| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ray McCormack
BIG
   |
Posted - 2007.05.07 11:35:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Votee
TS
Do you think its fair that you have 40% management fee, even after loosing 25-30B shareholder ISK?
regards,
Votee
I have the same question.
If STUFF made a big loss due to my mistake and say lost 30% of its value, I would eschew all salary until the NAV was back up to normal.
Tornsoul has plenty of money; I'd think such a thing would be expected, to convert one's salary into NAV.
I discussed this with TS. If we used our admin fee to shore up the equity loss it would amount to the same thing as us increasing our admin fee if collateral was sold for a profit. An option was also discussed whereby both dividends, admin fee and re-investment be used to shore up the equity (a la EMFI); but that is currently not within the business plan. At the moment, any gain or loss from the sale of collateral affects overall capital.
We could also follow extraneous activities to regain equity (as was suggested for FIN to increase security) but that may tie up ISK that could be needed for loans.
Now I'm not looking to get into an argument over what should have been done differently. I am also not interested in getting into a flaming match over how this information came to light. I am looking for viable options to rectify the current situation.
At best we're looking at a combination of all possible options.
| Get A Loan For That Must Have Ship / Module | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.10 19:33:00 -
[2]
How about you don't, and just keep the discussion sensible? I'm willing to listen to any point of view in an effort to achieve something.
| Get A Loan For That Must Have Ship / Module | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.10 20:42:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Rthor
Questions were asked. They were not answered.
Can you point out any unanswered questions to me and I'll get to them.
Originally by: Rthor
What do you mean "achieve something?" What exactly is the goal?
I want to come up with a viable proposal for regaining equity in an acceptable timeframe.
Originally by: Rthor
OK but you are not discussing.
But I am listening. I have also decided against replying to some suggestions above as I'm still fully investigating their possibilities.
| Get A Loan For That Must Have Ship / Module | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.10 22:58:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Rthor
First Two Paragraphs
The 'walls' you describe already exist. I regularly bounce collateral figures off various people as a test, I don't feel this needs to be a regulated procedure. Putting a percentage limit on loan size is also a limiting factor. I understand most of the above suggestions are aimed at erradicating any conflicts of interest, but one of the things you need to appreciate is the only default we have had was over a year ago. The fact we never had a defaulted loan in the recent months also speaks a little of our understanding of BPO value.
Originally by: Rthor
Third Paragraph
I understand the apprehension behind keeping ISK in a multi-purpose wallet. I have recently begun using an alt (Ray's Cat - the new BMBE CEO) as a storage vessel for a certain percentage of BMBE ISK. But keeping it all in one character's wallet is another major limiting factor. One of the biggest complaints we've had is the timely availability of ISK. That is why it is shared between myself and TS, so only one of us needs to be available at any one time.
Originally by: Rthor
Fourth Paragraph
A bunch of ideas in there I'm not sure have any correlation to our current situation. Having shares as a profit incentive has proved to not be a good idea. Ionia can explain more. The BMBE does not own a controlling share in the company.
Originally by: Rthor
Fifth Paragraph
I will poke TS to start including more figures in his reports.
A final note on releasing defaultor's details. When someone takes a loan with the BMBE they enter into it with complete confidentiality. We cannot break that confidentiality agreement just because we lost out due to a default (which under normal operations would not happen). If we were to benefit from a default and then still publicly humiliate the person it would be in bad taste. And we cannot have a double standard for naming defaultors. So, no, we will not name them as it stands.
| Get A Loan For That Must Have Ship / Module | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.11 08:29:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Verite Rendition
Uhh, this helps me how? Your suggestions just make the price of my shares go down even farther. I want them to go back up to where they belong.
It wouldn't drive share prices down. It's just using shares as a vehicle for the management fee.
It would drive down share prices. It would be doubling shares without doubling capital. And I don't see any benefit to using a share scheme rather than a profit split. Maybe I'm missing something.
Originally by: Shar Tegral
However the suggested sell off to cover the bpo value default could also potentially allow someone else to gain shareholder majority of BMBE. Even if this person couldn't vote in another CEO they could block any administrative "votes" BMBE would need. Might as well just ask them to make up the loss from their own pockets.
Again, we do not own a share majority. And we do not require administrative votes to go through in order for us to continue operating in the manner we wish.
| Get A Loan For That Must Have Ship / Module | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.11 08:33:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Balogh
Isn't the whole idea behind the corp wallet that everyone who has the appropriate roles (meaning, more than one character) has access?
There is only one character in the BMBE. And keeping BMBE ISK in the BIG corporation wallet will not happen. Possibly when divisional wallets come out we will employ the use of one only myself and TS have access to. That will allow us access to the same ISK and also alleviate Rthor's fears.
| Get A Loan For That Must Have Ship / Module | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.11 09:01:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Rthor
OK so I was really constructive and I still wholeheartedly disagree with how you do business.
And you are more than welcome to and I will listen to your disagrements. Just because I argue against your ideas at first does not mean I will always. You present an option to me and the logic is clear in your mind. I need to argue the ideas out first to ensure the logic is clear in my mind.
Originally by: Rthor
Moving some of the money sometimes to an alt is not a solution because it does not prove to you Ray that all the money is still in the bank. It has to be all and it has to be a permanent move to prove it that some money was not lost along the way. Yeah I hear you about the availability issue but somehow I dont think that either one of you is always on anyhow so if they are waiting anyhow maybe they can wait a little longer.
Perhaps divisional wallets will solve this problem as you see it. But in my mind the ability to have readily available ISK on multi-characters far outweighs the apparent risks. But I see how you feel having the ISK in a multi-purpose wallet could arise to a potential conflict of interest situation.
Originally by: Rthor
The naming of characters who default issue I just do not get TS's and Ray's logic.
The problem I see is that this happened a year ago. If we were to name defaultors then we should have named him at the time. We cannot just drop him in this ****storm that has developed because it is expedient.
| Get A Loan For That Must Have Ship / Module | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.13 18:48:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Eefrit
a) the date the loan was taken out
2006-05-21
Originally by: Eefrit
b) the dates (if any) of any interest payments
None.
Originally by: Eefrit
c) what the BPOs were valued at at the time (i.e. what loan to value was given)
Don't know.
Originally by: Eefrit
e) if the person is affiliated in any way with BIG or a close friend of anyone in BIG.
They are not affiliated with BIG in any way. They have never been in a corporation that is or has been affiliated with BIG. The CEO and Founder of their current corporation and corporation at the time of the loan are not affiliated with BIG in any way. I cannot guarantee they are not friends with any past or present BIG member, as that would mean me releasing the defaultor's name when asking them. They are not friends of anyone that is or has been involved with the BMBE, though.
| How To Afford A Tech II BPO | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.16 19:36:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Balogh
Is the collateral, like the ISK, located in personal hangars, or is it actually located in a BMBE hangar?
That depends. Usually we don't like to move high-value items about, so it's left in personal hangars wherever we received it.
| How To Afford A Tech II BPO | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 13:56:00 -
[10]
Originally by: SonOfAGhost
and continue to tacitly endorse scamming of the corp they run on your behalf.
How are we doing that?
| How To Afford A Tech II BPO | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 14:51:00 -
[11]
Originally by: SonOfAGhost
The story we have been given is that the loan was issued shortly before and defaulted on shorly after the patch. I've never heard anyone, including TS and Ray dispute that reported timing, which by itself is more than just a little suspicious.
The loan was given on 2006-05-21. It would have defaulted on 2006-05-28. I can't see exactly, but judging from patch-problem posts I'd say the patch was applied on 2006-06-03. In the patch notes it says that Skiff volumes were corrected 2006-06-20 in a static data update.
| How To Afford A Tech II BPO | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.19 12:21:00 -
[12]
Feb-06
0.00 (.00%)
March-06
0.00 (.00%)
April-06
567,705.06 (1.12%)
May-06
2,120,000.00 (4.17%)
June-06
1,660,000.00 (3.27%)
July-06
1,036,000.00 (2.04%)
August-06
651,000.00 (1.28%)
September-06
0.00 (.00%)
October-06
10,000.00 (.02%)
November-06
55,000.00 (.11%)
December-06
1,240,640.00 (2.44%)
January-07
1,769,120.00 (3.48%)
Feb-07
1,456,554.30 (2.87%)
Mar-07
1,559,647.00 (3.07%)
Apr-07
1,389,126.10 (2.74%)
Percentages based on an IPO price of 50,790,000.00 : 790 shares were sold at 52m, 1210 at 50m.
| How To Afford A Tech II BPO | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.19 14:56:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Those are very wild claims. I have never seen the developers say anything about removing T2 BPOs.
In this post here, specifically this out of context quote : Originally by: Oveur
Current Tech 2 BPOs will certainly not be removed.
followed quickly by this one : Originally by: Oveur
However, it's certainly worth investigating turning them into very high run BPCs like was done with the old Infinite copies
Read the rest of his replies in the thread. I recall him mentioning that advance warning (like a year) would be given before any changes to BPOs were made. But I can't seem to find that quote. I think it was in that thread somewhere.
| How To Afford A Tech II BPO | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.19 14:58:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Ezoran DuBlaidd
seriously, what are you people considering as "good" divs?
That's an entirely subjective number. And the only right answer is the one you yourself are happy with.
| How To Afford A Tech II BPO | BMBE ISK Loans | |
Ray McCormack
BIG
|
Posted - 2007.05.19 15:28:00 -
[15]
All Oveur is doing (use EvE-Files for a quick reference of all his posts in that thread) is speculating (read discussing) on possible changes to the system. Nothing is concrete, and until such time as a DevBlog or Patch Notes are released detailing changes, the only thing we can do is speculate.
| How To Afford A Tech II BPO | BMBE ISK Loans | |
| |
|