If this isnt frowned upon by the league Chapel Hill has agreed to loan 15 million dollars (as an investment) to R'leyh they shall pay back 5 million dollars per season for 5 seasons
[img]smile.gif[/img]
Printable View
If this isnt frowned upon by the league Chapel Hill has agreed to loan 15 million dollars (as an investment) to R'leyh they shall pay back 5 million dollars per season for 5 seasons
[img]smile.gif[/img]
The C'thulu Spawn anticipate the acceptance of this intuitive bussiness agreement.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure Scott banned loans. I for one would vote in favour of keeping the ban.
On another note, I don't think you should be able to make trades that require consideration that extends beyond your current subscription. What happens if the person who owes money for five seasons leaves after his subscription expires in four seasons? Does the new owner have to pay the money for the deal he knows nothing about? The same goes for draft picks beyond the expiration of your subscription.
I have no problems with the deal above.
And as far as I understood Scott?s ruling, he was banning loans and deals between seperate leagues.
As for extending beyond subscription periods - Well, if you take your chances and make deals that goes beyond a subscription periods, you just have to accept that the deal becomes worthless if a new manager takes over
I don't have a problem with loans per se, but I do think we should have some sort of understanding as a league on what's acceptable and what isn't.
I don't think we should allow any business transactions that extend beyond the period someone is subscribed.
I don't think any agreements should be allowed which trade a player and specify that he'll be traded back after a certain period.
I think loans are very similar to trading future draft picks. Both require something now for a future consideration. As long as there's enough of an interest rate that the borrower isn't getting something for nothing, I think loans are fine.
I wouldn't have a problem with the deal above as long as the term is within the timeframe of the owners' subscriptions.
You guys should have just kept your mouths shut and just traded the $5 million for a crappy player for the next 5 seasons, which would be perfectly legit. I don't have any problem with loans, but some people do, so I don't know how well it's going to go over. Just trade a crappy player for the $5 million. Nobody can say anything about that.
I believe the Ban was due to cross-league resources being used. I agree with bussiness deals should only stay within the bounds of subs. My sub should be for 5 seasons. Chapel hill should start getting paid this first season.
-- Actually we discussed that Z. but We both prefered just putting things way out in the open. It's pretty easy to see that this is a good bussiness deal for both parties. $15mil now nets $25mil in time to Chapel Hill. That's deefinately not free money.
Why would you need a loan already? [img]confused.gif[/img]
because he wants to buy the 50mill stadium
Shush...
[img]smile.gif[/img]
well you see as GK said we would rather not be underhanded about it, also the subscription is for 5 seasons because we get that free season remember [img]smile.gif[/img]
Safe bet, that there are no solid issues with this deal?
-- Like to get my money situated rather soon.
sweet as with me GK
i have no problem with it as well and since their was no major objection with it i dont see a problem with it
just place it in the trades thread like everyone else with a full description of what it is you are doing
I see that this thread was used saying that future loans could be made -as I read this through it seems we only did not want to make a stink over this one.
I do not like the idea of loans as a normal occurence - and offer my vote as no - I think there was a misunderstanding on this thread being an actual vote thread
No, I don't like the idea of loans...if you want trade and use that means of getting money I have no problem with that.
<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">This is the part that I never understand. It seems to me that either we have rules or we don't. Either loans are acceptable or they aren't. How can you be against loans in general -- but just "not want to make a stink over this one?"Quote:
Originally posted by hornetjohn:
I see that this thread was used saying that future loans could be made -as I read this through it seems we only did not want to make a stink over this one.
I do not like the idea of loans as a normal occurence - and offer my vote as no - I think there was a misunderstanding on this thread being an actual vote thread
I'm afraid it's a done deal. Someone wanted to do a loan. No one objected. The loan was made. Precedent has been established. If you don't want to have loans as part of this league then you have to object when people want to make loans.
Since this has been done already, loans are part of the league. I'm not saying that as "I'm in charge and I said they are," but just as a statement of reality. Even if I never added loans to the decision thread, here's what would happen the next time someone wanted to do a loan:
</font><ul type="square">[*]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">Someone posts that he wants to do another loan.</font>[*]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">You say you think they shouldn't.</font>[*]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">He says that GK and 4H did it.</font>[*]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">You say that it was a one-time deal.</font>[*]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">He says that's not fair that they got to do it and he can't.</font>[*]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">You say that's tough.</font>[*]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">He says he's doing it anyway since it's already been done and there's no vote that said he can't.</font>[/list]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">If you really don't want to have loans in the league, then you need to take active steps at this point. Follow the decision-making rules and start a discussion thread then do the vote.
I read the league rules...didn't see anything about loans....how about someone telling EVERYONE how to make loans, either the one getting or the one loaning....I don't like the idea of having anything that has to do with another league affecting this league...ie-loans paid or paid off in one league carrying over to this league. This league should be autonomus-nothing in this league having to do with anyother league....these leagues in Sim galaxy should be a world withing themselves...that's my feeling.
Can we clarify that it's forbidden to loan PLAYERS? (Just to clarify, I'm in favour of banning it. It opens a Pandora's box of using somebody else's trainer to see your gaps, etc.)
The cash trade between these 2 teams earlier was fine in my opinion. But to loan a player to another team would be completely unacceptable to me. There is a big difference between a little front office help and help on the court.
To clarify:
</font><ul type="square">[*]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">The loan that was done was entirely internal to this league.</font>[*]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">Loans or other trades that take place across leagues are forbidden by Scott. Even if we decided it was acceptable to do cross-league loans in this league, it would be forbidden in the other league.</font>[/list]<font size="3" face="Sylfaen, Verdana, Helvetica">