EVE Search - (#15 - 2007.04) BMBE Shareholder Report (version 2)

All Channels

Market Discussions

(#15 - 2007.04) BMBE Shareholder Report (version 2)

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.06 23:00:00 - [1] www.BIG-EVE.com/BMBE This is the fiftteenth BMBE shareholder report. (And it's yet again on time) Advertisement Dividend BMBE re-investment Average- and "End of Period" loans amounts Action Report BMBE Capital Advertisement From the start of May the BMBE has started advertising on http://www.eve-files.com and http://ineve.net The total expense of this is 300M ISK, and will be subtracted from the profit of May (ie. not this time), before dividend etc is calculated. The expense is monthly - And we will continue the arrangement, if it's felt that it helps the BMBE businees. And in that case, we will try to broker a discount on the price for a long term arrangement. Dividend April dividend : 2,778,252,200 ISK This equals 1,389,126.10 ISK per share Dividend will be paid out in the comming week Worth noticing is that this is the 5th month in a row with dividends in the 3B range. BMBE re-investment April BMBE re-investment : 1,389,126,100 ISK Average- and "End of Period" loans amounts Average : 41,395,833,333 ISK End of Period : 38,875,000,000 Action Report 2 new loans 1 loan refinanced 1 loan paid out in full BIG Lottery
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.06 23:00:00 - [2] BMBE Capital Wow... Just wow... What a circus the last couple of days huh Originally by: Shar Tegral Originally by: David Brooks, New York Times ... The conflict of interest charge is out of proportion to the hubbub. But scandals are like that - they are never about what they purport to be about. ... Most scandals are a pretense for members of an establishment to destroy people they don't like. In most scandals, people adjust their standards of rectitude, depending on whether they support or oppose the person at issue. The subject's enemies whip themselves into a fever of theatrical outrage, and the subject's defenders summon up fits of indignation at the lies of the accusers. Scandals are the playgrounds for partisans, and everybody else gets to play the role of junior high school bully, ganging up on whoever seems weakest and most alone. We'll here it is from the horses mouth then. Yes - A 30B ISK loan has defaulted, and the collateral was 2 Skiff BPO's. This was announced nearly a year ago here : (#4 - 2006.05) BMBE Shareholder Report Granted - Not in as much detail as now done. And in hindsight, which famously is 20/20, that was a grave mistake. Most seemed to be more concerned about the new dividend split method at the time however. I'll have to quote shar again.. Originally by: Shar Tegral however this knowledge wasn't secret. It just wasn't flaunted. Major difference. A distinct difference. As illustrated on this forum, it was known by many people, namely those that had asked the right questions. Now why havent I been more open about this in the past? Mostly becuase nothing have happened... - ie. the prints havent been sold. Posting each month that the prints still hadnt been sold, seems kinda moot. Apparently not everyone seems to think that. The only thing that has really happened is that the prints have been further researched, and we've tried to make a bit of ISK selling some of the ships (see below for numbers). Now, I cant quite figure out what the forum mob here is most upset about: The fact that the defaulted loan hasnt been publiced more or The insinuation that I should have lied about it. The first I cant do any more about than I've done in this post, ie. spell it out for everyone to see, and admit that it's been a grave mistake not earlier having plasted this all over the place. The second however, I can, and will do something about. But not in this post. You should however be able to find the relevant post easily... But let me just conclude that bit with saying that I have never lied, scammed, stolen or engaged in any other "illegal" activities in my time in EVE. Nor will I ever. Let me conclude with the numbers 101,440,000,000 ISK Total value of all shares sold 9,157,328,100 ISK total re-invested in the BMBE 1,300,000,000 ISK made from the skiff BPO's sofar ================================================== 111,897,328,100 ISK Total Subtract from that the defaulted loan and you get 81,897,328,100 ISK Total To that the value of the two Skiff BPO's should be added. This is the total capital that the BMBE has available for loans as of this writting. In case of liquidation this makes each share (not counting the skiff prints for simplicity) worth 40,948,664 ISK If you are one of the lucky ones having had shares since the beginning, you will per share have made 13,637,328 ISK in dividends Total beeing 54,585,992 ISK So if you paid below that amount for your, share, then you won't loose any ISK, and will even make a little bit. Ofc, the later you've gotten your shares (and hence had less dividend) the less of a chance you have of not loosing a bit of ISK. That's all folks. BIG Lottery
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.06 23:01:00 - [3] reserved BIG Lottery
Tami Auryn Natural Evolution	Posted - 2007.05.06 23:09:00 - [4] 1st :) reserved It's about time, never on time tss tss
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.06 23:16:00 - [5] Originally by: Tami Auryn 1st :) reserved It's about time, never on time tss tss It's on time. Go back to your troll cave until you have learned to tell the time. On time = First weekend of a new month. We still have that so STFU. BIG Lottery
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.06 23:38:00 - [6] Not even an "I am sorry" and back to attack mode.
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.06 23:59:00 - [7] Originally by: Rthor Edited by: Rthor on 06/05/2007 23:48:57 Not even an "I am sorry" and back to attack mode. Rhtor - Yes I'll attack this particular individual, it's simply paying back in kind. Be civil to me, and you'll get civil back. Tami however has long long long ago given up on that. Originally by: Rthor But I think that the numbers you give are not what they are purported to be. What I think people are asking is how much money is currently in the bank and not how much money was invested in it over the year. How much ISK is currently in the back is what I have posted 81,897,328,100 ISK Total Some of that is on loan, as can be read by the End of Period : 38,875,000,000 ISK amount BIG Lottery
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.07 00:03:00 - [8] The reason why I am asking is that you can simply add available cash to current loans and get a number. Is that number the same or within a few billions of what you calculated the value of BMBE to be?
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.07 00:08:00 - [9] Edited by: TornSoul on 07/05/2007 00:07:04 Rthor - The ISK is kept in my wallet (and Ray's). The only way to find out the value of the BMBE is to calculate it - I have other ISK in my wallet as well. So it's not a matter of "seeing how much is there" and then add it to what is on loan. Hope that clears it up. For what it's worth. To minimize the risk of me screwing up the books (for calculating the BMBE ISK) I'm actually doing two seperate books - Each set up differently. The idea beeing, a mistake done in one, will be cought, as it then wont give the same numbers as the other. BIG Lottery
Firid Soulbane Empyreum	Posted - 2007.05.07 00:30:00 - [10] Quote: Total BMBE capital now : 102.788B ISK Taken from BMBE report #6 How can you report that the total capital is 102.788b isk when its not?
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.07 00:39:00 - [11] Originally by: Firid Soulbane Quote: Total BMBE capital now : 102.788B ISK Taken from BMBE report #6 How can you report that the total capital is 102.788b isk when its not? Good question. If anything it should have said "worth" and not capital - The skiff's counting as "paper ISK" - still having their "book value" (which they still do) as they arent liquidated. One of the reasons why I havent put any value on them in the above - To avoid that differentation. But what I posted there should definatly not have been posted as it was - It's misleading. My apologies for that. BIG Lottery
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.07 00:40:00 - [12] Originally by: Firid Soulbane Quote: Total BMBE capital now : 102.788B ISK Taken from BMBE report #6 How can you report that the total capital is 102.788b isk when its not? Tornsoul, can you fix your numbers? --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2007.05.07 00:46:00 - [13] Originally by: TornSoul I'll have to quote shar again.. Originally by: Shar Tegral however this knowledge wasn't secret. It just wasn't flaunted. Major difference. A distinct difference. As illustrated on this forum, it was known by many people, namely those that had asked the right questions. TS, that's crap and you know it. If it's something that doesn't need to be kept a secret, then clearly there's no problem posting it on the forum. Otherwise if it needs to be kept a secret, why are you telling your buddies? Small investors seem to be getting shafted here hard; we're being marginalized for some reason, probably because it's easier. Every last one of us that own shares in BMBE deserve the same access to the same information as everyone else, anything else is dishonest and immoral. Withholding this information from selective people is selectively lying by acting as if you have no other information that you can state. Quote: Now, I cant quite figure out what the forum mob here is most upset about: The fact that the defaulted loan hasnt been publiced more or The insinuation that I should have lied about it. Why does it need to be either/or? It's both. Quote: But let me just conclude that bit with saying that I have never lied, scammed, stolen or engaged in any other "illegal" activities in my time in EVE. Nor will I ever. You lied. Your intentions may not have been mustache-twisting evil, but you lied by selectively withholding information. Quote: If you are one of the lucky ones having had shares since the beginning, you will per share have made 13,637,328 ISK in dividends Total beeing 54,585,992 ISK So if you paid below that amount for your, share, then you won't loose any ISK, and will even make a little bit. Ofc, the later you've gotten your shares (and hence had less dividend) the less of a chance you have of not loosing a bit of ISK. That's all folks. Gee, a whole 8% return on my investment in nearly a year and a half; I could have purchased a fleet of suicide Kessies and blown up T1 indys and have made more money than this. I trusted you as the custodian of my money, I want to know how you think it's acceptable to lose 30% of the capital and still charge a management fee. I want you to be held responsible, because quite frankly you're doing everything you can to avoid it. Oh, and how much money have you lost from this whole thing? Do you hold any shares that are still underwater like the rest of us, or are you in a position that you're shareless and just enjoying the nice payoff that is your management fee? If you don't have any risk in this operation, then you're not acting in the best interests of the rest of us who do. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.07 00:53:00 - [14] Originally by: Verite Rendition I trusted you as the custodian of my money, I want to know how you think it's acceptable to lose 30% of the capital and still charge a management fee. I want you to be held responsible, because quite frankly you're doing everything you can to avoid it. Oh, and how much money have you lost from this whole thing? Do you hold any shares that are still underwater like the rest of us, or are you in a position that you're shareless and just enjoying the nice payoff that is your management fee? If you don't have any risk in this operation, then you're not acting in the best interests of the rest of us who do. Firstly - It took an enourmous amount of shareholder preassure before I even agreed to use t2 BPO's as collateral. There has been many ups and downs in the T2 BPO market... I really really really didnt want to do it - It's just so damn risky. But I did it, and the risk hit us right smack in the face. We ourself have a good sized share amount. At a guess I'd think we are in the top 5 of major shareholders. So yes this influences us as well. BIG Lottery
Firid Soulbane Empyreum	Posted - 2007.05.07 00:56:00 - [15] Originally by: TornSoul Originally by: Firid Soulbane Quote: Total BMBE capital now : 102.788B ISK Taken from BMBE report #6 How can you report that the total capital is 102.788b isk when its not? Good question. If anything it should have said "worth" and not capital - The skiff's counting as "paper ISK" - still having their "book value" (which they still do) as they arent liquidated. One of the reasons why I havent put any value on them in the above - To avoid that differentation. But what I posted there should definatly not have been posted as it was - It's misleading. My apologies for that. Thats creative accounting and is both illegal (rl) and a lie. I cant understand that you are trying to "get away" with this when clearly there have been made some grave mistakes. Why not just come clean and tell your shareholders what really happened so that everyone can get on :)
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.07 01:00:00 - [16] Originally by: Firid Soulbane clearly there have been made some grave mistakes. Why not just come clean and tell your shareholders what really happened so that everyone can get on :) Grave mistakes indeed : I agree, and I even bolded that in my first post, so no one would miss my acknowledgement of that. Tell the shareholders what really happened.. ermm... Thats what I've just done in the first posts... ?? BIG Lottery
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2007.05.07 01:07:00 - [17] Originally by: TornSoul Originally by: Verite Rendition I trusted you as the custodian of my money, I want to know how you think it's acceptable to lose 30% of the capital and still charge a management fee. I want you to be held responsible, because quite frankly you're doing everything you can to avoid it. Oh, and how much money have you lost from this whole thing? Do you hold any shares that are still underwater like the rest of us, or are you in a position that you're shareless and just enjoying the nice payoff that is your management fee? If you don't have any risk in this operation, then you're not acting in the best interests of the rest of us who do. Firstly - It took an enourmous amount of shareholder preassure before I even agreed to use t2 BPO's as collateral. There has been many ups and downs in the T2 BPO market... I really really really didnt want to do it - It's just so damn risky. But I did it, and the risk hit us right smack in the face. We ourself have a good sized share amount. At a guess I'd think we are in the top 5 of major shareholders. So yes this influences us as well. I don't seem to recall being asked if the BMBE should loan out 30bil for 2 Skiff BPOs, this would be a management situation. The fact of the matter is that given that you were holding not 1 but 2 at the time indicates to me that at the time someone had to have an idea that Skiffs were being devalued (though I think anyone with an ounce of in them should have seen that as being inevitable). How is it that you guys were so unaware of the nerf? When we as shareholders approved T2 loans, we had an expectation that you'd use due diligence in making out loans against them. From my POV, it doesn't appear that BMBE used such diligence in making these loans, and I want to know why. Oh, and thank you for answering the share question. I'd still like to know however how your management fees relate to what you've lost (i.e. have your management fees shielded you from taking the full brunt of this loss?). ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
Chris Smith	Posted - 2007.05.07 01:12:00 - [18] Originally by: Verite Rendition Originally by: TornSoul Originally by: Verite Rendition I trusted you as the custodian of my money, I want to know how you think it's acceptable to lose 30% of the capital and still charge a management fee. I want you to be held responsible, because quite frankly you're doing everything you can to avoid it. Oh, and how much money have you lost from this whole thing? Do you hold any shares that are still underwater like the rest of us, or are you in a position that you're shareless and just enjoying the nice payoff that is your management fee? If you don't have any risk in this operation, then you're not acting in the best interests of the rest of us who do. Firstly - It took an enourmous amount of shareholder preassure before I even agreed to use t2 BPO's as collateral. There has been many ups and downs in the T2 BPO market... I really really really didnt want to do it - It's just so damn risky. But I did it, and the risk hit us right smack in the face. We ourself have a good sized share amount. At a guess I'd think we are in the top 5 of major shareholders. So yes this influences us as well. I don't seem to recall being asked if the BMBE should loan out 30bil for 2 Skiff BPOs, this would be a management situation. The fact of the matter is that given that you were holding not 1 but 2 at the time indicates to me that at the time someone had to have an idea that Skiffs were being devalued (though I think anyone with an ounce of in them should have seen that as being inevitable). How is it that you guys were so unaware of the nerf? When we as shareholders approved T2 loans, we had an expectation that you'd use due diligence in making out loans against them. From my POV, it doesn't appear that BMBE used such diligence in making these loans, and I want to know why. Oh, and thank you for answering the share question. I'd still like to know however how your management fees relate to what you've lost (i.e. have your management fees shielded you from taking the full brunt of this loss?). Proton POwers Alt - I dont think its fair to say its TS's fault and they should take the 30bil loss. Many IPO's have lost isk doing stupid things including PCT and never once did it come out of my isk. If CCP loses money this year, its employee's still get paid if they did the work. Period.
Firid Soulbane Empyreum	Posted - 2007.05.07 01:15:00 - [19] Originally by: TornSoul Originally by: Firid Soulbane clearly there have been made some grave mistakes. Why not just come clean and tell your shareholders what really happened so that everyone can get on :) Grave mistakes indeed : I agree, and I even bolded that in my first post, so no one would miss my acknowledgement of that. Tell the shareholders what really happened.. ermm... Thats what I've just done in the first posts... ?? You fail to tell us the reasoning behind choosing to keep the Skiff BPO's rather than selling them as you state in report #4. Neither have you given any info on what will happen to those prints now. Will you continue top produce from them or will they be sold?
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.07 01:20:00 - [20] Originally by: Verite Rendition I don't seem to recall being asked if the BMBE should loan out 30bil for 2 Skiff BPOs No we dont do a shareholder vote each time a prospective new client comes along... ??? You dont mean we should do that do you??? Originally by: Verite Rendition The fact of the matter is that given that you were holding not 1 but 2 at the time indicates to me that at the time someone had to have an idea that Skiffs were being devalued (though I think anyone with an ounce of in them should have seen that as being inevitable). How is it that you guys were so unaware of the nerf? In hindsight... The whole timing of that loan stinks - More than you perhaps at first think. I would dearly love if someone could come up with a excact date for when the nerf was made public. As I remember it - I was not aware of the nerf at the time of the loan. Originally by: Verite Rendition When we as shareholders approved T2 loans, we had an expectation that you'd use due diligence in making out loans against them. From my POV, it doesn't appear that BMBE used such diligence in making these loans, and I want to know why. And we definatly try to use due dilligence, which among other things involves thrawling the damn sell forums for auctions etc... We've gotten it wrong once - BIG time unfortunatly... Originally by: Verite Rendition Oh, and thank you for answering the share question. I'd still like to know however how your management fees relate to what you've lost (i.e. have your management fees shielded you from taking the full brunt of this loss?). I'm not sure I understand the question... The management fees has nothing to do with how many shares we have or not... ie. theres no correlation between the two. ??? BIG Lottery
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.07 01:28:00 - [21] Originally by: Firid Soulbane You fail to tell us the reasoning behind choosing to keep the Skiff BPO's rather than selling them as you state in report #4. Neither have you given any info on what will happen to those prints now. Will you continue top produce from them or will they be sold? Right after the loan was taken out, or around the time of the first payment (I can no longer recall which) the price of the prints fell through the bottom - To around 3-5B if I recall. We decided to hold on to the prints, based on the idea that at least a large part of the price drop was due to patch panic, and we hoped taht by holding on to the shares for some time, the prices would raise again - Meaning less or no loss for shareholders. Over the next monts we where encouraged in this belief by the prices going up again - But never enough to be able to sell them without a substantial loss. And then it happened again - Another patch, another drop. And this is where we are now.... In hindsigth, we should ofc have sold them when they topped, before the patch - But... Hindsight is just that - Hindsight ------- We will continue to produce from them - At their current value theres not much point in selling them. The capital influx will be marginal, and is unlikely to have any effect on BMBE's ISK making posibilities. With the prints in production, at least ther'll be a trickle. BIG Lottery
Votee	Posted - 2007.05.07 01:46:00 - [22] TS Do you think its fair that you have 40% management fee, even after loosing 25-30B shareholder ISK? regards, Votee
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.07 02:05:00 - [23] Originally by: TornSoul Edited by: TornSoul on 07/05/2007 00:07:04 Rthor - The ISK is kept in my wallet (and Ray's). The only way to find out the value of the BMBE is to calculate it - I have other ISK in my wallet as well. Do you think its a good idea that your personal wallet is also a public company's wallet?
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2007.05.07 04:16:00 - [24] Originally by: TornSoul Originally by: Verite Rendition The fact of the matter is that given that you were holding not 1 but 2 at the time indicates to me that at the time someone had to have an idea that Skiffs were being devalued (though I think anyone with an ounce of in them should have seen that as being inevitable). How is it that you guys were so unaware of the nerf? In hindsight... The whole timing of that loan stinks - More than you perhaps at first think. I would dearly love if someone could come up with a excact date for when the nerf was made public. As I remember it - I was not aware of the nerf at the time of the loan. You're likely right about it not being public in published notes at the time of the loan (I don't have a timeline here, so I'll give you credit for that). However I don't consider due diligence to just be aware of changes that CCP makes public (which these days often aren't announced until days before the patch) but also things that are known without being published by CCP. The Skiff trick was a massive rule-bending effort, it was highly likely from day 1 that CCP was going to do something about it. I wager that at the time of the loan, the Skiff has been nerfed on Sisi but no note published; when the carrier owners and BPO owners noticed it they offloaded their T2 BPOs on you. This is what I'd consider due diligence on the part of BMBE management. If you're just watching the patch notes you're going to get scammed again and again; a failure to watch Sisi is a failure to exercise due diligence. It's the futures market of EVE. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
DeathGrip Amarr Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2007.05.07 04:40:00 - [25] Originally by: Rthor Originally by: TornSoul Edited by: TornSoul on 07/05/2007 00:07:04 Rthor - The ISK is kept in my wallet (and Ray's). The only way to find out the value of the BMBE is to calculate it - I have other ISK in my wallet as well. Do you think its a good idea that your personal wallet is also a public company's wallet? I ran my IPO through my personal wallets. Not a great idea, but much easier.
Montaire Lacedaemon. Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.07 04:49:00 - [26] And frankly ANYONE "in the know" was fully aware of the Skiff nerf weeks ahead of time. I seem to recall it bieng generally known several weeks ahead of time. And frankly if your valuing those Skiff BPO's anywhere above 2-3b I've got a bridge to sell you. A great big space bridge.
DeathGrip Amarr Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2007.05.07 04:56:00 - [27] Originally by: Montaire And frankly ANYONE "in the know" was fully aware of the Skiff nerf weeks ahead of time. I seem to recall it bieng generally known several weeks ahead of time. And frankly if your valuing those Skiff BPO's anywhere above 2-3b I've got a bridge to sell you. A great big space bridge. Is this the auction for the bridge, if so 100bil isk :)
Heikki Gallente Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.05.07 09:57:00 - [28] TornSoul, considering recent drama partly arising from missing information, could you add a bit more information on monthly reports? I reckon you have to keep tally of this numbers for your accounting anyway: Namely, 1a) total actual capital of BMBE (after the reinvestment) 1b) book value of other assets, with major items listed 2) Total operating profits (instead of having us to calculate it from dividends) Also kind of interested to hear which entity did took the loan against Skiff BPOs.. -Lasse waiting to hear about the planned buyback plan
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.07 11:15:00 - [29] 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. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.07 11:35:00 - [30] 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 \|
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.07 12:15:00 - [31] Originally by: Ray McCormack 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. In case anyone misses the critical point... this is why BIG is trusted. PS: This Monday morning isn't too bad. How's yours? The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. Arknox > shar with bad hair day >>> solution = suicide and spawn fresh clone :D
Ezoran DuBlaidd Rivers Enterprises Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.07 13:06:00 - [32] Originally by: Shar Tegral Originally by: Ray McCormack 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. In case anyone misses the critical point... this is why BIG is trusted. PS: This Monday morning isn't too bad. How's yours? you do see the irony in your statement, right?
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.07 13:09:00 - [33] Originally by: Ezoran DuBlaidd you do see the irony in your statement, right? Actually no... I did write that before my first cup of coffee though. Still sipping it now. So I won't be offended in the least if you share with me the irony of it as you see it. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. Arknox > shar with bad hair day >>> solution = suicide and spawn fresh clone :D
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.07 16:12:00 - [34] Originally by: DeathGrip Originally by: Rthor Originally by: TornSoul Edited by: TornSoul on 07/05/2007 00:07:04 Rthor - The ISK is kept in my wallet (and Ray's). The only way to find out the value of the BMBE is to calculate it - I have other ISK in my wallet as well. Do you think its a good idea that your personal wallet is also a public company's wallet? I ran my IPO through my personal wallets. Not a great idea, but much easier. No offense but the question was for Tornsoul and not for you. If you answer it then he might ignore my question as "being answered." So the question remains: Tornsoul do you think it's a good idea to have one wallet for yourself and a public corporation? I realize that it is easier but I am sure that there are drawbacks outweighing that "benefit" to shareholders. For once I think that any kind of RL taxing authority or real life shareholders would be unhappy about such arrangement. So again do you think that it is OK? And if not are you going to change this from now on?
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.07 16:18:00 - [35] Okay, it appears that this it where TornSoul will answer questions, so here goes: 1) You now claim that the default resulted in a capital loss of about 30 Billion Isk almost immediately which left no time to sell them for a decent sum. Assuming that is the case could you please explain the post two months later in one of the BMBE reports that total assets were 102+ Billion Isk? 2) You claim that the details of the default were not intentionally withheld, but everyone that seems to have known also seems to have been under the impression that it was not "okay" to tell. This includes a few BIG members and supporters. 3) You claim that you did not sell the BPOs as you could not recoup the losses. A quick check using eve-search shows that Skiff BPOs sold for just short of 10 Billion Isk after the event in question. Did you expect the general usage of Skiff's to increase and thus hold on to recover even more of the Isk? 4) Please describe the due diligence process that BMBE followed/follows when valuing T2 BPOs, and let us know what went wrong with the Skiffs and if you still believe the due diligence was carried out to the best of BMBE managements efforts given the information publicly available at the time? If no, do you or BIG accept any responsibility for the losses as a management failure rather than a general swing in the Eve economy? I look forward to your reply now that your PC power supply is fixed. Sincerely, Eefrit
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.07 16:52:00 - [36] Originally by: Rthor So the question remains: Tornsoul do you think it's a good idea to have one wallet for yourself and a public corporation? I realize that it is easier but I am sure that there are drawbacks outweighing that "benefit" to shareholders. If I could have personal "divisional wallets" I would much prefer that arrangement. For drawbacks - The only drawbacks I'm aware of is the extra bookkeeping to know how much of the ISK in my wallet is BMBE ISK and how much is BIG ISK. From your comments, reading between the lines, it would seem to me that you have other drawbacks in mind? Care to elaborate? BIG Lottery
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.07 16:58:00 - [37] @Eefrit 1 : Already explained, read the threads 2 : Not a question but a statement. 3 : Also already elaborated on, in length, read the threads... 4 : Several questions, some already answered, pretty much the same as #3 really I'm aware you most liekly wont be satisfied with the responses above. Feel free to ask clarifying questions. (and read the thread for questions already answered in advance please) BIG Lottery
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.07 17:14:00 - [38] Originally by: TornSoul @Eefrit 1 : Already explained, read the threads 2 : Not a question but a statement. 3 : Also already elaborated on, in length, read the threads... 4 : Several questions, some already answered, pretty much the same as #3 really I'm aware you most liekly wont be satisfied with the responses above. Feel free to ask clarifying questions. (and read the thread for questions already answered in advance please) I have read the threads and fail to see where 1, 3 or 4 are explained. Yes you have made vague hand waving comments but nothing that would come close to the manager of a public company answering questions. In the past you have said to me that you do not believe that real world fraud and ethics rules should apply in Eve (I have the logs if you have lost yours), and maybe that is where we differ, in which case I doubt I will ever get a reconciliation of statements and facts along lines that you don't hold to. You are correct, I phrased 2 badly. I meant to ask for your comment on how you can reconcile your insistance that it was not kept secret when everyone that seems to have knew (including BIG members) felt it was. Yes, you have said it should have been declared at the time, but have not explained why it was so secretive. Sincerely, Eefrit
Sortiario Fair Trade Organization	Posted - 2007.05.07 17:18:00 - [39] Originally by: TornSoul @Eefrit 1 : Already explained, read the threads 2 : Not a question but a statement. 3 : Also already elaborated on, in length, read the threads... 4 : Several questions, some already answered, pretty much the same as #3 really I'm aware you most liekly wont be satisfied with the responses above. Feel free to ask clarifying questions. (and read the thread for questions already answered in advance please) As I see it, it is in your very own interest to clarify that your intentions were not that twisting evil as we all want to think. I encourage you to make a thorough statement concerning all questions put forth in the raging debate. From a communicative point of view, and in the light of recent events, this is the right thing to do. You latest report doesn't clarify on all questions put forth in all threads. ___________________ Sortiario Communication Consulting - SCConsult Communication advisory service
TornSoul BIG Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.05.07 17:34:00 - [40] Edited by: TornSoul on 07/05/2007 17:32:02 Originally by: Sortiario Edit: A Q&A-thread might also be an idea. If you answer any questions regarding BMBE that shareowners has the right to know, that is. I've seen you've already tried to collect all the posts in an "index". Feel free to try and do the same with all the lingering questions. I belive it would save us all a lot of reading/typing :-) I'll stop posting for a day or two (unless new lies arises) and see what you come up with. (You are probably trying to be objective, but from my PoV your preferences are quite clear - Be that as it may. Please dont take this as an insult, but more of a knudge towards the middle line) BIG Lottery
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.07 17:37:00 - [41] Originally by: TornSoul Originally by: Rthor So the question remains: Tornsoul do you think it's a good idea to have one wallet for yourself and a public corporation? I realize that it is easier but I am sure that there are drawbacks outweighing that "benefit" to shareholders. If I could have personal "divisional wallets" I would much prefer that arrangement. For drawbacks - The only drawbacks I'm aware of is the extra bookkeeping to know how much of the ISK in my wallet is BMBE ISK and how much is BIG ISK. From your comments, reading between the lines, it would seem to me that you have other drawbacks in mind? Care to elaborate? Could not you have had an alt handle all BMBE transactions? The advantage of this is that at the end of the month if you looked at the wallet amount and the number were different from what you think it was then you would know that some kind of a mistake of some kind happenned. If you have one wallet the only way you can tell what the assets of BMBE are is to theorize what it should be. Theorizing is fine but I would save it as a back up. As far as a drawback to having one wallet. Imagine a situation where you want to use BMBE capital for your own purposes. Let us say that you do this and you do not even realize that you have used BMBE capital and bought some kind of a tech2 BPO that tanked for yourself. Now you are stuck with it and BMBE has a liqudity crisis. This would be not possible if you have distinct wallets. Even if you have not taken shareholders money this arrangement of one wallet gives you liquidity. In essence BMBE capital is free for you to use for no interest charge if you so choose.
Sortiario Fair Trade Organization	Posted - 2007.05.07 17:53:00 - [42] Originally by: TornSoul Edited by: TornSoul on 07/05/2007 17:32:02 Originally by: Sortiario Edit: A Q&A-thread might also be an idea. If you answer any questions regarding BMBE that shareowners has the right to know, that is. I've seen you've already tried to collect all the posts in an "index". Feel free to try and do the same with all the lingering questions. I belive it would save us all a lot of reading/typing :-) I'll stop posting for a day or two (unless new lies arises) and see what you come up with. (You are probably trying to be objective, but from my PoV your preferences are quite clear - Be that as it may. Please dont take this as an insult, but more of a knudge towards the middle line) I'm quite aware that I'm considered on Eefrits side in this discussion, and that I am, in fact, backing him up. This doesn't stop me from trying to find out everything that I can about the information that is released, and when we knew what and what we knew about it at that time. As you'll see after a bit of forum browsing, I'm not afraid to change oppinion if I come across better arguments. Arguments I find convincing, and is not politically motivated. The quote you've... quoted... is just a word of advice if you wish to keep your public image as good as possible. ___________________ And, just to make absolutely clear, criticizing a person for wrongdoings or bad intentions in business does not mean you have to hate or dislike him on a personal plane. Judging from many of the posts in all the threads, not all people are aware that you can call your opponent in politics and business a numb imbecile one moment, and the next go out and have a laugh and a drink with him. This should be highlighted in big bold letters and sent in EVE-mail to all active forum players in EVE. ___________________ Sortiario Communication Consulting - SCConsult Communication advisory service
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.07 18:11:00 - [43] Tornsoul, who was the character who defaulted on the 30B loan and can you prove it?
Rusom Rokath Amarr 1m95	Posted - 2007.05.07 19:53:00 - [44] Edited by: Rusom Rokath on 07/05/2007 19:50:45 Originally by: Ray McCormack 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. Technically you're right, but there's a difference. The ground rule has always been to value collateral for 75% of its worth, so in case of a defaulted loan, selling off the collateral should normally increase the total of BMBE funds, as per the original business plan. Only if you managed to sell the collateral for more than the 100% of its 'real' worth at the time it was valued, could it be possible to see that as more than reasonable performance by BMBE management, therefore warranting a one time increase in management fees. Quote: 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. Investers in the BMBE took a risk, as you do with any investment. There's a difference between acceptable risk, and a major foul up by BMBE management. Nobody could reasonably expect TS to make a 30 billion mistake, shifting the financial burden of that mistake to the investers isn't something you should even consider. Quote: 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. No, at best we're looking at the possibily that TS admits he messed things up badly, and takes responsibility for his actions (yeah, I know, not in a million years is that ever going to happen). A good start would be to temporarily lower the management fee to 10%, and put the remaining 30% back into the BMBE, along with the profits of the skiff BPO's, until full equity is reached. If he had been more forthcoming with this information when the situation actually occurred, I'd be happy with him doing that until 95% or even 90% of full equity was reached, but let's not forget that this situation has gone unanswered for a while now.
JP Moregain Gallente EVE Reserve Bank	Posted - 2007.05.07 23:21:00 - [45] Wow I get busy with RL for a few days and this happens. So I guess what I don't understand is that you state in your old report a year or so ago that. " the change in sell price, compared to the loan they where used as security for, will be a change in how much capital the BMBE has available for loans." Which is reasonably close to RL accounting: write the value of the loan down to the net realizable value of the collateral and mark it to market until it is sold... Yet you didn't make any attempt do that until now. Do you have any reasons for that delay? I am not attempting to be a smart arse, just trying to understand the situation. Regards, JP http://www.evereserve.com
Silmas Gallente hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.05.08 07:22:00 - [46] Edited by: Silmas on 08/05/2007 07:18:43 All the mud-slinging aside, I have one question to BMBE representants: As it is clear that management made a mistake and BMBE as a corporation suffered loss of approximately 30% of it's value, are you going to do anything about it? The possible procedures after such huge loss of assets would be for example: - Fixing the problem somehow, ie have a solid plan how to regain the isk lost - Major changes in management who made the wrong decision, maybe changes to the operation procedures aswell, including management fee. - Allowing shareholders possibility to cash-out their shares for example at 50m/share, which would make most of the shareholders even or slightly profitable after all this. Could consider this as a vote of confidence aswell. (if all would cash-out, I guess it would be BIG then being on the losing end...) - - Some other option... those two I just quickly thought out.
Baun 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.05.08 20:12:00 - [47] Edited by: Baun on 08/05/2007 20:08:02 Fair questions posed by Sillmas. I don't think BMBE will give a buyback option but I think they should commit to assuring full capital to back the investments within some timeframe. This could most easily be done by reducing the management fee for the next several months or simply dumping isk directly into the BMBE that comes from previous management fees. The Enemy's Gate is Down
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2007.05.08 20:53:00 - [48] Originally by: Silmas Edited by: Silmas on 08/05/2007 07:18:43 All the mud-slinging aside, I have one question to BMBE representants: As it is clear that management made a mistake and BMBE as a corporation suffered loss of approximately 30% of it's value, are you going to do anything about it? The possible procedures after such huge loss of assets would be for example: - Fixing the problem somehow, ie have a solid plan how to regain the isk lost - Major changes in management who made the wrong decision, maybe changes to the operation procedures aswell, including management fee. - Allowing shareholders possibility to cash-out their shares for example at 50m/share, which would make most of the shareholders even or slightly profitable after all this. Could consider this as a vote of confidence aswell. (if all would cash-out, I guess it would be BIG then being on the losing end...) - - Some other option... those two I just quickly thought out. A 3 step plan to restore the lost ISK and fix the bank's operations 1) Return all management fees acquired since the incident, as possible. 2) Stop collecting all future management fees until the last of the ISK has been removed 3) Sell the bank; the current management is no longer capable of running it. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
Baun 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.05.08 22:57:00 - [49] Originally by: Verite Rendition 3) Sell the bank; the current management is no longer capable of running it. They have done a pretty crap job over the life of the bank but their performance lately has been quite good. There is really no indication that they are not capable of running it. It may be that you no longer trust them to do so. That is a fair viewpoint but it would be kind of sad if you let a sleazeball manipulate you like that. The Enemy's Gate is Down
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.08 23:29:00 - [50] Unfortunately what happens with the future of BMBE is something that shareholders literally have no say in, so it is more a hope for issue than a discuss issue. A murderer can not argue that he was not as bad as Stalin, ****** or Mao. If he murdered someone he is guilty of murder and charged on those crimed. In this situation, BMBE intentionally kept quiet and lied about a rather large management mess up which resulted in the loss of 30 Bill Isk (minus the current value of the Skiff BPOs). That in itself is not really worth harping on about. Mistakes happen and as long as they are learnt from, we move on. The issue is that lying about it was not a mistake. Covering it up was not a mistake. Those had to be thought through and a decision made to do just that. So when an investor questions trust based on lies and coverups by management it really does not matter how much you villify their oposition for bringing it into the public. The person could be satan incarnate and be responsible for every scam Eve has ever had. It still does not change the issue of whether BMBE should be trusted given their history when dealing with shareholders. Once again though, the trust discussion is a moot point as there is nothing shareholders can do about it. /Eefrit
Baun 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.05.09 00:48:00 - [51] Originally by: Eefrit Once again though, the trust discussion is a moot point as there is nothing shareholders can do about it. /Eefrit A great reason for you to keep talking about it then right? Maybe even a better reason for you to drum of malcontent by lieing? BMBE has the isk and they have never indicated there would be a buyback option. There is little reason to assume that they will contemplate one. What BMBE should do is what they should have done a long time ago; drastically reduce their management fee in order to bring the business in line with the market. Taking 40% of the profits is ludicrous. The only scenario in which it was not ludicrous is when the bank was opearting as a pawn shop and collecting on goods would have required an enormous amount of legwork. As things stand right now the BMBE, especially in light of some poor judgment, has no leg to stand on for maintaining its current management fee. A retroactive application (within reaosns) of something more reasonable (like 20%) and dumping the excess back into the coffers to bring the equity backup is the most sound plan. It will increase the profitability for shareholders, punish BMBE for bad judgment (apparently alot of people want to do this), still be fair to BMBE management going forward and it will correct mistakes from the past using only isk generated by the business already. The Enemy's Gate is Down
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.09 00:59:00 - [52] Originally by: Baun What BMBE should do is what they should have done a long time ago; drastically reduce their management fee in order to bring the business in line with the market. Taking 40% of the profits is ludicrous. The only scenario in which it was not ludicrous is when the bank was opearting as a pawn shop and collecting on goods would have required an enormous amount of legwork. As things stand right now the BMBE, especially in light of some poor judgment, has no leg to stand on for maintaining its current management fee. A retroactive application (within reaosns) of something more reasonable (like 20%) and dumping the excess back into the coffers to bring the equity backup is the most sound plan. It will increase the profitability for shareholders, punish BMBE for bad judgment (apparently alot of people want to do this), still be fair to BMBE management going forward and it will correct mistakes from the past using only isk generated by the business already. I think hell just froze over! Besides the insistance not to think through what I have and have not specifically denied, there are actually some good suggestions. Of course we will have to find something else to freeze over if they are now actually followed! /Eefrit
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2007.05.09 01:04:00 - [53] Edited by: Verite Rendition on 09/05/2007 01:00:52 Originally by: Baun Originally by: Verite Rendition 3) Sell the bank; the current management is no longer capable of running it. There is really no indication that they are not capable of running it. It may be that you no longer trust them to do so. That is a fair viewpoint but it would be kind of sad if you let a sleazeball manipulate you like that. They have a track record of being inept and of lacking integrity; that's a pretty good reason as far as I'm concerned for them to not run it. As for "let[ing] a sleazeball manipulate you like that", please do not ever mistake me for an idiot. I'm quite aware of what's going on, and I've been *****ing about things well before Eerfit made his post(I was the first one to even ask what BPO was lost, back at the start of this whole ordeal). I'm not the AUS corp lead megalomaniac for nothing you know. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
Baun 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.05.09 01:41:00 - [54] Edited by: Baun on 09/05/2007 01:38:42 Originally by: Verite Rendition As for "let[ing] a sleazeball manipulate you like that", please do not ever mistake me for an idiot. I'm quite aware of what's going on, and I've been ****ing about things well before Eerfit made his post(I was the first one to even ask what BPO was lost, back at the start of this whole ordeal). I'm not the AUS corp lead megalomaniac for nothing you know. There are independent reasons to be angry about what happened, but it is important that you explicitly separate anger over mismanagement and the concomittant distrust sourced therein from anger over accusations of theft that are only on the table because someone explicitly and repeatedly lied to foment public outrage. Trust me, I am not happy with the defaulted loan. What am I noting is that the dividends have been very good for several months running now (mostly since Ray took over). There is no indication that they cannot run the bank now and, as such, there is no reason to insist that they sell it. If the default had just happened* and the dividends were crap I might agree with you (though I would be more likely to argue that the situation warranted reduction in management fee. You should note that I in fact did just that in the past). As it stands now you are trying to argue for immediate sale on the basis of something that happened 1 year ago and when, in the present, the business appears to be operating succesfully. I find that to be non-sensical. The Enemy's Gate is Down
Callan Skiderlar LIfeline Incorporated	Posted - 2007.05.09 02:22:00 - [55] Taking a step back for a second, what I think this whole debacle points to is a flaw in the compensation structure of the bank. As has been pointed out, the shareholders have no real recourse to express displeasure with management's performance. The normal course of action would be to sell off the shares, which would tank the price and force those with majority control to make changes in leadership. That mechanism does not exist here. In hindsight, a good way to ensure accountability would be to tie management's compensation to the share price. So a better model might have been to set aside a block of shares for the management team as their compensation. However, I don't know if you could make this model work in such a way to make it worthwhile without giving up a majority, or close to majority, stake, which would foul up the entire shareholder feedback loop. --- "The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent." - John Keynes
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.09 02:25:00 - [56] Originally by: Callan Skiderlar Taking a step back for a second, what I think this whole debacle points to is a flaw in the compensation structure of the bank. As has been pointed out, the shareholders have no real recourse to express displeasure with management's performance. The normal course of action would be to sell off the shares, which would tank the price and force those with majority control to make changes in leadership. That mechanism does not exist here. In hindsight, a good way to ensure accountability would be to tie management's compensation to the share price. So a better model might have been to set aside a block of shares for the management team as their compensation. However, I don't know if you could make this model work in such a way to make it worthwhile without giving up a majority, or close to majority, stake, which would foul up the entire shareholder feedback loop. I agree that this is probably the main problem with the BMBE. Such a lack of accountability would never be accepted in modern IPO. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
SonOfAGhost Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.05.09 12:11:00 - [57] Originally by: Baun Fair questions posed by Sillmas. I don't think BMBE will give a buyback option but I think they should commit to assuring full capital to back the investments within some timeframe. This could most easily be done by reducing the management fee for the next several months or simply dumping isk directly into the BMBE that comes from previous management fees. It's been over a year so far, what sort of timeframe do you think is reasonable?
Sidrat Flush Caldari Private Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.05.09 13:07:00 - [58] what a hullabaloo about nothing much. For a company that's public and in these game mechanics so very lacking in terms of oversight, it's a miracle it's been around as long as it has. 30B is about the cost of an outpost. Not including the time it takes to organise one. How quickly can this company get back that 30B? Who cares. dividends are still being paid out, in this game that's a ceo's perogative, not an automatic action. Some ipos are scams. They last a week, a month at the most. Others deserve the benefit of the doubt and instead of whining about an event keep looking for the future. There's a shortage of empire research slots. A chronic shortage. Invest capital in them and see a return, as well as first refusal to slots. But then I'm not a shareholder so I have nothing to lose or gain from this matter. Life is about memories the more the better. Looking for CCP to improve availability of their GTC's, for non card carriers!
Hangman69 Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.05.09 13:52:00 - [59] Originally by: Ray McCormack What are people's opinions on extraneous activities, things outside the original mandate, to recoup equity at a faster rate? Possibilites include research facilities, capital construction, component construction and market trading. All have the ability to rapidly increase capital at a greater rate than any re-investment could, and are also quite secure in regards to any possibe capital drop (the BMBE would always get out at least what it put in). Ray, I bought into a bank, not some research outpost, I wanted steady but possibly low returns. If the bank model is broken sell off the assets back to the shareholders and start up a research model if you're telling us you can't get us good returns.
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2007.05.09 18:17:00 - [60] Originally by: Hangman69 Originally by: Ray McCormack What are people's opinions on extraneous activities, things outside the original mandate, to recoup equity at a faster rate? Possibilites include research facilities, capital construction, component construction and market trading. All have the ability to rapidly increase capital at a greater rate than any re-investment could, and are also quite secure in regards to any possibe capital drop (the BMBE would always get out at least what it put in). Ray, I bought into a bank, not some research outpost, I wanted steady but possibly low returns. If the bank model is broken sell off the assets back to the shareholders and start up a research model if you're telling us you can't get us good returns. I second this statement. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.09 18:31:00 - [61] I agree on this. BMBE has a mandate to act as a bank be that a short term (the original mandate) or longer term T2 (updated mandate). I would not be ethical to change this, and tbh I doubt TornSoul would change it. Keep to being a Bank and just be a good bank. /Eefrit
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Frontier Trade League	Posted - 2007.05.10 05:37:00 - [62] Originally by: TornSoul Let me conclude with the numbers 101,440,000,000 ISK Total value of all shares sold 9,157,328,100 ISK total re-invested in the BMBE 1,300,000,000 ISK made from the skiff BPO's sofar ================================================== 111,897,328,100 ISK Total Subtract from that the defaulted loan and you get 81,897,328,100 ISK Total To that the value of the two Skiff BPO's should be added. This is the total capital that the BMBE has available for loans as of this writting. That's all folks. Okay if at the time of the incident BMBE had 100 billion in capital available and then 30 billion was defaulted that would have left 70 billion plus the Skiff BPOs. Now many months later we see a capital of almost 82 billion. Under TornSoul and Ray it appears the fund has been steadily recovering. In 1 years time it has regained nearly half of what was lost. That's a pretty good record, if you correspond it to real world business. Someone mentioned that approximately they had received an 8% return on their investment thus far. 8% is a pretty good return. Even though this is a game, most people seem to think of shares in the wrong way. They are not a short term investment. They are a long term investment, and indeed it is possible that EVE will not last long enough for some investments to work. Most investment bankers would look for 15 to 30 year returns. If they want to replenish the fund more quickly, and that seems to be the desire, then really without going into some sort of side business which means tying up more capital and assuming more risk, the only really viable option would be to reduce the management fee. However it is unreasonable to assume that they should do it for free. Currently it is 40%, s small reduction in that towards only a 30% management fee would help replenish the fund more quickly while still giving them enough money to make it worthwhile I think. I know well how long it takes in managing just a small corp with small bank account. I can only imagine all the extra time required to keep up with loans, make sure payments are made on time, etc. Plus all the extra bookkeeping. I do have a question for Ray and TornSoul, have you read the new dev blog on corporations. Do you think the divisional corporate wallets will assist you once implemented? Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Heikki Gallente Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.05.10 10:26:00 - [63] Originally by: Ray McCormack extraneous activities IMHO in share based economy it is better to issue extra capital as dividends, and let the investors make decisions on how to (re)invest that capital. That is, BMBE should stay focused on it's core business (and get rid of the Skiff BPOs). Originally by: Sidrat Flush it's a miracle it's been around as long as it has. Would think quite it is quite opposite; BMBE has been structured in such way that it is likely to last. - Shareholders gave TS mandate to keep 40-50% of all profits - Shareholders did not insist on any oversight, nor did not require any power to close down the bank - Shareholders excplicitly insisted on going to T2 BPO game, accepting the risks - The only person with power to close the BMBE (TS) would lose his promised fee upon closing the bank -> makes no sense to that. Hence there motivation to keep the bank going even when it produces mere 1% monthly profit. Reckon would be hard for TS or anyone else to raise another IPO with such conditions. Asking (only) TS to give up his fee to recoup capital makes about as much sense as asking titan pilots to stop using DDD, or asking lawyers to charge only the minimal wage. Might make things more pleasant for the rest, but.. why should they? -Lasse
Ezoran DuBlaidd Rivers Enterprises Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.10 17:11:00 - [64] Originally by: Mecinia Lua That's a pretty good record, if you correspond it to real world business. Someone mentioned that approximately they had received an 8% return on their investment thus far. 8% is a pretty good return. Even though this is a game, most people seem to think of shares in the wrong way. They are not a short term investment. They are a long term investment, and indeed it is possible that EVE will not last long enough for some investments to work. Most investment bankers would look for 15 to 30 year returns. you sort of made your own point against what you said here. in the real world, 8% return in less than a year's time, could be a good investment. in eve, 8% divs in 3 months isn't much to speak of at all, and is, honestly, pretty craptastic. if that 8% is from more than 3 months, yeah, it's definitely time to liquidate those shares and, if nothing else, hide them under your bed. at least the isk won't lose value. your last paragraph, doesn't seem to apply to eve. it may apply to the real world; but, if you're not looking to see 100% of your investment back for 15-30 real world years, then i can make you a very happy investor for untold trillions of isk. and i promise that within 15-30 years, you'll have made back 100% of your investment plus a little. but since you're talking about the real world a lot in this post i'm quoting, let's continue with the real world thought. yes, in the real world, it could take years to get back 100% of your investment. in the real world, if your financial sheet is off a few dollars, you could be fined (tens/hundreds of) thousands of dollars. in the real world, any sort of cover up is fineable for quite a bit more, to include long jail terms. don't see where this real world comparison is practical.
Block Ukx	Posted - 2007.05.10 17:43:00 - [65] Actually, a voluntary fine is not a bad idea. The fine should be credited to the investors and should be a reasonable amount, like a monthÆs wages. These will give investors a sense of justice and will put the issue to rest. But first, TS is innocence till proven guilty of a ôpurposelyö cover up. EVE first corporate trial!
Ionia Advanced Manufacturing	Posted - 2007.05.10 18:47:00 - [66] If I understand the corporate charter correctly, the Skiff BPOs should have been sold right after the loan defaulted. I'd be interested in seeing the price of the BPO at that time compared to now. If the value has dropped, then I would credit that loss directly to management because they made a decision that was not what the shareholders agreed to.
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.10 19:03:00 - [67] When comparing return in general between RL and Eve it is a fairly accurate comparison to compare the expected RL (real) returns per year to expected Eve returns per month. It is harder to work out real returns in eve as we have no inflation figures published, but I would guess right now we have a general deflation situation so it would not be relevant. Ionia, as far as I recall, there were a few skiffs auctioned off after the default and at least one that I know of was over 9 Bill Isk. I don't think it would be reasonable to assume they would have both achieved that but looking back historically it would be very fair to expect them both to have fetched a 15 Bill Isk total. /Eefrit
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.10 19:10:00 - [68] Originally by: Ionia If I understand the corporate charter correctly, the Skiff BPOs should have been sold right after the loan defaulted. I'd be interested in seeing the price of the BPO at that time compared to now. If the value has dropped, then I would credit that loss directly to management because they made a decision that was not what the shareholders agreed to. That's completely unreasonable!!! It is a fault of: 1. shareholders- because they did not have to invest 2. CCP- because they did not put divisional wallets in yet 3. Eefrit's- because he wanted to buy it It is not a fault of: 1. Tornsoul- because he did Big Deal and Big Lottery 2. Baun- because he once was giving Tornsoul a hard time 3. Ray- because if it was a BIG member who defaulted on the loan Ray will give 30 billion of his own There you have it. And oh Shar Tegral look up definition of Snowjob while you are browsing Wikipedia.
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.10 19:15:00 - [69] Rthor, would you mind explaining what about what Ionia said is unreasonable? I did not quite follow the reasoning you used. Thanks, Eefrit
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.10 19:27:00 - [70] Originally by: Eefrit Rthor, would you mind explaining what about what Ionia said is unreasonable? I did not quite follow the reasoning you used. Thanks, Eefrit It is called sarcasm. Shaming them does not work. So my new strategy is to agree with them to the point of absurdity, which they are not all that far off anyhow. But hopefully they will try to continue arguing with me not realizing that it is their own position against which they are arguing. Then maybe a system overload will occur in their brains and something will snap or get fried and they will start thinking normally.
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.10 19:33:00 - [71] 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 \|
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.10 20:29:00 - [72] Originally by: Ray McCormack 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. OK but you are not discussing. Questions were asked. They were not answered. All this thread is for you is a way to control the situation by allowing people to vent while you just nit pick from afar. You hope people will blow off steam here and slowly it will go away. What do you mean "achieve something?" What exactly is the goal? This is not about making a first bank. This is about making a first bank WHILE creating a corporate compensation scheme that is practically criminal. If you want to really create a first Eve bank and you want that milestone and you want the game to benefit then concentrate ONLY on creating a bank AND NOT on stuffing your wallet.
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.10 20:42:00 - [73] 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 \|
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.10 22:15:00 - [74] Originally by: Ray McCormack 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. OK let's be constructive. In order to make this bank secure you have to create "walls" which may not be in best interest for TS to create. The reason for these "walls" is to try to eliminate conflicts of interests and moral hazard issues. If I understand correctly Ray you are doing day to day operations. It should be your decision and you should have the final say in overruling TS on whether to do a specific loan. There should be another person who is independent from both you and TS who would be able to at least look over the proposed collateral and tell you if it makes sense. Maybe one of your shareholders that you do not like and vice versa. This would create something of a wall between each one of you individually and the person seeking a loan. This would help prevent giving loans that are too risky or do not make sense to friends. You should also be on a lookout for loans that are just too large, as in 30 percent of your capital is too large for one type of a BPO. You should also sell off any BPOs that you got via default right away. You should make an alt and have him handle all BMBE transactions and nobody besides the person who is in charge of the bank should have control over this alt. That alt could only enter into transactions that have something to do with BMBE. There should be no possibility of "loans on a side if things are slow with the bank, etc." This would clean up the books of BMBE. As it is nobody, besides certain ppl, even knows if skiff defaults were the only ones. Furthermore, you Ray do not know what is going on if some transactions are in your wallet and some are in TS's all mixed with all your personal transactions. The making of this alt would require TS to send billions in cash to this alt. If books are cooked TS cannot do this because he knows that he is sending his own money. You should convert your 51 percent or whatever your ultimate control arrangement to actual shares and sell off half of them at least on the market or in a private transaction to somebody else. You would have to ask your shareholders approval of this restructuring if nothing else to start over with new and improved shareholder relations. Eefrit will probably try to buy them but thats OK. You would have some capital infusion anyhow and if Eefrit wants to keep buying shares your shareholders will be happy. You would also eliminate management fee. From then on your compensation would be based on share performance (so when you divest your controlling stake you should still leave something sizable like 20-30 percent of shares if your shareholders will allow you this) and from then on performance would be up to you. If share price fell enough then Eefrit would probably buy you out but he would be able to do this if books are in order and it would be of benefit to shareholders because you could negotiate a buyout premium. If Eefrit does not buy a large stake in BMBE once you divest your majority stake you can call BS on his buyout offer though this is just to score brownie points and should not be your priority. You would have to report better because without better reporting your share price will fall. You need to regain trust of investors and so at least once a month you have to be candid. What other people suggested things like average percentage of capital that is loaned out, etc. should be in your report. You should also report names of people who defaulted. This really is a no-brainer because you will think that you will have to defend this decision when making a loan later, and it may be that it will stop some people from defaulting as they too may have their own reputations to protect. If there is a real market for loans I think this arrangement would work so it maybe gives you some ideas how to proceed.
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.10 22:38:00 - [75] Originally by: Rthor And oh Shar Tegral look up definition of Snowjob while you are browsing Wikipedia. Snowjob The problem with you is that you seem to want there to be some sort of crime to have been committed. Furthermore, I only link to wikipedia when I use concepts or phrases that may not translate well into all languages. If you've got a problem with me doing that... tough. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. Arknox > shar with bad hair day >>> solution = suicide and spawn fresh clone :D
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.10 22:40:00 - [76] Originally by: Rthor OK let's be constructive. Very good post. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. Arknox > shar with bad hair day >>> solution = suicide and spawn fresh clone :D
Hexxx Minmatar	Posted - 2007.05.10 22:45:00 - [77] I'd just like to voice my support for TS's (and Ray's) efforts here. I've been critical in some of my posts but I want to be clear that I consider BMBE an undeniably successful business in no small part owed to the significant energy that it's management has displayed in handeling the venture. I would like to say that I think BMBE should stick to it's core business model and avoid branching out. As has been stated above, this is the appropriate move. If TS wanted to start a different business I'm sure he wouldn't have much trouble raising the capital. He is a consistently honest and trustworthy character, and barring his one slip (the reporting snafu) he is one of the more established players in the market. Hexxx LLP - Business Consulting Services - IPO's, Business Plans, Share/Stock Pricing, and general Consulting.
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.10 22:58:00 - [78] 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 \|
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.10 23:12:00 - [79] It is pretty common knowledge that I think that TornSoul has done a appalingly bad job with BMBE, however I think that since Ray has taken over most of the management good policies and practices have been put in place. Most of the problems with BMBE are from when TornSoul was running (I use the term loosely) the company. TornSoul may have the best intentions, but when it comes to business understanding he is quite frankly clueles and his good intentions come across as major stuff ups. Ray has shown himself to have both good intentions and a business understanding and thus far has performed very well given the limited amount of control he actually has in BMBE. Lets all give Ray time to correct issues and move on from there. Changes I would like to see: 1) I would like to see TornSoul hand all BMBE Isk over to Ray and have Ray run BMBE as he sees fit. TornSoul has proven inept and as such should not be part of the management. Yes once again, he may be a nice guy, and he may have nice ideas etc, but that does not mean he is competent when it comes to business. 2) I think the 50% of distributed profit that BIG has a right to should be changed to 50% of the shares. i.e. another 2000 shares should be issued and those given to BIG. From then on the profits should be distributed entirely to shareholders. 3) BIG should sell off some of these new shares to make up for the losses that would not have been incured had the BPOs been sold off immediately. That in my estimation (second opinions welcomed) should be 15 Billion Isk. Asking them to cover the full 30 Billion is not reasonable imho. 4) We all give Ray our support in trying to "fix" things. Sincerely, Eefrit
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2007.05.10 23:45:00 - [80] Originally by: Eefrit It is pretty common knowledge that I think that TornSoul has done a appalingly bad job with BMBE, however I think that since Ray has taken over most of the management good policies and practices have been put in place. Most of the problems with BMBE are from when TornSoul was running (I use the term loosely) the company. TornSoul may have the best intentions, but when it comes to business understanding he is quite frankly clueles and his good intentions come across as major stuff ups. Ray has shown himself to have both good intentions and a business understanding and thus far has performed very well given the limited amount of control he actually has in BMBE. Lets all give Ray time to correct issues and move on from there. Changes I would like to see: 1) I would like to see TornSoul hand all BMBE Isk over to Ray and have Ray run BMBE as he sees fit. TornSoul has proven inept and as such should not be part of the management. Yes once again, he may be a nice guy, and he may have nice ideas etc, but that does not mean he is competent when it comes to business. 2) I think the 50% of distributed profit that BIG has a right to should be changed to 50% of the shares. i.e. another 2000 shares should be issued and those given to BIG. From then on the profits should be distributed entirely to shareholders. 3) BIG should sell off some of these new shares to make up for the losses that would not have been incured had the BPOs been sold off immediately. That in my estimation (second opinions welcomed) should be 15 Billion Isk. Asking them to cover the full 30 Billion is not reasonable imho. 4) We all give Ray our support in trying to "fix" things. Sincerely, Eefrit 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. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.10 23:54:00 - [81] Originally by: Eefrit 1)TornSoul has proven inept and as such should not be part of the management. You had me with pretty much everything here. I think you could have said, "Most controversy surrounds TornSoul's management styles and as such it would be wise if TornSoul recuse himself from the Leadership role in managing BMBE." IMHO repeatedly stating things like this, specifically in this manner, only flames up the situation as many of us disagree with your uncharitable judgment. There are things to be solved with BMBE and I trust TornSoul enough that this discussion is not falling upon deaf ears... even if this is delegated to Ray. I guess my foolish wish is for this self-interested sniping or chest beating would stop so that serious matters can take the limelight. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. Arknox > shar with bad hair day >>> solution = suicide and spawn fresh clone :D
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.10 23:58:00 - [82] 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. 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. Less confusion and is exactly the same thing. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. Arknox > shar with bad hair day >>> solution = suicide and spawn fresh clone :D
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.11 00:07:00 - [83] OK so I was really constructive and I still wholeheartedly disagree with how you do business. 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. But actually it does not have to be entirely like this. You can say that TS has 50 billion and Ray has 50 billion and report their performance separately. And then if TS does not pull his weight he will be under pressure to move ISK to Ray's character. If Ray is loaning out his 50b and TS is not why should TS have 50 billion in his account. We can go back and forth like this but I think many times just because you can make some kind of a counterargument that does not mean that the other person is wrong. The naming of characters who default issue I just do not get TS's and Ray's logic. I would have zero qualms of naming people who defrauded my shareholders of 30 billion. You should go to war for your shareholders and not pull this "I am broke but I am a gentleman" crap. In your case it is even worse because it is "My shareholders are broke but I am a gentleman" crap. Ay ya yay. Come to think of this you should have a portion of proceeds saved up for hiring good mercs to take out deadbeats. :-) (And people who criticize you on forums for good measure also). Anyway, I could go on but half measures are just half measures. Even getting really serious about saving BMBE may not save it but using half-measures just prolongs the inevitable. You will either have another huge default in due time or you will be so conservative in loaning money that your market will dry up.
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.11 00:17:00 - [84] 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. That is not because of Eefrit but because of TS if shares are down. If they are too cheap and all this current nay saying drove them down then buy more. I think that they might be sold on a cheap if there is a sell off by BMBE like it was suggested, but its hard to say what would happen then. It may be that they could be cheap and then take off if other reforms restore both faith and profitability and result in higher dividends.
Balogh Gallente Real-time EVE Stock Exchange	Posted - 2007.05.11 06:02:00 - [85] Originally by: Ray McCormack 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. Isn't the whole idea behind the corp wallet that everyone who has the appropriate roles (meaning, more than one character) has access? ______________________________ Real-time EVE Stock Exchange, Blog
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.11 08:29:00 - [86] 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 - [87] 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 - [88] 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 \|
Silmas Gallente hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:16:00 - [89] What good would it do to anyone to name the defaulter? He/she just took advantage of changing situation regarding value of his BPO. Something that quite many would've done I am sure. Imagine yourself in same situation, what would YOU do? It's both bad luck and mistake on BMBE's part that such thing happened, things like that surprise alot of people quite often in this game. ISK is lost, ISK is gained. Move on. Repair damage.
Heikki Gallente Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:43:00 - [90] Originally by: Eefrit TornSoul hand all BMBE Isk .. changed to 50% of the shares Those seem to be valid ideas for some new bank; yet not something the shareholders of BMBE have agreed to. For the first one TS would pretty much need a clear majority vote; while the latter would be like giving TS rights for 50% capital currently belonging to shareholders. Ray, for some concrete suggestion: I reckon the current model basicly allows customers to use the bank as insurance against BPO value changes. I.e. it is even morally fair to take loan and voluntary default it (and hence would be wrong to give up the name of the fellow who borrowed against Skiffs). Would there be any point changing the loan rules to such that even if the loan defaults, the customer still has to pay the difference between remaining loan, and the price BMBE got from selling the BPO? The major effect from this would be giving BMBE rights to announce names of the people who break the contract (==don't pay the difference). As side effect even BMBE members could freely take loans without causing suspicion. -Lasse
Ionia Advanced Manufacturing	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:16:00 - [91] I agree with Ray for the most part. Ray is good people.
SonOfAGhost Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:34:00 - [92] Originally by: Silmas What good would it do to anyone to name the scammer? He/she just took advantage of changing situation regarding value of his BPO. Something that quite many would've done I am sure. Imagine yourself in same situation, what would YOU do? Fixed! This is something that quite many would not have done I am sure. Otherwise BMBE and ISSO would both have long since have gotten out of the loans business/gone bankrupt and Rast wouldn't have had any isk left to run off with. For all you know you ARE in the same situation and the thief in question is even now perusing the contents of your corp hangars. If you knew the identity of this thief would you tell your corpmates? Well, this particular individual stole 30B from a public corporation, that's why the public, not just the corp members should know. There is no question that we're talking about someone that knew his BPOs were about to lose value. Rather than be satisfied with the profits made from producing 2 of these BPOs prior to that, he chose to use them to scam BMBE. Who are you, or TS, or Ray to tell the folks that were robbed that they're not allowed to know the identity of the scammer and chose their own courses of action? Qui tacet consentit, by remaining silent, BMBE leadership become accessories to the crime. Silence for so long on the loss is what started the current uproar. Silence continuing, on who the thief was, and why the loss has not long-ago been recouped, will only drag their once-good names deeper into the muck. Repair damage first, then think about moving on.
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:41:00 - [93] Edited by: Eefrit on 11/05/2007 12:41:52 Ray, I understand the argument for witholding the defulters identity, but see no argument for witholding the details of the default. Could you please give us: a) the date the loan was taken out b) the dates (if any) of any interest payments c) what the BPOs were valued at at the time (i.e. what loan to value was given) d) essentially all information that you have other than the persons identity. e) if the person is affiliated in any way with BIG or a close friend of anyone in BIG. I think this is important. If you can't, would you mind explaining why not as this is not breaking confidence and something that should by all rights be reported on to investors anyway. I personally would accept your word on these, and if it is clear from your answers that nothing untoward was going on, then it will at least appease myself. Thanks, Eefrit
Ionia Advanced Manufacturing	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:42:00 - [94] Son, they didnt steal it, they just defaulted on their loan. The reason I would like to see the name disclosed is not to seek them out for any reason, but so other businesses can avoid dealing with the person if they should choose. It would be similar to your credit report in real life.
SonOfAGhost Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.05.11 14:02:00 - [95] Originally by: Ionia Son, they didnt steal it, they just defaulted on their loan. 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. Add to that it was not one, but two of the same BPO, and I have no doubt this is not a coincidence at all. Even if someone is a complete patsy and believes it was just chance the loan was taken right before the patch, defaulting because the collateral isn't worth as much, rather than inability to pay, is still theft in my book.
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.11 14:08:00 - [96] Originally by: SonOfAGhost defaulting because the collateral isn't worth as much, rather than inability to pay, is still theft in my book. QFT Good faith exist in agreements only when both sides act in good faith. Otherwise its not an agreement. It's an idiot and his newest bestest friend. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. Arknox > shar with bad hair day >>> solution = suicide and spawn fresh clone :D
JagGator United Freeloaders	Posted - 2007.05.11 22:03:00 - [97] Also in real life, if you default on your mortgage payment, the bank sells your house. If the bank does not recoup full loan value from the house sale, you still owe them the difference. The bank will get an judgement to garnish your wages (public information) or else you will have to declare bankruptcy (public information) in order to get out of owing the remainder of the loan. There is no way a defaulter is kept "in confidence" in the real world.
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.13 18:48:00 - [98] 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 \|
Mr Ratty Ratty Corp PLC Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2007.05.14 18:32:00 - [99] the skiff loan was 30bn, i forget the % but for t2 loand they loan you partial value of the bpo, 75% or something. so at a guess i'd say about 40bn would get you in the ballpark. How are you currently valuing the skiffs? 12 month profit (which seems to be the norm for t2) or ave auction price? Personally any biz making loans on based on the value of an item with an unstable price is going to get burned eventually, everyone who asked for the t2 loans should have known that, no eve investment is risk free you take the ups with the downs. Every investment in eve is not based on the rate of return, biz plan, or hoped for profit, it's based entirely on your trust in the person running the operation, if you have doubts, dont invest, TS is one of the most stubborn, cantankerous, stubborn (it's worth saying twice) buggers i know, i think shars the only one to give TS a run for the money in that regard, but thats why i invested with TS (and would have with shars last enterprise if i'd spotted the thread), you know exactly what you get, i've used BIG's services over the years, from buying my first BS BPO with the big deal (Which i still have, and it the only BS bpo that still makes me steady coin lol), to the Jove parts scavinger hunt and so on, each time i knew what BIG said i'd get, and i know what i got, funny thing, the 2 were almost exactly the same. BMBE they said, low but steady return....guess what i got (apart from a dry patch in the middle, but nobodys perfect), a low but steady return. They did exactly what it said on the box. Thats not to say TS wont budge, we got some of the returns reinvested, and hopefully we can get that excessive management fee reduced at some point, but again, we signed up when it was a 50/50 split, so anything better than that is a bonus. People seem to be getting bent out of shape about the defaulted loan, i think TS posted a link to it, but i'm pretty sure it was mentioned in a monthly report there was a default, and i don't see what difference shouting about it would have made, other than giving other loners the idea of trying to do it themselves! BMBE gives out loans, it would be the hight of naivete to think none would ever default! **** happens, you hold your nose till the stink goes and learn to watch where you step, long as you can do that things will work out. <><><><> http://www.freelancingcorp.co.uk
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.14 18:57:00 - [100] Originally by: Mr Ratty TS is one of the most stubborn, cantankerous, stubborn (it's worth saying twice) buggers i know, i think shars the only one to give TS a run for the money in that regard So I place second to TS in that. Only problem is, can't figure who to set my sights on to fix that. Hmmmm... any dev's handy for me to argue with this year? The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. ElweSingollo> Eve is P v P not P v GM.
Mr Ratty Ratty Corp PLC Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2007.05.14 21:54:00 - [101] Only just :) after all it is TS thread, gotta be nice to the locals and all. I meant it in a good way tho, peeps like you and TS, tend to be honest and if you plan on doing something tend to do it, and if you dont, you will at least make good to the best of your ability. <><><><> http://www.freelancingcorp.co.uk
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.16 16:31:00 - [102] Well I was reading this cause I was bored, and read some of the other threads. Given the rate of failure of various IPOs in EVE, the bank idea with no real game mechanisms to keep it in place I think has done pretty good with Ray and TornSoul at the helm. The economic model of EVE follows most real world economies (indeed CCP is hiring an economist if you didn't know that to help with the games economy). What have been the top 1000 Corporation Shares traded publicly in the history of EVE? (assuming there has been a thousand). How long did each of those last? What was the average return on each one over its lifetime? I bet if we sat down and looked at it, compared to many other endeavors in EVE, BMBE has been run well and has had a good return to its investors. Its most certainly in the top ten, and most likely the top 5. I do agree with several folks assessment, the printing of more shares means each share is worth less. Its called a split in the real world. Its like what Ray said though, without increasing the capital value of BMBE then if you doubled the shares you basically halve the share value. Eefrit appears to wants just that. If the shares became devalued he could buy more of them and thus have a means of gaining control. This very argument though could be counterproductive, someone might decide to try it again. That is one reason that I believe it is resonable to publicly name the person who defaulted. It is in the interest of similar business not to extend the same good faith credit to them in the future. The other reason is that outting them might make them come good and pay back the isk however unlikely that is. They made a mistake early on but seem to have learned. They've been running it good since then. I think they should be left to run it. Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Ezoran DuBlaidd Rivers Enterprises Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.16 16:38:00 - [103] Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf What have been the top 1000 Corporation Shares traded publicly in the history of EVE? (assuming there has been a thousand). How long did each of those last? What was the average return on each one over its lifetime? I bet if we sat down and looked at it, compared to many other endeavors in EVE, BMBE has been run well and has had a good return to its investors. Its most certainly in the top ten, and most likely the top 5. no.
Balogh Gallente Real-time EVE Stock Exchange	Posted - 2007.05.16 16:45:00 - [104] Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf I do agree with several folks assessment, the printing of more shares means each share is worth less. Its called a split in the real world. Its like what Ray said though, without increasing the capital value of BMBE then if you doubled the shares you basically halve the share value. A split actually splits already existing shares. No new shares are created. If I were to own 10 shares, after a 1:2 split I would own 20, which would be worth exactly the same as the 10 original shares. In EVE, the only way to increase the amount of shares is to issue new ones. Unlike a split, the new shares would be located in the corporation walle. Quote: Eefrit appears to wants just that. If the shares became devalued he could buy more of them and thus have a means of gaining control. That's incorrect. If a corporation were to issue new shares which would cause the existing shares to lose value, it would be easier to buy the existing shares. However, if you want to take control, buying the shares after the new ones have been issued is actually more expensive. ______________________________ Real-time EVE Stock Exchange, Blog
Kasia Pelarar Eve Share and Market Authority	Posted - 2007.05.16 19:03:00 - [105] Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf If the shares became devalued he could buy more of them and thus have a means of gaining control. Just picking this out as an EVE "urban myth". You can only take control of a corporation in EVE if you are part of that corporation. It does not matter how many shares you have, if you are not part of the corporation you cannot start a vote (directors only) or press the "run for CEO" button ("major" shareholder). See this post. Eve Share & Market Reporting Eve Share & Market Analysis graphical sig required
Balogh Gallente Real-time EVE Stock Exchange	Posted - 2007.05.16 19:33:00 - [106] Originally by: Kasia Pelarar Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf If the shares became devalued he could buy more of them and thus have a means of gaining control. You can only take control of a corporation in EVE if you are part of that corporation. Suppose I did gain control of the BMBE corporation. Then what? According to this post, the ISK isn't even located in the corporation wallet, but in Ray McCormack's and TornSoul's wallet. As BMBE's only business is lending ISK, and there's no ISK in the corporation wallet, having control of BMBE is meaningless. And because the location of the collateral is unspecified, there's no way to determine the status of the investors' money. : Is the collateral, like the ISK, located in personal hangars, or is it actually located in a BMBE hangar? ______________________________ Real-time EVE Stock Exchange, Blog
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.16 19:36:00 - [107] 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 \|
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.17 07:29:00 - [108] Originally by: Ezoran DuBlaidd Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf What have been the top 1000 Corporation Shares traded publicly in the history of EVE? (assuming there has been a thousand). How long did each of those last? What was the average return on each one over its lifetime? I bet if we sat down and looked at it, compared to many other endeavors in EVE, BMBE has been run well and has had a good return to its investors. Its most certainly in the top ten, and most likely the top 5. no. Okay I'll bite. Why do you say no? From a casual observance more than half of the IPOs ever offered have failed for one of three reasons: 1. Outright scam to begin with. 2. Corp theft reduced assets to the point the entity was no longer viable. 3. War caused such damage that the enterprise could not be pursued after the initial IPO sale. Probably at least a third and possibly as many as half have never paid out any dividends. Which means the investor lost their shirt so to speak. The only IPO that might have paid out better than BMBE in the past would have possibly been ISS before it was destroyed by war. (Not the last two ISS share plans but the early ones). This is just based on casual observance of this forum. I still contend that if you compare BMBE to the industry average within the New Eden universe it has done fairly well. Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Balogh Gallente Real-time EVE Stock Exchange	Posted - 2007.05.17 08:53:00 - [109] Edited by: Balogh on 17/05/2007 08:51:34 Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf The only IPO that might have paid out better than BMBE in the past would have possibly been ISS before it was destroyed by war. (Not the last two ISS share plans but the early ones). I still contend that if you compare BMBE to the industry average within the New Eden universe it has done fairly well. Based on the dividend paid in the last two months and the last trading price on EGSE (BMBE isn't tradable on RESX at this moment), BMBE's ROI is 4.33%. Compare that to other corporations' ROI on http://resx.nfshost.com/exchange.php. Do keep in mind the ROI is based on the current trading price, not the IPO price. ______________________________ Real-time EVE Stock Exchange, Blog
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.17 09:50:00 - [110] Originally by: Balogh Edited by: Balogh on 17/05/2007 08:51:34 Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf The only IPO that might have paid out better than BMBE in the past would have possibly been ISS before it was destroyed by war. (Not the last two ISS share plans but the early ones). I still contend that if you compare BMBE to the industry average within the New Eden universe it has done fairly well. Based on the dividend paid in the last two months and the last trading price on EGSE (BMBE isn't tradable on RESX at this moment), BMBE's ROI is 4.33%. Compare that to other corporations' ROI on http://resx.nfshost.com/exchange.php. Do keep in mind the ROI is based on the current trading price, not the IPO price. Well if you look at that and then place BMBE into it it would be 3rd on that exchange behind ISSO (which I mentioned the ISS ones had been superior) and FIN). Well consistent with my earlier assertion that BMBE was at the worst in the top 10 and probably was in the top 5 history wise. The EGSE though has different prices for many of the same shares. It shows negative momentum for FIN, and shows practically no momentum for all other listed shares including BMBE. Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Eefrit Eve Financial Services	Posted - 2007.05.17 12:40:00 - [111] I will grant that current performace has been fair of late, but it does not matter to long term investors what the current performance is if it has not been consistent. If you are going to compare BMBE to other public corps, you should look at the average dividend as a % of value over the last 6 months to a year. Doing that paints a rather different picture. Sincerely, Eefrit
Balogh Gallente Real-time EVE Stock Exchange	Posted - 2007.05.17 13:33:00 - [112] Originally by: Eefrit I will grant that current performace has been fair of late, but it does not matter to long term investors what the current performance is if it has not been consistent. If you are going to compare BMBE to other public corps, you should look at the average dividend as a % of value over the last 6 months to a year. Doing that paints a rather different picture. I have added a 6 month ROI column. As RESX hasn't yet recorded 6 months of dividend history for every corp, those corps will not show the 6 month ROI. Once 6 months of history has been recorded, the column will automatically activate for that corp. I'm currently adding as much history as possible, using ESMaR as source. ______________________________ Real-time EVE Stock Exchange, Blog
Kasia Pelarar Eve Share and Market Authority	Posted - 2007.05.17 13:48:00 - [113] Originally by: Balogh Originally by: Eefrit I will grant that current performace has been fair of late, but it does not matter to long term investors what the current performance is if it has not been consistent. If you are going to compare BMBE to other public corps, you should look at the average dividend as a % of value over the last 6 months to a year. Doing that paints a rather different picture. I have added a 6 month ROI column. As RESX hasn't yet recorded 6 months of dividend history for every corp, those corps will not show the 6 month ROI. Once 6 months of history has been recorded, the column will automatically activate for that corp. I'm currently adding as much history as possible, using ESMaR as source. Someone mention me? Okay - will be sending bill on Eve-mail No, really glad to be of service. If anyone wants to use the information then that is what it is there for. <shameful advert> Anyone wanting to donate please feel free, I just ask that you send an Eve-mail too (or message on cash receipt) so I know what you sent, and whether you wish to be anonymous (no-one yet). Even defunct shares (preferably those that were publicly launched); I have a sky Vision Enterprises from Treelox , just cannot remember when he sent it - no Eve-mail ). </shameful advert> Eve Share & Market Reporting Eve Share & Market Analysis graphical sig required
Ezoran DuBlaidd Rivers Enterprises Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.17 17:26:00 - [114] Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf words to be corrected with historical/current data/facts. sorry. no. iss is still paying 5% a month, every month, period. what's bmbe's average? is it even 4%? 3%? over it's liftime. fin consistently pays better. i believe, lifetime, aatp is even paying better. if you go thru the list, or even look on esmar/esman (which is only showing RECENT ones) bmbe is number 14. that's out of the current batch. so no, it's not in the top ten and certainly not the top five. unless you look at how much isk per share you receive, while completely ignoring the cost of said share, in which case, i can't help you, because you're ignoring way too many facts. now throw in LONG paying corps who just ended up closing their doors after 1-2 years of paying divs way better than bmbe (what? 8-15% on average probably or maybe better depending, like omara, pct, etc). then you've got bmbe even lower on the list. so no.
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.18 07:49:00 - [115] Originally by: Ezoran DuBlaidd Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf words to be corrected with historical/current data/facts. sorry. no. iss is still paying 5% a month, every month, period. what's bmbe's average? is it even 4%? 3%? over it's liftime. fin consistently pays better. i believe, lifetime, aatp is even paying better. if you go thru the list, or even look on esmar/esman (which is only showing RECENT ones) bmbe is number 14. that's out of the current batch. so no, it's not in the top ten and certainly not the top five. unless you look at how much isk per share you receive, while completely ignoring the cost of said share, in which case, i can't help you, because you're ignoring way too many facts. now throw in LONG paying corps who just ended up closing their doors after 1-2 years of paying divs way better than bmbe (what? 8-15% on average probably or maybe better depending, like omara, pct, etc). then you've got bmbe even lower on the list. so no. You yourself are ignoring many facts. If you do not like the returns, and are a shareholder in BMBE, then sell your shares to someone else. It is really that simple. TornSoul and Ray though have done a good job. They are clearly beating the average expected return when you consider all IPOs ever offered. (Yes you have to average in those that were scams, that lost everything due to theft, and those that were forced to close due to wartime losses.). Yes some have done better than BMBE, and there are still a few (two based upon the figures others have given above) that are giving better returns still. It is not uncommon for reports to be late, or even for a corporation to restate earnings for past quarters in the real world. My point was to point out that many of the people that have been flaming Torn and Ray are wrong. They have done a good job, they have stuck with it even though it was hard, and they have been working towards regaining what was lost. If you feel you can do better, start a competing bank, and lets see how well you do. Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
SonOfAGhost Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.05.18 13:45:00 - [116] Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf TornSoul and Ray though have done a good job. They are clearly beating the average expected return when you consider all IPOs ever offered. Originally by: Tornsoul Total beeing 54,585,992 ISK Since you don't seem to understand the 'investment' you're defending, let me spell it out for you. Assuming you paid IPO price at launch you've made a grand total (dividends + NAV) of just under 9.2% in 15 months. Definitely not top 3, I don't think I own a single share that HASN'T beat that. I should also emphasize that spectacular 7.3% annualized return is assuming reported NAV is even accurate now. After all the people you entrusted with your isk have misrepresented it before and continue to tacitly endorse scamming of the corp they run on your behalf.
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.18 13:56:00 - [117] 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 \|
SonOfAGhost Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2007.05.18 14:33:00 - [118] Originally by: Ray McCormack How are we doing that? I've already covered that in posts 94 and 97 of this very thread. Until you tell your investors who stole THEIR money, you remain complicit and are in effect encouraging others to rip off your investors for even more.
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.18 14:51:00 - [119] 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 \|
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.18 19:43:00 - [120] Originally by: Ray McCormack 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. Then the debtor intentionally defaulted the loan within a week of taking the money. In other words, you never had a good faith relationship. The debtor intended to drop the hammer on you and he did. Whether or not you keep white washing non disclosure of who it was under "confidentiality" is your business and your choice but don't act clueless when people keep bringing this up to sling mud at you. IMHO, you should have challenged the default and possibly disclosed the information as I'd suspect the debtor is a volunteer who had good knowledge of when the boom would fall. The timing of events was to exact to be anything else. As such the default was an exploitation and an abuse. Ethical deportment is still ethical deportment and it's not like such stunts haven't been pulled before. Now, to tidy this all up in one neat little bundle... ain't crap to be done about this now. I'm quite sure we are all sick and tired of hearing about it. Especially at the drop of a hat. "Ooooooooh... I see Torn's name in text. Must scream, moan, and whine about something I can't do a darned thing about. Oooooooooh.... " The thread turned to someone pointing out that BMBE has done a remarkable job. And yes they have. While there have been many ipo's in eve and people want to gradiate the truth of BMBE's success by classifying it this way or spinning it that way the point of the matter is: BMBE is, and still is, unique within Eve. Point to me any other successful lending institution and I'll bow out. Until then, everyone knows that lending is a risky business. When you bought shares of BMBE you accepted the risk of defaulted loans. Cry and whine about everything else around this fact but you fool no one. So... scam accusers... Proof or stfu. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. ElweSingollo> Eve is P v P not P v GM.
Motivated Prophet Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.18 20:40:00 - [121] Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf What have been the top 1000 Corporation Shares traded publicly in the history of EVE? (assuming there has been a thousand). How long did each of those last? What was the average return on each one over its lifetime? I bet if we sat down and looked at it, compared to many other endeavors in EVE, BMBE has been run well and has had a good return to its investors. Its most certainly in the top ten, and most likely the top 5. BMBE has returned about 13m isk on each 50m isk share, over the course of something like a year and a half. We'll call that 25%, for the sake of simplicity. There is not a single non-scam, non-ISS share issue in Eve (that has run for longer than a couple months) that has given out less than 25% dividends over the course of its lifetime, let alone underperformed BMBE on a month-to-month basis. Off the top of my head, and with a little help from EGSEx's website, corporations that have outperformed BMBE: ZERO. (hi, mom!) P.C.T -R.E- OT-TS ISSBO ISSMO FIN Omara I'm pretty sure a number of other, older shares outperformed BMBE, too: AATP comes to mind as a candidate for that designation. Hell, even ISSO has issued 25% in dividends so far. BMBE is not, and has not been, a very good investment on the strength of its financials. You're welcome to invest because you think TornSoul is the prettiest man in Eve, but don't try to dress him up to look like a top-quality share offering. MP -- TINY. Stage 2 IPO, because good things come in pairs.
Motivated Prophet Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.18 20:53:00 - [122] Originally by: Shar Tegral Point to me any other successful lending institution and I'll bow out. I have my own personal doubts about their veracity, but a LOT of other people seem to trust their reports are accurate, so--ISSO has become, largely, a lending institution. Furthermore, I challenge your definition of "successful" when you're applying it to BMBE. 25% RoI over 18 months is pretty good in the real world, but it doesn't even match inflation in Eve. I'd have been better off (and a hell of a lot more liquid) buying faction equipment and stockpiling it. Using cash-out value plus lifetime dividends, using NAV as the cash-out value per share (a far more accurate assessment), it's only 9% RoI, anyway. I think you could have made that by doing ANYTHING other than investing in BMBE--that's around one-half of one percent monthly return. With regards to "outing" the defaulter--he never intended to pay. There was no good-faith relationship. Why is this even an issue of contention? He should be revealed. He does NOT need advance notice; what he did was tantamount to a contract scam in Jita, only for 30b isk of public money instead of a bil or two of an idiot's wallet. MP -- TINY. Stage 2 IPO, because good things come in pairs.
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.18 21:07:00 - [123] Originally by: Motivated Prophet I'd have been better off (and a hell of a lot more liquid) buying faction equipment and stockpiling it. That's called hindsight. If you thought buying faction gear and stockpiling it was a less riskier prospect... why didn't you do it? I'm beginning to think that the hind in hindsight is not that someone is looking back... just the nature of someone who focuses on that to the exclusion of reality that existed at the time being discussed. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. ElweSingollo> Eve is P v P not P v GM.
Marodi Julita Sublime Captial Investments	Posted - 2007.05.18 21:12:00 - [124] Originally by: Motivated Prophet He does NOT need advance notice; what he did was tantamount to a contract scam in Jita, only for 30b isk of public money instead of a bil or two of an idiot's wallet. MP What about 30b isk of public money out of an idiot's wallet? :P Just kidding (although i'm sure someone is going to quote it and blah blah you know the forum drill)... But yeah... spending 3 months late last year not paying divs because the CEO was too lazy to even advertise is just pathetic. And this whole only giving partial information is for the birds. Thank god i sold my shares and made profit before BMBE started biting it..
Balogh Gallente Real-time EVE Stock Exchange	Posted - 2007.05.18 21:21:00 - [125] Edited by: Balogh on 18/05/2007 21:22:34 Note: All percentages indicate dividend, not profit, unless stated otherwise. According to the BMBE website, the lowest interest rate offered is 1.5% per week. Assuming all ISK is being lended at all times, BMBE provides a ROI of at least 2.6% per month, or 31.2% per year. The median interest rate is 2.5%, 3.5% or 7%, depending on the type of loan. I'll assume the average interest rate of all loans combined is 3%. At 3%, the ROI becomes 5.2% per month, or 62.4% per year. That's assuming all ISK is being lended at all times, which is an unrealistic goal. I'll assume instead that at least 80% of all ISK is being lended. That will make the ROI 4.2% per month, or 49.9% per year. Now add the occasional default. I'm don't know how much safety margin BMBE calculates, but I'll assume for the worst that BMBE undervalues BPOs, at 60% value. Let's also assume 40% of capital per year is being defaulted. This means a loss of 6.4% of dividend per year, or 0.5% per month. This will make the ROI 3.6% per month, or 43.5% per year. So, using pessimistic calculations, the ROI on BMBE shares is 43.5% per year. If instead 100% of all ISK is being lended and no defaults happen at all, the ROI is 62.4% per year. Originally by: Motivated Prophet BMBE has returned about 13m isk on each 50m isk share, over the course of something like a year and a half. We'll call that 25%, for the sake of simplicity. 25% ROI over 18 months is way less than 43.5% over 12 months (or 65.3% over 18 months). If I made a mistake with these calculations, feel free to correct me. Edit: typo correction ______________________________ Real-time EVE Stock Exchange, Blog
Ionia Advanced Manufacturing	Posted - 2007.05.18 22:24:00 - [126] Originally by: Balogh Edited by: Balogh on 18/05/2007 21:23:27 Edit: typo correction Note: All percentages indicate dividend, not profit, unless stated otherwise. According to the BMBE website, the lowest interest rate offered is 1.5% per week. Assuming all ISK is being lended at all times, BMBE provides a ROI of at least 2.6% per month, or 31.2% per year. The median interest rate is 2.5%, 3.5% or 7%, depending on the type of loan. I'll assume the average interest rate of all loans combined is 3%. At 3%, the ROI becomes 5.2% per month, or 62.4% per year. That's assuming all ISK is being lended at all times, which is an unrealistic goal. I'll assume instead that at least 80% of all ISK is being lended. That will make the ROI 4.2% per month, or 49.9% per year. Now add the occasional default. I'm don't know how much safety margin BMBE calculates, but I'll assume for the worst that BMBE undervalues BPOs, at 60% value. Let's also assume 40% of capital per year is being defaulted. This means a loss of 6.4% per year, or 0.5% per month. This will make the ROI 3.6% per month, or 43.5% per year. So, using pessimistic calculations, the ROI on BMBE shares is 43.5% per year. If instead 100% of all ISK is being lended and no defaults happen at all, the ROI is 62.4% per year. Originally by: Motivated Prophet BMBE has returned about 13m isk on each 50m isk share, over the course of something like a year and a half. We'll call that 25%, for the sake of simplicity. 25% ROI over 18 months is way less than 43.5% over 12 months (or 65.3% over 18 months). If I made a mistake with these calculations, feel free to correct me. The difference between theory and practise is that in theory, there is no difference between theory and practise, but in practise, there is.
Balogh Gallente Real-time EVE Stock Exchange	Posted - 2007.05.18 22:41:00 - [127] Originally by: Ionia Originally by: Balogh Edited by: Balogh on 18/05/2007 21:23:27 Edit: typo correction Note: All percentages indicate dividend, not profit, unless stated otherwise. According to the BMBE website, the lowest interest rate offered is 1.5% per week. Assuming all ISK is being lended at all times, BMBE provides a ROI of at least 2.6% per month, or 31.2% per year. The median interest rate is 2.5%, 3.5% or 7%, depending on the type of loan. I'll assume the average interest rate of all loans combined is 3%. At 3%, the ROI becomes 5.2% per month, or 62.4% per year. That's assuming all ISK is being lended at all times, which is an unrealistic goal. I'll assume instead that at least 80% of all ISK is being lended. That will make the ROI 4.2% per month, or 49.9% per year. Now add the occasional default. I'm don't know how much safety margin BMBE calculates, but I'll assume for the worst that BMBE undervalues BPOs, at 60% value. Let's also assume 40% of capital per year is being defaulted. This means a loss of 6.4% per year, or 0.5% per month. This will make the ROI 3.6% per month, or 43.5% per year. So, using pessimistic calculations, the ROI on BMBE shares is 43.5% per year. If instead 100% of all ISK is being lended and no defaults happen at all, the ROI is 62.4% per year. Originally by: Motivated Prophet BMBE has returned about 13m isk on each 50m isk share, over the course of something like a year and a half. We'll call that 25%, for the sake of simplicity. 25% ROI over 18 months is way less than 43.5% over 12 months (or 65.3% over 18 months). If I made a mistake with these calculations, feel free to correct me. The difference between theory and practise is that in theory, there is no difference between theory and practise, but in practise, there is. You're saying my pessimistic calculations aren't pessimistic enough? ______________________________ Real-time EVE Stock Exchange, Blog
Motivated Prophet Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.18 23:07:00 - [128] Originally by: Shar Tegral Originally by: Motivated Prophet I'd have been better off (and a hell of a lot more liquid) buying faction equipment and stockpiling it. That's called hindsight. If you thought buying faction gear and stockpiling it was a less riskier prospect... why didn't you do it? snip personal attack I did do something else. I had a better way to make money, and I made an IPO out of it, which has produced 40% RoI in terms of dividends alone, quintupled share value relative to IPO prices, and effected a small increase in NAV (just short of 200 million isk, or about 2%). BMBE has been in business three times as long, produced less than two-thirds the absolute dividends, its shares are very nearly worthless, and it has lost 15-20% of NAV. I do not own any BMBE shares. I've been holding up BMBE as an example of a bad investment more or less from the first moment I sold my shares. MP -- TINY. Stage 2 IPO, because good things come in pairs.
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.19 00:26:00 - [129] Originally by: Motivated Prophet I did do something else. Pointless self promotional snipped I do not own any BMBE shares. Then why continue trying to brow beat your point of view. If you've washed your hands and put them somewhere else perhaps you'd best keep them there. I know what a good investment is, I know what good management is. I could go on with a bit of self aggrandizing chest thumping as well but to be honest it has no point. Those who know better, even though we are painted as clueless, knew what made BMBE different than any other investment plan to date. It was an Eve social experiment in the viability, and profitability, of a lending institution. As of yet there has been no other successful attempt at this. (ISS is not a public lender) If you bought your shares without realizing the risk involved. Shame on you. If you sold your shares once you realized it, good for you. But what I don't get is how you try to snatch from BMBE any good credit whatsoever. Are you that bitter on a personal level? I don't hold BMBE up as an example of good investment as well. But I don't see any point, or truth, in vilifying them either. So I'll concede this field to you... I'm sure you'll have more than enough internal fuel to go on for days. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. ElweSingollo> Eve is P v P not P v GM.
Motivated Prophet Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.19 01:58:00 - [130] Originally by: Shar Tegral Are you that bitter on a personal level? No. I'm that bitter on a factual and professional level. Bienurdau Hywoaf originally brought up the topic of BMBE's profitability, saying it was probably amongst the highest-profit IPO's ever, an assertion I felt the need to forcefully correct. Upon further inspection, he appears to be a CAOD troll alt (especially given the lack of followup posted here), so my apologies to the forum for rising to his bait. The fault in this argument so far, however, has largely been yours. I feel that your ad hominem attack left me little choice but to respond with all available alacrity lest I be painted as a worrywart and--if I conclude from your attack correctly, quite literally--a "bum". Having put me in this position, you then question my speed and dedication with regards to my responses? That seems disingenuous. Even if we sidestep this whole interplay between you and me, the facts remain: 1) BMBE has been a terrible investment as compared to almost any other non-scam IPO, and 2) There is no justifiable reason not to reveal the defaulter's name immediately, and without notice. If you wish to contend that either of the above statements aren't true, that's fine. But let's cut out the bull** about my motivations being self-aggrandizement; I've already sold all my IPOs' shares. I'm here to protect my capital market**, my friends (the BMBE investors), and my favorite roleplaying arena, in that order. MP -- TINY. Stage 2 IPO, because good things come in pairs.
Marodi Julita Sublime Captial Investments	Posted - 2007.05.19 02:05:00 - [131] Originally by: Motivated Prophet Originally by: Shar Tegral BMBE has been a terrible investment as compared to almost any other non-scam IPO, and Actually.. thats not neccessarily true. Although I havent run the numbers, I think P-TEC was a better investment even though it WAS a scam. Gave out amazing dividends.
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.19 02:56:00 - [132] Originally by: Motivated Prophet Snipped the useless parts The fault in this argument so far, however, has largely been yours. I feel that your ad hominem attack left me little choice but to respond with all available alacrity lest I be painted as a worrywart and--if I conclude from your attack correctly, quite literally--a "bum". I never called you a bum. Do not assume the language, and usage, that is yours is mine. Proficiency with the English language does not mean it is owned by either yourself or me. And if you wish to point out fault I quote "Furthermore, I challenge your definition... ..." I set the record straight and you chose to challenge that. Stop hiding behind some sort of righteousness in this. Ergo, I may say that you are being a hind end with your incessant droning and I may even be correct. This has gotten pointless, repetitive, and inane. I will leave since you seem to think any positive mention, even if only in the perception of the poster, must be resoundingly denounced because of your self appointment as owner of the capital market, etc., etc., yada, yada. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. ElweSingollo> Eve is P v P not P v GM.
Motivated Prophet Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.19 08:27:00 - [133] Originally by: Shar Tegral This has gotten pointless, repetitive, and inane. I will leave since you seem to think any positive mention, even if only in the perception of the poster, must be resoundingly denounced because of your self appointment as owner of the capital market, etc., etc., yada, yada. Now it's just getting ridiculous. You've dug your own grave; I'm just posting to observe WP:WORD. MP -- TINY. Stage 2 IPO, because good things come in pairs.
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.19 09:48:00 - [134] I did some calculating last night. In the last round of dividends, both FIN and BMBE paid out 2% return on the investment. That is what was paid per share was worth 2% of the IPO value of a share. I didn't have time to run down the list, but I did those two because folks were tauting FIN as a better investment, and its not. Its running about the same at best. BMBE is still despite its losses been a good investment. AATP did not pay out well in its history. It paid out about average return of investment, it was not really a stellar endeavor. BMBE and FIN have paid above average over their lifetimes. Your assumption on BMBE loans/profits are pretty much that. Without having access to the real books, which even real world companies don't make public, there is really no way of knowing the amount of capital lent out at any point. Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Balogh Gallente Real-time EVE Stock Exchange	Posted - 2007.05.19 10:05:00 - [135] Edited by: Balogh on 19/05/2007 10:09:38 Used wrong numbers Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf I did some calculating last night. In the last round of dividends, both FIN and BMBE paid out 2% return on the investment. That is what was paid per share was worth 2% of the IPO value of a share. I didn't have time to run down the list, but I did those two because folks were tauting FIN as a better investment, and its not. Its running about the same at best. Keep in mind that this 2% FIN payment has been paid after two weeks instead of the usual month. Quote: Your assumption on BMBE loans/profits are pretty much that. Without having access to the real books, which even real world companies don't make public, there is really no way of knowing the amount of capital lent out at any point. As I stated, my assumptions are pessimistic. Unless a lot of things go wrong, it shouldn't get worse than that. However, as indicated by the actual return, it's 61% worse. ______________________________ Real-time EVE Stock Exchange, Blog
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.19 12:21:00 - [136] 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 \|
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.19 12:46:00 - [137] Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf AATP did not pay out well in its history. It paid out about average return of investment, it was not really a stellar endeavor. BMBE and FIN have paid above average over their lifetimes. AATP has paid out more than BMBE on average And AATP has growth potential--BMBE has lost capital, while AATP has gained it. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
Balogh Gallente Real-time EVE Stock Exchange	Posted - 2007.05.19 13:55:00 - [138] Originally by: Ray McCormack (snip dividend history) A grand total of 26.6% over 15 months, or 1.77% per month, or 21.3% per year. ______________________________ Real-time EVE Stock Exchange, Blog
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.19 14:18:00 - [139] Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf AATP did not pay out well in its history. It paid out about average return of investment, it was not really a stellar endeavor. BMBE and FIN have paid above average over their lifetimes. AATP has paid out more than BMBE on average And AATP has growth potential--BMBE has lost capital, while AATP has gained it. AATP has paid no dividends in over 30 days. They last paid dividends on April 12th 2007. They have routinely been getting later and later with dividends, something that many who have flamed Torn and Ray have accused them of. It is true though that on average prior to this past month that AATP has paid out better dividends. on average than that offered by BMBE or FIN as far as I can tell. I appologize for saying they didn't above. However FIN and AATP are going to face some hard times in the future if the Devs do as they have said elsewhere and remove the t2 BPOs once they feel the invention section can accomadate the game. I still believe Oveur's posts previously in the thread to one of his blogs where he said they were examining options but that the t2 bpos would be removed. Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.19 14:24:00 - [140] Originally by: Balogh Originally by: Ray McCormack (snip dividend history) A grand total of 26.6% over 15 months, or 1.77% per month, or 21.3% per year. I believe in the original agreement it was stated dividends wouldn't be paid the first 2 months, so you'd only use 13 months not 15, and really probably should just base it on the average of the last 12 months.....doing a 13 month average yields 2.05% monthly average. The 12 month average is better 2.1233% The last 6 month average for BMBE has been 2.45%. So there has been steady improvement. The first quarter of 2007 saw an average of 3.14% per month. So they have been improving. Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.05.19 14:41:00 - [141] Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf AATP did not pay out well in its history. It paid out about average return of investment, it was not really a stellar endeavor. BMBE and FIN have paid above average over their lifetimes. AATP has paid out more than BMBE on average And AATP has growth potential--BMBE has lost capital, while AATP has gained it. AATP has paid no dividends in over 30 days. They last paid dividends on April 12th 2007. They have routinely been getting later and later with dividends, something that many who have flamed Torn and Ray have accused them of. It is true though that on average prior to this past month that AATP has paid out better dividends. on average than that offered by BMBE or FIN as far as I can tell. I appologize for saying they didn't above. However FIN and AATP are going to face some hard times in the future if the Devs do as they have said elsewhere and remove the t2 BPOs once they feel the invention section can accomadate the game. I still believe Oveur's posts previously in the thread to one of his blogs where he said they were examining options but that the t2 bpos would be removed. Those are very wild claims. I have never seen the developers say anything about removing T2 BPOs. --23 Member-- Listen to EVE-Trance Radio!
Ezoran DuBlaidd Rivers Enterprises Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.19 14:51:00 - [142] Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Bienurdau Hywoaf AATP did not pay out well in its history. It paid out about average return of investment, it was not really a stellar endeavor. BMBE and FIN have paid above average over their lifetimes. AATP has paid out more than BMBE on average And AATP has growth potential--BMBE has lost capital, while AATP has gained it. AATP has paid no dividends in over 30 days. They last paid dividends on April 12th 2007. They have routinely been getting later and later with dividends, something that many who have flamed Torn and Ray have accused them of. It is true though that on average prior to this past month that AATP has paid out better dividends. on average than that offered by BMBE or FIN as far as I can tell. I appologize for saying they didn't above. However FIN and AATP are going to face some hard times in the future if the Devs do as they have said elsewhere and remove the t2 BPOs once they feel the invention section can accomadate the game. I still believe Oveur's posts previously in the thread to one of his blogs where he said they were examining options but that the t2 bpos would be removed. seriously, what are you people considering as "good" divs? 10% a month IS a good div. aatp has done what? 25-28% TOTAL over 8 months? 3.5%/month (if that) is a GOOD return? if that's all it takes to be considered a great investment, then pretty much anyone could take trillions and give that sort of a div. bmbe, correct me with actual numbers if i'm wrong, not a warm fuzzy feeling of goodness, is worse than aatp on lifetime averages.
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.19 14:56:00 - [143] 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 - [144] 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 \|
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.19 15:14:00 - [145] Edited by: Bienurdau Hywoaf on 19/05/2007 15:14:02 He didn't say necessarily they were but really showed two seperate possibilities: Originally by: CCP Oveur What I was refering to with BPCs is like we did some time ago with the old "Infinite-run" BPCs. In the old days, we didn't have runs so a copy was infinite except it's Efficiency was locked, mainly to differentiate a copy from an original. We changed all these into limited-run copies, except of course they were multiples of the max-run value and that's what we're referring to if a BPO would be turned into a BPC. A BPO-turned-BPC would give you long-term value, but it would in the end disappear. In addition to that, we would allow you to work with it, research efficiency of all BPCs, even add runs back to it at the cost of not being in manufacturing, so the investment isn't totally lost in some years, it's still a platform to research upon. (very similar to the suggestion above about decay of a BPO in production) or Originally by: CCP Oveur Absolutely, Invention could be the mechanic for acquiring BPOs. Read upper reply about the situation where T2 BPOs would possibly be changed to BPCs and the prerequisites of going that way if we'd at all consider it. Either option will impact heavily AATP and FIN, though I suspect since they only plan to add ammo/drone invention in Revelation 2, it might be Revelations 3 before you see either of those. Those quotes are taken from this Thread on page 16. Edit: Didn't get the full quote first time... Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.19 15:23:00 - [146] Originally by: Ray McCormack 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. Someone else knows the thread :), but as you said taken out of context. If your read the whole thing, then it is clear they will not be taken out without compensation of some sort as I quoted, or that rather than taking them out they may grant some means through invention to acquire BPOs in the future. Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Ray McCormack BIG	Posted - 2007.05.19 15:28:00 - [147] 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 \|
Bienurdau Hywoaf Minmatar Matari Holo News Network	Posted - 2007.05.19 15:34:00 - [148] Originally by: Ray McCormack 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. I would agree that a patch note or dev blog would come before any change. However as many pointed out in that thread some mechanism will need to be in place to replenish BPOs as the game progresses if you decide to leave them in. Even if CCP didn't change them out attrition in time would remove all of them (though that might take years). Many also argued that in leaving them in they basically would keep newbies from ever being able to compete with the older veterans, which would mean in time game stagnation and declining population. I think we are at least 6 months from such a change, but feel it most likely will come within a year. Idea: Treaties Idea: Jump Rigs
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.19 17:20:00 - [149] Originally by: Ray McCormack dividend stats Percentages based on an IPO price of 50,790,000.00 : 790 shares were sold at 52m, 1210 at 50m. In all fairness or unfairness it would seem more meaningful to quote dividend percentage off the current market share price and not use the IPO value. The effect would be higher dividend percentages with a healthy recognition that the underlying share value has changed. For example somebody able to buy a share of BMBE today for 25 million would get twice the dividend rate that you have quoted. And it would be a more robust estimate of the performance of the investment. Computing dividends off some basis that was paid by someone some time ago is straying from reality. This is a market forum right? So why dont we let free market into our reporting? Otherwise, and these numbers are completely unrelated to BMBE, somebody who got 30M in dividends but lost 30M in share value due to decrease in share price thinks that he or she is 30 M ahead on investment.
Motivated Prophet Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.19 18:55:00 - [150] Edited by: Motivated Prophet on 19/05/2007 18:54:35 Edit: fixed comma splice Originally by: Rthor Originally by: Ray McCormack dividend stats Percentages based on an IPO price of 50,790,000.00 : 790 shares were sold at 52m, 1210 at 50m. In all fairness or unfairness it would seem more meaningful to quote dividend percentage off the current market share price and not use the IPO value. The effect would be higher dividend percentages with a healthy recognition that the underlying share value has changed. For example somebody able to buy a share of BMBE today for 25 million would get twice the dividend rate that you have quoted. And it would be a more robust estimate of the performance of the investment. Computing dividends off some basis that was paid by someone some time ago is straying from reality. This is a market forum right? So why dont we let free market into our reporting? Otherwise, and these numbers are completely unrelated to BMBE, somebody who got 30M in dividends but lost 30M in share value due to decrease in share price thinks that he or she is 30 M ahead on investment. That screws over the original IPO investors, whose take on things--which negates your last complaint--is based on cash-out value plus dividends. Using NAV as the cash-out value, those people are up to 54,585,992 ISK per share, and paid, based on Ray's calculations, 50,790,000 per share on average. That's about 7.5% RoI. Since the first two months were stated as non-dividend months, that works out to about 0.57% RoI per month over thirteen months. If you can find me share prices from before this latest wave of accusations, I'd be happy to rework the numbers from the perspective of a newer investor, but the only metric that has any direct relationship to the talents of the management is the one taken from the perspective of an IPO investor. MP -- Proud steward of 47 billion isk in public money, and counting. Ask me about mineral compression!
Ionia Advanced Manufacturing	Posted - 2007.05.19 19:20:00 - [151] I still dont know where the idea of posting a % dividend came from, its rediculous. Post the actual amount of isk per share and each investor can calculate their own roi based on the price they paid.
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.19 19:38:00 - [152] Originally by: Ionia I still dont know where the idea of posting a % dividend came from, its rediculous. Post the actual amount of isk per share and each investor can calculate their own roi based on the price they paid. Either methodology allows for "massaged" representation of facts. Percentages though tend to favor "massaging" favorably which may explain why those who are on the negative camp argue for presenting "lesser" percentages. 6 in one hand... But I agree with you. Just the facts is better. The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. ElweSingollo> Eve is P v P not P v GM.
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.19 20:15:00 - [153] Originally by: Motivated Prophet That screws over the original IPO investors.... What are you talking about. I made a simple point: report accurately without untrue assumption of how much a share is worth. This does not have to be that difficult to agree with. In RL if I buy a share of something, receive a dividend and sell this share then my profit or loss is the difference between the prices that I paid for the shares plus the dividend. It is pretty simple math and if you use it then you do not have to constantly deal with the mystery of "what happened to the money in my wallet I thought I had more." If these shares actually had a "cash out value", which I presume you to mean that BMBE guarantees to buy back shares at IPO price, then I could see what you are talking about but we would not be having this discussion if they did. I realize that sometimes people refuse to acknowledge their loss so they delay selling their shares which are "underwater" and they kid themselves that they have not lost anything until they actually sold. Same thing is happening here when ppl look at dividends and ignore the fact that their share price fell in determining if BMBE is a success. If you really do not feel that BMBE management is not responsible for share price then no wonder the shares are worth less than IPO price because the would-be-buyers of your shares agree with you. The only way that a stock system is going to work in Eve is if share performance is used to evaluate management performance in the long run. Share price does not lie in a long run.
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.19 20:28:00 - [154] Originally by: Shar Tegral Originally by: Ionia I still dont know where the idea of posting a % dividend came from, its rediculous. Post the actual amount of isk per share and each investor can calculate their own roi based on the price they paid. Either methodology allows for "massaged" representation of facts. Percentages though tend to favor "massaging" favorably which may explain why those who are on the negative camp argue for presenting "lesser" percentages. 6 in one hand... But I agree with you. Just the facts is better. What?
Treelox Amarr Frontier Technologies	Posted - 2007.05.19 21:30:00 - [155] Edited by: Treelox on 19/05/2007 21:29:20 Originally by: Rthor Originally by: Shar Tegral Originally by: Ionia I still dont know where the idea of posting a % dividend came from, its rediculous. Post the actual amount of isk per share and each investor can calculate their own roi based on the price they paid. Either methodology allows for "massaged" representation of facts. Percentages though tend to favor "massaging" favorably which may explain why those who are on the negative camp argue for presenting "lesser" percentages. 6 in one hand... But I agree with you. Just the facts is better. What? ROI given as a % by reporting corps is very subjective. Not everyone paid the same ammount for their shares, so the % (in regards to the dividend) is not the same for everyone. Easy Example Pod Pilot A, buys 1 share of ACME for 1000isk. Pod Pilot B, buys 1 share of ACME for 500isk. ACME pays a dividend of 100isk. Pod Pilot A, has a 10% ROI (dividend) Pod Pilot B, has a 20% ROI (dividend) End Example I agree with Ionia and Shar, It would be nice to see the raw number, and not only the subjective % as based upon the IPO price. To further confuse things, I have been getting a 15% ROI(return on investment) on my AATP portfolio. Why? Because I had the good fortune to be in the right place at the right time, and be able to buy a bunch off someone who needed liquid isk quick. He sold me a bunch at +50% discount off their IPO face value. ++EDITED for Clarity++ -- FTEK \| Production ~ Research ~ Sales ~ Omber Zombie's Wet Work
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.19 21:59:00 - [156] What is a raw number?
Motivated Prophet Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.19 22:48:00 - [157] This is just getting ridiculous. I am defining "cash-out value" as NAV; that is NOT a buyback at IPO price, that is BMBE liquidating everything they own and dividending it. But, fine, insert your own numbers into: 50,720,000 ISK--sell value for BMBE shares at IPO 50,000,000 ISK--book value for BMBE shares at IPO 40,948,664 ISK--current value of each share 42,950,000 ISK--lowest sell order on EGSEx 34,000,000 ISK--highest buy order on EGSEx 13,637,328 ISK--dividends since inception Now, try to use that last number in a useful calculation without using the IPO values and without making yourself look like an idiot. Here, I'll do two for you: Joe bought BMBE shares at (pulling a number out of thin air) 40m apiece right after the IPO (somehow). Joe's shares are now worth 40,948,664 isk apiece--a 948,664 isk profit. Joe has received 13,637,328 isk in dividends. Joe now sells his shares to a non-existant, mythical buyer who's willing to pay 40,948,664 isk apiece for them. Joe has realized 14,585,992 isk in profit off of 40m isk in thirteen months, or 2.8% per month. Alternately, he can sell to the buy order, in which case he'd make 7,637,328 isk, or 1.47% per month. The glaring questions of how the hell he bought those shares for 40m isk and who he's selling them to (for the first example) are left unanswered. For the rest of us, let's stick to real-world numbers, OK? MP -- Proud steward of 47 billion isk in public money, and counting. Ask me about mineral compression!
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.05.19 23:10:00 - [158] Originally by: Motivated Prophet This is just getting ridiculous. QFT The Eve-Online forums may not have invented whining, but they sure have perfected it. ElweSingollo> Eve is P v P not P v GM.
Rthor Gallente Smugglers Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.19 23:38:00 - [159]
Ricdic Caldari Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd Zzz	Posted - 2007.05.20 02:01:00 - [160] I wonder if it's time to stop raping BMBE and let them get back to work. We should write a book on this. I will organise the chapters 1) BMBE, the beginning 2) Where art thou dividends 3) The money laundering 4) Ray (gangsta name) joins BMBE 5) The takeover (or not) 6) Failed takeover resulting in information leak 7) Doctored Reports Uncovered 8) Credibility attack on Torn Soul by Eefrit 9) Defensive stations for Baun 10) Credibility attack on Eefrit by Torn Soul 11) Eefrit found to have lied for personal gain 12) BMBE vs Eve Online, the debate 13) Debate completed, no outcome as expected 14) Debating continues and old points are rehashed. Guys, can we finish this with chapter 15? 15) BMBE is left to fix their mistakes and ensure it doesn't happen again. Work on building reputation back up, and show shareholders that their funds weren't ill-invested. Sick of the waits with empire research slots? Use mine!
Marodi Julita Sublime Captial Investments	Posted - 2007.05.20 02:10:00 - [161] Originally by: Ricdic I wonder if it's time to stop raping BMBE and let them get back to work. We should write a book on this. I will organise the chapters 1) BMBE, the beginning 2) Where art thou dividends 3) The money laundering 4) Ray (gangsta name) joins BMBE 5) The takeover (or not) 6) Failed takeover resulting in information leak 7) Doctored Reports Uncovered 8) Credibility attack on Torn Soul by Eefrit 9) Defensive stations for Baun 10) Credibility attack on Eefrit by Torn Soul 11) Eefrit found to have lied for personal gain 12) BMBE vs Eve Online, the debate 13) Debate completed, no outcome as expected 14) Debating continues and old points are rehashed. Guys, can we finish this with chapter 15? 15) BMBE is left to fix their mistakes and ensure it doesn't happen again. Work on building reputation back up, and show shareholders that their funds weren't ill-invested. 16) Baun is banished from Market Discussion forum for doing everything he can to fan the flames by not giving out information. I can hope can't I?
Verite Rendition Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.	Posted - 2007.05.21 00:01:00 - [162] Originally by: Ricdic I wonder if it's time to stop raping BMBE and let them get back to work. We should write a book on this. I will organise the chapters 1) BMBE, the beginning 2) Where art thou dividends 3) The money laundering 4) Ray (gangsta name) joins BMBE 5) The takeover (or not) 6) Failed takeover resulting in information leak 7) Doctored Reports Uncovered 8) Credibility attack on Torn Soul by Eefrit 9) Defensive stations for Baun 10) Credibility attack on Eefrit by Torn Soul 11) Eefrit found to have lied for personal gain 12) BMBE vs Eve Online, the debate 13) Debate completed, no outcome as expected 14) Debating continues and old points are rehashed. Guys, can we finish this with chapter 15? 15) BMBE is left to fix their mistakes and ensure it doesn't happen again. Work on building reputation back up, and show shareholders that their funds weren't ill-invested. Not until TS/Ray come at us with a plan to fix things. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic
Ricdic Caldari Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd Zzz	Posted - 2007.05.21 02:11:00 - [163] Originally by: Ricdic 11) Eefrit found to have lied for personal gain Eefrit has expressed distaste at me for posting this. He doesn't feel it was posted in a humourous fashion and is a direct attack against him. I thought it was pretty obvious that it was joking due to: 1) Reference to a book 2) Reference to chapter titles 3) Reference to Gangsta Ray 4) Reference to Baun commanding battle stations So, whilst I won't apologise as I shouldn't have to tiptoe around people, I do want this point to be clear. Thank you, Ricdic Sick of the waits with empire research slots? Use mine!
Marodi Julita Sublime Captial Investments	Posted - 2007.05.21 02:17:00 - [164] Originally by: Ricdic Originally by: Ricdic 11) Eefrit found to have lied for personal gain Eefrit has expressed distaste at me for posting this. He doesn't feel it was posted in a humourous fashion and is a direct attack against him. I thought it was pretty obvious that it was joking due to: 1) Reference to a book 2) Reference to chapter titles 3) Reference to Gangsta Ray 4) Reference to Baun commanding battle stations So, whilst I won't apologise as I shouldn't have to tiptoe around people, I do want this point to be clear. Thank you, Ricdic I think using Romeo and Juliet-esqe quote for a chapter also counts as a joke... I guess I have a broken humor chip in my positronic net.
Motivated Prophet Zerodot Schools Power Corrupts Industry's	Posted - 2007.05.21 09:08:00 - [165] All joking aside, we still need to know the name of the person who defaulted, and we need to know it before they have a chance to change corps, buy new alts, etc., etc., etc. MP -- Proud steward of 47 billion isk in public money, and counting. Ask me about mineral compression!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [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.