Clarification about Entropia banking operations

[SB2]

MA was very vague about the "other services" a bank would be able to offer... If you read back a bit regarding Anshe's initial postings about the IPO, it's pretty clear that discussions with MA on the issue of the IPO and shares in ABE had taken place and that tacit, if not explicit, approval had been given to her by MA before the shares were offered.

Let's keep in mind who the bad guy is here... MA makes announcements that are transparent as mud and modifiy the rules at their whim. If Anshe had the bucks to play the game by MA's rules, then so be it.

I agree wholeheartedly that CBE got shafted. I'm 100% in favor of CBE and the entreprenurial spirit of Akoz, Teilk and the others. I'm as pro-free enterprise as anyone in this forum and I applaud every creative idea that has been introduced by the players to work within MA's ever changing rule book...

If MA is protecting their interests by making this announcement, then it's MA that you have to blame.

[Art Ludgren]

Originally Posted by Teilk

I really appreciate the fact that MA has been kind enough to label all of us that have worked so hard for years to build an unblemished reputation that allows us to operate such businesses successfully with such pleasant terms as "scam attempt", and "permanent lockdown of account".


I am truly amazed that MA would pull such a stunt, though I know I should not be. the sudden reversal of policy is interesting as well. First it was more along the lines of "use at your own risk", now its "we will lock anyone who wants to compete in the free market".

SO the answer is to NOT USE the banks, REALLY, if you are bad enough off to have to borrow peds to play the game, maybe you should just go to gamblers anonymous?

[Teilk]

Originally Posted by SB2

MA was very vague about the "other services" a bank would be able to offer... If you read back a bit regarding Anshe's initial postings about the IPO, it's pretty clear that discussions with MA on the issue of the IPO and shares in ABE had taken place and that tacit, if not explicit, approval had been given to her by MA before the shares were offered.

Let's keep in mind who the bad guy is here... MA makes announcements that are transparent as mud and modifiy the rules at their whim. If Anshe had the bucks to play the game by MA's rules, then so be it.

I agree wholeheartedly that CBE got shafted. I'm 100% in favor of CBE and the entreprenurial spirit of Akoz, Teilk and the others. I'm as pro-free enterprise as anyone in this forum and I applaud every creative idea that has been introduced by the players to work within MA's ever changing rule book...

If MA is protecting their interests by making this announcement, then it's MA that you have to blame.

The funny thing is that I had tacit approval while running Teilks Loan Service. after that, with the incarnation of CBE, we had vaguely explicit approval (just a few short days ago, posted by marco here on EF), with the condition that MA would not back our customers if an issue requiring MA intervention arose.

The double standard however, is a bit unnerving. We are not allowed to loan money to those who request it, yet a new investor can buy/sell peds through unauthorized means, and sell shares with no regulation at all in a company that they have openly admitted that they have valued at over 200% of the actual value of the company.

I just have to laugh at the selective enforcement of the EULA with regards to investors, and the draconian laws put in place to protect their violations.

[SB2]

Originally Posted by Teilk

The funny thing is that I had tacit approval while running Teilks Loan Service. after that, with the incarnation of CBE, we had vaguely explicit approval (just a few short days ago, posted by marco here on EF), with the condition that MA would not back our customers if an issue requiring MA intervention arose.

The double standard however, is a bit unnerving. We are not allowed to loan money to those who request it, yet a new investor can buy/sell peds through unauthorized means, and sell shares with no regulation at all in a company that they have openly admitted that they have valued at over 200% of the actual value of the company.

I just have to laugh at the selective enforcement of the EULA with regards to investors, and the draconian laws put in place to protect their violations.

I understand, my friend... and as you know I am one of the biggest and most vocal critics of MA's policies as regards their playerbase... My point was simply to stay focussed on MA and their policies rather than at each other...

[BlackMagicWoman]

Originally Posted by Bertha Bot

Clarification about Entropia banking operations
04 June 2007
Therefore, any loan services offered outside the approved bank system will be considered by MindArk as scam attempts and the avatar offering such services risk a permanent lockdown of his/her account.
Originally Posted Here

This is total BS. MA is basically threatning anyone that would loan something to get locked. Good job MA!
Guys, be aware, be careful not to borrow items from your friends or you will be considered scammers!
Dont forget that the huge amount of money anyone would invest is not protected by the EULA if they decide to lock you account. All of your "goodies" will be theirs...

[Agnus_Dei]

Berta's conclusion:
Come into this awesome RCE universe as a "investor". If you have an idea of a nice new business we haven't discovered yet: try out, we will have a look at your moneyflow. If high enough, we will set up licenses for that business, sell them to our fellow ND and other friends and then kick you. Thanks and have fun... and please keep depositing for all of us and our fellow investors.


BertaTheBug

[Tekkie]

Ok, I feel I must voice my opinion on this matter.

Firstly, I have previously worked with Akoz and trust him 100%, Teilk although my communication with you is extremely limited your posts suggest you are a perfectionist and very intelligent, CindyWood - never had any comms with you but you are a member of a highly respected society and a friend of Akoz. All 3 people I would trust.

Now, as far as im concerned MA have made a terrible mistake by making these 3 people's business outlawed. And it so easily could have been avoided. As things are MA have adjusted the goal posts to suit the biggest investers and all this says to me is that "you give us the money, we will make darn sure that the playing community has to spend extra to you". Correct me if im wrong but where else is the cash coming from to pay back the initial cost of the licenses....its you and me, the paying public.

How I would have done it if I was MA.....

When they introduce the bank VU also add a feature of unsecure loan, ie when you right click an avatar and scroll down the list you will find Private trade and under that unsecure loan...this will open a trade window as before but with big red warning signs of the risk involved, hell the licenced bank rates could also be advertised in the warning messages aswell as a secure alternative This way if there is ANY conflict then MA can simply say "well you did click numerous warning messages before taking the agreement". Problem solved.

Is that really so hard to impliment?

instead we are in the situation of MA basically making rules up as they go along. The winners of the bank auctions didnt have this quote outlawing non approved loans when they bought the things so why now, they paid a price for what they saw at the time. Now it seems they may have paid too much...Poor form on your part bank owners - you simply paid too much and now ingame laws are being changed to help you (the minority) and will surely cost us the players (the majority) more. It stinks to the core.

I understand MA want to help protect peoples investment which is a good thing but to go as far as changing rules after the event has happened, ending free-trade and threatening players offering rival services with perm ban is way out of order.

Also it makes a farce out of some trades doesnt it....hell am I going to hire a fapper as surely im "loaning" their services or hell will I ever borrow or lend an item to/from a friend.

Ofc, Akoz and co could just operate as resellers, ie ok ill buy this off you and sell it back to you in a month time at such *a higher price*...Now MA, please tell us how that breaks the EULA, even with your new stance? as people called "resellers" have been enjoying the profits of this since the start

Too many Grey areas and a mess has been created by late rule changes and the shock of possible competition to MA and the bank buyers....time to sort it out in the next VU I think MA, I suggest you look at the option I have listed above.

[BlackMagicWoman]

Originally Posted by Teilk

I really appreciate the fact that MA has been kind enough to label all of us that have worked so hard for years to build an unblemished reputation that allows us to operate such businesses successfully with such pleasant terms as "scam attempt", and "permanent lockdown of account".


I am truly amazed that MA would pull such a stunt, though I know I should not be. the sudden reversal of policy is interesting as well. First it was more along the lines of "use at your own risk", now its "we will lock anyone who wants to compete in the free market".

dont worry Teilik, they labeled a whole country as well...
*time to stop depositing*

[Caliber]

Entropia Investment Fund started to be an alternative way of getting some land in EU. You don’t need to be rich or member of the millionaire club to get a piece of a property in EU. In some way, MA has made this EU to a “rich mans game” where the common man has absolutely no chance to get a piece of land.

Our idea might be rebellious to the MA concept of a rich mans club where only a few wealthy people owning land areas, but we will still believe in the concept of the masses can get together and own something together. In real life, we have seen that in Sweden many times, where cooperation’s and trade unions get properties/stores to the benefit of its members. It’s nothing unique, and we continue our work without be called scammers! Instead it would be better if MA created a secure system where this sort of business can operate.

Unfortunately MindArk has never been interested in the idea, not even when the Fund Manager informed them about what we started. I try to be as objective as possible, but it’s very hard to not neglect the fact, that MA still can clamp down on the small man trying to get something together.
However, history has proven that dictatorship don’t’ last long. MA have to listen to the common man and the entrepreneurs in game to be successful in the future, otherwise we loose interest.

[aridash]

im genuinly concerned now ive thought about this... how will they differentiate between a trade and a loan? what if i buy something from someone and get a good price, then the person wants to report me claiming it was just a loan? Am i a scammer by default, lock first ask questions later?