|
spend half
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 13:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
Tbh I'd spend 200m on planes, reserve 50m for 3DP, and save the rest for operating costs. So I'll go with 150,000,000 Also, we should ally ourselves with ROMARM and associates. We've not yet had a chance to shoot at fellow eurotrash, and we should.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 13:40
|
|
|
A The whole boteload.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 13:59
|
|
|
A Setting something aside for 3DP options means buying Akefs which... have been less than spectacular so far.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 14:18
|
|
|
Dance Officer posted:Also, we should ally ourselves with ROMARM and associates. We've not yet had a chance to shoot at fellow eurotrash, and we should.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 14:21
|
|
|
Should there be interest in a flex-i-spend, where we go above-below, I can adjust a bit. These are just some starting points. I know one of you wants me to propose exactly $165,473,000 because you're a terrible min-max sperglord. Which is OK. We all are. On another note, the SSLP allows us to get some interesting flexibility in regards to the OPFOR. Mainly, I can referee a Goon V. Goon match. There's some cool scenarios where the Chinese Air Force strikes a US Carrier Task Force. If you guys don't mind the SSLP format, I might get it going as a supplement.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
VOTING A - Saudi F-18 with 16+ missiles plz.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 15:14
|
|
|
A We're gonna make some serious scratch next mission, and who wants to live forever?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 15:33
|
|
|
habeasdorkus posted:A You assume too much. And we need to reserve funds for insurance! B+ (150-225 mil)
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 15:35
|
|
|
A Go big or go home
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 15:38
|
|
|
All in
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 16:25
|
|
|
With insurance it helps us to spend as much as we can because if we wreck it we can get it back. I would say we want to spend about 250 million and leave about 80 for insurance. So A.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:You assume too much. And we need to reserve funds for insurance! Fair enough. Change me to A- ($250m, giving us $80m to buy insurance)
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 18:01
|
|
|
B
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 18:04
|
|
|
A- ($250m, giving us $80m to buy insurance)
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
B
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 19:35
|
|
|
A
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
Yooper posted:On another note, the SSLP allows us to get some interesting flexibility in regards to the OPFOR. Mainly, I can referee a Goon V. Goon match. There's some cool scenarios where the Chinese Air Force strikes a US Carrier Task Force. If you guys don't mind the SSLP format, I might get it going as a supplement. This sounds amazing. On a tangential note - Can we expect a novel on the Ballad of Hyard Gunnes in the near future? B+
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 20:42
|
|
|
B because maintenance.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Yooper posted:Do we ... Vote: A> Spend it all! $300,000,000 Given the new setup and maintenance costs of the 3DP Option, I would think buying actual 'line-fit' planes would make for the best Return On Asset. In fact, I would propose thinking about 3DP's as another form of the 'Meteor Tax'; if there is a specific tactical need for a certain plane for a mission, we print it, use it, and ditch it, so we don't carry 'Hangar Queens' around on the books. Also, if we're in question time: To EU.NATO: "Seriously, pick up the phone. You're going to want to share whatever SIGINT you picked up from that whooping, because it will very likely affect how we choose our next employer and mission." To ROMARMO: "Say we want to leave, would you let us? Or, maybe we want to stay and make this mountain layer our new home?" To DT5: "How close do you think you gals can get to that air defense and take a gander?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
B Always best to keep a cash reserve just in case a rogue nuclear weapon just happens to obliterate our entire force.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
CourValant posted:In fact, I would propose thinking about 3DP's as another form of the 'Meteor Tax'; if there is a specific tactical need for a certain plane for a mission, we print it, use it, and ditch it, so we don't carry 'Hangar Queens' around on the books. And by "ditch it" you mean: "1) Purchase insurance on it; 2) Rig it to be drone operated; and 3) Send it out as our first line of defense to reveal enemy air defense and radar positions before recouping like 90% of our original purchase price." Right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
I feel I must protest your use of drones in this way. Drones are our friends, please do not send them out to eat missiles. Also I think we aren't allowed to do that anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 22:34
|
|
|
B+
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 22:45
|
|
|
power crystals posted:I feel I must protest your use of drones in this way. Drones are our friends, please do not send them out to eat missiles. But think of how proud we'd make Goldman Sachs!
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
habeasdorkus posted:Right? If we want to do that, then let's just 3DP drones and be done with it, no point in even buying insurance. The idea that we can 'buy insurance' for combat assets is in and of itself ridiculous. While I didn't want to get into an actuarial debate, since this is all an abstraction for MercNet Simulation 2020, if you look at all of the assets destroyed during our missions, on both sides, you'll quickly come to the realization that: a) Whoever we fly against will have their insurance dropped immediately by the 'Hired Goons Pre-Existing Condition' as there is a 100% chance of payout for our OPFOR. b) We lose on average 1 plane every 3 mission, which means the premium on our fleet is 1/3 of the replacement cost of an average asset, just for the insurance company to break even. This is quick and dirty actuarial stats; I'm not about to build actuarial tables based on HG's deployment history; or more to the point, tables for the OPFOR, because that's what realistic MercNet Simulation 2020 insurance rates should look like. Besides, in this world, Insurance Fraud is likely a War Crime and they'll send EU.NATO after us. power crystals posted:I feel I must protest your use of drones in this way. Drones are our friends, please do not send them out to eat missiles. Until you introduce me to a Drone's grieving Mother, I do believe this is exactly what they're built for. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
power crystals posted:I feel I must protest your use of drones in this way. Drones are our friends, please do not send them out to eat missiles. Boy have I got bad news for you about TALDs...
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2018 23:44
|
|
|
I had started reading this thread and caught up right about when Yooper started his break. Great to see things rolling again, and I like the new format. I'll also toss my name into the waiting list for whatever pops up.power crystals posted:I feel I must protest your use of drones in this way. Drones are our friends, please do not send them out to eat missiles. We're not supposed to send them on blatant suicide missions, but I think we could at least use some of our assets a lot more aggressively. CourValant posted:Besides, in this world, Insurance Fraud is likely a War Crime and they'll send EU.NATO after us. EU.NATO just tried to do a massive sweep and got utterly wrecked, so they have more important things to worry about for the moment. I suggest we remove any and all registration plates from the gripens, and if we lose one we send DT5 or someone to plant an insured aircraft's number in the wreckage. Then we just insure one or two of them instead of the whole fleet. As far as the voting, B+ seems good to me. 200 millionish.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 00:33
|
|
|
I feel like the real goal for Goldman Sachs might be creating PMC financial instruments, like insurance derivatives. Legal ways to bet on how successful a given PMC or a given country's military campaign will work out. Goldman Sachs could be on the hook for $75 million in insurance, but that'd be a drop in the bucket if they could make $7.5 billion back from gamblers. I mean, from hedge fund managers, pension systems, and day traders.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 00:33
|
|
|
CourValant posted:
1. EU.NATO is still in recovery mode and sorting the data through the massive bureaucracy is going to take time. Think of it like a monster coffee filter starting in Berlin, going to Brussels, over to "Virginia" and maybe ending at Gjader. 2. Judging from Victor Fieraru's statements, it's an emphatic Nu. 3. Two weeks. Some of the injuries are brutal and to top it off they are without the lubrication properties that Jack brings to the mix. Regarding disposable planes... intentionally suiciding them without a goal other than suicide isn't cool. However, sending a daring pilot on a deadly mission with the intent to succeed, and where success would lead to other successes.... that's OK. Just no, "Fly there, go to 2,000 ft, and lol."
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 00:34
|
|
|
Yooper posted:
The former was much closer to my original idea, it was only afterwards that I started thinking like an investment banker. I like the notion of being able to go for some high risk, high reward possibilities when failure makes things harder until the insurance payout comes through rather than bankrupting us.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:I feel like the real goal for Goldman Sachs might be creating PMC financial instruments, like insurance derivatives. Legal ways to bet on how successful a given PMC or a given country's military campaign will work out. Much more easy, and sure-fire ways, to make money on these low intensity conflicts than bet on the outcome. Just take on the time-honored tradition of war profiteering; that way, no matter which side wins, you make money. Which is to say, buy in the 3Bs, Bullets, Beans, and Bandages. Yooper posted:1. EU.NATO is still in recovery mode and sorting the data through the massive bureaucracy is going to take time. Think of it like a monster coffee filter starting in Berlin, going to Brussels, over to "Virginia" and maybe ending at Gjader. And what comes out the other end being completely 'non-value add' and only suitable for compost. Gotcha.  Yooper posted:2. Judging from Victor Fieraru's statements, it's an emphatic Nu. Welp, you heard it here first, boys. I suggest we start thinking about pulling up stakes and setting fire to what's being left behind, ala Alaska. Yooper posted:3. Two weeks. Some of the injuries are brutal and to top it off they are without the lubrication properties that Jack brings to the mix. By the by, where the hell is Jack anyways? We need him to start calling Halsey and see if we can play the Blue v. Red angle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
CourValant posted:Welp, you heard it here first, boys. I suggest we start thinking about pulling up stakes and setting fire to what's being left behind, ala Alaska. Hahahahahahaha NO. We're not staying in some shithole of a base that everyone and their mother hates. Gjader is a home that is completely irreplaceable. The only way we'd leave it behind is if it was pried from our cold dead fingers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
Dr. Snark posted:The only way we'd leave it behind is if it was pried from our cold dead fingers. And I'm sure Victor would be more than happy to oblige us. Nothing is irreplaceable, and we're a flying circus, we go where the work leads.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 01:22
|
|
|
CourValant posted:Much more easy, and sure-fire ways, to make money on these low intensity conflicts than bet on the outcome. This would be a new method of war profiteering. A box of bullets can get sold once, but the derivatives can be sold and packaged countless times over. Packaged in ways to minimize GS risks and maximize returns. This is also how a few billion worth of bad mortgages turned into a trillion dollars crisis, but that's been mostly forgotten.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 01:34
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:This is also how a few billion worth of bad mortgages turned into a trillion dollars crisis, but that's been mostly forgotten. Goldman Sachs knows that they'll have a seat when the music stops, why would that be a problem? Heck, even more opportunity created! I think we should take out insurance on our planes, then securitize the insurance premium money flow, tranche em, sell em all off, take out synthetic derivatives betting against them, and then go full on pants on head aggressive to take out ROMARM. Any planes we lose can easily be replaced by the money flowing in from our Even better if we can get any of our other opponents to go long on those synthetic derivatives. Maybe the Russians will stop going in so hard on us when we have their nuts in a financial vise. eta: I'm also for staying in Gjader, capital might be able to flow about the world freely but we still need someplace to park our planes and hunker down if FINRA comes calling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
 Welp. 12 to 12 for Option A to Option B so I'm splitting the difference. $225,000,000 I'll get with the suppliers and see what we can do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:Boy have I got bad news for you about TALDs... Those fly themselves so it doesn't count.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 02:01
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:Packaged in ways to minimize GS risks and maximize returns. habeasdorkus posted:I think we should take out insurance on our planes, then securitize the insurance premium money flow, tranche em, sell em all off, take out synthetic derivatives betting against them, and then go full on pants on head aggressive to take out ROMARM. Any planes we lose can easily be replaced by the money flowing in from our Because I'm not about to re-litigate that portion of financial history here, what I will say is that tranche'ing and 'securitizing' the money flow in this instance is not applicable as: 1) We're the ones paying the insurance premiums, not receiving them (these are GS assets, so these are debits against the GS account, not credits), meaning we don't have a steady, stable income to lever against. 2) HG is not a AAA rated institution (and we have zero access to anything close to being AAA worthy), meaning we, and by extension GS, cannot issue AAA rated investment vehicles for anyone else to buy. RandomPauI posted:This is also how a few billion worth of bad mortgages turned into a trillion dollars crisis, but that's been mostly forgotten. The debt lever isn't something we can apply here, because we don't have anything to lever against; in this analogy, HG is the home owner, not the insurance provider. Just because we're making insurance payments, that doesn't magically mean there is somehow financial voodoo we can perform, even if GS is our financing partner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 02:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
I thought we were partially owned by Goldman (and also IIRC a teachers union pension fund?) Though, yes, the credits would be all to the Squid and not to us. The reason we tranche things is so that our lovely terrible risk insurance policy assets can get some investment grade tranches that, like, Deutschebank thinks are actually worth something when they're really hot garbage. I'll stop fanwanking about creating a new global financial crisis via war crimes crossed with insurance fraud now. Sorry. I guess this makes me the spreadsheets mafia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2018 02:18
|
|