[CRYPTOSTOCKS] Private loan pass-through (WIT), Dividend up to 1.2% daily

[WITRcenter]

I have just paid 0.05BTC/share special big dividend, which is a part of the buying back plan. I will pay the other 0.055BTC/share soon, after which the WIT will be fully bought back.

[1714821866]

1714821866

[1714821866]

1714821866

[1714821866]

1714821866

[001sonkit]

Thanks for updating.

[notthepuma]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

[001sonkit]

at least he paid us bro!

https://cryptostocks.com/securities/17

[Chang Hum]

at least he paid us bro!

https://cryptostocks.com/securities/17

You don't count your from china too lol

[WITRcenter]

I have already bought the share back. The earliest investors of WIT earned a 31.20671% dividend of the face value.

Thanks for all my investors. Good luck!

[odolvlobo]

Well, what do the haters have to say now? Chang Hum? Blind? EskimoBob?

You were all completely wrong. You wrote dozens of posts about how this was a scam and a Ponzi scheme, and you were completely and utterly wrong. This guy ran a legitimate business and when it came time to shut it down, he paid everyone what they were due, and more. If you don't feel like total idiots, you should.

I think an apology is in order, don't you?

[Deprived]

Well, what do the haters have to say now? Chang Hum? Blind? EskimoBob?

You were all completely wrong. You wrote dozens of posts about how this was a scam and a Ponzi scheme, and you were completely and utterly wrong. This guy ran a legitimate business and when it came time to shut it down, he paid everyone what they were due, and more. If you don't feel like total idiots, you should.

I think an apology is in order, don't you?

That's a dangerous and naive perspective to take.

You may be right - but you could also be totally wrong (about it being a legitimate business etc).  Here's an alternative scenario - I'm NOT saying it's necessarily what happened - but it's equally consistent with what happened as your theory that it was a legitimate business not an intended ponzi.

Hypothetical scenario:

(To date

1.  He starts it as a Ponzi.
2.  It doesn't really take off - even though he buys a fair few shares himself (from himself) to make it look like it's growing.
3.  As it's a ponzi he can't PROVE it's real to get more customers so he decides instead to try to convince everyone he's totally trustowrthy - and turn it from a Ponzi into a long-con setup for a future ponzi.
4.  He announces it has to close for fairly vague reasons.
5.  All investments are repaid - but as he owns a load of shares himself and doesn't have enough cash to repay all at once he has to do the final payout in 2 parts (and transfer back from private account to issuer account in between).
6.  The cash repaid (and dividends paid) to actual investors is much smaller than it would appear from the records - as a lot of the shares were never actually sold to anyone other than himself.

(In future)

1.  He reappears saying he can now (for equally vague reasons) begin running the business again.
2.  He relists and this time bonds sell much faster - as he's proven (according to you) that the business is real and he's trustworthy.

IF that's the scenario then attitudes like yours are why it would be worth it (for him) taking the gamble of losing a bit now to potentially make lot more down the line.  It's exactly same principle as people who do conifdence loands that get bigger and bigger until they reach the size they aimed for and run with the cash.

Or, of course, it could all have been a legit business as you say - but assuming that to be the case isn't necessarily very smart.

[odolvlobo]

Well, what do the haters have to say now? Chang Hum? Blind? EskimoBob?

You were all completely wrong. You wrote dozens of posts about how this was a scam and a Ponzi scheme, and you were completely and utterly wrong. This guy ran a legitimate business and when it came time to shut it down, he paid everyone what they were due, and more. If you don't feel like total idiots, you should.

I think an apology is in order, don't you?

That's a dangerous and naive perspective to take.

You may be right - but you could also be totally wrong (about it being a legitimate business etc).  Here's an alternative scenario - I'm NOT saying it's necessarily what happened - but it's equally consistent with what happened as your theory that it was a legitimate business not an intended ponzi.

Hypothetical scenario:
...

You can invent an infinite number of scenarios, but there is no evidence to support any scenario other than the one in which this was a legitimate venture. I agree that evidence does not equal truth, but you have to go with the evidence.

It is difficult to accept anything as legitimate in the world of bitcoin. For example, there is no way for you to prove that your securities on LTC-GLOBAL are not Ponzi schemes. How beneficial would it be for these clowns to start posting in your threads, constantly accusing you of running a Ponzi scheme?

I agree that people need to be careful, but the actions of the haters in this thread were destructive and served no good purpose. They and everyone else need to understand this in order to make better decisions and use better judgment in the future. These people also need to be called out. It is important for them to lose credibility as a result of their poor judgment.

[Deprived]

You can invent an infinite number of scenarios, but there is no evidence to support any scenario other than the one in which this was a legitimate venture. I agree that evidence does not equal truth, but you have to go with the evidence.

It's not true to say that there's NO evidence to support any other scenarios.

For one thing there's the FACT that the final payment was made in two chunks - which only makes sense if large chunk of shares were held by himself and he didn't have funds to pay it all out in one hit.  You can't check now (as it's been delisted) but they were made in pretty close proximity - not like he had half funds on online and paid them out then a day or two later paid out the rest when the remainder got online.  Investing in your own asset makes sense sometimes (I own a good chunk in mine) - but in this case it wouldn't make legitimate sense (unless you believe adding fake volume to your own asset's trading is legitimate).

You also pointed out that my assets could equally easy be scams.  Well, there's no way to prove that I don't intend to grow them to a certain size then run off with the funds.  But there IS an absolutely key difference - that in my case anyone can verify (not totally - but almost entirely) that I'm doing what I say I'm doing, making the profits I say I'm making from doing it, and have the assets I say I have as a result.  So even if noone can be absolutely 100% sure I'm not going to scam (and noone CAN be sure of that except me - same for any unsecured asset) they can at least know that I have a functioning, profitable business model and hence don't need to scam to make a profit running it.  That wasn't the case with the asset this thread was for - and we still have no way of knowing whether it was a legit profitable endeavour or a failed ponzi that's been turned into a loss-leader for a second try later.

Businesses with no proof they're actually conducting a profitable business haven't exactly got a great track record here - just look at Pirate, OBSI.HRPT and all the various "Loans/investment" opportunities that turned out to just be dumping their funds into pirate rather than doing what they claimed to be doing.  So personally I'm always going to be extremely sceptical of ANY asset which either doesn't disclose its business or doesn't/won't provide some evidence that it's actually doing what it claims.  And I'd be doubly suspicious if matey from this thread showed up in a few months trying to run the same thing again.

[MPOE-PR]

There is nothing, I repeat that, nothing anyone, I repeat that, anyone can do or say to make a "secret business" legitimate.

There is nothing anyone can do or say to make a secret business legitimate.

No business which is secret can be legitimate, under any circumstances, ever.

There is no such thing as a legitimate secret business.

A business being secret is sufficient proof that it is illegitimate.

I hope that clarifies most points, and I look forward in great joy at the particular rephrasing of this simple, banal, and universally fucking true point that'll need to be hammered in next.

[Chang Hum]

Well, what do the haters have to say now? Chang Hum? Blind? EskimoBob?

You were all completely wrong. You wrote dozens of posts about how this was a scam and a Ponzi scheme, and you were completely and utterly wrong. This guy ran a legitimate business and when it came time to shut it down, he paid everyone what they were due, and more. If you don't feel like total idiots, you should.

I think an apology is in order, don't you?

Lol are you braindead mate? he's paid back all his investors (one other guy who's Chinese) read the OP before you post and if you think it's not a scam you deserve to lose your money!!

[odolvlobo]

Well, what do the haters have to say now? Chang Hum? Blind? EskimoBob?

You were all completely wrong. You wrote dozens of posts about how this was a scam and a Ponzi scheme, and you were completely and utterly wrong. This guy ran a legitimate business and when it came time to shut it down, he paid everyone what they were due, and more. If you don't feel like total idiots, you should.

I think an apology is in order, don't you?

Lol are you braindead mate? he's paid back all his investors (one other guy who's Chinese) read the OP before you post and if you think it's not a scam you deserve to lose your money!!

Wait. Which part of "he's paid back all his investors" is the scam?

[Kluge]

Keeping my mouth shut unless he re-opens...

[Chang Hum]

Well, what do the haters have to say now? Chang Hum? Blind? EskimoBob?

You were all completely wrong. You wrote dozens of posts about how this was a scam and a Ponzi scheme, and you were completely and utterly wrong. This guy ran a legitimate business and when it came time to shut it down, he paid everyone what they were due, and more. If you don't feel like total idiots, you should.

I think an apology is in order, don't you?

Lol are you braindead mate? he's paid back all his investors (one other guy who's Chinese) read the OP before you post and if you think it's not a scam you deserve to lose your money!!

Wait. Which part of "he's paid back all his investors" is the scam?

who? are you one?

EDIT: do you understand this is a failed scam?? because his op was ridiculous in the first place no ones done anything then take the piss out of him! the fact you have read it and don't see that is mind blowing, please have a look at some of his spreadsheets before you make another comment!

[WITRcenter]

As requested by Cryptostocks, I claim here that the delisting of the WIT share from Cryptostocks.com was my own instruction.

Thanks for the great platform of Cryptostocks. It accepted WIT right after Nefario refused to list me on GLBSE after he had ate my 8 bitcoin listing fee. Cryptostocks had asked and questioned me in detail of my business after he promised to keep it confidential for several hours. I think he showed the diligence to protect his investors as well as the good faith in people, like me a random stranger in the bitcoin community.

If Nefario can read this post, he can confirm that how sincerely wrote him an email to clarify my willingness to contribute a successful asset to the bitcoin economy after he shout me a scam aloud. I feel so lucky that he refused.

You can see that Cryptostocks far more deserves the listing fee. (He had actually listed WIT and checked the legitimacy of my business as much as he could.)  When my shares essentially stopped trading and cannot generate new fees for his platform, I asked him to return the listing fee which he promised long time ago in a public announcement, and he asked me where to send the coin to me. He is a man of his word.

I will post a summarize about the WIT asset when I have enough time to write it.

[lenny_]

New fancy sounding name, same scam.

• Absurdly high rate of return
• Vague business model
• Anonymous operator with zero verification

SCAM

+1