Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.07 19:07:00 -
[1]
Note: I have not made 3rd party arrangements for this bond yet. Bond will not be offered if suitable 3rd party involvement can not be found.
Objective: I am looking to increase my position in Technetium. To do this I am prepared to offer a fixed return ~0% risk bond to run for one or two months while we see where Tech is heading.
Proposal: Purchasing Phase: 500k units of Technetium from my own stock will be sent to the 3rd party. Once that security is confirmed reservations will be accepted in 2 blocks, one of 25b isk and one of 35b isk that I will use to buy more Technetium. Once the first block is spent that Technetium will be sent to the 3rd party and the next block will be accepted. This way the amount of public ISK in my hands is continuously less then the security in place.
Waiting Phase: Once final purchased volume of Technetium is known calculations will be made to determine the ratio of my assets (500k Tech) vs the Bond assets (60B isk in Tech). If Technetium drops to the point where my 500k units + Bond assets is approaching being unable to cover the value of the bond + interest the stockpile will be sold at a loss OR I will send additional technetium to back the security.
Exit Phase: Technetium will be transferred back to me 250k units at a time OR the 3rd party can undertake the selling process. Investors will be paid their investment + 6% per month. If the bond runs over a month interest will be calculated to compound monthly with partial months representing the corresponding fraction of 6%.
Risks: First let me note that all 500k of my units will compensate 100% of any loss and investors will be paid! Likewise if Tech rises the bond will eventually liquidate and investors will be paid! There are only two serious risks to this bond. The first is that tech drops so fast that it is unable to be sold fast enough and the Bond incurs a significant loss. If this happens I give my word that I will attempt to repay the losses on this bond to the best of my ability (I have more assets then 500k tech). As you can see by my own investment in this I am stringently trying to avoid this scenario. The second risk is that the 3rd party turns scam. I have a pretty short list of people I am willing to approach about this (when I get home from work I'll start making arrangements), and we all assume the risk of trusting the 3rd party together.
Procedure: Make reservations or ask questions in this thread. DO NOT SEND ME ANY ISK. Isk will only be sent in blocks to eliminate any question of scam. When you make a reservation your name will be placed in the appropriate block and when the time comes I will post and evemail to inform you to send ISK. If ISK is not sent within 3 days your position will be opened for a new investor.
Final Notes: If, by the time this bond is set up and ready to move, Tech has jumped significantly this bond will be cancelled. If events take place that make me thing investing in Tech further for the next month or so will turn out badly this bond will be cancelled. I reserve the right to liquidate the bond at any time. I will make one concession: If I liquidate this bond more then 3 days after all funds are collected but less then one month I will still pay one months interest.
Block 1: [EMPTY] Block 2: [EMPTY]
|
SetrakDark
Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.10.07 19:20:00 -
[2]
I also wanted to do this, but I just dont have the time or patience to deal with it. It is a great idea for re-portioning the the risk and return out to people with differing preferences.
Good luck.
|
Saidin Thor
|
Posted - 2010.10.07 19:30:00 -
[3]
Pending a trusted third party I'd be willing to throw 2B into this.
|
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.07 19:54:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Saidin Thor Pending a trusted third party I'd be willing to throw 2B into this.
Just to reiterate - this bond will not proceed at all unless a solid choice 3rd party is arranged. I'll be dedicating more time to making 3rd party arrangements later tonight as time permits me.
|
Morolen1
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.10.07 22:23:00 -
[5]
Put me down for 1b good sir. ----- I'm a Caldari Nationalist, Fascist is *Such* an ugly word. |
volhar
|
Posted - 2010.10.07 22:28:00 -
[6]
I think its a great idea, but just to play devil's advocate: wouldn't people be better off simply buying the stuff themselves? I mean, sure, your way mitigates the risk should tech crash, but to invest in the first place you'd have to be pretty convinced it won't
|
Betty Boom
Caldari SPECTRE Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.10.07 22:33:00 -
[7]
Originally by: volhar I think its a great idea, but just to play devil's advocate: wouldn't people be better off simply buying the stuff themselves? I mean, sure, your way mitigates the risk should tech crash, but to invest in the first place you'd have to be pretty convinced it won't
It is an NC alt, that try not to sell their Technium. Simple - the Idea is to find people to help stockpile it.
|
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 00:06:00 -
[8]
Originally by: volhar I think its a great idea, but just to play devil's advocate: wouldn't people be better off simply buying the stuff themselves? I mean, sure, your way mitigates the risk should tech crash, but to invest in the first place you'd have to be pretty convinced it won't
Mitigates is an understatement. My way is a guaranteed payment regardless of whether Tech makes a profit. I still pay out if it crashes, stagnates, or rises only a little. The theory is that there are enough people out there who have isk they can/will invest in a low risk bond that maybe can't justify the risk or effort required to trade commodities. Even big investors with positions in Tech may still look to spread their wealth to as many bonds or commodities as possible. There are numerous reasons to invest in a zero-risk 6% return even when there is market activity like Technetium going on in Jita.
I'm not 100% convinced Tech won't crash, but I'm making a bet. I made that bet when I bought 500k units. If you want to bet with me then please do, as that will make me money too.
|
Hinata
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 00:51:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Hinata on 08/10/2010 00:52:44 Your bond offer is hardly collaterized since the collateral is the same you will be investing in. If technetium crashes your collateral will crash in value along with it therefore making the ability to pay back investors with that collateral impossible till Technetium comes up again.
Which means that any potential investor might aswell do such an investment themselves since they will then get the whole profit and the same loss if it goes wrong
|
Block Ukx
Forge Laboratories
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 00:54:00 -
[10]
Originally by: PinkFish
Objective: I am looking to increase my position in Technetium. To do this I am prepared to offer a fixed return no risk bond to run for one or two months while we see where Tech is heading.
Proposal: Purchasing Phase: 500k units of Technetium from my own stock will be sent to the 3rd party. Once that security is confirmed reservations will be accepted in 2 blocks, one of 25b isk and one of 35b isk that I will use to buy more Technetium. Once the first block is spent that Technetium will be sent to the 3rd party and the next block will be accepted. This way the amount of public ISK in my hands is continuously less then the security in place.
Waiting Phase: Once final purchased volume of Technetium is known calculations will be made to determine the ratio of my assets (500k Tech) vs the Bond assets (60B isk in Tech). If Technetium drops to the point where my 500k units + Bond assets is approaching being unable to cover the value of the bond + interest the stockpile will be sold at a loss OR I will send additional technetium to back the security.
Exit Phase: Technetium will be transferred back to me 250k units at a time OR the 3rd party can undertake the selling process. Investors will be paid their investment + 6% per month. If the bond runs over a month interest will be calculated to compound monthly with partial months representing the corresponding fraction of 6%.
Risks: First let me note that all 500k of my units will compensate 100% of any loss and investors will be paid! Likewise if Tech rises the bond will eventually liquidate and investors will be paid! There are only two serious risks to this bond. The first is that tech drops so fast that it is unable to be sold fast enough and the Bond incurs a significant loss. If this happens I give my word that I will attempt to repay the losses on this bond to the best of my ability (I have more assets then 500k tech). As you can see by my own investment in this I am stringently trying to avoid this scenario. The second risk is that the 3rd party turns scam. I have a pretty short list of people I am willing to approach about this (when I get home from work I'll start making arrangements), and we all assume the risk of trusting the 3rd party together.
Procedure: Make reservations or ask questions in this thread. DO NOT SEND ME ANY ISK. Isk will only be sent in blocks to eliminate any question of scam. When you make a reservation your name will be placed in the appropriate block and when the time comes I will post and evemail to inform you to send ISK. If ISK is not sent within 3 days your position will be opened for a new investor.
Final Notes: If, by the time this bond is set up and ready to move, Tech has jumped significantly this bond will be cancelled. If events take place that make me thing investing in Tech further for the next month or so will turn out badly this bond will be cancelled. I reserve the right to liquidate the bond at any time. I will make one concession: If I liquidate this bond more then 3 days after all funds are collected but less then one month I will still pay one months interest.
edit: If Tech sits low enough that my 500k doesn't cover the 35b in block 2 I will send additional ISK to 3rd party to cover the difference before block two starts.
This is to confirm that IÆll be acting as a third party to this bond.
As delineated in the business plan, IÆm in possession of 500,000 units of Technetium that will be used as collateral for block #1.
BSAC Mineral Market Manipulation (MinMa) Information Desk |
|
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 02:15:00 -
[11]
I'd like to say thanks to Block Ukx for running 3rd party on this bond. I approached him first as the mineral exchange seemed like a good fit for what I'm trying to do.
The nature of my bond is that interest is added on to the total value of the holdings and will be paid on completion. If this poses a problem I can make the necessary changes, but it's much simpler this way. I'm expecting to hold Tech for 1-2 months and then pay out. However, if at that time it looks like there is still a lot of ground to be covered I'll approach investors about options to extend. IE, I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.
Another change is that Block Ukx has offered to do a small audit as necessary of the bond progress. If anyone sees a need for this I am not opposed to any sort of audit, but I can't see what the value would be at this point when assets are held 3rd party. Just let me know what information you need and I'll make sure it gets verified.
Let me say one more thing to try and generate some interest in this bond. If you set aside the notion that this bond is based on Technetium, just consider that this is a 6% return on a bond with full (130%) collateral. Tech has a long way to drop before the return gets threatened, and I have no interest in waiting until I lose 30B to sell. I'm fully prepared to take a heavy loss if this goes south.
|
Krythas
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 03:34:00 -
[12]
Put me down for 1bn, thanks.
|
Annika Petrovich
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 05:32:00 -
[13]
Given that technetium is a recent topic of heavy speculative discussion on MD and a rather heavily speculation prone commodity in game are you willing to submit to an audit?
I'm interested in uncovering a few pieces of data: first, are you an alt? If so, whose alt? How much technetium do you personally hold? Who, if anyone, have you direct traded with recently? Who, if anyone, have you had private contracts with recently? And finally, how much technetium do you, personally, hold?
I've spent a bit of time looking at technetium as a personal speculative investment - in light of your bond I'm tempted to dump 30b of my own money into buying tech as a medium term personal investment - the real question in my mind is are you serious about running a bond or are you here purely to drive buy traffic to tech?
I'll admit, on a jump from 65k to 75k I could make roughly 15% on my own investment - over the secured 8% I could make by investing with you. The only question remaining in my mind is whether or not you have 30b in tech you're trying to dump on the market after driving traffic ;)
|
RAW23
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 07:04:00 -
[14]
Edited by: RAW23 on 08/10/2010 07:13:47 This is a good idea and I would be willing to put a few billion in if certain factors can be worked out. My main concern is that the collateral provides little security in the case of a technetium crash (highly unlikely as I believe such a scenario to be) if you go for a two tranche approach. Would you consider limiting yourself to a single investment block as this would significantly increase the security for investors? If not, and I can understand reasons for not doing so, will you have an audit done to ensure that you do have the resources to repay investors in the case of a crash?
Secondly, I'd like the details for the sell off phase to be a bit clearer. I would like to know either that Block will be, as opposed to may be, carrying out the liquidation or that if you will be doing it that you will put up a surety bond against each chunk of 250k units as you receive it. I'm sure you understand the concern here as just passing them over to you will mean that 15-20bil of this loan will be entirely uncollateralised for a time and opens up a scam risk on your part as well as the speculative risk.
Edit - Actually, looking at Tech prices this morning, has the moment passed?
|
Ambo
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 07:19:00 -
[15]
It's a nice idea but imo the (eventual) rise of tech is so certain that this doesn't really make sense for me as an investor.
Lets say, for the sake of argument, that tech is currently valued at 60k pu. If I simply buy tech rather than investing in you then as long as tech is over 67k pu at the end of two months (or I sell it at some higher price in between) then I'll have made more money.
Admittedly, your bond does mitigate the risk of a crash in tech prices, I just don't see that as being likely enough to warrant the investment. Plus there is the risk of scam which, while it may be covered by the collateral, would still represent an opportunity cost.
Good luck but this one isn't for me. --------------------------------------
|
Annika Petrovich
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 07:23:00 -
[16]
Originally by: RAW23 Edited by: RAW23 on 08/10/2010 07:13:47 Edit - Actually, looking at Tech prices this morning, has the moment passed?
Given that this was very likely a "drive traffic to tech" post, rather than an actual bond, quite possibly yes.
Let's see where this goes over the weekend.
|
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 09:15:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Annika Petrovich Given that technetium is a recent topic of heavy speculative discussion on MD and a rather heavily speculation prone commodity in game are you willing to submit to an audit?
Yes. I'm perfectly willing to get audited to verify whatever is asked of me. What would you like the auditor to look for? Quote: I'm interested in uncovering a few pieces of data: first, are you an alt? If so, whose alt? How much technetium do you personally hold? Who, if anyone, have you direct traded with recently? Who, if anyone, have you had private contracts with recently?
I quit my old main following having an account hacked (hidden number) years ago. I am only interested in the market side of the game now and do not want to publicly divulge who that main was. It may be something I could reveal to an auditor, but most old players (auditors) still have the alliance ties that I am trying to keep dead.
All I am now is a network of alts. I lack any defining character as my identity. I'll save the details for an auditor as alt-network structure reveals too much about trade practice that is unrelated to this bond.
My private contracts all relate to the logistics of my personal operation. I'm not strongly connected with anyone of importance to MD.
I have another 120k units of Technetium I am holding back from this bond for really no thought out reason. Thats about as heavy a position in Tech as I can afford atm without risk of affecting my other operations. Quote: I've spent a bit of time looking at technetium as a personal speculative investment - in light of your bond I'm tempted to dump 30b of my own money into buying tech as a medium term personal investment - the real question in my mind is are you serious about running a bond or are you here purely to drive buy traffic to tech?
I'm very serious about running this bond. Establishing a method for taking leveraged positions seems like a worthwhile use of my time financially, and hopefully also sets a good example for MD. I hope that a few big players might take note of what I'm trying to do and invest on the merits of this bond to really fill this up. Quote: I'll admit, on a jump from 65k to 75k I could make roughly 15% on my own investment - over the secured 8% I could make by investing with you. The only question remaining in my mind is whether or not you have 30b in tech you're trying to dump on the market after driving traffic ;)
The big question on Technetium is CCP. They've already given an indicator to "fixing" the bottleneck, adding some spice to the market.
I do have 30+b in tech that I fully intend to dump on the market when the time is right. I'm not making any promises to anyone outside of investors in this bond. That said, if market conditions due to manipulation (thanks to this thread, in part) make entry too risky I won't collect isk for the bond and this will all get cancelled.
|
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 09:47:00 -
[18]
Originally by: RAW23 Edited by: RAW23 on 08/10/2010 07:13:47 This is a good idea and I would be willing to put a few billion in if certain factors can be worked out. My main concern is that the collateral provides little security in the case of a technetium crash (highly unlikely as I believe such a scenario to be) if you go for a two tranche approach.
Technetium has to lose nearly 1/3rd of its current value for this bond to risk any level of failure for investors. Remember that I have 30+b riding here and I simply will not allow it to go that far without selling. I'm self-employed and have the ability to monitor prices throughout the day and can dedicate time to updating orders as need be. Quote: Would you consider limiting yourself to a single investment block as this would significantly increase the security for investors? If not, and I can understand reasons for not doing so, will you have an audit done to ensure that you do have the resources to repay investors in the case of a crash?
The only reason for the separate blocks is to assure the community that I am not scamming. I will never have more public isk then collateral as things are set up now. Here's what I'll do to accommodate your concern: If this bond does not attract considerable attention during the next day or two I'll reduce to one block of 30b.
Even in the event of a crash Tech will still retain some value. I'm willing to get audited, but first I'd like to know what personal NAV you think is reasonable for this. I'm probably only worth 70-80b total right now including my Tech holdings. If this is below the threshold you feel necessary then I'll spare the auditor the pain of seeing my convoluted mess of a history. Quote: Secondly, I'd like the details for the sell off phase to be a bit clearer. I would like to know either that Block will be, as opposed to may be, carrying out the liquidation or that if you will be doing it that you will put up a surety bond against each chunk of 250k units as you receive it. I'm sure you understand the concern here as just passing them over to you will mean that 15-20bil of this loan will be entirely uncollateralised for a time and opens up a scam risk on your part as well as the speculative risk.
Winding up all assets besides the current block are held by BSAC. Currently BSAC is in possession of 500k units of Tech that I provided (verified a few posts up). This means that when I accept 25b isk there is ~32b in collateral. Before I accept the second block all Tech from block one will be sent to BSAC. When the time for the second block comes if my 500k units of Tech are not worth more then Block 2 I will temporarily send BSAC enough ISK to cover the difference before any isk is accepted. At no point will my access to public ISK exceed my personal collateral in this bond. Quote: Edit - Actually, looking at Tech prices this morning, has the moment passed?
I'm looking for Tech to reach up a bit more still and am still looking to buy at current prices.
|
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 10:02:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Ambo It's a nice idea but imo the (eventual) rise of tech is so certain that this doesn't really make sense for me as an investor.
Lets say, for the sake of argument, that tech is currently valued at 60k pu. If I simply buy tech rather than investing in you then as long as tech is over 67k pu at the end of two months (or I sell it at some higher price in between) then I'll have made more money.
Admittedly, your bond does mitigate the risk of a crash in tech prices, I just don't see that as being likely enough to warrant the investment. Plus there is the risk of scam which, while it may be covered by the collateral, would still represent an opportunity cost.
Good luck but this one isn't for me.
The certainty of Tech rise is contingent on CCP not fixing the bottleneck. They have shown their intention to fix exactly this. I believe there is isk to be made still before any change would be enacted, but an eventual crash is likely.
It has always been the case that assuming your own risk and making your own investments can pay better then a public bond. In spite of this many people invest in public offerings over the years.
I don't see where I've left room for scam risk to be an issue- If I scam I will lose ISK. BSAC could scam, but with as much work as Block as done to build up that business over the years, plus the natural synergy of commodities investments being tied to him, I have no doubt that he is the best possible 3rd party choice.
|
Block Ukx
Forge Laboratories
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 11:12:00 -
[20]
Originally by: PinkFish Currently BSAC is in possession of 500k units of Tech that I provided (verified a few posts up)
That is correct. I would like to add thet the 500,000 units of Tech is located in Jita.
BSAC Mineral Market Manipulation (MinMa) Information Desk |
|
RAW23
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 18:57:00 -
[21]
If you can fill the first block I'll put a billion in subject to the security conditions re: handling of public isk in your previous post. Might increase that depending on my liquidity as the bond fills.
Also, you mention several times CCP's intention to 'fix' the tech bottleneck. Do you have a source for that that you could link?
|
Kaaii
Caldari KaaiiNet Holding Executor Corp
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 19:14:00 -
[22]
2Bil towards block one
let me know when and I'll see to it.
According to Oveur, existing LSAA's already anchored will stay there. kieron Director of Community Relations,
|
flakeys
DRAMA Inc Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 19:58:00 -
[23]
i¦ll take 10 bille.
|
kiall Toz
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 20:12:00 -
[24]
Put me down for 3 billion
|
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 21:54:00 -
[25]
flakeys: Your original reserve was for 10 when kiall reserved 3b. If its alright with you I've split you into 13b in the first block and 5b in the second block.
|
flakeys
DRAMA Inc Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 21:59:00 -
[26]
Originally by: PinkFish flakeys: Your original reserve was for 10 when kiall reserved 3b. If its alright with you I've split you into 13b in the first block and 5b in the second block.
Sure thing , i am currently back into trade with an alt.Well not trade more making use of opportunities but it means my cashreserve flows up and down like mad.Hence why i said i might increase my investment but my 18 B stands as a minimum investment.
|
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.08 23:10:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Hinata Edited by: Hinata on 08/10/2010 00:52:44 Your bond offer is hardly collaterized since the collateral is the same you will be investing in. If technetium crashes your collateral will crash in value along with it therefore making the ability to pay back investors with that collateral impossible till Technetium comes up again.
Which means that any potential investor might aswell do such an investment themselves since they will then get the whole profit and the same loss if it goes wrong
I missed this post before or I would have addressed this concern earlier.
The structure of the bond protects against this eventuality by using both my collateral and the bond itself as collateral. If Tech drops the value of my stock decreases 3x as fast to compensate the loss of the public stock 100%. Tech has to drop to around 40k before public funds are in danger in any way.
|
PinkFish
|
Posted - 2010.10.09 14:04:00 -
[28]
Originally by: RAW23 If you can fill the first block I'll put a billion in subject to the security conditions re: handling of public isk in your previous post. Might increase that depending on my liquidity as the bond fills.
Also, you mention several times CCP's intention to 'fix' the tech bottleneck. Do you have a source for that that you could link?
From the Technetium thread:
Originally by: Claire Voyant Edited by: Claire Voyant on 30/09/2010 14:25:21 One moon produces 876K units per year, worth 70b+ isk. On the other hand they could drop 2400 units every day in random 0.0 systems for 365 days worth about 200M isk each.
Which one would raise the biggest stink? Remember that the devs said back in November that they would make small adjustments to the supply if it needed rebalancing, not another huge overhaul.
Messing with moons clearly says "we didn't know what the heck we we're doing the first time." While it may be clear to all of us that they didn't, admitting it is another matter.
From October 5, 2009:
Alchemy will be boosted
The profitability of alchemy and the initial values are all determined from current market value in reality (it is either profitable or not). With the above changes, alchemy reactions become unprofitable. The output will be changed, although this will need further tweaks to ensure there is an effective overflow pipe to respond to future market changes.
Future additional sources besides moons
Beyond Dominion, we are looking towards adding new sources of moon materials so that we will have a dynamic supply which can respond to the changing needs of the marketplace and help resolve the static supply issues we currently see. Some potential routes we have already mentioned previously here and are common suggestions on the forums. We are definitely looking hard at doing something cool here in the future along these lines.
If I had knowledge of a specific change at a specific date I probably wouldn't have the nerve to run this bond. But with a blanket 'we r b back 2 m35s up ur m00n m47s' (my confidence is expressed in the way I paraphrase) kind of a statement floating around I have a feeling CCP views any small changes made without warning as fair game.
|
Block Ukx
Forge Laboratories
|
Posted - 2010.10.09 15:11:00 -
[29]
Originally by: PinkFish
Block 1: (25b filled) Saidin Thor - 2b Morolen1 - 1b BSAC Exchange - 2b Krythas - 1b RAW23 - 1b Kaaii - 2b flakeys - 13b kiall Toz - 3b
Quoted for record keeping.
BSAC Mineral Market Manipulation (MinMa) Information Desk |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.10.09 17:07:00 -
[30]
Quote:
If I had knowledge of a specific change at a specific date I probably wouldn't have the nerve to run this bond. But with a blanket 'we r b back 2 m35s up ur m00n m47s' (my confidence is expressed in the way I paraphrase) kind of a statement floating around I have a feeling CCP views any small changes made without warning as fair game.
CCP are the hugest Market Maker we have in EvE. A simple flip of a switch and every market could crash or go to the sky. To keep economy functional before they were confident about their game balance models, they implemented hedges and market gimbal limits in the form of baskets and multiple alternate ways to generate stuff, usually with an equation solution that would impose limits beyond which it's nasty to keep going up or down.
Minerals and materials and probably more than I can imagine got their "alternates" that will flank or replace the main avenue in case it becomes economically too much or too little expensive.
The fundamental mechanisms behind all of this take RL years just to kick in or to be tuned, since the players act and react to counter them at their advantage. CCP themselves cannot know for sure if one faucet or sink is balanced in few weeks. Once made sure it needs a kick in some gear, they need to let it run for months and apply small changes (sometimes they bork it hard like for PI "release"). End result is: from the moment an economy looks it needs a change to when it happens, an undetermined and very long time might pass. Just look at minerals being left "free" after so many years that other MMOs had time to birth, live and die in the same timeframe.
- Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |