[BTC-TC] BTC Growth: Capital Growth via Hedge Fund-Style Investing

[Vycid]

Participants should be asbolutely clear about this: depending on the underlying reasons for the closure of BTC-TC, it is entirely possible that no other exchange will be able to take over BTC-TC assets; nobody yet knows the answer to this question. If no other exchange offers a credible plan, it is not possible to continue with the fund anyway.

Your ignorant approach to the matter is pretty much the reason you find yourself in this sad situation.

Pretending like "there are no solutions" because you don't actually have what it takes to use the solutions is a very flimsy excuse for your own inability.

Is... is this an advertisement?

"Use my product, or you are incompetent!"

[Rannasha]

Participants should be asbolutely clear about this: depending on the underlying reasons for the closure of BTC-TC, it is entirely possible that no other exchange will be able to take over BTC-TC assets; nobody yet knows the answer to this question. If no other exchange offers a credible plan, it is not possible to continue with the fund anyway.

Your ignorant approach to the matter is pretty much the reason you find yourself in this sad situation.

Pretending like "there are no solutions" because you don't actually have what it takes to use the solutions is a very flimsy excuse for your own inability.

Is... is this an advertisement?

"Use my product, or you are incompetent!"

That's pretty much MPex's marketing strategy, along with thinly veiled insults.

[drawingthesun]

Doesn't MPEX still require a $4000 fee to start trading?

[zefyr0s]

Participants should be asbolutely clear about this: depending on the underlying reasons for the closure of BTC-TC, it is entirely possible that no other exchange will be able to take over BTC-TC assets; nobody yet knows the answer to this question. If no other exchange offers a credible plan, it is not possible to continue with the fund anyway.

Your ignorant approach to the matter is pretty much the reason you find yourself in this sad situation.

Pretending like "there are no solutions" because you don't actually have what it takes to use the solutions is a very flimsy excuse for your own inability.

Is... is this an advertisement?

"Use my product, or you are incompetent!"

That's pretty much MPex's marketing strategy, along with thinly veiled insults.

Thinly? Veiled?

[thy]

Doesn't MPEX still require a $4000 fee to start trading?

Last time i saw something about it they had raised the cost for new traders to be allowed to trade on there exchange from 20 btc to 30 btc and that was after btc started to rise they changed the fee, around half a year ago if i remember correctly, i doubt they have had a single trader sign up for that kind of silly deal as the signup was free for the traders on there exchange way back....

[DrGregMulhauser]

Participants should be asbolutely clear about this: depending on the underlying reasons for the closure of BTC-TC, it is entirely possible that no other exchange will be able to take over BTC-TC assets; nobody yet knows the answer to this question. If no other exchange offers a credible plan, it is not possible to continue with the fund anyway.

Your ignorant approach to the matter is pretty much the reason you find yourself in this sad situation.

Pretending like "there are no solutions" because you don't actually have what it takes to use the solutions is a very flimsy excuse for your own inability.

Merely having an exchange is quite a few light years away from actually offering a credible plan forward.

This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange, but if MP has plans for a land-grab in this space -- say, by introducing significant improvements in functionality and value proposition to coincide with the sudden availability of a large number of issuers currently evaluating the merits of potential new homes, then I'm all ears. PM me, and I'd be very happy to hear what he's offering.

[Vexual]

if you can't do it without an exchange, you have no place here
dont most of your investees come to you directly anyway?

[DrGregMulhauser]

if you can't do it without an exchange, you have no place here

Sorry Vexual, but I have no idea what you're talking about (again)...

(You do get that my previous reply was to MPOE-PR and her plug for MPOE, right? You get that I was saying just because MP has an exchange does not mean he has a credible offer to provide a home for a fund of this type?)

I've already indicated that I am not willing to operate a fund of this type via email transfers, friedcat-style. Even if I were willing to do that, my guess is that very very few participants would want to continue with such severely impaired liquidity.

This has nothing to do with "can't do it without an exchange": I simply won't do it without an exchange. That's not negotiable, and if you or anyone else has a problem with that, then this fund very certainly is not for you.

ADDITION: For the benefit of Vexual, who edited the original post to add "dont most of your investees come to you directly anyway?": no, of course not. The fund is and always has been exchange traded. (Maybe you are confusing it with a prospective private equity fund, which is a different beast altogether.)

[ThickAsThieves]

if you can't do it without an exchange, you have no place here

Sorry Vexual, but I have no idea what you're talking about (again)...

(You do get that my previous reply was to MPOE-PR and her plug for MPOE, right? You get that I was saying just because MP has an exchange does not mean he has a credible offer to provide a home for a fund of this type?)

I've already indicated that I am not willing to operate a fund of this type via email transfers, friedcat-style. Even if I were willing to do that, my guess is that very very few participants would want to continue with such severely impaired liquidity.

This has nothing to do with "can't do it without an exchange": I simply won't do it without an exchange. That's not negotiable, and if you or anyone else has a problem with that, then this fund very certainly is not for you.

Have you spoken with Havelock?

[Progressive]

do you need a home for the fund, or facilities to trade?

He needs a platform for us, investors, to offer a liquidity for the shares. He is trading at BitFunder already as we know - the fund holds cca 200 BTC in Ukyo.Loan.

I would prefer Havelock. There are lower fees (but also lower liquidity). On the other hand users there have jumped on pretty much any offering (SANDSTORM, CBTC).

[DrGregMulhauser]

Have you spoken with Havelock?

I'm currently in contact with one exchange operator; although Havelock is on the list of possibilities, it's not first on the list. It has a way to go yet in terms of bulking up its relatively low volume, low liquidity/wide spreads, and the absence of derivatives. However, if any exchanges make a public announcement about plans to support ex-BTC-TC assets, or contact me directly, then I'll be very happy to explore in more detail.

[ThickAsThieves]

do you need a home for the fund, or facilities to trade?

He needs a platform for us, investors, to offer a liquidity for the shares. He is trading at BitFunder already as we know - the fund holds cca 200 BTC in Ukyo.Loan.

I would prefer Havelock. There are lower fees (but also lower liquidity). On the other hand users there have jumped on pretty much any offering (SANDSTORM, CBTC).

Liquidity after the closing of BTCT will surely improve on Havelock & BitFunder.

[MPOE-PR]

Merely having an exchange is quite a few light years away from actually offering a credible plan forward.

This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange, but if MP has plans for a land-grab in this space -- say, by introducing significant improvements in functionality and value proposition to coincide with the sudden availability of a large number of issuers currently evaluating the merits of potential new homes, then I'm all ears. PM me, and I'd be very happy to hear what he's offering.

A land-grab would imply that there's potentially valuable land to be had, and given attitudes like yours that presume it's the exchange, and not you, that needs to have a plan, there's no apparent reason for any such actions.

As to your vague dismissals: bring an argument if you have one, or else you can acknowledge that yes, indeed, you fucked up. Making unsubstantiated allusions to problems of another party is both unproductive and reprehensible. You picked a play pretend exchange built so shakily it couldn't stand for a year and have the gall to suggest that the actual exchange, which has stood on its own as the only correctly built, actually secure, lasting example has unnamed "functionality" issues?

That'd be part of the ignorance I pointed out to you, along with presuming that me taking the time to point this out has anything to do with "arguing" or "advertising".

[Vycid]

Merely having an exchange is quite a few light years away from actually offering a credible plan forward.

This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange, but if MP has plans for a land-grab in this space -- say, by introducing significant improvements in functionality and value proposition to coincide with the sudden availability of a large number of issuers currently evaluating the merits of potential new homes, then I'm all ears. PM me, and I'd be very happy to hear what he's offering.

A land-grab would imply that there's potentially valuable land to be had, and given attitudes like yours that presume it's the exchange, and not you, that needs to have a plan, there's no apparent reason for any such actions.

As to your vague dismissals: bring an argument if you have one, or else you can acknowledge that yes, indeed, you fucked up. Making unsubstantiated allusions to problems of another party is both unproductive and reprehensible. You picked a play pretend exchange built so shakily it couldn't stand for a year and have the gall to suggest that the actual exchange, which has stood on its own as the only correctly built, actually secure, lasting example has unnamed "functionality" issues?

That'd be part of the ignorance I pointed out to you, along with presuming that me taking the time to point this out has anything to do with "arguing" or "advertising".

MPOE-PR, surely you understand that longevity and functionality are not mutually inclusive?  It is entirely possible for a platform with extensive functionality to exist only briefly, and perhaps even easier for a platform with no functionality to exist indefinitely.

As far as I can see, MPEX has never had a public fund traded on its platform before. I cannot understand why a fund which already HAS been exchange-traded in the past would need to be the party bearing a proposal here.

[MPOE-PR]

MPOE-PR, surely you understand that longevity and functionality are not mutually inclusive?  It is entirely possible for a platform with extensive functionality to exist only briefly, and perhaps even easier for a platform with no functionality to exist indefinitely.

As far as I can see, MPEX has never had a public fund traded on its platform before. I cannot understand why a fund which already HAS been exchange-traded in the past would need to be the party bearing a proposal here.

You are confused. Something that occurred on scammy BTCT, just like something that occurred on scammy GLBSE, may not use this putative "experience" as some sort of authority. It is anti-experience and anti-authority. These funds you speak of are significantly less respectable, less serious and less worthy of consideration for being run by people clueless enough to have listed there, exactly in the way some guy who spent a summer as a witch doctor in the Amazon is less likely to be considered for a serious hospital position than someone who did not.

The general point about longevity and functionality in the abstract is plainly irrelevant. MPEx still has most of the BTC financial trade to date. More than GLBSE over its lifetime, more than BTCT over its lifetime, more than half of the sum of it all over its lifetime.

This isn't going away just because random noobs can't afford a little BTC or don't know how to use computers effectually.

[Ytterbium]

Merely having an exchange is quite a few light years away from actually offering a credible plan forward.

This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange, but if MP has plans for a land-grab in this space -- say, by introducing significant improvements in functionality and value proposition to coincide with the sudden availability of a large number of issuers currently evaluating the merits of potential new homes, then I'm all ears. PM me, and I'd be very happy to hear what he's offering.

A land-grab would imply that there's potentially valuable land to be had, and given attitudes like yours that presume it's the exchange, and not you, that needs to have a plan, there's no apparent reason for any such actions.

As to your vague dismissals: bring an argument if you have one, or else you can acknowledge that yes, indeed, you fucked up. Making unsubstantiated allusions to problems of another party is both unproductive and reprehensible. You picked a play pretend exchange built so shakily it couldn't stand for a year and have the gall to suggest that the actual exchange, which has stood on its own as the only correctly built, actually secure, lasting example has unnamed "functionality" issues?

That'd be part of the ignorance I pointed out to you, along with presuming that me taking the time to point this out has anything to do with "arguing" or "advertising".

Lol, obviously if no one uses it, it's not going to have problems. What's the point of listing on an exchange that charges $3750 to sign up and is used by no one?  (That's 30 bitcoins just to trade, not to issue securities) There clearly is none. There is zero reason for anyone to bother doing it.

Btw, just out of curiosity are you still pretending to be a woman, who works Mircea Popescu, rather then Mircea Popescu himself?  

I think that information would be helpful for people trying to evaluate your sanity, and thus business credibility.

[DrGregMulhauser]

This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange...

...bring an argument if you have one...unsubstantiated allusions to problems of another party is both unproductive and reprehensible...unnamed "functionality" issues?

If you sincerely want to go a few rounds with me over this, then feel free to start by finding a few colleagues who have spent some time investing out there in the real world -- as distinct from nothing more than during Bitcoin's brief infancy -- and ask them what real investors think of the "functionality" of MPEx, ask them what they think of the bot's option pricing, and most of all be sure to ask them what they think MP's FAQ answer about options hedging says about his credibility (unless he's long since deleted that out of sheer embarrassment).

Then, if those discussions with your more experienced colleagues haven't led you to question deeply whether MP's monthly PR budget of 12 BTC is even being well spent or is simply being wasted, feel free to PM me. If you have any actual substance to discuss -- rather than merely hurling personal insults -- then when I have the time, I'll consider replying. And we'll both be able to find out whether anything good can come of your insistence that you really want to have this discussion with me.

Otherwise, we're done here.

[Peter Lambert]

Can you give an update on how things stand now, things seem to be settling down some, and I would assume you picked up some shares at firesale prices, so what is the fund NAV looking like now?

[DrGregMulhauser]

Can you give an update on how things stand now, things seem to be settling down some, and I would assume you picked up some shares at firesale prices, so what is the fund NAV looking like now?

Barring further major market upheaval, I'd like to steer clear of daily, weekly, or on demand interim reports; there's quite a bit of other work to be done in terms of keeping things stable, taking advantage of the general carnage where we can, and evaluating the options for going forward.

Stay tuned...

[DrGregMulhauser]

At least give us an estimate of when the next update will come?

As already indicated, the original intention was to publish the next report early, on 1 October, so as to bring our reporting in line with calendar months.

Hopefully all participants will understand, however, that Burnside's countdown to 7 October being only 12 days away introduces a high level of uncertainty. As always, I am prioritising my efforts in a way which I believe best serves the interests of all participants in the fund.