| rubble | Tuesday, April 14, 2009 - 09:51 am 
I have just changed over some corps to public. They seem to be doing better. What is better public or state. |
| Maxwell 'Danger' Powers (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, April 14, 2009 - 06:46 pm
Public corporations can buy more upgrades (up to 225) and therefore become more profitable per worker employed. You will also recieve some cash from the sale of a percentage of the shares in the country.
The downside is that, as the country that owns the state corporation, since the corporation is no longer 100% owned by the country, the country no longer recieves 100% of the profit. All shareholders instead earn a dividend on the profits in proporation to the number of shares owned. |
| illuminatus (Golden Rainbow) | Tuesday, April 14, 2009 - 09:29 pm
Public corps and state corps upgrade to the same level.
The difference is not public vs. state.
The difference is country vs. enterprise.
A country controlled public upgrades to 200 like a state corporation does.
An enterprise controlled public upgrades to 225 like a private corporation does.
A Truly Public Corporation, in which all shareholders own less than 25% of total shares, upgrades to 250 regardless of whether it is country or enterprise controlled.
The only substantial advantage to making state corporations public, as far as I know, is that people can't attack them when at war with your country (keep plenty of anti-nuke missiles around though... the fallout forces corporations of all kinds to close).
The downside of making a state corporation public is that you can't infuse them with cash (which you usually should not have to) and that you lose some of the profit payments to shareholders. |
| Andrews Munoz | Wednesday, April 15, 2009 - 05:27 am
does public corps pay less maintenance services and use less FMU than state corps?im not sure about it but i think i read that in the documentation. |
| Maxwell 'Danger' Powers (Little Upsilon) | Wednesday, April 15, 2009 - 05:05 pm
Not to my knowledge (which is, admittedly, rather patchy). Both state and public corporations cost the same in terms of maintainance. |
| rubble (Little Upsilon) | Thursday, April 16, 2009 - 07:21 am
thanks for the info |
| Barack Obama (Little Upsilon) | Friday, April 17, 2009 - 04:54 am
Public is better. |
| Pathetic Sheep (Little Upsilon) | Monday, April 20, 2009 - 08:45 am
Fixed property costs are lower for CEO owned corps.
Public and Private corps have higher quality but use the same number of FMUs. The maintenance cost and FMUs used is the same thing. |
| Satan Lucifer (Little Upsilon) | Monday, April 20, 2009 - 09:34 am
Talking about Fixed property costs,is that the same to public corps or is that only to ceo corps? |
| Satan Lucifer (Little Upsilon) | Monday, April 20, 2009 - 09:45 am
Sorry,I was wrong,the ceo fixed property cost is less than state and public corps. |
| AlexandeRtheGreaT007 (Golden Rainbow) | Thursday, April 23, 2009 - 12:32 am
Publics are both good and bad. In some cases a truly public corporation can die from debt. In some cases it will become more profitable.
It should be completely upgraded BEFORE going public.
The best way to make money - the easiest - is to have CEOs that in your fed build in your country. CEO owned corps pay much more than any state owned corp for resources.
The best way to accomplish this is by setting your tax rate to 10% or lower and posting your country on this forum or on your fed forum.
ATG |
