I think the time has arrived to post a repayment plan. It's unfortunate, but it is what it is. At this point, if pirate pays anything at all, it will be a blessing, but it's not to be expected.

The best way to handle this is this: I think you should repay some amount to each creditor every week by sending a payment to their withdrawal address in % terms based on how large of a creditor they are to you. For example, if in week1 you can repay 100 BTC, then you divide that up, with larger creditors getting proportionately more. You repeat each week until the debt is repaid for all your creditors.

Otherwise, it wouldn't be fair if some creditors get paid earlier and others later.

Thanks nick.
-cyto

Nothing apparently.

NAV updated to 1.1758086495

And the credit crunch continues...

No coupons this Friday. Any news would be much appreciated - thanks Meni!

Just an FYI guys I'll be doing the NAV update tomorrow.

BTW Goat retired TYGRR.BOND-D last night, so I took the liberty of buying up all of the outstanding sell orders of MOVETO.FUND below the NAV per share. So for those of you who wished to exit at this time, you are out.

However, for those who may wish to enter at this time: I have temporarily suspended sales of the fund until the NAV is updated tomorrow. The rationale is that I want to see how this pirate situation plays out this weekend before resuming sales. Thanks.

Thanks vendor, that's a great recommendation. That would certainly eliminate a lot of the volatility while still being an objective measure of valuation. I'll start doing this then for the NAV unless other investors disagree. I think the 5-day average is probably the best since that's where most of the noise occurs IMO.

EDIT - OP updated to reflect the new method of calculating the NAV

Thanks Francesco for filling in these details for me.

Yes, it is a worrisome time in the bitcoin financial world, and trust me I am also deeply disturbed by the systemic crisis caused by pirate and the myriad of financial instruments that were "secretly" exposed to his operations. What's happening now is akin to realizing that the king has no clothes, and we're getting everyone nice and naked to see who is still swimming and who is not. It's giving me great information on who I can trust and who I cannot going forward.

That said, regarding marking things down: right now I just mark everything according to the last trade price. If I did it any differently, then everything would just become subjective and I don't want to go down that rabbit hole. We will take losses when they occur, but I don't want to mark anything down based on a speculation or guessing because that's unfair to my shareholders. For example, eventually Goat will buy back TYGRR.TECH and we'll mark it at whatever we have to at that point, and so on. Trust me, I've been messaging him repeatedly about buying this back so we can get it cleared ASAP. If there's a different approach I should take however, then definitely let me know, as long as it's objective and fair to everyone. I am always open to suggestion as I have learned a lot of good stuff by listening to my investors.

At this point since I am the majority shareholder I'm really the one holding the bag at the end of it all no matter what happens going forward, but at the same time I am also much more optimistic than everyone else seems to be at this time. We shall see what happens. Whatever you decide to do, just remember that it's your decision and to take responsibility for it. That is my philosophy, and a lesson that many are learning at this time.

I'm exhausted but I finished up a major code refactoring. Everything is all nice and clean now and multithreaded so it's a bit faster. It also has a manual pre-filter to ignore a ton of junk assets which really helps to speed things up.

I haven't added the asks and probably will not since the last trade price is more meaningful now that liquidity has mildly improved. I have also added in more prudent asset filters, which became a necessary modification to the system given the high risk of GLBSE issues. Additionally, I'm hoping that after the pirate situation is resolved liquidity will improve further as people move more funds into the GLBSE.

Anyhoo, just for fun here's a fresh set of debug outputs from the new/updated version 2 of MOVETO.FUND's backbone:

MOVETO.FUND Monthly Report 9/1/2012

Portfolio (Using last trade prices as of 9/1/2012)

SYMBOL	SHARES	PRICE	VALUE
COGNITIVE	2101	0.64	1344.64
BDK.BND	4339	0.1015	440.4085
TYGRR-TECH	153	1	153
ABM	12	0.36	4.32
BDT	2476	1.04	2575.04
TEEK.B	347	1.0	347
IBB	6	0.55	3.3
ZIP.A*	139	0.51	80.81
MPOE.ETF	4	1.4	5.6
CPA	127	0.08	10.16
NASTY	987	0.75	740.25
TYGRR-BOND.D	479	1.0	479
GOLD	1	0.01	0.01
MOORE	1	0.509	0.509
CIUCUI.BOND	59	0.1	5.9
OBSI.HRPT	1	0.102	0.102
TYGRR.BOND-P**	2000	0.4	800
TEEK.USD	2	0.1	0.2
GMVT-BOT	1	0.14	0.14
BTC	0.4318697	1	0.4318697
STARFISH	2200.6334	1	2200.6334
NCKRAZZE*	2400	1	2400

Valuation
Total: 11581.5347697
# Shares: 9749
NAV per share: 1.1879715632
Last HWM: 1.1694110613
New HWM: 1.1694110613***

* Indicates security is in technical default
** Insured at 0.4 BTC per share
*** High-Water-Mark locked since no performance fees are being charged this month until the situation with NCKRAZZE is resolved.

Summary
There is not much for me to say at this time given that there were sufficient posts made here over this past month that everyone knows exactly what is going on. I hope some clarity emerges over the month of September so that we can get back on track.

Whatever happens, I will keep you posted. Take care,
-cytokine

My thoughts on the matter re-posted from another thread:

+1000

Thanks Meni for posting this, and I really appreciate the professionalism and eloquence of your comments. I truely apologize for saying anything bad towards you in the past when I was pissed about PUREMINING. You have been nothing but honest and always upheld your obligations.

Meni is right that these deposit takers are having a serious liquidity crunch, and some are in default since they've stopped paying interest, but it doesn't mean that they're not ultimately good for their deposits. I'm tired of all this premature lynching going on, everyone needs to just be honest and uphold their obligations to their best of their abilities, and apart from that we need to just move on to new things. There's still a very good chance IMO that Pirate will settle for *something*, and so I expect the situation to improve over the next few weeks. At the very least, it certainly cannot get any worse than the current situation in which I'm operating under the assumption of a complete and total pirate default.

Ok and a valid point, so I will not collect any performance fees until the situation with Nick has become clear. This implies that the high-water-mark will remain locked at last month's high of 1.1694110613 until such time that Nick repays or otherwise we are given proof of his ability to repay. However, I will maintain the value of Nick's debt preserved at 2400 BTC at this time until we have further information because it would be greatly unfair to reduce the NAV prematurely and thus dilute all of my current investors (since then new investors would be able to get a "free ride" as Nick begins his repayment).


Are you one of my long-term investors? If so, you would have realized by now that one of the things I pride myself in is never bullshitting anyone, and I would appreciate it if you treated me with the same level of professionalism and respect that I treat my investors with. I am always honest and transparent. That said, Nick was obviously not honest with me, but I have done my best to avoid pirate exposure in the fund. Considering that I own 8K+ shares of the fund which comprises the entirety of my bitcoin denominated net worth, it's impossible for you to claim that my interests are not aligned with those of my investors. If you worry about Nick's creditors, then you should also understand the amount of stress I incur daily from running this fund and having this level of responsibility.

Yes. In the absolute worst-case scenario that Nick completely shafts us and renegs on the entirety of the 2400 BTC, then at this time that comprises exactly 20% of the portfolio and thus the NAV would be reduced to the IPO price of 1.0 BTC per share.

I do not think this absolute worst-case scenario is likely and believe that such an assumption is a case of catastrophic thinking, but you also must realize that the reason interest rates are so high is precisely because the risk is high, and so of course some fallout and drawdown is inevitable at some point in this fund - I have never stated otherwise. But please also consider that this whole pirate fiasco is literally the greatest financial crisis to ever hit bitcoin, yet even if we were to take a 50% haircut on Nick (thus giving us a 10% drawdown) then even under these conditions I will have outperformed my competitors in the realm of bitcoin funds. Even better will be that with pirate gone we will continue to grow without that kind of systemic risk lurking in the background. If you don't believe me, then simply take a look at what's going on with my competitors right now, and I think you'll quickly see how much better I'm performing.

Finally, I would like to say that I'm getting kind of tired of non-constructive verbal abuse from people that only complain once they have the advantage of perfect hindsight. Individuals are few and far between, however, that are willing to take the risk of imperfect foresight, but that's simply the nature of reality and what one must accept if they are to invest. I have thus far given more free money to my investors than I have taken in fees, by a ratio of 2 to 1 (I injected 400 BTC, while thus far have taken only around 200 BTC in fees to cover the huge amount of both stress and coding work that I have put into this fund). Money does not grow on trees, and there are only two legitimate ways to attain it: by doing work or by taking risk. The purpose of the fund is to make money from the latter, but we cannot move forward by falsely believing that we can have our cake and eat it too.

That is a good point. I update the NAV per share every weekend, and so no I cannot just randomly change it during the week. But it's not that way in the contract, and it probably should be.

EDIT - Fixed the contract above @ https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=82869.msg1148655#msg1148655


The problem is that the GLBSE is extremely illiquid yet has very high yielding assets. That's why I am forced to take time to do share buy-backs when they occur. The fund, like a standard hedge fund, is really designed for long-term investors, not for short-term trading in and out of the fund.

FYI I clarified the section on withdrawals in the contract, as well as the section regarding the special buybacks that may be requested after contract modification. The issues in these sections were brought to my attention rather rapidly through my conversation with IveBeenBit.

As always, there is an offer available for all current investors to liquidate at the current NAV due to the contract modification.

Updated contract:

I was not able to come to an agreement with IveBeenBit, so if anyone else wants to take him up on his offer then please do so.

Note that I will be doing the monthly update this weekend, so you should probably wait until I update the NAV again before initiating any side arrangement since I will be incorporating the monthly fee based on our recent growth.

Thanks,
-cyto

Same with me Nick. You know it's true...

I will provide you 140 of my personal shares. Please send me a PM with your GLBSE username and include PatrickHarnett so that he knows you are providing both your Starfish deposit and your Kraken fund shares as collateral. You must agree to hold these for the duration of the loan since I trust Patrick to turn them over to me in case you do not return the shares of MOVETO.FUND. I will send you an address for the weekly interest payments.

Thanks guys!

BTW, Important announcement regarding the fallout and resolution of the BS&T default

I figured I should comment at this time about pirate seeing as how he's basically front-page news in the bitcoin financial markets. As everyone knows, this fund has been free of pirate default risk since inception, and the roughly 20% gain from the IPO has been accomplished without any pirate returns.

In the OP, which I updated today, it states:

It is true that I did very recently buy some TYGRR.BOND-P for mere bitcents on the coin as a risky speculation, but am insuring this 100% using my own 6K+ shares of MOVETO.FUND as collateral (soon to be around 8K shares once I move over some more of my personal funds, at which point I'll have 100% of my bitcoin wealth in the fund). I have a hedge in place for this speculation, so we'll see what happens. If on September 11th we don't have a small profit from this, then I will simply retire some of my own shares to compensate for this most certainly misplaced speculation, which was based on information about how pirate claims to generate his returns.

That said, I really don't want to waste time thinking about this pirate crap any longer. Again, all our deposits and investments have been free of pirate default risk to the best of our ability to determine, and so while there may be some fallout from his default (I'm in talks right now to aquire GLBSE assets from Nick Rasse), I have a mission to achieve with this fund and I'm going to continue to do my best to preserve and grow your capital moving forward. After tabulating the fund's spreadsheet, I expect that the NAV per share will likely remain unchanged over the weekend due to a sell-off in the general markets (panic most likely), and of course I'll be doing a full monthly update with the financials. I have also decided that - as a result of such a large scandal - the best idea for us moving forward is to increase our level of conservatism and diversification to reduce the potential for us ever getting whacked by a scammer.

I would also like to take a moment to reaffirm my strong belief in integrity, transparency, and communication, which are all things that Pirate lacked, regardless of if he's just a plain-old scammer or just a guy whose overly risky financial bets went wrong. I will continue to serve you and the mission of the fund to the best of my ability, so lets move onward and upward and leave the pirate ship behind to sink into the sea.

Thanks guys.
-cyto

PS: On a constructive note, I think this event is just more proof that ratings agencies are strongly needed (as I've said before), because my strong point is trading and selecting investments in a technical and data-driven fashion (not to be a professional scam detector), so I would strongly prefer a 3rd party to handle asset ratings so that we can just use a simple filter to reduce our risk. I expect this service is coming soon.

WRONG. PH said this:


That is, PH figured out a way that Pirate could be using to make the money, and pirate confirmed it was accurate. That's all PH said and nothing more.

Now, I personally don't think Pirate is a fraud based on this information, but I also know it's possible that pirate may have lied to PH (or perhaps was honest but something went wrong with his high risk venture)... we'll all know soon. Therefore, Pat's reputation is not on the line here at all no matter what happens with Pirate. Pat never said Pirate wasn't risk free, in fact, he specifically marked his pirate pass-throughs as "high risk accounts" for a good reason!

Don't put words into people's mouths.

I will think about this for a while before I go in big. In the meantime I purchased a small quantity of shares. It is really great to see something like this appearing; it's a good alternative to the usual bonds and mining shares (or overvalued equities).

I second this. I promise: we are not here to eat you!

I can easily see that 2.5% or 2.6% per week is not sustainable without pirate backing you - I get this - you were margining your GLBSE investments in a sense, which is perfectly fine. So what we need to do is lower the interest rate until it's quite a bit less than what you're earning off of your other investments. That way you can start to make progress repaying without having to sell off your assets, and you can continue growing your capital.

I think this would be the best possible solution for everyone IMO.

That said, none of this matters right now because we should give this another week and see what happens with pirate.