Bitcoin Forum

Em, do you take into account fact that mining operationing can give you 3-4%/w of return?

That's nice, Dank Bank isn't up there.

Em, do you take into account fact that mining operationing can give you 3-4%/w of return?
By the way, u still havnt prove that btcst was ponzi, as others. In Business you cant make money when they are laying in your pocket, it means, that you cant return everyones money so easily... Why wont u go to the bank and tell them that they are ponzii, because it cant payout to everyone at once?

im sorry but your scam isn't organized enough to be a ponzi.

im sorry but your scam isn't organized enough to be a ponzi.  did anyone buy u a house or car yet?  i think u have a chance given how easily tricked this community is.

1) comparing a traditional bank to these 2bit ponzis insults science.  In the USA bank assets must be > total deposits.  FDIC insures this.  a "bank run" is not comparable to how a Ponzi unfolds

2) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ah0rJ1eK8mwpdEs2MFRfbGQybGhNamo1aGhDSURaT1E#gid=0  here is a doc showing how at 7% per week if you invest $100 it returns $130 trillion in 8 yrs.  still think its not a Ponzi?

If it's not a ponzi, how is it a scam?

Hey, who told you that pirate or others dont have assets over their total deposits? They can be absolutely same with banks. They just need time to turn they assets to btc. In some cases this might not be possible in short time, same with banks.

Bank wont provide me info.

Bank wont provide me info.

And patrik provides where his funds is used in, so whats the problem?

Dont be silly.

I also dont think Starfish is a ponzi, although any faith I might have had in Patrick and particularly his judgement is long gone. Dont know the others, wont comment.

Not all scams are ponzis but just because they aren't a ponzi doesn't mean they're not a scam or that they're viable.

I agree that "long-term offers" is an inappropriate label for many of the high-risk programmes being offered and that a more suitable way of segregating the different types of investments being offered needs to be found.

Micon, you are missing your poker scam site from the list. LOL
 

nope, total Ponzi for Starfish / PatrickHarnett

1%/wk to borrow money is still crack prices, still yields you owing giant interest as scam builds, and he is even making up increasing numbers month-over-month to show you the business is growing.    This one is a slow Ponzi.  

by APR % IMO

by APR % IMO

It is my poker site and it isn't a scam.

So Micon, what else would you have PatrickHarnett disclose to show it is not a ponzi?

btc is different than USD. What do you think of 0.5%/week? Total scam in anything denominated in USD right? But fastcash4bitcoins.com took out a loan like this. This is a reputable business with proven business model, do you think it's unreasonable for unproven entities to pay slightly more interest in loans? To accuire btc cost upwards of 4% if you deal with shitbag companies like bitinstant that pay their employees slave wages with no benefits and no insurance, so the interest isn't that unreasonable. Patrick is very transparent as well. How many ponzi disclose their total deposit?

Anything sufficient to do these four things would be enough for me:

1) Determine that claimed profits are in fact profits from investments.

Anything sufficient to do these four things would be enough for me:

1) Determine that claimed profits are in fact profits from investments.

2) Realistically assess the risk to investors.

3) Assure investors that there's a mechanism in place so that if they do take losses, they'll be able to reasonably assure themselves that those losses were due to legitimate investment losses and not just him deciding to keep people's money.

4) Assure investors that there's a mechanism in place such that if there are reductions in the total worth of all investments, losses will be taken proportionately by all investors instead of processing full payouts to those who happen to withdraw first and leaving essentially nothing for those who don't withdraw at the right moment.

It's not a matter of whether it's a Ponzi or not really. There are lots of scams that aren't Ponzis. The idea is to show that it's a legitimate loan or investment. If there was something that was otherwise a legitimate investment but couldn't do at least two of these four things, rational people would not invest in it.

Once again JoelKatz nails it.

I will say it plainly:  I believe that PatrickHarnett is blatantly making up his statistics on number of loans, repayments, etc.  To answer the question he would have to block-chain verify these transactions.  When he posts his August stats, let's see some block-chain verified loan repayments & interest payments.

You mean like 6b92e6ad01b05c5a004a8425df2534d7465dcf9d11c78a139cf1813071f1cf15

or this receiving address: 1KSp4tdijUq4ghqWNmHBE9BiddqEGPLmHA

Total liabilities (Deposits + other commitments) = 13,500
Total assets (cash, BTC, investments) = 29,400
Net assets 15,900BTC

July 2012 activity (updated 1 August 2012)
 - 14 loans repaid  (approx 7800BTC)
 - 32 loans current (approx 8800 BTC)
 - 66 deposits (total approx 15400)
 - deposits repaid during the month (at call) >3600

Total liabilities (Deposits + other commitments) = 19,700
Total assets (cash, BTC, investments) = 37,100
Net assets 17,400BTC

2: That's a good idea, and I do assess the risk of the loans and investments that I make.  I probably have one of the better databases of credit risk, but I still have some that have been spectacular failures (Rebate springs to mind).

3: Normally I take the losses, and not my customers.  Not aware of anyone that has had a loss on their deposit yet.  If anyone can provide a counter example that would be useful.

4: See #3 above.  People depositing to Starfish are not really exposed to the underlying.  When I consider some of the real-life bank runs I have observed, there can be queuing.  I think that if someone wanted to force the issue and required me to liquidate all my assets at a loss (rather than an orderly wind out) then they should accept that as their choice.  I have discussed that with several people recently and it is a feature of most investment funds/deposit schemes that coins are put to work, not simply lying around.

nope, total Ponzi for Starfish / PatrickHarnett

1%/wk to borrow money is still crack prices, still yields you owing giant interest as scam builds, and he is even making up increasing numbers month-over-month to show you the business is growing.    This one is a slow Ponzi.  

Once again JoelKatz nails it.

I will say it plainly:  I believe that PatrickHarnett is blatantly making up his statistics on number of loans, repayments, etc.  To answer the question he would have to block-chain verify these transactions.  When he posts his August stats, let's see some block-chain verified loan repayments & interest payments.

Wife Of Starfish - Wendy Harnett (if you want to check I'm a real person)

LMFAO

Bikini Pics, or it never happened ;)

She normally wears one-piece - maybe we'll do "private onsen" when we've in Beppu in November.

(and the btw - micon's done it now - Wendy's annoyed)

Bikini Pics, or it never happened ;)

Sorry Pitlane, no bikini shots (I'm 46!!!) I do have a photo of my hip replacement scar if that is of interest...

Don't worry. I am 38 and dig old chicks (I have to say that since I am also married...lol....and don't have much of a choice these days)

Thanks for the list Joel.  

1: Given confidentiality, and a lack of audit processes, it might be difficult to confirm.  I could get various people to verify the loans/rates/payments that they've made and similarly the list of dividends received over time from GLBSE and other investments that pay regular returns.  To provide the full list, demonstrating how 200 coins/week are generated I would expect people to pick on holes and deliberate omissions rather than the overall picture.

2: That's a good idea, and I do assess the risk of the loans and investments that I make.  I probably have one of the better databases of credit risk, but I still have some that have been spectacular failures (Rebate springs to mind).

3: Normally I take the losses, and not my customers.  Not aware of anyone that has had a loss on their deposit yet.  If anyone can provide a counter example that would be useful.

4: See #3 above.  People depositing to Starfish are not really exposed to the underlying.  When I consider some of the real-life bank runs I have observed, there can be queuing.  I think that if someone wanted to force the issue and required me to liquidate all my assets at a loss (rather than an orderly wind out) then they should accept that as their choice.  I have discussed that with several people recently and it is a feature of most investment funds/deposit schemes that coins are put to work, not simply lying around.

Also, thank you for noting there are many more scams than ponzis.  There are many scams on these forums, and I have had a decent number of people that have stolen funds from me either by simply running away with coins through to more elaborate identity theft.  However, I also have some other people I do good business with, some deals returning up to 5% a week (occasional), but more generally in the 2% to 2.5% per week range.  

I will add that currently I don't need any more funds to run the current business, and extra funds simply add more drag on profitability.  That's why I have limits on accounts in both number and value.

Sorry to break it to you Wendy, but Patrick and I have been gay lovers for the pass 6 months. We have strong feelings for one another. Sorry you had to find out like this. ;)

Sad to see someone who has lost all faith in humanity. Is this an american thing?

Here down under we still give people the benefit of the doubt

Why is is so hard to believe there are honest people in the world?

Patrick donates more than $500 a month to our local homeless shelter and I get PISSED OFF (note the caps Bitlane) when his integrity is questioned.

I thought you were younger, but hey, well get the Skyline and Supra on the track and have some fun.  BufferOverflow and Wendy as reserve drivers.

Just because I act like an immature, spoiled kid.....doesn't...er... never mind ;)

..and yes. I love my Skyline GT-R.

Im not saying patrick has no integrity, or even that he is a scammer, but its worth mentioning Madoff gave millions to charity. It doesnt prove a thing.

What Im questioning is Patricks judgement, and thats because of his utter failure to detect Pirate and half a dozen other scams and ponzis and give them undue credibility (not too mention, a lot of money) with his bogus credit rating system, vocal support and financial insurance. It has caused a lot of people to lose a lot of money, and will continue to do so.

Just out of curiosity what collateral did JRO list in his credit rating ? Does he have assets that creditors can place a lien on ?

oooo random skyline thread :)

what typa GTR do we all you have ?

I had a 33 GTST (wrote it off at race track) and then a 33 GTR (sold it a year or two ago.. didnt drive much as was to pussyish after crashing the other one)

1989 R32 GT-R....a REAL Skyline GT-R ;)

Total liabilities (Deposits + other commitments) = 13,500
Total assets (cash, BTC, investments) = 29,400
Net assets 15,900BTC

July 2012 activity (updated 1 August 2012)
 - 14 loans repaid  (approx 7800BTC)
 - 32 loans current (approx 8800 BTC)
 - 66 deposits (total approx 15400)
 - deposits repaid during the month (at call) >3600

Total liabilities (Deposits + other commitments) = 19,700
Total assets (cash, BTC, investments) = 37,100
Net assets 17,400BTC

Your husband is running a scam, and while it may be hard to accept it is the truth.

Hi PatrickHarnett's wife.  Nothing personal, just hate scams and feel the need to protect BTC.  Your husband is running a scam, and while it may be hard to accept it is the truth.

PatrickHarnett - back on topic - care to enlighten us as to where the ~$200k USD on deposit with you is working for the investors?




Also how much cash?  BTC?  what are "investments" ?  can we see some Block chain verification, or real world verification on how this money is used to generate more monies?

And back to more serious stuff - no, I will not be revealing my customer details and transactions.  I do not know of any entity that would so blatantly breach customer confidentiality in such a way.  If you wish to believe it is all a scam, reason isn't going to sway your opinion and I've already directed people to this thread for information regarding your warning.

Clearly, the "How to Identify a Ponzi (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=100696.0;all)" post wasn't clear enough. The very first "hint" that something "might" be a ponzi was: > 50% APR.

Indeed, it makes no sense to ask people to lend you money at those ridiculously high rates. It's literally pissing away money. Even credit card companies' usury rates are nowhere near as bad.

So, props to Micon for trying to make it clearer. Too bad nobody will listen, as usual.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...and...er....we can't get fooled again

The reason I've split my money between two investors is to offer a better balance if one defaults.

Look at GPUMAX, a 'Mining Service' ? Clearly a Money Laundering Operation, withheld miner payouts for days during this 'Pirate Fiasco' yet they get a quick taste of Bitcoins again and EVERYONE flocks back to them in droves.

Hi PatrickHarnett's wife.  Nothing personal, just hate scams and feel the need to protect BTC.  Your husband is running a scam, and while it may be hard to accept it is the truth.

Although, payments are once again current. I just got paid by them again. Hey, maybe I have a part of your "2650" BTC  ;)

And there it is. Regardless of what Trendon has done or is involved in doing, at the end of the day, the community at large seems to have spoken again and what they are saying is: MONEY TALKS.

People can not be cured of GREED and will continue to use that service. As I have said previously, I was booted out of GPUMAX in Feb or March for 1 week, then got back in. I finally quit (by my own doing) in May. I didn't care about the extra $5/day I would make.

We can't be known as the scam-currency and expect to grow.

Doesn't it simply prove that bitcoins are in fact becoming an accepted currency, now that all the scammers are here?

I would be more concerned if there were no scammers; then we'd have to worry!

So by implication, if it's not worth stealing, it's not worth anything ?...lol

I ask you to join me Metal.

This culture of blatant scamming is embarrassing legit BTC operations like SealsWithClubs.  We can't be known as the scam-currency and expect to grow.

Do you accept that some people borrow and pay back BTC at 10% per month in the lending section?

Do you accept that someone could borrow BTC for 1%/week, lend it out for 2.5% per week, then pay it back?

July 2012 activity (updated 1 August 2012)
 - 14 loans repaid  (approx 7800BTC)
 - 32 loans current (approx 8800 BTC)
 - 66 deposits (total approx 15400)
 - deposits repaid during the month (at call) >3600

Total liabilities (Deposits + other commitments) = 19,700
Total assets (cash, BTC, investments) = 37,100
Net assets 17,400BTC

These are very good questions and are key to understanding these scams:  

1)  Yes, I fully accept that there are a handful of legitimate users borrowing at these high rates (more than 1% per week, 10% for a 1 month loan, etc)

2)  however, there are not nearly enough of them (go add up a month's worth) to support the giant sizes of these high interest borrowing scams.  Vescudo alone has $25k USD on deposit with him.  RustyRyan has $6k USD on deposit.  PatrickHarnett has $100k+ with him.

Everyone says "look guys - people borrow at X% per week So I borrow at (X-1)% per week from you, handle all the BS, and we'll share the profits"  At the current size of this community, you could do this for a few hundred coins per month and make a very small profit.

Judging by PatrickHarnett's amateur-hour "My First Balance Sheet" for Starfish:

looks like he is loaning out $88k USD currently.  Seems like the community couldn't support a fraction of this.

Judging by PatrickHarnett's amateur-hour "My First Balance Sheet" for Starfish:

looks like he is loaning out $88k USD currently.  Seems like the community couldn't support a fraction of this.

A lot of bigger loans get made over IRC. For example Patrick has set up some big 4-figure BTC loans to gigavps over IRC. It's still possible (indeed likely) that some of the lenders are scamming, but your argument is flawed.

Everyone says "look guys - people borrow at X% per week So I borrow at (X-1)% per week from you, handle all the BS, and we'll share the profits"  At the current size of this community, you could do this for a few hundred coins per month and make a very small profit.

imho, bitcoin is perfectly suited for Ponzi/HYIP schemes. Not only can you sell the fact that bitcoin speculation can potentially pay off, but you can easily automate the scheme and run it even more anonymously than perfect money and liberty reserve. I'm surprised there isn't a massive bitcoin HYIP forum, and only a handful here. The only difference between the programs here and those other forums is the HYIP admin's didn't have to invest $50,000+ in advertising and listing fees to start their ponzi.

HYIP investment is just another form of gambling. Just like poker you believe you have the skills to game the system and beat everybody else who ends up losing.

Here is one for you. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77469.0
Not a ponzy but this guy is wasting investors coin fast.
It has lost more value in August than any of the defaulted PPT's.

Bryan is mad because his poker "friends" think bitcoin is a scam.

 http://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/showthread.php?796-Top-10-Reasons-Why-Bryan-Micon-is-Piece-of-Shit-Scumbag

You can't fix stupid. People that cannot tell the difference between "bitcoin was a currency used in a scam" and "bitcoin is a scam" aren't going to offer anything to bitcoin. Your illegal gambling site stands to gain a small bump. However I believe it would be very small. And it seems poker players have a lot more reasons to avoid your site than just the fact it uses btc. The accusactions of you using site admin status to game your players is interesting.

I think at some point you do more harm to your message than good. I do agree most everything in longterm offers is some variation of class scams. But the way you go about things (hostile, aggressive, illogical) would actually add some credibility to the things you are trying to protect sealswithclubs (I mean the community) from. You could learn some things from Joel on that front. I know perzonally I will avoid swc. Mainly because the admin abuse/bot accusactions seem as likely to me as the ponzi/scam ones. Supported by the way you act here and your googabled reputation.

Also of note, here is the write up of BCST, in Slovenian: 


http://www.racunalniske-novice.com/novice/dogodki-in-obvestila/bitconi-vredni-vec-milijonov-evrov-izpuhteli-v-piramidni-shemi.html?GSM36f88fbc4c3c56feeb257a445ff23069


while the google-translate is worth a chuckle, these are the type of stories these scams generate.  Yes most people are stupid, and will generally read "look, that scam currency again"  - well even though they don't understand, to make bitcoin widely accepted they have to trust it.  It's so imperative that the 90%+ of the humans that will hopefully use bitcoin and won't ever understand it completely trust it - that's what makes it work.   let's start building the trust and not killing it.

Yeah pretty much.
Personally I can't wait for the first time I see a nigerian scammer try to explain to someone how to set up a MtGox account.

Update:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=97094.msg1157225#msg1157225

Looks like you keep on winning.

New status.  To be fair to team Ponzi the interests was not paid out, it was credited to the account and is compounding:

Then why is it that you don't come off as a trustworthy guy?

Bryan, you should add TangibleCryptography to your list of ponzis: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99034.0

Clearly, 0.5 and 1% weekly, ponzi!

Actually, Tangible Cryptography sounds like more of a publicity stunt than a legitimate investment to me. You'll notice that it didn't last very long and is now fully funded. Unless TC wants to continue it as a publicity thing, they'll likely pay off all their investors very shortly, if they haven't already.

Then why is it that you don't come off as a trustworthy guy?

In other words, the only way to determine the real trustworthiness of somebody is to disregard any personal data and things that can be used to buy good will like "but he donates so much to the poor children" (Sorry starfish & wife, I am only pointing something that scammers can and tend to do) and instead pay attention to the hard and cold numbers, business models, market conditions, and results. 

Jesus, I was finally added. Micon, I've had principal and interest for loans listed -- it's been that way since I started taking deposits in March. I made loans (back in January) before I took deposits, and have been returning deposits for months, now, because I dislike the risk. My deposit amounts have been decreasing, not increasing. Most lendees have verifiable forum names. My name, phone number, and address are about as public as possible without publicly posting my ID. It doesn't really matter if people are willing to pay more for short-term loans than what you consider reasonable - that doesn't make the lender a ponzi-operator. -But, knowing that (or ignoring it because knowing what you're talking about takes too long) and still listing what I do as operating a ponzi implies you are a lazy loud-mouth troll.... or a dullard. (or both)


Now, let's look at what your actions have done. Knowing Pat on a much more personal level (we talk daily -- almost everyone in the lending cartel talks daily with each other), I can vouch for him as an honest, hard-working person - intelligent in the field he works professionally, as well as in what he does on this forum. He's basically facing a run, now. I've been put in a similar situation (not related to depositors fleeing, but bad loans leaving me starved for working capital), where I've had to call in loans (voluntarily, for them) at a loss. Pro-rating interest and then also having them asked to return the funds early would be kind of obnoxious. Generally, lendees get to keep all the interest they would've otherwise paid, and just return principal, since we're grateful they returned principal at all, given we need it *now* to pay out depositors. If any financial institution on Earth were faced with depositors fleeing at the rate we've experienced the past month, they would've all crumbled. It's not because they're ponzis, but because they (and we) rely on consumer confidence. We need that trust, and we can't have 50% of deposits jumping out the window all within a few weeks, because it requires we liquidate our assets at a loss -- a big loss. Lenders now leaving the market may indicate they operated a ponzi (and just happened to be returning deposits in all cases of people involved with the lending cartel), but, more likely, I'd imagine it indicates they're deeply annoyed by a small handful of people waltzing around with a shit-brush and smearing it on their faces every day, do not enjoy working capital starvation through the exodus of depositors, and of course, have a lot of bad loans popping up because lendees were quietly using funds to put into a Pirate account. Negative trends take away that light at the end of the tunnel -- but maybe you're just weeding out people who jump too soon - Idunno.

Keep doing what you do until you feel better about yourself, though - I'll be sticking around with ya. :)

Lenders now leaving the market may indicate they operated a ponzi (and just happened to be returning deposits in all cases of people involved with the lending cartel), but, more likely, I'd imagine it indicates they're deeply annoyed by a small handful of people waltzing around with a shit-brush and smearing it on their faces every day, do not enjoy working capital starvation through the exodus of depositors, and of course, have a lot of bad loans popping up because lendees were quietly using funds to put into a Pirate account.

I guess the irony is now perfect, because this is exactly one of the issues your customers have been warned can give you problems returning their money even if it's not a ponzi.

Byron Micon is the Ponzi Breaker. He jacks fools.

I think it's highly misleading for anyone in the bitcoin community to use the words bank, insured, trust account, deposit account or escrow account.  This is really aimed at rational bitcoin citizens that are accustomed to the western style reserve banking financial systems; I think a more appropriate term to describe these entities would be unregulated broker, unregulated lender, or even wholesale broker.  Bank is the word of the day, the others, I might discuss another day.  But all of these words share a common element, they are used by regulated entities to mean very specific things.

Banks can only function, when they are trusted.  Normal western style banks will fight to maintain a high level of customer service and honor all withdrawals.  You probably didn't read the real world bank deposit agreement, but In the fine print, their is usually a statement requiring prior written notification on amounts that would pose a danger to the normal operations of the real world bank.  But in practice, this is rarely enforced, because delaying or dishonoring a withdraw, will result in a loss of what they value most, trust.

A real world bank, will try to maintain that trust, even when faced with the prospect of more withdrawals than liquid cash (ie cash on hand, cash in the cash vault), they will make every effort to honor all the withdrawal the same day.  They will request the product(yes they call cash the product) from the reserve bank.  But that will never be the case for the bitcoin community, since it's virtual currency with no central banking operation.  If satoshi was an economist, he would probably cry if he saw the word bank used to describe something in the bitcoin world.  I tend to think he was a idealist coder, and didn't really understand the complexities of the finance world.

To make money, banks take short term deposits, and lend the funds out for longer terms, the interest differential is the profit.  But there is an inherit problem for banks when loans default above the anticipated default rate.  Also, when a real world bank faces the prospect of more withdrawals than available funds in liquid electronic accounts, they will take overnight loans from another bank.  When they are shut out of the interbank lending market, the real world bank will approach a discount window at the reserve bank (in secret usually).  For these reasons, a western bank usually has to earn a license, and is regulated to ensure it has the privilege of accessing the discount window.  I think we should all consider the use of the word bank to describe an entity in the bitcoin community an abusive brain teaser.

Pretty much all lending operations in the bitcoin world that pay interest on short term deposits, at any given time may face more withdrawal requests than available funds - each and every one of these lending operations should be considered by definition a ponzi scheme.   Anyone that pays a high yield on a short term deposit, in the bitcoin world needs to be labeled as a ponzi scheme - just to make folks aware of the risk.  In other words, they are taking money, and returning a fraction as interest without the backing of an interlending market and/or reserve window.  It's customers may face a situation where they can't get their money back, when they want it - not when the bank says they can have it.  If the intention of the entity was honorable but described themselves as a bank or used the word deposit in their operations; it was naive to think their customer's won't make a comparison to ponzi scheme - if they can't honor a withdrawal request.  

It's self-righteous to blame the customer, when the entity can't honor a valid withdrawal request on a short term deposit.

If Micon spent half as much time researching as he spent making wild accusations he'd have a good picture of the financial state of every lender on here.

Why would he care what the financial state of the lenders are?

Well since I was named...

I have bought back my Insured Pirate bonds...

I have bought back my Uninsured non guaranteed tygrr bond D... 
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=98421.msg1169673#msg1169673

I do not at all need help from the lending cartel and was able to manage my own risk... Yes I'm pretty destroyed by this mess but I still covered my debts.

Thank you...

Sorry - wasn't meaning to imply otherwise, just say that a lot of us work together to prevent depositors noticing any liquidity problems on our end in response to Zen. I'm focused on salvaging the situation, keeping us all in good standing with the community, and moving forward as a collective, and wanted it known - for selfish purposes.

Micon, you are missing the most obvious current ponzi: OBSI.HRPT (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91646.0)

It is within his contract though to take everyone's money whenever he wants, so I don't even know if it can be considered a scam  ;)

The business receiving these investments is in the financial sector and currently expanding. They have demonstrated an excellent return on my personal investments and I thought now would be a good time to offer an alternative to the other high risk pass-through investment opportunities on the market.

It appears that HK is having liquidity problems. My interest payments have been stopped. Is hashking a member of the cartel and will assistance be provided to him by you?

From the little I recall from HK in the cartel room, his problem is in liquidity, not negative equity, so we might be able to come to an agreement with him which is amicable for his depositors if he is unable to repay them within a reasonable amount of time (I have no idea if that's the case -- I'm speaking out of my ass a bit).

I'll admit that I don't know enough about the details to have much confidence in my conclusions. But I would just warn you that an equity problem often looks like a liquidity problem in the early stages.

For example, say you had people who borrowed money from you guys and then "invested" that money with Pirate planning to profit from the interest difference. Now that Pirate stopped making interest payments, they can't make interest payments either. This may appear to be a liquidity problem because your borrowers are either still hoping Pirate will pay back or just don't want to admit that they aren't going to pay back their loans. Once time, these non-paying loans will probably mostly fully default. If you make (or guarantee) loans to ease the liquidity problem, when those loans finally do fully default, there will probably be no money to pay you back.

A lot of people who thought they had little or no Pirate exposure may find out the truth is otherwise.

Don't mess with bitcoin.
http://daily.liftluxe.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Falling-Down.jpg

In response to this post:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81542.0  by PatrickHarnett which is was stickied in the "Long-term offers" section, a misnamed Ponzi-corner of this forum which contains nothing but scams.  Well I was right about BCST and I'm going to be right about all these too.  Here are a bunch of Ponzi Schemes, all are poorly executed and all follow the standard Ponzi 101 model of having a totally obscure business plan with a totally outrageous interest rate.  I will be making spreadsheets for each scam showing why they cannot pay the outrageous rates.


Ponzi Schemes & Similar Scams

User_name	Weekly	Monthly	Since	Credit Rating	Notes	Link
Capital One Corp	~6%	-	?	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=109883.0
Sky Deposits	1.25%	-	?	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=108965.0
Mybitcointrade	5.00%	-	?	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81357.0
RustyRyan	3.00%	-	28-Jul-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=96163.0
smart/ziggy	-	11.1%	May-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81357.0
vescudero	1.50%	-	Jun-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=89122.0
Chungenhung	1.36%	6.0%	Jan-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56853.0
Starfish BCB	1.00%	4.4%	Jan-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61262.0
Kluge	0.97%	4.25%	Mar-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=67446.0

Honorable Mention:
Dank and his various, odd scams that even the guys that got rolled by Pirate wouldn't invest in

updated to keep up with the new scams

What do you feel about this?
https://docs.google.com/a/glados.cc/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AvwwyRGyc1WgdGFKVlAtZVAzOGNqS1Brd05MUlFlT2c

What do you feel about this?
https://docs.google.com/a/glados.cc/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AvwwyRGyc1WgdGFKVlAtZVAzOGNqS1Brd05MUlFlT2c

Traditional angel funding (in the unlikely event anything significant's ever repaid) is probably the harshest to collect on since there generally aren't hard terms defining exactly what should happen, except when $10m+ companies with a brigade of lawyers are able to draft it up in a satisfactory manner. So, you might get a slip of paper (if lucky) saying you own 10% of Bullocks, LLC - aaaand... well - good luck turning that into anything useful. With regards to that, debt is a very attractive investment, because it has easy-to-define terms. I'm strolling way off-topic, though.

In response to this post:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81542.0  by PatrickHarnett which is was stickied in the "Long-term offers" section, a misnamed Ponzi-corner of this forum which contains nothing but scams.  Well I was right about BCST and I'm going to be right about all these too.  Here are a bunch of Ponzi Schemes, all are poorly executed and all follow the standard Ponzi 101 model of having a totally obscure business plan with a totally outrageous interest rate.  I will be making spreadsheets for each scam showing why they cannot pay the outrageous rates.


Ponzi Schemes & Similar Scams

User_name	Weekly	Monthly	Since	Credit Rating	Notes	Link
Capital One Corp (lol)	~6%	-	?	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=109883.0
Sky Deposits	1.25%	-	?	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=108965.0
Mybitcointrade	5.00%	-	?	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81357.0
RustyRyan	3.00%	-	28-Jul-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=96163.0
smart/ziggy	-	11.1%	May-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81357.0
vescudero	1.50%	-	Jun-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=89122.0
Chungenhung	1.36%	6.0%	Jan-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56853.0
Starfish BCB	1.00%	4.4%	Jan-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61262.0
Kluge	0.97%	4.25%	Mar-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=67446.0

Honorable Mention:
Dank and his various, odd scams that even the guys that got rolled by Pirate wouldn't invest in

I must say I did enjoy reading the prevarications of a certain "administrative clerk" with delusions of grandeur. "Cartel", eh?

Kids these days...

9/30/12

Effective immediately,

I am defaulting on my BDK.BND debt. Beyond this, I will no longer be honoring the contract in the form I originally laid out. I previously intended to empty my non-legal wife's (we personally consider ourselves married, but legally, we are individual and thus have rights we'd otherwise forfeit) 401(k). I obviously did not want to do this, but it became clear it was necessary as I was looking at $200-250/wk interest on this single debt while having been financially raped by loans to various members of the community (No, Pirate is not the primary cause of my distress. Please don't turn this into some Pirate discussion.). After weeks of tha stress, on top of previous stress... heated arguments... -- this is no longer an option. I do not think her response to my actions is unreasonable (she's already effectively lost tens of thousands due to my actions), but this clearly affects my ability to repay within what I'd consider a reasonable time-frame. I currently have a negative net worth excluding my residence which would be protected under a personal bankruptcy filing which I will not pursue unless a suit is formally filed against me. I'd advise against taking action on potential cynicism, and suggest you give me at least a couple months to confirm I am indeed making a decent effort toward repaying what I owe.

I am unable to pay interest on my current BDK.BND debt. It's impossible for me to keep up with that, living expenses, and interest on other debts which are small enough where I can close them - and I apologize, in a sense, for the unfairness of how this is being handled. BDK.BND-holders, who I've always wanted most protected from risk, are now getting the shaft. I cannot subject my wife to more loss, and will be forcing BDK.BND holders to suffer as a result of my unwillingness to liquidate my residence. I apologize for the trust I've violated, the business mismanagement, and this default as a result. If I were unable to compartmentalize, I would be unable to write this. I am truly and deeply sorry. I also apologize for not having the emotional fortitude to prevent what I'm also about to announce: I will not be communicating much, if at all. I will likely not read anything written in this thread beyond this post for months. I just can't handle it when there are many things I need to do to get the situation in order. I will not be responding to phone calls, Skype messages, nor responding to emails. I will not be clarifying what I've written, and will not be responding to questions. I just can't right now, and understand how bad that looks and is. Again, I apologize. I will post an impersonal message each time I make a dividend payment.

All BTC I currently own will go toward BDK.BND payments. These will come in the form of irregular, unannounced dividends -- there will no longer be .001BTC/bond dividends each week. I will never buy BDK.BND back, and that section of the contract can be considered practically void. I can do nothing but assure everyone that I have no intent to make any purchases of BDK.BND units, and will allow them to trade freely on GLBSE as people value them given I have absolutely no information on when, and in what amount, these bonds will be repaid. However, I promise I will repay the debt as it stands, as I'm able. So long as GLBSE is active, I am alive, and earning income, I will continue to make dividend payments on BDK.BND units as a gesture of goodwill (and appreciation for not suing me into bankruptcy) beyond the .101BTC "hard debt" I currently consider as existing. Basically - I will be making larger, more rapid payments until dividends beyond this date reach .101BTC/bond. After that time, I will continue paying irregular dividends in a way which is appropriate for the gratitude I owe, and possible for the amount I need to live. I am unable to provide a repayment schedule or dividend schedule. Essentially - I'm giving what I can without forcing an unreasonable amount of loss (beyond what I've currently caused) onto my non-legal wife, and I naively hope everyone trusts me to be doing exactly what I'm saying I will. I'll provide instructions in my will to give an update (with death certificate) on this forum in the event of my death. Though things have been pretty shit lately, I am not at all suicidal -- just gave the info in that last sentence as an FYI.

-Ben

(Additionally... Someone may remember I recently posted assets/liabilities on my side. This included many of my non-legal wife's assets. The CU/bank assets have been largely emptied to repay CD-holders and my mother, who fronted us money to purchase this house [I've since defaulted on that loan, too, after a partial repayment so I could repay CD-holders]. There is still one outstanding CD-holder who has been excessively generous in providing me time to repay.)

(Many individuals have my home address [NOT the Spring Arbor address. That is a family member's house. DO NOT release that address.]. I would prefer my home address not be released publicly, but would also not consider public release of that information unwarranted. If you are coming for a visit, I would like at least a voice message a day or two prior. Harm toward family's off-limits, and I would physically object to bodily harm which may result in my stay in a hospital, as that'd further impede repayment. I am armed, so please keep ideas of physical violence in check.)

But - yeah, bank runs are a big problem for reasons I've already given. It ain't rocket science. If the majority of depositors leave a bank within a month - the bank's fucked, and if the bank isn't FDIC (or with CUs, NCUA) insured, remaining depositors are probably fucked, too. OTOH, as you point out, if the majority of depositors withdraw from a ponzi operation - the ponzi op's fucked (well, he'd probably just leave), and the remaining depositors are probably fucked, too. So - could indicate someone's operating a ponzi, but that's no reason for Shit-Brush to get all worked up because his ponzi predictions have almost all come true.

vescudero seems to have paid back in full and is thus not a ponzi. im sure you will want to verify that but it is something that you should note. 

I suspect they will say that having paid back in full doesn't prove it wasn't a ponzi... Wait for it... ::)

You would know this because Pirate paid you back in full? lol....

Oh right...."Look guys he pays!"

 :D

Victor's paid back in full. You going to stop slandering the guy now?

I suspect they will say that having paid back in full doesn't prove it wasn't a ponzi... Wait for it... ::)

Vescudero is a scammer.  This payback is to build trust for the future. 

I laughed. I guess you can always use this argument. 

I suspect they will say that having paid back in full doesn't prove it wasn't a ponzi... Wait for it... ::)

I can't believe I missed replying to this. This is 100% completely and totally wrong. Bank runs are a 100% solved problem. Bank runs do not screw depositors.

It's not worth going into detail here, but the basic idea is this simple: Bank runs can only directly cause a liquidity crisis. They can only cause an equity crisis if a bank or lender is so poorly capitalized they should never have gone into business in the first place. Regardless of how much of a run you have, the total value of both the lender's capitalization and its loan equity will always be enough to ensure the depositors get back both their deposits and all earned interest. There may be a delay, but the money will get back to them. (And it's not hard to avoid even the delay, however, the lender will wind up broke with its capitalization  gone.)

That lenders don't structure to avoid this problem, despite how easy it is, just shows how inept they are and how indifferent they are to the interests of their depositors. (Or, more likely, how they are too poorly capitalized to operate properly or are outright scamming.)

Any time a bank or lender claims that depositors didn't get their money back (other than a delay where all principal and most interest is returned) because of a bank run, they are lying. The truth is most likely either that they were drastically undercapitalized to begin with , they made bad loans, they operated a Ponzi scheme, or they outright stole from their depositors.

Micon, I now understand why your wife left you. Women don't like guys who are so predictable as you.
I heard those kind of guys also make lousy poker players...

And why is it that you need to know everything that goes on with other peoples business?
Is it such a difficult concept to grasp that some people know some stuff you don't know and that they are not obliged to disclose their trade secrets to you?

I am once again right, and we will once again it will take some time and another scam for you to believe me this time.

In the case of Victor, why don't we judge any future scheme he comes up with on the face value of that.

What you should admit though is that Victor's most recent scheme wasn't a ponzi, on the basis that everyone has been paid back in full, with interest, on time.

going live on DD radio like I do every Wed. at 7pm / would love to debate you on this point. 

724-LOL-DONK  to call in after 7pm

In response to this post:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81542.0  by PatrickHarnett which is was stickied in the "Long-term offers" section, a misnamed Ponzi-corner of this forum which contains nothing but scams.  Well I was right about BCST and I'm going to be right about all these too.  Here are a bunch of Ponzi Schemes, all are poorly executed and all follow the standard Ponzi 101 model of having a totally obscure business plan with a totally outrageous interest rate.  I will be making spreadsheets for each scam showing why they cannot pay the outrageous rates.


Ponzi Schemes & Similar Scams

User_name	Weekly	Monthly	Since	Credit Rating	Notes	Link
Capital One Corp (lol)	~6%	-	?	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=109883.0
Sky Deposits	1.25%	-	?	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=108965.0
Mybitcointrade	5.00%	-	?	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81357.0
RustyRyan	3.00%	-	28-Jul-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=96163.0
smart/ziggy	-	11.1%	May-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81357.0
vescudero	1.50%	-	Jun-12	F	Seems to have paid back his small ponzi to create trust for next scam	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=89122.0
Chungenhung	1.36%	6.0%	Jan-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56853.0
Starfish BCB	1.00%	4.4%	Jan-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61262.0
Kluge	0.97%	4.25%	Mar-12	F	PONZI	https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=67446.0

Honorable Mention:
Dank and his various, odd scams that even the guys that got rolled by Pirate wouldn't invest in

remember all these guy!??

let's not let it happen again - fight the "deposit takers" at every measure!

I only remember that vescudero remains a reputed trader ...