[BitFunder] Graet.Loan - Paying 0.05% interest daily

[supermono]

Any news on this asset? Will it be continuing on BitFunder? Are any redemption requests being fulfilled nowadays? Thanks!

[1714029493]

1714029493

[1714029493]

1714029493

[1714029493]

1714029493

[gannicus]

I think it is pretty obvious that redemptions are not occuring right now. If Graet and Ukyo had funds ready for redemption, they would be buying their shares at bitfunder itself for <0.01 instead of redeeming yours for 0.01. The only option left for those who wish to redeem the shares at face value is to wait. I have a considerable amount of BTC in those shares, but I am aware that there is no way to redeem them any time soon at face value, and I also do not want to redeem them with a loss.

[Progressive]

I think it is pretty obvious that redemptions are not occuring right now. If Graet and Ukyo had funds ready for redemption, they would be buying their shares at bitfunder itself for <0.01 instead of redeeming yours for 0.01. The only option left for those who wish to redeem the shares at face value is to wait. I have a considerable amount of BTC in those shares, but I am aware that there is no way to redeem them any time soon at face value, and I also do not want to redeem them with a loss.

I have no problem waiting for the redemption, but I would like to hear any response from the issuer.

[supermono]

I think it is pretty obvious that redemptions are not occuring right now. If Graet and Ukyo had funds ready for redemption, they would be buying their shares at bitfunder itself for <0.01 instead of redeeming yours for 0.01. The only option left for those who wish to redeem the shares at face value is to wait. I have a considerable amount of BTC in those shares, but I am aware that there is no way to redeem them any time soon at face value, and I also do not want to redeem them with a loss.

Wait how long? If we don't sell by November 1, and then the issuer still doesn't come through, then we're really screwed.

I'm aware that the circumstances going on right now are pretty exceptional. But it seems to me that a contract is still a contract, and if they don't have enough cash on hand to redeem, they should use their credit card or get a traditional bank loan if they have to in order to get the funds to cover the redemptions. After all, it's not like most people are suddenly for no reason deciding they want to redeem (although even in that case, the redemption requests should still be fulfilled). In this case, most redemption requests are as a result of the policy changes Ukyo himself implemented, where he created all these new verification requirements and told US users and non-verified users that they can only sell until Nov. 1, and that all their BTC and shares will be transferred out of their accounts on Dec. 2. So that imposes a certain deadline on the process. When Ukyo made his announcement, he should have anticipated the US and non-verified bondholders needing to redeem, and should have secured the necessary financing. I'm worried about the precedent that could be set here. Otherwise, what is to stop someone else in the future from opening an exchange and raising funds by selling bonds, then telling the majority of investors they have only a few weeks to get out, not redeeming bonds, and forcing people to sell back at a loss just to meet the exchange operator's arbitrary deadline? I realize that these are trying times, and a situation that Ukyo probably didn't envision when he originally issued the bonds, so I do not mean to accuse Ukyo of planning to scam investors or anything. But the result seems to be the same, and I worry about the precedent if a bond issuer is allowed to just ignore the redemption clauses in their contracts like this. I'm not really happy with explanations from Ukyo like "the expectation was to use the funds for other things."

Graet I am less sure about; I don't know if Graet was involved in planning the policy changes at BitFunder or not (if he was involved in planning the policy changes, then IMHO he should have obtained the necessary financing to fulfill bond redemption requests as well). Actually, my opinion is that if a bond issuer does not have enough cash on hand to redeem a bond when requested, he should always get the cash and fulfill the redemption request, even if he has to take out another loan to do it, not just in this case. Otherwise what's the value of a bond if issuers are not going to redeem it when requested? But it just seems worse in this case if Ukyo makes these policy changes without obtaining the cash to cover redemption requests on his own bond. And then the lack of communication is the worst thing; it would be different if an announcement were made that bond redemption requests would be fulfilled on October 25 (for example). At least then investors could be sure that they will be able to get out by redeeming before the Nov. 1 deadline. I don't know if anyone else has heard anything from Graet, but I sent him a PM and never got a reponse back. I'm sure he is probably getting tons of PMs these days and may be overwhelmed. But if he doesn't want to respond to tons of PMs from individual investors asking the same questions, the solution is to post an announcement in the forum with basic information like 1) the future plans for the assets he is managing and 2) how he will be handling redemption requests, or even a short one-line announcement like "I am still checking on options; I will be making an announcement about my assets and redemption requests by (particular date before November 1)".

[thy]

I think it is pretty obvious that redemptions are not occuring right now. If Graet and Ukyo had funds ready for redemption, they would be buying their shares at bitfunder itself for <0.01 instead of redeeming yours for 0.01. The only option left for those who wish to redeem the shares at face value is to wait. I have a considerable amount of BTC in those shares, but I am aware that there is no way to redeem them any time soon at face value, and I also do not want to redeem them with a loss.

First it dosen't really matter if they have the funds in hands or not, they have already taken way to long time to redeem the shares and they should have given better updates to what progress there making in the redeem process, they are clearly in violation of there contracts and should have bought up the nessesary btc by now if there short or have taken up other (btc) loans(without clauses to redeem premature of when they expect to be able to payback the loan) to cover the situations with redeem requests that hasent been fulfilled yet.
Secondly im pretty sure they at least have some funds avaliable and both get more each day, if they use that to buy up stocks under face value instead of doing what they can to redeem shares they are violation there contracts even worse...

[thy]

I think it is pretty obvious that redemptions are not occuring right now. If Graet and Ukyo had funds ready for redemption, they would be buying their shares at bitfunder itself for <0.01 instead of redeeming yours for 0.01. The only option left for those who wish to redeem the shares at face value is to wait. I have a considerable amount of BTC in those shares, but I am aware that there is no way to redeem them any time soon at face value, and I also do not want to redeem them with a loss.

Wait how long? If we don't sell by November 1, and then the issuer still doesn't come through, then we're really screwed.

I'm aware that the circumstances going on right now are pretty exceptional. But it seems to me that a contract is still a contract, and if they don't have enough cash on hand to redeem, they should use their credit card or get a traditional bank loan if they have to in order to get the funds to cover the redemptions. After all, it's not like most people are suddenly for no reason deciding they want to redeem (although even in that case, the redemption requests should still be fulfilled). In this case, most redemption requests are as a result of the policy changes Ukyo himself implemented, where he created all these new verification requirements and told US users and non-verified users that they can only sell until Nov. 1, and that all their BTC and shares will be transferred out of their accounts on Dec. 2. So that imposes a certain deadline on the process. When Ukyo made his announcement, he should have anticipated the US and non-verified bondholders needing to redeem, and should have secured the necessary financing. I'm worried about the precedent that could be set here. Otherwise, what is to stop someone else in the future from opening an exchange and raising funds by selling bonds, then telling the majority of investors they have only a few weeks to get out, not redeeming bonds, and forcing people to sell back at a loss just to meet the exchange operator's arbitrary deadline? I realize that these are trying times, and a situation that Ukyo probably didn't envision when he originally issued the bonds, so I do not mean to accuse Ukyo of planning to scam investors or anything. But the result seems to be the same, and I worry about the precedent if a bond issuer is allowed to just ignore the redemption clauses in their contracts like this. I'm not really happy with explanations from Ukyo like "the expectation was to use the funds for other things."

Graet I am less sure about; I don't know if Graet was involved in planning the policy changes at BitFunder or not (if he was involved in planning the policy changes, then IMHO he should have obtained the necessary financing to fulfill bond redemption requests as well). Actually, my opinion is that if a bond issuer does not have enough cash on hand to redeem a bond when requested, he should always get the cash and fulfill the redemption request, even if he has to take out another loan to do it, not just in this case. Otherwise what's the value of a bond if issuers are not going to redeem it when requested? But it just seems worse in this case if Ukyo makes these policy changes without obtaining the cash to cover redemption requests on his own bond. And then the lack of communication is the worst thing; it would be different if an announcement were made that bond redemption requests would be fulfilled on October 25 (for example). At least then investors could be sure that they will be able to get out by redeeming before the Nov. 1 deadline. I don't know if anyone else has heard anything from Graet, but I sent him a PM and never got a reponse back. I'm sure he is probably getting tons of PMs these days and may be overwhelmed. But if he doesn't want to respond to tons of PMs from individual investors asking the same questions, the solution is to post an announcement in the forum with basic information like 1) the future plans for the assets he is managing and 2) how he will be handling redemption requests, or even a short one-line announcement like "I am still checking on options; I will be making an announcement about my assets and redemption requests by (particular date before November 1)".

I totally agree to your post. Ukyo should have been prepared and should have had most if not all btc's needed for redeems ready, then if not all requests could be handled the first day, all should at least have been solved within a day or two when he would be more certain of the exact amounts needed

Great havent been logged into bicointalk after the 11 oct (under his own name at least)
Ukyo seems to have been in every day but havent made a single post after 12 oct.
None of them have aswered my PM's or fullfilled my redeem requests.

[gannicus]

I understand and I share your concerns aswell. The thing is: we really can't do anything. At least they are paying the interests, which shows that they still have (some) commitment to these loans, and enforces the theory that they aren't responding because they are really busy. If they did not really care at all, they wouldn't be even doing that.

[Bananery]

Yes, we're fucked with this one as well. Graem is an idiot, who didn't think much when he took this loan or he's just can't see the simple fact of rising bitcoin exchange rate.

He took this loan to pay another loan. He says he could get a loan from a bank, but decided to try bitcoin loan on bitfunder. I made simple calculations. Graem took 2000BTC loan and converted it into fiat, he got around 225,000USD.

If he redeems all the shares by the end of 2013, which he won't, he'll pay back roughly 450,000USD. This makes it 100% in interest for 7 month. What bank gives loans with those interests? Maybe mafia.

Graem would have been better if he just took that loan and bought bitcoins, paid back fiat and now he would be much richer. Now he's broke and will probably go bankrupt soon.

Graem also lied about this "This loan is not tied to the success or failure of any business."

It is tied to his CrownCloud and OzCoin. OzCoin is currently 38THash/s. With 2% fee, he can make 332BTC in one year if his percentage stays the same. It won't, mining will soon be the thing of big companies who don't need any pools. It means that his share will drop.

His CrownCloud business is 100% fiat and doesn't pay much. Therefore, Graem's estimations to redeem by 2016 are bullshit. I don't even know how he calculated those estimates, he probably thought exchange rate will stay at 100USD for years now.

Tell me Graem, if the exchange rate is 500USD in 2016, will you come up with 1 million by then? And if it is 1000USD?

The way exchange rate grows, you're paying mafia like interest rates now, Graem. So, stop paying dividends, sell as much as you can what you own, I don't care what you, just redeem as much as possible as fast as possible. I'm prepared for no dividends and less than face value rather than dragging this into 2016, when we'll lose almost 100% of our investments.

[Progressive]

Well, at least Ukyo replied (maybe thanks to the Bananery's rant).

I thought that Graet needed bitcoins (not fiat) due to the issue with his OzCoin pool. Did he said anywhere that he is converting the BTC to fiat?

[TsuyokuNaritai]

TradeFortress has announced that the Great debt owned by BTCInvest is not being honored, and that as well as the lost bitcoins it's making necessary extra complications & verification requirements in the liquidation process for BTCInvest's 147 investors.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=135157.msg3412811#msg3412811

Please could you respond. Thanks.

[Bananery]

Graem must be shocked and in disbelief how bad this loan turned out. I want numbers on his BTC and fiat income. Numbers on investments and any other assets that can be liquidated. Numbers on redeemed shares and request length.

Graem, if you can't afford to redeem this loan fast, stop paying dividends as Ukyo does and put every penny you get into redeeming.

As I already said, I'm prepared for no dividends and less than face value rather than dragging this into the future even by a second longer than necessary.

[julz]

While a lack of communication is worrying in itself - surely it's unreasonable to expect borrowers like this to be in a position to pay back a large percentage of the money at short notice.
Aside from the obvious exodus of US holders - there are probably many who just want to exit because of the increased exchange rate.

If you asked someone to suddenly cough up 25% of their home loan - they'd also not be in a position to do it, but that doesn't mean they can't afford the loan payments.

The circumstances are clearly unexpected by all.. and if Graet were to liquidate assets to pay people back sooner - it would pretty much defeat the purpose of having taken out this loan.

If he just communicated more, people (like me) might be willing to buy more of these shares - which would help those who need to exit.. but without the communication - we're left wondering/speculating if the underlying businesses are not going well (overexposure to mining, now with massively reduced income due to difficulty?)

In short - a failure to be able to quickly pay out in what amounts to a 'rush on the bank' is not such a concern - but the lack of information regarding his financial affairs is.

[Bananery]

Home loans are paid in fiat. These are bitcoins we are talking about, which went up in value about 100% since Graem Tee took this loan. His pool income will decrease, not because difficulty increases, but because mining is increasingly becoming the business of companies and large mining farms that don't need any pools.

His CrownCloud is purely fiat, and while pays a little, it is still fiat. If bitcoin goes up even more, Graem will soon have troubles to pay even the interest, and the loan itself will be very very hard to repay by face value of bonds.

Doesn't really matter if he converted BTC into fiat or not, part of which he did, the truth still is that raising BTC exchange will make harder and harder to pay anything.

[TurdHurdur]

With BitFunder closing down will you be paying the dividend like Ukyo intends to?

[ADgordo]

With BitFunder closing down will you be paying the dividend like Ukyo intends to?

Will he be taking 5 minutes to communicate?

[ohyeahok]

what can we do for the bitfunder close.
please Greaet.
give we a message.

[szmarco]

where is Graet?
It's time to say something...

[Progressive]

My plan originaly was to buy the bonds and wait for Graet's planned redemptions (from summer 2014 to 2015).
But the fact that Graet is not communicating is worrying me.

As far as I know Graet is from Austraulia - what steps should I take in order to prepare evidence before contacting Australian authorities? Anyone familiar with Australian law?

Did anyone of you received any info from Graet/Graem at IRC or other channels?

[Graet]

Hi folks,
Apologies for not responding earlier, been very busy plus trying to work out the best way to manage graet.loan with the changes at BitFunder. My initial hope had was to find a larger investor that could buy graet.loan from US based lenders and continue on BitFunder, BitFunder announcing it will close made that harder.

Timing in BitcoinWorld seems to be an important thing, the forums were down for days, came back, I went on a family vacation and a few hours after I left changes at BitFunder were announced, by the time I got home my portfolio had lost > 60% BTC value and I had a large number of redeem requests. In the past I have been able to fulfill redeem requests quickly but I do not have the liquidity to pay out many requests at once. The loan was mainly used to consolidate multiple smaller loans and to be able to use a central management system to pay interest, also in the past when possible I have bought back graet.loan on the market, not all 200,000 issued are still in circulation.

I still consider graet.loan to be a loan and intend to continue to pay interest and to buy back as I am able.

Best wishes
Graet

[thecoinjournal]

Hi folks,
Apologies for not responding earlier, been very busy plus trying to work out the best way to manage graet.loan with the changes at BitFunder. My initial hope had was to find a larger investor that could buy graet.loan from US based lenders and continue on BitFunder, BitFunder announcing it will close made that harder.

Timing in BitcoinWorld seems to be an important thing, the forums were down for days, came back, I went on a family vacation and a few hours after I left changes at BitFunder were announced, by the time I got home my portfolio had lost > 60% BTC value and I had a large number of redeem requests. In the past I have been able to fulfill redeem requests quickly but I do not have the liquidity to pay out many requests at once. The loan was mainly used to consolidate multiple smaller loans and to be able to use a central management system to pay interest, also in the past when possible I have bought back graet.loan on the market, not all 200,000 issued are still in circulation.

I still consider graet.loan to be a loan and intend to continue to pay interest and to buy back as I am able.

Best wishes
Graet

Thank you so much Graet, I'm holding a small amount of Graet.Loan and would trust you.