Ideosphere Forum

Re: fx-propose: Proposal: 'POIL30'

Author: John Monroe
Conversation: fx-propose: Proposal: 'POIL30' ( prev | next ) reply!
Topic: fx-propose ( prev | next )
In-Reply-To: chrisran.bma e-mail's post
Followed-Up-By: chrisran.bma e-mail's post
Date: Fri Aug 24, 2018 05:20 pm
chrisran.bma e-mail
John MonroeSam FentressFX
chrisran.bma e-mailchrisran.bma e-mailchrisran.bma e-mail



Is a 5% drop enough? Based on that definition we reached peak oil in 1980. Of course production recovered subsequently but there were six years following 1980 where production was over 5% below 1980 levels, and two years when it was over 10% below 1980.
How long do you keep it open to see if there is a new peak? We had to wait until 1989 after the 1980 peak. Would that be at the judges discretion or should the terms be more tightly defined?
https://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?product=oil&graph=production
John

Sent from my iPad

> On Aug 24, 2018, at 12:06, chrisran.bma e-mail <chrisran.bma@virgin.net> wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> The intention was that Peak oil in 2030 or 2031 or later would be judged at 100. The formula could give a higher value but the value would be capped at 100.
>
> I simply hadn't considered the short description carefully or in that way. I have changed the short description to “Year of peak oil” as you suggest. If you would prefer to switch the direction of the claim, I would be happy to accept that change if it is, for some reason, sensible, but I don't see much point. Late year of peak Oil result in a high value seems more natural to me and is more in line with (corrected) “Year of peak oil”.
>
> Thanks for pointing this out and let me know if any other changes needed.
>
> Regards
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>> On 24 August 2018 at 17:18 Sam Fentress <sfentress@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> One thing that has often confused me about these kinds of scaled claims: The payout for YES goes up the further in the future peak oil is (2020 pays 0, 2030 pays 100), but then does it fall back to 0 at 2031, or do all YES coupons pay 100?
>>
>> If the former, then it seems like an odd price-is-right style guessing game: if you buy YES you hope it happens as close as possible to 2030 but not a day later. But the latter seems odd because it's the inverse of the stated claim: "peak oil BY 2030". YES should not pay anything if it happens after 2030.
>>
>> Either way seems odd (or quite possibly there is just something I'm not getting).
>>
>> Would there be any advantage to switching the direction of the scale, so that 2020 pays the highest for YES, and 2030 pays 0? Or instead changing the "short" description to simply "Year of peak oil" as some others do?
>>
>> Sam
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:42 AM chrisran.bma e-mail < chrisran.bma@virgin.net> wrote:
>> Re POIL30, any
>>
>> * Improvements/suggestions
>>
>> * Comments
>>
>> * Offers to be judge ?
>>
>> .
>>
>> I count 4 active claims created since 2009 (well maybe not active as one has no trades at all and has passed due date).
>>
>> Retired claims with due date since 2009 number 103. So nearly 100 fewer claims and many are pretty well decided like the POIL claims. Seems like more claims are needed and it is easy enough to see lists of these claims.
>>
>> I haven't currently got enough funds to propose many.
>>
>> So what are the most important claims that need replacing with new claims? Or new ones? Perhaps Tesla is getting lots of diverging positive and negative coverage. How to create a claim on this? Tesla bankrupsy/administration/CVA date? or does Tesla make $1bn profit before and bankrupsy/administration/CVA? or ...
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Chris Randles (7886)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21 August 2018 at 12:01 FX <info@ideosphere.com> wrote:
>>
>> The following claim has been proposed. If you have constructive suggestions for
>> improving it, please follow-up to this message. Thank you.
>>
>> claim: POIL30
>> owner: 7886 (crandles)
>> judge: TBD
>> short: Peak Oil by 2030
>> long:
>> This is a scaled claim that will pay (10*(peak year-2020)) capped at
>> or between 0 and 100. The peak year is defined as year of highest oil
>> production according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy.
>> When there is a subsequent year with oil production being over 5%
>> below the peak year and this is neither the year following the peak
>> year nor is due to temporary unusual circumstances, then the claim
>> should be judged.
>>
>> What temporary unusual circumstances are, is at the judges discretion
>> but might include things like natural disasters or terrorist action
>> on oil production/refining or other facilities or government action
>> like bans/rationing possibly taxes etc that are expected to last 18
>> months or less.
>>
>> However, if oil production remains below 95% of the peak year's oil
>> production for three years then the circumstances cease to be
>> temporary unusual circumstances and the claim should be judged.
>>
>> It is possible the claim will need to be kept open past the due date
>> to see if a new peak is reached, or to see if oil production declines
>> to less than 95% of peak oil production or to see if circumstances
>> remain temporary unusual circumstances.
>> due date: 2031/07/31
>>
>> (signed) FX

source



All trademarks, copyrights, and messages on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Forum: Copyright (c) 2000-2001 Javien Inc All rights reserved. Distributed under the GPL