[ANN][BCC] Bitconnect Coin - Decentralized Cryptocurrency

[AGM76]

Again, the lending wasn't a Ponzi

It was a ponzi. They advertised unrealistic return rates and last bagholders didn't get their money back. Your mental gymnastics can't change that fact.

Again another nutty one. So if you're holding bitcoin and all the whales dump it doesn't it make it the same thing? There is nothing that's going to keep the price of bitcoin up if everyone sells it at the same time.

Bitconnect didn't dump any coins! I showed that on the coinmarketcap graph. Very small volumes on the exchanges around the time of the dump. They probably did the opposite and bought it back cheap. How could they have been dumping a coin that has 100% yearly inflation and rises from 16 cents (I think the lowest) to close to $500 in a year and is freely traded on lots of exchanges??

You obviously don't understand that the lending system made them less likely to dump any coins (as it would stop the lending being profitable for them - to say the lending was a Ponzi when it was profitable is ludicrous) but nevermind. Bitcoin is obviously more of a Ponzi.

Im quotting this for references, bookmarked this and archived it as well. It will be nice to show this back to you once the whole empire ended and check what your reaction will be

You obviously don't understand that the lending system made them less likely to dump any coins (as it would stop the lending being profitable for them - to say the lending was a Ponzi when it was profitable is ludicrous) but nevermind. Bitcoin is obviously more of a Ponzi.

If Unrealistic return rates isnt considered as ponzi to you then what would it be? a gift?

You are probably still young but I can ensure you that suchmoon and I has been here quite some time and has seen alot of these kinds of things dissapearing

I know what the scams are. Many lending platforms that have come out recently after bitconnect have been scams but most haven't been.

You mention unrealistic returns but they weren't unrealistic, were they? Their own coin grew much more. They never promised any guaranteed returns and some days it was 0%. Some higher levels of lending gave you a guaranteed 0.25% (this was for $10k+) but there was no guarantee for sub-$1000 amounts including reinvestments . The fact it was profitable for them means they weren't a Ponzi.

[metallicelmo]

Is there any simple explanation of how Bitconnect really worked behind the scenes? I believe the system ran fine with bitcoin going up in price, however a 40% market correction killed the entire Bitconnect businessmodel I think. Glad I never invested in it

[AGM76]

Without the success of Bitcoin this Project would failed in Juny 2017 already.... Trought huge liquidations of ppl which Lended their Coins when BTC was 1200$ and lower this Site could stay up but they reached the Point of what i call breakover aka more cashouts then investments so they suspended the exchange to sell millions bcc down while they was showing bcc for 220$ on their homepage he was 40$ on other exchanges...
I saw bitconnect in may but after i googled some reviews it was a clear shit coin... His success is made on a ponzi system calls "volt. software" which dont even exist i bet! This need to go wrong at one Point guys... Sorry for those who lost huge here but see it also as a learning process
cheers

I've been trying to explain all this is incorrect and they didn't need any bitcoins or money coming in (they profited from the lending system). Look at the volumes when the price went down and you can see they didn't dump any coins.

Also, other people have shown that their exchange still was $220 when it reopened. In fact, some people managed to sell there at that price when it was $40 on other exchanges.

[AGM76]

Is there any simple explanation of how Bitconnect really worked behind the scenes? I believe the system ran fine with bitcoin going up in price, however a 40% market correction killed the entire Bitconnect businessmodel I think. Glad I never invested in it

No, they didn't need bitcoin to go up. The only thing they needed was their coin value to increase more than the interest they paid (over any time period they chose), or it would start costing them more in BCC than was lent to them and this would in time eat into their reserves (they were profitable so obviously never even had to use their BCC reserves and could easily have carried on). They hopefully also had bitcoin reserves from the ICO but the lending was profitable so didn't really need it once they'd used the ICO funds for development and marketing etc.

[NikuSH]

Bcc completely fall. By the way I heard about hype on bcc with 5% per day. And as soon as possible bcc reached 20$

[arallmuus]

Again, the lending wasn't a Ponzi

It was a ponzi. They advertised unrealistic return rates and last bagholders didn't get their money back. Your mental gymnastics can't change that fact.

Again another nutty one. So if you're holding bitcoin and all the whales dump it doesn't it make it the same thing? There is nothing that's going to keep the price of bitcoin up if everyone sells it at the same time.

Bitconnect didn't dump any coins! I showed that on the coinmarketcap graph. Very small volumes on the exchanges around the time of the dump. They probably did the opposite and bought it back cheap. How could they have been dumping a coin that has 100% yearly inflation and rises from 16 cents (I think the lowest) to close to $500 in a year and is freely traded on lots of exchanges??

You obviously don't understand that the lending system made them less likely to dump any coins (as it would stop the lending being profitable for them - to say the lending was a Ponzi when it was profitable is ludicrous) but nevermind. Bitcoin is obviously more of a Ponzi.

Im quotting this for references, bookmarked this and archived it as well. It will be nice to show this back to you once the whole empire ended and check what your reaction will be

You obviously don't understand that the lending system made them less likely to dump any coins (as it would stop the lending being profitable for them - to say the lending was a Ponzi when it was profitable is ludicrous) but nevermind. Bitcoin is obviously more of a Ponzi.

If Unrealistic return rates isnt considered as ponzi to you then what would it be? a gift?

You are probably still young but I can ensure you that suchmoon and I has been here quite some time and has seen alot of these kinds of things dissapearing

I know what the scams are. Many lending platforms that have come out recently after bitconnect have been scams but most haven't been.

You mention unrealistic returns but they weren't unrealistic, were they? Their own coin grew much more. They never promised any guaranteed returns and some days it was 0%. Some higher levels of lending gave you a guaranteed 0.25% (this was for $10k+) but there was no guarantee for sub-$1000 amounts including reinvestments . The fact it was profitable for them means they weren't a Ponzi.

Call it whatever you want, lending / scams / realistic rate of returns but I will call it as a ponzi. Unless the whole empire ended then you will always stick with your opinion . Scams / ponzis are always profitable for their owner, if it is not then there is no point to do it.

Nevermind though, I'll just show what you wrote back to you once this whole madness ended

[rohitm]

Is there any simple explanation of how Bitconnect really worked behind the scenes? I believe the system ran fine with bitcoin going up in price, however a 40% market correction killed the entire Bitconnect businessmodel I think. Glad I never invested in it

No, they didn't need bitcoin to go up. The only thing they needed was their coin value to increase more than the interest they paid (over any time period they chose), or it would start costing them more in BCC than was lent to them and this would in time eat into their reserves (they were profitable so obviously never even had to use their BCC reserves and could easily have carried on). They hopefully also had bitcoin reserves from the ICO but the lending was profitable so didn't really need it once they'd used the ICO funds for development and marketing etc.

Dude, you're either stupid or delusional. How much money did you lose? It was a Ponzi disguised as crypto investment to start with and it remains a Ponzi today.

[EastSound]

Is there any simple explanation of how Bitconnect really worked behind the scenes? I believe the system ran fine with bitcoin going up in price, however a 40% market correction killed the entire Bitconnect businessmodel I think. Glad I never invested in it

No, they didn't need bitcoin to go up. The only thing they needed was their coin value to increase more than the interest they paid (over any time period they chose), or it would start costing them more in BCC than was lent to them and this would in time eat into their reserves (they were profitable so obviously never even had to use their BCC reserves and could easily have carried on). They hopefully also had bitcoin reserves from the ICO but the lending was profitable so didn't really need it once they'd used the ICO funds for development and marketing etc.

Dude, you're either stupid or delusional. How much money did you lose? It was a Ponzi disguised as crypto investment to start with and it remains a Ponzi today.

Nope, this is the scammer running the show. Check the post history, a cheerleader from the very beginning

[dooglus]

BTC wroth $10010 exchanged to BCC (when rate was say 400$); scam exposed and exit from devs give 1 BCC = $150; $10010 ends up with 66.73 BCC; which value then crashed to say $25 ($7 at lowest in the week). Ends up with $1668. Ouch that's a huge loss for those gullible enough to put their eggs on it. But huge gain for the BCC devs since they've got the BTC.

You have this a little wrong. BitConnect converted people's USD valued loans to BCC at a rate of $363 per BCC, so a $10010 loan ended up being converted to around just 27 BCC. The BCC then fell to say $25, meaning the $10k loan was now worth just $675. Over a 90% loss.

[dooglus]

Again, the lending wasn't a Ponzi

It was a ponzi. They advertised unrealistic return rates and last bagholders didn't get their money back. Your mental gymnastics can't change that fact.

Again another nutty one. So if you're holding bitcoin and all the whales dump it doesn't it make it the same thing? There is nothing that's going to keep the price of bitcoin up if everyone sells it at the same time.

You're missing the point. Assets go up and down in price. That doesn't make them a Ponzi. It isn't the fact that the price of BCC collapsed 90% in a few hours that made the lending platform a Ponzi. That's a result of it being a Ponzi, not a cause.

What makes it a Ponzi is that it promised to pay anyone who invested more than $10k at least 0.25% per day in USD terms. You keep saying there was no guaranteed daily interest, but there was for all but the smallest loans.

That is what made it a Ponzi. They were paying at least 0.25% per day to their biggest lenders with no way of sustaining those payments in the long term.

You seem to think that it wasn't a Ponzi because they were able to pay the interest due to the fact that their token kept going up in price. Do you not see that that isn't sustainable, that the token would eventually stop going up in price, and that when it did they would eventually be unable to continue paying 0.25% compound interest per day? The only reason their token kept going up in price was because the demand for the token (ie. new people joining the scam) was greater than the supply (ie. people cashing out of the scam). When the supply of new suckers fell below the rate at which people were cashing out, BitConnect's profit reached its peak, and that is exactly the correct time to pull the plug and run off with the profits. "They made a profit while the scam was growing therefore it wasn't a scam" isn't a valid argument, but it seems to be what you are trying to get away with.

You obviously don't understand that the lending system made them less likely to dump any coins (as it would stop the lending being profitable for them - to say the lending was a Ponzi when it was profitable is ludicrous) but nevermind. Bitcoin is obviously more of a Ponzi.

All Ponzis are profitable for their owners. You still didn't provide any evidence for Bitcoin itself being a Ponzi.

Ponzis promise returns to their victims. Bitcoin promises nothing of the kind to anyone.

[suchmoon]

Again, the lending wasn't a Ponzi

It was a ponzi. They advertised unrealistic return rates and last bagholders didn't get their money back. Your mental gymnastics can't change that fact.

Again another nutty one. So if you're holding bitcoin and all the whales dump it doesn't it make it the same thing? There is nothing that's going to keep the price of bitcoin up if everyone sells it at the same time.

Nobody is promising me crazy returns for holding Bitcoin. Your false equivalence is false.

Bitconnect didn't dump any coins! I showed that on the coinmarketcap graph. Very small volumes on the exchanges around the time of the dump. They probably did the opposite and bought it back cheap. How could they have been dumping a coin that has 100% yearly inflation and rises from 16 cents (I think the lowest) to close to $500 in a year and is freely traded on lots of exchanges??

You obviously don't understand that the lending system made them less likely to dump any coins (as it would stop the lending being profitable for them - to say the lending was a Ponzi when it was profitable is ludicrous) but nevermind. Bitcoin is obviously more of a Ponzi.

Obviously you're a persistent shill. All ponzis are "profitable" until they're not.

No, they didn't need bitcoin to go up. The only thing they needed was their coin value to increase more than the interest they paid (over any time period they chose), or it would start costing them more in BCC than was lent to them and this would in time eat into their reserves (they were profitable so obviously never even had to use their BCC reserves and could easily have carried on). They hopefully also had bitcoin reserves from the ICO but the lending was profitable so didn't really need it once they'd used the ICO funds for development and marketing etc.

Which is a completely unsustainable "business model" and pretty much a classic ponzi scheme. Introducing some token (BCC) into the scheme doesn't change anything. It doesn't matter if it's BCC or a share in Madoff's mutual fund, the promised returns were fake, fueled by new victims bringing in more cash.

[dooglus]

Yes, normally the capital release would be in dollars in the lending wallet. So people would then have to press the transfer button to transfer to BCC coins at the current rate (it bypassed the exchange). The only problem with this was that because everyone would receive it at the same time, the coin value was likely to go down due to people being forced to sell at the time before it depreciated (as it would be going lower in value) so bitconnect would have to pay back more BCC than was initially loaned (normally they always pay less even including all the interest).

They could have stopped the lending in a few other ways but basically anyone holding any cryptocurrency can easily lose 90% if there is panic in the markets.

The value of the BCC coin is likely to return in the future when you think how many times more valuable bitcoin is for almost double the current supply.

Suppose BitConnect had tried to wind up their lending platform in a responsible way, and simply stopped accepting new loans. Loans would expire at all different times, the BCC would slowly make their way back onto the market, and people could cash out at a profit as they were promised.

Why wouldn't that work? Well, as soon as BitConnect announces that it isn't accepting any more loans, the demand for BCC tokens pretty much dries up. The only reason most people were buying it was because they could get crazy daily interest lending it to BitConnect. Once that goes away so does the demand. So the price drops. Maybe not 90% overnight, but steadily.

Every day as new loans expire, BitConnect has to pay out ever increasing amounts of BCC to meet the USD value expected by the lenders. Those ever increasing amounts of BCC get dumped on the exchange, causing the price to drop further and causing the amount of BCC needed to repay the next day's expiring loans even more. This compounds exponentially day after day for the next 200 days. There's no way BitConnect has enough BCC tokens to repay everyone fairly as the BCC price drops ever closer to zero. They end up insolvent, unable to repay the bagholders.

Repaying all loans at once, using an over-inflated valuation for the BCC tokens they were repaying people looks like a desperate attempt to get out of an insolvent platform.

Nobody is going to want to hold BCC tokens going forward. They will be seen like PayCoin - just another failed scam coin.

[CryptToad]

Another day, another time out while trying to exchange BCC for BCCX. Try again tomorrow.
Honestly they should just automatically gift us BCCX at 8 to 1 ratio. 3:1 is still a huge haircut.

[zintips]

BTC wroth $10010 exchanged to BCC (when rate was say 400$); scam exposed and exit from devs give 1 BCC = $150; $10010 ends up with 66.73 BCC; which value then crashed to say $25 ($7 at lowest in the week). Ends up with $1668. Ouch that's a huge loss for those gullible enough to put their eggs on it. But huge gain for the BCC devs since they've got the BTC.

You have this a little wrong. BitConnect converted people's USD valued loans to BCC at a rate of $363 per BCC, so a $10010 loan ended up being converted to around just 27 BCC. The BCC then fell to say $25, meaning the $10k loan was now worth just $675. Over a 90% loss.

====================

I agree. Buying the BCCX coin has also been a fiasco. The screen freezes after making the purchase at reset time and it never stops to confirm, after 10 minutes the wheel swirling and no purchase executed at 9:00:01 secs. All those that bought BCC at $20 outside the bitconnect exchange are now competing with the ones that paid $363 per coin to buy the BCCX. I am trying to buy the BCCX because I do not want to move the BCC coin outside and get $21 for a coin I paid $363. It is a bad deal altogether dealing with Bitconnects.

[zintips]

Another day, another time out while trying to exchange BCC for BCCX. Try again tomorrow.
Honestly they should just automatically gift us BCCX at 8 to 1 ratio. 3:1 is still a huge haircut.

===============

I agree. Same here. It does not matter what you do, sign early, buy BCCX at 9:00:01, nothing happens? screen freezes. Sorry all coins sold out! day after day.  We are dealing with robots and it looks like they just want the BCC coins inside trapped with the $150 carrot.

[AGM76]

Again, the lending wasn't a Ponzi

It was a ponzi. They advertised unrealistic return rates and last bagholders didn't get their money back. Your mental gymnastics can't change that fact.

Again another nutty one. So if you're holding bitcoin and all the whales dump it doesn't it make it the same thing? There is nothing that's going to keep the price of bitcoin up if everyone sells it at the same time.

You're missing the point. Assets go up and down in price. That doesn't make them a Ponzi. It isn't the fact that the price of BCC collapsed 90% in a few hours that made the lending platform a Ponzi. That's a result of it being a Ponzi, not a cause.

What makes it a Ponzi is that it promised to pay anyone who invested more than $10k at least 0.25% per day in USD terms. You keep saying there was no guaranteed daily interest, but there was for all but the smallest loans.

That is what made it a Ponzi. They were paying at least 0.25% per day to their biggest lenders with no way of sustaining those payments in the long term.

You seem to think that it wasn't a Ponzi because they were able to pay the interest due to the fact that their token kept going up in price. Do you not see that that isn't sustainable, that the token would eventually stop going up in price, and that when it did they would eventually be unable to continue paying 0.25% compound interest per day? The only reason their token kept going up in price was because the demand for the token (ie. new people joining the scam) was greater than the supply (ie. people cashing out of the scam). When the supply of new suckers fell below the rate at which people were cashing out, BitConnect's profit reached its peak, and that is exactly the correct time to pull the plug and run off with the profits. "They made a profit while the scam was growing therefore it wasn't a scam" isn't a valid argument, but it seems to be what you are trying to get away with.

You obviously don't understand that the lending system made them less likely to dump any coins (as it would stop the lending being profitable for them - to say the lending was a Ponzi when it was profitable is ludicrous) but nevermind. Bitcoin is obviously more of a Ponzi.

All Ponzis are profitable for their owners. You still didn't provide any evidence for Bitcoin itself being a Ponzi.

Ponzis promise returns to their victims. Bitcoin promises nothing of the kind to anyone.

I'm pretty sure people are holding onto bitcoins because they think it is going to go up in value. It's not as if it can be used for anything else other than some sort of speculative asset with nothing backing it. All tokens don't really have any other backing other than supply and demand. At least bitconnect's model always worked despite all the bad press and made many people very rich. I didn't invest much in it. Most of mine is in DavorCoin as they started by paying 2% a day and that only opened at the end of November (4 times as much as I ever invested in bitconnect but I still got all my investment back from them overall).

By the way, they obviously could always change terms for new loans instead of guaranteeing 0.25% at least for $10k plus forever but do you really think that is excessive? If you work it out it's less than 2.5 times the investment amount a year. I'm pretty sure people who hold bitcoin expect it to go up more than that each year, some speculating it will go up to a millions dollars!  As already mentioned, the bitconnect model also gave value by guaranteeing the investment amount in USD so people could invest in cryptos without worrying about their portfolio going down in value (that doesn't even include the extra interest they also paid). Any sane person would prefer the bitconnect model than the bitcoin model. They shut down due to all the idiots saying they were a Ponzi. Look at the housing market and how many idiots also believe it always goes up. Bitconnect's model wouldn't have failed as there was no reason for the price not to go up all the time until something forced them to end it. Coin holders may have lost out in the end when the bubble burst but that's just the same as the current economy which goes in cycles of boom and bust. The difference is bitconnect would have had enough collateral to refund the guaranteed investments if they were allowed to run normally (remember that they wouldn't necessarily need to refund them all at once and the coin would probably rise again slowly after a crash - in the long term the lending could still just carry on after a BCC crash if they didn't face any legal issues). Obviously all coin holders take the risk of a crash but the investments would have been easily guaranteed if it wasn't made to shut down.


I forgot to mention that apparently bitconnect are working on refunding those who came in the last couple of months and didn't have enough time to get their investment back... not sure what they will do but they certainly have enough profit to do that.

[YuTü.Co.in]

Another day, another time out while trying to exchange BCC for BCCX. Try again tomorrow.
Honestly they should just automatically gift us BCCX at 8 to 1 ratio. 3:1 is still a huge haircut.

===============

I agree. Same here. It does not matter what you do, sign early, buy BCCX at 9:00:01, nothing happens? screen freezes. Sorry all coins sold out! day after day.  We are dealing with robots and it looks like they just want the BCC coins inside trapped with the $150 carrot.

Speakin' of carrots, by the look of this mob wielding sticks et al., I'd say the natives are restless ...

"WE NO MORE F5 FOR BCCX !!! Fix or we cut Mr. BITCONNECTTTTTTTT's balls off."

[fulcare]

and now it is back $19. Is there any chance for a comeback or not? Whatever you read in the news these days Bitconnect is said to be dead and it's hard to imagine that there is a chance for revival. Any insider knowledge here proving the opposite?

[Sienio]

Another day, another time out while trying to exchange BCC for BCCX. Try again tomorrow.
Honestly they should just automatically gift us BCCX at 8 to 1 ratio. 3:1 is still a huge haircut.

===============

I agree. Same here. It does not matter what you do, sign early, buy BCCX at 9:00:01, nothing happens? screen freezes. Sorry all coins sold out! day after day.  We are dealing with robots and it looks like they just want the BCC coins inside trapped with the $150 carrot.

thb
i have tried this method:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq6tqXkHaNE

quite simply. and finally hour ago i was lucky to buy it.

Goodluck to yall!

[AGM76]

and now it is back $19. Is there any chance for a comeback or not? Whatever you read in the news these days Bitconnect is said to be dead and it's hard to imagine that there is a chance for revival. Any insider knowledge here proving the opposite?

Well  have you seen how fast BitconnectX sell out the ICO each day? I don't think BCC will be that low for long.

According to the Texan Cease and Desist, staking coins are a security lol. Not just the lending haha.  Are PoS coins illegal now in USA? I thought Ethereum moved to that?