Well played. I keep toying with the idea of getting back into trading, but I worry that I'll be sloppy because I was able to so easily collect so many coins in the fall from $32 to $2. In a sense, that sloppiness is why I lost 150-170 coins in Bitcoinica. It didn't feel like I was risking anything, but I don't want to fall into that trap again, which is why I moved everything offline for a while.
buy sell holdgood move In the days of the run-up to $15.xx I was convinced a crash was coming and wanted to move everything to MtGox to take advantage of it, but (1) all my coins were offline without any digital copies, and (2) I was out of town and had no way to access my paper wallets. That's the trade-off I consciously made, of course. And there's no way to know that if I hadn't done that I wouldn't have lost a bunch in trading throughout the year. But my certainty of the impending crash this go around has me feeling a measure of regret in getting so protective. |
|
|
|
|
Well played. I keep toying with the idea of getting back into trading, but I worry that I'll be sloppy because I was able to so easily collect so many coins in the fall from $32 to $2. In a sense, that sloppiness is why I lost 150-170 coins in Bitcoinica. It didn't feel like I was risking anything, but I don't want to fall into that trap again, which is why I moved everything offline for a while.
|
|
|
|
Didn't he just say he defaulted days ago? What new deadline?
OMG people. As a debtor your default doesn't start when you make some kind of official announcement. It starts when you don't make a payment or otherwise violate the agreement you have with your lender. Pirates default started almost 2 weeks before he made his official announcement. |
|
|
|
from now until dec 2, it's gradually going to increase to somewhere between $15 and $20.
I think it's the other way round, er, wait, I'm a bull, I mean. |
|
|
|
This super low volume is really scary, who else thinks this is the calm before the storm downwards?
Oh, not me. See, look at my avatar. Not me. |
|
|
|
Update! Some accounts have been repaid. Looks like calling the default was uncalled for.
Also, it doesn't matter if tomorrow he pays back every last bitcent. It will still have been the case that he was in default. |
|
|
|
|
What's the reason they don't have scammer tags? If "scammer" doesn't suit this situation well, then I propose a tag something like "Don't trust with money", which doesn't necessarily entail scamming, just that at the very least this person has been negligent in some way.
In any event, because things move so quickly around here and after a few months are apt to get forgotten, I think for the protection of newcommers they ought to be tagged in some way, or we should have a sticky in the main discussion area that lists people who've contributed to significant losses of other people's wealth.
|
|
|
|
I don't understand why they're being so obstructive. I mean, they're almost being maliciously obstructive. I just don't get it. I will never trust any of those guys ever again and intend to stay as far away as possible from anything they're involved in.
It will be interesting to see whether they ignore the liquidator's requests for co-operation. Technically, they're required by law to co-operate with the liquidator. At a practical level, the consequences for failing to do so could be limited given that none of them reside in NZ. I doubt any of them would be overly concerned about being banned from being directors of NZ entities in the future. And while a liquidator could find that they have personal liability for the debts of Bitcoinica LP, there's no reason to believe that any of them have sufficient assets for such a finding to be meaningful. It will be interesting, however, to see whether the liquidator finds any reasons to refer issues related to Bitcoinica to the Serious Fraud Office. It will be interesting. But, hey, in the meantime, let's all go party with them in London! |
|
|
|
I too hoped things would be further along by now. The lawyers are looking at skipping receivership and proceeding directly to liquidation. This is intended to save time but nothing in the legal world is fast by bitcoin standards. With luck, the Court will approve a liquidator in September.
This is good news. From what you've said, there's nothing to be gained by going through receivership if Wendon is intending to make its recovered entitlements available to all creditors. It's ridiculous that you've been forced into the situation of requiring court approval for liquidation, though. Agreement by the general partners to wind up the partnership in voluntary liquidation would have made this process a lot faster and less costly.I don't understand why they're being so obstructive. I mean, they're almost being maliciously obstructive. I just don't get it. I will never trust any of those guys ever again and intend to stay as far away as possible from anything they're involved in. |
|
|
|
|
With all the pirate stuff going on it's easy to forget that the Bitcoinica/Bitcoinica Consultancy/Bitcoin Consultancy/Intersango crew are also responsible for tens of thousands of bitcoin and USD losses to people around here. I'm sure they're loving the break pirate is giving them.
|
|
|
|
if i were him i would hold onto those coins for many years, slowly washing little bits here and there.
If I were him I'd give people their money back. a) why? Because it's the right thing to do. b) you wouldn't be able to. since the interest was (most likely) imaginary gains, the money he has is less than lenders' principal (totoal principal minus withdrawals).
I understand that the imaginary gains couldn't be paid out, I'm saying the right thing to do is to return what he actually has. Of course, if I really was him, I wouldn't have done this in the first place. |
|
|
|
if i were him i would hold onto those coins for many years, slowly washing little bits here and there.
If I were him I'd give people their money back. |
|
|
|
To me it seems like I'm suppose to think it's going down based solely on the ask orders but I can't identify any fundamental reasons why it should go down..
The fundamental reason it should go down is that pirate wants it to and lots of people are scared of him. The fundamental reason for it to go down is proudhon's current avatar. That's cypher's fault then. |
|
|
|
|
Oh no, bitcoin is compromised. Buy LTC!
|
|
|
|
|
Pirate's recent announcement doesn't add any new information to what was already known before he made the announcement. His declaration that he is in default is more than a week late. It was already an indisputable fact that he was in default.
|
|
|
|
Funny that Pirate admits what already happened 12 days ago. He was in default the second he didn't pay someone who requested a withdraw.
Of course the question is now that he is in default what % can he repay. Will creditors get anything. If so how much. He spends time talking about things that aren't in dispute and then provides no new information.
This is just silly at this point. |
|
|
|
I'm new here.
Is this where we say SORRY to Pirate ?
Yes, it's also where we can say "Thank You", too. |
|
|
|
How many donations did pirate40 collect I wonder?
I am not interested in what is owed, only what was donated to him.
Nobody except Pirate knows how many wagers were sent his way. You can however make some educated guesses by looking at the 500K BTC owed and the timespan between the average wager and the closing. My SWAG (scientific wild ass guess) assumptions: 1) The PirateDice system has been operating for roughly 10 months however it really only got large (PPT, gblse bonds, forum buzz, shill supporters) in the last two months. 2) While some gamblers withdrew their winnings most compounded or increased their winning wagers 3) We will take Pirate at his word that the total unpaid wagers & unpaid paper winnings were ~500K BTC as closing. 4) The average unpaid wager is roughly 12 weeks old then 500K / (1.07^10) = ~220K BTC wagered. 5) 15% of the total amount wagered were paid out with winnings. These shorter term paid winnings had an average age of 8 weeks. thus ~60K BTC (220 * 0.15 * 1.07^8) was paid out and not re-wagered. My SWAG conclusion: ~220K BTC were wagered. ~60K BTC were paid out as winning and not re-wagered. PirateDice has ~180K BTC in assets (or more like USD equivalent) PirateDice owes ~561K BTC (500K * 1.07 * 1.05) Once again a total SWAG it likely is completely wrong but probably in the ballpark. That squares well with the claim he made to me on IRC that, at the time, he could drop the price to $1.15 or so. At the time that would have taken around 200,000 BTCs. |
|
|
|
To me it seems like I'm suppose to think it's going down based solely on the ask orders but I can't identify any fundamental reasons why it should go down..
The fundamental reason it should go down is that pirate wants it to and lots of people are scared of him. |
|
|
|
ermegerd! It's true!!!  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
