ololajulo
Sr. Member
 Offline
Activity: 2240
Merit: 270
SOL.BIOKRIPT.COM
|
 |
February 08, 2018, 09:21:39 PM |
|
17% will be sold for ICO and 83% will be used for development and bounty, it sounds a little bit scary.
After pre-sale of premined 4.8 million (17%) BitConnect coin, PoW/PoS algorithm will work to issue new coins to BitConnect coin miners and BitConnect coin holders. I wish dev would contribute more. I dont expect this thread to be still open, It should be locked by now. |
|
|
|
Idolic21_IT_Investor
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
February 08, 2018, 09:24:06 PM |
|
... skipping the fallacies ...
The lending platforms should work properly if the people running them know what they are doing and I still think they are a good model as they generate profits for the company with the lending so are not real ponzis
Generating profit for scammers doesn't mean it's not a ponzi. In fact the whole reason for the scammers to take the risk to run such illegal scheme would be to generate a profit. These are not "lending platforms". The borrowed funds are not used for any other purpose other than to perpetuate the scam, which ends when there aren't enough suckers bringing in new money. You are really dense to keep repeating your own erroneous views. You probably noticed I stopped responding to you before because of this. How many times have I explained how the actual 'lending' part is profitable for the company and also the lender. The company while it runs smoothly, pays back less coins than are lent, so it's like the reverse of staking coins since people get back less coins but are still happy due to the marketing and increase in coin price (they can afford this marketing due to their profits). It is deflationary as long as the company don't sell all these extra coins and just keep some out of circulation, but even if at times the coin didn't increase in price, they would just need to use their reserves of the coins (you probably noticed most have large premines for this reason, although ERC20 tokens can have unlimited supply if they wanted) and this would cause inflation and possibly a lack of buyers at some point (inflation is also what happens with all staking coins but lending when operating well is deflationary - lending doesn't even guarantee any return). So as long as the coin doesn't fall to ridiculous levels and remains stable in price, the lending platform can continue. You might have noticed that Bitconnect, unlike Davor, had a very stable price that tended to increase a lot so that means the company was actually making profits. If the coin wasn't going up, the lending would still function but the company couldn't take any profits without stealing from investors and harming the platform. The company are not stealing from investors with the lending because the lenders are happy with the reduced profits as long as the company uses their profits to increase the coin value with buy back or marketing etc so the lenders accept this is how they make money. They also bring value by guaranteeing the investment value amount from fluctuations in the market. That is why it's a good model for cryptocurrencies. Basically, you have never shown one iota of understanding about the lending platform model so it's no use even responding to your comments until you show you have listened and have at least some understanding. Thanks for the enlightenment, bud. Now I fully see how lenders made a profit off BitConnect. They loaned X BCC to them, whereupon they paid back X - Y. Granted, I'm still a tad confused as to how BitConnect made their money, probably having something to do with the Z-factor, but unfortunately equations containing more than two variables or constants is (or is it 'are') beyond my prowess, albeit back in the 70's I would've been able to perform such equations in my head like I did for ALL the questions on the SAT, earning a perfect 800 in its math section and the first one in the room to complete said portion of the SAT taken at IU, then went fishing with my dad at Brown County Forest Preserve, but I digress. I've been following this thread closely after Bitconnects fall out last month. Its been a nightmarish ride, but somehow I held onto my coins and even got them into the QT wallet. I'm finally at the point where my BCC are staking. I'm resolved to just leave them in there and see what happens. I've already lost 99% value on them so whats another 1% when there is at least some potential to make some of it back on a pop.
One scenario thats popped in my head:
BCCX exchange could open listing BCC, but what if BCC gets rebranded to BCCX? Kind of like how AntShares got rebranded to NEO. It changed the whole look for the AntShares Crypto and I'm sure everyone has seen how well NEO is doing now. I'm not comparing NEO to BCC though. I'm merely just suggesting that a rebrand and color change of BCC to BCCX could be in the cards. If they can use the new BCCX exchange to legitimize BCC's use case and utility, then that could bring a significant amount of volume back to BCC. Of course they won't be bringing back lending services again since it provokes the ponzi scheme hunters to come out.
Another scenario is:
What if on their new BCCX exchange they create pairs that allow you to use BCC to buy other Cryptos other then Bitcoin. Like ETH/BCC or NEO/BCC which would bring volume to BCC because then people would be using it to buy other Cryptos. Of course this sound controversial just typing it because so many have convinced themselves that BCC is a scam coin even though its more decentralized then ever.
Bottom line: I've already mentally accepted this lost so if it goes to 0 then so be it. I'm going down with the ship or I'm going back up with it. But I do think Bitconnect has some moves left to possibly create BCC value again.
*I'm not promoting anyone buy BCC. I'm not giving financial advice. So save your comments and complaints about promoting a 'scam' coin and bla bla bla. I'm merely just sharing my thoughts and speculation on how BCC can create value again. If anyone is interesting in having a mature discussion about it, feel free to reply.
That's a brilliant idea! Allow BitConnect to operate their own exchange in restoring trust in them. Of course this would create a nightmare for its owners, for down the road they would have to devise another exit strategy, one not yet used AND believable, else they'll have to resort back to blaming the exchange's demise on the ye ol' standby - FUD and ... wait for it ... TEXAS. A sarcastic response. Why am I not surprised. Why would Texas shut it down if its not doing the Lending anymore. Have you seen a Cease and desist for the BCC exchange? No. Its still up and running. Bitconnect has already been running their own exchange since they started so its not a new idea, but the pairs is a utility I was thinking of for BCC on BCCX. But who knows. Its just an idea to speculate on. |
|
|
|
|
|
YuTü.Co.in
|
|
February 08, 2018, 09:25:27 PM |
|
He said bitcoin was “far inferior to existing payment options” because it was slow and expensive. Bitcoin transactions can easily take several hours to process. “At these speeds, if you bought a bunch of tulips with bitcoin they may well have wilted by the time the transaction was confirmed.” Since you’re here …
… we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading the Guardian than ever but advertising revenues across the media are falling fast. And unlike many news organisations, we haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our journalism as open as we can. So you can see why we need to ask for your help. The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our perspective matters – because it might well be your perspective, too. Dear Gardian, Please remit to me your bitcoin wallet address so that I can make a donation unless, perhaps, you prefer wilted tulips. Your call. AnonomatopoeiaKa-Pow |
|
|
|
|
bitChipper
|
|
February 08, 2018, 09:26:53 PM |
|
Also, one more thing. It is absolute BS that the Youtube Promoters are under fire about this. They all lost their money too and were affected just as much me and anyone else that was using Bitconnect. This is as stupid as the first story that came out about someone sewing McDonalds for making them fat. Its stupid because that person is blaming McDonalds for their own failure to have self discipline not to eat junk food. Yet they won the case and the world no longer has super size as an option.
So people are blaming the youtube promoters knowing full well they were taking on a risk. Craig Grant, Trevon James, and CryptoNick all lost way over $2 Million between all of them and ppl want to sew them? They advertised to us about doing Bitconnect. We did it, but guess what: The Bitconnect user created their account, sent Bitcoin, bought Bitconnect and then 'Accepted' the lending contract to lend out Bitconnect. The Youtube promoters didn't do any of that so for God SAKES PEOPLE, take some responsibility and leave the Youtube Promoters alone.
THE ONLY REASON PPL ARE BLAMING THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS IS BECAUSE DEEP DOWN THEY KNOW THEY FKED UP AND GOT THEMSELVES IN A HORRIBLE SITUATION. BUT THEY SEE THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS HAVING SO MUCH MONEY STILL SO THEIR TRYING TO TAKE A BITE OUT OF THEM. The real truth is people aren't facing the fact that they made a bad decision and are dealing with a huge loss just like myself. My advice is to blame yourself, learn from your mistake, and move on. If you can't face your problems head on, then grow TF up.
I disagree, the promoters most of the time only showed the potential gains and not the potential risk, and in general just enticed newbies to invest in something they didn't understand. That Jedi Knight guy was making videos telling people bitconnect was the perfect hedge against bitcoin!....4 months ago i literally had to block all bitconnect related videos on youtube because i couldnt stand how people were promoting it. |
|
|
|
|
|
YuTü.Co.in
|
|
February 08, 2018, 09:33:04 PM |
|
Also, one more thing. It is absolute BS that the Youtube Promoters are under fire about this. They all lost their money too and were affected just as much me and anyone else that was using Bitconnect. This is as stupid as the first story that came out about someone sewing McDonalds for making them fat. Its stupid because that person is blaming McDonalds for their own failure to have self discipline not to eat junk food. Yet they won the case and the world no longer has super size as an option.
So people are blaming the youtube promoters knowing full well they were taking on a risk. Craig Grant, Trevon James, and CryptoNick all lost way over $2 Million between all of them and ppl want to sew them? They advertised to us about doing Bitconnect. We did it, but guess what: The Bitconnect user created their account, sent Bitcoin, bought Bitconnect and then 'Accepted' the lending contract to lend out Bitconnect. The Youtube promoters didn't do any of that so for God SAKES PEOPLE, take some responsibility and leave the Youtube Promoters alone.
THE ONLY REASON PPL ARE BLAMING THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS IS BECAUSE DEEP DOWN THEY KNOW THEY FKED UP AND GOT THEMSELVES IN A HORRIBLE SITUATION. BUT THEY SEE THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS HAVING SO MUCH MONEY STILL SO THEIR TRYING TO TAKE A BITE OUT OF THEM. The real truth is people aren't facing the fact that they made a bad decision and are dealing with a huge loss just like myself. My advice is to blame yourself, learn from your mistake, and move on. If you can't face your problems head on, then grow TF up.
Trevon James in on record in stating that he was on welfare prior to hooking up with BitConnect. That said, exactly where did that big chuck of the ~U$2M which he lost come from? Further, if a person is on the brink of disaster, should they be residing in an expensive hotel or return to sightly above their roots (seriously, no pun intended here; the gist is obvious), living within their means. BTW, bud, my last post was not meant to dis you or your sentiment. Just shedding additional light is all. Peace. |
|
|
|
Idolic21_IT_Investor
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
February 08, 2018, 09:39:47 PM |
|
Also, one more thing. It is absolute BS that the Youtube Promoters are under fire about this. They all lost their money too and were affected just as much me and anyone else that was using Bitconnect. This is as stupid as the first story that came out about someone sewing McDonalds for making them fat. Its stupid because that person is blaming McDonalds for their own failure to have self discipline not to eat junk food. Yet they won the case and the world no longer has super size as an option.
So people are blaming the youtube promoters knowing full well they were taking on a risk. Craig Grant, Trevon James, and CryptoNick all lost way over $2 Million between all of them and ppl want to sew them? They advertised to us about doing Bitconnect. We did it, but guess what: The Bitconnect user created their account, sent Bitcoin, bought Bitconnect and then 'Accepted' the lending contract to lend out Bitconnect. The Youtube promoters didn't do any of that so for God SAKES PEOPLE, take some responsibility and leave the Youtube Promoters alone.
THE ONLY REASON PPL ARE BLAMING THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS IS BECAUSE DEEP DOWN THEY KNOW THEY FKED UP AND GOT THEMSELVES IN A HORRIBLE SITUATION. BUT THEY SEE THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS HAVING SO MUCH MONEY STILL SO THEIR TRYING TO TAKE A BITE OUT OF THEM. The real truth is people aren't facing the fact that they made a bad decision and are dealing with a huge loss just like myself. My advice is to blame yourself, learn from your mistake, and move on. If you can't face your problems head on, then grow TF up.
I disagree, the promoters most of the time only showed the potential gains and not the potential risk, and in general just enticed newbies to invest in something they didn't understand. That Jedi Knight guy was making videos telling people bitconnect was the perfect hedge against bitcoin!....4 months ago i literally had to block all bitconnect related videos on youtube because i couldnt stand how people were promoting it. McDonalds commercials also just show potential gains in taste buds getting satisfied. No risks are ever posted on Fast food commercials so how do they get away from not getting sewed when someone goes to the hospital with health issues related to the processed McDonalds food. |
|
|
|
|
|
YuTü.Co.in
|
|
February 08, 2018, 09:56:32 PM |
|
Also, one more thing. It is absolute BS that the Youtube Promoters are under fire about this. They all lost their money too and were affected just as much me and anyone else that was using Bitconnect. This is as stupid as the first story that came out about someone sewing McDonalds for making them fat. Its stupid because that person is blaming McDonalds for their own failure to have self discipline not to eat junk food. Yet they won the case and the world no longer has super size as an option.
So people are blaming the youtube promoters knowing full well they were taking on a risk. Craig Grant, Trevon James, and CryptoNick all lost way over $2 Million between all of them and ppl want to sew them? They advertised to us about doing Bitconnect. We did it, but guess what: The Bitconnect user created their account, sent Bitcoin, bought Bitconnect and then 'Accepted' the lending contract to lend out Bitconnect. The Youtube promoters didn't do any of that so for God SAKES PEOPLE, take some responsibility and leave the Youtube Promoters alone.
THE ONLY REASON PPL ARE BLAMING THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS IS BECAUSE DEEP DOWN THEY KNOW THEY FKED UP AND GOT THEMSELVES IN A HORRIBLE SITUATION. BUT THEY SEE THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS HAVING SO MUCH MONEY STILL SO THEIR TRYING TO TAKE A BITE OUT OF THEM. The real truth is people aren't facing the fact that they made a bad decision and are dealing with a huge loss just like myself. My advice is to blame yourself, learn from your mistake, and move on. If you can't face your problems head on, then grow TF up.
I disagree, the promoters most of the time only showed the potential gains and not the potential risk, and in general just enticed newbies to invest in something they didn't understand. That Jedi Knight guy was making videos telling people bitconnect was the perfect hedge against bitcoin!....4 months ago i literally had to block all bitconnect related videos on youtube because i couldnt stand how people were promoting it. McDonalds commercials also just show potential gains in taste buds getting satisfied. No risks are ever posted on Fast food commercials so how do they get away from not getting sewed when someone goes to the hospital with health issues related to the processed McDonalds food.  "After enjoying a Winston, we're both heading down to the new tasty hamburger join in town to order us some McT-Rexs, then off to bed to make a pile, if you know what I mean.
Hint: Bam-bam, if you're versed in onomatopoeia." |
|
|
|
Idolic21_IT_Investor
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
February 08, 2018, 10:05:57 PM |
|
Also, one more thing. It is absolute BS that the Youtube Promoters are under fire about this. They all lost their money too and were affected just as much me and anyone else that was using Bitconnect. This is as stupid as the first story that came out about someone sewing McDonalds for making them fat. Its stupid because that person is blaming McDonalds for their own failure to have self discipline not to eat junk food. Yet they won the case and the world no longer has super size as an option.
So people are blaming the youtube promoters knowing full well they were taking on a risk. Craig Grant, Trevon James, and CryptoNick all lost way over $2 Million between all of them and ppl want to sew them? They advertised to us about doing Bitconnect. We did it, but guess what: The Bitconnect user created their account, sent Bitcoin, bought Bitconnect and then 'Accepted' the lending contract to lend out Bitconnect. The Youtube promoters didn't do any of that so for God SAKES PEOPLE, take some responsibility and leave the Youtube Promoters alone.
THE ONLY REASON PPL ARE BLAMING THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS IS BECAUSE DEEP DOWN THEY KNOW THEY FKED UP AND GOT THEMSELVES IN A HORRIBLE SITUATION. BUT THEY SEE THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS HAVING SO MUCH MONEY STILL SO THEIR TRYING TO TAKE A BITE OUT OF THEM. The real truth is people aren't facing the fact that they made a bad decision and are dealing with a huge loss just like myself. My advice is to blame yourself, learn from your mistake, and move on. If you can't face your problems head on, then grow TF up.
I disagree, the promoters most of the time only showed the potential gains and not the potential risk, and in general just enticed newbies to invest in something they didn't understand. That Jedi Knight guy was making videos telling people bitconnect was the perfect hedge against bitcoin!....4 months ago i literally had to block all bitconnect related videos on youtube because i couldnt stand how people were promoting it. McDonalds commercials also just show potential gains in taste buds getting satisfied. No risks are ever posted on Fast food commercials so how do they get away from not getting sewed when someone goes to the hospital with health issues related to the processed McDonalds food. lol Ya ba daba DOOOOOOOOOO |
|
|
|
|
suchmoon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3850
Merit: 9090
https://bpip.org
|
|
February 08, 2018, 10:10:51 PM |
|
So as long as the coin doesn't fall to ridiculous levels and remains stable in price, the lending platform can continue. You might have noticed that Bitconnect, unlike Davor, had a very stable price that tended to increase a lot so that means the company was actually making profits. If the coin wasn't going up, the lending would still function but the company couldn't take any profits without stealing from investors and harming the platform. The company are not stealing from investors with the lending because the lenders are happy with the reduced profits as long as the company uses their profits to increase the coin value with buy back or marketing etc so the lenders accept this is how they make money. They also bring value by guaranteeing the investment value amount from fluctuations in the market. That is why it's a good model for cryptocurrencies.
Basically, you have never shown one iota of understanding about the lending platform model so it's no use even responding to your comments until you show you have listened and have at least some understanding.
It could only work if there was an infinite supply of victims and their money, but there is no such thing so the scam must end at some point. Due to scammers wanting to exit with maximum profit it would likely end when it's at its peak, which is exactly what happened with Bitconnect. Neither Bitconnect nor any other ponzi can go up forever. Not possible. Ask Madoff or Garza. *I'm not promoting anyone buy BCC. I'm not giving financial advice. So save your comments and complaints about promoting a 'scam' coin and bla bla bla. I'm merely just sharing my thoughts and speculation on how BCC can create value again. If anyone is interesting in having a mature discussion about it, feel free to reply.
There is no value to be created. It's a scam. Like Paycoin and other blatant scams. Your shilling is pointless. |
|
|
|
|
Idolic21_IT_Investor
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
|
February 08, 2018, 10:25:50 PM |
|
So as long as the coin doesn't fall to ridiculous levels and remains stable in price, the lending platform can continue. You might have noticed that Bitconnect, unlike Davor, had a very stable price that tended to increase a lot so that means the company was actually making profits. If the coin wasn't going up, the lending would still function but the company couldn't take any profits without stealing from investors and harming the platform. The company are not stealing from investors with the lending because the lenders are happy with the reduced profits as long as the company uses their profits to increase the coin value with buy back or marketing etc so the lenders accept this is how they make money. They also bring value by guaranteeing the investment value amount from fluctuations in the market. That is why it's a good model for cryptocurrencies.
Basically, you have never shown one iota of understanding about the lending platform model so it's no use even responding to your comments until you show you have listened and have at least some understanding.
It could only work if there was an infinite supply of victims and their money, but there is no such thing so the scam must end at some point. Due to scammers wanting to exit with maximum profit it would likely end when it's at its peak, which is exactly what happened with Bitconnect. Neither Bitconnect nor any other ponzi can go up forever. Not possible. Ask Madoff or Garza. *I'm not promoting anyone buy BCC. I'm not giving financial advice. So save your comments and complaints about promoting a 'scam' coin and bla bla bla. I'm merely just sharing my thoughts and speculation on how BCC can create value again. If anyone is interesting in having a mature discussion about it, feel free to reply.
There is no value to be created. It's a scam. Like Paycoin and other blatant scams. Your shilling is pointless. Since you can't prove technically why BCC is still a scam then I'm taking this as your own personal opinion. BCC is just a decentralized coin now and it remains to be seen what utility it can still be used for in the future. If there is one thing to learn from all of this is that the company and creators can go up in smoke but the Decentralized coin lives on. Which means there is still a chance to create value in the future. You can keep dismissing it as a scam, but how is that when it doesn't have the same utility it did a month ago? |
|
|
|
|
suchmoon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3850
Merit: 9090
https://bpip.org
|
|
February 09, 2018, 12:46:28 AM |
|
Since you can't prove technically why BCC is still a scam then I'm taking this as your own personal opinion. BCC is just a decentralized coin now and it remains to be seen what utility it can still be used for in the future. If there is one thing to learn from all of this is that the company and creators can go up in smoke but the Decentralized coin lives on. Which means there is still a chance to create value in the future. You can keep dismissing it as a scam, but how is that when it doesn't have the same utility it did a month ago?
Its current value is proof enough. There was never any utility other than to perpetuate a scam. Now that's gone. There is no point to invent another utility for it. There are plenty of existing coins already serving all kinds of purposes, and it's easy enough to clone a new one that doesn't have a scam baggage. BCC does not have any redeeming qualities like technological innovation or anything of the sort. Back in the day during Paycoin's demise many bagholders were dreaming about re-purposing it into something useful. Today it has a $40 daily volume at $0.04. That's the future of BCC. |
|
|
|
|
zintips
Member
Offline
Activity: 159
Merit: 10
|
|
February 09, 2018, 01:07:03 AM
Last edit: February 09, 2018, 02:43:25 AM by zintips |
|
======================================== You are a lucky dude. Many of us were forced to pay $363 per BCC less than a month ago. BCC will go to ZERO at some point, the problem now is if bitconnect-X will turn out to be another Ethconnect and run away with all the ICO raised funds? If you have not turned the BCC into BCCX there is a message in Bitconnect Twitter, if you can trust it? : Bitconnect Refund @Bitconnect_Ref Feb 7 More We are extremely sorry about how BitConnect have ended. We have decided to refund as much BitConnect (BCC) as possible, and sending your total investment value back in BTC.
Send your BCC to our wallet:
8UwZPcbaFa34bg4stu7NGMqXGLBowRfjvx
You will receive 325.78$ per coin. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
suchmoon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3850
Merit: 9090
https://bpip.org
|
|
February 09, 2018, 01:18:52 AM |
|
Also, one more thing. It is absolute BS that the Youtube Promoters are under fire about this. They all lost their money too and were affected just as much me and anyone else that was using Bitconnect. This is as stupid as the first story that came out about someone sewing McDonalds for making them fat. Its stupid because that person is blaming McDonalds for their own failure to have self discipline not to eat junk food. Yet they won the case and the world no longer has super size as an option.
So people are blaming the youtube promoters knowing full well they were taking on a risk. Craig Grant, Trevon James, and CryptoNick all lost way over $2 Million between all of them and ppl want to sew them? They advertised to us about doing Bitconnect. We did it, but guess what: The Bitconnect user created their account, sent Bitcoin, bought Bitconnect and then 'Accepted' the lending contract to lend out Bitconnect. The Youtube promoters didn't do any of that so for God SAKES PEOPLE, take some responsibility and leave the Youtube Promoters alone.
THE ONLY REASON PPL ARE BLAMING THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS IS BECAUSE DEEP DOWN THEY KNOW THEY FKED UP AND GOT THEMSELVES IN A HORRIBLE SITUATION. BUT THEY SEE THE YOUTUBE PROMOTERS HAVING SO MUCH MONEY STILL SO THEIR TRYING TO TAKE A BITE OUT OF THEM. The real truth is people aren't facing the fact that they made a bad decision and are dealing with a huge loss just like myself. My advice is to blame yourself, learn from your mistake, and move on. If you can't face your problems head on, then grow TF up.
I disagree, the promoters most of the time only showed the potential gains and not the potential risk, and in general just enticed newbies to invest in something they didn't understand. That Jedi Knight guy was making videos telling people bitconnect was the perfect hedge against bitcoin!....4 months ago i literally had to block all bitconnect related videos on youtube because i couldnt stand how people were promoting it. McDonalds commercials also just show potential gains in taste buds getting satisfied. No risks are ever posted on Fast food commercials so how do they get away from not getting sewed when someone goes to the hospital with health issues related to the processed McDonalds food. There are laws and regulations for the food industry, and there are laws and regulations for securities. McDonald's is likely complying with the disclosures they are required to provide, such as ingredients, calories, etc. Bitconnect and its shills most certainly were not, thus the cease & desist. I doubt Youtube shills are registered brokers, and even if they are they would be in trouble for promoting unregistered securities. Your false equivalence is false. |
|
|
|
|
tvtinh
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 168
Merit: 1
ICO Advisor | Top 15 ICOBench Expert
|
|
February 09, 2018, 01:37:03 AM |
|
I told many of my friends about this scam and ponzi that it would not last for long and it could make them bankrupt but it seemed they were very greedy and now they have nothing  |
Mr. Tinh Tran is among top 15 Global ICO Experts on ICOBench
|
|
|
canibalgb
Full Member
Offline
Activity: 448
Merit: 102
Beam me up!
|
|
February 09, 2018, 02:08:54 AM |
|
I told many of my friends about this scam and ponzi that it would not last for long and it could make them bankrupt but it seemed they were very greedy and now they have nothing These lending platforms know that your friends and friends of your friends are greedy. That's why they exist, and they profit a lot. |
|
|
|
|
|
AGM76
|
|
February 09, 2018, 02:11:22 AM |
|
Thanks for the enlightenment, bud. Now I fully see how lenders made a profit off BitConnect. They loaned X BCC to them, whereupon they paid back X - Y. Granted, I'm still a tad confused as to how BitConnect made their money, probably having something to do with the Z-factor, but unfortunately equations containing more than two variables or constants is (or is it 'are') beyond my prowess, albeit back in the 70's I would've been able to perform such equations in my head like I did for ALL the questions on the SAT, earning a perfect 800 in its math section and the first one in the room to complete said portion of the SAT taken at IU, then went fishing with my dad at Brown County Forest Preserve, but I digress.
Yeah, lenders would get less coins but bitconnect or whoever the company was would profit by selling the extra coins at some point without adding to the circulating supply and thus the lending would not increase inflation (it might make sense not to sell the extra coins immediately to increase profits if the value was growing). Obviously, if the coin value was decreasing the interest rates should be low or there should be some other methods used to prevent the market being flooded with cheap coins from the interest conversion (such as limits in converting the interest until the coin gets back to a certain level). The point is that the lenders know the profits they give the company in the lending are necessary to increase the value (even if it's just by reducing the supply). It doesn't necessarily involve marketing the coin or bringing in new users but that would probably be the best use of the profits. The coin value would still grow just from a reduction of supply if the buying and selling volumes didn't change so the lending is definitely not a Ponzi like other cryptos that generate no wealth. I see in the future that lending platforms would allow users to cancel the lending at any point in time. They should forfeit all their interest if they want their money before the capital release date (plus a fee for the service as this will give the company at least some profit from the lending). In that way, it will truly be a service to guarantee the value of the investment from fluctuations in the market price and lenders can ask for their money back at any time. Regarding BCC, I'm a bit concerned that two exchanges (LiveCoin and Coinexchange) will be delisting it and they both happened at the same time. |
|
|
|
|
soulcancer
Member
Offline
Activity: 276
Merit: 12
Life is toxic...CHUG IT!!
|
|
February 09, 2018, 02:23:44 AM |
|
I also thought thread would be locked by now...I pray that they keep it up forever though...there is so much education in here...I have been reading it for days...I never got involved w/ this coin (thank god)...and im not sure how to feel about those who got burnt...I know it sucks but, wow....there were so many warnings...this is post number ELEVEN on the thread... From Bill, one of the owner's of Bittrex:
"that coin is def not crowd funding on bittrex. Scam"
Don't waste ur BTC guys.
and so many more red flags and warnings throughout |
|
|
|
|
zintips
Member
Offline
Activity: 159
Merit: 10
|
|
February 09, 2018, 02:38:49 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nhiatay
|
|
February 09, 2018, 02:52:24 AM |
|
======================================== You are a lucky dude. Many of us were forced to pay $363 per BCC less than a month ago. BCC will go to ZERO at some point, the problem now is if bitconnect-X will turn out to be another Ethconnect and run away with all the ICO raised funds? If you have not turned the BCC into BCCX there is a message in Bitconnect Twitter, if you can trust it? : Bitconnect Refund @Bitconnect_Ref Feb 7 More We are extremely sorry about how BitConnect have ended. We have decided to refund as much BitConnect (BCC) as possible, and sending your total investment value back in BTC.
Send your BCC to our wallet:
8UwZPcbaFa34bg4stu7NGMqXGLBowRfjvx
You will receive 325.78$ per coin.After I send all BCC to this wallet, will it disappear forever  . It can be trust or not ? |
|
|
|
|
|
