 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]
|
Investors,
Consider joining [spam link removed]
Investor forum for users of peer to peer BTC lending websites on the Internet.
Focus is on sharing experience, promoting safe investment practice, and working together to recover bad loans and expose scammers.
You're joking right? I wouldn't touch btcjam and you are asking people to sign up on a site that looks like a 10 year old created it in MS FrontPage 20 years ago? Uh... Nah.  I signed up and learned a lot from it. But then again I'm not an art critic  |
|
|
|
I think a lending website that works on the concept of trusting nobody except reputable escrows. The amount of borrowers of your website who are con artists is staggering. In addition, I think a social lending website should be able to develop a mechanism that enables the sale of ownership of debts. Any information would be provided and a good hacker/detective can probably recover a purchased debt. There is far too much leverage for borrowers on BTCJam.
Appreciate the feedback. We are working hard on getting great borrowers & I think over our growth we have made advancements here. Fraud rates are down which is good thing. As blockchain tools/services keep growing I think one day something you mentioned might be possible. It would be more fair to us investors if a portion of the fees that BTCjam collects went to an insurance fund that would refund the principal on our investments in the event of borrower default. It would also likely improve motivation for borrower screening and debt collection if BTCjam assumes some risk by having skin in the game. Having a marketplace as a business is having complete skin in the game.. If the marketplace isn't good, rates arent good, borrowers arent good 0 we lose - it is a very simple theory. It's out business, Im not sure we could have more skin in the game than that. Screening is something that we are working very hard on to delivery better practices and lower defaults across the board. I will grant you that a good business reputation has value, but judging from the amount of negative feedback on this forum from burned lenders, I would say that BTCjam has at minimum a skin rash problem  . Equating the dings and dents to your business reputation to what lenders are losing in cash to defaults is begging the question of how to prevent defaults in the first place. Basically all you are saying here is that BTCjam is working really really really hard to lower the amount of defaults, and by implication that we lenders should trust you because you are working really really really hard on this (would also be interested in seeing some statistics on the number of BTCjam defaults and how much debt has been lost and recovered b.t.w.). As a lender I would personally feel more secure about investing if I knew that the company doing the screening is working transparently and has more than just its already damaged reputation at stake. We are working towards lowering defaults, that is part of the business in many ways. Being transparent about screening is tricky because we are then providing a lot of details about how we screen etc. Not sure that is the best idea at this time, but your comments are noted. We are trialling out some different collection methods/tools but aren't at a point to comment about that any more at this time. Thanks for sharing this. Out of the 12 Brazilian loans I have made since September... - 5 are paying on time
- 5 have not made the first payment
- 2 remain to be seen (first payment not due yet)
Looks like we are headed for minimum 50% default rate on Brazilian loans  Adding insult to injury is the fact that investors in BTCjam fiat backed loans are now getting massacred by a 100% spike in Bitcoin rates since September (that's a 90% loss of principal for a 10% loan - BTCjam is able to rate the borrowers and determine "fair" loan interest for them risk free, since BTCjam collects their fees up front when investors fund the loan). Is BTCjam some sort of stealth philanthropy project for Brazilian borrowers or WTF?!? Can you PM me an alias so I can check this out in more depth? Quite frankly we have more and more Brazilian borrowers and 12 listings is a very small sample size but I'd be more than happen to look into this and see what is going on, thanks! I sent you a PM a long time ago - any news? I have also noticed since then a user called "BTCjam Debt Collections" is buying up some loans, but not others (example - " https://btcjam.com/listings/49302-vehicle-needs-transmisssion"). Why are some lenders getting help, and others not? |
|
|
|
I opened an uphold account. I am in the US.
Uphold works as advertised... mostly.
I can add funds and convert between currencies, including bitcoin. But when sending btc, there's something wrong with the miner fee calculation.
When I open my bitcoin balance page, getting ready to send bitcoin from my uphold account to an external address, uphold adds a miner's fee that's much too high -- by orders of magnitude. The fee is as much as .0775 btc. And it depends on the amount of bitcoin I want to send. Higher btc amounts result in higher miner's fees.
According to uphold, they don't charge for bitcoin transactions. If that's true, then Uphold is just throwing away wads of money on the miner fee for absolutely no reason.
Don't they have a support department you could raise the problem with |
|
|
|
I think a lending website that works on the concept of trusting nobody except reputable escrows. The amount of borrowers of your website who are con artists is staggering. In addition, I think a social lending website should be able to develop a mechanism that enables the sale of ownership of debts. Any information would be provided and a good hacker/detective can probably recover a purchased debt. There is far too much leverage for borrowers on BTCJam.
Appreciate the feedback. We are working hard on getting great borrowers & I think over our growth we have made advancements here. Fraud rates are down which is good thing. As blockchain tools/services keep growing I think one day something you mentioned might be possible. It would be more fair to us investors if a portion of the fees that BTCjam collects went to an insurance fund that would refund the principal on our investments in the event of borrower default. It would also likely improve motivation for borrower screening and debt collection if BTCjam assumes some risk by having skin in the game. Having a marketplace as a business is having complete skin in the game.. If the marketplace isn't good, rates arent good, borrowers arent good 0 we lose - it is a very simple theory. It's out business, Im not sure we could have more skin in the game than that. Screening is something that we are working very hard on to delivery better practices and lower defaults across the board. I will grant you that a good business reputation has value, but judging from the amount of negative feedback on this forum from burned lenders, I would say that BTCjam has at minimum a skin rash problem . Equating the dings and dents to your business reputation to what lenders are losing in cash to defaults is begging the question of how to prevent defaults in the first place. Basically all you are saying here is that BTCjam is working really really really hard to lower the amount of defaults, and by implication that we lenders should trust you because you are working really really really hard on this (would also be interested in seeing some statistics on the number of BTCjam defaults and how much debt has been lost and recovered b.t.w.). As a lender I would personally feel more secure about investing if I knew that the company doing the screening is working transparently and has more than just its already damaged reputation at stake. We are working towards lowering defaults, that is part of the business in many ways. Being transparent about screening is tricky because we are then providing a lot of details about how we screen etc. Not sure that is the best idea at this time, but your comments are noted. We are trialling out some different collection methods/tools but aren't at a point to comment about that any more at this time. Thanks for sharing this. Out of the 12 Brazilian loans I have made since September... - 5 are paying on time
- 5 have not made the first payment
- 2 remain to be seen (first payment not due yet)
Looks like we are headed for minimum 50% default rate on Brazilian loans Adding insult to injury is the fact that investors in BTCjam fiat backed loans are now getting massacred by a 100% spike in Bitcoin rates since September (that's a 90% loss of principal for a 10% loan - BTCjam is able to rate the borrowers and determine "fair" loan interest for them risk free, since BTCjam collects their fees up front when investors fund the loan). Is BTCjam some sort of stealth philanthropy project for Brazilian borrowers or WTF?!? |
|
|
|
After what has their owner and CEO said about Bitcoin and after the statements that he has made about Bitcoin in past, I would never use this service. I also urge the other users to do the same, to stay away from Bitreserve.
“I’ll be surprised if bitcoin is here in five years,” Watson told Fortune . “The value of bitcoin isn’t the currency, but the technology. I think once the world becomes more accustomed and attuned to the platform of bitcoin, the noise will go away, and the currency will go away, too.” He totally ignored the Elephant in the room - namely who controls the technology? If bitcoin infrastructure continues to expand over the next 5 years then I think that the Bankster types will be hard pressed to create a competitive alternative they can control using blockchain technology. |
|
|
|
They are not moving away from Bitcoin.
Could you elaborate on that please? They are quoted in the above article for not seeing much future in bitcoin. |
|
|
|
Not getting much action on this thread, but in case someone may interested I just found out that Bitreserve has changed its name to "Uphold" (strange choice - "Holdup" backwards does not inspire confidence!?!), and it also looks like they are moving away from Bitcoin, according to this article: http://fortune.com/2015/10/14/bitreserve-bitcoin-uphold/I still hope to hear from someone who has actually used this service  |
|
|
|
when I go to a site , the browser reports an error: sec_error_revoked_certificate
I filed a support case about that with them and never got an answer - seems to be fixed now though (error does not show up in Firefox anymore). |
|
|
|
I think a lending website that works on the concept of trusting nobody except reputable escrows. The amount of borrowers of your website who are con artists is staggering. In addition, I think a social lending website should be able to develop a mechanism that enables the sale of ownership of debts. Any information would be provided and a good hacker/detective can probably recover a purchased debt. There is far too much leverage for borrowers on BTCJam.
Appreciate the feedback. We are working hard on getting great borrowers & I think over our growth we have made advancements here. Fraud rates are down which is good thing. As blockchain tools/services keep growing I think one day something you mentioned might be possible. It would be more fair to us investors if a portion of the fees that BTCjam collects went to an insurance fund that would refund the principal on our investments in the event of borrower default. It would also likely improve motivation for borrower screening and debt collection if BTCjam assumes some risk by having skin in the game. Having a marketplace as a business is having complete skin in the game.. If the marketplace isn't good, rates arent good, borrowers arent good 0 we lose - it is a very simple theory. It's out business, Im not sure we could have more skin in the game than that. Screening is something that we are working very hard on to delivery better practices and lower defaults across the board. I will grant you that a good business reputation has value, but judging from the amount of negative feedback on this forum from burned lenders, I would say that BTCjam has at minimum a skin rash problem . Equating the dings and dents to your business reputation to what lenders are losing in cash to defaults is begging the question of how to prevent defaults in the first place. Basically all you are saying here is that BTCjam is working really really really hard to lower the amount of defaults, and by implication that we lenders should trust you because you are working really really really hard on this (would also be interested in seeing some statistics on the number of BTCjam defaults and how much debt has been lost and recovered b.t.w.). As a lender I would personally feel more secure about investing if I knew that the company doing the screening is working transparently and has more than just its already damaged reputation at stake. |
|
|
|
I think a lending website that works on the concept of trusting nobody except reputable escrows. The amount of borrowers of your website who are con artists is staggering. In addition, I think a social lending website should be able to develop a mechanism that enables the sale of ownership of debts. Any information would be provided and a good hacker/detective can probably recover a purchased debt. There is far too much leverage for borrowers on BTCJam.
Appreciate the feedback. We are working hard on getting great borrowers & I think over our growth we have made advancements here. Fraud rates are down which is good thing. As blockchain tools/services keep growing I think one day something you mentioned might be possible. It would be more fair to us investors if a portion of the fees that BTCjam collects went to an insurance fund that would refund the principal on our investments in the event of borrower default. It would also likely improve motivation for borrower screening and debt collection if BTCjam assumes some risk by having skin in the game. Sure this would be one way to make all investors happy but ,when the user doenst pay the btc promised on the lending you would get a part of the btcjam funds to pay some of your loss ,pretty sure this wont happen they live for profit not to cover what scammers steal. I'm pretty sure that they would make MORE profit if lenders feel more secure about lending! Also it would up their game when they are rating borrowers, so fewer defaults would also give them more profit (Win-Win  ). |
|
|
|
I have been looking into Bitreserve (bitreserve.org) as a way to hedge against bitcoin volatility, and even went so far as to attempt to create a user account on the site so I could try it out. Unfortunately I am unable to get past "step 3 of 3 - account verification", since I never seem to get the SMS that they are supposed to send me. I suspect that it may be because my phone and I live in Europe . Another concern is privacy -Bitreserve is based in the U.S.A. where data protection laws are weaker that in the E.U., and Security - what happens to my assets in the event of company or government bankruptcy, or if bitcoin becomes obsolete (apparently you can only use bitcoin to move payments in and out of Bitreserve). I would appreciate your sharing insight and experience with Bitreserve |
|
|
|
I think a lending website that works on the concept of trusting nobody except reputable escrows. The amount of borrowers of your website who are con artists is staggering. In addition, I think a social lending website should be able to develop a mechanism that enables the sale of ownership of debts. Any information would be provided and a good hacker/detective can probably recover a purchased debt. There is far too much leverage for borrowers on BTCJam.
Appreciate the feedback. We are working hard on getting great borrowers & I think over our growth we have made advancements here. Fraud rates are down which is good thing. As blockchain tools/services keep growing I think one day something you mentioned might be possible. It would be more fair to us investors if a portion of the fees that BTCjam collects went to an insurance fund that would refund the principal on our investments in the event of borrower default. It would also likely improve motivation for borrower screening and debt collection if BTCjam assumes some risk by having skin in the game. |
|
|
|
Jeg synes det er en lusket måde at skrive beløbet på - hvis du mener 0,001 BTC så er der tale om ca. 1,5 DKK! Held og lykke! |
|
|
|
|
