open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked [EBANK] The long, drawn-out death wail (dividends, and more to come)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 ... : last (24)

Author Topic

Ray McCormack
Nordar Innovations.
Posted - 2011.04.14 05:11:00 - [511]
 

In Kwint's position, I would have done the same thing.

Also, there's a lot of passing acquaintance with the truth in the posts above, from all parties.

Clementina
The Scope
Posted - 2011.04.14 05:17:00 - [512]
 

Quick Question for the people still following this failed bank for the 2nd? 3rd? year.

How much is an EBANK share worth? Is the value above 0.00 isk?

Leneerra
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.04.14 11:31:00 - [513]
 

Sencnes,

Your idealized sollution is utter nonsense, considering how it actually went down. (As far as I could tell from the sidelines).

ebank unilatirally changed the agreement with their customers, eventually freezing accounts completely for an inderterminate time.
Months passed
(I repeat months. And deadlines were either not given, or not kept if one was given).
a Director liquidated his ebank deposits at 100% (but he did return the surplus above that amount) without much public outcry from ebank.
Then as far as I know Kwints first action was to try and work something out with ebank about the intrests on the mutual debts
(not sure if it was tried privately first, but it was done publicly).
ebanks reaction was a rude no.
Kwint responded with unilaterally changing the agreement (quite similar to ebanks actions before)
ebank proclaimed they would try to circumvent the changes in the agreement.
Kwint took action (I'd formaulte it as this: He declared ebank in default, sold their collateral without setling the surplus)
ebank then cried foul.

My opinion on the matter: ebank got what it deserved.
(Yes I do understand his actions cost me money too, assuming I get anything payed out eventually.)

Discaimers and (non)random remarks:
Eve is a game.
RL is always more importand than the game.
Those that stuck with ebank are to be commended for their endurance and willingness to try and make the best of a difficult situation.
If you pretend ebank is a business, then I will also also pretend it is a business.
Those that cannot communicate civilly should not comunicate as a representative for others (ps: A CEO is always a representative).

Misty McGinnity
Mystify Trading Company
Posted - 2011.04.14 11:36:00 - [514]
 

Originally by: Leneerra
Sencnes,

Your idealized sollution is utter nonsense, considering how it actually went down. (As far as I could tell from the sidelines).



Please do not create discord within our community in such a manner. This is clearly trolling Sences. I've always found his posts to be logical, well thought through and superbly presented.

Syds Sinclair
Posted - 2011.04.14 11:42:00 - [515]
 

..So SencneS let me get this right.

You admit that both EBANK and Kwint were in the wrong, but Kwint was in the wrong moreso then EBANK.

So, for Kwint's wrongness, he is a scammer.

By your own words, EBANK is a scammer, just a kettle bit less then Kwint.

EMIRITE?

You heard it here folks, EBANK Amin admits that EBANK are scammers, just not as much as Kwint.

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2011.04.14 11:48:00 - [516]
 

Originally by: Syds Sinclair
You heard it here folks, EBANK Amin admits that EBANK are scammers, just not as much as Kwint.
You just won Eve forums, you may proceed to the winners circle and continue jerking off.

All biases aside, seriously mate, this bit of word play here is cheap and far beneath what I've come to expect from you. My relevance in these matters, and to most people, is small but I just thought I'd tell you that you've lost my respect with this statement.

Misty McGinnity
Mystify Trading Company
Posted - 2011.04.14 11:50:00 - [517]
 

Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Syds Sinclair
You heard it here folks, EBANK Amin admits that EBANK are scammers, just not as much as Kwint.
You just won Eve forums, you may proceed to the winners circle and continue jerking off.

All biases aside, seriously mate, this bit of word play here is cheap and far beneath what I've come to expect from you. My relevance in these matters, and to most people, is small but I just thought I'd tell you that you've lost my respect with this statement.



Please do not take Shar to heart. His respect for you has not been lost forever, he is simply providing you constructive critism. As they say : Sometimes you have to be nasty to be nice!

Johnny Ringo
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2011.04.14 12:09:00 - [518]
 

Originally by: Clementina
Quick Question for the people still following this failed bank for the 2nd? 3rd? year.

How much is an EBANK share worth? Is the value above 0.00 isk?


Finally after pages and pages of recriminations and gum flapping an interesting and relevant question. How about at least an estimate so we can plan?

Cheque Please
Hot Like Mexico
Posted - 2011.04.14 14:16:00 - [519]
 

Originally by: Ray McCormack
Originally by: Amarr Citizen 155
Originally by: Syds Sinclair
Ray "Unreasonable" McCormack
Don't forget "Pimpin dem hoes"
At the office it's "Two Rulers" McCormack.



Ray and AC, if only these were the new forums I'd dutifully thumbs up every post you make in this thread

For while I disapprove of your snarkiness, frown upon your Abe Lincoln top asshattery, and wish you'd just pay these poor people back... my god, it is hilarious

can't.take.eyes.off.train

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2011.04.14 14:38:00 - [520]
 

Edited by: SencneS on 14/04/2011 14:39:13
Syds Sinclair it's not the same scenario.. EBANK is liquidating and returning what ISK it can to the shareholders, that is happening. I fully understand that the current perception of EBANK is it hasn't given ANY ISK and is holding it all, this makes it appear a scam, however I am wondering what you're opinion will be once EBANK finishes distributing the shares, finishes liquidating and paying out what it was able to recovery and build up?

The key to the argument here is, EBANK will NEVER see that ISK from KWINT... EBANK customers WILL get the ISK EBANK was able to recover.

I agree, at this very point in time EBANK is no better then KWINT, so for now if calling EBANK a scam to justify defending a scammers actions makes you personally feel better, then so be. Just be aware the conditions of your opinion are going to change, are you going to change or still blissfully and with full ignorance maintain the same opinion?


Rafia Landras Audeles
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.14 15:10:00 - [521]
 

Originally by: SencneS
Edited by: SencneS on 14/04/2011 14:39:13
Syds Sinclair it's not the same scenario.. EBANK is liquidating and returning what ISK it can to the shareholders, that is happening. I fully understand that the current perception of EBANK is it hasn't given ANY ISK and is holding it all, this makes it appear a scam, however I am wondering what you're opinion will be once EBANK finishes distributing the shares, finishes liquidating and paying out what it was able to recovery and build up?

The key to the argument here is, EBANK will NEVER see that ISK from KWINT... EBANK customers WILL get the ISK EBANK was able to recover.

I agree, at this very point in time EBANK is no better then KWINT, so for now if calling EBANK a scam to justify defending a scammers actions makes you personally feel better, then so be. Just be aware the conditions of your opinion are going to change, are you going to change or still blissfully and with full ignorance maintain the same opinion?




ITT: Things you wish you will live to see.

Leneerra
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.04.14 15:38:00 - [522]
 

Edited by: Leneerra on 14/04/2011 15:39:54
Sencnes,

I disagree with your Evaluation of the situation at the time of the Kwint episode (and I guess many before and since).

At that time ebank was proclaiming loans defaulted, loans on which no interest was being paid, and/or no downpayments were forthcoming nor scheduled.
Whatever assets ebank had as security on those loans (not a lot I admit, with sadness even) was declared ebank property and the proceeds from the sales or use of those former securities became ebank property (and said to be schedueled for eventual return to the bank depositors)

Kwint did exactly the same, except he did not promse to devide the difference on the sale of the securities between the remaining investors on the day of closing the bond

Your proclaimed benevolent intend does not change the mechanics of the situation or actions.
Or: In your eyes the end may justify the means, but not everyone may agree. And might does noth make right.

Edit spelling, hope I got them all

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2011.04.14 15:47:00 - [523]
 

Originally by: Leneerra
Edit spelling, hope I got them all
Doesn't matter, you still hit the right notes.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2011.04.14 17:34:00 - [524]
 

Edited by: SencneS on 14/04/2011 17:36:09
Originally by: Leneerra
Kwint did exactly the same, except he did not promse to devide the difference on the sale of the securities between the remaining investors on the day of closing the bond.


I think I see where you're coming from, but am having trouble determining how they relate. Let me see if I understand what it is you're trying to say.

Kwint loaned EBANK 2 Billion ISK and expected interest.
EBANK loaned Kwint 5 Billion ISK and expected interest.
The second EBANK stopped interest payment and froze the account, Kwint performed the same with the bond to EBANK.

If this is your opinion the same actions where taken so it's justified, but I think it's important to include scope. Kwint deliberately targeted EBANK while honoring all other debts. EBANK did it to everyone of it's accounts on a global scale. Sure I admit, EBANK's actions are much broader and damning but it's unilateral. From an outsider looking at the actions EBANK did and, what Kwint did, was no different. Please do not take this next statement snotty in any way, I'm not trying to argue in defense, I'm applying the same logic you are applying to the situation.

I said back then that EBANK was unable to repay the full debt. If you take it from a purely investment standpoint KWINT's account was only worth about 30% of his initial investment. EBANK's investment was still worth 100% its initial investment. This is going to sound rich, but again I'm applying the same logic you're applying, in a claim genuine manner in a thought out way, without bias to either side.

To be as "correct" as possible, KWINT had the right to withhold the Bonds value in according to it's actual value to the sum of Kwint's account balance. Meaning, since Kwint Bonds where valued, sold, and closed out at 100% the value, his outstanding debt to EBANK was 5 Billion. Kwint had the right to withhold any debt of EBANK's to the sum of his account, but not more. In a all things are equal scenario Kwint owed EBANK just under 3 Billion ISK.

This is the part that will sound rich, please don't troll this statement, I'm not justifying this here, I'm mealy stating what happened. EBANK then chose to lower the debt Kwint owed EBANK by clearing out his account at 100% it's value. Remember it was only worth 30%, but EBANK chose to honor 100% the account balance and lower Kwints outstanding debt to EBANK. If EBANK was to follow the value Kwint's debt to EBANK would still be over 4 Billion. EBANK is only expecting ~2.93B from Kwint because it has already issued 100% account balance to Kwint, in the form of lowering his debt owing.

Now this is me applying personal thought.. (Feel free to troll this part if people feel they must)

In return to EBANK lowering his debt Kwint had this to say "You're damn straight I'm keeping the two-point-something billion as a fee and damages." This was in a statement about him fully liquidating his bond and re-paying investors. Now I can't speak for Kwint but he said "EBANK forced him to Liquidate 30 Billion" when all EBANK was asking for is 3 Billion, personally it sounds like Kwint just wanted out of MD, EVE, and used EBANK as an excuse to get out while he could.

Why did Kwint, who did liquidate and could repay 100% his debt to investors, not repay EBANK's remaining debt.. EBANK has already "paid" Kwint 100% of his account balance without his API. This is the part a lot of people seem to be ignoring here. While I admit the reason EBANK did that was not as a sign of good faith but a retaliation, if you just consider the actions and the implication of the actions as Leneerra describes, the outcome is why I have a bias opinion of him and why I declare him a scammer.

A little harsh it may be, but I can not find fault with that process of eliminating what was done and boiling it down to JUST the affect.
The saying is "an EYE for an EYE", not "an EYE for both eyes".


Rogueresearch
Posted - 2011.04.14 18:00:00 - [525]
 

Edited by: Rogueresearch on 14/04/2011 18:06:06
Originally by: SencneS
Extremely large wall of text.[


Does anybody actually read this stuff?

So I log into Eve forums and I get a dialogue box asking which character i want to log onto. So I Type Roguehalo and make my post and then discover I've posted with an alt.

2 Questions for CCP.

1/ How hard can it be to keep someone logged into forums in THE SAME CHARACTER UNLESS THEY REQUEST OTHERWISE?????

2/ WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO SORT OUT THIS POSTING WITH WRONG CHARACTER NONSENSE????

I mean it's only been going on for several years now. SadSadSad

Rafia Landras Audeles
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.14 18:18:00 - [526]
 

Originally by: Rogueresearch
Edited by: Rogueresearch on 14/04/2011 18:06:06
Originally by: SencneS
Extremely large wall of text.[


Does anybody actually read this stuff?

So I log into Eve forums and I get a dialogue box asking which character i want to log onto. So I Type Roguehalo and make my post and then discover I've posted with an alt.

2 Questions for CCP.

1/ How hard can it be to keep someone logged into forums in THE SAME CHARACTER UNLESS THEY REQUEST OTHERWISE?????

2/ WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO SORT OUT THIS POSTING WITH WRONG CHARACTER NONSENSE????

I mean it's only been going on for several years now. SadSadSad


It worked fine in the new forum. Oh noes, the new forum wasn't perfect so we are back to this.

SecneS: I think the only point to make here is that Ebank didn't try to work anything out till after they had humilliated and ****ed Kwint off to the point of saying "You know what, **** this, to hell with my bond and everything".

Ebank did not act in good faith when it should have (that was the point of the "Whatcha gonna do" internet tough guy bull****.

But okay, show this good faith then, pay all of your investors their money back, with the interest owed to them. Kwint wanted merely for that interest to be noted and promised to be paid for which he was called a "financial terrorist" by Ray.

And if he gets to cash out at 100% why doesn't everyone else? Looks like a double standard to me.

The only difference seems to be that he said "enough" and had enough leverage to do something about your bull****, while 99% of those unlucky enough to be involved in Ebank have no leverage and thus no option but to take Ray's **** with a smile.

Whats the difference between this and any scam here where the scammer says theyll return the money at some point in the future, by the way? That you guys make a few posts, change your terms arbitrarily and kick sand in people's eyes every so often?

You lack the humility that people sitting on a giant failure and the assets of other people who have no recourse should have.



Khanid Voltar
Night's Dawn Investment Fund
Posted - 2011.04.14 18:27:00 - [527]
 

Originally by: Rogueresearch
Edited by: Rogueresearch on 14/04/2011 18:06:06
Originally by: SencneS
Extremely large wall of text.[


Does anybody actually read this stuff?

So I log into Eve forums and I get a dialogue box asking which character i want to log onto. So I Type Roguehalo and make my post and then discover I've posted with an alt.

2 Questions for CCP.

1/ How hard can it be to keep someone logged into forums in THE SAME CHARACTER UNLESS THEY REQUEST OTHERWISE?????

2/ WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO SORT OUT THIS POSTING WITH WRONG CHARACTER NONSENSE????

I mean it's only been going on for several years now. SadSadSad


There is an option within your forum settings that allows you to select the default character with which to post.

Used to annoy the hell outta me too, till I realised I could change the default. Hasnt gone wrong once since I set it up correctly.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2011.04.14 18:57:00 - [528]
 

Rafia, if you insist on participating in a discussion about the finer points of a situation you should at least post with some thought.. Against my lack of better judgement here, because your post is highly inflammatory, there is so much wrong with your post it's difficult to choose where to start. It actually goes to show just how little thought you put toward the post, I'll narrow it down to just one observation to the vomit you just sprayed on the thread.

"If he gets to cash out at 100% why doesn't everyone else? Looks like a double standard to me."

If everything went EBANK's way, Kwint would pay 5B ISK. In return EBANK would pay Kwint 1 Billion ISK (using 50% account value, which is not accurate or final in anyway) The net result here, EBANK has 4 Billion ISK more to issue to accounts. The way it happened was.. EBANK didn't get ANY ISK from Kwint.. The net result EBANK doesn't have any additional ISK added to liquidation. What Should have happened in my opinion. Kwint issue the outstanding ~3 Billion ISK.

Now in order to get that 5 Billion Outstanding debt from Kwint, EBANK chose to clear 2 Billion from his account in exchange for 3 Billion REAL ISK back. But that did't happen. What you're arguing here is stupidity.. You're saying that EBANK showed favoritism to Kwint by clearing his Debt and effectilvly cashing out his account at 100%..

If you actually used your brain instead of spewing garbage, you'd see; EBANK would have an additional 3 Billion ISK to issue to all it's account holders and REMOVES Kwint's stake in it, so their dividend is larger because Kwint would not have been included.

I think I can honestly and safely speak for EVERY EBANK account holder in saying. EBANK clearing KWINT's account and took his account balance and applied it to Kwints Debt and Kwint repairing the remaining debt, is BETTER then what the current outcome..

You once asked me "How dumb are you?" Well, I have to consider the source of the question, and I can say "Not as dumb as you."

Rafia Landras Audeles
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.14 19:04:00 - [529]
 

Originally by: Rafia Landras Audeles


SecneS: I think the only point to make here is that Ebank didn't try to work anything out till after they had humilliated and ****ed Kwint off to the point of saying "You know what, **** this, to hell with my bond and everything".

Ebank did not act in good faith when it should have (that was the point of the "Whatcha gonna do" internet tough guy bull****.

But okay, show this good faith then, pay all of your investors their money back, with the interest owed to them. Kwint wanted merely for that interest to be noted and promised to be paid for which he was called a "financial terrorist" by Ray.

And if he gets to cash out at 100% why doesn't everyone else? Looks like a double standard to me.

The only difference seems to be that he said "enough" and had enough leverage to do something about your bull****, while 99% of those unlucky enough to be involved in Ebank have no leverage and thus no option but to take Ray's **** with a smile.

Whats the difference between this and any scam here where the scammer says theyll return the money at some point in the future, by the way? That you guys make a few posts, change your terms arbitrarily and kick sand in people's eyes every so often?

You lack the humility that people sitting on a giant failure and the assets of other people who have no recourse should have.





I bolded the important lines to assist your reading comprehension. I apologize if the post is too complicated for you to understand.

Love your evasion and random insults while managing to not address the post though. Very Ebank. Very you.

Cheque Please
Hot Like Mexico
Posted - 2011.04.14 20:27:00 - [530]
 

Edited by: Cheque Please on 14/04/2011 20:29:39


Hmm, I had pegged Ray as the sure-fire winner in the 'biggest troll' competition that this thread has become, but I have to say, the dark horse SencneS is making up A LOT of lost time

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2011.04.14 20:52:00 - [531]
 

Edited by: SencneS on 14/04/2011 20:52:46
Originally by: Cheque Please
Hmm, I had pegged Ray as the sure-fire winner in the 'biggest troll' competition that this thread has become, but I have to say, the dark horse SencneS is making up A LOT of lost time


Please refer to me as the While Stallion :)

Edit:- Added link

@Rafia

There is nothing to address in that drivel..
Every single one of you so called "points" have already been addressed in previous posts in this very thread, not only by me but others as well. You comment on a post which was boiling down to just actions and their affects, which is how the thread was progressing, with nothing but garbage emotional thoughts and intentions about why you think those actions happened.

It has always been in EBANK's best intentions to resolve the issue. I don't care if Ray traveled to Kwint house, lit a bag of his stools on fire and rang the doorbell, stood there waiting for Kwint to answer the door with a bucket of tar and feathers.. Kwint owes EBANK just short of 3 Billions ISK, until such time as he pays up, he is a scammer, and you're defending the actions of a scammer.

Continue down the path if you must, if you can't reply with anything remotely constructive, you need not reply at all.

Rafia Landras Audeles
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.14 21:01:00 - [532]
 

Originally by: SencneS
Kwint owes EBANK just short of 3 Billions ISK, until such time as he pays up, he is a scammer, and you're defending the actions of a scammer.





I'm sorry, I lost count, how much money do you owe the community at large? And interest?

I like the "IF you take our bs you are a hero, else you are a scammer" argument, but.. didn't you guys arbitrarily decide to hold on to peoples money to do as you please... for how long now?

Your horse looks pretty high.

Quite a bit higher than it should be, I think.

A passerby may see it and miss the part where you arbitrarily withheld a significant amount of money, unrepentedly abuse your investors, and blatantly stole people's money and interest on it.

But hey, good luck on the insurance venture. You look legit.

Syds Sinclair
Posted - 2011.04.14 21:10:00 - [533]
 

Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Syds Sinclair
You heard it here folks, EBANK Amin admits that EBANK are scammers, just not as much as Kwint.
You just won Eve forums, you may proceed to the winners circle and continue jerking off.

All biases aside, seriously mate, this bit of word play here is cheap and far beneath what I've come to expect from you. My relevance in these matters, and to most people, is small but I just thought I'd tell you that you've lost my respect with this statement.



..In my defence, I had about 10 minutes to read SencneS post and post myself before I had to take my daughter to school and me off to work.

And not so in my defence, I find the hyperbole funny. Also, I think that it shines a light on the whole attitude that every breach in contract by EBANK is for the good of the dumb whiney investors who are unreasonably asking questions.

But a breach of contract by a mere peon? Smeone who is not a board member of EBANK? SCAMMER!

This point is illustrated a few posts down by SencneS while he clearly states, no word play, that EBANK and Kwint's actions are on equal ground. What separates them is what EBANK is
going to do. For the past 2+ years and into the unknown future. All while Ray "Unreasonable/Pinpin' dem Hoes'/Two ******ed" McCormack and Co. Is flouting their "might is right" antics.

But mostly the hyperbole. Because I think that Internet spacebux mogul RPers are funny.

In all honesty I know that my feeble post do noting for the EBANK board or the slighted investors. Just a fun thought experience and opportunity to channel the debater in me.

Roguehalo
Caldari
Roguehalo Ship Brokers
Posted - 2011.04.14 21:11:00 - [534]
 

This is currently a Ray 'I'm the greatest thing since sliced bread' McCormack and Amarr Citizen 155(don't ask) vanity thread.

Ray's a self confessed pr*ck and Amarr's just Rays gopher........

Come on people let this thread die it's long overdue death.

Cheque Please
Hot Like Mexico
Posted - 2011.04.14 21:16:00 - [535]
 

Originally by: SencneS

It has always been in EBANK's best intentions to resolve the issue. I don't care if Ray traveled to Kwint house, lit a bag of his stools on fire and rang the doorbell, stood there waiting for Kwint to answer the door with a bucket of tar and feathers.. Kwint owes EBANK just short of 3 Billions ISK, until such time as he pays up, he is a scammer, and you're defending the actions of a scammer.



But... but... you do realize that EBank has yet to pay off its own debt in over 3 yrs time? Give me the bank's 500bil and a list of who I send it to and how much and I'll sort it out in 10 min. Maybe you should start using the "honor among thieves" line to get Kwint to pay back the 3 bil.

Ray has the snappy one-liners, which make him the crowd pleaser, but you definitely have your own style, that je ne sais quoi. Your responses are dissonant like mad poetry.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2011.04.14 21:56:00 - [536]
 

Edited by: SencneS on 14/04/2011 21:59:13
Originally by: Rafia Landras Audeles
I'm sorry, I lost count, how much money do you owe the community at large? And interest?


How much does EBANK owe the community? 100% of it's available NAV. Which they'll be getting once Shares have finished being deployed to it's customers.

The small flaw in your argument if while Kwint had to deal with Ray, Ray also had to deal with Kwint.. You're argument is one sided, remove the two entities to remove emotional connection and bias and what do you have? One person owes another ISK.. That person willfully didn't pay the ISK when they have every ability to. In it's most basic form away from emotional connection, intentions, Kwint didn't satisfy his obligation intentionally! EBANK is unable to satisfy it's obligations, given the time and effort put into it, it still unable to satisfy it's obligations, when that happens the entity gets liquidated for what it can get.

Since you insist on focusing on JUST emotional and preserved intentions of Ray and Kwint ignoring the basic underlaying cause and affect.. For every single argument you can use to support Kwint actions, you can use the exact same argument to support Ray's actions. I already said they both escalated it, feeding off each other to the point of collapse. You can't seem to do the same, and only believe that Ray just wanted to bully someone.. Great argument, worthy of archive entry in WPDU..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally by: Syds Sinclair
This point is illustrated a few posts down by SencneS while he clearly states, no word play, that EBANK and Kwint's actions are on equal ground.


Can you twist that a little more please.. WOW that's really pulling that out of context.. How disappointing..
Originally by: SencneS
From an outsider looking at the actions EBANK did and, what Kwint did, was no different.



Syds Sinclair
Posted - 2011.04.14 22:07:00 - [537]
 

Originally by: SencneS
The key to the argument here is, EBANK will NEVER see that ISK from KWINT...


..But what if Kwint had just froze the ISK?

Originally by: SencneS
EBANK customers WILL get the ISK EBANK was able to recover.


[Citation needed].

Except if you are now or ever been or will be in the future a member of KIA.


Originally by: SencneS

I agree, at this very point in time EBANK is no better then KWINT,


See Shar? No word play!

Originally by: SencneS

Just be aware the conditions of your opinion are going to change, are you going to change or still blissfully and with full ignorance maintain the same opinion?


Fellas fellas, it's going to get better. You'll get your ISK. Just be patient. I mean common, it's only been three years.

Rafia Landras Audeles
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.14 22:16:00 - [538]
 

Originally by: Rafia Landras Audeles
Edited by: Rafia Landras Audeles on 14/04/2011 00:30:23
Kwint:

Quote:
Ray,

Let me lay the situation bare for you:

EBANK and I both hold a portion of the other's debt and we both owe interest on it. Every week I pay the interest on my debt and every week you essentially tell me to go screw myself. I pay and you thumb your nose at me, denying me not just access to my money but unilaterally declaring your interest to be null and void while mine is still to be paid in full.

From my perspective EBANK is demonstrating a willful and intentional failure to meet their commitments. Not having the funds to honor withdrawals is unfortunate but understandable. Declaring you're no longer going to pay interest is not. In fact, taken in time with your continued insistence that debts to you be honored and the idea that the bank will continue to operate after returning to solvency makes this seem downright malicious. You are at best taking advantage of the situation to limit your future liability and at worst -and I would argue- downright defrauding your customers.

Returning to the point at hand, we both owe each other capital plus regular interest payments. I'm paying, you're telling me "tough luck." How do you suggest we resolve this?

Just to clarify a bit further, here's the situation I'm asking for: I let EBANK hold several billion of my money for as long as they like with me having no control over it and in exchange I get an IOU for 3% monthly. EBANK has in turn loaned me a couple billion via bonds which I pay them actual cash for at 4.25% monthly. So, EBANK holds my money ransom giving me an IOU that even taken at facevalue is worth less than what I give them every month in actual cash. This is the situation I'm trying to cajole you guys into accepting!


And Ray:

Quote:
Originally by: Kwint Sommer How do you suggest we resolve this?


Quote:
We just sold your shares. Now what?


You are right, unless you are a gifted psychic its rather hard to see how Ray wanted to work this out. He tried so hard, the poor dear, and is so misunderstood.

Why this thread and the rest of the Ebank comedy efforts show just how hard Ray tries to work things out with everyone.




I'm sorry, was Kwint's spacing particularly rude?

Yes, they had to deal with each other. One was a total ****. One wasn't. It is rather easy to see which was which.

And we are back to the only difference being that Kwint had leverage and didn't have to take your bull****. Which sadly, is not true for the poor saps you keep hostage and have for.. how long now?

And why exactly should anyone play ball with you again? Why are your terms and abuses binding?

Oh yeah, might.

Well, it seems that by your own arguments, Kwint was more than justified then!

What's good for the goose is good for the gander isn't it?

Syds Sinclair
Posted - 2011.04.14 22:21:00 - [539]
 

Originally by: SencneS
Originally by: Syds Sinclair
This point is illustrated a few posts down by SencneS while he clearly states, no word play, that EBANK and Kwint's actions are on equal ground.


Can you twist that a little more please.. WOW that's really pulling that out of context.. How disappointing..





..Don't try to ride Shar's coat tails by implying that my content doesn't meet your expectations. I've been not meeting peoples expectations for years now!

So how about this little gem?

Quote:
I agree, at this very point in time EBANK is no better then KWINT,


Let me be honest, I have no desire nor gain any satisfaction by spinning or twisting others posts. I honestly try to take the connotations and inflictions of peoples posts into full consideration.

If I quote something out of context, you or anyone, please enlighten me and if your argument suffices me then I will happily take it back, evaluate, and re comment.

Syds Sinclair
Posted - 2011.04.14 22:40:00 - [540]
 

..To Rafia and anyone else who still cares. It's clear to me that SencneS nothing more then a shill, a cheerleader, and a herald for EBANK and especially Ray.

To SencneS. This nightmare could have all been avoided is EBANK and Co. Had just takin the approach of liquidation > paying a % to all investors instead of trying to keep the bank running,and I might add collecting a tidy salary for the board.

I think everyone knows who and what your plans were to take care of first.


Pages: first : previous : ... 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 ... : last (24)

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