Plot hook - old stock certificates

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.misc (More info?)

In Brenden Frasier's movie "Blast from the Past"
an old plot device is used to make his character
a millionaire: before his family went
missing-presumed-dead in their underground shelter,
his father stowed away a handful of stock
certificates for his son's future. It so
happened that these stocks - IBM and such -
went up phenomenally in value over the
35 years the family was entombed alive.

I've seen this plot device used, but I don't
understand if it's a doable thing. If I
find a 30-year old IBM stock certificate in
my father's old copy of _Gunga Din_, is
it worth what a current share of IBM is
worth doubled all the times the stock has
split since the share was purchased?

Does the company supposedly have a record
of who owns each share? Will they notice
if someone who owns a couple hundred
shares vanishes without a trace for a
decade or so? What if a stockholder
vanishes without a trace and has no
family to start proceedings to have
them declared dead, will the company
merely have that many shares of stock
permanently non-voting?

I was thinking of using this plot device
in an adventure, but my lack of knowledge
about the details made me leery of doing
so - you know how players will think of
things the GM didn't beforehand, and
I'm sure they'll come up with a plan
that makes these details important.

Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet

 

[john]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.misc (More info?)

OK, if you buy one share at 10 bucks, and it grows to 90 bucks, And then
splits three ways you have 3 shares at 30 bucks. Simple math, no tricks.


--
John TI2#003
seerazREMOVE@aol.com

 

[Oberon]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.misc (More info?)

On 27 May 2005 11:46:06 -0700, firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:

>In Brenden Frasier's movie "Blast from the Past"
>an old plot device is used to make his character
>a millionaire: before his family went
>missing-presumed-dead in their underground shelter,
>his father stowed away a handful of stock
>certificates for his son's future. It so
>happened that these stocks - IBM and such -
>went up phenomenally in value over the
>35 years the family was entombed alive.

Good idea. You could have some documents show up to indicate
that this happened but the stocks can't actually be found. Or
the stocks were found, but by the wrong person and now the
disinherited son must reclaim his inheritance by proving fraud.
Or you could just be boring and make him a multi-millionaire.

>I've seen this plot device used, but I don't
>understand if it's a doable thing. If I
>find a 30-year old IBM stock certificate in
>my father's old copy of _Gunga Din_, is
>it worth what a current share of IBM is
>worth doubled all the times the stock has
>split since the share was purchased?

It depends. Stocks are sometimes revalued (e.g. 100 'old stocks'
at 100 cents get revalued as 90 new stocks at 110 cents (face
value) with the odd 1 dollar (or the equivalent of that at the
current stock market price) being handed out to the shareholder
as a dividend. This is common nowadays. Once upon a time, stocks
didn't change from decade to decade and you could rule that, in
your world, the stock market is a bit old fashioned especially
for this particular company who don't do stock revaluations,
etc.

>Does the company supposedly have a record
>of who owns each share?

I think so. They have a 'Registrar' as we call them in Britain.

>Will they notice
>if someone who owns a couple hundred
>shares vanishes without a trace for a
>decade or so?

No.

>What if a stockholder
>vanishes without a trace and has no
>family to start proceedings to have
>them declared dead, will the company
>merely have that many shares of stock
>permanently non-voting?

The shares will be in limbo; no one will notice that nothing is
being done with them.

>I was thinking of using this plot device
>in an adventure, but my lack of knowledge
>about the details made me leery of doing
>so - you know how players will think of
>things the GM didn't beforehand, and
>I'm sure they'll come up with a plan
>that makes these details important.

Just make up your own rules for what happens in your world. For
instance, you could have a system where, after someone dies, the
heirs have a decade to register their claim to the stock. If no
one registers the stocks vanish form the market (as if they'd
been bought back by the company) or some other rule to add spice
to the narrative.

>Walt Smith
>Firelock on DALNet

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.misc (More info?)

Oberon wrote:
> On 27 May 2005 11:46:06 -0700, firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>In Brenden Frasier's movie "Blast from the Past"
>>an old plot device is used to make his character
>>a millionaire: before his family went
>>missing-presumed-dead in their underground shelter,
>>his father stowed away a handful of stock
>>certificates for his son's future. It so
>>happened that these stocks - IBM and such -
>>went up phenomenally in value over the
>>35 years the family was entombed alive.
>
>
> Good idea. You could have some documents show up to indicate
> that this happened but the stocks can't actually be found. Or
> the stocks were found, but by the wrong person and now the
> disinherited son must reclaim his inheritance by proving fraud.
> Or you could just be boring and make him a multi-millionaire.
>
>
>>I've seen this plot device used, but I don't
>>understand if it's a doable thing. If I
>>find a 30-year old IBM stock certificate in
>>my father's old copy of _Gunga Din_, is
>>it worth what a current share of IBM is
>>worth doubled all the times the stock has
>>split since the share was purchased?
>
>
> It depends. Stocks are sometimes revalued (e.g. 100 'old stocks'
> at 100 cents get revalued as 90 new stocks at 110 cents (face
> value) with the odd 1 dollar (or the equivalent of that at the
> current stock market price) being handed out to the shareholder
> as a dividend. This is common nowadays. Once upon a time, stocks
> didn't change from decade to decade and you could rule that, in
> your world, the stock market is a bit old fashioned especially
> for this particular company who don't do stock revaluations,
> etc.
>
>
>>Does the company supposedly have a record
>>of who owns each share?
>
>
> I think so. They have a 'Registrar' as we call them in Britain.
>
>
>>Will they notice
>>if someone who owns a couple hundred
>>shares vanishes without a trace for a
>>decade or so?
>
>
> No.
>
>
>>What if a stockholder
>>vanishes without a trace and has no
>>family to start proceedings to have
>>them declared dead, will the company
>>merely have that many shares of stock
>>permanently non-voting?
>
>
> The shares will be in limbo; no one will notice that nothing is
> being done with them.
>

Don't forget that if the company pays dividends and no one claims the
money the company must re-invest the it, usually into bonds or more
stocks in the company.
Ken

 

[Oberon]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.misc (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 08:03:58 -0400, Ken Vale
<k3nv4l3@r0g3r5.com> wrote:

>Oberon wrote:
>> On 27 May 2005 11:46:06 -0700, firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> The shares will be in limbo; no one will notice that nothing is
>> being done with them.
>
>Don't forget that if the company pays dividends and no one claims the
>money the company must re-invest the it, usually into bonds or more
>stocks in the company.

>Ken

Maybe the original stockholder had delegated the management of
his stocks to some small firm of private bankers who are doing
the reinvesting of dividends for him?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.misc (More info?)

Oberon wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2005 08:03:58 -0400, Ken Vale
> <k3nv4l3@r0g3r5.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Oberon wrote:
>>
>>>On 27 May 2005 11:46:06 -0700, firelock_ny@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>The shares will be in limbo; no one will notice that nothing is
>>>being done with them.
>>
>>Don't forget that if the company pays dividends and no one claims the
>>money the company must re-invest the it, usually into bonds or more
>>stocks in the company.
>
>
>>Ken
>
>
> Maybe the original stockholder had delegated the management of
> his stocks to some small firm of private bankers who are doing
> the reinvesting of dividends for him?
>
That too, though there are rules about inactive accounts that the
government has put in place.
Ken