grunt1472
Divestiture Amalgamated
   |
Posted - 2007.01.10 04:55:00 -
[1]
Territorial alliances claim and protect space. Many of them build or acquire outposts, which provide a very convenient base of operations. If you attack a territorial alliance's space, especially its outpost systems, you are directly attacking that alliance's property and their home.
ISS has never and will never claim space to the exclusion of others. (Because the sovereignty mechanics are tied to POS resource consumption, ISS may show up in some systems as sovereignty holder; this is not a territorial claim, it is a prudent cost-cutting measure.)
ISS has built a number of outposts and has operated others. These outposts were not financed by ISS funds. They were paid for by investors in the various station IPOs. While some ISS members are undoubtedly also shareholders in the stations, it is commonly believed that the majority of dividend-paying outpost shares are owned outside of ISS. Despite having no direct ownership claim, many ISS corporations have lived in and operated from these ISS managed outposts.
The difference between ISS outposts and the rest is that for all practical purposes, the corporations who make their homes at ISS outposts are not landlords. They are much closer to renters. Besides pride and a general desire to drive off nasties, they have no vested interest in the outposts themselves. It is a place to dock and repair, but it does not belong to them.
By comparison, if one attacks, for example, an IAC outpost, one directly threatens not only the home and the livelihood of IAC pilots, but also what was a very substantial investment of time and ISK for many of those pilots. They're not fighting for someone else's property; they're fighting for their own. The same cannot be said for ISS pilots.
Because ISS has never had the means or desire to maintain a credible combat force to act as primary protectors of these outposts, the ISS business model depends on its neighbors being okay with its presence. And because the ISS corporations themselves don't actually have a dog in the race when it comes to ISS outpost operations, there is effectively no one who will actually fight back when the outposts are threatened.
Yes, mercs can be hired for a time, but mercs can't occupy and subdue. In theory the folks who owned the ISS shares were supposed to show up and protect the outposts that really belonged to them. In practice we've seen that apparently doesn't work. It appears to be more cost effective to just write off the investment than to risk further losses defending them.
The ISS outpost concept was a cool one, and appreciated by many pilots. But it can only work as long as the other alliances permit it to. That time appears to have ended. The trading-oriented ISS IPO may mark a new, non-outpost direction for ISS. But giving them any more outposts under any circumstances and protected by any agreements would be throwing good money after bad. |