open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked [GLTB] Long Term Bond 350b - Running
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

Author Topic

Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Posted - 2011.04.30 22:33:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Grendell on 22/08/2011 04:25:40
Hello fellow MD readers,

On behalf of an anonymous party I will be gathering funding for a 350b bond. Because the duration of the bond the interest rate will be lower than the current standards used in MD. Given the stability and intended duration of the bond it will make up for all those times investors have isk sitting idle looking for a new investment. So it would largely equate to the same returns.

> Once a month, the interest payment will be made, likely to be done within the 1st week of each month.
> In the event of a default, investors will be refunded their capital investment and accrued interest to that point if possible. Any isk after the liquidation will be taken as my fee.
> Previous public and private investors will get priority, as will larger investors over smaller investors. This is to make things easier for me.


The anonymous party will be transferring collateral over to me to cover to full amount of the bond. Collateral will be in the form of various T2 BPO's. Each BPO has been under-valued 15% below market value as I'm extra cautious with this volume of ISK and I don't like the standard 10% safety net.


The total Bond size will be 350b isk.

The terms:
1b isk minimum investment
1b investment increments
1.75% monthly interest for investments below 50b
2% monthly interest for investments 50b and above
No fixed duration (Approximately 2-4 years)
Cash out requests requires a 1 month notice, and will be cashed out as funds are available
Periodically the bond will be lowered as the client buys back bonds from investors.

Current Investors:
[GIP] - 90b - Received
Grendell - 70b - Received
Miasma May - 50b - Received
Anonymous II - 50b - Received
Manentia - 25b - Received
jyppy - 20b - Received
ursu5 - 20b - Received
Ruiryu - 20b - Received
Mindlles - 3b - Received
Bazzelmeister - 1b - Received
Midas 9192 - 1b - Received

Backup Investors:
*

Notes of interest:
->> Sunday May 1st, Changed Interest rate options for investment size! (*Thank you candy for sparking the ideaSmile)
->> Monday July 4th, Interest paid.
->> Tuesday August 2nd, Interest paid and bond filled.

Backup Investors:
Reserved.

Investing:
> Reserve an amount 1b+ with increments of 1b.
> Post your reservation here
> Eve-mail your reservation for anonymity
> The monthly intervals will be the 1st of each month

Previous Public Offerings
Public Offering for 225b Link
Public Offering for 100b Link

Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Posted - 2011.04.30 22:40:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Grendell on 30/04/2011 22:45:53
Reserved.

Brock Nelson
Posted - 2011.04.30 22:47:00 - [3]
 

Damn

Breaker77
Gallente
Reclamation Industries
Posted - 2011.04.30 23:45:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Grendell

1.75% monthly interest



Sad

If this was higher I'd invest in this, sadly this is way to low for me.


Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.05.01 00:22:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Breaker77
Originally by: Grendell

1.75% monthly interest



Sad

If this was higher I'd invest in this, sadly this is way to low for me.




This is getting close to EvEBOR, which I estimated to be from 1.25 to 1.50%.

Kethas Protagonist
Protagonist Ventures
Posted - 2011.05.01 03:26:00 - [6]
 

"EvEBOR"?

On a possibly related note, wasn't Block trying to estimate the global effective risk-free discount rate?

Loraine Gess
Posted - 2011.05.01 03:51:00 - [7]
 

We'll see if 350b is Grendell's breaking point...

Block Ukx
Forge Laboratories
Posted - 2011.05.01 03:53:00 - [8]
 


A first attempt at gauging the effective 30-day interest rate resulted in <R30> = 3.53 %. I think this number is a bit high, and to get a better number it requires multiple interactions.


I have a few questions.
1) How much collateral are you holding at this time?
2) Would you be issuing shares to manage the bond?
3) Would you allow bond holders to list in the Exchange?

flakeys
The Great cornholio's
Paper Tiger Coalition
Posted - 2011.05.01 05:57:00 - [9]
 

Well grendell , i'm out for various reasons but to keep it short 350B in T2 bpo's only 15% over collateral and the interest rate are my main concern.


Good luck and cya soon.


TornSoul
BIG
Gentlemen's Agreement
Posted - 2011.05.01 06:49:00 - [10]
 

1.75% is too low for me. Confused


Ambo
I've Got Nothing
Posted - 2011.05.01 07:24:00 - [11]
 

2 Red flags for me:

1. Interest is simply too low to consider. 2.5% if I was holding the collateral would be as low as I'd go.
2. It requires trusting you Grendell. Nothing personal but time has shown that no one is trustworthy in eve. No matter how squeaky clean their previous dealings.

Lord Wickham
Posted - 2011.05.01 10:07:00 - [12]
 

Nothing in eve has a stability rating for that period. Would need to be revalued every 6 months. Can't see any way to counter act this.

RAW23
Posted - 2011.05.01 10:41:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Loraine Gess
We'll see if 350b is Grendell's breaking point...


For a brief moment, c.750bil potentially. 350 in cash plus the c.400 in BPOs.

Candy Oshea
Amarr
Techfree Investment Group
Posted - 2011.05.01 11:20:00 - [14]
 

Pretty clearly not a scam, why would he offer such a low interest rate.

Think about it. if it was even 3% this would have been filled. If he wanted to scam he would have inticed ppl in with a decent interest rate. (10%+ )

Grendell appears to me as a shrewd businessman, who is in this offering, is loaning @ say 3-5% to his customer & is trying to eep every little bit of cash out of it & fair enough too.

Best of luck with your Bond Grendell.

Florestan Bronstein
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2011.05.01 11:53:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Candy Oshea
Pretty clearly not a scam, why would he offer such a low interest rate.

to lure you into thinking that this offering can't be a scam Razz

Breaker77
Gallente
Reclamation Industries
Posted - 2011.05.01 12:52:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Florestan Bronstein
Originally by: Candy Oshea
Pretty clearly not a scam, why would he offer such a low interest rate.

to lure you into thinking that this offering can't be a scam Razz


Offering at least 3% would have probably filled this offer by now.

The interest is simply too low to attract the majority of investors. However I am sure there are people with tens of billions laying around and nothing to do with it that might possibly step in.


Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Posted - 2011.05.01 14:20:00 - [17]
 

Hey everyone, sorry for the late reply I had family show up unexpectedly. I'd ask everyone to please keep EvEBOR and other in-directly related discussion out of here, as I don't want it the thread to get de-railed.

Now off to the questions!Razz

Originally by: Block Ukx

1) How much collateral are you holding at this time?
2) Would you be issuing shares to manage the bond?
3) Would you allow bond holders to list in the Exchange?



1) The collateral is conservatively worth just under 410b. On top of the conservative evaluation, I took off another 15% as a safety net.
2) No shares for the bond will be issued to pay out interest. The EvE share system has far to many long term problems that I'd like to avoid.
3) I don't see the need to. I don't want people swapping around their bonds unless it goes through me. I like to keep things simple, and organized centrally.

Originally by: flakeys
Well grendell , i'm out for various reasons but to keep it short 350B in T2 bpo's only 15% over collateral and the interest rate are my main concern.
Good luck and cya soon.



As stated to Block the BPOs have a 15% safety net deducted from their conservative evaluation, so the total safety net is actually larger then 15%.
Thank you for the wishes, I'm sure I'll see you in future bonds.Wink

Originally by: TornSoul
1.75% is too low for me. Confused



Interesting, I might have a proposition for you.Smile

Originally by: Ambo
2 Red flags for me:
1. Interest is simply too low to consider. 2.5% if I was holding the collateral would be as low as I'd go.
2. It requires trusting you Grendell. Nothing personal but time has shown that no one is trustworthy in eve. No matter how squeaky clean their previous dealings.


1. The collateral has to stay in my hands as the client trusts me and would like to remain anonymous. So can't budge there.
2. Well I can't force anyone to trust me, to each their own.Wink

Originally by: Lord Wickham
Nothing in eve has a stability rating for that period. Would need to be revalued every 6 months. Can't see any way to counter act this.


Generally the only items that have consistently risen in price has been T2 BPO's. Overall each BPO has it's frequent fluctuations in the market based on profits. Negating the daily fluctuations in profits, the profit trend for most BPO's is generally stable. Don't forget this isn't 1 BPO either, it's across multiple BPO's. So I can guarantee that during the duration of this bond some BPO's will drop in value, but I can also guarantee that some others will rise in value. Simba the Circle of Life! (Sorry had to say itWink)

Originally by: RAW23
Originally by: Loraine Gess
We'll see if 350b is Grendell's breaking point...

For a brief moment, c.750bil potentially. 350 in cash plus the c.400 in BPOs.


That's exactly right, as I will need to hold the isk and BPO's as collateral simultaneously for a brief amount of time.

Originally by: Candy Oshea
Pretty clearly not a scam, why would he offer such a low interest rate.

Think about it. if it was even 3% this would have been filled. If he wanted to scam he would have inticed ppl in with a decent interest rate. (10%+ )

Grendell appears to me as a shrewd businessman, who is in this offering, is loaning @ say 3-5% to his customer & is trying to eep every little bit of cash out of it & fair enough too.

Best of luck with your Bond Grendell.


Sadly I couldn't offer a higher rate of return as there is my client's baseline of what he is willing to pay monthly, and then there is my fee that I have to take out for me. Thank you for your compliments and the idea you just gave me.Wink

Originally by: Florestan Bronstein
Originally by: Candy Oshea
Pretty clearly not a scam, why would he offer such a low interest rate.

to lure you into thinking that this offering can't be a scam Razz


I can't argue people to trust me, in the end everyone has to stick to their comfort level, no harm in that and completely understandable. I'm paranoid by nature myself.


Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Posted - 2011.05.01 14:32:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Breaker77
Originally by: Florestan Bronstein
Originally by: Candy Oshea
Pretty clearly not a scam, why would he offer such a low interest rate.

to lure you into thinking that this offering can't be a scam Razz


Offering at least 3% would have probably filled this offer by now.

The interest is simply too low to attract the majority of investors. However I am sure there are people with tens of billions laying around and nothing to do with it that might possibly step in.




I completely agree, had the rate been 2.5-3% I suspect this would be very close to full by now. This offering is more intended on the investors looking for long term stability.
Basically the way I see it is; When and if the usual trusted 3% investments comes around, there is a lot of down time where I'm sure many investors have their isk sitting idle not really doing anything for them. So given the intended duration, this would close those unpaid gaps and generally balance out overall. Not only by stability in the rate and no idle time. But also due to the fact that there's also a risk of scamming in those offerings, which would drop the average rate of return even lower. So in the end it really still revolves around trust and peoples comfort levels.

Ok I think I got everyone's questions/commentary. Hope I didn't miss anyone.Laughing

Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Posted - 2011.05.01 14:39:00 - [19]
 

Thank you candy for the spark you set off in my head, as I've made the following change:

1.75% monthly interest for investments below 50b
2% monthly interest for investments above 50b

Rafia Landras Audeles
Gallente
Posted - 2011.05.01 14:53:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Rafia Landras Audeles on 01/05/2011 14:54:25
Is there any proof beyond your word that the collateral exists?

I would think that things are getting perhaps... a bit high. Lets not forget that cosmoray very successfully ran a similar structure with nonexistent collateral for ponzi funding scams (or so he claims, he may be a garden variety failure, however).

Either way this is a huge step up from previous bonds, and if we assume that Grendell is not ******ed (and if he was he wouldnt be a successful 3rd party) then we can assume that he would make an offering where he was to scam look as if he wasn't going to scam (re: interest).

It also helps with misdirection. Notice that a lot of the discussion is not that the bond is over one third of a trillion isk, but rather that the interest is too low.

Finally, I wonder.. Was Grendell the good guy in Beowulf?

Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Posted - 2011.05.01 15:21:00 - [21]
 

Edited by: Grendell on 01/05/2011 15:21:34
Originally by: Rafia Landras Audeles

Is there any proof beyond your word that the collateral exists?



Nothing but my word and my good Amarrian looks. Basically I can't divulge the exact BPO's, as it would give clues as to who the client is. Thanks eve-search.Laughing

Originally by: Rafia Landras Audeles

I would think that things are getting perhaps... a bit high. Lets not forget that cosmoray very successfully ran a similar structure with nonexistent collateral for ponzi funding scams (or so he claims, he may be a garden variety failure, however).



Very different structure, if I might say. He was running a business, I'm the middle man in a transaction.

Originally by: Rafia Landras Audeles

Either way this is a huge step up from previous bonds, and if we assume that Grendell is not ******ed (and if he was he wouldnt be a successful 3rd party) then we can assume that he would make an offering where he was to scam look as if he wasn't going to scam (re: interest).



The previous bond was 100b, but don't forget the bond before that was 225b. I would like to think I'm not ******ed, I do quite well with my 3rd party service with over 10 Trillion isk in 3rd party transactions. During the 225b bond I at the peak held 595b in other peoples assets and isk. So really not that much of a leap.Wink

Originally by: Rafia Landras Audeles

It also helps with misdirection. Notice that a lot of the discussion is not that the bond is over one third of a trillion isk, but rather that the interest is too low.



Well it's understandable why there is a lot of discussion about the rate as it's not the norm seen in MD. I suspect why people aren't too stiff on the total amount is because I've handled larger amounts with out any issues.

Originally by: Rafia Landras Audeles

Finally, I wonder.. Was Grendell the good guy in Beowulf?


He certainly was not! He's considered the one of the antagonists in the story. You knew that, but I do answer even the most obvious questions!Very Happy


EDIT: Spelling

Lord Wickham
Posted - 2011.05.01 15:24:00 - [22]
 

Grendell are you still allowing the owner of the bpo's production rights over them? If so then surely a better rate can be reached? If this is not the case then maybe this avenue should be explored to get investors a better rate. If your valuation is correct and I don't doubt that is, the income from these should alone pay the interest? Leaving the bond owner to make his profit from the funds. Forgive me if I'm suggesting things already in place

Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Posted - 2011.05.01 15:34:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Lord Wickham
Grendell are you still allowing the owner of the bpo's production rights over them? If so then surely a better rate can be reached? If this is not the case then maybe this avenue should be explored to get investors a better rate. If your valuation is correct and I don't doubt that is, the income from these should alone pay the interest? Leaving the bond owner to make his profit from the funds. Forgive me if I'm suggesting things already in place


That's right the client will still be producing from the BPO's while they are being held by me. The rate was based on projected profits and timeline to periodically do buybacks to reduce the total bond size. Setting a higher rate would not only cost the client more monthly, but also long term by reduction in profits that would be used for the periodic buy backs. We also don't want the bond to run forever.Laughing


Vilgan Mazran
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2011.05.01 16:36:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Vilgan Mazran on 01/05/2011 16:38:46
This raises a few questions imo:

Why does the person w/ the T2 BPOs need 350B?

Also, why would they pay even 2%?

They can already play eve for free and still make a hefty profit just manufacturing off their existing BPOs. The additional profit from T2 BPOs isn't such that its really worth purchasing more and paying 2% (plus risk of Grendell scamming someday, plus nerf risk, etc) imo.

I'd assume that the client here is AC155 or Ray McCormack, in which case the whole operation makes a bit more sense. If that's the case, it'd likely be a bit more likely to garner interest imo if they just said so and the sequence went: you lock down BPOs, then we send isk directly to them. No mysterious "person who wishes to remain hidden" and 700B or whatever in your hands at the same time.

Lord Wickham
Posted - 2011.05.01 16:56:00 - [25]
 

i agree with what vilgan said mostly. basicly we are funding an initial investment probly into a large cap fleet or sovereign takeover, because its clearly obvious that the bond owner won't be investing the isk into a profit making venture.

Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Posted - 2011.05.01 16:59:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Vilgan Mazran

This raises a few questions imo:

Why does the person w/ the T2 BPOs need 350B?

Also, why would they pay even 2%?

They can already play eve for free and still make a hefty profit just manufacturing off their existing BPOs. The additional profit from T2 BPOs isn't such that its really worth purchasing more and paying 2% (plus risk of Grendell scamming someday, plus nerf risk, etc) imo.

I'd assume that the client here is AC155 or Ray McCormack, in which case the whole operation makes a bit more sense. If that's the case, it'd likely be a bit more likely to garner interest imo if they just said so and the sequence went: you lock down BPOs, then we send isk directly to them. No mysterious "person who wishes to remain hidden" and 700B or whatever in your hands at the same time.


Same reason why anybody here really takes out a loan or bonds etc. To make more moneyWink If a person can have the assets generate revenue for them and have the general value of the assets in isk to invest in other areas, then it just increases their revenue for a monthly fee.

Breaker77
Gallente
Reclamation Industries
Posted - 2011.05.01 18:38:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Grendell

Basically the way I see it is; When and if the usual trusted 3% investments comes around, there is a lot of down time where I'm sure many investors have their isk sitting idle not really doing anything for them. So given the intended duration, this would close those unpaid gaps and generally balance out overall.


Sadly I have around 14 bil laying around, but the interest is still too low for me Sad

3% comes close to a PLEX per month, this just really isn't worth it to me. I do hope (and probably know) your offering will get filled. It's just a shame I can't profit from it YARRRR!!


flakeys
The Great cornholio's
Paper Tiger Coalition
Posted - 2011.05.01 19:05:00 - [28]
 


Originally by: grendell
Originally by: flakeys
Well grendell , i'm out for various reasons but to keep it short 350B in T2 bpo's only 15% over collateral and the interest rate are my main concern.
Good luck and cya soon.



As stated to Block the BPOs have a 15% safety net deducted from their conservative evaluation, so the total safety net is actually larger then 15%.
Thank you for the wishes, I'm sure I'll see you in future bonds.Wink


Mostly the return is what keeps me off , i think the current MD popular rate allready is way too low but i like to take a part of it in certain spots however going even lower like this offering is where i draw the line.

But yes you can be sure that with new offerings you will see my face poke in to take a bite grendell :)



Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Posted - 2011.05.02 03:54:00 - [29]
 

To breaker and flakeys, I'm sure I'll see you guys around for the future ones.Wink First investment in for 20b with an investor that wants to remain anonymous. Anonymous or not everyone is welcome.Razz

Liberty Eternal
Posted - 2011.05.02 05:32:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: Liberty Eternal on 02/05/2011 05:50:10

*Activates voice of scepticism*

Sorry, but this offering stinks. An anonymous client? Really? If he's asking for 350 billion then he should be prepared to waive his anonymity - unless he's

a) Bad Bobby
b) An imaginary friend

Only last month you were here asking for 100 billion - that folded early [almost instantly!] and lo-and-behold, you're back and upped it to 350 already. And on a final note this offering has the exact same structure of cosmoray's final scam attempt, with the corresponding complete lack of investor security.


Edit: typo


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only