|
I did mention the entertainment aspect of the lending section?
And, while I initially didn't appreciate psy in some other parts of the forum (SC and BTC-xpress), I eventually worked out what was going on as psy's posts are of good quality.
|
|
|
|
Soooo much criticism!
I find it all rather unnecessary, until I prove myself otherwise..!
Feel free to take as many notes as you'd like Patrick.
Thanks. It's useful, especially as you aim to be able to borrow in the future, and as a lender, I may provide you with that loan. I have done many loans to relatively new users, and some were simple scammers, and others have turned into good customers. At this stage, I don't have an opinion one way or the other. As for critisims, yes, some members derive their entertainment from spotting the next potential scammer, bad loan or dubious newbie. That comes with the forum, and isn't likely to go away any time soon. Sometimes it really pisses people off and other times users simply disappear. |
|
|
|
This 2% is not quite true. PPT is getting more than 2% as they are putting up .32 BTC and receiving 7% on 1 BTC compounded weekly, so that is really a 9.375% return. This does not include any instant return if shares sell for more than 1.0 BTC. Money in hand now is better than later. The point wasn't in the exact numbers the point is that our "greediness" will be temperred by the market's (your) "greediness" I get the point, I just didn't want people to think PPT is unprofitable for the issuers as that would not be good. roflmao |
|
|
|
As for screwing up other people's deposits, current information is that it is not very likely. Would you prefer that as a separate exercise I dump more coins into Pirate's scheme directly?
Yes, I would. But you're clearly not going to do that. You'll instead use money from others for it and won't risk your money. About the net loss: You can throw sand at my eyes all you want, but rest assured you won't blind me  Actually, I am risking my own money - that's what the insurance fund is for. I could easily lose (and expect to at some stage) drop 500 coins in insurance payouts if/when pirate defaults. However, I would prefer that it gets unwound nicely and I don't lose 500 coins in this. I am in it for some profit and it is a good idea making one of the more lucrative schemes available to those who currently do not have access. On that basis, it's a good idea, and one people could easily replicate (low barrier to entry). Picking up stochastic's points: Certainly PPT is solvent and can easily meet its obligations - currently we are over-secured (even with tomorrows bond sale) And also yes the gain is higher than 2% because of the compounding, (but not on the 0.32 that we are putting up - that cannot be invested). As mentioned elsewhere, 1BTC invested for four periods is 1.31 and we're paying 1.28. So 3% plus any premium. |
|
|
|
Ok, I see I used the wrong word.
I should've said "sell more 100BTC shares" instead of "sell those 100 BTC shares".
But, yeah, your statement still stands. You guys had the work, you wish to be the only ones to be rewarded and because of that you don't even want to share the risk. Understandable!
I just hope I and other depositors don't get fucked* because of your greediness...
*booted out of BS&T
Well, we are going to be doing more of those 100 BTC shares, but they are not open market at this stage. The risk/return ratio isn't set yet and that will take a little while to sort out. Anyway, on current bidding, bond holders will be making about 26% and our "greediness" will net us 2% and given the reserves set aside (not earning interest in other things), that puts us in a net loss. As for screwing up other people's deposits, current information is that it is not very likely. Would you prefer that as a separate exercise I dump more coins into Pirate's scheme directly? |
|
|
|
I thought the main PPT is only used as "bank" for the insurances, not paying out the earnings from PPT.X auctions? Why would you buy shares at 100 BTC each there that are only used to be distributed in case of pirate's default?
If anything you should be glad that there are people willing to invest and by doing that secure more than the 25% default insurance. I am only 25% glad. You are not more glad because they don't want to sell those 100 BTC shares to reduce risk, hence reducing their profits also. Perhaps some additional information (really a restatement) will clarify. We came up with an idea to provide a partially insured bond that would include a reserve of unencumbered bitcoins. The total size ultimately growing to 32% or 8000 bonds or 2560 bitcoins. The six founding shareholders are committed to provide this necessary level of funding. There is no additional sweetener to cover the many hours that we have collectively put into this venture through extra shares or "fees". If additional shares were issued and sold, it would not necessarily increase the reserve as we could simply reallocate the existing shares (i.e. transfers). Also, any surplus over the agreed reserve could be paid as dividends to the PPT shareholders - nothing particularly fancy about that either. Profits are driven by any margin between the sale of bonds and the interest due, not the number or value of the PPT shares. I might also point out that in the event of a Pirate default, an event that some people consider certain at some stage, the PPT shareholders will suffer a loss of their investment (the above mentioned 2560 coins). |
|
|
|
Well, I didn't mean to imply that OTC is a requirement to exchange funds, but that's how it is being read, seemingly.
OTC is not the only way to build trust, that is why you guys were able to do without it.
No, we were observing, as you have, that there are multiple ways of doing things. |
|
|
|
Most things that are worth doing are not easy. OTC registration is one of them. Its just like many aspects of the business world - if you want to taken seriously, you have to jump through a few hoops first.
Oddly enough, I've received >$10k in deposits and never registered for the damn thing. Similar - did a lot of business before doing the OTC thing. I have done some ratings recently (only took 30 minutes), but playing with a few other bits and pieces. I do have people send me BTC500 deposits as that's a sensible level, and they get paid back too. (had 1000 coins returned to happy owners in the past few weeks) Currently, I'm paying interest on more than 3000 coins (that's about 0.0001/sec if I bother to watch in real time) and have some nice interest payments arriving regularly from different loans. |
|
|
|
|
Watching, and making notes.
|
|
|
|
|
never2sleep Date Registered: February 15, 2012, 08:37:31 PM
Vorksholk Date Registered: February 12, 2012, 10:35:05 PM
|
|
|
|
Date of birth and full name (two hits): 17038302 JENSEN ANDRE RONALD TAWHIAO 21/08/1978 NEW ZEALAND 18352632 JENSEN ANDRE RONALD TAWHIAO 21/08/1978 RAETIHI NEW ZEALAND I have also paid for the ASIC company extract so have several addresses (in Victoria) to cross-reference and have done a PPSR search on Mr Jensen. |
|
|
|
|
It's a few bucks, and I know someone who can do it for me - I'll hunt some details.
(also watching to see my case in NSW hit the web - as far as I know papers were filed last week)
|
|
|
|
|
A useful thing to do, if you have not done so, it log back into the site and print your entire profile and trading history. I have these safely stored in pdf files covering 15 pages. I would not like to see other people lose access to their information when (rather than if) the website is removed.
p.s. did a little search on Raetihi because it's a tiny town - Andre went to pre-school there around 1985-91.
Also, my Commonwealth a/c didn't show anything useful on the corresponding Martin Place account.
|
|
|
|
It was 3% per 3 days to be precise.
As an aside to the main thread, I'll disagree, because while payouts were each three days, the rate was 1% simple interest. For those compounding, that would effectively be 3% per three days. I beleive the text actually said "paying 1% per day". |
|
|
|
Does anyone know the historic interest rates of BST?
1%/day - for as long as I can remember (i.e. back to the thread creation date - December or late November) |
|
|
|
How much funds are in the PPT default thing?
To cover the first round of bonds, probably 650-ish (Burt has the exact number). That's based on 7*100 less setup fees which were around 50. With additional weeks and bonds, additional capital will be injected to maintain the capital reserve. With a planned maximum of 8000 total, 25% it should build to 2560 coins in the next couple of weeks. |
|
|
|
It's bullshit when people jump on a bitcoin site operator whenever they are getting pushed around by the banks.
The exchange operator gets scammed, and people blame the victim? You have to wonder if the people complaining are the same ones who used the phished bank accounts.
I mean, if I was part of the established banking system, I would use phished bank accounts myself just so that I could reverse the charges later and screw over the exchange, then I would get on here and bad mouth the exchange operator.
The issue at the heart of the matter is the same as its been from the beginning: How do you reconcile non reversible BTC payments with reversible fiat bullshit controlled by TPTB??
SOLUTION: If you start such an exchange, run your bank accounts as dry as possible. Withdraw extra funds and trade a portion of it to gold (pecunix accounts?). Have as many possible accounts under different names and corporations as you can. Don't let the banks know that the different accounts are all yours.
Bottom line is, if you're going to succeed as an exchange that trades with bank deposit money, you're either going to have to completely sell out to their rules, or go to great lengths to fool them.
Your post is not particularly useful. I do not use stolen bank accounts. My funds were not actually being used for trading and were caught between a deposit/withdrawal cycle - nothing to do with non-reversible BTC payments. I am prepared to take the issue further with the Australian authorities because I'm not keen to lose $3k and as it was all clearly AUD denominated it's a simple complaint to spell out WBX was holding my AUD and failed to release it. My transactions record that in a very straight forward manner. |
|
|
|
|
I'm sure Burt will pick up the extra words.
As for the "immediately" issue, it's more about the trigger event. Personally I am assuming that at some point in the future there will be a day when this stops - either with some notice, or possibly no notice. At that stage there should be four bonds in operation, cycling through a week apart. To pick a day for illustration, if this was day#2 of a bond, there would also be day 9, 16 and 23 for each bond respectively. Also, I am not sure if glbse allows the premium paid on each issued bond to be tracked to the purchaser as ideally some kind of pro-rating/refund would be a nice addition too.
The world isn't perfect, and this is one of those cases (like buying a share) where the value might go down as well as up. We're trying to cover the events before they happen, so the discussion is useful.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
