FastLearner
Fury Holdings
Brutally Clever Empire
   |
Posted - 2007.09.11 23:02:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Ricdic
kinda bizarre how there are like corps of the month that get blasted.
EIB then BMBE now ISSO 
I have been organising a flame ******ant suit for quite some time in the expectations that someone may want to try and rumble one of my corporations.
I dunno, I just think we need to move past it. They are offering the minimum for a few months and will then move on. I don't really understand why they don't being offering this buyback right away so those who are truly dissatisfied and vocal about it can get out. Kinda win/win for both parties and ISSO can always relist those shares when the unhappy people are out, and they have tightened up operations.
Seems like the sane thing to do in my opinion.
I dunno much about EIB (before my time), but the other two seenmed to fail on a bunch of different very basic criteria:
1. Sub-standard profits (7% seems about a mediocre return for an IPO nowadays)
2. Lack of communication from those in charge
3. Deliberate mis-valuation of assets (i.e. listing a NAV for the company KNOWING that's it wrong)
4. Late payment of dividends
In fairness, ISSO have only failed on the first three of those - BMBE failed on all four. But TS has the support of a lot of the "in-crowd" in these forums - so gets a bit more lee-way.
Whether you're next "corp of the month" is open for debate - how many of the above list of points do you meet? I doubt you are - only number 1 seems to apply to any of your endeavours so you're most likely safe (#1 on its own carries little weight - as so many people have ISK invested that, without other motivation, they'd rather not rock the boat with no refund option open).
If you give good returns and are accessible then I don't see why anyone would be worried - personally I'd welcome the attention of someone trying to make me out as incompetent, as it'd be free bumping of my threads all day long and I have nothing to hide. Only the incompetent/crooked have to fear public attention - the rest of us take it as free publicity. My personal view is that ISSO are actualy doing a fairly decent job for the amount of capital they control - they're just suffering from ill-advised PR. I'd guess they have fairly competent people in charge (not really good ones, obviously) and are just failing at communicating the issues they face properly.
Like most of the long-standing IPOs with no buy-back, they';re in the trap of being good enough to make a semi-respectable profit - but not good enough to compete on % returns with more keen newcomers with more ability. They therefore have to fall back on their "no buy-back" policy to maintain capital - as once they start buying back shares they permanently lose control of capital. The market is full of old companies with this attitude - who rely on the "fact" that they're somehow trustworthy because they've returned crap for ages as making them better than newer companies who can make much more. If I needed more ISK invested myself I'd make an effort to drive this point home - but as I;m constantly near my saturation point I'd rather idiot investors put their ISK in under-performing "reliable" companies than in total rip-offs.
Where I maybe agree with you (though for entirely different reasons) is that I also believe there are fairly random scape-goats picked. I suspect you think they're picked at random - I believe they're picked out of poorly performing corporations, just with those in the "in-crowd" left out of the available options. Securing one another's assets and being on advisory boards for one another's IPOs can only replace delivery of good profits for so long.
|