Andrew Laurus hoax

[Ytterbium]

What's odd is the time the news broke, a Sunday eve, so some journals have run without confirming sources,  the fake shill twitter account that speads fud about KnC for a guy called Andrew Laurus who checks out no where else,

Why do you keep calling this a "fake shill twitter account"? There's no evidence the twitter account doesn't actually belong to Andrew Laurus. Kim Dotcom follows this guy, as does the WSJ reporter herself  (She also follows bitcoin examiner, and bitcoin examiner follows Laurus as well)

While it seems likely that whoever runs the Andrew Laurus twitter is the source, what makes you think the guy running it isn't the same guy who worked at Lehman, etc?

I think you're missing the most obvious person to have planted the story: Andrew Laurus - followed by both Harriet Agnew, and bitcoinexaminer on twitter.  He brags to these reporters that he's setting up this big deal. Maybe there is no deal and he's just blowing smoke up their asses in order to get some press for himself and make himself seem like a bigger deal then he is.

If the story is fake, that's a much more plausible explanation then the idea that some random upset chip buyer is able to con the WSJ into running a hoax story by pretending the be Andrew Laurus.

The WSJ content is word for word based on that article. No new substance. It appears to have been that easy...

I don't think anyone approached the WSJ, as I said it is likely the jorno keeps an eye out here, especially w.r.t. the timing of the Bitcoin examiner article succeeded by the WSJ hours later when this forum was still mulling it over.

It also doesn't mention anything about BFL or KnC.

[1714694148]

1714694148

[Ytterbium]

So apparently the WSJ has issued a correction.  Here's a press release from the Tavistock group, specifically saying that they have no relation to bitcoin or Andrew Laurus.

My guess is that Andrew Laurus was running a con on some people, and never expected to see it reported in the WSJ, where it could more easily be debunked.

I guess I was wrong about the WSJ taking it's fact checking seriously.

[Bitcoinorama]

So apparently the WSJ has issued a correction.  Here's a press release from the Tavistock group, specifically saying that they have no relation to bitcoin or Andrew Laurus.

My guess is that Andrew Laurus was running a con on some people, and never expected to see it reported in the WSJ, where it could more easily be debunked.

I guess I was wrong about the WSJ taking it's fact checking seriously.

Sorry man, but welcome to the world of mass media where 'likes', and 'shares' have taken greater preference over 'honesty' and 'content'.

On a side note, I bet Joe Lewis is livid with whoever is responsible it has probably caused him and his associated companies a monster headache today as all kinds of lunatics chase him for a comment...

Ah to have been a fly on the wall...

[Phinnaeus Gage]

EDIT: This was obviously a hoax.  The WSJ has issued a correction (behind paywall here) and The Tavistock group has put out a press release disclaiming any association:

"Unfortunately, many immature investments and investors would like the association of private investors like Joe Lewis. They bring instant credibility," said Douglas McMahon, senior managing director of Tavistock Group, a private investment organization founded by Lewis.

"'Our' Joe Lewis has nothing do with Bitcoin, Phoenix Funds or Andrew Laurus," said McMahon.

So the question is, who's behind the Hoax?  My guess is this "Andrew Laurus" person was probably spreading rumors about this "deal" as part of some sort of scheme. Both of the reporters who covered (at bitcoin examiner and the WSJ) follow him on twitter.

_____
Old version of text:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323997004578644491403250124.html

Joe Lewis, a billionaire foreign-exchange trader who teamed up with hedge-fund manager George Soros in 1992 to bet against the Bank of England, is the latest high-profile financier to throw his weight behind the virtual currency called bitcoin.

Mr. Lewis leads the Phoenix Fund, a Zurich-based private-equity fund that on Tuesday plans to invest $200 million in Avalon, a company that makes computer servers aimed at creating bitcoins, according to people familiar with the situation.

....

The Phoenix Fund was set up this year to invest in bitcoin mining-hardware companies. It looked at several of Avalon's rivals in the sector, including Butterfly Labs and KnCMiner but decided against investing, according to a person familiar with the private-equity firm's strategy.

....

The bitcoin deal was put together by Andrew Laurus, a former government-bonds salesman at Lehman Brothers who is also an investor in the fund. Avalon was set up by Yifu Guo, a pioneer in the bitcoin-mining industry. He was part of the team that developed the first ASIC bitcoin mining hardware. ASIC stands for application-specific integrated circuit, a type of custom-designed microchip. Mr. Guo couldn't be reached for comment.

So here's the question: Does this explain all of Josh's weird behavior lately? It's likely that Joe Lewis didn't tell the other people he was looking into investing with that he was also looking possibilities as well.

With Inaba's hubris, he probably assumed the deal was a definite go ahead.  That would explain why he was in here telling everyone that he was going to laugh at people who were predicting their failure, that he was going to "stick it up [our] asses" and that the bitcoin talk forum was a "minor player" in everything - clearly alluding to "major players" elsewhere, like Joe Lewis.

Anyway, obviously this guy decided BFL wasn't for him.  They have a chip design, but Avalon (and ASICMiner) have probably made enough to fund 20nm designs on their own.

Interestingly he also looked at KnC and wasn't interested.    

I told Josh to take off that silly red nose prior to Joe Lewis came a callin', but I see he didn't listen to me. Probably calling Joe a monumental asshole and givin' him a quarter didn't help matters either.

Later that day, Sonny arrived at the office and asked Josh what's new, whereupon Josh told Sonny nothing but that he was now able to blow up 22 balloons a minute. Needless to say that for the next few minutes, all calls to Josh's office was put on hold.

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Wow, how does the WSJ eff that up so bad.

Same way CNN, and MSNBC, and Fox, and Bloomberg have all fucked up recently.  Their "journalist," who these days is a kid out of school, because the legitimate journalists aren't found on the internet side and won't be for a generation, wants to get out before anybody else, and so reports the first bullshit tweet. 

And others respond to the same bullshit Tweet on that network, as well as the now "legitimatized" news blog report, the FUD and bullshit increase exponentially, and the bullshit self-confirms.

I PM'ed theymos to have him remove CNN from the list. Here's my argument: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4nK5cvg_5A

[Bitcoinorama]

What's odd is the time the news broke, a Sunday eve, so some journals have run without confirming sources,  the fake shill twitter account that speads fud about KnC for a guy called Andrew Laurus who checks out no where else,

Why do you keep calling this a "fake shill twitter account"? There's no evidence the twitter account doesn't actually belong to Andrew Laurus. Kim Dotcom follows this guy, as does the WSJ reporter herself  (She also follows bitcoin examiner, and bitcoin examiner follows Laurus as well)

While it seems likely that whoever runs the Andrew Laurus twitter is the source, what makes you think the guy running it isn't the same guy who worked at Lehman, etc?

I think you're missing the most obvious person to have planted the story: Andrew Laurus - followed by both Harriet Agnew, and bitcoinexaminer on twitter.  He brags to these reporters that he's setting up this big deal. Maybe there is no deal and he's just blowing smoke up their asses in order to get some press for himself and make himself seem like a bigger deal then he is.

If the story is fake, that's a much more plausible explanation then the idea that some random upset chip buyer is able to con the WSJ into running a hoax story by pretending the be Andrew Laurus.

The WSJ content is word for word based on that article. No new substance. It appears to have been that easy...

I don't think anyone approached the WSJ, as I said it is likely the jorno keeps an eye out here, especially w.r.t. the timing of the Bitcoin examiner article succeeded by the WSJ hours later when this forum was still mulling it over.

It also doesn't mention anything about BFL or KnC.

Sorry I hadn't seen you wrote this earlier, the twitter account having looked at it again may well be genuine. I hadn't seen Kim DotCom on there previously as I hadn't noticed twitters action by to load more followers past a certain point. The mentioning of KnC was a rant from his twitter. He was dismissive about them in one of the articles onlines as well, but whatever everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

He certainly kicked up a huge fuss and was distanced by the main player in the article. His tweets come across as irrational and agitated. I wouldn't expect that from a 'Senior Government Insider', and the last person you want involved in Bitcoin is someone that was involved in bond selling from a Bank that collapsed through the misselling of sub prime bonds and was the catalyst to the largest crash in financial history and gave guidance to the government around that time. It's what Bitcoin was created to escape from...

[Ytterbium]

Sorry I hadn't seen you wrote this earlier, the twitter account having looked at it again may well be genuine. I hadn't seen Kim DotCom on there previously as I hadn't noticed twitters action by to load more followers past a certain point. The mentioning of KnC was a rant from his twitter. He was dismissive about them in one of the articles onlines as well, but whatever everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

He certainly kicked up a huge fuss and was distanced by the main player in the article. His tweets come across as irrational and agitated. I wouldn't expect that from a 'Senior Government Insider', and the last person you want involved in Bitcoin is someone that was involved in bond selling from a Bank that collapsed through the misselling of sub prime bonds and was the catalyst to the largest crash in financial history and gave guidance to the government around that time. It's what Bitcoin was created to escape from...

Well, who knows if he actually worked at Lehman, "Andrew Laurus" sounds like the kind of name someone would make up.