Company having suspicious activity on the Stock Market

Hey guys,

I have already reported a company that is having suspicious activity on the Stock Market.

This company is buying shares on different companies, and after buying them, they sell the shares on the same day, at a higher value to different company names, under the same user. After selling the shares, and making a "good" profit out of it, the companies that bought the shares are liquidated.

I believe this is cheating, as this company is making profit by buying/selling shares to companies under another user (seems to be himself), increasing (manipulating) the stock shares, and after that leaving in several companies shares under the "AS Holding", as the companies that bought the shares are liquidated.

I hope that the support team can solve this problem as soon as possible, so no further companies get the same problem as I did, and also this user get suspend for life.

Thanks.

Please write a formal request/notice to the support-team

There you can mention name of the companies / nicknames involved.

This forum is not the right place as (IMHO) the support will not take any action based on an entry made here in this forum.

Well, in Airlinesim, everything depends. There are so many unclear and gray areas that really, the most important word combination is, "it depends".

In cases like this, there are three factors to consider:

1. Malicious Intent

2. Outcome had the action not been done

3. Benefit generated

In stock trade of this company these factors would need to be considered first before determining if there was any wrongdoing, and there was a recent thread in UAB section, where UAB candidates explain that players should be given chance to reply and counterclaim any accusations made against them.

Each and every step of the process must be considered, whether such step is legal, undefined, or prohibited by AS standards.

First of all, selling stock at profit (or at loss) is not illegal in AS, if the transaction is between the two willing parties.

1. Malicious Intent - what was the intent here? Was there an intent to generate profit by quickly selling the stock to a second holding just because quick profit is possible? Was that second holding operated by the same player who sold the stock, another player playing in the gameworld?

With the intent we need to determine if the intent in itself was malicious, if we agree that it was, we need to also consider the outcome had the action not been done and benefit.

2. Outcome had the action not been done - if the stock was not sold, what would happen? Would the airline selling the stock have gone bankrupt? Would the airline have failed to pay wages and need to get rescue loan? Would an aircraft be taken away because lease payments could not be made?

3. Benefit - the benefit that was generated by malicious intent, did it allow the airline to quickly multiply its benefit? It is not the same to unjustifiably earn 5 million for a 10 million airline, than it is 5 million for a 500 million airline. Did the benefit allow airline to grab slots or get into the markets it otherwise could not, if it was not for the malicious intent in the first place?

The “malicious intent”, “outcome if the action did it not happen”, and “benefit” are the deciding factors.

As I do not play in the Quimby world, you can most likely consider yourself these three factors, and try to answer those questions (as you know the airlines in question). Maybe you will realize yourself that not a damage was done, or maybe you will discover that what was done was really inappropriate. But only finding answers to those 3 factors can you be absolutely sure what transpired.

One of the reasons I am applying for UAB is to pursue a definition of certain undefined behaviors. To open (public) discussions about whether some currently undefined actions and behavior should be prohibited by rules (or hard code), whether some should be allowed and to what extent, etc. Currently, there is a larger scale of gray and undefined behaviors and actions than both defined (legal) and prohibited combined.

1) Malicious Intent - what was the intent here? Was there an intent to generate profit by quickly selling the stock to a second holding just because quick profit is possible? Was that second holding operated by the same player who sold the stock, another player playing in the gameworld?

This company is buying shares on different companies, and after buying them, they sell the shares on the same day, at a higher value to different company names, under the same user. After selling the shares, and making a "good" profit out of it, the companies that bought the shares are liquidated.

You know, it might not be a bad idea to actually read what the poster typed instead of simply hijacking the thread to post your campaign speech. Just saying.

You know, it might not be a bad idea to actually read what the poster typed instead of simply hijacking the thread to post your campaign speech. Just saying.

Thank you for your reply, I appreciate it, as it made me see I have not phrased my reply and thoughts properly.

My reading comprehension stands quite well. :rolleyes: The OP says the second holding was by the same user. I was paraphrasing and saying that it needs to be checked whether it was really by the same user or (most likely) other user. In essence, I do not believe it was the same player buying and selling, based on the fact that you cannot sell stock from one of your holding and buy it with a different holding you have. Not without intermediary and not in one transaction.

But then, the OP claims “under another user (seems to be himself)”.

First it’s the same user, than it’s a different user. Maybe it’s a different player who happens to be always the same.That’s all what my response was about… to determine who exactly did what.We should not be quick to judge from mere assumptions and appearances.

I apologize if there was unclarity in my reply that may have caused misunderstanding of the thoughts I wanted to transmit.

I have been following up this companies movements, and I can say (without having access to information that the support team can) that the user A, with the company X, is buying shares on different companies. After buying this shares, he sells shares to the company Y, from user B. It seems to be that it's the same person behind both users, or that they have talked about this as:

1. Company Y, from user B, only buy shares on companies and to shares that is selling company X from user A.
2. Company Y short after buying shares from user A, are liquidated, and then user B founds a new company under other name, to keep the same strategy.

I hope that the support team can address this correctly, as this will benefit companies in a way that seems (at least to me) not fair. Also it is not a fair competition, but also this user is leaving several companies with a manipulated stock, and many of their shares in hand of "AS Holding".

About your 3 questions:

1. The only person that can give an answer about the intention is the user. But as I can see, there's the intent to take advantage for these transactions, over and over.
2. It doesn't seems that the airline will go bankruptcy as they are ordering new planes.
3. It is letting this enterprise to get a profit that shouldn't be there. Is a way to "transfer" money from new holdings to my own, keep doing these over and over, and I could transfer several 10 million AS$ to my "main" holding.

If this is allowed, as I can see, I would create several holdings, buy shares everywhere, and sell them again, as this user seems to be doing. This way I could get a lot of easy money to grow up my airline.