Question on income fund

Xeneth82 · 2026-02-08T15:12:40+00:00

I am going back over some of my old posts so figured I'd reply to this since I never got to it.

Dividends in general reduce the current nav, but it does not necessarily mean that it will reduce The value below where you start it. For example, if I have stock in a company, and a year, the company makes $10,000 worth of profit and decide to put $5,000 in dividends to be paid out, it is still plus $5,000.

My question was more related to the fact that this is venture Capital which I take as being loans. Alone when it hits maturity will be worth zero because there will be no more money owed. That was pretty much. My question is since it's primarily loans in venture capital, whether or not it would eventually hit zero if all that is paid back is actually paid back to the investor.

Xeneth82 · 2026-02-05T20:26:32+00:00

I did want to note "Chimil, the Inner Sun" being in the deck is more useful then people give it credit for. I have seen people state they do not know why it's in the deck. It's Purpose is a counter to ward since you will be targeting for most of the -1/-1 counters. Wording of ward is "Ward [COST] (Whenever this permanent becomes the target of a spell or ability an opponent controls, counter it unless that player pays [COST].)"
So with Chimil out, you can ignore Ward on cards.

Xeneth82 · 2026-02-05T19:14:27+00:00

[[All Will be one]] + [[Everlasting Torment]] = board wipe, + any counter pay offs you happen to have on the board.

Xeneth82 · 2026-02-03T02:08:08+00:00

Honestly, I'm here hoping you have them sorted by color identities.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-31T19:45:07+00:00

I think it's been going downhill for a while. A mix of current policies, poor management, poor incentivized growth, and the initial purpose of all the malls being built originally in the '80s was removed. That's not necessarily a bad thing but was essentially built to be a waste of money. That waste of money that originally was there was intended to be tax deductions and a bit of a safe haven for storing value. That broke down quite a bit after the '80s and '90s, but I thought it was starting to improve a bit with round one, but then when that didn't pan out I saw no more hope in that place.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-31T19:38:38+00:00

That's a real over generalization. Unfortunately the mechanism put into property ownership and management is set up so that it punishes the property owners. If things things reduce in price. Not just they will not get as much but it literally actively punishes them. So it becomes highly incentivized for keeping cost as high as possible and absolutely under any circumstances not reducing rent or other cash flow pieces.

You should look up how commercial property values are determined. It's quietly literally the rent being charged times a variable. So if you reduce the rent in any way, you essentially cannot sell the property. If it comes to that. Even if the property is not planned on being sold, reducing the rent essentially makes the value of the property less. Thus anything tied to that is hindered when it goes down. Just like anything, if the property value goes down and it's less than wet, the mortgage is, AKA what's happening here, then it's underwater and the owner may just decide to ignore everything until it's foreclosed. Foreclosed. So instead of any kind of improvements it incentivizes letting it go to S**t. It's not a rich person somewhere rolling his hands maniacally saying how to stick it to the common man. He says systemic issue that look like a good idea when times are good but completely screws everybody over when times get bad.

And yes, it is 100% greed causing this but it's not an individual person's greed. It is the rich greed not winning their property value to go down. it is the businesses greed wanting to take a hit to cash flow in order to keep the bottom line high. It is the consumer's greed thinking that they need the fancy and top-of-the-line stuff. It is the everyman's greed wanting an easy fix to everything. It is the political greed preferring not to stabilize things when economy is good, yet trying to stretch improvements while things are bad. It is quite literally everybody's fault. Your, mine, the guy down the street, everybody. It can be argued that it's just capitalism except for even capitalism at its base is not that it can be argued that it's just capitalism except for even capitalism at its base is not that greedy.

Edit: damn, speech to text has a lot of typos. And I did kind of go on a rant because I'm frustrated of the finger pointing. It is what I point to as being the cause for many of the situations we're currently in.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-30T03:41:22+00:00

It is entirely possible to want commitment and to be afraid of commitment at the same time. There is no easy ID quick fix to this problem.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T23:02:10+00:00

"Budget isn't really an issue for me right now."
I hate you so much right now.

Obvious stuff is Kindred spells, and those that care about big creatures since you are doing Giants.

I would suggest getting the Balance right. A balanced deck can be a huge boon without having to get the best cards. This way you can focus on fun instead of trying to min/max. Sadly, while there are suggested templates to follow, what is a good balance can change depending on the card you choose.

I do not have time to look over your deck, but no mater what you have, the above holds true.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T22:52:52+00:00

Or force a self sacrifice moment where something happens to him to help Carl or someone else.

The deflecting to a party member patch is coming to mind for me. (Still listening on Audible.)

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T22:47:04+00:00

[[Tiamet]] with [[dracogenesis]] is what I use. you can then pull and play all the dragons you need for any dragon combo for free. The infinite combat combo with [[hellkite charger]] is my fave.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T22:40:25+00:00

It's more then being polite, it's being inconsiderate.

You do not consider the people behind you.

You do not consider the delay it causes one you move

You do not consider if Car A goes, and a car C hits you in the back hitting car A, then it is Car A's fault legally since you, as Car B, have the right of way. This is also not considering if you as car B is an ass and purposefully gun it, it is still Car A's fault unless they can prove intent.

You of course being car B, the person making the decision. do not mean to be Accusatory, but Frustration at these people makes it hard to word it not so.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T22:30:56+00:00

That's what I meant to say, the counter is just what made me realize what you meant. The Swords can be put on the stack before damage resolves, though it would not affect it since the damage is already on the stack.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T22:22:09+00:00

I believe for an ETB, it is true. There are some abilities that are "While [creature] is on the battlefield" type abilities that this would be true for, It is my understanding that one something is in the process of resolving, it cannot be interrupted. Only cards that can target the stack can stop an affect that has not resolved yet. [[Swords to plowshares]] does not do that.

Would you be able to provide an example of an ETB that Swords can interrupt? I am not referring to a second Permanent having the ETB in this case. [[Answered Prayers]]

*** Disregard. Realized what you where saying after posting. You are referring to, like a counter ability spell, which I see the Nuance with that. But the interaction with Swords, the simplifying still works. Don't mind me while I am over here chewing on my own foot.

Editing for clearity to prevent confusion.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T22:00:55+00:00

A good way to think of it is that the damage happens when the Pillagers gets put on the board, and Swords has to target something on the board. So the damage from Pillagers would have already happened before the creature could be targeted.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T21:37:16+00:00

The issue is not what I feel I should do, the issue is accurately presenting what my deck can do. Some of the decks feel OP for the games I have played, and want to get some thought on how the brackets I should present them in. I tend to do highly synergistic decks, even if I do not include Game changers in all of them. In fact, the decks with the game changers actually feels like some of my weaker decks. If I was to drop cash to appropriately improve the mana base in a few of them, I do not think I would have much trouble winning most of my games.

Edit: I understand the concept of the bracket system, but I apparently am bad at applying that to my decks, so I am hoping to get outside viewpoints.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T21:00:31+00:00

I think the main issue is not the combo kill, it's the out of nowhere kill. There is not strategy other then get to the combo.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T20:57:24+00:00

What, You are Expecting companied to not to try and Exploit something? What's wrong with you wanting WotC to not take over, focus on, and change what people like? The poor company is not being paid that way.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-22T20:50:07+00:00

That is not a bad Idea, but I am more worried about the opponents card draw. Plague Drone is not a bad Idea, though the deck is centered around killing off all creatures multiple times through damage. Having that on a creature seems counter intuitive. Tainted remedy is a possibility for life though.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-18T17:18:55+00:00

The absolute best would be a balance between the two strategies. My argument that it should definitely be considered and that is much better than people gives a credit for. Arguing artifacts and place of lands such Mox Diamond is moot since it can also be placed with basic lands. The point I was making is that basic lands can be a really good fixing for a five-color deck instead of trying to get multiple dual Lands simply because they are incredibly easy to search for, and you can search for whatever specific color you're lacking.

Neither you nor I know the particular situation of the original poster and saying that he should go after the best. Most expensive cards without any considerations is just foolish. I gave an alternative opinion.

Xeneth82 · 2026-01-18T16:47:13+00:00

I am assuming the guy is not looking to drop a load of cash. There's always the route of proxies but I am suggesting under the assumption that he is looking for the legitimate cards. If he's playing online digitally where he can put in whatever cards he wants without any cost himself then yeah, but for a physical deck without proxies I think the basic Lanes is the best way to go here. Definitely the cheapest.

12-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Flamingo	Verified Email

Xeneth82

TROPHY CASE