These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Banks. We need them.

Author
DoraTheExplora Taft
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#41 - 2012-03-17 20:42:00 UTC
Dane Eham wrote:
Most people wouldn't use a bank in the real world if they had an Eve wallet. I suspect most money in banks earns no or virtually no interest and is only there for security and the convenience of transfers. Eve banks are actually worse than keeping the money in your own wallet on both those counts.

Maybe the Eve economy needs lending but the average player has no desire or need for a bank.

this is absolutely right ccp already provides the public option for secure banking. If the issue is wanting to achieve secure returns for isk you don't want to develop yourself then you're going to have to take some risk.
DoraTheExplora Taft
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#42 - 2012-03-17 21:19:07 UTC
May I just submit an idea for stock pricing in eve? A somewhat intuitive framework would be to simply directly tie a base stock price to the value of a special wallet division in a corporation. Let's call it the "investment fund" of a corporation. Now before I go into this more you should note this system is still entirely trust based but it at least has the potential to produce situations that have balanced incentives

At the point of a corporation going public they issue some number of public shares which is entirely up to them. It could be millions but whatever it is the base price of the stock is dependent on this formula: (1/total number of stocks issued) x (value of investment fund). So if the investment fund were 10 billion and 1 million stocks were issued the base price would be 10000 isk. As more stocks are purchased more isk is transfered to the fund and the value of the investment fund goes up of course and the base price rises. Now as for what the base price actually means I'm thinking of it as the price at which anyone can buy without needing another party to offer to sell. You would also be able to place orders to buy and sell already owned stock at whatever price you wish. This facilitates larger trades between players that don't effect the base price directly

So in essence at the point where the publicly available stock becomes scarce or not at all available, the private speculative market would take over

Now as for the question of dividends I think that should be left completely up to the players who run the corp itself. Ideally you would have tools in place to securely give some percentage to stockholders if you wish. Say a 2% of the value of the investment fund dividend for all stock holders each month or simply no dividends if you're confident people will continue to value your stock

In the end the idea is that it would at least be possible, although most likely uncommon, to produce a situation where the people running a corp would have every incentive to increase the value of the investment fund steadily in order to continue to grow

While this is comparable to a ponzi scheme I think it is entirely possible for corps to use this model to create real value for investors.
Hexxx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2012-03-17 21:30:55 UTC
DoraTheExplora Taft wrote:
May I just submit an idea for stock pricing in eve? A somewhat intuitive framework would be to simply directly tie a base stock price to the value of a special wallet division in a corporation. Let's call it the "investment fund" of a corporation. Now before I go into this more you should note this system is still entirely trust based but it at least has the potential to produce situations that have balanced incentives

At the point of a corporation going public they issue some number of public shares which is entirely up to them. It could be millions but whatever it is the base price of the stock is dependent on this formula: (1/total number of stocks issued) x (value of investment fund). So if the investment fund were 10 billion and 1 million stocks were issued the base price would be 10000 isk. As more stocks are purchased more isk is transfered to the fund and the value of the investment fund goes up of course and the base price rises. Now as for what the base price actually means I'm thinking of it as the price at which anyone can buy without needing another party to offer to sell. You would also be able to place orders to buy and sell already owned stock at whatever price you wish. This facilitates larger trades between players that don't effect the base price directly

So in essence at the point where the publicly available stock becomes scarce or not at all available, the private speculative market would take over

Now as for the question of dividends I think that should be left completely up to the players who run the corp itself. Ideally you would have tools in place to securely give some percentage to stockholders if you wish. Say a 2% of the value of the investment fund dividend for all stock holders each month or simply no dividends if you're confident people will continue to value your stock

In the end the idea is that it would at least be possible, although most likely uncommon, to produce a situation where the people running a corp would have every incentive to increase the value of the investment fund steadily in order to continue to grow

While this is comparable to a ponzi scheme I think it is entirely possible for corps to use this model to create real value for investors.



My first reaction was a violent "Absolutely not."

However, there is something there that bears more thought. I encourage you to flesh the idea out a little more.

Food for thought: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed-end_fund


Johnny Frecko
Violence is the Answer
Wormhole Society
#44 - 2012-03-17 23:40:27 UTC
@DoraTheExplora and the whole stock market.

If anything :

1)the corp sets it's own price on the stock
2)stock prices are determined on the free market, much like bonds etc.

- which means, if you try to sell a stock at 1M per unit, and no one buys, you'll have to reduce the price.
What makes people buy any asset? pretty much the NPV of the asset. Any new "start-up" corp with unknown chars, they won't be able to sell their stocks for any significant price.

Any asset is worth it's foreseeable net inflow of cash. In a stock - it's worth the foreseeable dividend payments.
as in real life, the company/corporation isn't obligated by any means of actually paying the divident. Yet a corp that will never pays dividends is likely to get a very bad price for his stocks.

either way - this is filled with ways to scam and rip people off of their money. more holes than i wish to count.


now back to on-topic.

let's just assume we solved(you solved?) all the problems associated with banks.
1)trust - completely trust-worthy
2)Loans withdrawls and deposists are easily done through a new super interface.

- this will create a huge influx of deposits, people LOVE free isk(intrests) - Intrest must be driven by supply and demand for deposits and loans - meaning that at first a VERY low intrest will be set(if you ask me, it would be around 0.01% to 0.1% monthly) - why? because some people have rediculous amounts of isk they can drop into this new game mechanic(which is completely safe, remember?).

So what do we have? A very low intrest rate for deposits, That's fine, Now for lending, you'd expect a 5-7% margin between lending and saving, so your loan market will be dominated by demand aswell, the more people loan, the higher the intrest will be. ofcourse if ALOT of people will take loans, the intrest for lending can rise dramaticly(only so-much isk to lend, and demand is high).

Now, a regular bank functions in a very intresting manner - All your money is automaticly or manually deposited to the bank - you'd expect the same to happen in eve, as the system is completly safe, and people will let their dorment isk sit there and gain intrest.

So the bank will have ALOT of isk to lend, acutally it will have more than the actual amount of ISK in the game to lend.

An intresting situation - you take a loan to buy a T2 BPO, as soon as the ISK changes hands, the guy you bought the BPO from puts the ISK directly into the bank - even though isk changed hands, the bank didn't see a difference. So in theory(and in real life) the bank can loan around 5 times more isk than it has in its reserves.

you'd expect very low lending intrests for the first 100% of the deposists, once the bank lends more than that the intrests will rise.

Result : Huge influx of ISK to the market - Lending will be pretty much the thing to do to advance with your character.

the actual ramifications are actually way grander - because you'll get a huge influx of new starting business that are unable to finance themselves currently.

This is the monetary theory at it's very core, and you do not really know what a huge influx of ISK might do to the game. for example - plex prices will be insane :)

just my input
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#45 - 2012-03-18 00:21:36 UTC
Dane Eham wrote:
Most people wouldn't use a bank in the real world if they had an Eve wallet


True Lol but actually humans are so well dressed like pets by money, it's bank dealers and the fact everything is worth of money (really?) they're unable to think by themselves and realise money is a mean and not an end.

The number of different direct and indirect bank taxes pick for an entire life that you just save by not having a bank account is huge enough you could most probably pay yourself a very nice sweet home that would last for generations.

There are few things I have no respect in this life, bank jerks are on my top list by a large margin after tyrants and ethnic racists, and believe me or not I do know how fragile a life can be.
Unfortunately we are stupid enough to let as heritage to our children monetary murderer system and an energetic way of life, so pathetic that if god really existed he would have to be ashamed of creating such shameless crap, and we are proud of it right?

Just don't feck me in game with that crap of bank, I already can barely read or listen guys making illnesses to themselves because another stupid like like him changed his sell order by 0.01 isk, fecking can't even figure out this is a game, they continue their shameless useless existence through pixels...yeah go ahead and be the richer of your graveyard, it's so important.

I'm out of this crap.
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#46 - 2012-03-18 00:47:54 UTC
Do we need banks?

I think we need CCP to keep the playground fair, thats what the 24% is about, Me thinks.
Jake Andarius
Andarius Trading Corp.
#47 - 2012-03-18 00:56:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Jake Andarius
Claire Voyant wrote:
If we all had to put our money in player banks, and if those banks had to lend out most of that money to stay in business, the price of everything would go wacko. Just please put this silly idea out of your head. We don't want your bank.


MushroomMushroom wrote:
On the more general economics level, the last thing the economy needs right now is the inflationary pressure that a fractional reserve banking system would create, particularly if CCP shifts drones towards bounties... more isk, less minerals.


Trading Gives MeWood wrote:
Limiting the individuals ability to steal outright would allow banks to exist in a fashion that would protect the consumer without creating a "federal reserve" or FDIC insurance model that would literally explode the money supply and potentially create massive inflation.


Johnny Frecko wrote:
This is the monetary theory at it's very core, and you do not really know what a huge influx of ISK might do to the game. for example - plex prices will be insane :)


If banking became feasible in EVE, the money supply would indeed increase through the money multiplier effect of fractional reserve banking. That is, 10 billion ISK is deposited in a bank, the bank keeps a mandated amount in reserve (let us say 20%), and then lends out 8 billion ISK. The borrower spends that money, which gets deposited back in a bank. That bank keeps 1.6 billion ISK and lends out 6.4 billion ISK. The process repeats until the amount becomes negligible. Assuming that all idle ISK is always deposited at banks, the ultimate effect is that banking has increased the money supply by 400% (if the reserve is 20%). This increase in the money supply would, of course, lead to the rise in the prices of goods (i.e. inflation).

The unanimous opinion of the above quoted posters seems to be that money multiplier inflation is a horrible, horrible evil that would destroy or corrode the EVE economy. I would like to offer a different perspective.


  1. The actual amount of inflation would be much lower than 400% because not everyone will deposit their idle ISK. Strictly speaking about active players, there would be a significant segment of the population that would never deposit their idle ISK into banks. Some players would like to have immediate access to their ISK, and personally do not feel the returns of 1%-2% a month are worth the cost of having even an hour delay on the usage of their ISK. Others players would be forever suspicious of banks and decide to hold on to their own ISK. These individuals withholding their ISK would significantly reduce inflation because the money multiplier effect is exponential--each person withholding 1 billion is a lost 4 billion in potential money supply creation.

  2. Even if considerable inflation occurred, that inflation would happen over a period of many years. EBank held around 1 trillion ISK at its peak point. The money supply on active accounts was around 300 trillion ISK at the end of 2010 (QEN Q4 2010). So let us say we learned how to create safe banks today. How long do you think it would take the public to deposit 30 trillion ISK in those banks? That would still only be a tenth of the Q4 2010 money supply that would undergo the money multiplier effect. Inflation would steadily occur as more banks arose and players become more comfortable with banking. That means that the economy would not experience any sudden, drastic inflation that would damage consumer's spending power over a short period of time.

  3. Hyperinflation could not possibly occur. Hyperinflation is a phenomenon that has happened in some countries to make their currency altogether useless. Hyperinflation occurs because, in the real world, people (particularly governments) have the ability to print money to pay for their debts. Governments that have bad monetary policies will continued to print money to pay for their debts. The end result of flawed monetary policies is sometimes hyperinflation-the government prints money until the point that the currency becomes practically worthless. In the real world, money is created by governments (usually through a central bank that tries to match the increase in money supply roughly to the increase in labor.) In EVE, ISK is created by player labor. The more players run missions, the more money is created proportional to their efforts. Hyperinflation is impossible under these conditions. The maximum amount of inflation that could occur through the creation of EVE banks would be 400% (given 20% reserves).

  4. The economic benefits of readily available loans would far outweigh the economic costs of inflation. So let us say 400% inflation did eventually occur. Keep in mind that this would occur over several years such that individual consumers would barely even notice a loss in purchasing power. But say you had 5 billion ISK in 2012, stopped playing EVE, and reactivated in twenty years when the full inflation had occurred. Your 5 billion ISK would only be worth about 1 billion ISK in 2012 goods. Even if it takes a long time, that is a huge net loss for the economy as a whole, right? Wrong. First, the purchasing economic power is never actually lost; it is transferred to players who have been taking out loans. Second, instead of that 5 billion ISK sitting in your wallet unused, it would have been used by players to establish businesses that they would not have been otherwise able to do. With that 5 billion ISK put to work, the borrower can actually create more wealth from it, and this wealth is not adding to the inflation. This is real wealth, because it is generated directly from labor. As a result, the net economic gains from putting unused capital to work are actually quite huge.


Hopefully this clears up a few misconceptions and fears about the inflation that would occur from EVE banking.
Darth Tickles
Doomheim
#48 - 2012-03-18 03:50:23 UTC
That is a lot of words for something that is never going to happen.

If people want to have fun discussing hypotheticals, then by all means go nuts. However, if you think this is actually going to happen, you are sadly wasting your time.
Hexxx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2012-03-18 06:07:37 UTC
Tanya Powers wrote:
Dane Eham wrote:
Most people wouldn't use a bank in the real world if they had an Eve wallet


True Lol but actually humans are so well dressed like pets by money, it's bank dealers and the fact everything is worth of money (really?) they're unable to think by themselves and realise money is a mean and not an end.

The number of different direct and indirect bank taxes pick for an entire life that you just save by not having a bank account is huge enough you could most probably pay yourself a very nice sweet home that would last for generations.

There are few things I have no respect in this life, bank jerks are on my top list by a large margin after tyrants and ethnic racists, and believe me or not I do know how fragile a life can be.
Unfortunately we are stupid enough to let as heritage to our children monetary murderer system and an energetic way of life, so pathetic that if god really existed he would have to be ashamed of creating such shameless crap, and we are proud of it right?

Just don't feck me in game with that crap of bank, I already can barely read or listen guys making illnesses to themselves because another stupid like like him changed his sell order by 0.01 isk, fecking can't even figure out this is a game, they continue their shameless useless existence through pixels...yeah go ahead and be the richer of your graveyard, it's so important.

I'm out of this crap.


If I may produce a summary...

"I don't like banks because they do bad things that I can't explain, but they are bad because I said they are. Also, capitalism sucks and so do video games."
Hexxx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#50 - 2012-03-18 06:08:33 UTC
Darth Tickles wrote:
That is a lot of words for something that is never going to happen.

If people want to have fun discussing hypotheticals, then by all means go nuts. However, if you think this is actually going to happen, you are sadly wasting your time.


And yet it's happened before....crazy. Big smile
Akeirah
Pixel Universe Brokerage Services
#51 - 2012-03-18 09:22:19 UTC
The fundamental problem remains, even above and beyond inflation, that with any system that is developed it will require some form of trust. It has been shown many times that characters that are trusted, or at least well known enough we think we can trust them, can still be corrupt. No single character should be trusted with a large sum of ISK, as so many things could happen and it all becomes lost.

The best solution, barring any additional improvements or intervention from CCP, would be to have a large group to hold on to the isk, so that no one player has control of a great amount of ISK at any single time. This network of characters holding the ISK, though, would make it more difficult to make investments that would help the interest rate. Even with this method, there are limited ways of making sure that one person does not have multiple alts in this group, giving him or her control of a large amount of ISK regardless.

It will be nearly impossible to create a loan system without collateral, as there is nothing that would require a character to pay back the ISK. A good solution would be to reduce the amount of collateral needed to loan based on the number, amount, or length of time for loans that a player has paid back on time. First loan would be for something like 85% of the collateral being offered, and with a proven payment record (and not one or two) the could eventually be increased in increments up to 125% to 150% of the offered collateral. This system is of course not completely secure, but is definitely a way to weed out some of the scammers.

If there are to be multiple banks working similar methods, a cooperation of sorts would be needed, if nothing other than a shared blacklist of characters that have run off with loans or bank funds, and IP addresses of those who took bank funds as well. Neither of these is entirely secure, but it does provide some matter of security.

Kouryusei wrote:

I'd be willing to talk with some respected players to bring this to fruition, and I'm willing to put a large sum of real-life money in escrow (or convert it directly in to a large quantity of PLEX and therefore ISK) to insure against losses (in return for equity of the overall business). Though, who could be trusted to deal with high £X,XXX to low £XXX,XXX of my money? I'd be looking for some real-life contracts in this regard, and a third-party escrow service between myself and the other party.


In theory something like this could work, but it would be very close to RMT unless you are gaining ISK and ISK only from this venture. I would not see an issue with having the escrow as £, with the stipulation that it be turned to PLEX's if it is ever needed, but I do not see it going over well if you received £ in return for the investment. You would be rather safe in your £ investment with a well written RL contract with the person or persons in charge of this venture as you suggested. The issue with that is once again you may have to receive ISK/PLEX in compensation, as it also brushes the RMT line. I say this because:

I make a contract with you.
I run off with 2 trillion ISK.
£XX,XXX is converted to PLEX to pay back the investors.
I would then owe you £XX,XXX in exchange for the ISK I run off with.

It could be possible with special exceptions from CCP, or just taking the ban that would follow if they did deem this as RMT.
Kouryusei
Keizai Inc
#52 - 2012-03-18 11:05:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Kouryusei
Akeirah wrote:
The fundamental problem remains, even above and beyond inflation, that with any system that is developed it will require some form of trust. It has been shown many times that characters that are trusted, or at least well known enough we think we can trust them, can still be corrupt. No single character should be trusted with a large sum of ISK, as so many things could happen and it all becomes lost.

The best solution, barring any additional improvements or intervention from CCP, would be to have a large group to hold on to the isk, so that no one player has control of a great amount of ISK at any single time. This network of characters holding the ISK, though, would make it more difficult to make investments that would help the interest rate. Even with this method, there are limited ways of making sure that one person does not have multiple alts in this group, giving him or her control of a large amount of ISK regardless.

It will be nearly impossible to create a loan system without collateral, as there is nothing that would require a character to pay back the ISK. A good solution would be to reduce the amount of collateral needed to loan based on the number, amount, or length of time for loans that a player has paid back on time. First loan would be for something like 85% of the collateral being offered, and with a proven payment record (and not one or two) the could eventually be increased in increments up to 125% to 150% of the offered collateral. This system is of course not completely secure, but is definitely a way to weed out some of the scammers.

If there are to be multiple banks working similar methods, a cooperation of sorts would be needed, if nothing other than a shared blacklist of characters that have run off with loans or bank funds, and IP addresses of those who took bank funds as well. Neither of these is entirely secure, but it does provide some matter of security.

Kouryusei wrote:

I'd be willing to talk with some respected players to bring this to fruition, and I'm willing to put a large sum of real-life money in escrow (or convert it directly in to a large quantity of PLEX and therefore ISK) to insure against losses (in return for equity of the overall business). Though, who could be trusted to deal with high £X,XXX to low £XXX,XXX of my money? I'd be looking for some real-life contracts in this regard, and a third-party escrow service between myself and the other party.


In theory something like this could work, but it would be very close to RMT unless you are gaining ISK and ISK only from this venture. I would not see an issue with having the escrow as £, with the stipulation that it be turned to PLEX's if it is ever needed, but I do not see it going over well if you received £ in return for the investment. You would be rather safe in your £ investment with a well written RL contract with the person or persons in charge of this venture as you suggested. The issue with that is once again you may have to receive ISK/PLEX in compensation, as it also brushes the RMT line. I say this because:

I make a contract with you.
I run off with 2 trillion ISK.
£XX,XXX is converted to PLEX to pay back the investors.
I would then owe you £XX,XXX in exchange for the ISK I run off with.

It could be possible with special exceptions from CCP, or just taking the ban that would follow if they did deem this as RMT.


It is definitely something that I would have to look in to closer (in terms of potential alluding to RMT), but the stipulation on it would definitely be conversion of £ to PLEX. I could always buy outright PLEX from the start and remove £ from the equation, so any defaulted debt would be dealt with solely in ISK and £ would never touch the equation. I'd be happier just having £ in escrow, but I'd never expect £ back (apart from if eventually, when my own personal indemnity was no longer needed a very long time down the line, and the bank found it easier to rely on their own profits - then of course I'd expect whatever was left of my unconverted insurance, along with any debts in ISK owed directly to me or my corporation as a result).

I do not want to receive £ in return for any investment I make, I have things outside of Eve for that. I want ISK, enough ISK to start my own casino with hookers and blackjack (bonus points for the most of you who will recognize that reference). I look at it this way, I have lost a ridiculous amount of money in RL investments and I've gained a ridiculous amount in return - I truly love the economy aspect of this game and now I have a lot of free time, want to become far more heavily involved in it than I was the first time around. I'm thinking long term, I do believe my corporation name is quite fitting in that regard. I have to take over the bitter sea and all that.

Edit: Beyond this, we could always consider the inclusion of external contracts for large quantities of ISK. They might be hard to enforce, but by just phrasing the wording of the contract to be liable for "{n - determined by in-game value of PLEX at time of default} PLEX at £{n - determined by cost of PLEX at time of default}". We would have to make it clear that any default down the line (that would be chased up after coming out of the insurance fund), would not involve the retrieval of actual money, but only PLEX or ISK... we'd have some form of external accountability. I'm half asleep (damn Australian F1), so I'll make what I'm trying to say clearer later in the day!
Darth Tickles
Doomheim
#53 - 2012-03-18 11:32:22 UTC
Hexxx wrote:
And yet it's happened before....crazy. Big smile


And those irrationally exuberant examples showed just how awful and unworkable the idea is.
Kara Roideater
#54 - 2012-03-18 11:33:43 UTC
Jake Andarius wrote:

If banking became feasible in EVE, the money supply would indeed increase through the money multiplier effect of fractional reserve banking. That is, 10 billion ISK is deposited in a bank, the bank keeps a mandated amount in reserve (let us say 20%), and then lends out 8 billion ISK. The borrower spends that money, which gets deposited back in a bank. That bank keeps 1.6 billion ISK and lends out 6.4 billion ISK. The process repeats until the amount becomes negligible. Assuming that all idle ISK is always deposited at banks, the ultimate effect is that banking has increased the money supply by 400% (if the reserve is 20%). This increase in the money supply would, of course, lead to the rise in the prices of goods (i.e. inflation).

The unanimous opinion of the above quoted posters seems to be that money multiplier inflation is a horrible, horrible evil that would destroy or corrode the EVE economy. I would like to offer a different perspective.


I don't think that the money multiplier effect is really what the issue is but, rather, the velocity of money. The money multiplier, and fractional reserve banking in general, can't really apply in eve because it requires that people be able to spend something other than physical currency, which is not the case with the eve markets (although parallel markets using bank created money could, presumably, be set up).

As I understand it, fractional reserve banking works something like this: person A deposits 1mil dollars into his account. The bank lends 90% of that amount to someone else. But here is the important part. The bank does not take any money away from the initial depositor. The initial depositor still has 1mil dollars in his account according to the bank's books and Person B now has 900k dollars credited to his account. So, at this point, the bank is in physical possession of 1mil dollars but has deposits amounting to 1.9mil dollars. The books are balanced because the bank also now owns a piece of paper saying that person B owes them 900k dollars.

So, this transaction has increased the money supply in that a further 900k dollars are now available over and above the amount of actual currency the bank holds. BUT it is clear that it is not possible for both of the bank's customers to draw out the full amount of their deposits in cash and spend it, because while the deposits total 1.9mil the bank only possesses 1mil (plus a note indicating customer B's debt of 900k). In order for both to be able to spend the money they have on deposit, at least the amount over and above the currency reserve must be spent in a non-cash form. This could be done by, for example, person B transferring their 900k to a second bank via a digital transfer which would not require that the first bank actually transfer 900k in cash but would be based on trust that the first bank will pay what it owes when required. So, anyone accepting 'bank paper' of some form or another, rather than hard currency, will be able to take payment in a form appropriate to the increased money supply generated in this way.

But in EVE the only thing you can spend on the ingame market is actual isk. In our scenario, where the bank has 1mil isk in cash and a 900k note of debt from customer B and two depositors with 1 mil and 900k in their accounts, if those customers both want to spend their money they can't because the eve markets will not accept a piece of paper from the bank in lieu of actual isk.

That is my understanding of the fractional reserve system, in any case. Hopefully Mme Pinkerton/Florestan Bronstein will be along soon to clarify (if she is still around?).
Adunh Slavy
#55 - 2012-03-18 11:34:07 UTC
Johnny Frecko wrote:

So the bank will have ALOT of isk to lend, acutally it will have more than the actual amount of ISK in the game to lend.

An intresting situation - you take a loan to buy a T2 BPO, as soon as the ISK changes hands, the guy you bought the BPO from puts the ISK directly into the bank - even though isk changed hands, the bank didn't see a difference. So in theory(and in real life) the bank can loan around 5 times more isk than it has in its reserves.


Sure that's correct as it applies to Eve? In the real world, the assets created are the debt owed and the majority of the money. The asset an Eve bank creates is the debt it is owed by the lender and none of the money. To make the loans, in Eve, the bank must have full monetary consideration, it must hand over the ISK to the borrower, there is no way for the bank to ledger up ISK it does not have, they can do this in the real world, we can't do this in Eve.

If the Eve bank can commoditize its owed debts, the asset it created, by the issue of some additional security, then it can increase the functional money supply, albeit in a far less liquid form. That is far far different than commercial banks printing money with pencils and keyboards.

What the banks in Eve will do is create more liquidity and increase the velocity of money, but there is no way in Eve for a bank to create money out of thin air as is done in the real world.

Also, reading a lot of these comments, I think there are a few of the points Hexxx made that are being completely missed. First,

Quote:
"During the height of EBANK, there was a phenomenon I noticed that freaked me out. A handful of people know about this, they can confirm it if they'd like to. The phenomenon was that for several months we were tracking deposits significantly exceeding withdraw requests...so much so in fact that they covered interest payments. In theory, so long as people had confidence in the Bank, deposits would always cover interest payments in perpetuity. The more we grew, the more true this became."


Deposits out paced withdraws - there is no multiplier here, there is a liquidity concentrator, for lack of a better term.

Next this statement I think is freaking some people out,

Quote:
If a bank ran long enough, a certain percentage of it's funds in any given year are "freed" due to characters leaving and never returning but not being bio-massed. Normally this would simply add to the money supply, but in a EVE Bank this would drive down the fractional reserve requirement (Any Bank in EVE MUST have an ability to draw truly massive amounts of ISK in the event of a run. Runs are not an "if", they are a "when".)


Hexxx is not talking about fractional banking in our current terminology, he is talking about the RESERVES held to service withdraws. That is, how much money the bank does not loan out at any one time to ensure that it can pay out to those customers that want to close accounts, sell back shares, etc. He is not talking about a fractional reserve banking system with a money multiplier. (Had you, Hexxx, left out the word "fractional", fewer people would be freaking out I think.)


Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Kara Roideater
#56 - 2012-03-18 11:40:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Kara Roideater
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Sense


1 minute between our posts so lets call it a draw.Smile

Adunh Slavy wrote:

What the banks in Eve will do is create more liquidity and increase the velocity of money, but there is no way in Eve for a bank to create money out of thin air as is done in the real world.


Although, as Claire Voyant pointed out to me in the second argument I ever had on MD, 'out of thin air' is an unfortunate phrase. The money doesn't just appear from nowhere but is, rather, projected into the present from future earning potential (i.e. the debt incurred by the customer is worth something as an asset because it is backed by his future earnings ... or something like that; my brain generally starts to bleed at this point when thinking about banking).
Johnny Frecko
Violence is the Answer
Wormhole Society
#57 - 2012-03-18 12:33:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Johnny Frecko
Adunh Slavy wrote:


What the banks in Eve will do is create more liquidity and increase the velocity of money, but there is no way in Eve for a bank to create money out of thin air as is done in the real world.

Also, reading a lot of these comments, I think there are a few of the points Hexxx made that are being completely missed. First,

Quote:
"During the height of EBANK, there was a phenomenon I noticed that freaked me out. A handful of people know about this, they can confirm it if they'd like to. The phenomenon was that for several months we were tracking deposits significantly exceeding withdraw requests...so much so in fact that they covered interest payments. In theory, so long as people had confidence in the Bank, deposits would always cover interest payments in perpetuity. The more we grew, the more true this became."


Deposits out paced withdraws - there is no multiplier here, there is a liquidity concentrator, for lack of a better term.



The banks do not print money in real life, nor do they create it out of thin air.
National or Government banks do print money, to some extent, yet it's called government bonds in most cases. they do not just "print" money(it was done before, to devestating effects on various countries and economies).

So in today's standards, a bank works by having a small(VERY SMALL) % of equitty to cover the loans given.

You also must consider the assumptions i made when writing my theory
1)Banks are completely safe.

meaning that EVERYONE will deposit isk into the banks even to get the smallest amount of isk possible from idle cash.
You can refer to the boumal-Tobin theory on cash-holding individuals(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol%E2%80%93Tobin_model) - That model, in it's simplest way, shows you that if there are no transaction comissions and the delivery is *somewhat* instant, people will have most if not all their isk deposited.

We're also assuming here that people can take loans that are 100% safe to the bank(which is yet to be solved). In those two special criterias, you can see a world where money is created from "thin air".

EBANK's difference was that first of all, it wasn't safe. 2nd of all, you could not take easy loans from it. Safety is the most important thing for any banking system, and EBANK didn't offer that.

Again - on the mechanics of creating money. Just out simplicity.

i have 0 isk. i take a loan for 1M isk. i buy a BPO from you, i have 0 ISK, you have 1M isk.
You deposit that isk, Bank sees:
Deposits : 1M
Loans : 1M
repeat process 50 times by 50 different users : you'll get
Deposists : 1M
Loans : 50M.

You just created money out of "thin air". without printing it, i must add.
How much equity you demand the bank to have in order to safeguard the deposits, How much do think the deposit/loan ratio should be - all those are regulation questions, and have nothing to do with the functionality of the bank.
While it works, it will work fine. if it's completely safe, it will never collapse. (Assuming it's completely safe to deposit and all loans can be recovered to some extent).

But as i said, you need to assume that before you can even consider talking about a bank, Because you don't have these assumptions in our eve-world, Many things can, will and actually went wrong.

You can make it worse btw if you allow ISK transfers from bank account to bank account as means of payment for daily stuff. Alot of people don't keep all their ISK in their wallet to avoid being scammed, if you have billions and billions, you either have an alt, or a corp wallet to hold that isk for you.(or, a truely safe bank account with intrest)

edit : I never said inflation was bad, Expectations for inflation are actually a good thing and most modern economies have a set yearly goal for a certain amount of inflation. i also said that it might be hard to predict the exact effects of such a huge influx of isk into the game.
Adunh Slavy
#58 - 2012-03-18 12:40:11 UTC
Kara Roideater wrote:

Although, as Claire Voyant pointed out to me in the second argument I ever had on MD, 'out of thin air' is an unfortunate phrase. The money doesn't just appear from nowhere but is, rather, projected into the present from future earning potential (i.e. the debt incurred by the customer is worth something as an asset because it is backed by his future earnings ... or something like that; my brain generally starts to bleed at this point when thinking about banking).



Yes, that's true. It is based on the future potential/earnings/work/labor of the borrower. My main point was the amount of 'consideration' the bank must have in the transaction. In the real world the bank's level of commitment is whatever the reserve requirement is. The rest of the money, they 'print' them selves. So long as they get back that reserve requirement, the rest is gravy.

In Eve on the other hand, there's no way to do that.

A poster above described a 20% reserve situation, a multiplier of 5. In that scenario 50B in Debt, owed by the banks to their depositors, is created, "check book money". Even if those banks can find a way to trust one another and commoditize their debts, regardless of the commoditization of borrower debt, there's no way to increase the ISK supply.

It would be interesting to see if someone could pull that off in Eve, have a secondary currency market based on check book debt evolve, but this would be a competing currency to ISK, it would not impact prices in terms of ISK one bit.

Off on a rambling tangent, back to your normally scheduled "what ifs ..."

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Kara Roideater
#59 - 2012-03-18 12:54:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Kara Roideater
Johnny Frecko wrote:

Again - on the mechanics of creating money. Just out simplicity.

i have 0 isk. i take a loan for 1M isk. i buy a BPO from you, i have 0 ISK, you have 1M isk.
You deposit that isk, Bank sees:
Deposits : 1M
Loans : 1M
repeat process 50 times by 50 different users : you'll get
Deposists : 1M
Loans : 50M.

You just created money out of "thin air". without printing it, i must add.
How much equity you demand the bank to have in order to safeguard the deposits, How much do think the deposit/loan ratio should be - all those are regulation questions, and have nothing to do with the functionality of the bank.
While it works, it will work fine. if it's completely safe, it will never collapse. (Assuming it's completely safe to deposit and all loans can be recovered to some extent).



This isn't quite right. To start with, you need to distinguish between deposits and reserves, as once 50 people have deposited a million, 50 people will have 1 mil in their accounts (i.e. deposited). In addition, the 1mil in cash can only be used by one person at a time so the amount of money actually circulating in the economy is not increased. It would only be increased if you could provide some way to allow more than one person to make use of the credit in their account at a time.

Edit - Basically, it would really suck to be a depositor at your bank because if the 1mil is always out on loan, no depositor will ever be able to withdraw his cash. And if one depositor withdrew his cash and closed his account, the bank would then have 0 isk, be unable to make loans and also unable to honour any other withdrawal requests. I'm still having a problem identifying exactly where on the fundamentals you have gone astray though.
Adunh Slavy
#60 - 2012-03-18 13:03:06 UTC
Johnny Frecko wrote:

i have 0 isk. i take a loan for 1M isk. i buy a BPO from you, i have 0 ISK, you have 1M isk.
You deposit that isk, Bank sees:
Deposits : 1M
Loans : 1M
repeat process 50 times by 50 different users : you'll get
Deposists : 1M
Loans : 50M.


I saw this one part, I'll read the rest of your post now ...

You're forgeting a big part ... that bank owes 50M to its depositors.

I'm a bank, you're a player. Everyone in this thread is a potential depositor.

Hexxx deposits 1M.
I owe Hexx 1M
I lend it to you, I still owe Hexxx 1M
You buy something from Kara for 1M
Kara deposits 1M in the bank
I have 1M
I owe 2M
You owe Me 1M
JoeNewDude Borrows 1M.
I have zero M but I owe 2M
round and round and round
Sooner or later ...
50M in desposits
50M in loans
50M in Bank Debt

Still only 1 Mil in ISK ... see it?

No ISK is being printed here, debt owed by the bank to its depositors is being printed.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt