| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shar Tegral
   |
Posted - 2008.01.05 03:33:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: FastLearner
Bottom line is that investment is about trust. You can't earn trustt when you're prevented from scamming by collateral. Hence thos entities who have returned large sums of ISK in the past (with no collateral) can get all the capital they want. Yep - it isn't equitable. Yes, it makes little sense. But to argue against it you need to provide a good reason (and capitalise the first letter of each sentence) or you're going nowhere.
As is often said, Eve != Real Life. Thus the above statement is where the function in Eve's Dysfunction is located. Originally by: FastLearner
I've nver spammed teh frums with threads like EBank do
Sadly I feel the way you do about this actually. I understand the drive to create presence but I think we have accomplished that and can minimize our "branding" efforts. Of course not all threads are made by "us" so... I also experience some level of regret as when I post, these days, it is seen as an "ebank" posting regardless of whether it's just an opinion of my own or not. My only hope is that I've been an ass long enough that most know that I am not an ebank appendage.
"Be all you can be" is a motto even idiots and jerks live up to... all to often. |
FastLearner
Fury Holdings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 03:42:00 -
[32]
Originally by: SiJira
Originally by: Monty Kvaran
Trying to eliminate high return investments helps no one, and there is always a tradeoff between risk and reward...
they wont be eliminated - they will be clearly unsecured and no one will leave the md because most of the isk they earned in the past 6 months is gone
and im way ahead of you on the other points
High-return investments aren't going to exist in a fully-secured environemnt. Return is usually tied to risk - and with no risk (eliminatd by IPOs being secured) there's no need for IPOs to ofer high returns. I'd like more high risk/high return investments - not less. Where we have common ground is possibly in that I'd like the risk to be unforeseen market movements, rather than the IPO owner getting bored/stressed and giving up on trying (or being a scammer from the start).
|
Hexxx
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 03:50:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: FastLearner
Bottom line is that investment is about trust. You can't earn trustt when you're prevented from scamming by collateral. Hence thos entities who have returned large sums of ISK in the past (with no collateral) can get all the capital they want. Yep - it isn't equitable. Yes, it makes little sense. But to argue against it you need to provide a good reason (and capitalise the first letter of each sentence) or you're going nowhere.
As is often said, Eve != Real Life. Thus the above statement is where the function in Eve's Dysfunction is located. Originally by: FastLearner
I've nver spammed teh frums with threads like EBank do
Sadly I feel the way you do about this actually. I understand the drive to create presence but I think we have accomplished that and can minimize our "branding" efforts. Of course not all threads are made by "us" so... I also experience some level of regret as when I post, these days, it is seen as an "ebank" posting regardless of whether it's just an opinion of my own or not. My only hope is that I've been an ass long enough that most know that I am not an ebank appendage.
I understand completely. I spent a long time avoiding buying a single share of stock; just so I could hold on to my claim of "independence". I sacrificed that the second I signed on with EBANK though and while the price was high, it was worth it.
Doesn't mean I don't get frustrated just the same though on how people view me sometimes.
Consulting, IPO Template, and Stock/Bond definitions.
|
Jade Grimpkin
Grimpkin Independent Traders
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 12:05:00 -
[34]
nominating myself as trusted person. \o/
me, yes yes me, all me. isk please.
|
Trilori
Caldari
GearBox Fleet Svcs
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 13:06:00 -
[35]
Originally by: SiJira
Originally by: FastLearner
What's a trusted person?
Who decides what a trusted person is? What if the person running the IPO doesn't trust anyone?
Quote:
you are a trusted person - most market regulars are trusted persons
if you dont trust someone like shadarle then its up to you not to invest - generally trusted people are obvious and some dont even frequent the market forum
Quote:
What if a trusted person wants to run an IPO - can they hold their own collateral?
Quote:
they can if they want to - even a trusted person can get more security by having another trusted person explicitly say they will pay everyone if the ipo issuer dissapears
Still what determines a trusted person? You're saying that if you are a MD regular or even some who rarely or if at all visit MD are trusted. What you're saying is basically almost everybody is trusted??? I'm not so sure about that.
Why is Hexxx or Ricdic or Fury Banker trusted? These people have created big names for themselves, they are well known by the community so I instantly trust them. ALTHOUGH that does NOT MEAN I shouldn't just blatantly go shove all my ISK in their possession because they are insta "Gods" noooo you have to read... I did that I read at the EBANK website what I wanted to know and I was still happy in spite of the community in other words they were gold in my book.
Is the average MD junkie trusted? Trustworthy or whatever? I don't know, that depends on who you are talking about? Shadarle? I guess he's trustworthy? But I can't say he is because I don't know him, I'm not saying he isn't but thats coming from me not from my 3rd person (as if I had one).
Hey what about me? Am I trusted? I sure as heck don't think so, I'd like to gain one's trust someday though.
Ok I have a question about big named/trusted holding collateral for themselves rather than giving it to someone else to do. I don't disagree that a big named/trusted person couldn't hold collateral themselves for an IPO they want to put out; They would be stupid not to put it in a 3rd party trust to hold because of the "hit by bus scenario" and would be doing a public disservice if they didn't.
I think that sums it up
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 15:35:00 -
[36]
Edited by: SiJira on 05/01/2008 15:36:19
trustworthy people include a lot of people that are already running big ipos and are generally helpful
no one is trying to kill the unsecured ipos - but not everyone person needs to run an unsecure ipo to build up trust - if they have a solid plan to make money they can secure it and they wont need any more ipos after the first - most people have already realized that being secure gets your ipo sold out faster
to those who are against the idea - why dont you invest in all the high interest unsecure ipos at 8-20% and ill invest in all the secure ones at 6-10% and then we can compare notes when i get all my money back and you only get half
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Motivated Prophet
Zerodot Schools
Power Corrupts Industry's
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 16:43:00 -
[37]
SiJira, you've lost your mind.
This thread is not worth any more of my time than it takes to say that.
MP
--
Proud steward of 47 billion isk in public money, and counting. Ask me about mineral compressionexpansion! WTF? |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 17:17:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Shadarle on 05/01/2008 17:18:21
The idea that people should only invest in secured IPO's is ludicrous.
Running secured IPO is worth almost nothing in terms of trust, especially when it's only 1 billion or 2 billion isk. You don't have to trust someone at all if their IPO is secured.
The choice between 6-10% secured and 11-20% unsecured is false. Nobody with a brain will pay more than 5-6% in the future on a secured IPO. At least not a decent sized IPO. 5-6% isn't worth my time. I can get that through about 10 different passive methods without having to trust anyone else. >7% is what I care about, and nobody is going to offer that on a large IPO that is secured, unless they are missing some brain cells.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 23:32:00 -
[39]
Edited by: SiJira on 05/01/2008 23:34:38
Edited by: SiJira on 05/01/2008 23:33:09
Originally by: Shadarle
The idea that people should only invest in secured IPO's is ludicrous.
why would anyone get that idea? risk vs reward means i dont mind taking a few percent less for full security
most people dont need to run multiple ipos or have some type of ipo running at all times so they wont care much about building up reputation - but those that do the security will have a better reputation for every ipo they secure by word or management of collateral - everyone wins because the security holder has a first pick on the ipo that is to be secured
Quote:
The choice between 6-10% secured and 11-20% unsecured is false.
i dont mind taking a 6% ipo when its secure because you can have 20% ipos and when a third of them scams im better off
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Kwint Sommer
Incoherent Inc
Otaku Invasion
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 03:04:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Riethe
The thread title alone is enough to disregard this entire post.
QFT
Wait, did I just agree with a known scammer that IPO's shouldn't be secure? Well **** it, even if it makes me look bad, risk VS reward!
___________________________________________
5% Mining Implants & 5% Manufacturing Implants *From 110M to 150M |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 13:33:00 -
[41]
to be against this idea is to actively support scamming
no where was it said that investments with no security and higher returns cant be offered
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Treelox
Amarr
Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 14:55:00 -
[42]
Originally by: SiJira
to be against this idea is to actively support scamming
Let me get this right, earlier in the thread you insinuated that I might be a scammer, and now your saying that I "actively support scamming"?
If you knew me at all you would be laughing at this point.
Anyways if your so in need to see this plan of yours work, I suggest you step up, and be the first "big name" to 100% underwrite the next "great idea" that comes along.
AKA money where your mouth is.
--
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 14:58:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Treelox
Originally by: SiJira
to be against this idea is to actively support scamming
Let me get this right, earlier in the thread you insinuated that I might be a scammer, and now your saying that I "actively support scamming"?
If you knew me at all you would be laughing at this point.
Anyways if your so in need to see this plan of yours work, I suggest you step up, and be the first "big name" to 100% underwrite the next "great idea" that comes along.
AKA money where your mouth is.
i dont hold enough reputation and it certainly wouldnt be the first time a big name has provided security for someone else
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Treelox
Amarr
Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 15:18:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Treelox on 06/01/2008 15:19:07
Originally by: Tree
Anyways if your so in need to see this plan of yours work, I suggest you step up, and be the first "big name" to 100% underwrite the next "great idea" that comes along.
AKA money where your mouth is.
Originally by: SiJira
i dont hold enough reputation
Dont sell yourself short, its amazing to me how other peoples perception of your own reputation can differ greatly.
Originally by: SiJira
it certainly wouldnt be the first time a big name has provided security for someone else
No it wouldnt, but it would be the first time that it has been institutionalized as you propose.
----edit
had one too many quoting forum codes, cleaned it up
--
|
EBANK Ricdic
Eve-Tech Savings n Loans
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 15:56:00 -
[45]
I am all for people with assets locking them down for the ability to hold them as security for loans/bonds/stock offerings etc.
Should it be mandatory? Never.
It's a Risk V Reward thing, If every IPO is secured then the holders of securities need the auditing and scrutiny. If every IPO is secured it removes a lot of new blood and younger blood from the arena.
Had the system been in place 1.5 years ago, I would never have recieved the funding to start C-R-A (wasn't secured in the least) and it's highly unlikely that I would be where I am today.
It's all about taking a chance, making an educated decision, even the thrill in the gamble. But we need the freedom and variety we still recieve. We have 3 different banks more than willing to provide secured loans for all kinds of rates/conditions/setups. (BMBE/FURY/EBANK).
Having said that, I am getting disapointed at all these new bond/loan requests. The smaller ones mainly. People trying to bypass the financial institutions to get public loans with their own chosen conditions.
This in itself is smart business sense, however these people don't know what they are getting themselves into, there shouldn't be a "non-disclosure bond offering" for unsecured new investment opportunities. For existing people, larger offerings, and the likes this is ok.
Anyway, in the end I vote no on this idea. Lets not assume this 'promotes scammers' in ANY way, my first, well all (excluding EBANK) public corps have been unsecured.
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 16:06:00 -
[46]
the point is that people that have not enough or no assets to put up for collateral might not realize that they have publicly respected friends who can put up their promise of repayment in case of wrongdoing as collateral
those who really dont know anyone or have very little but have a great idea need to know where to go to put up some collateral or have a rich friend put up a blueprint for collateral
if you were someone who has never come to the eve forums before and then you came to the market discussion and were smart enough to know you need more than your promise and a good plan to start an ipo - would you be able to find fury-ebank-bmbe and know they provide collateral - without trying to read most posts in the first two pages of the md first? thats a lot of reading if you wouldnt
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
EBANK Ricdic
Eve-Tech Savings n Loans
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 16:32:00 -
[47]
Originally by: SiJira
if you were someone who has never come to the eve forums before and then you came to the market discussion and were smart enough to know you need more than your promise and a good plan to start an ipo - would you be able to find fury-ebank-bmbe and know they provide collateral - without trying to read most posts in the first two pages of the md first? thats a lot of reading if you wouldnt
So whats the problem with the current self moderation that takes place? Why the need to change proven processes? This WILL limit some player's abilities to raise funds. Back 1.5 years ago I probably had no-one specific who could have vouched for me (well Cally could have, from my time in EIB, but that would have gone down well huh).
In a perfect world where everyone had rich friends and idle assets it might work, but generally when people start an IPO/BOND, they do so to 'raise' funds, meaning they don't already have them.
|
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 18:23:00 -
[48]
SiJira, you seem to be in a fantasy world. You seem to think everyone has a way of putting up collateral or that they have rich friends. This discounts a large majority of the most successful IPO's we've seen in the history of MD.
The best IPO's have been unsecured.
What makes IPO's useful, exciting, fun, worth doing is that they are gambles. You are judging the person's character to decide if they are trustworthy. You are then judging if the person is competent. Finally, if the person meets both of those you judge if their plan is plausible. But the person is the most important factor.
Suggesting that someone supports scamming if they disagree with you is absurd. It only hurts your cause. You remind me of another poster that has been absent as of late from these forums. Absent about as long as you've been here. I'll not name names, but I'm sure a few other people here may have a name popping into their head.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
Daeva Vios
Ares Arms and Modules LLC
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 18:25:00 -
[49]
Originally by: EBANK Ricdic
In a perfect world where everyone had rich friends and idle assets it might work, but generally when people start an IPO/BOND, they do so to 'raise' funds, meaning they don't already have them.
This.
The only people who would be capable of doing this would be the ones creating an IPO/Bond specifically to take the quick path to improving their reputations. You can create a reputation for yourself through demonstration of your knowledge of how the game works, sure. You can create a reputation for yourself by surrounding yourself with high-rep folks and getting close with them, sure. Or you can get twice the rep gains over half the time and prove yourself "trustworthy" by fronting the security and not leaning on it, delivering what you said you'd deliver.
You then use that easy rep to gain more unsecured funds, and duck out whenever you've made enough money to feel satisfied with yourself.
Supporting this proposed system seems to support scamming, when cast in this light. Hmmmm.
|
Treelox
Amarr
Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 18:26:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Shadarle
You remind me of another poster that has been absent as of late from these forums. Absent about as long as you've been here. I'll not name names, but I'm sure a few other people here may have a name popping into their head.
can I get a cookie if i evemail the name and get it right?
Cause i am sort of wondering where that other individual has run off to.
--
|
Daeva Vios
Ares Arms and Modules LLC
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 18:27:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Shadarle
SiJira, you seem to be in a fantasy world. You seem to think everyone has a way of putting up collateral or that they have rich friends. This discounts a large majority of the most successful IPO's we've seen in the history of MD.
The best IPO's have been unsecured.
What makes IPO's useful, exciting, fun, worth doing is that they are gambles. You are judging the person's character to decide if they are trustworthy. You are then judging if the person is competent. Finally, if the person meets both of those you judge if their plan is plausible. But the person is the most important factor.
Suggesting that someone supports scamming if they disagree with you is absurd. It only hurts your cause. You remind me of another poster that has been absent as of late from these forums. Absent about as long as you've been here. I'll not name names, but I'm sure a few other people here may have a name popping into their head.
That other individual knew how to spell, for the most part.
At least, if I'm thinking of who you're thinking of. 
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 01:15:00 -
[52]
make it easier to get security for those who dont know they can even get it
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Treelox
Amarr
Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 01:27:00 -
[53]
Originally by: SiJira
make it easier to get security for those who dont know they can even get it
Making any process of starting up an IPO is counter productive to keeping out the rifraf, scammers and **** poor business managers, IMO.
Maybe thats just me, but it is how I see things.
--
|
Daeva Vios
Ares Arms and Modules LLC
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 01:47:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Treelox
Originally by: SiJira
make it easier to get security for those who dont know they can even get it
Making any process of starting up an IPO is counter productive to keeping out the rifraf, scammers and **** poor business managers, IMO.
Maybe thats just me, but it is how I see things.
I think this is largely correct. Anyone sufficiently interested in running a legitimate public business in this game will figure out how to come here and use what tools are already available to do it properly. Even some of the aforementioned tools have been used successfully by scammers in the past, and more tools would only make it easier.
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 02:00:00 -
[55]
Edited by: SiJira on 07/01/2008 02:04:56
Originally by: Daeva Vios
Even some of the aforementioned tools have been used successfully by scammers in the past, and more tools would only make it easier.
a link for those that do have collateral to show them where to put it for security would help scammers?
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 02:06:00 -
[56]
Originally by: SiJira
Edited by: SiJira on 07/01/2008 02:02:00
Edited by: SiJira on 07/01/2008 02:01:28
Originally by: Daeva Vios
Even some of the aforementioned tools have been used successfully by scammers in the past, and more tools would only make it easier.
a link for those that do have collateral to show them where to put it for security would help scammers?
A link where? People don't read the stickied stuff anyhow.
As soon as they post their IPO/Bond people will ask if they have security if people think they need it thus it will be handled then. This is how it works now and it works just fine.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 02:09:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Shadarle
Originally by: SiJira
Edited by: SiJira on 07/01/2008 02:02:00
Edited by: SiJira on 07/01/2008 02:01:28
Originally by: Daeva Vios
Even some of the aforementioned tools have been used successfully by scammers in the past, and more tools would only make it easier.
a link for those that do have collateral to show them where to put it for security would help scammers?
A link where? People don't read the stickied stuff anyhow.
As soon as they post their IPO/Bond people will ask if they have security if people think they need it thus it will be handled then. This is how it works now and it works just fine.
lets make it work better because i havent noticed any changes regarding people sending isk as soon as they can unless the op strictly states that its just a discussion
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 02:10:00 -
[58]
Originally by: SiJira
Originally by: Shadarle
Originally by: SiJira
Edited by: SiJira on 07/01/2008 02:02:00
Edited by: SiJira on 07/01/2008 02:01:28
Originally by: Daeva Vios
Even some of the aforementioned tools have been used successfully by scammers in the past, and more tools would only make it easier.
a link for those that do have collateral to show them where to put it for security would help scammers?
A link where? People don't read the stickied stuff anyhow.
As soon as they post their IPO/Bond people will ask if they have security if people think they need it thus it will be handled then. This is how it works now and it works just fine.
lets make it work better because i havent noticed any changes regarding people sending isk as soon as they can unless the op strictly states that its just a discussion
And the problem with this is? If people send money that is their own concern. If they treat their money in this manner why do you care if they get burned?
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 02:23:00 -
[59]
Edited by: SiJira on 07/01/2008 02:23:13
Originally by: Shadarle
If people send money that is their own concern. If they treat their money in this manner why do you care if they get burned?
if its made easier to find secure investments because people have an easier time finding how to secure them then there is more isk in the general market community
Quote:
You remind me of another poster that has been absent as of late from these forums. Absent about as long as you've been here. I'll not name names, but I'm sure a few other people here may have a name popping into their head.
can you explain this quote because i cant tell who came before me if i wasnt there
Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Ricdic
Caldari
Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd
Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 02:43:00 -
[60]
Originally by: SiJira
can you explain this quote because i cant tell who came before me if i wasnt there
I remember a person who once said "If you don't disclose shareholder names you are a scammer/poor business manager."
You basically said the same thing earlier in that if people don't agree with your belief they are scammers/prospective scammers, or endorse scamming. It's a load of bs and you have already seen almost every poster has been against your idea. Are we all scammers?
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=500043
Largest Empire Research Alliance in EVE! |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |