now if someone is looking to expand their capital production then the full API is needed to verify that they have the BPOs they state to have that's exactly one of the things a full API key won't show you You would have to use screenshots or when talking about serious stuff like Capital BPOs better contracts to verify that this someone actually does possess BPOs and not just BPCs; please read up on limitations like this before actually accepting to do audits, mk?
Breaker77 Gallente	Posted - 2009.11.13 23:24:00 - [52] Edited by: Breaker77 on 13/11/2009 23:25:36 Originally by: Dagny Bronstein Originally by: Breaker77 Now if someone is looking to expand their capital production then the full API is needed to verify that they have the BPOs they state to have that's exactly one of the things a full API key won't show you Been a long day at work You can always create a contract with an absurd price on it so it can be declined Which of course would then mean you wouldn't need a full API key. edit: Not to mention that the full API also shows the running S&I jobs so if it's in research then it will show up there and you would know it's a BPO since BPCs can't be researched.
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.11.14 06:35:00 - [53] Originally by: Vasta Magna Because trust is the whole purpose of an audit, if you are using (relative) unknowns you are handicapped from the start. I think it would need to be very, very limited. I agree on most your points. This project is merely an attempt of starting some people on the path of auditing. What they can do will be very limited, but at least they can expose a throwaway alt created for the occasion, with no trades logged etc. I see others here discuss more advanced audits on larger bonds, but that is not what I brought to the table - I clearly stated those are for VV and Kazuo. For a new auditor that is uncertain about the tools and methods, Kazuo has offered to be contacted for advise. I am certainly not the expert here.
Brock Nelson Caldari Flux Technologies Inc	Posted - 2009.11.14 19:31:00 - [54] Step 1: Create alt Step 2: Create 2nd alt Step 3: Both alts audit your main Step 4: Scam! Yeah, why don't you setup this whole thing like it was a year ago? New Auditor pair up with Trusted auditor? Tools for Research Business
Tylwyth Teg Caldari	Posted - 2009.11.14 20:32:00 - [55] Originally by: Brock Nelson Step 1: Create alt Step 2: Create 2nd alt Step 3: Both alts audit your main Step 4: Scam! Yeah, why don't you setup this whole thing like it was a year ago? New Auditor pair up with Trusted auditor? Yeah for this to work we need to take the selection process out of the hands of the people asking for ISK. Not sure how to do this in a trustworthy way......maybe instead of the person pitching the bond/ipo/whatever choosing the auditors, one of the potential investors should pick 1 and another potential investor pick another. Thus getting around the easy collusion scenario above.
cosmoray Bella Vista Holdings Corp	Posted - 2009.11.14 20:34:00 - [56] From an investor standpoint I am going to throw a couple of caveats in here. These are MY opinions, and it will effect my investing. Qualifications To be an auditor (even small scale), you must have had (at least 1 to qualify): 1. Successfully run an IPO or bond (successful means closed without default) 2. Made a significant contribution to the MD forum (approximately 100+ posts minimum), to the point people recognise you easily. 3. At least 6 months old 4. Have holdings in MD IPO's/bonds totalling over 1B ISK. Audit Size First audits have to be completed under 3B size. Audit is successful if bond launches & closes successfully. Second & Third audits under 5B. Open after that. That being said, these two people don't qualify as they are both new: InUrJita CheckinUrPrice Tylwyth Teg
Breaker77 Gallente	Posted - 2009.11.14 23:28:00 - [57] Originally by: cosmoray Qualifications To be an auditor (even small scale), you must have had (at least 1 to qualify): 1. Successfully run an IPO or bond (successful means closed without default) 2. Made a significant contribution to the MD forum (approximately 100+ posts minimum), to the point people recognise you easily. 3. At least 6 months old 4. Have holdings in MD IPO's/bonds totalling over 1B ISK. Well I pass all 4 of those Well at least more than 100 posts in MD, now as to the usefulness of them, I can't say. Originally by: Brock Nelson Yeah, why don't you setup this whole thing like it was a year ago? New Auditor pair up with Trusted auditor? So you are going to start auditing again to help follow up on us?? VV will suffer burnout if he doesn't get help and Kazzac seems to be busy with other things for the time being.
Brock Nelson Caldari Flux Technologies Inc	Posted - 2009.11.15 01:19:00 - [58] Originally by: Breaker77 Originally by: Brock Nelson Yeah, why don't you setup this whole thing like it was a year ago? New Auditor pair up with Trusted auditor? So you are going to start auditing again to help follow up on us?? VV will suffer burnout if he doesn't get help and Kazzac seems to be busy with other things for the time being. v0v I'm just saying how it was done when VV and I became an auditor. There was only one available auditor at the time as well. Tools for Research Business
Dethmourne Silvermane Gallente Silvermane Enterprises	Posted - 2009.11.15 01:36:00 - [59] Now I'm vaguely tempted to start up a trading bond for my lazy trading strategy
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles	Posted - 2009.11.15 10:38:00 - [60] Originally by: cosmoray From an investor standpoint I am going to throw a couple of caveats in here. These are MY opinions, and it will effect my investing. Qualifications To be an auditor (even small scale), you must have had (at least 1 to qualify): 1. Successfully run an IPO or bond (successful means closed without default) 2. Made a significant contribution to the MD forum (approximately 100+ posts minimum), to the point people recognise you easily. 3. At least 6 months old 4. Have holdings in MD IPO's/bonds totalling over 1B ISK. I never actually did #1, but I did spend a while renting out corp divisions on a private basis before I began auditing. --- 34.4:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule
Deus Mallius	Posted - 2009.12.08 12:52:00 - [61] Hey all. I'm hopefully about to commence a small bond and I'm in need of a 2nd auditor. If someone can contact me in game it would be much appreciated.
SiJira	Posted - 2009.12.10 21:36:00 - [62] very good thread - needs a sticky t2 titans incoming Sigs need to contain only EVE related content. Zymurgist
Coconut Joe Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.12.10 21:59:00 - [63] Originally by: cosmoray From an investor standpoint I am going to throw a couple of caveats in here. These are MY opinions, and it will effect my investing. Qualifications To be an auditor (even small scale), you must have had (at least 1 to qualify): 1. Successfully run an IPO or bond (successful means closed without default) 2. Made a significant contribution to the MD forum (approximately 100+ posts minimum), to the point people recognise you easily. 3. At least 6 months old 4. Have holdings in MD IPO's/bonds totalling over 1B ISK. Audit Size First audits have to be completed under 3B size. Audit is successful if bond launches & closes successfully. Second & Third audits under 5B. Open after that. That being said, these two people don't qualify as they are both new: InUrJita CheckinUrPrice Tylwyth Teg Hello cosmoray, how many people do you think are prepared to do auditing, and meeds these requirements?
Aluin Chaput Caldari Metanoia. Consortium.	Posted - 2009.12.14 23:47:00 - [64] I would like an auditor for my IPO, preferably a experienced one who has handled a few IPOs/Bonds.
GoldIntrepidous E-P-O-C-H	Posted - 2009.12.15 04:48:00 - [65] Please add me to the list of volunteer's
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.12.16 11:06:00 - [66] Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 16/12/2009 11:08:06 I refrained from posting about this till now: - because I (and others) am apparently affected by / possibly have consequences off this initiative and this could wake up trolls and flames. - have little time to play ATM and even less to participate in MD. - wanted to see how it evolved by its own legs I think now enough time has passed - about 1 month. My observations - wholly subjective and not meant to be any sort of "commandment" are as follow: 1) The initiative does not show to have produced many tangible results. 2) The initiative does not tackle and fix the base issues for auditors. 3) The initiative does not strongly appeal to investors. And before anyone asks, no I don't have my own magic wand solution nor have the time to even think about it. 1) I don't see many new investments - neither big nor small - opting for this kind of auditing. I actually don't recall of a single "serious" report but I could very well be mistaken as I can't follow the forums almost at all since weeks. I am mostly searching for My Appreciated Customers threads so to timely honor collateral restitutions and similar. So, I don't want to even judge the guys in here but I'd like to see links or whatever to some of their results. A severe lack of them would indicate something in this campaign is not going well and the OP could inform about his idea of why. 2) Auditing is not worth the time spent. This, along with "your institution needs transparency (said to EBANK in older times)" are two of my mantras. This initiative, playing devil's (and investor's) advocate looks like: "if you are fine we can lower the bar on information quality / quantity and get it done for cheap". I am quite sure investees / bond issuers may like the deal because of the twisted mechanism making them and not investors the ones to pay for the audit. But those who have to toss the coins are not so keen at reducing information, when EvE is already such an hostile and unsafe financial environment even with "full" audits. Furthermore I have been hit by some statements (in game and not) about people talking like the NAV is something so quick and easy to assess. Or about assets value. I'd love to introduce them to true rigs value, to faction and officer gear calculations, to BPO vs BPC proofing, low sec POS defenses and merc contracts assessment and so on. Sure, the shortened audits would try and focus on simpler investments but then we see the domain further restricted to basically hi sec trading. But then, what's important more than precise NAV calculation, performance prediction (read: transactions analysis, checking for phantom / trap / dubious movements) and so on? Imho lowering costs is not a solution to a devalued meta-profession. Putting it to being a valued meta-profession and thus having investors obtain quality reporting is to be pursued instead. Kazuo, Brock etc. are not held off by some magic elements. They have their own activities and as good enterpreneurs they pick the lucrative activities and discard the "wastes of time". Till auditing stops being a "waste of time" they won't be back (assuming this is the only impediment). I have been accused in the past of making too low prices and thus driving other auditors away. Besides I made some investigations and found out the others don't ask for much more themselves, I have actually slammed my face against "GTFO walls" when I dared to ask for more. Now, the approaches seen so far are: - leave the job (Kazuo, Brock and others) - ask for the real "EvE-man-hours" equivalent value (Shar) and thus becoming affordable only to banks and greater investments. - lower the price but also the bar. (Continued) - Auditing and consulting Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.12.16 11:12:00 - [67] I dare say none of the above is working. And MD does not seem to accept further costs. By seeing the latest investments getting more and more... crappier it looks like people just gave up at even trying - both to propose something decent and at investors demanding transparency off it). I have my own ideas but since I am sure they would not be accepted I am not wasting further bandwidth. 3) I'd like to see a real professional investor (Flakeys and the likes) talk about these micro-audits and the feeling they convey when it's the time for them (and not a generic "other" - i.e. putting the money where the mouth talks) to toss out the cash. - Auditing and consulting Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.12.16 11:31:00 - [68] Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha A severe lack of them would indicate something in this campaign is not going well and the OP could inform about his idea of why. No worries, all is well, for the past month there simply has not been any bonds that were suitable for these limited audits. Only 1 has been reported on (see post 2), 2 more on the way. Some other investees were requested to get a free audit and quickly left the building. Re. the price of audits, it was never the intention to lower the price of genuine audits, but to get more people started with auditing. There are several raods to follow from here: 1) Auditors can leave the programme and launch themselves as paid auditors. 2) We can also introduce payment to the concept, for instance each 001 auditor gets paid 5 mil isk per previous audit they have made. If you already have made 5, you must be paid 25 mil for the next one. Any comments welcome. ---------------------------------------- Buy / sell Jidsale shares here
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.12.16 12:54:00 - [69] Quote: No worries, all is well, for the past month there simply has not been any bonds that were suitable for these limited audits. Which prompts the question: "is this offer / "format" covering enough of the demand to be relevant"? Or is the investors "market" asking for apples and getting oranges? This is why I actually started the above post, because if "auditing lite" would be the mean to relieve "heavy auditors" from part of their burden, then this should really happen. Otherwise all we get are people leveraging on busy auditors to basically help themselves. Quote: Re. the price of audits, it was never the intention to lower the price of genuine audits, but to get more people started with auditing. Same as above. "More is not necessarily better". I know the MD credo is about "volume is god" but we are not ship modules. I don't see starting more auditors as a durable solution. All you get is like another MMO I played. Gameplay sucked, lag sucked, once out of newbie "room" you'd be thrown rocks. What did the devs do? They started more advertising. They got numbers. But the numbers clashed against the game and quickly vaned. First we need to address why there are few auditors and then how to keep up with the resulting increased demand. As of now auditors demand is not high, despite there is some further potential for growth. What do you think the new auditors will do once they start asking money and they are told to GTFO? What do you think they could ask, when a full audit perceived value is basically "miners' wage per hour"? I mean, in the past I accepted some meager pricing because I liked it, I liked to learn the intricacies "of the system" (which is intriguing, compared to how rudely easy is to achieve most things in EvE). But if I had time as a premium (like now), chosing to be auditor would have meant to be an idiot. An idiot that cannot report and give advices about other people's profitability and competitivity with a straight face because the job is so low on returns that doing it is a sign of being a bad manager / trader. Until a full audit does not yield higher returns than basic AFK missioning (at least given how it's an high responsibility, high stress / flames etc. job), it's not worth doing. By throwing new auditors in the mix, all you get is for all of them to be unknowing ignorants feeding on breadcrumbs till they learn the harsh rules of finance matters, and then stop working. Now, I can understand how one side (investees) are perfectly fine with this, because they spend less and can keep many more skeletons in their closet. But I don't see how this will satisfy investors nor I see how this would help the other auditors. Auditors that do exist, they just value their other money income avenues as way too much more worthwhile to pursue. - Auditing and consulting Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
Sama's Minion	Posted - 2009.12.16 13:10:00 - [70] So you are saying that breaker's and varo's audits where sub-par? I really don't know where you are getting at? This is for small ventures, and unknown auditors. Its really that simple, it will not lower the overall quality, it will help improve it and its offerings, where it used. Only thing you where right about, 2 audits in 1 mth, is just not good enough. Though I will add one more to that number in less than a day....
Magnu Stormhawk	Posted - 2009.12.16 13:30:00 - [71] The way I see it, there are some offerings that are helped by a small audit, and these free mini audits have their place. At the very least the existence of the free audit offer weeds out some of the scams. More serious offerings that really need an proper audit, will have one forced upon them by the investors if they want to get off the ground. If people want their IPO or bond to fly, they will have to pay the price. There is very little competition for you as an auditor, so that cant be what pushes fees down. The investors dont pay for it, but demand it, so they arent dictating fees and pushing your price down. The investee is the one that needs the service, they can refuse the price but then they dont get their loan (or have to compensate with high interest etc). I have to admit I dont know what you charge, but I cant see any argument for the fees being not worth the time. I would expect if i tried to launch a 5 bil IPO or bond, that i would have to fork out a couple of hundred mil to have a proper audit. I dont know how aligns with what you currently (or used to) charge. I have a point somewhere in this ramble...oh yeah - Charge what you want, let people take it or leave it.
Mme Pinkerton Caldari	Posted - 2009.12.16 14:12:00 - [72] Originally by: Magnu Stormhawk At the very least the existence of the free audit offer weeds out some of the scams. It will also weed out the issue of investment decisions being based on "audits".
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.12.16 14:19:00 - [73] Quote: I have to admit I dont know what you charge, but I cant see any argument for the fees being not worth the time. I would expect if i tried to launch a 5 bil IPO or bond, that i would have to fork out a couple of hundred mil to have a proper audit. For a 5B bond? I had people go mental at the very prospect of paying ... drumrolls ... 30M Not a typo. Thirty millions. You know those loooooong audits? Yes, those with short and long version? Yes, those with also graphs? Yes, those that take hours and hours to make? THESE are valued similar orders of amounts (if multiple accounts are involved they can rise to 50-60M but that's it, even if the bond is 16B). I had actual requests (not for a 500M bond but for multiple billions) to delay the payment of such amounts. I had actual people complain on SCC-lounge about how unbearably high are these fees. I had people revolt about how this destroys the bond interest rate viability. You know what? In RL I used to need to bargain and make my blood green to get some dang money off short-arms people. But this is a game, once the novelty effect is over, having 1 of 3 people crying murder for these amounts (ie they are not even ok with them) makes me tell them to GTFO, them and their audit, and I go do something else. Quote: I have a point somewhere in this ramble...oh yeah - Charge what you want, let people take it or leave it. So far - and pure tangible heads count prove this is not just whining - the ones who left it are exactly us. - Auditing and consulting Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
Magnu Stormhawk	Posted - 2009.12.16 14:56:00 - [74] Thanks for the insight. I can see where the frustration comes from. Its a joke at that rate of pay. Speaking from RL experience in my line of work, the onerous nature of signing an audit report is reflected well in the meta game of eve, in terms of the comfort that investors gain and the risk you take to your reputation and business in giving it. Your fee should reflect the risk you take as well as the time you put in. My clients may decline an audit because they dont want to pay the fee and they arent legally required to, but they come back and pay it once their funders tell them how it is. I think the free audits a very useful, but they should take care to remain free unless the audit is serious about the job. A small audit and small fee or any hybrid between a proper job and a free check will muddy the waters and could end up in tears for everyone.
Breaker77 Gallente Reclamation Industries	Posted - 2009.12.16 15:57:00 - [75] Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha Quote: No worries, all is well, for the past month there simply has not been any bonds that were suitable for these limited audits. Which prompts the question: "is this offer / "format" covering enough of the demand to be relevant"? Since this thread was started we've had a "Ripoff PL" scam attempt. Someone wanting 1.1 trillion ISK, another multibillion ISK offering, that then offered up 2 smaller offerings when the large one was tore apart by hopeful investors. Oh lets not forget the offering that had all his character trading alts vouching for him. How is this supposed to take off when every offering starts off with the title "I'm going to scam you"?? Yes it is a lot of work, yes I'm not getting paid. I spend a couple of hours doing checks through the various programs, eve search, ingame, ect. and report it in the simplest way I can. Quite frankly your reports are too damn long and I could really care less if their cat took a **** on the right or left side of the tree this morning. Most people lose interest after reading a few seconds. Do they have the skills? Do they have the stated assets/collateral? Are they known scammers/have a history of scamming? Seriously, thats all thats needed!
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.12.16 16:08:00 - [76] Quote: Quite frankly your reports are too damn long Did you skip the part where every of them got a "shorter version" for those unwilling to read the whole thing? The long version is actually not really long to write, it's the checks composing it that are long to do. These checks are going to stay, I refuse to do an half work, I take great pride in putting in my best and - on the opposite side - flamers take great pride in highlighting the uncovered holes, if any. This easily leads to the hard work of a serious bond issuer to be ruined and possibly locked because of my lack of care and I could not condone myself for that. - Auditing and consulting Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll	Posted - 2009.12.16 16:46:00 - [77] Well in comparison to VV fee's when I launched my IPO, we paid 1.55B ISK in auditing fees! Around 100M ISK/Hour avg.
Mme Pinkerton Caldari	Posted - 2009.12.16 16:51:00 - [78] Originally by: Breaker77 Do they have the skills? Do they have the stated assets/collateral? Are they known scammers/have a history of scamming? Seriously, thats all thats needed! In my books you just disqualified yourself as an auditor... Every time I read this thread I have to think about creating an account solely for "testing" auditors (and every time I come to the conclusion it's not worth the money). At least you should also look for * direct trades * money transfers * assets hidden in outstanding private contracts * especially for young characters: unaccounted-for assets (like +3 implants without any record of acquiring them, jettison with one character acquire with next) * plausibility of SP count (e.g. my main has less SP than would be expected, because I trained an alt on the same account which I later transferred to a 2nd account); again double-check with remaps/implants for young characters (how long has he really had these +3s plugged in?) * strange trading patterns (lots of small trading could mean he's trying to hide prior records by pushing them over the 1000 transactions limit) * plausibility of skill selection (does he min-max, is he highly focused etc.) * suspicious standings * suspicious killmails (via API, not just public killboards) * make sure you didn't forget to check for POSes * characters with similar names/variations of same name that could possibly be alts * have one (better two) interviews to test the knowledge of EVE in general, MD & his business plan in particular, let him explain any inconsistencies/yellow flags It's not enough only to look for known scammers, big part of an audit is to assess the general "fishiness" of the audited party. and yes, you have to report any significant findings to the investors - the value of your audit is very different if the transactions log goes only back for one week than if it goes back for 3 months. PS. Is it feasible to hide assets in anchored secure cans?
Andron Blaxcor	Posted - 2009.12.16 17:24:00 - [79] I'll toss my hat back into the arena. When VV audited me, I was happy to pay because I knew the profit I would make was many times the fee. I was very happy with the audit. I think the existence of this thread has served a slightly different function tan that initially envisaged. It seems to have proved a tool to quickly deter weak scams. Many would-be scammers seem to fold as soon as they are offered a free audit. A legitimate business would never be put off by a free audit (unless they're very uptight with their information). So far as I know, no audit performed as a result of this has supported something which turned out to be a scam (I don't read the forums religiously so I may be mistaken here). If the above paragraph holds true, then this thread seems to have had some success if the ultimate aims of an auditing body are considered. The reason nobody has picked out any really elaborate scams and that few successful businesses have been audited are because both are relatively rare on these forums. Just my thoughts.
Varo Jan Caravanserai Consulting	Posted - 2009.12.16 20:19:00 - [80] Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha By throwing new auditors in the mix, all you get is for all of them to be unknowing ignorants feeding on breadcrumbs till they learn the harsh rules of finance matters, and then stop working. You were an "unknowing ignorant", as you so kindly put it, when you did your first audits. They weren¦t impressive but you learned as you did more. Some never learn. There are two past auditors who I would not trust to carry out an audit. Quote: Now, I can understand how one side (investees) are perfectly fine with this, because they spend less and can keep many more skeletons in their closet. Scare tactics. You¦re implying that a new auditor is incapable of finding any skeletons. Quote: But I don't see how this will satisfy investors The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Breaker and I did an audit on a one billion bond. Investors were satisfied with the results and invested. Unexpectedly, I was asked to hold collateral. No investor spoke against that. I¦ll consider the audit a true success when the bond is repaid, but so far so good. Incidentally, at least two audits by established auditors didn¦t prevent scams.
Mme Pinkerton Caldari	Posted - 2009.12.16 20:45:00 - [81] Edited by: Mme Pinkerton on 16/12/2009 20:45:42 Originally by: Varo Jan Scare tactics. You¦re implying that a new auditor is incapable of finding any skeletons. [...] Incidentally, at least two audits by established auditors didn¦t prevent scams. newsflash: contrary to public belief, you don't have to kill your predecessors in order to achieve elite-status in MD. just get along with each other, k? would be better for MD as a whole.
Breaker77 Gallente Reclamation Industries	Posted - 2009.12.16 22:34:00 - [82] Quote: At least you should also look for * direct trades * money transfers * assets hidden in outstanding private contracts All covered under scams/scamming (hmmm 3 billion ISK received from jhgfkjhjkdfahg). However you can not search for outstanding contract on another player, only finished contracts and contracts can not be pulled from the API! Quote: * especially for young characters: unaccounted-for assets (like +3 implants without any record of acquiring them, jettison with one character acquire with next) So they buy 1 unit of trit 1000 times and the wallet journal is now erased with no record of that. Quote: * plausibility of SP count (e.g. my main has less SP than would be expected, because I trained an alt on the same account which I later transferred to a 2nd account); again double-check with remaps/implants for young characters (how long has he really had these +3s plugged in?) You would see I specifically mentioned that in my 2nd audit I performed. Quote: * strange trading patterns (lots of small trading could mean he's trying to hide prior records by pushing them over the 1000 transactions limit) Scam content Quote: * plausibility of skill selection (does he min-max, is he highly focused etc.) Young player that doesn't have a clue what to train, or just trains what he needs to do that now!! Everyone has some random skills that they are probably thinking WTF did I train that for?? Hell I'm training for capitals and I have no desire to go to lowsec/0.0 space. Quote: * suspicious standings * suspicious killmails (via API, not just public killboards) Scamming category Quote: * make sure you didn't forget to check for POSes assets Quote: * characters with similar names/variations of same name that could possibly be alts Scamming category Quote: * have one (better two) interviews to test the knowledge of EVE in general, MD & his business plan in particular, let him explain any inconsistencies/yellow flags In my 2nd audit I replied that I was waiting to hear back from him to clear up some questions I had. Seriously, you can't trust me thats fine, however everything you mentioned I covered in my 100 words or less audit report without coving anything up in novel that rivals War and Peace.
Vaerah Vahrokha Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.12.16 22:50:00 - [83] Quote: You were an "unknowing ignorant", as you so kindly put it, when you did your first audits. They weren¦t impressive but you learned as you did more. I think you did not get the post context. Ignorance was not related with auditing but with the ignorance about the fact that after the first "oooh, aaah" it gets old fast once they see the meager returns. And this exactly when interest and curiosity are slowly replaced by routine. Quote: Scare tactics. You¦re implying that a new auditor is incapable of finding any skeletons. No, just bad reading. "can keep many more skeletons in their closet" means that they do find skeletons but less than if they did proper audits. This allows for a dangerous gray area, where the investee circumvents the obvious checks with expedients and the auditor puts hands ahead: "hey I was just doing a free audit-lite, how could I discover that". Quote: Incidentally, at least two audits by established auditors didn¦t prevent scams. Incidentally, audits can never prevent scams. In an hypothetical bad word, every single audited bond could be a scam because of an abnormally long sequel of people feeding "legit" characters that in the middle of the bond run change their mind and flee with the money. Audits, as said for an hundred times, are to inform, not to make investments safer. Exactly like Concord is not here to protect but for retribution. - Auditing and consulting Before asking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h and http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
Varo Jan Caravanserai Consulting	Posted - 2009.12.17 03:05:00 - [84] Quote: Quote: Scare tactics. You¦re implying that a new auditor is incapable of finding any skeletons. No, just bad reading. "can keep many more skeletons in their closet" means that they do find skeletons but less than if they did proper audits. This allows for a dangerous gray area, where the investee circumvents the obvious checks with expedients and the auditor puts hands ahead: "hey I was just doing a free audit-lite, how could I discover that". We¦re talking at cross-purposes. I said new auditor, and that doesn¦t necessarily mean lite audits. I could nitpick more, but there¦s no point. More auditors are needed. If you disagree with the methods suggested in this thread, then be proactive and constructive and suggest a workable alternative. As for me, I¦ll continue to offer free audits for small offerings. It will be for the community to judge whether they are robust enough to assist in investment decisions.
SetrakDark Caldari DarkCorp Technology and Finance	Posted - 2009.12.17 03:09:00 - [85] Originally by: Varo Jan As for me, I¦ll continue to offer free audits for small offerings. It will be for the community to judge whether they are robust enough to assist in investment decisions. I haven't read any of the recent content of this thread, but I did read your audit and found it more than satisfactory. Auditing is a thankless, yet crucial job. When someone steps up and does a good job of it, they should be thanked.
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll	Posted - 2009.12.17 03:14:00 - [86] Originally by: SetrakDark Originally by: Varo Jan As for me, I¦ll continue to offer free audits for small offerings. It will be for the community to judge whether they are robust enough to assist in investment decisions. I haven't read any of the recent content of this thread, but I did read your audit and found it more than satisfactory. Auditing is a thankless, yet crucial job. When someone steps up and does a good job of it, they should be thanked. QFT VJ is imo the most promising upcoming auditor around, if this was a race track, I would put my ISK on him :p
Mme Pinkerton Caldari	Posted - 2009.12.17 07:22:00 - [87] Originally by: Breaker77 However you can not search for outstanding contract on another player, only finished contracts and contracts can not be pulled from the API! Guess what, that's exactly why I listed this - because putting assets in outstanding contracts is an efficient way to hide them from the API. However, you can ask for a screenshot of the outstanding contracts and doublecheck that with the records for contract fees - not perfect but at least something. One of my central points was to stress the limitations of the API and mention some parts of the API no convenient programs exist for (standings, [killmails can be read with EveHQ]). Originally by: Breaker77 Quote: * especially for young characters: unaccounted-for assets (like +3 implants without any record of acquiring them, jettison with one character acquire with next) So they buy 1 unit of trit 1000 times and the wallet journal is now erased with no record of that. no need to clutter up your journal with suspicious entries.
Breaker77 Gallente Reclamation Industries	Posted - 2009.12.17 15:20:00 - [88] Edited by: Breaker77 on 17/12/2009 15:20:40 Originally by: Mme Pinkerton Originally by: Breaker77 However you can not search for outstanding contract on another player, only finished contracts and contracts can not be pulled from the API! Guess what, that's exactly why I listed this - because putting assets in outstanding contracts is an efficient way to hide them from the API. However, you can ask for a screenshot of the outstanding contracts and doublecheck that with the records for contract fees - not perfect but at least something. While that would work, what is to stop them from taking a SS, then creating a contract to hide the assets. No assets listed in API and no outstanding contracts. I do understand what you are getting at, however as it has been repeated a million times, an audit is not a guarantee of anything.
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2009.12.28 10:31:00 - [89] Can someone maybe audit the Satane / Sextrader offer? She is claiming that she has asked for an audit, but selling shares already. ---------------------------------------- Buy / sell Jidsale shares here
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll	Posted - 2009.12.28 10:36:00 - [90] I can audit her.
Kalrand Charles Ponzi School of Business GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.12.28 11:38:00 - [91] I'd do it too.
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries Sex Drugs And Rock'N'Roll	Posted - 2009.12.28 11:44:00 - [92] Originally by: Kalrand I'd do it too. I'd do it for you
Kalrand Charles Ponzi School of Business GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.12.28 13:33:00 - [93] Originally by: Ji Sama Originally by: Kalrand I'd do it too. I'd do it for you I think you did.
Vahdrok Nyrus OX Syndicate Shipyards	Posted - 2009.12.31 15:24:00 - [94] I'm looking to have an audit done in the near future and would like to hire on two auditors. My goal with this is to allow a "younger" auditor some exposure while being verified in a seperate report by a more experienced auditor. Though I will need to speak with a few people about this before going ahead, I wanted to check here and see if this take on auditing is a worthwhile approach. My fear is that the first report will be trolled apart but hopefully the draw of learning and publicity will be enough to outweigh the mindless ridicule these forums can spawn. I've seen the works of 77/Ji/Varo and would like to allow anyone else listed in this thread the chance first to gain some exposure. If not, I would welcome any of those three to continue their work. Any thoughts on this approach are welcomed and if any newish auditor would like to sign up please let me know. -----------------------------
SetrakDark Caldari DarkCorp Technology and Finance	Posted - 2009.12.31 15:55:00 - [95] Originally by: Vahdrok Nyrus Any thoughts on this approach are welcomed and if any newish auditor would like to sign up please let me know. This approach is ideal in my mind. The problem is getting the experienced auditor.
Kayonn	Posted - 2010.01.30 10:21:00 - [96] This is something I would like to do. In RL I have been doing investment banking and worked in Wall Street for a decade. This would be fun and is something that I'm very familiar with and can help out with hedging/investing ideas. Let me know if you would like my help. I think 50 to 100 million ISK is reasonable depending on the size of the company/audit. I would like to start off by reading a finished 10Q or K to familiarize myself with the standard layout and detail of an EVE audit. If anyone is interested in my help eve mail Kayonn or my alt Dakcen Leeus.
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2010.01.30 10:47:00 - [97] Originally by: Kayonn I think 50 to 100 million ISK is reasonable depending on the size of the company/audit. Sounds great, but for that you would have to stand independently. 001 auditors do not receive isk. ----------------------- MD stock market / Audits 001 / MD investees
Sugar Jugs Juggalicious	Posted - 2010.01.30 10:58:00 - [98] Happy to perform audits as required.
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2010.01.30 11:40:00 - [99] Originally by: Sugar Jugs Happy to perform audits as required. Cool, I have added you to the list. The list was growing long, I have therefore removed 5-6 people that have been there from the start, but have not actually done any audits as far as I know. If you want to be added again, just post. ----------------------- MD stock market / Audits 001 / MD investees
Letias Caldari JAFA Trade and Manufacturing Cooperative	Posted - 2010.02.01 23:08:00 - [100] I would also be very keen to do this :) _____________________________ Originally by: Damini Frostmane Sex isn't sex unless one of you is crying afterwards :-)
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2010.02.02 07:23:00 - [101] Originally by: Letias I would also be very keen to do this :) Hey Letias, I am not quite sure who you are, I will add you to the list if you remain active on MD. ----------------------- MD stock market / Audits 001 / MD investees
Commercant Epique	Posted - 2010.02.25 17:14:00 - [102] I am looking for an auditor for my current bond. I would like to have the audit done before tommorrow if possible. If you are interested please let me know here or in-game.
AtreusDK1	Posted - 2010.02.25 18:15:00 - [103] Hello, my name is Atreus. I am a bit new in Eve, but i am here to stay, I love the game and all its possibilities, especially in the market section. I am from Denmark (1 Hour behind Eve time), 18 years old, and currently studying on a 3 year long youth education, called an HTX (Higher Technical Exam). We are using laptops on my school, which means that I will be available from around 7 in the morning, to as late in the evening as needed. So this is the deal, I got a lot of spare time on my hands, and I would like to spend some of it on doing audits. I am used to writing reports on products, which includes analyzing the market, product and the need for the product. For my first audits I will basically be taking everything I can get, and for free, to prove myself to you, and get some reputation as a trustworthy auditor. Feel free to ask questions here, or contact me ingame.
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2010.02.25 18:37:00 - [104] Hey Atreus, it's the same deal, if I see you are active on the MD I will put you on the list. ----------------------- Phoenix Mutual Fund / MD stock market / Audits 001
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries United Corporations Of Modern Eve	Posted - 2010.02.25 18:37:00 - [105] I am gonna have brunch with caleb this sunday, do you live in copenhagen? You are more than welcome to join us, we could talk about auditing and eve in general, we have a lot of knowledge about eve, and could help you get kick started :)
AtreusDK1	Posted - 2010.02.25 18:47:00 - [106] Originally by: Cista2 Hey Atreus, it's the same deal, if I see you are active on the MD I will put you on the list. Okay, will try to, be, most of the time i am just reading post on here, but i will try to change it Originally by: Ji Sama I am gonna have brunch with caleb this sunday, do you live in copenhagen? You are more than welcome to join us, we could talk about auditing and eve in general, we have a lot of knowledge about eve, and could help you get kick started :) I would love to Ji Sama, but unfortunately I am from Jutland, thanks for the offer though
Vitamin B12 Tyrell Megacorporation	Posted - 2010.02.25 19:30:00 - [107] hey i would like to make some free audits. also already sent you a evemail.
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries United Corporations Of Modern Eve	Posted - 2010.02.25 19:38:00 - [108] No worries. Perhaps ill see you at Gankaton10, or the Eve-Meet-And-Greet in Jutland :)
Cista2 Jita Direct Sale	Posted - 2010.02.27 22:53:00 - [109] This list is still active and can take in new aspiring auditors. Some auditors that have started their career with doing free audits in Audits 001 are now with the new Auditing Fund program that Breaker77 initiated, where audits are paid for by MD player donations. The same can happen for any new auditor. ----------------------- Phoenix Mutual Fund / MD stock market / Audits 001
Lord Arbalest Amarr Zero Profits	Posted - 2010.02.27 23:09:00 - [110] Expressing an interest in doing a few free small audits depending on my free time at request. I audit as a profession in 'real' life - and so the concept is not alien to me.
Sugar Jugs Juggalicious	Posted - 2010.02.27 23:16:00 - [111] Bumping my offer to audit. :)
Cyaxares II	Posted - 2010.02.28 08:57:00 - [112] a few pieces of advice to new auditors: (1) read the API documentation on eve-id (2) check out every single tool using the API information you can find. Pay attention to the small differences (does it take transaction fees into account when calculating profit? does it average price information? where does it take asset values from? how does it treat blueprints, faction items, ...). At the end you should have for each XML page delivered by the API at least one tool you feel comfortable with (and that you know in its limitations). (3) don't forget the more "esoteric" information you can get using the API; standings and killmails for example will be unremarkable in 95% of the time - but you should be glad for the one time they give you a valuable clue. (4) You are a detective not an accountant - period. Tools assist you in your work but they don't do the work for you. (5) Don't let someone bully you into delivering the audit within <n> hours. It takes as long as it takes. Don't accept to audit lol-offerings or offerings that look like they won't get off the ground anyways. This only ties up auditor resources which should be better spent on promising looking offerings. People are not entitled to get an audit done, select wisely which audits you accept and which you decline.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.