Comments on: Monetizing antiquities (without selling them) http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/28/monetizing-antiquities-without-selling-them/ A slice of lime in the soda Wed, 22 May 2013 01:01:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Jorg Lueke http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/28/monetizing-antiquities-without-selling-them/comment-page-1/#comment-1072 Jorg Lueke Fri, 01 May 2009 13:12:07 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/28/monetizing-antiquities-without-selling-them/#comment-1072 While the specific solutions in the Milken report may or may not be very workable, they do represent the right approach forward. The approach in the UK, based partly on incentives while encouraging reporting and study has clearly shown to be superior to the top down restrictions of many other governments. Sharon Waxman's comment is also right on target. While the specific solutions in the Milken report may or may not be very workable, they do represent the right approach forward. The approach in the UK, based partly on incentives while encouraging reporting and study has clearly shown to be superior to the top down restrictions of many other governments. Sharon Waxman’s comment is also right on target.

]]> By: William Ortel http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/28/monetizing-antiquities-without-selling-them/comment-page-1/#comment-1052 William Ortel Fri, 01 May 2009 01:45:09 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/28/monetizing-antiquities-without-selling-them/#comment-1052 How could a trading partner really feel secure that a government in question wouldn't screw them through graft or outright nationalization? I could see the emergence of "permit fees" being a huge part of this. Further, what's to stop the government in question from simply changing the rules in the middle of the game? I'm sure a cash-starved country would look on a valuable finding like the homeless look on thanksgiving. There would need to be some mechanism to look after the interests of investors on the ground. How could a trading partner really feel secure that a government in question wouldn’t screw them through graft or outright nationalization? I could see the emergence of “permit fees” being a huge part of this.

Further, what’s to stop the government in question from simply changing the rules in the middle of the game? I’m sure a cash-starved country would look on a valuable finding like the homeless look on thanksgiving. There would need to be some mechanism to look after the interests of investors on the ground.

]]> By: David Neubert http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/28/monetizing-antiquities-without-selling-them/comment-page-1/#comment-905 David Neubert Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:27:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/04/28/monetizing-antiquities-without-selling-them/#comment-905 I've seen this sort of stuff when I was working on debt/equities deals in emerging markets. In the end, you always rely on the good graces of the government involved to get your money back. I’ve seen this sort of stuff when I was working on debt/equities deals in emerging markets. In the end, you always rely on the good graces of the government involved to get your money back.

]]>