PlanetCalypsoForum.com :: Entropia Universe Discussion and Resources
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 50
  1. #1
    Elite Divinity's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    India
    Avatar
    Divinity Deth Undefined
    Society
    Freelancer
    Posts
    4,871
    Images
    195

    Company Shares System - Divinity's Suggestion List

    Firstly, allow me to thank whoever @ MA HQ agreed to move ahead with this project which has been suggested by a lot of us ( especially those running funds) earlier.

    However, it would have been great if MA took some advice in terms of how things need to work to make this a major success before moving ahead with the project.

    Anyways hopefully am not too late and i hope some thought is given to features that need to be there to make this work on a broader scale.

    ***1. Feature of Reducing Costs Associated ( Events/Fertilizers/Advertising) from the tax should be available for Assets under the Company. This is unlike the CLD/AUD etc deed system but will be intrinsic if active LA's/fund managers need to use the share system. ***Critical According to Me. Without this MA might as well not waste there time with this project.


    **********2. Feature of Adding Revenue ( Banks especially ) : Currently Banks are in such a decrepit state in terms of UI and functionality that I cannot even describe in words. Also the fact that there are 2-3 Banks active ingame means I cannot expect MA to put it on a priority list in terms of UI ( There are plenty more mass scale requirements and as such I would not expect Bank UI to be a priority) . Getting back to my point currently a lot of loans are done outside of the game mechanics because a flat rate for an LA loan is not possible and similarly with tiered/non tiered gear. With banks there is also the added revenue from resale of gear that is lost to the bank ( Sometimes at a loss to the bank) which needs to be factored in. All of this necessitate having a way to add revenue to the share system to make it work as intended. ********* TO BE MARKED AS IRRELEVANT FOR NOW

    3. A voting system which would enable control of the asset via majority holdings needs to be in place. Things like majority control % should be user defined to prevent hijacking of the *Company*( typo) by malicious entities. Some rule sets with flexibility given as provision here would mean better control can be maintained.

    Without these 3 features, I for one would be unable to use the system at all, so I am speaking from my own personal point of view here. Others could agree/disagree on the same. I understand that there is cost associated with this and I am sure everyone who creates "Company Share" using the system would not mind paying a fee for it. I certainly would not mind (subject to how much it is).

    Irrespective of what you decide to include or not, I am extremely happy about the fact that this was considered as something which needs to be worked on. While trust will still remain a factor ( especially if above features are implemented) it will go a long ways in making EU into more then just a game with currency conversion possibilities.

    PS : I would appreciate if others share there point of view here and we can discuss to make this more feasible for MA and helpful for EU.

  2. #2
    Guardian mspatterson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2015
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    XXX ViPô₩₳₹₱
    Avatar
    Count Sinner Gism
    Society
    The Ministry
    Posts
    326
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Divinity View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    3. A voting system which would enable control of the asset via majority holdings needs to be in place. Things like majority control % should be user defined to prevent hijacking of the *Company*( typo) by malicious entities. Some rule sets with flexibility given as provision here would mean better control can be maintained.
    kinda disagree with this.. sure a safety net is nice but imo once you make something available in shares, the shareholders can do what they like with them. If you want to retain control for sure retain 51% and your golden.

    I think the higest shareholder should have control. that's it. this is what creates the share value. you take away the goal at the end you take away the value.

    Well maybe vote for manager be ok. But primary control should always be highest shareholder. Accurate share market history be nice too. That way dead LA's with missing owners etc vs live maintained ones with good history will be clearly visable.
    Last edited by mspatterson; 04-25-2019 at 15:48.
    ✘✘✘ ViPô₩₳₹₱ - 24/7 Mobile Offline Messaging - https://discord.gg/RXEDNUh

  3. #3
    Elite Divinity's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    India
    Avatar
    Divinity Deth Undefined
    Society
    Freelancer
    Posts
    4,871
    Images
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by mspatterson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    kinda disagree with this.. sure a safety net is nice but imo once you make something available in shares, the shareholders can do what they like with them. If you want to retain control for sure retain 51% and your golden.

    I think the higest shareholder should have control. that's it. this is what creates the share value. you take away the goal at the end you take away the value.

    Well maybe vote for manager be ok. But primary control should always be highest shareholder. Accurate share market history be nice too. That way dead LA's with missing owners etc vs live maintained ones with good history will be clearly visable.
    Use Case Analysis : Person "A" creates shares and puts efforts in making the shares worth 2x of initial offering. Person "B" ( with malicious intent) starts buying shares from start and eventually gets to 51% even with last few % being bought @ 2-3x of initial offering. Then he stops managing the LA completely driving the ROI to near 0. Buys the remaining % for peanuts.

    If on the other hand Person "A" creates shares with a visibility of the fact that he retains managerial control till 60/70/80% ( arbitrary number) vote against him ( here am using vote not ownership simply) then the buyer of the share is buying the shares based on the parameter being known.

    I am not saying not to keep it as you say, am saying give the option to the guy creating the company so he can micromanage and then may the best man win.

    Eventually it is the buyer as well who decides whether it is worthwhile for him to invest in any "share" not the seller alone.

  4. #4
    Guardian mspatterson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2015
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    XXX ViPô₩₳₹₱
    Avatar
    Count Sinner Gism
    Society
    The Ministry
    Posts
    326
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Divinity View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Use Case Analysis : Person "A" creates shares and puts efforts in making the shares worth 2x of initial offering. Person "B" ( with malicious intent) starts buying shares from start and eventually gets to 51% even with last few % being bought @ 2-3x of initial offering. Then he stops managing the LA completely driving the ROI to near 0. Buys the remaining % for peanuts.

    If on the other hand Person "A" creates shares with a visibility of the fact that he retains managerial control till 60/70/80% ( arbitrary number) vote against him ( here am using vote not ownership simply) then the buyer of the share is buying the shares based on the parameter being known.

    I am not saying not to keep it as you say, am saying give the option to the guy creating the company so he can micromanage and then may the best man win.

    Eventually it is the buyer as well who decides whether it is worthwhile for him to invest in any "share" not the seller alone.
    I see what your saying about driving the price down but its still the best way. Alternatively tho aside from primary owner there could be a voted in manager. but I was just thinking of diff scenarios with 2/3/4 etc total investors with 2 there be an issue if primary was MIA. So id suggest maybe a once a month max timed vote that lasts maybe couple days or a week and most votes wins management. even if its just one vote cuz everyone else was MIA. this would solve the issue of management at least so it could continue to be maintained.
    ✘✘✘ ViPô₩₳₹₱ - 24/7 Mobile Offline Messaging - https://discord.gg/RXEDNUh

  5. #5
    Old Alpha
    Joined
    Nov 2006
    Location
    UK
    Society
    Viral
    Posts
    1,107
    Images
    25
    The main one i think thats touched on is the ability to minus expenses.

    Fert is easy thats on the terminal and easy to track.
    Advertising and event prizes will need some form of monitoring. Some events require long algorithms to calc in excel. Needs some thought
    Proud Owner of
    La25- Osseo Outpost - La51- Osseocollum Oasis

  6. #6
    Mindark sure knows thier customers , they teaser us test invite us and introduce their new camera system with a big bang and a company share system just pop out of nowere since it wasn't on anyones radar to our pleasant suprise but so much hype potential wasted.



    Uhm right

    About banks :
    They said owned land areas, bank buissnes is most likely not included.

    I suspect all shares will be passive with no rights over the land area and most likely the distributed amount of revenue generated from land areas will be set by the owner before he relase shares, probably with fixed taxes at mining and hunting set in stone on share generation. I wouln't be suprised if its impossible to allocate 100% of the revenue towards share holders and expect more a hard cap around 70% to 80% that can be chosen.

    As a share holder you need to put your trust in the land owner. Maybe we even get a fail safe system that auto buy fertilizer from auction and keep the la at least at max spawn and min maturity if the owner fail to keep it running.

    The value of a LA might be determined on how much shares are out and how much percentage from the revenue is going to the rat tail of investors when selling LA's in the future.

    I dont expect a fancy vote system that empower share holders to influence anything done with the LA , mindark suprise me.

    I also have no idea how they wish to deal with promotional events because if you manage that LA and 80% of the revenue goes somewere else but in your pocket any event prices will burn a hole in your wallet.

    Im looking forward towards this feature and how it will work out
    Do i see panic CLD sales yet ?

  7. #7
    Guardian mspatterson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2015
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    XXX ViPô₩₳₹₱
    Avatar
    Count Sinner Gism
    Society
    The Ministry
    Posts
    326
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Fiona Simmons View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Mindark sure knows thier customers , they teaser us test invite us and introduce their new camera system with a big bang and a company share system just pop out of nowere since it wasn't on anyones radar to our pleasant suprise but so much hype potential wasted.



    Uhm right

    About banks :
    They said owned land areas, bank buissnes is most likely not included.

    I suspect all shares will be passive with no rights over the land area and most likely the distributed amount of revenue generated from land areas will be set by the owner before he relase shares, probably with fixed taxes at mining and hunting set in stone on share generation. I wouln't be suprised if its impossible to allocate 100% of the revenue towards share holders and expect more a hard cap around 70% to 80% that can be chosen.

    As a share holder you need to put your trust in the land owner. Maybe we even get a fail safe system that auto buy fertilizer from auction and keep the la at least at max spawn and min maturity if the owner fail to keep it running.

    The value of a LA might be determined on how much shares are out and how much percentage from the revenue is going to the rat tail of investors when selling LA's in the future.

    I dont expect a fancy vote system that empower share holders to influence anything done with the LA , mindark suprise me.

    I also have no idea how they wish to deal with promotional events because if you manage that LA and 80% of the revenue goes somewere else but in your pocket any event prices will burn a hole in your wallet.

    Im looking forward towards this feature and how it will work out
    Do i see panic CLD sales yet ?
    although I aggree with you in that faith shud be put in landowner.. we all must realize that this is a game and a lot of legal steps and precautions are generally not done. For example land owner dies in plane crash.. no will etc.. now what? everyone invested loses everything? there needs to be a way for LA to keep functioning in the event of sudden owner absence. youd still be able to trade your shares etc and vote on a manager to maintain it at least.

    I don't have an LA so ill admit my knowledge is quite limited but property irl I do. There are some gamey aspects that can be over looked but some real life ones that cant be.
    ✘✘✘ ViPô₩₳₹₱ - 24/7 Mobile Offline Messaging - https://discord.gg/RXEDNUh

  8. #8
    Elite Divinity's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    India
    Avatar
    Divinity Deth Undefined
    Society
    Freelancer
    Posts
    4,871
    Images
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by mspatterson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I see what your saying about driving the price down but its still the best way. Alternatively tho aside from primary owner there could be a voted in manager. but I was just thinking of diff scenarios with 2/3/4 etc total investors with 2 there be an issue if primary was MIA. So id suggest maybe a once a month max timed vote that lasts maybe couple days or a week and most votes wins management. even if its just one vote cuz everyone else was MIA. this would solve the issue of management at least so it could continue to be maintained.
    Not sure how voting solves the issue if the person owns 51% of the shares and as such would hold most of the voting power and decision making power.

    Quote Originally Posted by dombath View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The main one i think thats touched on is the ability to minus expenses.

    Fert is easy thats on the terminal and easy to track.
    Advertising and event prizes will need some form of monitoring. Some events require long algorithms to calc in excel. Needs some thought
    I don't think it is feasible for MA to take into account costs etc outside of the scope of ingame events. Even with Ingame events events where say CLD is part of the prize ( point being markup is involved) they cannot get into the intricacies of it. There is a level of trust that will need to be involved at some point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiona Simmons View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    About banks :
    They said owned land areas, bank buissnes is most likely not included.

    I suspect all shares will be passive with no rights over the land area and most likely the distributed amount of revenue generated from land areas will be set by the owner before he relase shares, probably with fixed taxes at mining and hunting set in stone on share generation. I wouln't be suprised if its impossible to allocate 100% of the revenue towards share holders and expect more a hard cap around 70% to 80% that can be chosen.

    As a share holder you need to put your trust in the land owner. Maybe we even get a fail safe system that auto buy fertilizer from auction and keep the la at least at max spawn and min maturity if the owner fail to keep it running.

    The value of a LA might be determined on how much shares are out and how much percentage from the revenue is going to the rat tail of investors when selling LA's in the future.

    I dont expect a fancy vote system that empower share holders to influence anything done with the LA , mindark suprise me.

    I also have no idea how they wish to deal with promotional events because if you manage that LA and 80% of the revenue goes somewere else but in your pocket any event prices will burn a hole in your wallet.

    Im looking forward towards this feature and how it will work out
    About Bank : You have a point there since i went in and checked and the deed too is similar to appartment/shop deed and not that of LA/Mall.

    Passive Rights : Also makes sense really if passive rights are there , though i think % distribution would really screw things up from Land Management perspective considering how dynamic things are in EU.

    You do make some good assumptions there and I agree that it needs to be simple for MA to implement else it will not be implemented at all.

    My solution would be

    1. Company Deeds give passive income rights ( as suggested by you)
    2. Company Manager/CEO or whatever gets to reduce costs ( advertising/ferts/events) before monthly payout is made. ( Am assuming for now only LA's/Malls get this feature)

  9. #9
    Elite Divinity's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    India
    Avatar
    Divinity Deth Undefined
    Society
    Freelancer
    Posts
    4,871
    Images
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by mspatterson View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    although I aggree with you in that faith shud be put in landowner.. we all must realize that this is a game and a lot of legal steps and precautions are generally not done. For example land owner dies in plane crash.. no will etc.. now what? everyone invested loses everything? there needs to be a way for LA to keep functioning in the event of sudden owner absence. youd still be able to trade your shares etc and vote on a manager to maintain it at least.

    I don't have an LA so ill admit my knowledge is quite limited but property irl I do. There are some gamey aspects that can be over looked but some real life ones that cant be.
    1. If the person dies without will and with noone claiming the account, the deeds will expire into tt value ( basically 0) thereby increasing the power of the remaining deeds available. I do not see how the current game dynamics will cause an issue there.

  10. #10
    Guardian mspatterson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2015
    Gender | Ingame
    Male | Male
    Location
    XXX ViPô₩₳₹₱
    Avatar
    Count Sinner Gism
    Society
    The Ministry
    Posts
    326
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Divinity View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Not sure how voting solves the issue if the person owns 51% of the shares and as such would hold most of the voting power and decision making power.



    I don't think it is feasible for MA to take into account costs etc outside of the scope of ingame events. Even with Ingame events events where say CLD is part of the prize ( point being markup is involved) they cannot get into the intricacies of it. There is a level of trust that will need to be involved at some point.



    About Bank : You have a point there since i went in and checked and the deed too is similar to appartment/shop deed and not that of LA/Mall.

    Passive Rights : Also makes sense really if passive rights are there , though i think % distribution would really screw things up from Land Management perspective considering how dynamic things are in EU.

    You do make some good assumptions there and I agree that it needs to be simple for MA to implement else it will not be implemented at all.

    My solution would be

    1. Company Deeds give passive income rights ( as suggested by you)
    2. Company Manager/CEO or whatever gets to reduce costs ( advertising/ferts/events) before monthly payout is made. ( Am assuming for now only LA's/Malls get this feature)
    It solves the noone currently able to manage the land problem. Obviously voting power matters and 51% trumps all other votes. But if that person were missing the highest power vote or combination of votes that actually voted take effect.

    This would allow the LA etc to continue functioning and generating income for all shareholders until whatever needs to be done with the primary shareholder is taken care of or they return to the game.
    Last edited by mspatterson; 04-25-2019 at 19:43.
    ✘✘✘ ViPô₩₳₹₱ - 24/7 Mobile Offline Messaging - https://discord.gg/RXEDNUh

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Planet Calypso on Twitter  Follow Planet Calypso on Facebook