These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Ishukone-Raata Enforcement Directive [I-RED] "Ishukone Subsidiary seeks Matari Investment"

Author
Katrina Oniseki
Oniseki-Raata Internal Watch
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#121 - 2012-05-05 14:27:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Katrina Oniseki
Fair point, Elsebeth. I should say military instead of militant. But then, I could be mistaken again in my assumption that EM is not industrial in nature.

--

At any rate, it's quite apparent that there are no interested Capsuleer parties.

Under my authority with this project, I can officially state that this is now a closed matter. Consider the offer retracted.

Katrina Oniseki

Elsebeth Rhiannon
Gradient
Electus Matari
#122 - 2012-05-05 18:13:21 UTC
Katrina Oniseki wrote:
Fair point, Elsebeth. I should say military instead of militant. But then, I could be mistaken again in my assumption that EM is not industrial in nature.

You are indeed mistaken. Military and industrial do not exclude each other. Most of our pilots do both, and if I can say so myself, do them well.

Elsebeth Rhiannon
CEO
Gradient


Bastian Valoron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#123 - 2012-05-05 21:24:13 UTC
Generally speaking, trade and open dialog between organizations leads more often to positive than negative outcomes. However, in this case we must first ask what is the current status of the business agreement between the Intaki Assembly and Ishukone? If I were a Matari investor, I would be concerned over I-RED's capacity to respond to all the obligations it has made over the years. Furthermore, if it happens that the Intaki shipping contract has been violated, the investing party may become involved in an expensive and time consuming legal process which will undoubtedly be harmful to the business.

Since this dealing under discussion seems to have wide and far reaching implications on intergalactic politics, I suggest that the investment contract itself along with all the legal documents will be made public and presented here on this forum, before the paperwork is signed. As a dedicated friend and ally of the Matari people, it would put my mind at ease to see that they will be treated fairly, and all the conventions of ethical business practices are being followed.
Katrina Oniseki
Oniseki-Raata Internal Watch
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#124 - 2012-05-05 21:29:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Katrina Oniseki
Rikaato for your concern, M. Valoron.

Unfortunately, the offer has already been debated and withdrawn. Your concern, while noted, is no longer relevant.

Katrina Oniseki

Rek Jaiga
Teraa Matar
#125 - 2012-05-06 14:38:36 UTC
Katrina Oniseki wrote:
Ishukone sold TCMCs because it doesn't care.

...

I think you're misunderstanding business and sales as 'picking a side' in your war.


I think these are the salient, underlying points of the entire conflict of this thread. There are two fundamentally different attitudes at play here.

After looking over Teraa Matar's own trade capabilities and market demands, I would like to politely decline formal trade-dealings with I-RED. We are mostly self-sufficient, as I have spread the ideas of psuedo-subsistence Valentina alluded to within the corporation's memberbase. Of course, we also do not produce much in the way of physical products that can be sold to I-RED: we produce services for the Republic in securing space, if you will. I simply cannot see beneficial mutual trade between TRA and I-RED, as our member's needs and outputs do not match; business dealings would come at more time-loss than benefits gained.

In short, we are in fact a "militant organization" and trade "isn't our thing" for the time being. I wish I-RED the best of luck in acquiring Republic-based trade partners that will result in benefit for all.
Rek Jaiga
Teraa Matar
#126 - 2012-05-06 14:42:22 UTC
The deal has already been withdrawn? Ah, nevermind then. I do hope the members of I-RED do look over our reasons stated above for declining the deal. I am certain you understand that profit is not only monetary but also can be social or political, and I did not see any financial gains outweighing the implicit costs due to the simple strain of doing business.
Mekhana
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#127 - 2012-05-08 19:54:24 UTC
I-RED are more than welcome to operate in Matar space. It is always welcome to see more capsuleers of character.

Vide longe er eros di Luminaire VII, uni canse pra krage e determiniex! Sange por Sange! Descanse bravex eros, mie freires. Mortir por vostre Liberete, farmilie, ide e amis. lons Proviste sen mort! Luminaire liber mas! 

Hamish Grayson
#128 - 2012-05-08 21:33:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Hamish Grayson
Arkady Sadik wrote:
Vechtor wrote:
Trade has never served to remove profits or to remove economic strength.
Please, Mr. Vechtor - we both know that you wouldn't be a successful business man if you were truly this naive. I understand your need to keep up the cover, but I would recommend in the future to avoid getting into a situation where you have to resort to silly statements such as that to protect your business strategy.

Have a nice day.



Captain Sadik,

If I may offer a suggestion, when debating in a public forum even a minimal effort to research the topic you are discussing can help you avoid public embarrassments like this in the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_trade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

Respectfully,
Hamish Grayson
Silas Vitalia
Doomheim
#129 - 2012-05-08 21:59:00 UTC
Hamish Grayson wrote:
Arkady Sadik wrote:
Vechtor wrote:
Trade has never served to remove profits or to remove economic strength.
Please, Mr. Vechtor - we both know that you wouldn't be a successful business man if you were truly this naive. I understand your need to keep up the cover, but I would recommend in the future to avoid getting into a situation where you have to resort to silly statements such as that to protect your business strategy.

Have a nice day.



Captain Sadik,

If I may offer a suggestion, when debating in a public forum even a minimal effort to research the topic you are discussing can help you avoid public embarrassments like this in the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_trade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

Respectfully,
Hamish Grayson


Sadik's just being his usual ornery stick in the mud. I can almost picture him as a baby, emerging from the womb already frowning and then denigrating his mother for lapses in moral character. Lol

Sabik now, Sabik forever

Arkady Sadik
Gradient
Electus Matari
#130 - 2012-05-08 22:35:56 UTC
Hamish Grayson wrote:
Arkady Sadik wrote:
Vechtor wrote:
Trade has never served to remove profits or to remove economic strength.
Please, Mr. Vechtor - we both know that you wouldn't be a successful business man if you were truly this naive.
Captain Sadik,

If I may offer a suggestion, when debating in a public forum even a minimal effort to research the topic you are discussing can help you avoid public embarrassments like this in the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_trade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

Respectfully,
Hamish Grayson
Pilot Hamish,
Quoting from the first link:

Quote:
Free trade is often opposed by domestic industries that would have their profits and market share reduced by lower prices for imported goods.
I was somewhat confused that you apparently didn't even bother to read the stuff you link to in such an arrogant post.


The topic of that "Free Trade" article is about international relations; the topic at hand here is more about investment decisions, which is about the Free Market - that's a different concept. A Free Market means I, as an investor or consumer, are free to choose where I invest and consume. A corporation that pollutes the environment vs. a corporation that does not (or to a lesser degree) would be a good comparison here. Arguing that it is against the idea of a Free Market to prefer the corporation with lesser pollution is completely missing the point of a Free Market.

I have no clue why tribalists need to explain to Caldari what this "Free Market" (and apparently "Free Trade") thing means, but here we go.
Katrina Oniseki
Oniseki-Raata Internal Watch
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#131 - 2012-05-08 23:05:34 UTC
This thread needs to be locked.

Katrina Oniseki

Hamish Grayson
#132 - 2012-05-08 23:15:28 UTC
Arkady Sadik wrote:

I was somewhat confused that you apparently didn't even bother to read the stuff you link to in such an arrogant post.


I beg your pardon.   If I'd realized how far beyond your reading comprehension skills the articles were, I would not have linked them.

Humbly,
Hamish Grayson
Vechtor
Doomheim
#133 - 2012-05-08 23:59:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Vechtor
Arkady Sadik wrote:
I have no clue why tribalists need to explain to Caldari what this "Free Market" (and apparently "Free Trade") thing means, but here we go.


You don't have to explain anything, as you don't understand it.
As I said before, free trade expands the frontier of consumption possibilities because you exchange the surplus of what you produce cheaper than foreign consumers of your good for goods they produce cheaper than you but that you would also like to consume. It’s a win-win situation you apparently don’t understand.

The problem at stake here has nothing to do with free trade removing Matari profits over anything.
The problem at stake here would be how the economic benefits of free trade outweighs the strengthening of one of your enemies. It’s a political problem, not economic, and that’s something I-RED couldn’t clarify.
Katrina Oniseki
Oniseki-Raata Internal Watch
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#134 - 2012-05-09 00:06:47 UTC
Vechtor wrote:

The problem at stake here would be how the economic benefits of free trade outweighs the strengthening of one of your enemies. It’s a political problem, not economic, and that’s something I-RED couldn’t clarify.


I'm sorry. I believe I did clarify that, though perhaps not very well.

I-RED is not Ishukone, as I said. What profits I-RED does not necessarily profit Ishukone. The reverse holds true. What profits them (more often than not) does not directly profit us. Entering a trade deal with I-REd specifically does not mean the same as entering a trade deal with Ishukone, nor do your profits necessarily affect Ishukone in the slightest measure.

As for the benefits to the Republic, I should think it would be obvious how increased trade would benefit any society. I can't say for sure, since the details of whatever arrangement would have been worked out would be said in private, but surely the Republic would have benefited from the deal in some fashion.

At any rate, just to prevent any misunderstanding... this is just a clarification. The offer is no longer valid.

Katrina Oniseki

Vechtor
Doomheim
#135 - 2012-05-09 00:51:25 UTC
What made me say what I said, Katrina (you don't mind me calling you Katrina, do you?) was this:

Altarr Orkot wrote:
Ishukone subsidiary serves the interests of it's parent company. News at 11.

So, even tho you state that:

Katrina Oniseki wrote:
I-RED is not Ishukone, as I said. What profits I-RED does not necessarily profit Ishukone. The reverse holds true. What profits them (more often than not) does not directly profit us. Entering a trade deal with I-REd specifically does not mean the same as entering a trade deal with Ishukone, nor do your profits necessarily affect Ishukone in the slightest measure.

you are not denying that I-RED profits do serve to strenghten Ishukone, nor are you disagreeing with what Altarr said earlier. For the sake of doubt, Matari could more than likely be suspicious with that regard.

Katrina Oniseki wrote:
As for the benefits to the Republic, I should think it would be obvious how increased trade would benefit any society. I can't say for sure, since the details of whatever arrangement would have been worked out would be said in private, but surely the Republic would have benefited from the deal in some fashion.

Economicaly speaking, I have no doubt whatsoever they would, even not knowing any details of whatever arrangement you could have made privately.
The Ishukone "more than likely strenghtening" with given agreement, directly or indirectly via I-RED, and the underlying political problem outweighing whatever economic advantages the Republic might have with said agreements, unfortunately, would persist.
Katrina Oniseki
Oniseki-Raata Internal Watch
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#136 - 2012-05-09 01:45:33 UTC
Very true, Vechtor. Regrettably, there is nothing we can say to assuage their feelings against working with us. Their opinions are not necessarily wrong, but they are a bit skewed away from what I would consider to be the right choice.

The fact is, they have a legitimate gripe, and we have no reason or need to push the issue.

Katrina Oniseki

Aurelie Severasse
Doomheim
#137 - 2012-05-09 01:56:08 UTC
I might be telling tales out of school, sweetheart, but I think this:

Altarr Orkot wrote:
Ishukone subsidiary serves the interests of it's parent company. News at 11.


is simply stating that for I-RED to act in the interests of Ishukone is not news, and should not come as a surprise.

I don't think any claim was made as to what extent there is a concrete link between the two groups. Unfortunately, events beyond the scope of I-RED's control have created circumstances in which it is not possible for they and the Matari to be allies. I don't necessarily think this prevents them from doing business, but not being a party to the business, my opinion on the matter is not significant.

The division between the Matari and the Caldari is as false as the division between the Caldari and Gallente. Peace and co-operation between all groups are possible, if people are prepared to put gripes of the past behind.
Gosakumori Noh
Coven of One
#138 - 2012-05-09 04:33:32 UTC
Aurelie Severasse wrote:
The division between the Matari and the Caldari is as false as the division between the Caldari and Gallente. Peace and co-operation between all groups are possible, if people are prepared to put gripes of the past behind.


It is the stuff of nightmares.

Now, all of this seems to have resolved itself in a plodding, predictable fashion; however, the proposition showed grace under fire of groupthink, and that at least is to be commended. Speaking in the abstract - hypothetically, even - I wonder if cooperation between groups might have proven more feasible if Ishukone had only acted on a plan for regime change prior to the proposition.

In any event, the Nefantar tribe should be receptive to capital transfers. Such flows would align with their unique circumstances quite well. What's more, the Mandate is basically "Matari space" - without so many of those, you know... Sebiestor.


Jon Engel
Machete Carbide
#139 - 2012-05-09 16:49:50 UTC
Gosakumori Noh wrote:
Aurelie Severasse wrote:
The division between the Matari and the Caldari is as false as the division between the Caldari and Gallente. Peace and co-operation between all groups are possible, if people are prepared to put gripes of the past behind.


It is the stuff of nightmares.

Now, all of this seems to have resolved itself in a plodding, predictable fashion; however, the proposition showed grace under fire of groupthink, and that at least is to be commended. Speaking in the abstract - hypothetically, even - I wonder if cooperation between groups might have proven more feasible if Ishukone had only acted on a plan for regime change prior to the proposition.

In any event, the Nefantar tribe should be receptive to capital transfers. Such flows would align with their unique circumstances quite well. What's more, the Mandate is basically "Matari space" - without so many of those, you know... Sebiestor.




Meh...

The Capsuleer market is always going be stacked in the Caldari State's favor because of that god damn star system we all know and hate to go to but can't beat the prices anywhere else most of the time...

At least in regards to Empire space, isn't free trade among Individuals or Groups of Individuals forming collective groups registered to Concord as "Corporations" do this kind of crap all the time and only, only because I-Red is a "supporter" of the "liberal" political and economic "faction" of the Caldari state lead by Ishukone that this is even considered an issue? I think it's time people stop looking for god damn conspiracies everywhere and stop stressing the little things.

Business is about ISK, If IRED can yank some coin out of the Republic and if a few Greasy Minmitars stand to make some money out of the deal than I would say nothing is worthy of discussion or debate other than people wanting to voice stupid concerns over stupid trivial matters.

Hell, IRED lived in Gallente Space for the longest time. You should know by now that whatever political bullshit you adhere to every capsuleer follows the path towards more money. Capsuleer alliances are no different.

Also, I am only replying here because I am bored and looking for a bit of discourse to pass the time. Carry on folks.,
Vikarion
Doomheim
#140 - 2012-05-10 08:41:45 UTC
Perhaps I-RED might consider investing in the Khanid Kingdom and the Empire instead? If the Minmatar can't abide simple business relationships, I'm sure the other side will oblige.