idea

[LoupGaroux]

Don't listen to LoupGaroux, he's a Nazi.

Really? A Nazi? That's the best you could come up with? Well, I guess someone willing to embrace the Number of the Beast in his moniker will certainly expect to find a lot of followers with that kind of thinking. Have a good life, 'cause your afterlife is going to suck something awful.

[malevolent]

Don't listen to LoupGaroux, he's a Nazi.

Really? A Nazi? That's the best you could come up with? Well, I guess someone willing to embrace the Number of the Beast in his moniker will certainly expect to find a lot of followers with that kind of thinking. Have a good life, 'cause your afterlife is going to suck something awful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

[brendio]

http://s17.postimage.org/7eiptj6u5/seem.jpg

Say what you will about the asset proposal, but the area looks pretty cool.

I wonder is that an artificial lake there or did they refurbish a natural one into that rectangular shape?

It's tremendously huge.

What area specifically are you talking about?

The one in the picture of course. That's Siem Reap is it not?

Clicking through the images on the map I find it mostly very beautiful.

I believe that's West Baray, and yes it is artificial. There is also a smaller, East Baray reservoir.

[goodlord666]

Don't listen to LoupGaroux, he's a Nazi.

Really? A Nazi? That's the best you could come up with? Well, I guess someone willing to embrace the Number of the Beast in his moniker will certainly expect to find a lot of followers with that kind of thinking. Have a good life, 'cause your afterlife is going to suck something awful.

A French one, too, at that. Shame on you! Shoo shoo!

That's not the number of the beast, thats the natural number following 665 and preceding 667. Sheesh!

(but let's not hijack this thread with nazi analogies and numerology)

[LoupGaroux]

Don't listen to LoupGaroux, he's a Nazi.

Really? A Nazi? That's the best you could come up with? Well, I guess someone willing to embrace the Number of the Beast in his moniker will certainly expect to find a lot of followers with that kind of thinking. Have a good life, 'cause your afterlife is going to suck something awful.

A French one, too, at that. Shame on you! Shoo shoo!

That's not the number of the beast, thats the natural number following 665 and preceding 667. Sheesh!

(but let's not hijack this thread with nazi analogies and numerology)

Splendid. Apology accepted. Back to white slavers and carbohydrates then.

[pyrkne]

Don't listen to LoupGaroux, he's a Nazi.

Really? A Nazi? That's the best you could come up with? Well, I guess someone willing to embrace the Number of the Beast in his moniker will certainly expect to find a lot of followers with that kind of thinking. Have a good life, 'cause your afterlife is going to suck something awful.

A French one, too, at that. Shame on you! Shoo shoo!

That's not the number of the beast, thats the natural number following 665 and preceding 667. Sheesh!

(but let's not hijack this thread with nazi analogies and numerology)

Splendid. Apology accepted. Back to white slavers and carbohydrates then.

Damn Goat enslaving the disadvantaged and sullying the good name of Bitcoin, all in one fell swoop!

But seriously - after thinking about this proposal a more, I still like some of the ideas. A bitcoin-backed security that is something other than loans or mining is hugely likeable on its own.

I was wondering about the long-term nature of the hypothetical rice-farming asset - this got me thinking about how it would affect payment of dividends. Over the course of a year, the price of bitcoin can and will change significantly, right? Naturally, purchases of shares and payouts could be handled with fiat $. Bitcoin would still be used for the transfer of money.

My ultimate question - Why don't any securities do this?

Would it not be disastrous if a borrower was repaying a loan in a currency that has just doubled in value? I don't even want to think about being that guy...

[markm]

Most people have set up similar to the way fiat systems are set up: they have one "special" asset/commodity that is "local currency" and gets special treatment or focus on account of its being the local favourite.

That is basically a bias people have brought with them from the fiat world. In Open Transactions assets are assets, you can trade any for any, you can send any of them as dividends any time you choose and so on. Well okay, shares are special in the sense that to accomodate people's preconceptions the ability to send dividends is only enabled for assets of share type, but really you could choose to set up your dollars asset contract using type share if you wanted to be able to send dividends to all holders of dollars so there can be that distinction between shares and other types of assets but its up to you to use it or not when creating your asset contract.

(Eventually there will also be a type "deeds" for things of which each instance is individual too, for things like real estate or vehicles etc.)

A lot of the bias comes simply from being on the bitcointalk forum, if you were in the alternate blockchains forum maybe there would be more variety.

-MarkM-

[DeathAndTaxes]

Over the course of a year, the price of bitcoin can and will change significantly, right? Naturally, purchases of shares and payouts could be handled with fiat $. Bitcoin would still be used for the transfer of money.

My ultimate question - Why don't any securities do this?

We have sold LoC notes denominated in dollars using BTC as a transfer mechanism.  These are private notes though we favor dealing with a few sophisticated investors than trying to compete in the ponzi-o-rama (3% per week, no 5% per week, no 7% per week, no 1.2% per day, no ∞ per millisecond).

Trying to do it on GLBSE (or any exchange) would be very difficult.  Even the IPO would be tough because if you want a fixed dollar face value the amount paid in BTC is going to continually vary.  GLBSE (or any exchange) could with minimal change in code support dollar denominated assets (traded w/ BTC).  Look at bitmit.net as inspiration.  They allow sellers to sell dollar denominated products in BTC by showing the price in USD with the continually adjusting BTC equivalent.

[El Cabron]

Just to make clear since the rice will be the dividend I will have to sell this for fiat, buy BTC and then send them on. The only other option would be for me to mail you rice.

We should think of this investment as based in fiat but only use BTC as a medium of exchange (cuz its fast and almost fee free). When you hold this investment you should not think of it as a BTC investment but as a fiat investment. The land will need to be bought and then sold back into fiat due to local laws.

If you want to invest with this, do not take BTC from your saving account, take fiat buy BTC and then send that.

I'm very bullish on BTC but I also do not want all of my eggs in one basket.

Also keep in mind this might be a high risk investment. Rice might not grow every year due to drought or flooding. Land prices might free fall. Anyway I think it will be better than fiat and can't wait to go look at the different plots. The guy that will be assisting us and farming for us is highly competent and I trust him.

Thanks.

Thanks.

[Bitcoin Oz]

Over the course of a year, the price of bitcoin can and will change significantly, right? Naturally, purchases of shares and payouts could be handled with fiat $. Bitcoin would still be used for the transfer of money.

My ultimate question - Why don't any securities do this?

We have sold LoC notes denominated in dollars using BTC as a transfer mechanism.  These are private notes though we favor dealing with a few sophisticated investors than trying to compete in the ponzi-o-rama (3% per week, no 5% per week, no 7% per week, no 1.2% per day, no ∞ per millisecond).

Trying to do it on GLBSE (or any exchange) would be very difficult.  Even the IPO would be tough because if you want a fixed dollar face value the amount paid in BTC is going to continually vary.  GLBSE (or any exchange) could with minimal change in code support dollar denominated assets (traded w/ BTC).  Look at bitmit.net as inspiration.  They allow sellers to sell dollar denominated products in BTC by showing the price in USD with the continually adjusting BTC equivalent.

Interesting thought. Deposit btc but denominate the asset in USD ?

[markm]

Interesting thought. Deposit btc but denominate the asset in USD ?

Basically just use BU (Bitcoin Union) instead of WU (Western Union) to zap the USD over to him...

-MarkM-

[pyrkne]

Interesting thought. Deposit btc but denominate the asset in USD ?

Basically just use BU (Bitcoin Union) instead of WU (Western Union) to zap the USD over to him...

-MarkM-

I like this. I'm pretty sure a transaction fee is magnitudes and magnitudes less than what Western Union charges.

[the_thing]

You're bullish on BTC, yet you denominate your investment in USD. If the price of BTC rises (as you presume), you will have to pay much more than 4-6% per year. I hope you realize that.

[the_thing]

You're bullish on BTC, yet you denominate your investment in USD. If the price of BTC rises (as you presume), you will have to pay much more than 4-6% per year. I hope you realize that.

i dont think you understand. Im paying dividends in rice.

You're going to mail your creditors rice?

[markm]

No, he is bullish on rice (or more accuirately I guess on riceland and its produce), yet is willing to send his shareholders bitcoin.

-MarkM-

[bitcoinbear]

Maybe you could get a rice distributor to adopt bitcoin, then you can sell the rice for bitcoin, thus removing one step of transactions? This might take a few years, but eventually everybody will know about bitcoins, and many will see the advantages of the system for international payments.

[the_thing]

You're bullish on BTC, yet you denominate your investment in USD. If the price of BTC rises (as you presume), you will have to pay much more than 4-6% per year. I hope you realize that.

i dont think you understand. Im paying dividends in rice.

You're going to mail your creditors rice?

I will if they want. But they will have to pay customs and shipping. So I'm going to assume they will want me to sell it for them in fiat, I then convert the fiat in the BTC and send them the BTC.

I just read the whole thread and found out that you want to denominate your debt in USD, not in bitcoins. I apologize.

[coinft]

I just read up on this whole thread. It's interesting, and would be a good showcase for legitimate BTC uses.

I can imagine investing a minor sum, and would like to see the following (eventually):

* I want to see the share holder contract, and a translated contract with the farmer(s).
* Detailed information about the land and the owner who holds it on investors behalf.
* I don't think you rely on GLBSE or other exchanges, they are still too volatile.
* From what I read I think the shares would be stock style, giving shared ownership, shared risk, and shared profits?
* Who will do the rice selling and for what fees?
* Do you plan to wind this down by selling the land eventually,
* or just have individual owners sell their shares for profit? If so, on which market?
* How do you plan to handle shared decision making?
* If this reaches the size of a company, do you plan to register share holders (partners) by name and verified identity?
* Can you evaluate the land price regularly to provide a current NAV to share holders?

[thatbluedude]

I thing goat should start writing some basic contract draft. The basic idea is interesting but it's the details that count
 

I just read up on this whole thread. It's interesting, and would be a good showcase for legitimate BTC uses.

I can imagine investing a minor sum, and would like to see the following (eventually):

* I want to see the share holder contract, and a translated contract with the farmer(s).
* Detailed information about the land and the owner who holds it on investors behalf.
* I don't think you rely on GLBSE or other exchanges, they are still too volatile.
* From what I read I think the shares would be stock style, giving shared ownership, shared risk, and shared profits?
* Who will do the rice selling and for what fees?
* Do you plan to wind this down by selling the land eventually,
* or just have individual owners sell their shares for profit? If so, on which market?
* How do you plan to handle shared decision making?
* If this reaches the size of a company, do you plan to register share holders (partners) by name and verified identity?
* Can you evaluate the land price regularly to provide a current NAV to share holders?

I share this concerns.
other points:
obligatory " why shoud I trust you, at this profits I'm still fucked if you run 5 years from now".
the contract should let shareholders vote to recieve payouts in a currency other in bitcoins, in case bitcoin fails.
shareholder own what exactely? land, rice produced?
you should offer divident reinvesting.
you should offer me some way to keep my shares in cold storage. After investing I should be able to print everything, file it, and pull it out to vote or cashout (see divident reinvesting) a decade from now.

disclaimer:
I admit I'm more interested to see if this works out and getting a reference framework for the future than investing huge summs. actual investment from my side would be in single BTC digits.

[thatbluedude]

First there will be a contract.
There is not one now because we are in the feedback stage.

yes, but the feedback could be much more precise if you had some rought draft for common reference. Currently everyone only has his own assumption to go on. Doing this "advance payment" off your time would also indicate that you are serious and allready thought about this.