Administrators Popular Post Alex Posted February 26, 2018 Administrators Popular Post Share Posted February 26, 2018 There was a suggestion made by Seb about creating an official game bank to process loans for players that didn't gain too much traction, and people were convinced existing banks already fulfilled that role pretty well. My suggestion here is different. I've been thinking about ways to offer funding to new players to help them get started. Taking some ideas from Seb's suggestion, I'm thinking that it would be cool to introduce a Loan mechanic into the game, whereby you could propose loans to players (like trades) and set the terms. Obviously there would be some necessary restrictions to prevent abuse. The first of these being that loans would have to be for Cities, Infrastructure, or Land, and would have to be processed automatically. Meaning, you could not just take out a loan and spend the cash however you wanted. If you accepted a loan for $X that was purposed for Cities #3 and #4, those cities would be automatically purchased, and then your nation would take on a debt. Repayment would have to be mechanically imposed. That means that given an interest rate and length of the loan, a payment would be automatically calculated and taken out of the loan-taking nation's treasury every turn. If they didn't have enough money to pay the amount, probably a penalty would be imposed and added onto the principle of the loan. To get a loan, someone would have to be offering one. It would probably make sense to have a subforum and/or Discord channel where loan-takers could come to negotiate with loan-offerers. New player looking to get cities #3,#4,#5? That would cost $3,375,000. Maybe someone offers you an interest rate of 1%/day and a term length of 4 weeks. So that would be a payment of $12,857/turn. The player making the loan would make $945,000 over 4 weeks, or about a 28% monthly return on their investment of ~$4m. Of course, interest rates, lengths of loans, etc. would all be up to the discretion of the loan-offerers and loan-takers, which should create competition and the best rates for nations taking out loans. The process would work similarly as described above for loans for Infrastructure or Land. I.E. A loan for enough money to buy each city up to X infrastructure would have the corresponding value calculated, and then the infrastructure would be automatically purchased upon acceptance of the loan. Same for land. Abuse would be largely limited as you can't sell cities, and selling infrastructure or land offers little return. Therefore, creating a multi and issuing a loan, then sending yourself back the money etc. would be pointless. As for dealing with loan defaults, that is trickier. I don't have a perfect idea yet, but theoretically defaults would be largely limited by the fact that payments are made automatically. For a nation that goes inactive and is then raided to the point where they have no money or income, they would not be able to make payments any longer. Should the loaning nation be stuck with the loss? If so, then that would largely limit the willingness to offer loans, and make it harder for new players to get a loan. My best thought so far is that for an extra cost the loaner could take out 'insurance' from me, which would cost some fixed rate but would guarantee the loan if the nation were, for example, deleted (meaning they had gone inactive and hadn't paid the loan back.) In any case, I'd love to hear all of your thoughts. I know banks exist and loans are offered already, but they're largely kept from new players who (even though they're the riskiest to lend to) probably need it the most, and would help them grow and get more involved in the game. It would also offer a mechanical way to offer existing loans. So, what do you think? 1 14 8 Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted February 26, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted February 26, 2018 I look forward to having kids learn about taking on soul crushing debt. Can we make this mafia style if they cant pay back their loans, which means that the lender can destroy a set amount of infra/land/improvements every week they don't get paid back, and then exponentially increase the interest on top of it? 1 13 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayayay Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 (edited) Loan payments are fairly flexible in the game. They are usually suspended and/or expanded during wars or raids. Sometimes people agree to pay with resourses instead of cash or prefer to pay off a loan in advance rather than pay minimum payments for god knows how long. Interest is also based on risk, by mechanically enforceing repayment it could basically lead to people offering the lowest mechanically allowable interest rates since a. It's guarrenteed income and b. If they don't pay out it would be due to them going inactive/ quiting the game which they would have done anyways. The biggest thing is that loans tend to be for larger city purchases that alliances don't buy for their members, at that level, the repayment periods can be so long that wars can be fought and cause major problems with repayment. If there is a way to cancel the loan repayments It is almost guaranteed people would just click it either before the war breaks out or during, forcing people to have to actually interact to negotiate the rest of the payments, completely defeating the point. Also, the insurance guarantee is so obviously abusable that I'm not even going to bother spelling it out. Edited February 26, 2018 by Malal 3 1 Quote Orbis Wars | CSI: UPN | B I G O O F | PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea. On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said: This was !@#$ing gold. 10/10 possibly my favorite post on these forums yet. Sheepy said: I'm retarded, you win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NastyGamer Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Interesting idea... especially the defaulter thing. The loan should not be "spendable". No money, resources, credits. Just cities and infra. Or Projects. Will prevent cheating. If I give out loan for $3,375,000 (#3,#4,#5).. then according to the insurance I'll get back 80% of my money back if the borrower goes inactive, etc. This can attract people to take a risk.. as the investment might return 120% or 80%. @MalalThis game has gone from bad to worse for non-aligned new members. Wanna play this game? Better join a grant alliance. Alex might wanna improve that. What if someone does not want an alliance. He should be able to grow. Loans.. may not be the only way.. but at-least Alex is coming up with ideas. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayayay Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 (edited) 32 minutes ago, WarGamer said: @MalalThis game has gone from bad to worse for non-aligned new members. Wanna play this game? Better join a grant alliance. Alex might wanna improve that. What if someone does not want an alliance. He should be able to grow. Loans.. may not be the only way.. but at-least Alex is coming up with ideas. In order to play this game you do need to join an alliance. The tutorial, while helpful, isn't very good and alliances actually teach people how to play. Besides, as a nation sim half the game is interacting with other people and the only two realistic options are joining an alliance or creating one and the success of the latter option is nearly non-existent for noobs. Edited February 26, 2018 by Malal 2 2 Quote Orbis Wars | CSI: UPN | B I G O O F | PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea. On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said: This was !@#$ing gold. 10/10 possibly my favorite post on these forums yet. Sheepy said: I'm retarded, you win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Costello Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Speaking on behalf of my recent in game company take-over. Micro Bank is a new bank on the block and caters to smaller loans. So this is deeply loved and totally agree with this form to it's loans. I say Aye! 3 Quote I hold the Right to my own Fate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldYak Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 This is an interesting idea. As mentioned above, alliances generally do well by their n00bs, but this does offer a nonaligned player an opportunity to grow while learning the game mechanics. And a small banking system has evolved on the open market, but this idea places it into the game mechanics and offers an additional channel for risk tolerant nations to invest. As for loan guarantees, it seems to me an unnecessary layer, at least at the outset. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utter Nutter Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 I think Alex nailed it with this idea. lately, private banks have been suffering from various cases of defaults and the insurance option would provide for a good solution to that, allowing the investor to choose to take the risk or not. by making this a non monopolized system, meaning each player can on its own and advertise their loans, it invites everyone to make their own little bank and adds diversity to the idea. It also simplifies a bank manager's job by automating the entire repayment process. This loans are optional obviously, non compulsory, it gives another tool for players should they choose to use them, so I don't see why this is a negative thing, it just adds an extra layer of opportunities for all players to interact with eachother and strategize how to best grow your nation. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utter Nutter Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 1 hour ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said: Can we make this mafia style if they cant pay back their loans, which means that the lender can destroy a set amount of infra/land/improvements every week they don't get paid back, and then exponentially increase the interest on top of it? lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiki Mod Popular Post Dr Rush Posted February 26, 2018 Wiki Mod Popular Post Share Posted February 26, 2018 Quote 2. Any form of income needs to have a risk with it. Even infra carries a certain level of risk, this carries basically none. 3. Blockades? 5. I see newbies not knowing what they are doing taking out city loans right off the bat and not being able to grow properly as a result. 6. What if you have negative income? 7. What if the loan payments put you into negative income? 8. New point, you have stated that you feel instant cash for rebuilds is a good thing. I would counter that it rather defeats the purpose of going to war as a rather large portion of the damage you do to an enemy is in the lost income during rebuilding. 9. New point, I have never heard a good argument for removing meta gameplay in favor of a hardcoded mechanic. Amazingly, almost all the same points apply to the Alex reskin as the original idea. 10 Quote 23:38 Skable that's why we don't want Rose involved, so we can take the m all for ourselves 23:39 [] but Mensa is the cute girl at the school dance and she's only dancing with us right now to get our friend jealous 23:39 [] If Rose comes in and gives Mensa what she wants, she'll just toss us aside and forget we ever existed 23:39 zombie_lanae yeah I do hope we can keep having them all to ourselves 23:40 zombie_lanae I know it's selfish but I want all their love 6:55 PM <+Isolatar> Praise Dio Pubstomper|BNC [20:01:55] Rose wouldn't plan a hit on Mensa because it would be !@#$ing stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Thrax Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Well. I'd generally say that implementing a system for something that players can already do themselves (and which is going to end up more rigid than whatever terms players may want to negotiate between themselves, to boot), is kinda just a waste of dev time compared to new features or ease-of-use upgrades that can help everyone. The novel part of the idea is admin insuring loans to smaller nations. Which sounds like, basically, a way admin is helping whales make even more money from "helping" smaller players. So I don't like that idea, particularly. 6 Quote Slaughter the shits of the world. They poison the air you breathe. ~ William S. Burroughs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goomy Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 I think this system will server to benefit unaligned players and smaller AAs as well. This means that if you are in a micro alliance that doesn't have the fund to build you up past say city 5, you still have an opportunity to grow. Private banks should still be allowed to operate outside of this system as many managers enjoy the running process, this is an addition to the existing choices which will be a great benefit to, and help maintain, small nation growth and interest in the game. It should be possible for this system to encompass Alliances as well, taking a predetermined amount out of their turn-ly tax revenues to pay for the loans. This will be useful for both small and large alliances alike that need funs. 1 Quote "LMFAO nazi Goomy is the best Goomy" - Kyubey "Goomy is Perfect" - Ripper Some sort of gov for CoS #RollBezzers2k18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamasith Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 I like the idea of expanding the market to loans and thus create competition in this sphere as well. I suppose, the concept of insurance, tieing a particular insurance contract to a particular loan, cannot be handled by the market, right? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin Lannister Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Seems like a fair idea. This already exists by and large for the mid tier players, but no one loans out to new players without any reputation so essentially banks only loan out to people with good reputation. This way, new players will also be able to benefit from the loans. The default insurance part needs to be worked out a bit to make sure there is no abuse of the system. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubayoo Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 (edited) I still have about another week before becoming reactive since taking a break for the holidays up to Valentine's Day, but I'll pitch in my two cents here. Yes, a mechanic system helps so people don't have to jimmy the trade market with 1 food trades to make regular payments. It also serves as a regular reminder that payments are due. I also don't see how insurance is abusive although there should be a separate insurance market or preferably a credit default swap market with an exchange of cash flows - the insurer sends cash to the lender on a regular basis, and the borrower actually pays its payments to the insurer. If the borrower defaults, the insurer still sends payments to the lender for the contracted time period. However, this is a social political game. Making payments automatic circumvents social politics. It disables people from saying, "Eh... I don't want to pay up," and creating the associated drama. This is especially true in the international sense. We have to remember that we're not talking about personal commercial banking here. We're talking about nationstates wielding clout. What should actually exist is a bounty-hunting mechanic. Lenders and borrowers would agree upon a forgiveness period before a bounty can be assigned. For example, 3 days. Within that time period, the borrower can make payments. Once the clock runs out, however, the lender can post the loan on a bounty-hunting market. The clock would reset everytime a payment is made as well. Bounties would be organized in two ways: One, the lender could simply pay the bounty-hunter to attack the borrower. The mission could require a certain amount of damage to be inflicted, or a certain amount of funds to be extracted and returned to the lender. The lender could also insure the bounty-hunter up to a certain amount to afford their own damages. Two, the lender could sell the loan to the bounty-hunter for a percentage of its original value. For example, 75%. Loan payments would be made to the bounty-hunter, and the bounty-hunter would be allowed to declare war on the borrower. Bounty wars would qualify as their own type, and would inflict more casualties as well as extract more loot. Furthermore, any bounty-hunter enforcing a bounty would get a significant defensive advantage if counter-declared upon by someone in the target's alliance or the alliance's allies. Edited February 26, 2018 by Dubayoo 1 Quote My Avie: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/senna/ Shortened versions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9qZu7h5ys0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvVqSpS65VE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dubayoo Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 3 hours ago, Malal said: Loan payments are fairly flexible in the game. They are usually suspended and/or expanded during wars or raids. Sometimes people agree to pay with resourses instead of cash or prefer to pay off a loan in advance rather than pay minimum payments for god knows how long. Interest is also based on risk, by mechanically enforceing repayment it could basically lead to people offering the lowest mechanically allowable interest rates since a. It's guarrenteed income and b. If they don't pay out it would be due to them going inactive/ quiting the game which they would have done anyways. The biggest thing is that loans tend to be for larger city purchases that alliances don't buy for their members, at that level, the repayment periods can be so long that wars can be fought and cause major problems with repayment. If there is a way to cancel the loan repayments It is almost guaranteed people would just click it either before the war breaks out or during, forcing people to have to actually interact to negotiate the rest of the payments, completely defeating the point. Also, the insurance guarantee is so obviously abusable that I'm not even going to bother spelling it out. I'm not really sure what you mean by mechanically allowable interest rates. You'd just type a number into a box. Maybe the box would only go up to 3 decimal places, but still, it's not like people are going to ask for .001% interest. There's no value in that. Loans are also used often to rebuild after a war is over since there's more income to be made by purchasing cheaper cities and infrastructure than more expensive cities an infrastructure. The lender's profit comes from the difference in cost compared to buying cities and infrastructure oneself, and the borrower's profit comes from not having to wait for income to normally come in before rebuilding. The only way insurance seems abusive is if it's a complete package. For a simple example, say a $10m loan is issued with $1m in principal being repaid per week. The lender should only buy insurance for the remaining principal, not all of the principal including what's already paid. If 5 weeks have passed, then only $5m would be insured, not $10m. If the borrower defaults at that point, the lender shouldn't get more than the originally lent principal such as $5m already repaid plus $10m originally insured. Of course, if there's a private insurance (or credit default swap) market, this wouldn't be a problem anyway. Insurers wouldn't be dumb enough to insure the entirety of the loan while part of it is paid off. Quote My Avie: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/senna/ Shortened versions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9qZu7h5ys0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvVqSpS65VE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PackAnimal Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 It's a nice idea. If the insurance rate was set at 3-5% of the debt, it would mean that banks would increase the interest rate to pay the insurance, and other banks would offer lower rates to highly trusted people who they don't believe will default. It'd create some form of competition and incentivise risk 1 Quote Mans two modes of existence can be thought of as his light and dark side. He is either the Protector or the Ravager. The Immovable Object or the Unstoppable Force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Sketchy Posted February 26, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted February 26, 2018 This kind of bypasses the responsibility of alliances to grow their own players. This might be ok if it was an ease of access mechanic for alliance banks to offer their members, but public banks are a different story entirely. How do you factor in things like alliance tax rates? Will the loans be taken before tax (screwing the alliance over) or after tax (allowing people to skimp out on repayment). This update doesn't help new players. Most alliances that are worthwhile already grow new players, this creates a competitor to those alliances with no vested interest in those players wellbeing outside making money off them. I can see this turning into a loan shark situation where new players (who thanks to the recent updates make shit all and NEED money to start up) are inundated with loan offers from whales, and being new players as they are, possibly accepting those offers and being in large and difficult to escape debt. Add to this that if loans are taken before tax rather than after (they really shouldn't be), then you are likely screwing them out of alliances who would have helped them on their own but are now removing them due to their crushing debt and 0 taxes. Too many issues arise from this update, and its only designed to help richer players get richer with less work than they have to put into it now. Considering the lucrative nature of public banks, I don't think making it easier to do is a good thing. The effort you put in should correlate with the money you make. 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post LordStrum Posted February 27, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted February 27, 2018 Still trying to replace a player-created mechanic with a hard-coded one. All the changes in the world won't get over that. 12 Quote On 3/16/2016 at 9:54 PM, Lykos said: Our next move is obviously rolling LordStrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Psweet Posted February 27, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted February 27, 2018 12 hours ago, Alex said: My best thought so far is that for an extra cost the loaner could take out 'insurance' from me, which would cost some fixed rate but would guarantee the loan if the nation were, for example, deleted (meaning they had gone inactive and hadn't paid the loan back.) While I actually don't mind the crux of the rest of this idea too much (it's certainly better than the world bank idea previously floated), this in particular is a total non-starter for me. In general I feel that if you need to make a hardcoded, out-of-game solution to an in-game problem, the system doesn't work well as proposed. The reason why there isn't already insurance in the game is because it's simply not profitable to run at any scale. I've done business with no fewer than three different people/businesses who offered my bank insurance, and none of them lasted long at all. Here is why: For insurance to make a profit, it needs either one of two things. The first and simplest is for the premiums that it receives to be greater than the payout that it has to make due to losses. BUT if this is the case, it would mean that the coverage they offer is NOT WORTH BUYING because its customers are paying more than they get. Secondly, the premiums can be equal to or less than what the payout is BUT the insurance company then needs to invest their float somehow to earn additional profit. This is what insurance companies IRL do, however it's a lot harder in Orbis since we don't have a stock market you can just plunk money into and expect to receive a return on with relatively little risk (over a long time frame). There's brokering, and there's the insurance company making its own loans (at which point it's basically just a bank), and there's investing in other businesses (like... banks...), and that's about it. The upshot is that it's very hard to make a profitable insurance company in Orbis. Now, the reason why I take issue with "game-sponsored" insurance is that since insurance is not a profitable business, this will again act as an inflator. Because the insurance company will end up paying out as much as or more than it receives in insurance (if it does not, players will soon learn that it's not worth buying), it will increase the amount of money in the game. This is even BEFORE accounting for the proliferation of loans that you seek, which by itself will dramatically increase the flow of money, and therefore the rate at which more money comes into the game. There is nothing wrong with there being a risk on investing money. I don't understand why there seems to be an obsession with creating risk-free investments. Risk is the primary driver of interest rates to begin with - if you make it risk free, the interest rates on offer will plummet to the point of barely being worth having. I don't mean to sound alarmist, and I don't profess to say that this WILL happen, but it COULD spell the death of banks as a whole. Call me biased all you want, but I think the creation of a private banking industry in a game where it wasn't an actual mechanic is something to be proud of, not something to be trying to replace with risk-free mechanics. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 12 hours ago, Malal said: In order to play this game you do need to join an alliance. The tutorial, while helpful, isn't very good and alliances actually teach people how to play. Besides, as a nation sim half the game is interacting with other people and the only two realistic options are joining an alliance or creating one and the success of the latter option is nearly non-existent for noobs. Ideally one should not need to join an existing alliance. Otherwise no new sides can possibly form; just reshuffled old players with the same friendships and grudges doing the same exact things over and over. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holton Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 32 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said: Ideally one should not need to join an existing alliance. Otherwise no new sides can possibly form; just reshuffled old players with the same friendships and grudges doing the same exact things over and over. New players, by and large, need to join established communities to get involved in the metagame. If they want to make something new afterwards, that should be encouraged - I agree. But throwing people to the sharks is asking to lose newbies in droves. I don't like any idea that removes something that is covered by the meta. This would be a downvote for me. 3 Quote Superbia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward I Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 The only thing this adds to the game is a way to force players to pay back loans and potentially to guarantee that lenders get paid for loaning money. Everything else already exists: players have created their own banks; alliances regularly distribute aid and loans to their own members; and whales have IC, non-hard-coded means of recouping past losses and mitigating futures ones. Please, can someone explain to me why risking greater inflation and putting a damper on the prolific IC innovation that characterizes this game is desirable? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForgotPants Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 This doesn't sound like a very good idea for someone taking a loan. Additionally, insurance for loans sounds like a terrible game mechanic with a lot of scope for abuse. People could start creating new nations, applying for loans for cities and infra, start warring and then once their nation is exhausted, abandon the game. And then start again. The people giving the loan don't suffer at all. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erland Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 I think this is a great idea. Instead of making a subforum where people can request loans, it should be done ingame in the trading section. Nations can sell bonds of a particular interest rate (price) in order to raise money, and lenders with cash can buy them, and also resell those bonds on the same market. This would allow multiple nations to contribute to funding and creditors would be able to get their money back immediately by reselling the bonds, or nations who want to make lump sum payment on their loan could buy back the bonds they issued, or bonds from other nations. Nations can create 1 bond at a cost of $1000 per turn for n turns, and each turn the holder of the bond gets the money paid from the issuer, and the value of the bond remaining decreases. The value will be calculated by the revenue per turn * remaining turns. On the market, the remaining bond value and turns remaining will be shown, as well as the interest rate. For example, someone who wants a loan of $1m repaid over 30 days would issue 3 bonds @ 360 turns (3 * 1000 * 360 = 1080000) then sell them on the market for a total of $1m, or 333,333 each. This represents an interest rate of 8% over 30 days. The monthly interest rate used for sorting the trade price could be (((revenue per turn * remaining turns / offer given) - 1)*360/remaining turns)*100. If someone else puts an offer of 3 bonds (360 turns) for 990k (330k per bond), this would be a lower price and represent a higher interest rate of 9.09%. Say someone has bonds with only 300 turns remaining, each one is now only worth 300k so to get an equivalent interest rate of 8% per month, the bonds could be sold for 281.25k each. To prevent abuse by new players this system could also work by ensuring that upon the initial sale of the bonds, funds immediately go towards the player's next city/project/infrastructure/land payment, instead of receiving cash. As for nations who can't make the payments, there should be a display on each nation page to show how many bonds they have outstanding and a check to make sure they can't issue more bonds than they can pay back. If a nation defaults, the bond holder will lose their money and the issuer could be given a bad credit rating. Nations could get a good credit rating for making repayments over time and also based on the percentage of their income that is going towards repayments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.