Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Call it stupid, call it naive, but the fact is that some of our older players are getting sloppy, are reducing themselves to poor business practices, and most importantly they are setting a bad example for anyone else looking to get into the business sector.

---

It is called hubris. Bob isn't the only one that can develop it you know.

I'm all for new blood. I'm just not for watering it out with an influx of morons. Thus I ask hard questions with the intent of identifying the lazy or ignorant. Kindness and respect must be earned and the only coin I deal in is intelligence.

So, newcomers be warned, I'm not your friend.

Now, now, children... fight nicely!

There is no need for us to get all acrimonious. We know that there are currently no standards regarding "Investor Relations" (more correctly "Organizational Ethics") but this does not obviate the needs for something. It is all part of the growth and maturity of this "long term" side of the game.

That we all agree Eve would suck if there was some regulatory body enforcing these standards. Yes, yes, yes.

But with the totally open market we have today, instead of a Free Trade Market it is more Unfettered Human Greed, it is very likely that an organization could take in billions and actively depreciate its own stock value so that it may later buy it all back. It could even post itself as a successful non-scam operation.

Bah... we all know that there are many bullcrap methods to defraud people. There aren't that many methods to at least treat them with respect and dignity. I think the latter is mostly what Ricdic, and many, are saying.

"At least kiss me if you are going to bugger me."

Originally by: Shadarle

---

With all the posts of the "old guard" I have not seen a single one who agrees that investors should be given more information.

---

LOLOL. I guess I'm not old guard.

Ray: The BMBE example provided pointed out that your management has improved situations. That being the case, stop derailing the thread into Ricdic doesn't have the "best of intentions" or "he's a know it all" debate. Let us tackle the topic not the person or the accuracy of the examples.

Originally by: Daeva Vios

---

If people feel that what I have proposed is inadequate, let me know so I can delete my post. I just feel that two sets of conflicting "standards" will be detrimental.

---

No, it happens all the time. Often titled as "competing" not "conflicting". Whichever gets standardized first, clarified best, and is most widely used... wins.

Originally by: Kylar Renpurs

---

Not criticising any of my shareholders, this is purely an example, since the information I provide isn't particularly valuable, but I've only got about 5 or 6 subscribers out of my 30 odd investors to my mail list.

---

Regarding this; I have a mailing list in game that I use. Whenever I accept an investor I eve mail them a confirmation & instructions on how to join the mailing list. (Granting them permission to join is also a good thing if you keep it private like I do!)

Of course, perhaps CCP could be asked to implement a "share holders" mailing list that is automatic when someone holds shares in a corporation. Granted, it'd be complicated by the fact that corporations can be share holders as well (thus unclear who/how to autojoin people to the list) but perhaps it'll autojoin all corp members in such cases.

Just a thought.

I should point out that both of my previous investment issues did not use the in game share mechanics. I manually tracked & dividend-ed each investor because regardless of the admin overhead I wanted control over who was invested with me.

Originally by: Ray McCormack

---

I'm getting a little tired of you EBANK lot telling everyone how they should be running their corporations. While there may be some validity to your arguments, I just find it extremely arrogant and patronising.

---

Now you are getting annoying mate. I'm not one of EBANK lot simply because I happen to be associated with them in an advisory role. I am my own damn self. Even to my own detriment I have always acted according to my own personal compass.

So, please sir, get a grip.

Originally by: Ray McCormack

---

And no where do I see you telling someone how to run their business.

---

I'm not offended and please feel free to continue expressing yourself. I'm still sipping that first wake up coffee or I would not have been so direct in response.

Also, I beg to differ here sir even if it opens me up to a lot of criticism. Everything I've ever done has always been about telling others what I think is the best way to do things. Everything.

Eve Guardian was about adding content to the game in a constructive manners. Even my own financial projects were to show what I thought was "best practice" for running an ipo/bond issuance. And lord knows behind the scenes at EBANK I'm very vocal on my opinions regarding direction and motivations.

I agree that Ricdic "loaded" the first post. I doubt if it was intended to be flamebait. I don't need to guess this either. He openly confessed that he added some "controversy" for the purpose of stimulating discussion instead of just a ne'er ending series of "I agrees".

In the end, I think the thread has done a lot for the market. There is, again, interest in coming up with an "open source" standards for the investment world of Eve. And, unlike previous times, this wasn't motivated from some major scam striking the community.

Regardless of the heated opinions and stances that were taken (I'm still invested in BMBE because of confidence in you and Tornsoul) this thread has served a good purpose.

Besides anything that makes Liisa post has to be good. Think that's not true... just ask him.

Originally by: Ray McCormack

---

Case in point.

---

Now that we are mutually past that would you care to share some of your invaluable experience with us?

1 - Do you see the need for improvement in BMBE?

2 - Do you see similar needs in the community?

3 - Do you have any opinions not yet touched upon regarding the financial community such as it is?

Feel free to answer as literally or as expressively as you deem. I know you will do as you deem fit just I won't be offended either way. I like this thread. For me it's all about the topic, not so much any individual's post.

So, let's (de)rail it somewhere to a better place. Spiritually, grammatically, ecumenically... ...

Originally by: Ray McCormack

---

The BMBE incident mentioned is over a year old, and was outed almost six months ago, and has no bearing on any alarming new trends within the business community as Ricdic would put it.

---

I know. I was accused of being BMBE's public ho for my defense of BMBE. So please, pull in the fangs a bit.

I ask these questions, and post on this thread, for honest intent. OP withstanding or not depending on your point of view, the topic is a good one. Not about blasting any one specific group or organization.

And six (6) months in the ipo market is recent . This is a long term market. Most would speculate that a mature ipo issue can only be defined one of two ways: Older than 24 months or successfully closed out with all investors satisfied.

Originally by: Ray McCormack

---

I care about your intentions behind this post (which is blatant flamebait, you admit as much youself, and third parties have confirmed it) and the methods with which you went about it.

---

How'd you go from my saying "controversial for discussion sake" to "flamebait" I'll never know but let me set this one straight. It is not, imho, flame bait and I've been one of the major propellers of this thread.

Now, I'd say go to your corners gentlemen and take a breather. I'd say it if I thought either of you would do it. I doubt it's likely as you both have your own personal bits between your teeth. And from my pov it looks like you two can't stop chewing on each other.

Shame on both of you.

Originally by: Montaire

---

I think that those are your primary points. And I agree with 1 and 3. When ISSO did somthing I thought was dirty I sold my shares and started talking about it. When they changed, I absolutly gave them credit.

{... ...} Hurt them where it matters - their wallet. Keep at it untill they change. Then buy their stock before the Wardec end is announced and make a fortune off it.

Its the beauty of eve.

---

Sadly I see this as the "abuse" of eve.

The situation you describe benefits defrauding investors not some sort of market pressure towards better performance or even governance. A stock issuer's funds are suffer zero negative impact from sell-offs of their stock. (Totally unlike rl public corporations I might add.) And wardec's are somewhat redundant as most issuer's are insulated. (I.e. Wardecing me has zero influence on performance... which is the level of protection investors want/demand.)

A corporation could easily encourage sell off's via lack of communication or equivocal actions for the sole purpose of purchasing back the stocks, via an alt, and later on display that they've really been turning a profit.

Neener-neener-neener on those who sold off.

PS: Which is why I do the manual tracking as well. I can't rig performance to use an alt to buy up my own stocks. I'm either legit or not, no middle ground.

Originally by: Montaire

---

I have seen people drive a companies stock down because they knew it was a good company, with great long term prospects. Once the price was down a good 5, 10 or even 15% they purchased the stock themselves at a bargain price.

---

My issue isn't that this happens. As you say, Eve shouldn't be safe. My issue is that those "people" you talk about are often enough inside traders. (Unverifiable of course, always unverifiable)

Part of maintaining investor confidence is to avoid declining share price for quantifiable reasons. In eve, so what. Their reputation get's a bit tarnished, again so what. They've already gotten the money. What do they care if people play those games with their stocks? At best they only care if it creates an opportunity for they themselves to buy back the stocks.

Of course reputable companies maintain a published buy back price on the stocks. The valuation process is varied and, in some cases, arcane but the practice is to be commended. In fact, it is one that should be accept as a standard.

Of course honoring the buy back is, again, post facto but the process starts somewhere.

Originally by: Montaire

---

Why dont we let the people here simply vote with their isk ?

---

I can answer that one easily enough.

Because you only get to vote once.

After that you don't matter.

Edit Note: Damn typoes

Originally by: Montaire

---

Then you better make that vote count.

---

Originally by: Montaire

---

People CAN influence these policies. But they should do so with their wallet and within the structure of the game. If I was sufficintly upset at a company I have many ways I can make that displeasure felt.

---

In the world of flip-flop that must take wish-wash to the nth degree.