Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 02:41:00 -
[1]
Hello All
This post is for the purpose to gauge interest in a new long term IPO by SHSG.
The base offering of this IPO would be in the 10b / 20b range. It would replace all of our current bonds sets.
The goal of this IPO would be for long term investment for the purpose of manufacturing from the BPO set that we have been building through bonds over the last months.
We think a modest return of 3% to start and a monthly buyback @ 94.998% of shares. We dont wish to offer the moon, but we fully expect over time and once our logistics are worked out, that investors could see much better returns.
This is a discussion phase only. Please reply with questions and comments.
Stealing Honest CEO SHSG
|
Lando Antilles
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 02:52:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Lando Antilles on 30/03/2011 02:52:12
Which BPO set are you working on?
Mind you I could probably have searched for this, but you could've linked to it too. ---------------------- My *locked* EVE CV |
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:02:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Lando Antilles Edited by: Lando Antilles on 30/03/2011 02:52:12
Which BPO set are you working on?
Mind you I could probably have searched for this, but you could've linked to it too.
Perhaps set is the wrong term. Over the last few sets of bonds we have been purchasing and researching BS/BC of all races. We have a set that we think is ready to use to build.
We are starting small. We are beginning to add Freighters to this list, but they will need a research period before we can build on them. Phase D will be our last bond set and includes the freighters & accessories.
SH
|
Candy Oshea
Amarr Techfree Investment Group
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:22:00 -
[4]
i have looked into manufacturing T1 BS etc in high sec.
Build cost(including mineral opportunity cost) is imo too high for BS manufacture to be competitive. tbh i can make more isk with BS buy orders than actually making them.
I have looked at Orca's as well and tbh profits are very slim on those also.
Haven't looked into freighters at all tho, but i suspect the same. slim margins, lots of hauling.
Would be interested in seeing some numbers in particular whether or not you factor in opportunity cost of minerals you have acquired from buy orders. also some characters with the skills for building. will you be willing to supply these?
Have you thought of tech 2 invention/manufacture?
Best of luck with your venture
Candy.
|
Kethas Protagonist
Protagonist Ventures
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:29:00 -
[5]
How/why did you finance the purchase and research of, but not manufacture off of, BC/BS BPOs with borrowed funds? Holding a BPO that's undergoing ME/PE research doesn't actually provide any income to pay bonds back with.
To be clear, I'm curious, not skeptical.
|
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:43:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Kethas Protagonist How/why did you finance the purchase and research of, but not manufacture off of, BC/BS BPOs with borrowed funds? Holding a BPO that's undergoing ME/PE research doesn't actually provide any income to pay bonds back with.
To be clear, I'm curious, not skeptical.
Ok im trying to understand what you typed.
If im correct you asked me why i financed the purchase and research of bpos, but didnt have any one manufacture off them?
Answer: I make my isk from trading not from manufacturing. The purchase and research of bpos was a solid place to put profits.
Now that they are getting researched to a level that is profitable, we think its time to look into manufacturing.
SH
|
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:56:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Candy Oshea i have looked into manufacturing T1 BS etc in high sec.
Build cost(including mineral opportunity cost) is imo too high for BS manufacture to be competitive. tbh i can make more isk with BS buy orders than actually making them.
I have looked at Orca's as well and tbh profits are very slim on those also.
Haven't looked into freighters at all tho, but i suspect the same. slim margins, lots of hauling.
Would be interested in seeing some numbers in particular whether or not you factor in opportunity cost of minerals you have acquired from buy orders. also some characters with the skills for building. will you be willing to supply these?
Have you thought of tech 2 invention/manufacture?
Best of luck with your venture
Candy.
I have not looked into T2 Invention/manufacture.
Correct me cause im probably wrong, but... high sec cost is the base cost?
I can build in 0.0, but any fees less than jita is " i mine it so its free" ?
|
Kethas Protagonist
Protagonist Ventures
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:58:00 -
[8]
I took
Originally by: Stealing Honest Over the last few sets of bonds we have been purchasing and researching BS/BC of all races.
to mean "Several previous bonds were executed in part to let me purchase and research BS/BC BPOs." This didn't make sense to me since owning and researching BPOs, by itself, doesn't produce any income to pay back a bond with, so it was pointless as the goal of a bond. You're saying that instead it would be more accurate to say "during some of my previous bonds, while trading profitably and paying back my investors that way, I've been purchasing and researching BS/BC BPOs on the side." That makes sense and answers my question.
|
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 04:02:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Kethas Protagonist I took
Originally by: Stealing Honest Over the last few sets of bonds we have been purchasing and researching BS/BC of all races.
to mean "Several previous bonds were executed in part to let me purchase and research BS/BC BPOs." This didn't make sense to me since owning and researching BPOs, by itself, doesn't produce any income to pay back a bond with, so it was pointless as the goal of a bond. You're saying that instead it would be more accurate to say "during some of my previous bonds, while trading profitably and paying back my investors that way, I've been purchasing and researching BS/BC BPOs on the side." That makes sense and answers my question.
No
Our bonds have been for the purpose of purchasing and researching BPO's. That is way we have made sure our 3rd parties have been aboe to research for use while the bonds are running.
The fact that it didnt make since to you i can overlook at this time.
|
Syds Sinclair
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 04:46:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Syds Sinclair on 30/03/2011 04:49:07
Originally by: Stealing Honest
Originally by: Kethas Protagonist I took
Originally by: Stealing Honest Over the last few sets of bonds we have been purchasing and researching BS/BC of all races.
to mean "Several previous bonds were executed in part to let me purchase and research BS/BC BPOs." This didn't make sense to me since owning and researching BPOs, by itself, doesn't produce any income to pay back a bond with, so it was pointless as the goal of a bond. You're saying that instead it would be more accurate to say "during some of my previous bonds, while trading profitably and paying back my investors that way, I've been purchasing and researching BS/BC BPOs on the side." That makes sense and answers my question.
No
Our bonds have been for the purpose of purchasing and researching BPO's. That is way we have made sure our 3rd parties have been aboe to research for use while the bonds are running.
The fact that it didnt make since to you i can overlook at this time.
..Lovely. I in fact wont overlook that you cannot see the logic in Kethas' train of thought and answer in a likewise logical way.
Now, would this be an accurate statement:
Quote: I have utilized bonds to purchase BPOs. I have researched the BPOs. I am paying back investors with profits from trading.
If you really do not understand the valid question, then I don't want you handling my isk.
If you do understand the valid question, but are just deflecting/spinning it to where you don't have to answer, I don't want you handling my isk.
|
|
Brock Nelson
Caldari T2 Technologies Unlimited SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 04:55:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Stealing Honest
The goal of this IPO would be for long term investment for the purpose of manufacturing from the BPO set that we have been building through bonds over the last months.
We think a modest return of 3% to start and a monthly buyback @ 94.998% of shares. We dont wish to offer the moon, but we fully expect over time and once our logistics are worked out, that investors could see much better returns.
Honestly, 3% is extremely low for an IPO. The main differences between IPO and Bonds is that IPO generally have a higher interest than bonds as well higher risk as it tends to rely on market condition.
Is 3% something you intend to set or aim for? If its something you intend to pay out, then its more of a bond than IPO.
Investor Relation | IPO Doc |
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:01:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Syds Sinclair
Originally by: Stealing Honest
Originally by: Kethas Protagonist I took
Originally by: Stealing Honest Over the last few sets of bonds we have been purchasing and researching BS/BC of all races.
to mean "Several previous bonds were executed in part to let me purchase and research BS/BC BPOs." This didn't make sense to me since owning and researching BPOs, by itself, doesn't produce any income to pay back a bond with, so it was pointless as the goal of a bond. You're saying that instead it would be more accurate to say "during some of my previous bonds, while trading profitably and paying back my investors that way, I've been purchasing and researching BS/BC BPOs on the side." That makes sense and answers my question.
No
Our bonds have been for the purpose of purchasing and researching BPO's. That is way we have made sure our 3rd parties have been aboe to research for use while the bonds are running.
The fact that it didnt make since to you i can overlook at this time.
..Lovely. I in fact wont overlook that you cannot see the logic in Kethas' train of thought and answer in a likewise logical way.
If you really do not understand the valid question, then I don't want you handling my isk.
If you do understand the valid question, but are just deflecting/spinning it to where you don't have to answer, I don't want you handling my isk.
lol i made an edit at the same time you posted.
As you your statement.....
The fact that he didnt understand is fine. I can understand if you dont wish to invest, and thats fine too.
It's as simple as i stated, all of our bonds where for the purpose of purchasing and researching BPO's. Our core business is from trade and always has been.
SH
|
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:04:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Brock Nelson
Originally by: Stealing Honest
The goal of this IPO would be for long term investment for the purpose of manufacturing from the BPO set that we have been building through bonds over the last months.
We think a modest return of 3% to start and a monthly buyback @ 94.998% of shares. We dont wish to offer the moon, but we fully expect over time and once our logistics are worked out, that investors could see much better returns.
Honestly, 3% is extremely low for an IPO. The main differences between IPO and Bonds is that IPO generally have a higher interest than bonds as well higher risk as it tends to rely on market condition.
Is 3% something you intend to set or aim for? If its something you intend to pay out, then its more of a bond than IPO.
3% is my base standard.
|
Candy Oshea
Amarr Techfree Investment Group
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:05:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Stealing Honest
I have not looked into T2 Invention/manufacture.
Correct me cause im probably wrong, but... high sec cost is the base cost?
I can build in 0.0, but any fees less than jita is " i mine it so its free" ?
Ill give you an example & hopefully alot of others will learn also. (excluding sales taxes, & brokers fees as they are variable)
Quote: Blueprint: Stealing honest Frigate 4000
Bill of materials - 100,000 tritanium
Market: Highest Buy order price for tritanium is 3.00 isk Lowest Sell order price For tritanium is 3.60 isk.
The actual cost of the tritanium is: 300,000. The opportunity cost is 360,000. The potential profit from selling/"Flipping" raw minerals is 60,000. (again excluding fees)
The highest Buy order price for Stealing honest Frigate 4000: 250,000 The lowest Sell order price of Stealing honest Frigate 4000: 356,000
so depending on how you calculate your profits, building this frigate is a loss of 4,000 using opportunity cost, & a "profit" of 56,000 if not including the opportunity cost.
i suspect alot of builders out there use the latter as there basis for "profit" & while technically it is still pure profit, it could be higher & require less energy by simply flipping the tritanium at 3.6
Hope this clears my point up.
Cheers,
Candy.
|
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:10:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Candy Oshea
Originally by: Stealing Honest
I have not looked into T2 Invention/manufacture.
Correct me cause im probably wrong, but... high sec cost is the base cost?
I can build in 0.0, but any fees less than jita is " i mine it so its free" ?
Ill give you an example & hopefully alot of others will learn also. (excluding sales taxes, & brokers fees as they are variable)
Quote: Blueprint: Stealing honest Frigate 4000
Bill of materials - 100,000 tritanium
Market: Highest Buy order price for tritanium is 3.00 isk Lowest Sell order price For tritanium is 3.60 isk.
The actual cost of the tritanium is: 300,000. The opportunity cost is 360,000. The potential profit from selling/"Flipping" raw minerals is 60,000. (again excluding fees)
The highest Buy order price for Stealing honest Frigate 4000: 250,000 The lowest Sell order price of Stealing honest Frigate 4000: 356,000
so depending on how you calculate your profits, building this frigate is a loss of 4,000 using opportunity cost, & a "profit" of 56,000 if not including the opportunity cost.
i suspect alot of builders out there use the latter as there basis for "profit" & while technically it is still pure profit, it could be higher & require less energy by simply flipping the tritanium at 3.6
Hope this clears my point up.
Cheers,
Candy.
Yes it does. I will need to look at this very close.
Thanks
|
Brock Nelson
Caldari T2 Technologies Unlimited SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:16:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Stealing Honest
Originally by: Brock Nelson
Originally by: Stealing Honest
The goal of this IPO would be for long term investment for the purpose of manufacturing from the BPO set that we have been building through bonds over the last months.
We think a modest return of 3% to start and a monthly buyback @ 94.998% of shares. We dont wish to offer the moon, but we fully expect over time and once our logistics are worked out, that investors could see much better returns.
Honestly, 3% is extremely low for an IPO. The main differences between IPO and Bonds is that IPO generally have a higher interest than bonds as well higher risk as it tends to rely on market condition.
Is 3% something you intend to set or aim for? If its something you intend to pay out, then its more of a bond than IPO.
3% is my base standard.
So, its a bond then
Investor Relation | IPO Doc |
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:21:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Brock Nelson
Originally by: Stealing Honest
Originally by: Brock Nelson
Originally by: Stealing Honest
The goal of this IPO would be for long term investment for the purpose of manufacturing from the BPO set that we have been building through bonds over the last months.
We think a modest return of 3% to start and a monthly buyback @ 94.998% of shares. We dont wish to offer the moon, but we fully expect over time and once our logistics are worked out, that investors could see much better returns.
Honestly, 3% is extremely low for an IPO. The main differences between IPO and Bonds is that IPO generally have a higher interest than bonds as well higher risk as it tends to rely on market condition.
Is 3% something you intend to set or aim for? If its something you intend to pay out, then its more of a bond than IPO.
3% is my base standard.
So, its a bond then
Nope it will be a public share offering with a base 3% return, if launched.
|
Lando Antilles
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:27:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Lando Antilles on 30/03/2011 05:27:33
Originally by: Brock Nelson The main differences between IPO and Bonds is that IPO generally have a higher interest than bonds
no.
Originally by: Brock Nelson as well higher risk.
in RL, yes. in EVE, they are both easily scammable
the distinction is really whether the investor owns part of the company or if the company is in the investor's debt. I thought this had been covered before. ---------------------- My *locked* EVE CV |
Brock Nelson
Caldari T2 Technologies Unlimited SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:30:00 -
[19]
An IPO shares all of the profit with the shareholders regardless of how much profit there is. It could be 9%, 20% or 0%. Investors of IPOs must understand that there could be no profit for the period which is basically what makes it IPO.
So what happens if you didn't generate enough profit which falls below 3%?
Investor Relation | IPO Doc |
Brock Nelson
Caldari T2 Technologies Unlimited SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:34:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Lando Antilles Edited by: Lando Antilles on 30/03/2011 05:27:33
Originally by: Brock Nelson The main differences between IPO and Bonds is that IPO generally have a higher interest than bonds
no.
I'm going to disagree with you here, the idea behind IPO is that all of the profit goes back to shareholders or is reinvested (which raises the value of shares) whereas in a bond, a set interest must be paid back to investors.
IPO generally have a higher risk mainly due to the fact that its relying on market condition. Take my IPO for example, PI market could easily become unprofitable but that's something investors is aware of. Bond do not rely on market condition, it relies on the bond manager's ability to generate enough isk to pay the set interest.
Stealing Honest is setting a base, this implies Bond more so than IPO.
Investor Relation | IPO Doc |
|
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:35:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Brock Nelson An IPO shares all of the profit with the shareholders regardless of how much profit there is. It could be 9%, 20% or 0%. Investors of IPOs must understand that there could be no profit for the period which is basically what makes it IPO.
So what happens if you didn't generate enough profit which falls below 3%?
No thats not true.
An IPO means the shareholders own part of the company. My last IPO ran at 15% min but paid much higher returns per div cycle.
What im offering is a Min 3% per div cycle to start.
|
Lando Antilles
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:50:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Brock Nelson An IPO shares all of the profit with the shareholders regardless of how much profit there is. It could be 9%, 20% or 0%. Investors of IPOs must understand that there could be no profit for the period which is basically what makes it IPO.
True Brock. There are typically no guarantees with IPO dividends. When they are successful ventures here in EVE, they do tend to pay out better than fixed bonds, I'll give you that.
SH, I would be wary of setting a min dividend for an IPO. If you're Intel and have a proven track record, that's more doable. Also such a 'guarantee' tends to blur the line between debt and equity financing. This is one of my MD pet peeves.
---------------------- My *locked* EVE CV |
Brock Nelson
Caldari T2 Technologies Unlimited SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:57:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Brock Nelson on 30/03/2011 06:03:24
Originally by: Stealing Honest
Originally by: Brock Nelson An IPO shares all of the profit with the shareholders regardless of how much profit there is. It could be 9%, 20% or 0%. Investors of IPOs must understand that there could be no profit for the period which is basically what makes it IPO.
So what happens if you didn't generate enough profit which falls below 3%?
No thats not true.
An IPO means the shareholders own part of the company. My last IPO ran at 15% min but paid much higher returns per div cycle.
My suggestion is this: Make it completely public, 100% IPO with no set interest/dividend payment amount. This way, you're not subjected to making an x-amount of isk to pay to shareholders. The pressure will be off of you to make certain amount of isk.
What im offering is a Min 3% per div cycle to start.
Either the company is wholly owned by shareholders or is privately owned. There is no hybrid. IPO converts the privately owned corps into publicly owned.
Investor Relation | IPO Doc |
Brock Nelson
Caldari T2 Technologies Unlimited SRS.
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 06:04:00 -
[24]
My suggestion is this: Make it completely public, 100% IPO with no set interest/dividend payment amount. This way, you're not subjected to making an x-amount of isk to pay to shareholders. The pressure will be off of you to make certain amount of isk.
Investor Relation | IPO Doc |
Lando Antilles
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 06:11:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Brock Nelson My suggestion is this: Make it completely public, 100% IPO with no set interest/dividend payment amount.
+1
Originally by: Brock Nelson This way, you're not subjected to making an x-amount of isk to pay to shareholders. The pressure will be off of you to make certain amount of isk.
umm... is that the work ethic you're using w/ T24U ?
In a public company (albeit one in a regulated economy) CEO's and directors do have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders. So, it's not really completely laissez faire. ---------------------- My *locked* EVE CV |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 08:27:00 -
[26]
Quote:
Nope it will be a public share offering with a base 3% return, if launched.
EvE does not implement preferred shares (yet).
In order to give an interest rate yet to become a public corporation you may check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convertible_bond convertible bonds out.
Quote:
Either the company is wholly owned by shareholders or is privately owned. There is no hybrid. IPO converts the privately owned corps into publicly owned.
They may always create a subsidiary and issue shares out of it.
Auditing | Research | 3rd Party | Collateral Holding | EvE RL Charity |
trance atlas
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 11:36:00 -
[27]
so you want to take out x amount to pay off current investors correct?
if the above is true would you just be paying back the original investment amount, or the original investment amount plus % of interest gained, or original investment + all assumed interest .
collateral?
long term = ?
|
Roguehalo
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 12:35:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Roguehalo on 30/03/2011 12:35:36
What is your current nav and will you be having an audit to confirm the figure?
edit : spelling
|
Lauren Hellfury
Full Pocket Aggro
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 13:53:00 -
[29]
Whilst I can't speak directly for SH I believe that the following is correct and will help to clear up a couple of issues raised whilst he is sleeping
/whiteknight
When he talks about replacing current bonds it is, as can be seen from his previous postings, simply that he will be paying off all current bonds and switching to a single IPO. The isk raised from the IPO will not be used to pay off existing bonds.
This is not a refinancing but a shift in position.
The choice of IPO is down to the narrower margins involved and the desire for it to be self sufficient rather than drawing isk away from the trading that he does. The payments needing to be made are going to be, at minimum, between 3b and 6b per month. If it were to be a short term offering then a bond would have been easier but with a fixed term bond you need to have created the bond value in profit after interest has been accounted for.
By going the IPO route it allows the manufacturing to be set up separately from his other activities and will generate additional income. Once the initial funding has been accumulated through profit retention then there is the option of taking it back into private ownership or continuing.
If it is successful then I would envisage this being an ongoing thing with the retained profit being used to expand.
When we talk about the dividend payments here it is very easy to combine that with Brocks belief that all profit should be returned as dividends. Just change how the profit is calculated.
Whilst that may seem a little scammy from some perspectives it is actually a very workable position. You agree to return all net profit to the shareholders. Net profit is then simply the gross profit minus all trading fees (broker/tax), isk paid as management fees (which could be a percentage of the gross profit), isk used for other purposes (additional asset purchases, loans or anything else). It's just a case of how you do the accounting, for simplicities sake it is often easier to just declare a percentage of profit to be returned as dividends so that the rest can remain fluid.
/whiteknight
|
Stealing Honest
Stealing Honest Speculation Group LLC
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 14:27:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Lauren Hellfury Whilst I can't speak directly for SH I believe that the following is correct and will help to clear up a couple of issues raised whilst he is sleeping
/whiteknight
When he talks about replacing current bonds it is, as can be seen from his previous postings, simply that he will be paying off all current bonds and switching to a single IPO. The isk raised from the IPO will not be used to pay off existing bonds.
This is not a refinancing but a shift in position.
The choice of IPO is down to the narrower margins involved and the desire for it to be self sufficient rather than drawing isk away from the trading that he does. The payments needing to be made are going to be, at minimum, between 3b and 6b per month. If it were to be a short term offering then a bond would have been easier but with a fixed term bond you need to have created the bond value in profit after interest has been accounted for.
By going the IPO route it allows the manufacturing to be set up separately from his other activities and will generate additional income. Once the initial funding has been accumulated through profit retention then there is the option of taking it back into private ownership or continuing.
If it is successful then I would envisage this being an ongoing thing with the retained profit being used to expand.
When we talk about the dividend payments here it is very easy to combine that with Brocks belief that all profit should be returned as dividends. Just change how the profit is calculated.
Whilst that may seem a little scammy from some perspectives it is actually a very workable position. You agree to return all net profit to the shareholders. Net profit is then simply the gross profit minus all trading fees (broker/tax), isk paid as management fees (which could be a percentage of the gross profit), isk used for other purposes (additional asset purchases, loans or anything else). It's just a case of how you do the accounting, for simplicities sake it is often easier to just declare a percentage of profit to be returned as dividends so that the rest can remain fluid.
/whiteknight
I only have a few minutes to respond, but ill be back in about 6 hours.
What Lauren said here is the basic frame that i had been talking about for the last couple days before opening this discussion thread.
Also to answer a couple fast questions: Nav 25b+ Collateral: The BPO's can be locked or 3rd partied, i can work from copies.
This IPO would not be used to pay off current bond investors. Those bonds are running fine on their own and will pay off before we launch any type of IPO.
Ok i have to run, ill check back in about 6 hours to answer more questions.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |