Pirate accomplices

[Coinoisseur]

How many BTC did he actually pay back out? Is there some public full accounting of transactions I'm missing?

[1714871362]

1714871362

[1714871362]

1714871362

[bitcoinBull]

BTCST was a short-term business that had to end, but GPUMax is the real deal. It's a miner wet dream.

What's so great about GPUMax exactly? Other than inspiring your wet dreams..

[BadBear]

Didn't pirate say he's made 30k BTC or $300.000 USD in profits from his scam? I'm sure the IRS would love to know about this.

If it were a scam, he'd have made $5 milllion off of it, and seems the FBI would be more interested than the IRS.

True, but the burden of proof for tax evasion is much lower. Just ask Al Capone.

If it was a ponzi he would have a whole lot less than that. Where else would the 7% a week come from.

You know if you add that up that would be more than $5 million paid out so if he ran a ponzi I bet he is down a few million.

He can wright that off as a business loss correct?

 

Except I'd.guess most reinvested the interest, and didn't actually realize all those paper gains.

[JoelKatz]

Except I'd.guess most reinvested the interest, and didn't actually realize all those paper gains.

We also don't know how much of his debt he himself holds. So some portion of his interest payments may have just been to himself.

[Charles Bass]

Didn't pirate say he's made 30k BTC or $300.000 USD in profits from his scam? I'm sure the IRS would love to know about this.

If it were a scam, he'd have made $5 milllion off of it, and seems the FBI would be more interested than the IRS.

True, but the burden of proof for tax evasion is much lower. Just ask Al Capone.

If it was a ponzi he would have a whole lot less than that. Where else would the 7% a week come from.

You know if you add that up that would be more than $5 million paid out so if he ran a ponzi I bet he is down a few million.

He can wright that off as a business loss correct?

 

Except I'd.guess most reinvested the interest, and didn't actually realize all those paper gains.

sure, only compound interest make you rich , and the most of us want to become rich by bitcoins...

[hannesnaude]

Where can you show that Theymos or myself said we did not think it was a ponzi?

and then less than 12 hours later in the same thread.

I still do not think he is running a ponzi.

Epic fail.

[bitcoinBull]

...mmm...Brunic, do you actually know what pirate was doing to legitimately earn 7%/week, or do you just have a theory?

It's the "unofficial" theory I could say. I can't say I know, since I'm only a small part of his business, I can only suppose.

But this theory is a great business model IMHO. If I had the resources and the customers, don't worry, I would not be losing my time on this forum trying to explain it.

[makomk]

Not necessarily. Imagine that the BTC price crash tomorrow morning and goes to 2$. What do you do if you took your own USD and bought your own BTC with it? You lose around 80% of your business value.

By borrowing BTC, he don't stay exposed for long to market volatility. If the BTC crash tomorrow, he don't care, since the BTC are not his (didn't invest to buy them), he only have USD that stay a lot more stable. It's a protection against volatility.

That's only the case if the BTC price crashes. If it skyrockets whilst his funds are in USD instead, he's not just out part of his business value, there is no upper limit on his potential liability to his lenders. That's... probably something he would want to avoid.

About growth, pirate always reserved himself the right to return coins if he didn't need them, and it occurred at certain occasions. At first too, he had limited capacity, and always advertised how much was available. There was no infinite growth, far from it, he kept the growth under tight control.

Well, ponzi schemes tend to do that in their early stages. I'm sure everyone here has seen that webpage about Currin Trading by now? If he were to allow big investments early on, one big fish withdrawing would be enough to sink the scheme. It's not until later stages when the ponzi's demand for new money becomes voracious.

You beat me to it. At times pirate needed money fast and paid 3% a day!!! Then other times he not only would not take new funds but sent them back to people!!

Suppose you're a ponzi operator and it's far too early to scuttle the scheme yet, but people have asked for withdrawals you can't afford to pay right now. What do you do? (See also page 8 of this document, from a proven Ponzi called Perma-Pave.)

[hannesnaude]

The point was to show I do not think pirate was running and ponzi and I never have. Theymos however clearly does think that it always was a ponzi.

Sorry, but that is not what is implied by your question.

Where can you show that Theymos or myself said we did not think it was a ponzi?

I'll even give you the benefit of the doubt that you did not express yourself properly as anyone who has read your posts can tell that your "wright"ing is not the best.
But then there is this awkward little bit from the same thread:

Vladimir,

when did i ever:

- imply that pirate is not operating a ponzi scheme

I'm waiting for p4man to do the same for me...  Slandering fools they are...

followed momentarily by:

I still do not think he is running a ponzi.

Yet I am an "accomplice" and Theymos is not...

Stop hiding behind Theymos. Theymos never claimed that he understood the business model and it is definitely not a ponzi. Quite the opposite. Theymos did not attack anyone on the forums who dared warn others that it might be a ponzi. You on the other hand have a well established track record.

Have you read the whole thread?

I have indeed. Have you read any of it?

[Vladimir]

Goat, you are wiggling too much. Simply answer these simple question honestly if you capable of that.

- have you  managed a proxy for an opaque investment that has exhibited all the classical signs of a ponzi scheme?
- have you profited or expected to profit from prolongation and proliferation of a ponzi scheme?
- have you  owed a duty of care and fiduciary duty to anyone who gave you money?
- have you provided adequate risk disclosures?
- have you implied at any time that pirate is not operating a ponzi scheme?
- have you implied at any time that you know some magical/secret biz model behind pirate operation?
- have you implied at any time that you know true identity of pirate?
- have you promoted investment into and lent credibity (or false credibility) to a ponzi scheme in any way?
- have you tried to silence, spam, mock, attack those who publicly warned about the risks of investing into such schemes?
- ought you to know better?
- what is you your real name and address for service of legal papers?

These are simple questions. Answer them if you dare.

[Shadow383]

"Stop hiding behind Theymos. Theymos never claimed that he understood the business model and it is definitely not a ponzi. Quite the opposite. Theymos did not attack anyone on the forums who dared warn others that it might be a ponzi. You on the other hand have a well established track record. "



Theymos very much claimed to understand the business model and he concluded it was a ponzi operation. He then asked for people to list uninsured ppt's on GLBSE a company he partly owns.

I am not attacking people like Theymos who think BTCST is a ponzi. Everyone should be able to do whatever they want with their money. I do not find fault with Theymos for wanting uninsured PPTs listed on GLBSE.

However to call me an "accomplice" and him not, well it is very silly.

This thread is about who to blame for a "scam".

You met pirate, claimed to understand his operation and helped funnel money into the scam through your PPT.
Say what you want, and I have to give you kudos on paying out your insured PPT quickly, but it's difficult to look at the pictures of the pirate posse in Vegas and conclude that you're all totally innocent, particularly given how that meetup was used to legitimise BS&T...

[JoelKatz]

Let us assume that I did know it was a ponzi, why would I go there and then post my photo on the internet?

To help you further bury your knowledge that it was a Ponzi scheme. To help you later deny "really knowing" it was a Ponzi scheme. And for a variety of non-rational reasons.

To help sell my insured bonds? The ones I lost significant BTC on?

To help avoid losing significant BTC on your bonds. To help you convince yourself that your money was safe, which is what you wanted to believe. And for a variety of non-rational reasons.

It is really astonishing how Ponzi schemes make people think and act. People who know it's a Ponzi scheme will lie about the scheme to friends and family to get them to invest and will convince themselves that they're helping them. It's pretty stunning really .. and sad. You've been reading the forums. You know how it is.

People who have money in a Ponzi scheme often maintain a kind of split personality where to some extent they know for sure it's a Ponzi scheme and to some extent they hope it isn't and can act like they don't know it is. It's quite strange and makes otherwise reasonable people do the very strangest things.

You know something. But you think it's in your interest not to know it. So you convince yourself you're not really sure. But deep down, you are sure. But you have a kind of plausible deniability that you build up in your own mind. I'm sure a lot of people reading this are finding that it resonates, and I hope a lot of them don't like that in themselves and try to learn something from this mess.

Or double down. Whatever. It's up to each of you.

[BadBear]

In case you missed it Goat. 

Goat, you are wiggling too much. Simply answer these simple question honestly if you capable of that.

- have you  managed a proxy for an opaque investment that has exhibited all the classical signs of a ponzi scheme?
- have you profited or expected to profit from prolongation and proliferation of a ponzi scheme?
- have you  owed a duty of care and fiduciary duty to anyone who gave you money?
- have you provided adequate risk disclosures?
- have you implied at any time that pirate is not operating a ponzi scheme?
- have you implied at any time that you know some magical/secret biz model behind pirate operation?
- have you implied at any time that you know true identity of pirate?
- have you promoted investment into and lent credibity (or false credibility) to a ponzi scheme in any way?
- have you tried to silence, spam, mock, attack those who publicly warned about the risks of investing into such schemes?
- ought you to know better?
- what is you your real name and address for service of legal papers?

These are simple questions. Answer them if you dare.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Seems to me ppl r trying to find a scapegoat and Goat just has an appropriate name. Everyone who gave money to Pirate ought to blame only himself.

[JoelKatz]

Seems to me ppl r trying to find a scapegoat and Goat just has an appropriate name. Everyone who gave money to Pirate ought to blame only himself.

If you hire a hit man to kill your boss, you ought only to blame yourself. But everyone else can blame the hitman too.

If you invested in Pirate, you probably deserve some blame. If you encouraged others to invest in Pirate, you probably deserve some blame. If you lied a "white lie" to help people invest in something you thought would really help them but should have known was a Ponzi scheme, you deserve some blame. Etcetera.

[556j]

I have never tried to stop anyone from expressing their opinion.

We get it you think it is a ponzi move on unless you really have nothing better to do with your life.

 

Took about 30 sec to find that one, there's many more.

[malevolent]

Here's a post I made a bit ago:
When I first joined #bitcoin-otc, I did a crapton of trading.  I did a bunch of moneypaks to btc and back.  Basically, playing market maker for whomever needed to move.  Pirate joined around the same time as me, a few days earlier if I'm not mistaken.  He was doing much the same thing.  As a result, it was inevitable for us to end up trading.  At various times, we each would come up with some big fish (or so it seemed at the time) and would help each other out with sourcing coins or finding coins good homes.  All of these trades were always online, with random people that would join #bitcoin-otc.  Eventually, pirate had some 'IRL' customers and it seemed they were larger than your typical moneypak transactions.  Eventually, I got into mining rather than trading because of a few bad moneypaks that someone screwed me with.  It seemed safer and less time intensive.  Meanwhile, pirate seemed to be branching out his trading and there were times where he needed to borrow coins.  When trading, you'd tried to line up the incoming with the outgoing to minimize exchange risk and maximize profit, but then sometimes things go weird with one side or whatever and a person would end up needing to borrow.  It happened to me at times in the past so I didn't think anything of it to loan out.  Time went on, the lending became more regular and one thing leads to another and we end up here.  Pirate never really told me what he was doing but I felt I had a good grasp of what was going on.  The dip in and out of two transactions could make 10% pretty easy (5% on both sides, sometimes much more than that) so 7% actually seemed fair.

Even in the long-term and with such a huge volume??

[Come-from-Beyond]

If you invested in Pirate, you probably deserve some blame. If you encouraged others to invest in Pirate, you probably deserve some blame. If you lied a "white lie" to help people invest in something you thought would really help them but should have known was a Ponzi scheme, you deserve some blame. Etcetera.

1. Some guys on BTC-e stated they earned good money using Pirate scheme and withdrew money just in time.
2. Noone here said "I'm an idiot coz didn't withdraw my coins before the closure of Pirate's scam".
3. Almost everyone here makes Goat a scapegoat.

All this looks incorrect. From the correct point of view it would be:

1. Some guys got coins of other guys with Pirate's help.
2. "Victims" of the scam should say "I'm an idiot, next time I'll be smarter".
3. Goat shouldn't be the only scapegoat. Add here the others, everyone who gave coins to Pirate to support his scam should be blamed.

PS: Goat, perhaps u r not interested in my opinion, but I'd like to say that u should ignore accusations in this thread.

PPS: I repeat for everyone - blame everyone who gave coins to Pirate, especially if they got profit with it.

[Frankie]

I have never tried to stop anyone from expressing their opinion.

We get it you think it is a ponzi move on unless you really have nothing better to do with your life.

 

Took about 30 sec to find that one, there's many more.

Their opinion had already been expressed.

Er?  So you would only be trying "to stop anyone from expressing their opinion" if you said something like "and if anyone else who hasn't expressed their opinion yet thinks its a Ponzi, shut yo' mouth."

Hairsplitting a bit much, aren't we?

[Frankie]

You all are dumber than a box of fraking hammers.

One:
No rich idiots exist that buy 10% over price.  Period.  Certainly not enough to move 500K BTC a week every week into perpetuity.

You're already missing it.

OK, so what is it? I'm honestly curious about what wrinkle turns the madness D&T describes into a totally winning business plan. What's to lose? Pirate's shutting down anyway, and even though many continue to deny it was ever a Ponzi scheme, you know that hope is fading every day.