My thoughts exactly. It just isn't possible that he's dealing with many people. So, let's assume that he is dealing with 20 people. We know that Pirate needs to use most of his reserves, otherwise he wouldn't have borrowed anything. For simplicity, let's say that is 90% of his investments. My guess is that 90% is around 400k BTC right now. Let's assume that he charges 10% on all transactions within his business. Let's also assume that transactions are only done with people once a week.
That's 20k BTC that each person is transacting per week, or almost a quarter of a million dollars. Again, this is per person, per week.
Ok, so maybe this is happening more than once a week. In that case, he can get away with charging lower fees. However, he could also get away with having a lower reserve, so that means that far more money than that is going through him each week. You can see how quickly this gets insane
At one point, someone mentioned futures, or some twist of the concept, as a possible explanation. That'd explain the reserve requirement. He might not need to have them on a daily basis, but must have a large quantity on the off chance someone actually wants to take possession of said coins. |
|
|
|
I'm not claiming that everything happens on this forum, but like with the mysteryminer example, I'm claiming that someone here would know something.
Not everyone has a big mouth and goes blabbing..  There's probably money to be had to keep one's mouth shut. For a while there was a guy named rubberchicken on irc who claimed to control (and seemed to back it up) a large number of coins. He was around a bunch and then disappeared. There's nothing to say there aren't more of those types of guys out there. Oh and if I had to guess just based on the estimated volume of pirate's business, I'd tend to say it was skewed towards fewer, larger persons, but I really have no idea. If there were only a few, it would explain why there aren't people talking about it. |
|
|
|
I've got an OpenCL error running oclvanitygen on a Mac (NVIDIA Geforce GT 120):
A "Failed to wait for events" error; is this an OSX-specific OpenCL error, or have others run into this? How can I diagnose what is going wrong here?
My guess is that the kernel is only for AMD and the NVIDIA architecture isn't ideal for this kind of thing. Aye. |
|
|
|
I'd like to know what the 'scam subforum' is. Could you please clarify? If you're implying that all long term investment opportunities are scams, then you need to start a new thread about that.
In this very thread, the decision was made to create a subforum for the express purpose of housing several ponzi schemes. The subforum was given a misnomer; Ponzi schemes are not long term nor are they investments. You can call it whatever you want. I prefer clear and simple language. No, the decision was made to move all long term investments to a subforum. |
|
|
|
|
Sorry, but most mining farms' profits, if they're actually sharing most of the profits with the people invested, are >1% a week and would classify as HYIP under your definition. I think you need to stop relating USD rates to bitcoin rates. Clearly there are gains to be made in bitcoin that are much harder to replicate in USD.
In summary: Traditionally, HYIP are edge cases. If many businesses are getting 1%, then 1% isn't edge case and therefore, not HYIP.
|
|
|
|
What a surprise. The scam-artists want to get the expose as far away from their promotional material as possible.
Keep in mind that the scam subforum (I fail to see how a ponzi scheme qualifies as "long-term") remains under the legitimate heading "Lending."
We were having an adult conversation in this thread without any name calling until you decided to post. I'd like to know what the 'scam subforum' is. Could you please clarify? If you're implying that all long term investment opportunities are scams, then you need to start a new thread about that. |
|
|
|
But thats besides the point. Someone controlling a botnet has no reason to interact with the bitcoin community. Someone buying or selling coins on a massive scale and overpaying, literally, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, would have every interest in seeking competitive alternatives.
Or perhaps said buyer doesn't want to deal with the flakes on this forum, instead dealing with a specific person who might cater to their specific needs and doesn't ask a bunch of questions and therefor paying them well for it. |
|
|
|
|
Is there an 'end date' for this poll? If any/all of these proposals are adopted, what are the timelines like?
|
|
|
|
Seriously consider those thoughts. We can speculate what his business is all we want, but we need to wonder: why haven't we heard of a single customer?
Why doesn't the mystery miner that controls an extreme amount of hash and shows up periodically ever surface making claims or even interact on this forum? A lack of interaction on this forum certainly doesn't mean something doesn't exist. Contrary to some opinions, this forum isn't the center of the bitcoin universe. |
|
|
|
|
How'd you get it? Where's the guarantee it isn't terminated in 30 days?
|
|
|
|
if the room is sealed and dust free then it is probably okay... but there is a reason why a case was invented.. *air flow*  There are vent holes on every side. In this instance, there doesn't seem to be much directed airflow. Those very holes also allow the same amount of dust in as if it was naked. |
|
|
|
I created the subforum. Someone else can move the posts.
I saw that, and saw Maged wasn't on so I went ahead and got a good start. I did a lot at once so people will see where they go. Wasn't sure what to do with Micon's thread so I just left it for now, but since it's about those long term offers it should probably be there as well. Please don't take me for being an ass, but shouldn't a thread started to debate whether a thread is actually lending or not be in Meta? |
|
|
|
|
Dividends have been issued. A few more buyouts this week. Thanks everyone for your interest.
|
|
|
|
I'm sure they are breaking your door down.  Oh....bump. I've been pleasantly surprised. |
|
|
|
Well obviously Graet is terrible at bait and switch tactics considering it took him over a year to work out this long con. Clearly Oz is a ponzi. |
|
|
|
I can sell you as many as you need at a cool 100 BTC each.
Let's get back to reasonable offers, thanks. Ummmmm, what offers? The ones in the pms. I do appreciate the free bump though. |
|
|
|
Then perhaps there needs to be a deposits subforum. While deposits/loans can be considered the same thing, I'd argue the loans are typically given by the more trusted to the less trusted, whereas the deposits are given by the less trusted to the more trusted and as such, represent two different market segments. The people stickied in the deposits subform, while not officially endorsed, would be your long term, seemingly highly reliable people.
Absolutely not. The sooner you realize that loans and deposits are ABSOLUTELY the same thing, the sooner you'll wise up and realize that the risk profile is no different. We will not separate deposits from regular loans other than through the "Who Pays What?" sticky, no exceptions. So then why aren't we arguing that bonds are the same thing? After all, there's nothing to verify that those people have actually bought anything or done anything, yet we have a securities board. It seems John (johnthedong) and matthewh3 seem to agree with me, at least in principle, so surely I'm not being that unreasonable. I have to wonder if it'd be more acceptable had someone else proposed it first, since it seems you oppose most anything I have to say the last few weeks. |
|
|
|
I can sell you as many as you need at a cool 100 BTC each.
Let's get back to reasonable offers, thanks. |
|
|
|
the most staunch supporters like BurtW and Bitcoinmax staunch supporter? i think i've been pretty agnostic to be honest. i've never said pirate's op is a ponzi, but have also never claimed that it isn't. Who needs details when you can make them up as you go? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
