Moneypot Investors are invited to vote and speak up

[JackpotRacer]

the following happened not long ago

A Moneypot investor withdraw 103 BTC and I posted it when it happened
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1994708.msg20182491#msg20182491

and I was wondering after 2-3 days the Bank Roll was back to 300+ so I thought it was a software glitch. Now we know what happened.

A Moneypot Investor tried to withdraw 103 BTC but Moneypot refused to complete the withdrawal and claiming that they have a deal with the Investor that his investment will stay until December with the following condition:

even though he had lost 35 Bitcoin as an investor with Moneypot, he would have to keep his funds there until
he made the loss back or Moneypot would refund him in December.

hmmm that is a really nice deal 35 BTC without any risk to lose! the question is what guarantee he received? did he receive a Bank Guarantee or only the word of MP owners?

But how can MP owners promise him 35 BTC until December?  Sorry but that doesnt sound very serious!
where should those 35 BTC come from?  from players? what if players will go on winning?

last time someone claimed that MP cant pay the Investors the promised compensation right now because the BTC is 2.5k USD LOL ( stupid reason IMO) what if in December the BTC is 5k USD?

I invested 16 BTC and lost 4 BTC and didnt get such a generous offer beside the empty promises to compensation. I feel Scammed

where are the Investors who got such a generous offer from Moneypot?

where are the Investors who got promised long ago the compensation like me and got a lot of air till now?

P S
Moneypot in the past complained that my answers were manipulating the voters

Moneypot is welcome to propose some more answers and I will add those

[1715633517]

1715633517

[1715633517]

1715633517

[1715633517]

1715633517

[1715633517]

1715633517

[JackpotRacer]

reserved

[JackpotRacer]

Please add: "The deal is not accurately described".

Details aren't publicly disclosed, but it is not how it's described and did not affect any other players or investor.

I will be glad to add your question but please give us the details and story of your side. thx

I saw the withdrawal of the 100+ BTC so it looks that you didnt complete the withdrawal and fits to the story the Investor is claiming that MP did not let him withdraw.

[FXOpen]

MoneyPot is failing, it is clear to see. Was destined to end this way right when it was bought.

[JackpotRacer]

MoneyPot is failing, it is clear to see. Was destined to end this way right when it was bought.

I sadly agree because this was exactly what our house saw coming after the first 3 month of actions of the new owners

[FXOpen]

MoneyPot is failing, it is clear to see. Was destined to end this way right when it was bought.

I sadly agree because this was exactly what our house saw coming after the first 3 month of actions of the new owners

Yup, its on a steep downhill slope. Will be complete irrelevant by the end of 2017

[poordeveloper]

It is also important to add that most players consider all Moneypot sites the same. Their implementation is too obvious and even if the site owners made an effort to create a different site, it is mostly "yet another Moneypot site".

Had it been developed differently, it'd have been more successful.

[JackpotRacer]

It is also important to add that most players consider all Moneypot sites the same. Their implementation is too obvious and even if the site owners made an effort to create a different site, it is mostly "yet another Moneypot site".

Had it been developed differently, it'd have been more successful.

thx for your posting

Had it been developed differently, it'd have been more successful.

could you please give an example what you mean here? thx

[poordeveloper]

It is also important to add that most players consider all Moneypot sites the same. Their implementation is too obvious and even if the site owners made an effort to create a different site, it is mostly "yet another Moneypot site".

Had it been developed differently, it'd have been more successful.

thx for your posting

Had it been developed differently, it'd have been more successful.

could you please give an example what you mean here? thx

I mean they should have developed their system/API for casinos/dice sites in a more flexible way. Basically, I mean they should have allowed casinos to use their bankroll without making that fact obvious on the casino's HTML code or the Moneypot website.

They would have earned money anyway and the players would not feel they're always playing the same game.

While I agree that for players the fact that a site is using Moneypot can be an assurance of safety, they tend to think "oh look, another Moneypot casino" when they see one.

If you read the threads here on BitcoinTalk of any Moneypot sites you'll read several of these comments.

[JackpotRacer]

It is also important to add that most players consider all Moneypot sites the same. Their implementation is too obvious and even if the site owners made an effort to create a different site, it is mostly "yet another Moneypot site".

Had it been developed differently, it'd have been more successful.

thx for your posting

Had it been developed differently, it'd have been more successful.

could you please give an example what you mean here? thx

I mean they should have developed their system/API for casinos/dice sites in a more flexible way. Basically, I mean they should have allowed casinos to use their bankroll without making that fact obvious on the casino's HTML code or the Moneypot website.

They would have earned money anyway and the players would not feel they're always playing the same game.

While I agree that for players the fact that a site is using Moneypot can be an assurance of safety, they tend to think "oh look, another Moneypot casino" when they see one.

If you read the threads here on BitcoinTalk of any Moneypot sites you'll read several of these comments.

thx for the explanation. IMO the MP business idea was a very good one. one mistake was to allow the untitled dice version to be implemented without any restrictions.

[Bitcoingiver]

For me with what I have read on this thread I think this is stealing by tricks because you didn't know the information about moneypot and thier tricks. I think this should also be a big warning to everybody. The big problem is that the investor is not even sure that moneypot is going to pay them by December.

[JackpotRacer]

For me with what I have read on this thread I think this is stealing by tricks because you didn't know the information about moneypot and thier tricks. I think this should also be a big warning to everybody. The big problem is that the investor is not even sure that moneypot is going to pay them by December.

yes that is exactly what I thought. but to be fair we dont know if the Investor got a bank/fiat guarantee or an escrowed guarantee

but here is what RHavar posted in regards to the problem and deal

If I was an investor, I'd be pretty concerned. Promising returns strictly increases your risk, and largely defeats the purpose of an investor system. I think you guys have already promised investors a couple hundred bitcoin (?) after the incident last year; so unless you have some sort of cash injection -- solvency would seem to be a major concern.

link
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1737934.msg20406071#msg20406071

thx for your straight forward posting

[Wendigo]

Why is MoneyPot failing to generate profit? Not enough house edge or a lot of lucky gamblers?

[Kakmakr]

It all depends on what the deal was between the parties, when the investment was done. If you did this with a proper contract, then you would have built in a exit clause to protect yourself. If either parties deviated from the original contract, then they would be in breach of contract and this could be taken to court.

The problem with contracts like this is, none of this can be contested. The Bitcoin gambling industry is still operating in the Wild West territory, where anything goes. You invest in these things with no protection or real recourse if something goes wrong.

They are saying that they are operating from somewhere in Canada 

[JackpotRacer]

Why is MoneyPot failing to generate profit? Not enough house edge or a lot of lucky gamblers?

the answer is that there is enough house edge and Moneypot is earning but the investors not and that is very strange but also very clear sign that MP owners care in 1st place for them and not the investors

a lot of lucky gamblers? yes LOL some are to lucky that it stinks and I dont need eeeth graphs to see this. next Dogedigital will attack me that I am spreading FUD but I have enough experience to see this and RHavar has also enough experience and just read back all what RHavar wrote regarding MP and Bank Roll management (Kelly) and all their empty promises they gave to the investors.

the magic word for MP is TRANSPARENCY! I dont see it yet but I am always asking for it. the end is written on the wall (sadly because it was a great business idea but now in the wrong hands)

It all depends on what the deal was between the parties, when the investment was done. If you did this with a proper contract, then you would have built in a exit clause to protect yourself. If either parties deviated from the original contract, then they would be in breach of contract and this could be taken to court.

The problem with contracts like this is, none of this can be contested. The Bitcoin gambling industry is still operating in the Wild West territory, where anything goes. You invest in these things with no protection or real recourse if something goes wrong.

They are saying that they are operating from somewhere in Canada 

we dont know what contract they have and I only hope for the investor that he is well secured with his 103 BTC and that he gets his 35 BTC he lost

but I as an investor would also like to get the guarantee he has and my loss back as all investors should get compensated as MP promised it.

last stats
Bankroll:    323,358,010 bits
Wagered: 99,419,893,646 bits
Investor Profit:    -90,265,274 bits
Bets:  1,184,510,230 

just imagine the Bank Roll less 103 BTC ............... the max bet would be crippled again and soon we will see what MP owners have in their Bank Roll..........

[JackpotRacer]

please vote!

most voters feel scammed and fooled

Dogedigital is missing on BCT forum since 27th July thats very strange and unusual for the most active MP owner

Last Active:   July 27, 2017, 09:05:27 PM

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=315650

[poordeveloper]

I have seen the post of Dogedigital above but there is no actual solution proposed on it.

Do they always just try to earn time (by replying vaguely) to have your coins for longer?

If they're losing money, they should do something instead of just waiting and trying to avoid withdrawals for as long as possible.

[JackpotRacer]

I have seen the post of Dogedigital above but there is no actual solution proposed on it.

Do they always just try to earn time (by replying vaguely) to have your coins for longer?

If they're losing money, they should do something instead of just waiting and trying to avoid withdrawals for as long as possible.

thx for your posting

it is exactly as you pointed it out! Dogedigital is trying to win time!

as you see his promise for the 103 Investment of an Investor +35 BTC loss to pay this amount in December is also just to win time

latest in December Moneypot's Bank Roll will be less 103 or even more and guess what then?

Moneypot needs to show strength and that would mean to compensate Investors now to bring back trust

[DarkDays]

I invested 16 BTC

Didn't you get that money by stealing it from one of your players?

[Bitinity]

I invested 16 BTC

Didn't you get that money by stealing it from one of your players?

Never heard about it before and I do not find any accusations against him. If it is true, can you tell us how many btc have been stolen and why there is no one complaining it? I'm not in his side though, just so surprised to read your post about he stole money.