State Corporation VS Public Corporation

Which one of the two states that makes the most money for you're Country, can you please help me on this one and make the right decisions?

Thank you.

In my main country I have 25 ceo corps (including 8 that are public) and I have 8 country controlled public corps and my country makes a profit of 12B with a decent (but no great army) and I am in 12 place on WG. And from waht I hae been told profit over 10B in great.

You'll hear other opinions on this that differ from mine but the more private and public corps you have the better. Though for me state controlled public corps serve a purpose beyond monthy profit but that is a trick of mine that I don't let out.

Also I remeber reading somewhere that is you have a public corp that largest share holder is 25% or less it can be upgraded farther than a state corp. Though someone will have to back me on that.

I guess the short answer to your question the more private and public the better.

Side note to stave off decent on this. If you are corps you don't want a ceo to buy(for whatever reason) you can make them national

Hope some of what I said helps

Another question on the Public Corporations.

Why do their Income from Dividend always goes down to zero, when in the world world in terms sharemerketing, they always make profits.

Can someone explain this to me why this is the different between the real world and the simcountry? please thank you.

I don't think the dividend income always goes down. But if/when it does it is for two reasons

!) the owner sets the profit sharing on that corp to zero. I am don't get why one would do that but i have seen it

2) life cycle of a corp in simecountry. I said this in another post I had 4 factory maintance corps that were making money hand over fist and then the market for it drop out I had to close one of them and cut back production on 2 others. And now it seems food corps are making more than they were. Corps in simcountry go in cycles it seems and I think in the real world as well

I don't think the dividend income always goes down. But if/when it does it is for two reasons

!) the owner sets the profit sharing on that corp to zero. I am don't get why one would do that but i have seen it

2) life cycle of a corp in simecountry. I said this in another post I had 4 factory maintance corps that were making money hand over fist and then the market for it drop out I had to close one of them and cut back production on 2 others. And now it seems food corps are making more than they were. Corps in simcountry go in cycles it seems and I think in the real world as well

Ah ok thank you so much.

All comes down to what sort of economy you want. State run (with high taxes) or CEO run (with low taxes). I do however find that countries with a lot of CEOS in it tend to be richer.

CEO only makes more money for you if you own the CEO as well as the country. Otherwise if you want to maximize profit you are best to go state.

@John
Ceo Payss takes and Enterprise fee plus the employees pay income tax. As I've said I have several Ceo corps and make good money

The enterprise fee (country resources used) and taxes are still less than the total profit of a state corporation. That is why CEO corps are only more profitable if you own the CEO, as you take the profit on top of the taxes and fees. I have done the math on this. Look at the country Atlas Shrugged on LU. Number 1 economy on that world and runs primarily state corporations. The only CEO corps there belong to my own CEO.

John Galt, Everyone,

It's not always that simple. There are a lot of reasons why it's good for a country to have some CEO controlled corporations.

1). Having CEO controlled Corporations, enables a country to use Back to Work Schools, and Special Clinics, to enlarge their workforce. This enables them to build more Corporations, producing more profit.

2). While a well run and profitable State Corporation, will produce more money for the country, than a Private one. Corporations don't always produce a profit. Sometimes there are downturns in product markets, that cause Corporations to lose money. In those cases, a State Corporation will draw money from the country, draining it's cash. Where as a Private Corporations still pays the "country resources used tax" even when making loses.

3). CEO Corporations require fewer workers than State Corporations, enabling the country to have more corporations, with the same population size. Producing more profit.

4). Building, upgrading, and buying the materials for a new Corporation can be slow and expensive. For State Corporations, this cost is carried by the country, for Private Corporations, the CEO pays all those costs.

5). While a player such as John Galt can squeeze a lot of profit out of his state Corps, most players don't know how to optimise their corporations that well. A highly skilled player will get more from their state Corps, but by the time a player understands the economy that well, they don't need to ask for advice on CEO vs Country controlled Corporations. A regular player will likely make more money by hosting Private Corporations.

6). It's not really a question of either or. There aren't enough CEOs to have fully private economies anymore, so even if you focus on CEOs you are still going to a have a significant and profitable State sector.

Signed President of DanNation on LU

Well Said Daniel
I'd like to add that another advanagte of ceo corp is work force of it pays taxes and isn't on Social Security helpimg the econ that way with out the president having to worry about the country

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

1). Having CEO controlled Corporations, enables a country to use Back to Work Schools, and Special Clinics, to enlarge their workforce. This enables them to build more Corporations, producing more profit. <!-/Quote-!>

True. Makes the function of back to work school better overall.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

2). While a well run and profitable State Corporation, will produce more money for the country, than a Private one. Corporations don't always produce a profit. Sometimes there are downturns in product markets, that cause Corporations to lose money. In those cases, a State Corporation will draw money from the country, draining it's cash. Where as a Private Corporations still pays the "country resources used tax" even when making loses.<!-/Quote-!>

Its not like a CEO run by a player will not lose money either. Oh and by the way; i have some corperations (FMU) that are rock bottem in price; and they are NOT GIVING A DIME. 0.00 country resource used. Still using workers as well.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

3). CEO Corporations require fewer workers than State Corporations, enabling the country to have more corporations, with the same population size. Producing more profit. <!-/Quote-!>

Not exactly true. As the effeinacy goes up; there is less low level workers needed. This is actually an increase in High tech workers; so private corperations have more high tech workers then state.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

4). Building, upgrading, and buying the materials for a new Corporation can be slow and expensive. For State Corporations, this cost is carried by the country, for Private Corporations, the CEO pays all those costs. <!-/Quote-!>

Still costs a CEO money to build though. So just because a players gets a freebie on one end, does not mean someone is not paying on the other. Tax not an issue? Ever?

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

5). While a player such as John Galt can squeeze a lot of profit out of his state Corps, most players don't know how to optimise their corporations that well. A highly skilled player will get more from their state Corps, but by the time a player understands the economy that well, they don't need to ask for advice on CEO vs Country controlled Corporations. A regular player will likely make more money by hosting Private Corporations. <!-/Quote-!>

A regular player? You mean a player who barley plays this game,then ridicule and disparage other players who played this game several years before they have? I just note; why not just learn and take the time instead of defending private corps? Not very strong evidence to support that claim.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

6). It's not really a question of either or. There aren't enough CEOs to have fully private economies anymore, so even if you focus on CEOs you are still going to a have a significant and profitable State sector.<!-/Quote-!>

Its really that plus the fact country's have all grown in size.


I really don't like to be an ass at this point, but come on daniel. Half the shit you wrote is not even factual, my dude.


Just for the record. That how those work. In case anybody gets the wrong ideas.

Daniel, you can have the perks of special clinics and back to work schools by building your own CEO corps in your own countries. If you have 2 CEO accounts you can build 40 private corporations in each of your own countries. That is enough to max out the benefits from those.

My main country brings in around 160 B per game month profit with this strategy. The rest of my slave countries all bring in over 100B (they have smaller populations than main). It is really easy to achieve this. I don't micromanage at all. I just choose my settings once and leave them.

Natural Adder,

I'm going to assume you are having a hard day, rather than intentionally being rude. Everything I have said is based in fact. Some of your points add detail to what I was saying, others are talking about a different topic.

The thread was about if it is better for a player that is new to the game, to allow CEO run Corporations in their nations, or if they are going to make more money with a self run, state economy. All my points we're given in that context.

On what you said under 2). "Its not like a CEO run by a player will not lose money either."

True, but so long as they are still producing and selling products, they still pay country resources used tax. Which, on average, makes CEO corps a more consistent revenue source for a Country.

On 3). "Not exactly true. As the effeinacy goes up; there is less low level workers needed. This is actually an increase in High tech workers; so private corperations have more high tech workers then state"

Yes, they use more high tech workers, but the total workforce count is still lower. So the country can still have more corporations, which then enables more profit.

On 4). "Still costs a CEO money to build though."

That is exactly what I said. That the CEO pays the costs, so from the point of view of the President, it's an advantage.

"Half the shit you wrote is not even factual, my dude."

Clearly inaccurate. And unnecessarily rude. Not sure why you would even make such a baseless claim. I work extremely hard to make sure that every detail I provide is accurate for the current version of the game. If I get something factually wrong, please tell me, so that I can learn and provide better information. But don't just say I'm wrong, because we have different play styles.

Signed President of DanNation on LU

The original question wasn't about State vs CEO it was if a Public corp will make more money for a country. If it is country controlled the answer is no because you are not receiving 100% of the profit.

With a State controlled company the country receives all of the profit.

1) This is a benefit to a country. With the recent population boom it has lost some of it's value and the rehab and training is limited.

2) The Country Resource Fee is not always paid, it depends on the market condition. CEO corps pay no taxes when loosing money and it takes several months of profit before they start paying again.

3) Same as 1

4) Since new corps loose money until upgraded the country is not subsidizing but also not profiting from them.

5) With a decent Welfare Index and choosing the right product any player can make 1B$ a month with a state corp. If it is CEO owned you only receive a fraction of that with the country fee.

Daniel, we get it, you like CEO corps. Please don't glorify them. As John Galt said above they are only more profitable if you are the CEO and the country is in your empire.

Just to put some numbers for context here, my state oil corps generate a profit of 1.12 B. My CEO oil corps pay 0.729 B in Country Fees and 0.22B in taxes (30%). So 1.12 B vs 0.949 B, and that is with taxes. Many CEO havens have 0% tax, which I find to be absolutely insane but to each his own.