Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Also compound interest on a 3% account can make it have a higher interest return than some people think. This interest calculator gives people an idea on what we are referring too.

---

Originally by: Ambo

---

That's 3.7% per month. Not exactly an earth shattering difference and this assumes I don't touch it and nothing happens to ebank fro a whole year.

---

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Edited by: EBANK Ricdic on 11/08/2008 10:14:16

Originally by: Ambo

---

That's 3.7% per month. Not exactly an earth shattering difference and this assumes I don't touch it and nothing happens to ebank fro a whole year.

---

Now count it for two years. Then consider that we are:

1) Beating FIN rates
2) Competing with if not beating BMBE rates

In both of the above cases people have had to hold onto their shares for the two year period and EBANK have never wanted to compete with public corporations.

---

Quote:

---

In the past 7 days over 100 billion isk was deposited into EBANK. In that same 7 days only 30 billion isk was withdrawn.

---

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

I'm not going to say much more than this is one of those things that I felt should have been fixed long ago.

One of many little holes and oversights.

I think Ebank is going to be as proactive as CCP. Until someone abuses or exploits these holes (Which I can't bring myself to do mind you) they won't wake themselves up from their slumber of superiority.

---

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Now count it for two years. Then consider that we are:

1) Beating FIN rates
2) Competing with if not beating BMBE rates

---

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

- Special Interest Accounts: Unless this was recently instituted (which I highly doubt) there were no special interest accounts for ebank staff or directors. It was discussed as a form of compensation and deemed to elitist to be effective.

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

You shouldn't have to stop by everyday in the hope that they'll be accepting deposits.

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

I'm not going to say much more than this is one of those things that I felt should have been fixed long ago.

One of many little holes and oversights.

I think Ebank is going to be as proactive as CCP. Until someone abuses or exploits these holes (Which I can't bring myself to do mind you) they won't wake themselves up from their slumber of superiority.

---

Just out of curiosity, what's your fix for this?

The only one that comes to me is opening up savings accounts to everyone and setting a floating deposit max for all of EBANK. Then, whenever it's reached they stop accepting additional funds into savings accounts. To me at least, this is a big turn off to customers. You shouldn't have to stop by everyday in the hope that they'll be accepting deposits. Not to mention establishing and keeping up to date the deposit limit is a pain.

---

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

1) Our salaries are all relatively low. For example for our first year of operation I was paid a total of 1.5 billion isk in salaries. Bonuses etc weren't counted as they haven't been considered yet. Our staff mostly work for EBANK because they enjoy doing so, there are no big payouts being recieved by our staff.

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

Also just to note, while ebank staff members may NOT get a special interest rate yesterday ricdic freely admitted that there is at least one person who has been given a special 5% interest rate savings account. He freely admitted it in the public ebank channel so it's not like I've uncovered some deep dark secret but just putting it on the forums for the record.

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

- Privileged Accounts: There are a few, recent, actions that I am aware of that due trouble me. I am currently doing all I can to extract the one person at Ebank I truly care for from a bit of malfeasance on Ricdic's part. That being said, once the highly privileged and badly issued loan is paid off then I'll gripe about it more.

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

I'm not going to say much more than this is one of those things that I felt should have been fixed long ago.

One of many little holes and oversights.

I think Ebank is going to be as proactive as CCP. Until someone abuses or exploits these holes (Which I can't bring myself to do mind you) they won't wake themselves up from their slumber of superiority.

---

Just out of curiosity, what's your fix for this?

The only one that comes to me is opening up savings accounts to everyone and setting a floating deposit max for all of EBANK. Then, whenever it's reached they stop accepting additional funds into savings accounts. To me at least, this is a big turn off to customers. You shouldn't have to stop by everyday in the hope that they'll be accepting deposits. Not to mention establishing and keeping up to date the deposit limit is a pain.

---

there is a very, very easy fix to this.

here's how you do it:
1)allow everyone to deposit as much isk as they want into savings accounts
2)Ebank each month makes an estimation of how much they can/will pay out in interest
3)interest rate for that month is the percentage of these numbers.

its fair for everyone while at the same time moving closer to how a real bank works. It also allows a much stronger secondary market imho.

Also just to note, while ebank staff members may NOT get a special interest rate yesterday ricdic freely admitted that there is at least one person who has been given a special 5% interest rate savings account. He freely admitted it in the public ebank channel so it's not like I've uncovered some deep dark secret but just putting it on the forums for the record.

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

EBANK is a business, not a charity. This goes both ways.

The surplus that EBANK manages is used to compensate for future anticipated defaults or revenue interuptions. Bank stability was and is of paramount importance.

---

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

EBANK is a business, not a charity. This goes both ways.

The surplus that EBANK manages is used to compensate for future anticipated defaults or revenue interuptions. Bank stability was and is of paramount importance.

---

I never claimed it was a charity, but how does what you're doing currently make good business sense?

I never said you had to pay out all your earnings as interest, that's why I said an amount you had decided to pay.

@ric: I was not trying to imply it was cloak and dagger, in fact I stated it was in a public channel specifically to make that clear. I do however apologize if I got the number wrong.

---

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

You really want to go down this road or would you rather just bite the bullet and apologize now before it gets ugly?

---

Tick tock, still waiting.

Or does Hexxx have your tongue?

---

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

I for one withdrew all my money from EBank after learning that I could not gain a savings account because essentially what it meant was that you could pay me a lower interest while still being able to use my money to make the isk to pay those who happened to have an account longer.

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

Originally by: Shadarle

---

Frankly at this point I think they should be charging less than 3% if they are still filling up at 3%.

---

For many months now only 1.5% accounts have been available. Not 3%.

---

Originally by: Shadarle

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

Originally by: Shadarle

---

Frankly at this point I think they should be charging less than 3% if they are still filling up at 3%.

---

For many months now only 1.5% accounts have been available. Not 3%.

---

Which is exactly my point. They have too many people at 3% and don't need to offer 3% to get investors... thus why are they still paying anyone 3%? They shouldn't be paying anyone 3% since they don't have to.

---

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

Originally by: Hexxx

---

Originally by: Shadarle

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

Originally by: Shadarle

---

Frankly at this point I think they should be charging less than 3% if they are still filling up at 3%.

---

For many months now only 1.5% accounts have been available. Not 3%.

---

Which is exactly my point. They have too many people at 3% and don't need to offer 3% to get investors... thus why are they still paying anyone 3%? They shouldn't be paying anyone 3% since they don't have to.

---

Our blended rate is actually around 2.5% when accounting for all the cash in sweep and checking accounts. In other words, of our total funds, we only pay about 2.5% on the lot of it. It used to be 2.7% but it's gone down as Checking accounts have grown.

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

Originally by: Proton Power

---

Honestly Shar, you really do seem to have it out for EBANK now, I don't know what happend in the past, and honestly I don't care.

---

I entered this thread putting "malicious rumors" to rest mate. Nice to see the level of gratitude.

Yeah, I twist Ric's tail. So what, he can't take his own medicine? As you said, this is none of your business. But as we can see... there are those required to follow Ebank policies regarding EO forum posting and then there are those who haven't read Animal Farm.

---

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

Originally by: Hexxx

---

I'll be posting on our internal forums in a bit.

Ricdic and Proton, I am asking that you (for the moment) please refrain from posting in this thread. I'm also asking that the rest of our EBANK staff and Directors also refrain for the moment.

I appreciate your help on this.

---

Originally by: Treelox

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

I'll be posting on our internal forums in a bit.

Ricdic and Proton, I am asking that you (for the moment) please refrain from posting in this thread. I'm also asking that the rest of our EBANK staff and Directors also refrain for the moment.

I appreciate your help on this.

---

As I have said since the begining of Ebanks public opening, there needs to be ONE and ONLY ONE public spokesperson. The rest of the Staff, Partners, and Board memebers of EBank need to be muzzled, and accept that status. Those to be muzzled gave up their right to express their personal interpitations of events and policy the moment they joined a such a "public" entity that needs to provide a united public front, instead of a mish mash of ego's.

While having many different types of ego's, ideals, minds, and ethics is a benifit in the board room, it does nothing but cause your percieved public corporate image to be tarnished if multiple people post from slightly different viewpoints all in the name of the corp.


Your loss of being able to express your personal interpitation of Ebank policy may seem harsh, but IMO it is the price you must pay to help further the bank in a PR sense.

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

EBANK does not have a censorship policy and honestly, I don't know if I'd ever be in favor of blanket censorship on the EVE-O forums.

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

This is something that I personally struggle with...I have only asked people to censor themselves a handful of times. I don't like doing it and I don't like the idea of censorship period.

EBANK does not have a censorship policy and honestly, I don't know if I'd ever be in favor of blanket censorship on the EVE-O forums.

---

Originally by: SencneS

---

Just to inform all readers that I have now taken notice of this thread and will be helping Hexxx in any issues that arrive. Hexxx and I are really the two that handle sensitive issues raised on these forums.

---

Originally by: Treelox

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

This is something that I personally struggle with...I have only asked people to censor themselves a handful of times. I don't like doing it and I don't like the idea of censorship period.

EBANK does not have a censorship policy and honestly, I don't know if I'd ever be in favor of blanket censorship on the EVE-O forums.

---

This is not about you having to force people to censor themselves, and you having to institue a policy of censorship. This is about all involved agreeing to Self-Censorship.

Honestly as a public entity with so many mouthpieces, your guys often muddy your own waters, or even worse one of you gets involved in trolling/flaming/insults. I would think that if yor staff and directors really did care about the continued success of the WHOLE of Ebank they would be more than willing to self censor themselves, for the betterment of the whole of ebank.

It is the exact same concept as a 0.0 allaince's leadership asking its memebers to not post to CAOD, it causes less bovine scatology.


Sadly Hexxx, I realise that you will have a hard time trying to get this going, since you and I both know that you have a few impulsive staff/directors who are prone to post before they think. Those same people would throw their toys from the crib if they couldn't post as their impulses provoked them.

---

Originally by: Proton Power

---

BTW Thanks for the help Tree, we should talk somtime ahve not done so in a while.

---

To Shar -verb:
 1 - To say what you mean.
 2 - To say what it means.
 3 - To say something mean.

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

Otherwise, unless Ebank can break out of its groupthink cycle, Ebank has jumped the shark.

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

Regarding bond and share market.

I presume you would require an EBank account to trade on your market platform?

What worries me, is that there might be a push from MD to make all new IPO's/nond launches to be added to the EBank exchange. In this case IPO launches would be semi-forced to launch through EBank. Too much power in one set of hands.

I don't think it would be too much of a problem for the more regular MD players as it might help drive down capital costs, but new players might not be able to do it alone.

(note: If the only IPO launches are the new ALT mega billion un-thought out IPO's it won't matter anyway)

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

I presume you would require an EBank account to trade on your market platform?

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

What worries me, is that there might be a push from MD to make all new IPO's/nond launches to be added to the EBank exchange. In this case IPO launches would be semi-forced to launch through EBank. Too much power in one set of hands.

I don't think it would be too much of a problem for the more regular MD players as it might help drive down capital costs, but new players might not be able to do it alone.

(note: If the only IPO launches are the new ALT mega billion un-thought out IPO's it won't matter anyway)

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

Hell, perhaps someone with a dunce cap at CCP will look over at ebank, and think "Huh... I guess an exchange and securities market can work. Let's build em the tools in game to make their lives easier."

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

dodgy maths

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

I'd say ill-informed but actually he's very well informed and is just trying to fan some flaming here.

---

Originally by: Lubimchik

---

Ahh now that wash day is over!

What about savings bonds?

Model them similar to a real banks savings bond system, where it has to mature and there is a penility for taking it out early blah blah blah. You guys probably know a billion times more about it then I do!

Simply put, I wouldnt mind sealing away some isk to gain interest and to keep from spending it. Who knows maybe I will want to open an Eve Online Strip Club in the future? Yep... cash in the savings bond and let the girls come!

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
Hell, perhaps someone with a dunce cap at CCP will look over at ebank, and think "Huh... I guess an exchange and securities market can work. Let's build em the tools in game to make their lives easier."[/quote

---

I woudn't hold my breath if I were you.



Allthough RESX and EGSX are well run operations, the volume of shares traded is totally lacking. RESX requires an account; not a bad thing in itself, but not having free access to your ISK without an extensive wait and penalty is a bit of a pain. EGSX requires the use of a broker...another stumbling block.

As far as being required to have an account with EBank to use their exchange: I think it's a good thing...if it will mesh seamlessly with the current EBank accounts. If another tedious step is required it will be just the third (or fourth if you count that other useless exchange) dead exchange. Today people want results real-time...And since time is somewhat compressed in EvE it becomes even more critical.

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

Hell, perhaps someone with a dunce cap at CCP will look over at ebank, and think "Huh... I guess an exchange and securities market can work. Let's build em the tools in game to make their lives easier."

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

EBANK is a business, not a charity. This goes both ways.

The surplus that EBANK manages is used to compensate for future anticipated defaults or revenue interuptions. Bank stability was and is of paramount importance.

---

Originally by: Ambo

---

But you're still calculating the percentage return based on the original investment rather than the amount currently invested.
I appreciate that it adds up but you're still returning 3% per month, just on a larger amount of money. Think of it from my balance sheet's point of view:

The amount I have in an ebank account is increasing every day, i.e. I'm letting you have more of my money to play with every day.

Also, these projections of yours are over ridiculous timescales. Sure it's easy to say ebank will beat fin over a 2 year timeframe but just think about that for a minute... 2 years. It's a bloody long time in Eve.

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

You really want to go down this road or would you rather just bite the bullet and apologize now before it gets ugly?

---

Tick tock, still waiting.

Or does Hexxx have your tongue?

---

That was not necessary.

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

I'll be posting on our internal forums in a bit.

Ricdic and Proton, I am asking that you (for the moment) please refrain from posting in this thread. I'm also asking that the rest of our EBANK staff and Directors also refrain for the moment.

I appreciate your help on this.

---

Originally by: CornerStoner

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
Hell, perhaps someone with a dunce cap at CCP will look over at ebank, and think "Huh... I guess an exchange and securities market can work. Let's build em the tools in game to make their lives easier."[/quote

---

I woudn't hold my breath if I were you.



Allthough RESX and EGSX are well run operations, the volume of shares traded is totally lacking. RESX requires an account; not a bad thing in itself, but not having free access to your ISK without an extensive wait and penalty is a bit of a pain. EGSX requires the use of a broker...another stumbling block.

As far as being required to have an account with EBank to use their exchange: I think it's a good thing...if it will mesh seamlessly with the current EBank accounts. If another tedious step is required it will be just the third (or fourth if you count that other useless exchange) dead exchange. Today people want results real-time...And since time is somewhat compressed in EvE it becomes even more critical.

---

EBANK accounts will seamlessly mesh with the exchange.

Chairman of the Board of Directors | www.eve-bank.net

Originally by: Shadarle

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

I for one withdrew all my money from EBank after learning that I could not gain a savings account because essentially what it meant was that you could pay me a lower interest while still being able to use my money to make the isk to pay those who happened to have an account longer.

---

That was a laughable statement to make. You were truly shocked that E-Bank was doing what they were doing to make themselves money and not to help you make more money? I know I frankly am shocked to discover a business is in the business of making money!

If you don't like the way they do things don't invest in them. It's VERY simple. They aren't here to give you a good investment place, they are here to get people to give them their money as cheaply as possible and to exploit the massive demand in the investment market for a reliable investment. Frankly at this point I think they should be charging less than 3% if they are still filling up at 3%.

---

Originally by: Khrillian

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

EBANK is a business, not a charity. This goes both ways.

The surplus that EBANK manages is used to compensate for future anticipated defaults or revenue interuptions. Bank stability was and is of paramount importance.

---

You seem to be acting like a charity towards your 3% account holders by letting them keep the 3% interest rate, even though there are plenty of people that would be willing to open accounts at 2.5% or 2% interest.

The 3% holders don't give you anything special, just their money, which anyone else could give you. So what's the logic behind fixing their interest rates at 3%? As someone else said, you're only alienating 1.5% account holders and other potential customers.

It seems like a silly way to run a bank. As far as i know RL banks only give more to certian people for investing *more,* whereas if I remember correctly, you limited per-character holdings in a savings account, to make sure everyone gets something. This seems a lot like a charity.

---

Quote:

---

Ricdic (about starting ebank, July 2007): Think of it as a miniature EIB done right. I cannot see this getting anywhere near 700b any time in the future tbh.

---

Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155

---

I guess it seems people are pretty interesting in earning 3%. I guess if there was a guy they could trust that had extra savings accounts, they could buy bonds from him. If only there was a guy.

---

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Edited by: EBANK Ricdic on 12/08/2008 02:34:46
It's a lose lose situation. If we shut down Savings accounts we show an inconsistency and fall back on our promises. If we open up Savings accounts we risk damage done to the EBANK operation.

Option 1 hurts our current customerbase
Option 2 allows our customerbase to perform on equal ground but adds a very real financial risk to the EBANK operation

Option 3 (releasing of bonds) will benefit both current and new customers and hopefully over time we can phase out the savings accounts through encouraging (not forcing) people to choose our bonds over their current savings accounts.

Every company has special deals and rates from time to time. There were zero restrictions on savings accounts back when they were offered, anyone could recieve them. We cannot be blamed if a client chose not to take advantage of a special offer (which was always advised as a limited time offer).

---

Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155

---

I guess it seems people are pretty interesting in earning 3%. I guess if there was a guy they could trust that had extra savings accounts, they could buy bonds from him. If only there was a guy.

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155

---

I guess it seems people are pretty interesting in earning 3%. I guess if there was a guy they could trust that had extra savings accounts, they could buy bonds from him. If only there was a guy.

---

AC since you didn't want cross posting in your offering, kindly don't cross post and advertise in this one. This thread has already been derailed enough as is.

---

Quote:

---

Ricdic (about starting ebank, July 2007): Think of it as a miniature EIB done right. I cannot see this getting anywhere near 700b any time in the future tbh.

---

Quote:

---

Ricdic (about starting ebank, July 2007): Think of it as a miniature EIB done right. I cannot see this getting anywhere near 700b any time in the future tbh.

---

Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155

---

I guess it seems people are pretty interesting in earning 3%. I guess if there was a guy they could trust that had extra savings accounts, they could buy bonds from him. If only there was a guy.

---

AC since you didn't want cross posting in your offering, kindly don't cross post and advertise in this one. This thread has already been derailed enough as is.

---

The difference, is that my thread is for investments. This thread is for discussions regarding the ebank accounts, more specifically the savings accounts and the future of accounts for ebank. My post here serves more purposes than to simply advertise a bond issue that people aren't really interested in. you fail.

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

and what purpose is that exactly?

---

Quote:

---

Ricdic (about starting ebank, July 2007): Think of it as a miniature EIB done right. I cannot see this getting anywhere near 700b any time in the future tbh.

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Edited by: EBANK Ricdic on 12/08/2008 02:34:46
It's a lose lose situation. If we shut down Savings accounts we show an inconsistency and fall back on our promises. If we open up Savings accounts we risk damage done to the EBANK operation.

Option 1 hurts our current customerbase
Option 2 allows our customerbase to perform on equal ground but adds a very real financial risk to the EBANK operation

Option 3 (releasing of bonds) will benefit both current and new customers and hopefully over time we can phase out the savings accounts through encouraging (not forcing) people to choose our bonds over their current savings accounts.

Every company has special deals and rates from time to time. There were zero restrictions on savings accounts back when they were offered, anyone could recieve them. We cannot be blamed if a client chose not to take advantage of a special offer (which was always advised as a limited time offer).

---

no option 1 hurts PART of your current customer base while giving you a much, much larger customer base.

---

Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

and what purpose is that exactly?

---

Have you been paying attention to any of the discussion going on in this thread? Come on Vhaluus.

---

Originally by: Shadarle

---

I second this sentiment.

---

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Edited by: EBANK Ricdic on 12/08/2008 02:34:46
It's a lose lose situation. If we shut down Savings accounts we show an inconsistency and fall back on our promises. If we open up Savings accounts we risk damage done to the EBANK operation.

Option 1 hurts our current customerbase
Option 2 allows our customerbase to perform on equal ground but adds a very real financial risk to the EBANK operation

Option 3 (releasing of bonds) will benefit both current and new customers and hopefully over time we can phase out the savings accounts through encouraging (not forcing) people to choose our bonds over their current savings accounts.

Every company has special deals and rates from time to time. There were zero restrictions on savings accounts back when they were offered, anyone could recieve them. We cannot be blamed if a client chose not to take advantage of a special offer (which was always advised as a limited time offer).

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

Fortunately, everyone is free to vote with their ISK. EBANK is probably the most democratic business in all of EVE in that regard.

---

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Edited by: EBANK Ricdic on 12/08/2008 02:34:46
It's a lose lose situation. If we shut down Savings accounts we show an inconsistency and fall back on our promises. If we open up Savings accounts we risk damage done to the EBANK operation.

Option 1 hurts our current customerbase
Option 2 allows our customerbase to perform on equal ground but adds a very real financial risk to the EBANK operation

Option 3 (releasing of bonds) will benefit both current and new customers and hopefully over time we can phase out the savings accounts through encouraging (not forcing) people to choose our bonds over their current savings accounts.

Every company has special deals and rates from time to time. There were zero restrictions on savings accounts back when they were offered, anyone could recieve them. We cannot be blamed if a client chose not to take advantage of a special offer (which was always advised as a limited time offer).

---

Originally by: RaWBLooD

---

Originally by: Shadarle

---

I second this sentiment.

---

I don't. He brought up a good point and should not be ridiculed for it.

---

Quote:

---

Ricdic (about starting ebank, July 2007): Think of it as a miniature EIB done right. I cannot see this getting anywhere near 700b any time in the future tbh.

---

Originally by: Khrillian

---

I guess if you want a fair way to keep the 3% accounts, you could allow their owners to sell them. This way the market value of the account would rise above the ISK balance, so they would really only be getting a return of 2% or whatever the market would bear.

This appears to be a win-win situation if you feel there is a legitimate public-relations issue, although to be honest I think the Shar debacle was much worse for your image, you can pick your battles as you see fit.

---

Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155

---

Originally by: RaWBLooD

---

Originally by: Shadarle

---

I second this sentiment.

---

I don't. He brought up a good point and should not be ridiculed for it.

---

he didn't bring up any point. He missed an obvious observation.

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

If your 'obvious observation' was that people cant be that interested in savings accounts because they aren't investing in your bond then your logic is deeply flawed.

If that's not it, well then yes I will have to admit that I am missing it.

---

Quote:

---

Ricdic (about starting ebank, July 2007): Think of it as a miniature EIB done right. I cannot see this getting anywhere near 700b any time in the future tbh.

---

Originally by: Nido Gentz

---

Originally by: Khrillian

---

I guess if you want a fair way to keep the 3% accounts, you could allow their owners to sell them. This way the market value of the account would rise above the ISK balance, so they would really only be getting a return of 2% or whatever the market would bear.

This appears to be a win-win situation if you feel there is a legitimate public-relations issue, although to be honest I think the Shar debacle was much worse for your image, you can pick your battles as you see fit.

---

Even if this was a good idea, it would be a logistical nightmare to carry out.

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

I don't think you can hold up your reputation for stability (in your offering) as a defense. After all, by making savings accounts limited, you became inconsistent and fell back on your promises. It seems like you're picking and choosing which promises to fall back on.

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

Okay, I understand Ric, but K-Mart will not let you continue to make purchases with a 20% discount simply because you did during a special offer. This is a lasting effect, and the switch-on/switch-off system really doesn't work as well as variable interest rates unless the 'switch-off' mode disables deposits as well. Hell, let anybody get a savings account whenever they want, but when they're switched off, disable deposits. This business of some customers having an account and some not is just...strange.

---

Originally by: TheVad

---

Edited by: TheVad on 12/08/2008 06:41:40
This whole dicussion is rediculous! EBANK'S internal operations is its own business. It offers various services and a client can use them or not, PERIOD. EBANK offers stable services with relative protection on the these services(interest bearing accounts and loans). Soon it will offer other services like a stock exchange and RIPO's.

Clients can make thier own decision on how they want to invest thier ISK. This is a buisness folks and obviously even with the 1.5 interest rate account, people are deciding the 1.5 interest rate is better then nothing. Trust me when I say EBANKS interest rates is purley based on supply and demand.

TheVad

---

Originally by: Rho'varo

---

As a consumer, if I get a savings account with my retail bank of choice, I don't have a right to keep my initial interest rate forever. (I wish! I'd still be using the 12% savings account I had as a child.) Even my own "premium rate savings account" (when I had one) offered only a (slightly) higher interest rate and still no particular set rate

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

Okay, I understand Ric, but K-Mart will not let you continue to make purchases with a 20% discount simply because you did during a special offer. This is a lasting effect, and the switch-on/switch-off system really doesn't work as well as variable interest rates unless the 'switch-off' mode disables deposits as well. Hell, let anybody get a savings account whenever they want, but when they're switched off, disable deposits. This business of some customers having an account and some not is just...strange.

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

Hell, perhaps someone with a dunce cap at CCP will look over at ebank, and think "Huh... I guess an exchange and securities market can work. Let's build em the tools in game to make their lives easier."

---

After CCP fixes lag, makes sovereignty warfare fun, introduces ambulation, reworks the rest of the graphics, populates low sec, introduces T3 mods and T2 capitals then I'm sure they'll get right on making tools that .001% of the community will directly use. Until then, they have bigger fish to fry.

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

These things won't change with a lower rate. Agree with Shad, that a really low rate will help the secondary market.

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

Now the bonds will have rates and periods that I will discuss at length with you closer to the launch of the exchange, but rates will range from the absolutely pitiful (ie less than even a 1.5% Checking account) all the way through 7 different rate steppings to something that'd make it one of the best products available in the secondary market. In addition to that we will be offering 4 different periods of maturity. The upshot of this is that out of an arsenal of 28 different bond products, once up to speed, 4 different bonds will be available at all times, and a new bond will open just about once a month (not all months), continuously.

...

So Savings accounts will quite often be a better product than a lot of the bonds, but only up to the 3b deposited and not always better than the bonds. I hope you understand then that people who have Savings accounts will still use bonds in order to invest more than 3b, and people who don't have them will have the option to use bonds without the 3b sitting on the side. That's what a Savings account is in the future of EBANK - a sideline product.

---

Originally by: Ambo

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

These things won't change with a lower rate. Agree with Shad, that a really low rate will help the secondary market.

---

Have to disagree. I believe its not Ebank's savings accounts that have mullered the secondary market, it's thier loans.

Many of those billions of isk worth of loans had the potential to be IPOs/bonds/whatever.

---

Originally by: TheVad

---

Clients can make thier own decision on how they want to invest thier ISK. This is a buisness folks and obviously even with the 1.5 interest rate account, people are deciding the 1.5 interest rate is better then nothing. Trust me when I say EBANKS interest rates is purley based on supply and demand.

---

Originally by: Rho'varo

---

Wouldn't an analogy to actual RL bank accounts be most apt? Considering retail discounting and contractual relationships (e.g., mobile phones) has some value, but surely it makes sense to look to the RL equivalent?

---

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Answer these two questions Shadarle.

What is the point of modifying existing accounts that are causing no harm to EBANK if we are about to change the system entirely? Shouldn't our resources be dedicated to implementing the new system rather than changing the old?

---

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

Answer these two questions Shadarle.

What is the point of modifying existing accounts that are causing no harm to EBANK if we are about to change the system entirely? Shouldn't our resources be dedicated to implementing the new system rather than changing the old?

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

A)why the HELL would anyone be stupid enough to put money in any bond that makes them less than a checking account? given your current policy of not phasing out accounts you're going to have three different levels of people who want their money only invested in the short term with you

1)the lucky ones with their savings account who can get much better than the lowest level of bonds as much as they want.
2)the semi-lucky ones who currently have checking accounts.
3)presumably if these bonds are going to pay less than checking accounts you will be closing new checking account creation as well. So on the bottom of the ladder is all the people who don't have a checking account yet and are stuck with the lower than checking interest

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

B. Now I know you're a business and as such your main purpose is to make money, but surely you realize any Ebank bond that competes with the upper echelon of bonds and stocks available on the market is going to seriously harm all non-ebank secondary market activity. I thought Ebank had stated they do not wish to damage the secondary market like this?

---

Originally by: Vhaluus

---

C. So really those with saving accounts are still going to have an advantage, just in a more complicated system.

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

Question about EBank market mechanisms.

For example, if I was to launch Cosmoray Construction on the market (if I could), and people actively traded these shares, how would you track who owned what and how would dividends get paid?

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

Question about EBank market mechanisms.

For example, if I was to launch Cosmoray Construction on the market (if I could), and people actively traded these shares, how would you track who owned what and how would dividends get paid?

---

Yes you could launch directly in EBANK (and in answer to your earlier question, you can also use existing shares). Flexibility is king in EBANK.

As for tracking shares, basically if the IPO uses ingame shares, then you'd only be able to see who has deposited shares in EBANK, and then only if you have actually got the IPO listed and your name verified as the IPO manager. So to get the full list, you'd have to combine EBANK's plus the in game one.

If the share is a virtualized share, you can see the whole lot. Dividends for ingame shares are tracked by the API and will get distributed into every shareholder's Sweep account, while virtualized shares simply get paid within EBANK (and none of that 2b limit nonsense - EBANK is 100% 64-bit ftw!)

---

Originally by: EBANK Ricdic

---

With the way these dutch auctions drive dividend prices down, they end up well below any EBANK loan ever would anyway. Packtsu's loan for example (heavily publiised here before) was closer to 10% iirc and he sourced funding here for less than half that.

---

Originally by: Ambo

---

I believe its not Ebank's savings accounts that have mullered the secondary market, it's thier loans.

Many of those billions of isk worth of loans had the potential to be IPOs/bonds/whatever.

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

As such, there is NO evidence of hurting it, and the rabid speculation based on the false assumption that because EBANK is doing well in the face of a market that's not performing does not mean that it has sapped the secondary market dry to be successful. Therefore this assumption is false and baseless, and I'd invite you to stop incubating it.

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

Mr H. thx, and back to mechanics.

For example, say I launch an IPO for 10B of which 8B is for public and 2B is for me.
reservations are made in the same way in MD.

Virtual Launch
Instead of distributing the shares would I just deposit the 80% of shares with EBank. These "virtual" shares would be sent to the correct owner with an EBank account who made the reservation. The money removed from the account and I get paid the 8B.

The dividends could then be paid to EBank who distribute them to the correct account holders electronically. The shares could then be virtually traded, but the dividends would go directly to the account holder in EBank.

Is this the virtual style of direction you guys are thinking of?

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

Will there be a way to privatize specific bonds, say for instance an profit sharing industrial alliance wants to create a system for payouts that eschews the in game mechanics and utilizes ebank (where nearly 80% of the funds sit anyway)

If so, you've just made me feel like it's september and Im waiting for xmas

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

3) Forced Buybacks. If you want to shutdown the IPO, and buy back the shares, you can simply request EBANK to do this as well, and all the shares will be bought back from shareholders, avoiding you waiting for them to get back to you.

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

3) Forced Buybacks. If you want to shutdown the IPO, and buy back the shares, you can simply request EBANK to do this as well, and all the shares will be bought back from shareholders, avoiding you waiting for them to get back to you.

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

7) IPOs and bonds can allow buy orders to be placed before the stock is launched. This is to allow auctions. When launched, the manager simply fills those orders. Under normal launches, the manager just has a massive sell order for all the stock. IPO managers will however be able to limit the amount of shares a person can get, by setting a maximum percentage of shares an investor can get at IPO time. This however, is not maintained throughout the life of the stock, and an investor can increase their shareholding by buying others' stock.

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

This seems iffy. This is essentially attaching a call option to every security traded through EBANK. Since call options generally devalue a security, they should only be attached when bonds/shares are issued, they should be optional (i.e. not all bonds must be callable), and it should be clear when trading that call and put options are or are not attached.

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

This seems iffy. This is essentially attaching a call option to every security traded through EBANK. Since call options generally devalue a security, they should only be attached when bonds/shares are issued, they should be optional (i.e. not all bonds must be callable), and it should be clear when trading that call and put options are or are not attached.

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

I know you hate auctions, but it seems you're supporting them anyway. Because of previously-discussed problems introduced by issuing a security at a different price than was originally intended, thus raising the capital which the issuer receives, will EBANK also allow rate-based auctions? This obviously complicates things considerably, since two different trading interfaces are then introduced for the same security. It does, however, further broaden the variety of services which EBANK offers.

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

It'll work great for private entities though. In my case, having a trade/industrial alliance where various corporations can 'buy' into the alliance and profit share for the total sum of the entire alliance allowing them access to greater profits or assets. Until such time that they wish to leave the alliance for other goals, endeavorers, etc.. and we can simply buy them back out.

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

This seems iffy. This is essentially attaching a call option to every security traded through EBANK. Since call options generally devalue a security, they should only be attached when bonds/shares are issued, they should be optional (i.e. not all bonds must be callable), and it should be clear when trading that call and put options are or are not attached.

---

It really isn't. We won't do this unless a shareholder vote says we can (which are also supported btw) and the manager requests and this has been discussed for a fair while. It really is so that issues like the FIN buyback could be done in a breeze. That's all. Most of the time, you just put a buy order for everything and you can get the stock. It's just there if you need it as a tool.

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

It'll work great for private entities though. In my case, having a trade/industrial alliance where various corporations can 'buy' into the alliance and profit share for the total sum of the entire alliance allowing them access to greater profits or assets. Until such time that they wish to leave the alliance for other goals, endeavorers, etc.. and we can simply buy them back out.

That coupled with the rest of the tools and single point of mgt is going to make life much easier in the future. I'd imagine there are other examples where this can be used as well.

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

It'll work great for private entities though. In my case, having a trade/industrial alliance where various corporations can 'buy' into the alliance and profit share for the total sum of the entire alliance allowing them access to greater profits or assets. Until such time that they wish to leave the alliance for other goals, endeavorers, etc.. and we can simply buy them back out.

That coupled with the rest of the tools and single point of mgt is going to make life much easier in the future. I'd imagine there are other examples where this can be used as well.

---

You won't be able to force a buy back on an individual shareholder - it will be all shareholders or nothing, sorry.

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

So it's not 'forced' then, but just a tool for buybacks?

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

Look. Investors go on holiday, disappear and do whatever. Getting all your shares back is basically an impossible task.

All a force buyback means is that you just shove the entire amount in your Sweep account, and EBANK can press a button to distribute the entire amount to shareholders' Sweep accounts and take away their shares. It's basically a dividend for the full amount that collects all the shares in return automatically.

---

Originally by: Wikipedia

---

A call option is a financial contract between two parties, the buyer and the seller of this type of option. Often it is simply labeled a "call". The buyer of the option has the right, but not the obligation to buy an agreed quantity of a particular commodity or financial instrument (the underlying instrument) from the seller of the option at a certain time (the expiration date) for a certain price (the strike price). The seller (or "writer") is obligated to sell the commodity or financial instrument should the buyer so decide. The buyer pays a fee (called a premium) for this right.

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

It can be used as a liquidation or exit strategy for an IPO which needs to close for some reason. EVE is not going to be a mirror for the RL all the time. This is one of those times.

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

It can be used as a liquidation or exit strategy for an IPO which needs to close for some reason. EVE is not going to be a mirror for the RL all the time. This is one of those times.

---

Then I would hope this is a provision which is rarely used, and only at the explicit discretion of EBANK? I should also hope that this won't be something that sticks with EBANK forever for 'consistency' reasons, should a more proper options system be implemented.

---

Originally by: SencneS

---

Packtu'sa there is also one thing you may be forgetting.

Lets assume for a second that the CEO is unable to perform the duties of the CEO or s/he is unable to provide the return that was promised.

He has two options...

1) Force a buy back even at the shareholders wrath.
2) Let the share rot, and screw the share holders.

As much as a forced buy back may be displeasing to hear, because you managed to pick up some kick ass shares. The CEO could tell the shareholders to sit and spin if the share holders don't want to sell them back.

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

1) Options and Derivatives are not a space that I think is worth exploring for EBANK. It was tried once and it did NOT work.

---

Originally by: Lubimchik

---

Edited by: Lubimchik on 12/08/2008 19:32:01
This forced buy back thing, is it generally something that the share purchasers know ahead of time, or is this something a CEO can just spring on them? Cause if he can spring it on them... it wouldn't very fair, part of investing as a share holder is getting a good deal on good shares, and if the CEO can just rip them away from you at that low price well it really decreases the over all "value" of the investment.

Now if the share purchasers know this ahead of time it might be a different story as they can expect it!

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

At least at the moment, the only reason I can think of to switch Kwint Industries over would be the ability to establish an automatic dividend payment. Any chance we'll see that option?

---

Originally by: Packtu'sa

---

Okay, so why not forget the forced-buyback system entirely, and just let the CEO place a low buy order for his shares and announce that no dividends will be paid? Shareholders can then bite the bullet and sell at a loss, or they can hold the shares and get nothing, as you said.

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

Honestly though, in the beginning I think we're only supporting 100% virtual shares first, and I'd encourage people to just do a 100% EBANK Exchange launch. It's easier and you don't need to work about 32-bit dividend caps.

---

Quote:

---

Ricdic (about starting ebank, July 2007): Think of it as a miniature EIB done right. I cannot see this getting anywhere near 700b any time in the future tbh.

---

Originally by: Khrillian

---

Originally by: TheVad

---

Clients can make thier own decision on how they want to invest thier ISK. This is a buisness folks and obviously even with the 1.5 interest rate account, people are deciding the 1.5 interest rate is better then nothing. Trust me when I say EBANKS interest rates is purley based on supply and demand.

---

Lol please draw a usual supply/demand graph and coming out with 2 equilibria - one interest rate at 1.5% and one at 3%. Post it when you're done

---

Originally by: Thorrak McFluffypants

---

Edited by: Thorrak McFluffypants on 12/08/2008 22:54:49

Originally by: Hexxx

---

Honestly though, in the beginning I think we're only supporting 100% virtual shares first, and I'd encourage people to just do a 100% EBANK Exchange launch. It's easier and you don't need to work about 32-bit dividend caps.

---

The issue with 100% virtualization of shares is that, as stated previously, it locks out non-EBANK-participants. For reasons discussed elsewhere I personally am not comfortable with EBANK at this time, and as such would not be able to participate in a 100% EBANK IPO. Although I would only be a drop in the bucket, I doubt I am alone in this, and as such an EBANK IPO would necessarily be limiting its prospective participants.

Furthermore, 100% virtualized shares expose me, as the investor, not only to the risk of IPO insolvency but EBANK insolvency. Although you understandably do not feel this to be a possibility, it is possible. With 100% virtualized shares EBANK would hold the shares from the time of issue to the time of repurchase/collapse, which for some IPOs can be a period lasting months to years. If EBANK fails over this period, there is no guarantee that I as an investor would be able to reclaim the shares held by EBANK -- even if the IPO I invested in continues as a going concern.

The one feature I feel would help relieve my fears would be if EBANK were to implement share redemptions. If I can invest using an EBANK account and then withdraw the shares I purchase, it would reduce my exposure to EBANK insolvency from years to hours. Any plans to implement this, or are all ebank IPOs destined to stay within ebank?




Edit: Forums lost my original post. Edited to reduce post spam.

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

Now I like the ideas and options EBank are planning, I have a question:

1. Will EBank charge commisions for using the exchange (to the IPO launcher or via trading)

2. or, is this to provide added services to help the secondary market and the customer experience

???

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

(7) IPOs and bonds can allow buy orders to be placed before the stock is launched. This is to allow auctions. When launched, the manager simply fills those orders.

---

Originally by: Kwint Sommer

---

After CCP fixes lag, makes sovereignty warfare fun, introduces ambulation, reworks the rest of the graphics, populates low sec, introduces T3 mods and T2 capitals then I'm sure they'll get right on making tools that .001% of the community will directly use. Until then, they have bigger fish to fry.

---

Originally by: Rho'varo

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

(7) IPOs and bonds can allow buy orders to be placed before the stock is launched. This is to allow auctions. When launched, the manager simply fills those orders.

---

Would the orders be filled like Kwint's auction on expansion shares where higher bidders paid higher prices, or as is perhaps more common where all winning bidders pay the lowest winning price, or would this simply be an option in the process?

---

Originally by: Mr Horizontal

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

Now I like the ideas and options EBank are planning, I have a question:

1. Will EBank charge commisions for using the exchange (to the IPO launcher or via trading)

2. or, is this to provide added services to help the secondary market and the customer experience

???

---

Good question. Why don't you answer it!

Basically, you have normal and virtualized shares. Our plans for the exchange are not to make money from a commission structure, but it would use commissions to make virtualized shares more attractive and balance the inherent disadvantage virtualized shares being bound by EBANK's exchange rules over normal shares that are bound by nothing.

We can charge for listing, commission for buying and commission for selling, as well as using anything provided by EBANK like it's various tools etc.

The only cost we are definite about is to have an excessive teller charge for bringing excessive amounts of your ingame shares in and out of the Exchange so as not to abuse the human element of this.

In all honesty though this was something we haven't nailed exactly, and was something we'd sort out while testing the exchange. If you have ideas for a structure now, then I'm listening

---

Originally by: ECredit

---

Originally by: Thorrak McFluffypants

---

Originally by: Hexxx

---

Honestly though, in the beginning I think we're only supporting 100% virtual shares first, and I'd encourage people to just do a 100% EBANK Exchange launch.

---

The issue with 100% virtualization of shares is that, as stated previously, it locks out non-EBANK-participants. For reasons discussed elsewhere I personally am not comfortable with EBANK at this time, and as such would not be able to participate in a 100% EBANK IPO. Although I would only be a drop in the bucket, I doubt I am alone in this, and as such an EBANK IPO would necessarily be limiting its prospective participants.

...

---

No one is holding a gun to your head. You can choose the level of expsure you want to have related to EBANK services and investment options. As a matter of fact I encourage it as a smart move. Your investment portfolio should be diverse. Just like in real life. There are mutiple stock exchanges in the world and I hope once choose to invest in mutiple stock echanges in EVe is that is thier desire.

---

Originally by: Thorrak McFluffypants

---

Although noone is holding a gun to my head, a 100% virtualized IPO would not allow for shares to be sold through other stock exchanges.

---

Originally by: cosmoray

---

If someone is launching a virtual IPO, then I would not charge for listing on the exchange.
Makes a good incentive to IPO launcher to have on your exchange which means more business.
I would probably charge a sellers commision of 1% just like tax in Eve. This would add up if it became a popular way to trade like the Eve markets, and make it cheap to trade. Volume is key

---