EVE Search - Portsmouth Shipyards Inc. [PSI] IPO

All Channels

Market Discussions

Portsmouth Shipyards Inc. [PSI] IPO

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kitex Blacktag Test Labs	Posted - 2007.11.27 08:07:00 - [451] Yes, it would. I've had Excel calculate the percentages given by the UI (up to the given 10 decimal places) for every possible vote total from 1 to 12001. Sadly, there is not a single whole number out of those 36,000 results. Honestly, I can't even use the results to identify a likely number of votes placed. The total vote value that most nearly yields whole numbers on each percentage is indeed 12001, which much more closely yields whole numbers than any other value. That stumps me, because I find it extremely unlikely that every shareholder voted. Especially when shareholders have specifically stated here that they didn't vote. I'd go so far as to say that there's likely a bug in how those votes are being reported by the UI. I'm giving up on it, because I can't reach a solid conclusion. I'm not going to waste more energy fighting it, because I don't see a liquidation in the cards. I would like to see a plan from Wylker though, because even if liquidation isn't going to happen, continuing on the same course that has already failed to pay a single dividend seems quite bizarre. Somethings got to change, regardless that the apparent outcome of the vote is to change nothing. Blacktag - Buy ships / Fittings / Drones / Ammo in BULK with Delivery!
Kitex Blacktag Test Labs	Posted - 2007.11.27 08:26:00 - [452] The more I look at Excel, the more convinced I am that the given percentages for each option can only be derived from a vote total of 12001 votes. 10 decimal places really is a lot to work with, and no other vote total even comes close. I do really find it impossible that every shareholder voted. I'm thinking bug, either in how the vote is being reported, or in all unvoted shares defaulting to the first option in the vote. I'm actually going to apologize to Wylker for accusing him of voting his shares. It seemed an obvious conclusion at the time, but Excel is really pointing me at the "bug" angle now. Blacktag - Buy ships / Fittings / Drones / Ammo in BULK with Delivery!
Shinhan Phoenix Knights Dark Nebula Galactic Empire	Posted - 2007.11.27 08:46:00 - [453] Originally by: Shadarle Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: cosmoray Scenario 1. If Wylker didn't vote his 8001 shares, so 4000 shares voted: 1. 83.0097491876% means that 3320.39 shares voted for option A 2. 5.84117990167% means that 233.6472 shares voted for option B 3. 11.1490709108% means that 445.9628 shares voted for option C OK who has been voting with SHARE FRACTIONS. Scenario 2. If Wylker did vote his 8001 shares. 1. 83.0097491876% means that 9962 shares voted for option A 2. 5.84117990167% means that 701 shares voted for option B 3. 11.1490709108% means that 1338 shares voted for option C This actually seems like a very good method of detecting how many shares voted... It is actually quite interesting that no one else thought this up previously. It's quite obvious and seems to make mathematical sense. Time to go back through some old threads to check some votes I think. You didnt notice my post? Its at the bottom of the 14th page. Is it possible to setup "default vote", so those who havent voted at all are counted as if they voted for option "A"? Anyway, the fact that 100% shares have been used in the voting is very strange. Wylker, if you are absolutely sure you havent voted and nobody else has access to your account, file a petition to CCP. -- Selling apples, 1 signature each. ѼѼѼѼѼѼѼ
Ricdic Caldari Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd Zzz	Posted - 2007.11.27 09:24:00 - [454] I am gonna test the default to A theory now. Will see what happens in 24 hours. Will have all but 200 shares vote on Option B, with the final 200 shares not vote at all. If the current guess is correct, that would mean the 200 default to an Option A vote and the whole voting system is corrupt. this would subsequently mean any new votes would have an a) No vote b) Yes c) No type system in order to work. Either way we will find out in 24 hours once this vote has occured. Need Empire Research Slots. Click here
Matalino Gallente Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2007.11.27 14:45:00 - [455] Originally by: Shadarle It is actually quite interesting that no one else thought this up previously. It's quite obvious and seems to make mathematical sense. Time to go back through some old threads to check some votes I think. How do you think that I posted the number of shares that did not vote on the change to financing for DATAC? I am suprised that more of you didn't already know this. ************************** Datacore Harvesting IPO
Kitex Blacktag Test Labs	Posted - 2007.11.27 15:37:00 - [456] In fairness, it's an insignificant detail to 99.9% of the EVE populace. I probably read that post of yours once, but had no memory of it. When I did read it, I wouldn't have cared how you knew what you knew, because I wasn't hounding you for failing to meet obligations. Blacktag - Buy ships / Fittings / Drones / Ammo in BULK with Delivery!
Matalino Gallente Ki Tech Industries	Posted - 2007.11.27 15:53:00 - [457] Originally by: Kitex In fairness, it's an insignificant detail to 99.9% of the EVE populace. True, I would not have expected many people in say General Discussion to know this, but I would think that this community with all the votes and polling that is done would have known that. In any case, everyone reading this thread knows: and knowing is half the battle. ************************** Datacore Harvesting IPO
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.11.27 18:35:00 - [458] Edited by: Shadarle on 27/11/2007 18:35:13 Originally by: Matalino Originally by: Kitex In fairness, it's an insignificant detail to 99.9% of the EVE populace. True, I would not have expected many people in say General Discussion to know this, but I would think that this community with all the votes and polling that is done would have known that. In any case, everyone reading this thread knows: and knowing is half the battle. I've never issued a share vote myself and I've only seen them posted about 2-3 times in the past, usually just percentages are listed. Only 1 other vote was listed differently. I want to go back and dig up the CRA vote on revealing shareholder names now though. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Wylker Caldari Pyrrhus Sicarii The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.27 19:35:00 - [459] Yeah I've never really looked into other people's votes, but I can tell you certainty that I did not set any kind of "default option" nor did I vote with any of my personal shares or with the non-voting 6001 shares held by Portsmouth. If the information about the reporting is in fact correct, I also agree that it is ridiculous to assume that every single shareholder voted. I know for a fact that a few of my corp mates that hold shares have been out of town for the holiday weekend and wouldn't even have been able to log in and vote. In the interest of making sure of things, I will put up an identical vote again tonight and we'll see what happens. In the interim, I will flesh out my plans for the other options to see what reaction from shareholders looks like. I will most likely be taking a partner or two going forward since I am just not able to devote the necessary time to this venture right now. More details to come. Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Sales Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Discussion
cosmoray	Posted - 2007.11.27 20:08:00 - [460] Sorry Wylker numbers don't lie, there is no alternative vote outcome that proves you didn't vote. Maybe all spare votes defaulted to option A. In the interests as fairness for the vote please set up: 1. Liquidation 2. T2 other production 3. Carry on as before This will help with the potential default voting. Also we can run the numbers again, with the vote details. note: Now that you don't want to spend as much time running the IPO any longer why are you even bothering with the vote. Give the money back and move on.
May Shiko	Posted - 2007.11.27 20:23:00 - [461] Originally by: Wylker I will most likely be taking a partner or two going forward since I am just not able to devote the necessary time to this venture right now. More details to come. I have to agree with cosmoray, and again, speaking on behalf of at least one share, this is not what was agreed to. It's safe to say that the original model for this IPO has failed spectacularly, people didn't sign up for a co-operatively run non-capital production IPO. I could understand the changes if it helped to boost already established profits. But you've yet to pay out a single isk in dividends. Why should the investors and people like myself who forum ***** on behalf of shareholders, allow you to bring further individuals into this IPO? They are simply further factors that increase the chance of a scam at this point in time. If you're going to continue down this road of significant changes, I wish to reinforce and restate my desire (on behalf of others as a private broker) that you offer a buyback as an exit strategy for people who are not interested in the future of this IPO.
Wylker Caldari Pyrrhus Sicarii The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.27 20:30:00 - [462] Originally by: cosmoray Sorry Wylker numbers don't lie, there is no alternative vote outcome that proves you didn't vote. Maybe all spare votes defaulted to option A. Heres what proves I didn't vote: I said I didn't vote. Seriously. Don't make me get all internet tough guy and ask you to call me a liar to my face. If you read the posts above, it is fairly obvious that there is a problem with the vote, as only a complete and utter dumbass would believe that 100% of all shares actually voted. If you choose to believe that then go ahead, but I can't give any rational response to it. Now, as much as I appreciate the impassioned voices of people who are posting here, and can respect everyone's opinion, the bottom line is that there are a great many people who have interest in this project. Please continue to share your opinions and give suggestions, and of course I will absorb any and all feedback; but to expect me to make a decision based off the posts in this thread is completely unfair to the entire population that doesn't frequent the forums. This is the point of the vote. I will put up another 96 hour vote tonight, and I like the idea of changing the order of the options, so I will do that as well. Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Sales Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Discussion
Wylker Caldari Pyrrhus Sicarii The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.27 20:32:00 - [463] Originally by: May Shiko you offer a buyback as an exit strategy for people who are not interested in the future of this IPO. The problem with this is that there can not be a partial buyback. If I liquidate (at a loss) assets to allow people to have shares repurchased, it will invalidate the ability of the program to make ANY returns at ANY point. I have made this point before and going forward I am likely going to not respond to points that have been beaten to death. Please read the entire thread and make suggestions based on new ideas or building upon points that have been raised already. It is very difficult to have intelligent discourse when we lose the thread of the discussion. Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Sales Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Discussion
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.11.27 20:40:00 - [464] Originally by: Wylker Originally by: May Shiko you offer a buyback as an exit strategy for people who are not interested in the future of this IPO. The problem with this is that there can not be a partial buyback. If I liquidate (at a loss) assets to allow people to have shares repurchased, it will invalidate the ability of the program to make ANY returns at ANY point. I have made this point before and going forward I am likely going to not respond to points that have been beaten to death. Please read the entire thread and make suggestions based on new ideas or building upon points that have been raised already. It is very difficult to have intelligent discourse when we lose the thread of the discussion. There we go, we now have a definitive answer to the question of if he'll offer a buyback. No. Not sure where that leaves all the people who want the hell out... but at least they now know they are stuck. A good question to Wylker is this though. What % of people have to want liquidation for you to do it? 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%? The vote is worthless if we don't have a pre-determined number to look for to know what the vote means. Otherwise any result could be offset by a "Well, that isn't high enough so we'll continue on". Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Wylker Caldari Pyrrhus Sicarii The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.27 20:42:00 - [465] Originally by: Shadarle Originally by: Wylker Originally by: May Shiko you offer a buyback as an exit strategy for people who are not interested in the future of this IPO. The problem with this is that there can not be a partial buyback. If I liquidate (at a loss) assets to allow people to have shares repurchased, it will invalidate the ability of the program to make ANY returns at ANY point. I have made this point before and going forward I am likely going to not respond to points that have been beaten to death. Please read the entire thread and make suggestions based on new ideas or building upon points that have been raised already. It is very difficult to have intelligent discourse when we lose the thread of the discussion. There we go, we now have a definitive answer to the question of if he'll offer a buyback. No. Not sure where that leaves all the people who want the hell out... but at least they now know they are stuck. A good question to Wylker is this though. What % of people have to want liquidation for you to do it? 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%? The vote is worthless if we don't have a pre-determined number to look for to know what the vote means. Otherwise any result could be offset by a "Well, that isn't high enough so we'll continue on". 1) I still would like to offer a buy back as soon as some profits are made. One way or the other there is a lot of isk to be made, right now it is a question of how and how much. I don't want to leave anyone out in the cold but there is a certain reality to the situation as well 2) I would say a simple plurality rules here, I think asking for an absolute majority would be too difficult. Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Sales Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Discussion
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.11.27 20:44:00 - [466] Originally by: Wylker Please read the entire thread and make suggestions based on new ideas or building upon points that have been raised already. It is very difficult to have intelligent discourse when we lose the thread of the discussion. A suggestion? Synthesize down the points made in this thread and start a brand spanking new discussion thread all of its very own. Using the ipo thread itself to try to handle various topics quickly becomes burdensome as the pages just grow and grow. Isolate the topics into their own discussion to avoid clutter. Anyone wants to post on another topic can be directed either to a thread covering that or to a new thread on that... perhaps even a hearing petition thread. If they continue, state you are ignoring their posts unless they post it in >link< thread. If you worry about losing track of topics you can always update your original ipo thread with a small index of "official matters" brought before the "board" as it were. Taikun's Lost Bet
May Shiko	Posted - 2007.11.27 20:46:00 - [467] Maybe it's time to liquidate, pay out those who want out, see where you stand and evaluate your position from there? It's not impossible, it's quite feasible there are many options out there. It's quite possible to make 10% a month off of 10billion, and that's very easy on real life. How do I know? I do it with Shiko Productions. Other people make even more off of larger sums of money, FastLearner does it with Fury Bank. As investors, we've shown a lot of faith, a lot of patience. Ultimately, we can not force you to return the money we trusted you with, but you're pretty much selling your reputation. As investors, we're quite willing to deal with the fact that business models and markets fail. We generally don't forget people who come asking for money, and then proceed to do as they please, ignoring requests, very well. You're already abandoning the idea of the PSI IPO, by changing the fields you work in, by proposing bringing others in, a lot of us are simply no longer interested in doing business with you. Again, if you'd like to sell your reputation for 40billion, it's not the smallest amount, nor is it the largest, nor will it be forgotten. I'd like to stress, on behalf of approximately forty or so individuals, who represent many a few billion isk for investing purposes, that you don't sell your reputation for so little. There's more to be made in the long run, and jerking around the people who gave you cash in the first place, is not a smart move.
Letias Caldari Teikoku Trade Conglomerate Visions of Warfare	Posted - 2007.11.27 21:05:00 - [468] Originally by: Wylker Originally by: Shadarle Originally by: Wylker Originally by: May Shiko you offer a buyback as an exit strategy for people who are not interested in the future of this IPO. The problem with this is that there can not be a partial buyback. If I liquidate (at a loss) assets to allow people to have shares repurchased, it will invalidate the ability of the program to make ANY returns at ANY point. I have made this point before and going forward I am likely going to not respond to points that have been beaten to death. Please read the entire thread and make suggestions based on new ideas or building upon points that have been raised already. It is very difficult to have intelligent discourse when we lose the thread of the discussion. There we go, we now have a definitive answer to the question of if he'll offer a buyback. No. Not sure where that leaves all the people who want the hell out... but at least they now know they are stuck. A good question to Wylker is this though. What % of people have to want liquidation for you to do it? 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%? The vote is worthless if we don't have a pre-determined number to look for to know what the vote means. Otherwise any result could be offset by a "Well, that isn't high enough so we'll continue on". 1) I still would like to offer a buy back as soon as some profits are made. In all this time you haven't sold anything
LaVista Vista Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd Zzz	Posted - 2007.11.27 21:18:00 - [469] Originally by: Letias Originally by: Wylker Originally by: Shadarle Originally by: Wylker Originally by: May Shiko you offer a buyback as an exit strategy for people who are not interested in the future of this IPO. The problem with this is that there can not be a partial buyback. If I liquidate (at a loss) assets to allow people to have shares repurchased, it will invalidate the ability of the program to make ANY returns at ANY point. I have made this point before and going forward I am likely going to not respond to points that have been beaten to death. Please read the entire thread and make suggestions based on new ideas or building upon points that have been raised already. It is very difficult to have intelligent discourse when we lose the thread of the discussion. There we go, we now have a definitive answer to the question of if he'll offer a buyback. No. Not sure where that leaves all the people who want the hell out... but at least they now know they are stuck. A good question to Wylker is this though. What % of people have to want liquidation for you to do it? 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%? The vote is worthless if we don't have a pre-determined number to look for to know what the vote means. Otherwise any result could be offset by a "Well, that isn't high enough so we'll continue on". 1) I still would like to offer a buy back as soon as some profits are made. In all this time you haven't sold anything If hes yet to make any profit, you arent even trying. Its still possible to make isk, in fact with little work. It just isnt that profitable. But its definately possible to make at least 1bill during what.. 3 months? Proud nublet of more public ISK than * CAP4U - The Plan
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.11.27 21:25:00 - [470] I just wonder what the theory is... that profits will go up AFTER the nerf hits next patch? If there was a time to make a profit it was up until the last few weeks. Before that you could make a profit (albeit a fairly small one), but if you haven't made a single ISK in 3-4 months then you honestly should just give up and liquidate. You should tons of copies of all your BPO's to sell which would be worth at least a billion isk over all this time if not a lot more. I'm baffled if even something as easy and quick as running copies wasn't done... when you clearly weren't producing anything anyhow. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.11.27 22:54:00 - [471] Pardon the humor here, this is not a troll, but is anyone else noticing that the PSI motto "Reach for the sky" is also the first words of an old fashion western hold up? /me imagines Wylker walking into the Market Forum. Wylker chews some tobacco, spits, pull his gun shouting, "Reach for the sky." Taikun's Lost Bet
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.11.28 03:50:00 - [472] Except he isn't riding into the sunset with the money like the bank robbers of old would, he is sitting down right in the middle of everyone and refusing to give it back. He's probably just sitting there because of the size of the balls he must have to do it leaves him unable to move. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Kylar Renpurs Dusk Blade	Posted - 2007.11.28 03:55:00 - [473] Originally by: Shadarle Except he isn't riding into the sunset with the money like the bank robbers of old would, he is sitting down right in the middle of everyone and refusing to give it back. He's probably just sitting there because of the size of the balls he must have to do it leaves him unable to move. Lmfao,,, quotified Improve Market Competition! Originally by: Shadarle Exce
Boone Kai	Posted - 2007.11.28 04:01:00 - [474] If you all really want to talk to Wylker, you could just check out his posts on Scrapheap Challenge or pm him there. He posts there daily, and therefore should be much more accessible. Here's his post on this IPO: http://www.scrapheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?p=292678
LaVista Vista Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd Zzz	Posted - 2007.11.28 05:17:00 - [475] Originally by: Boone Kai If you all really want to talk to Wylker, you could just check out his posts on Scrapheap Challenge or pm him there. He posts there daily, and therefore should be much more accessible. Here's his post on this IPO: http://www.scrapheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?p=292678 The amount of times i have pointed this out is stupid. Proud nublet of more public ISK than * CAP4U - The Plan
Kitex Blacktag Test Labs	Posted - 2007.11.28 06:39:00 - [476] Originally by: Boone Kai If you all really want to talk to Wylker, you could just check out his posts on Scrapheap Challenge or pm him there. He posts there daily, and therefore should be much more accessible. Though he doesn't ***** these forums like some of us, I actually have no problem at all with his current level of participation in this thread. He's participating, and has posted quite reasonably in the presence of some lingering hostility. I'll reserve judgment to see if things continue to proceed along a course to a resolution of some sort, but for now my biggest area of concern (communication) does not seem to be going too poorly. It's a bit of an about-face for me, but I'm all for credit where it's due. I'm still hoping for a resolution involving liquidation because I believe there are more stable and reliable sources of income available, but I'm willing to do my ranting with my votes for now. Blacktag - Buy ships / Fittings / Drones / Ammo in BULK with Delivery!
Ricdic Caldari Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd Zzz	Posted - 2007.11.28 07:24:00 - [477] Buzz Lightyear also says "Reach for the sky" as one of his buttons. Need Empire Research Slots. Click here
Riethe	Posted - 2007.11.28 07:30:00 - [478] Originally by: Ricdic Buzz Lightyear also says "Reach for the sky" as one of his buttons. I thought that was Woody.
Wylker Caldari Pyrrhus Sicarii The Church.	Posted - 2007.11.28 07:32:00 - [479] TO INFINITY, AND BEYO.... Just kidding, new vote is up. Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Sales Portsmouth Shipyards IPO Discussion
Ricdic Caldari Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd Zzz	Posted - 2007.11.28 07:37:00 - [480] Originally by: Riethe Originally by: Ricdic Buzz Lightyear also says "Reach for the sky" as one of his buttons. I thought that was Woody. You don't turn me on that much any more, sorry Need Empire Research Slots. Click here

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.