1817 rules

[John A. Tamplin]

Last chance for any changes to the rules -- they will be printed early next week.

--
John A. Tamplin

[Pierre LeBoeuf]

John,

I am currently playing 18NY in an email game, but unless I get to play it at my local club tomorrow night, I won't get another chance to play before early next week. Is my errata good enough for you to change the rules, or should I send you an updated pdf myself?

Pierre

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dtg-proto" group.
> To post to this group, send email to dtg-...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to dtg-proto+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/dtg-proto?hl=en.

[John A. Tamplin]

On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Pierre LeBoeuf <pierre...@verizon.net> wrote:

I am currently playing 18NY in an email game, but unless I get to play it at my local club tomorrow night, I won't get another chance to play before early next week.  Is my errata good enough for you to change the rules, or should I send you an updated pdf myself?

I was just planning on uploading them separately -- it will be easier for people who have the current rules to know what has changed anyway. 

--
John A. Tamplin

[Steve Thomas]

John Tamplin wrote:

> Last chance for any changes to the rules -- they will be printed early
> next week.

I'm glad you asked...

It is my understanding that at the end of each OR, the Canadians should
steal the next available unsold train, ignoring any train that has been
discarded through a company being over the train limit. However, the rules
don't say this exactly.

5.11 says "Export the next available train from the train pool by removing
it from the game."

5.7 says "New trains are purchased from the Bank in the order they appear at
the top of the train stack. The Bank will also sell any train from the Open
Market." It also says "If a phase change includes a reduction in the Train
Limit, all Public Companies, including the one operating, must discard any
trains in excess of the Train Limit to the Pool."

1,5 calls the place new trains come from the "Train Yard". It mandates that
the supply of trains be divided into three stacks--those currently
available, those available next, and the rest. BTW, "Current Available" is
appalling English.

I suspect the simplest fixes are to change 5.11 "train pool" -> "train yard"
or perhaps "Train Yard", and to change 5.7 "in the order they appear at the
top of the train stack" -> "in order" and "Pool" -> "Open Market".

--
Steve Thomas maisn...@btinternet.com

[Eric Brosius]

I'd like to see clearer wording about the situation in which two 5-
share companies merge to form a 10-share company, and more than 5
shares are sold short.

As the rules are currently written, it's possible to do more shorting
(for example, to go from 6 shares short to 10 shares short,) which
seems against the spirit
of the new rules (which aim to allow at most 5 shares short.) I
suggested a ratcheting mechanism that does not allow more shorting of
a company that has
6 or more shares sold short. I'm not sure this has been resolved;
Craig indicated that a change might be appropriate, but I think this
issue is still outstanding.

See the following discussion:

http://groups.google.com/group/dtg-proto/browse_thread/thread/38a4494b2ad3eba3#

Eric

[Craig Bartell]

Section 6.1.3 covering 5-share mergers was updated to cover this.

Section 4.3 covers short selling and lists this constraint(among others):
"No more than 5 shares in total may be sold short in a 5-share or
10-share company."

Would you suggest different or additional wording? I would like to make
it clearer if possible.

Craig

[John A. Tamplin]

On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Craig Bartell <ho...@craig-bartell.com> wrote:

Section 6.1.3 covering 5-share mergers was updated to cover this.

Section 4.3 covers short selling and lists this constraint(among others):
"No more than 5 shares in total may be sold short in a 5-share or 10-share company."

Would you suggest different or additional wording?  I would like to make it clearer if possible.

How about:

No share may be sold short if there are already 5 or more in play.  If a short share and a regular share of a company are in the open short interest section of the stock market and there are more than 5 short shares in play, the pair are removed from the game.

--
John A. Tamplin

[Eric Brosius]

On Jan 7, 1:03 pm, "John A. Tamplin" <j...@deepthoughtgames.com>
wrote:

>
> How about:
>
> No share may be sold short if there are already 5 or more in play.  If a
> short share and a regular share of a company are in the open short interest
> section of the stock market and there are more than 5 short shares in play,
> the pair are removed from the game.
>

Yes, with some wording to say that, if either the short share or the
regular
share or both belong to the surviving company, it should be swapped
with
a short share or regular share of the disappearing company before
being
removed (this eliminates as quickly as possible the anomaly whereby
certificates from the disappearing company stand in for those of the
surviving company, and facilitates making the disappearing company
available once again for an IPO.)

[John A. Tamplin]

On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Eric Brosius <brosiu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes, with some wording to say that, if either the short share or the
regular
share or both belong to the surviving company, it should be swapped
with
a short share or regular share of the disappearing company before
being
removed (this eliminates as quickly as possible the anomaly whereby
certificates from the disappearing company stand in for those of the
surviving company, and facilitates making the disappearing company
available once again for an IPO.)

Ok.  (Though all the orders so far include the optional extra 5 short/long shares/company, so it won't be an issue for them anyway).

--
John A. Tamplin

[Chris Shaffer]

"No more than 5 shares in total may be sold short in a 5-share or 10-share company."

The problem is that the above sentence is provably false, since two 5-share companies can merge causing more than 5 shares in total to be sold short in the resulting 10-share company.

--
Chris

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dtg-proto" group.
To post to this group, send email to dtg-...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to dtg-proto+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[John A. Tamplin]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Chris Shaffer <chris....@gmail.com> wrote:

"No more than 5 shares in total may be sold short in a 5-share or 10-share company."

The problem is that the above sentence is provably false, since two 5-share companies can merge causing more than 5 shares in total to be sold short in the resulting 10-share company.

No, while you can have more than 5 shorts in play, you can't sell a share short to cause more than 5 to be in play.  My proposed wording is even clearer:

No share may be sold short if there are already 5 or more in play.  If a short share and a regular share of a company are in the open short interest section of the stock market and there are more than 5 short shares in play, the pair are removed from the game.

--
John A. Tamplin

[Eric Brosius]

How about:

No share may be sold short if there are already 5 or more short shares
for
that company in play. If there are more than 5 short shares in play
as a
result of a merger of two 5-share companies, then whenever a short
share
and a regular share of the company are in the open short interest
section
of the stock market, the pair are removed and placed back in the
supply,
swapping certificates from the disappearing company with equivalent
certificates from the surviving company as needed so that certificates
from the disappearing company are removed. If all certificates from
the
disappearing company have been removed, the company is once
again available for an IPO.

[Chris Shaffer]

We can agree to disagree about the meaning of the original wording.  Your proposed wording is perfect.

--
Chris

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dtg-proto" group.
To post to this group, send email to dtg-...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to dtg-proto+...@googlegroups.com.

[Eric Brosius]

Is the very latest version of the rules available somewhere?

I created a file called "1817 for 1846 players" using an earlier
version of the 1817 rules, and I'd like to update it so it
corresponds to the latest version.

Thank you,
Eric

[Craig Bartell]

These are the most up to date rules available:
http://www.proto.deepthoughtgames.com/home/1817-prototype-files

Craig

[Eric Brosius]

On Feb 11, 11:27 pm, Craig Bartell <h...@craig-bartell.com> wrote:
> These are the most up to date rules available:http://www.proto.deepthoughtgames.com/home/1817-prototype-files
>
> Craig
>

I think that this set is still unclear (at least to me)
about whether it is permissible to short a share
of a 10-share company that was created from a
merger in the situation where more than 5 shares
but fewer than 10 shares are currently short.

[Pierre LeBoeuf]

John,

It's been awhile (I'm sure you've enjoyed the peace and quiet).  I have cataloged our recent 18NY email game and have a (19 page) Word document ready for upload to the dtg website.  Would you like me to send it?  

I hope to get working on my rules update next.

Pierre

[David Fair]

Is this still the most up-to-date set of proto files? I am fairly certain that the set I have played on had a different Bank of NY chart...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "dtg-proto" group.
To post to this group, send email to dtg-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to dtg-proto+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/dtg-proto?hl=en.

--
Thanks,
Dave
--
David Fair     daf...@gmail.com

[Craig Bartell]

John Tamplin made some edits to the rules for clarity purposes.  I don't know if he posted the most recent version.

Yes, you can short a 10-share company that was created from a merger (or conversion).  You can not short a company in the stock round it was formed via an IPO.  The purpose was to allow a company to run a set of operating rounds before it can be shorted.  In the case of a merger, both 5-share companies had the opportunity to run prior to the merger.

Craig

[Steve Thomas]

Craig Bartell wrote:
> Yes, you can short a 10-share company that was created from
> a merger (or conversion).

That wasn't the original query: suppose two 5-share companies merge, and
they have between them six or more short shares in player hands. I am
fairly sure that the intent of the rule is that in a subsequent stock round,
players may not further short that company until the number of shorts is
below five. There was a time when the rule was worded in such a way as to
allow such shorting; the only time you couldn't short a 10-share company was
when there were exactly five or ten shorts outstanding (or before it had
operated or in phase 8).

In the latest rules set (v28c) the relevant rule is "No more than 5 shares
in total may be sold short in a 5-share or 10-share company." I don't see
that this could plausibly be interpreted in such a way as to allow short
selling when the number of outstanding shorts exceeds five. The only
possible problem with it is that it is technically false, since the limit
can be breached by merger. Changing it to "Shares in a company may not be
sold short if the total number of short shares in that company is greater
than or equal to five." would fix that. The current constraints are
expressed in both the active and passive voices; that matches the rest of
the rules, but it's a wart nonetheless and particularly obviius in a bullet
list.

That said, Real Men play with a ten-short limit on 10-share companies
anyway. But that's another matter entirely.

--
Steve Thomas maisn...@btinternet.com