Changing lending policy (so you should)

[Gunthar]

When i started my lending thread i wasnt aware of the "little borrowers ponzi" issue and none of the most trusted member adviced on it. The only "harsh" reply was from KenR. And yes, when you see an "harsh" reply to your post, you first get anger burning yourself and then, if you are a mature and understanding person, you start to ponder about the real reasons why you got such a slap on you face. Basically account's buyers/sellers aka account's farmers are repeteadly borrowing microloans in the attempt to build a fucking little ponzi scheme. And when they think they wont bother anymore, they just default, apparently "loosing" their collateral but indeed not giving a fuck about it as it was all planned as a scheme.
There is not so much defaulting behaviour within my borrowers but i can see where it is going to already...
Yes, account buying/selling on the forum is allowed...but it is discouraged. And accepting bitcointalk accounts as collaterals is NOT a discouragment: it is supporting the account farmers/ponzi!
Soooooo....i'm changing my lending policies (and so should do any lender accepting btct accounts as collateral) and i will not accept them as collateral anymore, unless: Sr/Hero/Legendary that will NOT ruin their trust for a few bucks...(high trusted greens are already borrowing from me without collaterals, tho).
Old borrowers with active loans that will default and had a collateral account, will NOT be sold, but i'll park them on hold somewhere in my old laptop, updating their signature with my lending service advertising, like i did with this fucker https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=663738

If you want to read more about what made me take this decision, here are some useful links:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1462756.0;topicseen
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1455496.msg14712654#msg14712654

~Gun

[1715231344]

1715231344

[1715231344]

1715231344

[1715231344]

1715231344

[codehtcmail]

As a fellow lender, after having 3 member accounts on my hands from defaulted loans, I totally agree to what you say, and me too I changed my policies to no accounts as collateral, except the obvious highly trusted members who would not ruin their trust for a small loan.

Good luck for your business.

[Joel_Jantsen]

Not taking accounts as collateral ,agree.But wait,what's an alternative ?

Answer : Bitcointalkers don't really have an alternative except worthless domain names and reversible paypal balances.

Out 100 borrowers,only 5% of them offer really legit altcoins or say other digital goods.Everything is BS apart from that.How many trusted borrowers we have anyway ? Speaking of green trust,recetly wheelz got hacked and a few others too.Without taking a valid collateral ,its not safe to give high amount loans as you never know who is the person behind the account.[Signed messages from oldest staked addresses are legit]

[Justin00]

Is simply to understand that there is a "Market Account" for scamming loan purpose. If you go on Digital Good you could see a lot of Newbie that ask for Full or Sr Member , and usually they "need account" quicky.

So i suggest  you (and codehtc too)  to check better before giving out a loan (for example if you  see inactivity on forum for long time shoud indicate that account probably was bought) .

[alani123]

I guess that an alternative to this would be to provide very limited options for account collaterals so it'd be against the receiving party's interest to default. For example, if you only offer to lend them 10% of the account's market value he'd want the account back or would decline the loan to begin with.

[Justin00]

I guess that an alternative to this would be to provide very limited options for account collaterals so it'd be against the receiving party's interest to default. For example, if you only offer to lend them 10% of the account's market value he'd want the account back or would decline the loan to begin with.

Yes, it's a good idea. But even start from hero or legendary, because is possible to buy a Sr with less than 0.1BTC....  10% should be the weekly ROI of a good signature campaign, so i think till 50% of valued price from www.bctalkaccountpricer.info/ could be accepted . For example my account value on www.bctalkaccountpricer.info/ is about 0.28 BTC , so a due diligence should be to lend no more than 0.14 BTC .

[Joel_Jantsen]

Yes, it's a good idea. But even start from hero or legendary, because is possible to buy a Sr with less than 0.1BTC....  10% should be the weekly ROI of a good signature campaign, so i think till 50% of valued price from www.bctalkaccountpricer.info/ could be accepted . So for example my account value on www.bctalkaccountpricer.info/ is about 0.28 BTC , so a due diligence should be to lend no more than 0.14 BTC .

What the fuck are you even talking about ? I don't think you quite understand the entire point of this thread.HEY OP IS TRYING TO STOP TAKING ACCOUNTS AS COLLATERAL!
You should probably get off the lousy account purchases and your shit ROI schemes as it does nothing but spams the entire forum (just like you're doing it now).The information mentioned on bitcointalkaccountpricer is wrong,it would be stupid of you take those rates into consideration.The goal is to avoid account sales (so people like you can't take advantage of shit ROI YoShit campaign schemes.)

[codehtcmail]

Up until now I have refused a dozen of loan applications that seemed to me like a sale attempt. Many loan applications were sent to me over PM not even in my loaning thread so no other experienced member would come and give me advice about the borrower, but a simple investigation always showed me they were trying to sell the account they are putting as collateral and so I decline their applications.
It's a scam that is becoming very common here, disguising a sale as a loan to leave you with the account on hand while they enjoy whatever amount they took as a loan.

[Justin00]

Yes, it's a good idea. But even start from hero or legendary, because is possible to buy a Sr with less than 0.1BTC....  10% should be the weekly ROI of a good signature campaign, so i think till 50% of valued price from www.bctalkaccountpricer.info/ could be accepted . So for example my account value on www.bctalkaccountpricer.info/ is about 0.28 BTC , so a due diligence should be to lend no more than 0.14 BTC .

What the fuck are you even talking about ? I don't think you quite understand the entire point of this thread.HEY OP IS TRYING TO STOP TAKING ACCOUNTS AS COLLATERAL!
You should probably get off the lousy account purchases and your shit ROI schemes as it does nothing but spams the entire forum (just like you're doing it now).The information mentioned on bitcointalkaccountpricer is wrong,it would be stupid of you take those rates into consideration.The goal is to avoid account sales (so people like you can't take advantage of shit ROI YoShit campaign schemes.)

Please stop trolling. Your reply is stupid because i only quoted a post of  alani123 (another legendary, more trustable than me) and gave my opinion. So if you have to post only for signature (because you are just  doing this) go away. 

[Quickseller]

If you wish to give out loans with collateral then you should accept as broad of a range of collateral as possible to allow you to potentially make a greater BTC volume of loans (which would result in greater BTC amount of interest/profit).

When accepting collateral for a loan, then you want to ensure that both the loan amount and the value of the collateral are amounts so that the borrower has ample incentives to repay the loan on a timely basis. This generally means that ensuring that the value of the loan is sufficiently less then the value of the collateral, however if the collateral is somewhat difficult to sell then the lender should ensure that the value of the loan plus a value for the time required to sell the collateral is sufficiently less then the value of the collateral.

I would note that a very high percentage of loans that use accounts as collateral will end up defaulting, however I suspect that this is partially due to lenders giving too high a percentage of the value of the accounts they are accepting as collateral worth of loans. I suspect that if a lender were to lend somewhere in the range of 25%-50% of the value of an account then the loan would probably get repaid, and if it doesn't then the lender would be sufficiently compensated for his time.

If you are considering to make a loan, the borrower only has his account as collateral, but since you do not agree with using accounts as collateral, you instead choose to make a no collateral loan, then you will most likely get burned.

[DarkStar_]

I would note that a very high percentage of loans that use accounts as collateral will end up defaulting, however I suspect that this is partially due to lenders giving too high a percentage of the value of the accounts they are accepting as collateral worth of loans. I suspect that if a lender were to lend somewhere in the range of 25%-50% of the value of an account then the loan would probably get repaid, and if it doesn't then the lender would be sufficiently compensated for his time.

If you are considering to make a loan, the borrower only has his account as collateral, but since you do not agree with using accounts as collateral, you instead choose to make a no collateral loan, then you will most likely get burned.

I agree with Quickseller. If you under value accounts, people who are looking to default to sell their account won't come to you. Look at knowhow's thread - he got a bunch of defaults of member accounts so he lowered his value, and it seems he has less. I would say I value accounts at ~75% of their value usually, and I have a default rate of 27.27% (3/11). I really don't mind if people default with an account other then it can be a pain sometimes, because I can sell it for more profit. One account I managed to sell for 4 times the loan value. I'm not going to be changing my policy, unless something big happens.

[Gunthar]

What the fuck are you even talking about ? I don't think you quite understand the entire point of this thread.HEY OP IS TRYING TO STOP TAKING ACCOUNTS AS COLLATERAL!
You should probably get off the lousy account purchases and your shit ROI schemes as it does nothing but spams the entire forum (just like you're doing it now).The information mentioned on bitcointalkaccountpricer is wrong,it would be stupid of you take those rates into consideration.The goal is to avoid account sales (so people like you can't take advantage of shit ROI YoShit campaign schemes.)

Exactly even if not my preferred vocabulary. We are at a point that lending and accepting accounts as collateral is only FEEDING THE ACCOUNT FARMERS AKA SIG:SPAM AKA SCAM.

Tips&Tricks: Did you know when you hold an account from a defaulted loan you get to read the whole story of their PM? Do you know there are people that lended from QS, zaza, DS, codec, myself and lot others that soon as we sent them satoshis, they used it to fucking rush to scam someone, using the borrowed satoshis? Did you know that a lot of shitcoins trades (read: SCAM) are feed by borrowed BTC from previous mentioned lenders? Did you know that half of fucking account farmers are all connected to just a very few REAL OWNERS dancing around lending threads and account auctions using the borrowed coins to infinitely buy/borrow/sell/buy/borrow/sell....etc?

Definitely, the account sales ONLY feed 2 things: SCAMS and SIGNATURE SPAM.
Cmon guys (read: Darkstar) you really are here accepting all of this and not changing your policies because you have profit?
I really wish to be a DT in this moment...

[DarkStar_]

What the fuck are you even talking about ? I don't think you quite understand the entire point of this thread.HEY OP IS TRYING TO STOP TAKING ACCOUNTS AS COLLATERAL!
You should probably get off the lousy account purchases and your shit ROI schemes as it does nothing but spams the entire forum (just like you're doing it now).The information mentioned on bitcointalkaccountpricer is wrong,it would be stupid of you take those rates into consideration.The goal is to avoid account sales (so people like you can't take advantage of shit ROI YoShit campaign schemes.)

Exactly even if not my preferred vocabulary. We are at a point that lending and accepting accounts as collateral is only FEEDING THE ACCOUNT FARMERS AKA SIG:SPAM AKA SCAM.

Tips&Tricks: Did you know when you hold an account from a defaulted loan you get to read the whole story of their PM? Do you know there are people that lended from QS, zaza, DS, codec, myself and lot others that soon as we sent them satoshis, they used it to fucking rush to scam someone, using the borrowed satoshis? Did you know that a lot of shitcoins trades (read: SCAM) are feed by borrowed BTC from previous mentioned lenders? Did you know that half of fucking account farmers are all connected to just a very few REAL OWNERS dancing around lending threads and account auctions using the borrowed coins to infinitely buy/borrow/sell/buy/borrow/sell....etc?

Definitely, the account sales ONLY feed 2 things: SCAMS and SIGNATURE SPAM.
Cmon guys (read: Darkstar) you really are here accepting all of this and not changing your policies because you have profit?
I really wish to be a DT in this moment...

Fair enough. I might consider changing my policy soon. Currently I only accept Full Member+ accounts so they at least are kinda attached.
Edit: Thought about it a bit and realized that if I do Senior+, I would probably get less defaults as they are usually more attached to their accounts and it takes longer to farm it up. I will change my policy once I become Sr. Member (~10 days).

[KenR]

Sorry if I was being harsh.That was certainly not a personal attack.Hope you get the intentions behind it.We all are trying to fight the same war here.

[Gunthar]

Sorry if I was being harsh.That was certainly not a personal attack.Hope you get the intentions behind it.We all are trying to fight the same war here.

Nods...no worry bud...men always talk harsh at beginning then...they start to use their brain. Thanks for pointing me up to this issue, no matter how you did it.

[Gunthar]

quoting for reference

Loan Amount:0.01
Amount to be repaid: 0.012
Repayment Date: Next 10 days
Bitcoin Address: 1CnAuWh46naBMbzabtQLFdwXxfZG6JgPCU
Collateral: My acc

Unfortunately for these kind of request, i changed my policy and i am not accepting accounts as collateral anymore. So should do any lender here. I know you and you have been repaying early your previous loans but please understand: the damage of account farmers are doing to this forum, doesnt worth the 0.002 this loan would produce.
If you have any other valid collateral i will happily fill this loan.
More details here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1472164.msg14845460#msg14845460
G.

[Your Point Is Invalid]

This is stupid, most users here dont have any valuable digital goods apart for their accounts

[Jog4444]

This is stupid, most users here dont have any valuable digital goods apart for their accounts

Kind of agree. I understand what OP means and agree with that also.
I bought some altcoin before I even bought btc. It's nice to have it there if you ever need it or makes money with market. (I hold)
I think bct accounts are flooding the market and you never know if they are the original owner anymore cause half of them don't stake tell the time they need a loan and it's just a crap show.

If I was a lender, (good thing I'm not haha)
I'd only accept alt coin or give no Collateral to customers with good record.

I'm sorry OP if I went off topic. You have a very good point.

Cheers...

[Your Point Is Invalid]

This is stupid, most users here dont have any valuable digital goods apart for their accounts

Kind of agree. I understand what OP means and agree with that also.
I bought some altcoin before I even bought btc. It's nice to have it there if you ever need it or makes money with market. (I hold)
I think bct accounts are flooding the market and you never know if they are the original owner anymore cause half of them don't stake tell the time they need a loan and it's just a crap show.

If I was a lender, (good thing I'm not haha)
I'd only accept alt coin or give no Collateral to customers with good record.

I'm sorry OP if I went off topic. You have a very good point.

Cheers...

Most of us dont own altcoins,this is bitcointalk not altcointalk, also taking altcoins as collateral is risky since price can swing either way in a matter of minutes

[bitkilo]

This is stupid, most users here dont have any valuable digital goods apart for their accounts

Kind of agree. I understand what OP means and agree with that also.
I bought some altcoin before I even bought btc. It's nice to have it there if you ever need it or makes money with market. (I hold)
I think bct accounts are flooding the market and you never know if they are the original owner anymore cause half of them don't stake tell the time they need a loan and it's just a crap show.

If I was a lender, (good thing I'm not haha)
I'd only accept alt coin or give no Collateral to customers with good record.

I'm sorry OP if I went off topic. You have a very good point.

Cheers...

Nothing wrong with accepting alt coins as collateral, established alt coins will always be good.
If you gave out a no collateral loan to a "trusted" member and they defaulted you are left with nothing, if you took the account as collateral then you would at least be left with something of value to sell if needed.

I don't like all the account selling that goes on here really either but it's not something that can be stopped easily.