These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Market Discussions

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Player run insurance, for MD bonds.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#61 - 2013-03-14 18:09:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Bad Bobby
coeira wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:

Candy did clearly state that the numbers were all placeholder figures. Using them for any analysis seemed entirely redundant to me. If the idea ever received even a breath of life I would expect the numbers to change dramatically and be at least viable in a shallow sense.

My concern, is not that nobody would use the proposed service but that somebody might use it. As an unused service it would do little harm and as a cautionary example to others it may even do some good. If anyone was to actually make use of it, even if the pre-req for doing so was utter retardation, then it would be a very bad thing.


they may only be place holder figures but looking at them still tells you the service isnt going to be viable the higher the payouts the higher he admin fee's need to be to pay for them. I just dont believe there could be a mid ground where the admin fee's and payout would be attrative for both customers and Candy to both be happy.

As I said, the customers would mostly be fools.

As foolish people are not in short supply, I don't see that alone being an issue.

If foolish people were in short supply then the EVE universe would be pretty much unrecognisable.

It is a common issue with people that they are unable to look at something through the eyes of someone other than themselves. If you look at this idea and think "nobody would use it" then you are not the target audience and you are not looking at it through the eyes of one of "those people".
Nerdy McButtHurt Trald
Doomheim
#62 - 2013-03-14 18:58:46 UTC
I don't see why people are criticizing this so heavily.
You are not obligated to buy insurance.

As long as you remember that ALL investing in EVE is a trust game (unless you hold the collateral)!

Do I trust Chribba, Grendell, etc to act as a 3rd party?
Do I trust this investment not to scam?
Do I trust this insurance?

If you invest you are trusting someone.



It is also fairly clear how this will be broken though.

Someone rep grinds investment amounts up. People continue to invest as they believe that the insurance controls are in place.
This could be helped by starting a new account and defaulting on a small bond (500M) and ensuring the insurance pays out.
This gives further confidence in the insurance model, as Candy's rep increases so does the bond by default.

At some point the rep grinder says thanks very much and keeps the loot. At that point it is Candy's choice whether to pay out. The real rep damage is Candy's not the scammer, as they don't usually care about the toon itself.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#63 - 2013-03-14 21:36:30 UTC
Candy Oshea wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:

Are you thinking of the MD audit fund?

That was certainly a related idea and I feel a much better one. RAW23, myself and some others set it up in order to pay auditors to audit small MD offerings.


Yes thats the one, my mistake, as at the time audits were expensive & the entry barrier for a small trader to get funds was too high, due to said cost.


Audits were not *that* expensive. They earned me 5-7M per hour. That was OK for the first years but then multiple EvE API changes (that broke some nice auditing softwares) and a general scammers tecniques improvement (mostly in the flawed EvE mechanics exploiting and in their increasingly improved ability to social engineer people) made it longer and harder to made.
Another factor is that at a certain point I stopped having convenience to do anything *actively played* that would earn me less than 50M per hour. I simply could not feel the face to ask an auditing fund to pay me 350-400M for investments as small as 2B.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Candy Oshea
Techfree Investment Group
#64 - 2013-03-15 00:02:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Candy Oshea
Vera Algaert wrote:

So to make money you need a better grasp on the risks of unsecured offerings than "the market". The market for unsecured offerings is pretty spotty, interest rates are often chosen based on psychological criteria (nice thresholds such as 10%, 15%, ...) or the desire to impress rather than due to pure supply/demand (e.g. a Dutch auction) and most MD regulars (me included) have never done proper analysis of how risky which classes of offerings really are (relying on gut instinct instead).


I think you are being too nice here, the market for Unsecured offerings is non-existant, the word i wanted to use gets turned into ********

There is no measurement units for this. "gut feelings" are all we can do, and to base a business on it only to be taken advantage of by the very ppl its trying to prevent is a horrible idea.
______
I think you are right, what we can gain from this is a possibility of a real risk model, which can be used more like a probability matrix for investors rather than insurance, using data gather over the last years MD Bonds, however doing even that, can lead to shadyness, as one can cook the books etc.


Some measurements we can attain are:

1) % of failures/success
By finding players than ran MD bonds, didn't scam at all, and have either retired or are not doing it anymore, the data can't include any current fund managers & there current bonds, it also can't include any of my bonds.,The average interest rate per success. (SR)

We run that data, over the last 5 years (this will take some uber patience to gather), splitting each year up into its own %. (Now known as Y1, Y2 etc)

2) Scammed amount & the amount of successive bonds they have ran to step it up to scam level.
Run that data over the years, and you will probably find the first 3-4 have been a success, leading to the scam. this figure will help us determine a "cash-out" average (C1, C2 etc), & a number of successive bonds average (N1, N2 etc), total amount of scams (S1, S2)

3) Scam VS Legit ratio
Find lowest common denominator place into a ratio. (Y:S) or a percentage

3) Interest rates of Successful scam.
This measurement is to help measure the Player being scammed' assessment of the risk Vs reward. (IR)

4) Interest rates of Successfully run Bonds (unsecured)
Just as an interesting measure, to compare it to scammer % levels.

After finding all these measurements, you could apply the figures (take the following with a grain of salt they are not real figures!)

MD Bonds, historically have a 42% chance of being scams (Y:S)
the average most scammers use as a cash-out is 16,45b (C) (But show the outliers, like Bad bobby Vs a simple 200m scam (i think debra was scammed out of 200 recently)
the average amount of bonds used to reach the cashout level is 4.1 (N)
the average interest rate used to lure Saps into scams is 8.97% (IR)
the average interest rate per successful bond is 5.65% (SR)

iCandy  - I have accidently swallowed some Scrabble tiles, my next shit could spell disaster!
Candy Oshea
Techfree Investment Group
#65 - 2013-03-15 00:09:52 UTC
Debra Tao wrote:
I doubt there is enough data out there to craft a reasonable model, ie a non-bullshit thing that actually predicts fairly well the risk of a bond.

Even if you think that there is enough information for that, such a model should adapt and rely on a lot on "gut feelings" to spot scammers that fake a type of offering that has been successful in the past.

So basically i don't think it's possible.


I Disagree with you on the data not being there, & Agree with you that the "gut feelings" & "Business models" shouldn't be used in the same sentence. lol.

Read my response to Vera with regards to data collection, i think there would be some very useful % etc that could help.

Tell us what you think!

iCandy  - I have accidently swallowed some Scrabble tiles, my next shit could spell disaster!
Candy Oshea
Techfree Investment Group
#66 - 2013-03-15 00:23:13 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
Big waste of time that can only end in burnout and/or tears.

There are thousands of fun and challenging things to do in this game that don't involve trying to make structures out of sand.

Unless this is some big cashout scam, in which case great idea and good luck.


Uncle, Agree on point 1 & 2, however i have done most everything in game already, & i enjoy the roleplay thing, like any other creative type. But i have pretty much settled on giving up Bonds, using my own isk (yay) & increasing the amount of photoshop posts i do in the story thread. (im already have planned a satire if you will on this thread lol)

Cashout scam? lmao. It is comments such as those which make going legit the better troll in MD nowadays, its far to cliche to scam you see.

iCandy  - I have accidently swallowed some Scrabble tiles, my next shit could spell disaster!
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#67 - 2013-03-15 00:31:04 UTC
As long as you know what you're getting into. Your money, your time, your game, play how you like.

Best of luck.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Candy Oshea
Techfree Investment Group
#68 - 2013-03-15 00:40:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Candy Oshea
coeira wrote:

why exactly would anybody take up this anyway?


Lets run some sims. & Find out. Bear

You invest 10b in a partially collateralized offer.
Fee: 10m <-- is this viable for me? no. taking a massive risk, underwriting a loan for only 10m fee?
Deposit required: 2B <-- is this too much? with 2b, I can make about 4-5% on market per day (using my own market profit % history)
Payout in case of scam: 2b + (0.3x10b) = 5b <--- is this worth the 2b you invested for 35 extra days on top of your loan?
Payout in case of Success: 2b.+3% interest (add an interest rate here, so they potentially gain (as i would naturally gain from deposits anyway) could solve the reverse interest rate scenario -Vera?)

To be able to adjust the numbers for viability(me) & Appropriately priced Fees(you), we need to apply a risk profile.

The "Risk profile" has to be applied at the time of the bond, not after the fact (as Vera pointed out)(the data for these isn't collected, we don't yet have a working Risk profile to apply to any bonds)

iCandy  - I have accidently swallowed some Scrabble tiles, my next shit could spell disaster!
Candy Oshea
Techfree Investment Group
#69 - 2013-03-15 00:44:39 UTC
Varius Xeral wrote:
As long as you know what you're getting into. Your money, your time, your game, play how you like.

Best of luck.


Relevant

iCandy  - I have accidently swallowed some Scrabble tiles, my next shit could spell disaster!
Candy Oshea
Techfree Investment Group
#70 - 2013-03-15 00:48:10 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:

It is a common issue with people that they are unable to look at something through the eyes of someone other than themselves. If you look at this idea and think "nobody would use it" then you are not the target audience and you are not looking at it through the eyes of one of "those people".


The Target audience, is anyone who wants to roleplay(as an investor) with their money, and invest it in a player run bond.

The actual audience is (if it went ahead), lowlifes and sociopaths trying to rip me off.

iCandy  - I have accidently swallowed some Scrabble tiles, my next shit could spell disaster!
coeira
Speculum Ambitus
#71 - 2013-03-15 08:04:35 UTC
Candy Oshea wrote:


Lets run some sims. & Find out. Bear

You invest 10b in a partially collateralized offer.
Fee: 10m <-- is this viable for me? no. taking a massive risk, underwriting a loan for only 10m fee?
Deposit required: 2B <-- is this too much? with 2b, I can make about 4-5% on market per day (using my own market profit % history)
Payout in case of scam: 2b + (0.3x10b) = 5b <--- is this worth the 2b you invested for 35 extra days on top of your loan?
Payout in case of Success: 2b.+3% interest (add an interest rate here, so they potentially gain (as i would naturally gain from deposits anyway) could solve the reverse interest rate scenario -Vera?)

To be able to adjust the numbers for viability(me) & Appropriately priced Fees(you), we need to apply a risk profile.

The "Risk profile" has to be applied at the time of the bond, not after the fact (as Vera pointed out)(the data for these isn't collected, we don't yet have a working Risk profile to apply to any bonds)



thats all well and good for covering bonds with some collateral. and those bonds have already gained free coverage for there lose in terms of the collateral my point was to the high risk ventrure for which i'd would be the main stay of any bond insurance scheme theres no incentive for them to do it.

also it seems you've no real plan on how your going to run this and are wing and changing it as the flaws are exposed on this thread. the low risk offering disappeared from your orginal post. and I suspect this quote will disappear to quicly

Quote:
Capped at 2b investment amount, max payout is 2b.


and as a finally point as I said above I dont think there is any middle ground where the money your going to make and the money gets back is going to leave both partys happy. because if your simply trading to pay back peoples scammed money your soon going to lose interest in this and then potentally scam yourself. for the simple fact if it did take off you could have 10-100s of billion isk in public cash without ever having to come back to these forums .
Candy Oshea
Techfree Investment Group
#72 - 2013-03-15 11:19:56 UTC
1.2/10 - not even worth a pity like, or quote brackets.

re-read the thread, try again.

iCandy  - I have accidently swallowed some Scrabble tiles, my next shit could spell disaster!