Bitcoin Savings and Trust | Home | Closed

[Maged]

Pretty strong words Maged. Have anything to back them up?

Stop being like that. I've already brought up new points, in addition to the existing ones. However, if you'd prefer, I can play this game your way: What's wrong with strong words, especially when the evidence backs it up? What's wrong with rational thinking?

Speaking of business, how does he, as a single person...

Likely the same way that I, as an Online Community Manager, have time to do analytics on forums, develop marketing and social media strategies, and more all while having the time to chat with players in-game and through IRC and other medias. Ironically, it doesn't take that much time to write on IRC, and I think it's rather silly that you're going to try to use that.

Except he clearly has enough time to do all of that, which I don't dispute. In fact, he's doing just about all of that already! I fail to see how that leaves him with enough time to do sales, especially since I believe that he said that they are in-person exchanges?

People tried this before and it didn't really catch on much, but if you really think it's going to crash, go short on him. So many people believe strongly in him that I'm sure you'll find a counterparty who is willing to take regular insurance payments from you in exchange for coverage if things go south. My issues with CDSes don't really apply to high-profile people like you, because there's no doubt that you aren't pirateat40 and you have little power to cause him to default. So look for a counterparty for a large OTC CDS Have fun!

You can be like one of the protagonists of http://www.amazon.com/Big-Short-Doomsday-Thorndike-Nonfiction/dp/141043026X, fighting the bubble and making money on the way down.

Again, I could care less about Pirate. I don't want to go long or short with him. I'm much more concerned about how his default will effect Bitcoin, both in terms of the price, but also in terms of how its perceived. At that point, I'm also concerned about how it'll affect the reputation of the forum. If someone as big and reputable as Pirate can get away with this, why should any reputation here be trusted?

Maged, if you want we could do some sort of insurance or bet on pirate defaulting. That way you can stay in BTC.

BTC is an experiment and well... this is how it goes:)

That doesn't help me if BTC is worth 50% of what it was before he defaulted.

[John (John K.)]

copumpkin: I'm just having a lengthy discussion why shorting BS&T doesn't work properly. The offers in the past were not true shorts or had other issues. I know people who would short the living hell out of BS&T, and this is not an understatement.

No one is going to convince anyone else.

I know for a fact that the little flamewar triggered multiple withdrawals, independent on the rate changes. We just need to keep going until the kill switch is flipped.

Chilling new deposits alone should bring the thing down, that's why it's essential we do not leave this thread here alone. I think we're pretty close to the limit. Heck, there are some large asks and sales on Gox today, could be the remainder of the active wallet on its way to Malaysia.

Why Malaysia?  

[exahash]

Chilling new deposits alone should bring the thing down, that's why it's essential we do not leave this thread here alone. I think we're pretty close to the limit.

Based on what?

[copumpkin]

That doesn't help me if BTC is worth 50% of what it was before he defaulted.

Sure it does. Insure yourself for twice as much as you'd normally do

[Vandroiy]

I think we're pretty close to the limit.

Based on what?

Well, there are few indicators of further growth in the scheme, the rule and rate change, and the reaction yesterday looked pretty erratic. When the flamewar broke loose, Pirateat40 quickly posted he'd be at DefCon or something, which I doubt he will. All of it looks like he has been preparing for shutdown since things went rough yesterday.

Sure, it depends on how many withdrawals we can trigger. One coin too little, it keeps going; one too many, it's over. We can just guess how close we are, but if I have to guess, we're close.

[bitclown]

People tried this before and it didn't really catch on much, but if you really think it's going to crash, go short on him.

Maged, if you want we could do some sort of insurance or bet on pirate defaulting.

It doesn't surprise me that Pirate's victims are so obsessed with gambling...

[Philj]

Please quote for me where he states he will continue this forever.  Its you lovely people that keep making this estimations about what will happen "if things keep going the way they are". 

I don't want to be a dick but Actually I could if I weren't typing  this on a Kindle. He says he imagines this can go on for a very long time(he sees no end in sight) in the thread where we can ask Pirate questions (a day in the life of ...).

He told me personally this could go on as long as bitcoin was healthy.

Pics or it didn't happen!

And what is healthy? Bitcoin was healthy when it was $0.00001 per BTC

[Vandroiy]

Goat: betting on the default? Bring it on! But it's hard to find a trustworthy third party.

http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=433 sounds like a possible option. I wouldn't trust the site with a lot, but it would be a start. Yet look at it, 10:1, with half a coin to win? Come on. Why didn't you start raising that already?

If you trust that I'm just wrong, but not a scammer, I might be able to arrange a bet on a similar time-scale with someone who can place more serious amounts.

[hazek]

Chilling new deposits alone should bring the thing down, that's why it's essential we do not leave this thread here alone. I think we're pretty close to the limit.

Based on what?

Rates dropping, limits increasing, ect ect

[copumpkin]

People tried this before and it didn't really catch on much, but if you really think it's going to crash, go short on him.

Maged, if you want we could do some sort of insurance or bet on pirate defaulting.

It doesn't surprise me that Pirate's victims are so obsessed with gambling...

What? It's the standard market response.

[waltmarkers]

so now does pirate's business model include buying bitcoins constantly? haven't found any answer yet around here... beginning at the lows last winter, did he perhaps even rescue Bitcoin singlefootedly? 

I pretty sure that the last thing the pirate does is buying bitcoins

He obviously lends them out to some other people at higher interests, without being nosy on where they get the bitcoins from.
Ot it's a ponzi...
Either of the two - feel free to choose your believes, I'm still not quite sure about mine

Isn't it clear what he does? He's said as much on other threads. People lend him bitcoins that he then sells for hard currency locally at a (significant) markup. Whoever buys those coins more than likely sends them to a third party, who converts them back to fiat (possibly another fiat).

Pirate moves his currency back into bitcoins. More than likely Pirate is never in fiat more than a day or two, leaving him minimally exposed to bitcoin / fiat pair volatility risk.

Pirate's customer has a steady need to send currency through bitcoins on a regular basis, for payment for some ongoing good or service. These customers are paying a significant premium for this service, likely 10% or more. That's why Pirate can afford to pay 7 points per week. As long as pirate's customers' business grows (or they move more bitcoins through him) he can afford to keep paying 7% indefinitely. It is likely that at some point he may have to close to new deposits (as he has done in the past).

Bitcoin is a easy way to move large amounts of currency without the use of banks or walking large amounts of cash through airports. Hell, it's better than diamonds or art. Sure is more liquid.

He's doing exactly what he says he does, arbitrage with a very short term loan (The loan is as fast as he can turn hard currency to bitcoin).

(If I've stepped a little too close to home, please let me know and I'll edit / delete my post.)

I reiterate my previous theory. As he moves more money his counter party demands a lower margin (but still insane for banking). BTC is not subject to AML/KYC for in person transactions like art, jewelry or annuities/life insurance. He could COMPLETELY LEGALLY take a suitcase full of cash, and give his customer bitcoins EVERY WEEK.  FYI 1,239,316.26 BTC were sent in the last 24 hours. That's $8 Million USD today!

He then can go to his bank, with said suitcase full of cash and deposit it. Most likely he has set up an LLC or some other business account. Sure, they'll flag it and ask him where he got it. He'll say I sell bitcoins. The bank will record that on the ticket and make the deposit.His buyer or buyers don't come in to it at all. They could be selling perfectly legal items or not, it doesn't matter. Because bitcoin is not a prepaid access under the FinCEN regulations and he is not a broker dealer according to FINRA he's AML exempt. This will go away when FinCEN and FINRA correct their regulations to include bitcoin.

[Tomatocage]

Chilling new deposits alone should bring the thing down, that's why it's essential we do not leave this thread here alone. I think we're pretty close to the limit.

Based on what?

Rates dropping, limits increasing, ect ect

But a Ponzi has no limits.

[Maged]

@ Maged,

Pirate taking the coin off the table will not make the price drop. People will have to buy more to replace it.

Now THAT'S something I'd bet against.

Most of the time, when bitcoins are stolen, the thief won't sell most of the bitcoins. However, what would happen if Pirate wanted to be different? Let me put it this way: Pirate currently has enough bitcoins to clear the entire MtGox orderbook that is currently visible.

[copumpkin]

Pirate currently has enough bitcoins to clear the entire MtGox orderbook that is currently visible.

Can you define what you mean by the visible orderbook?

[waltmarkers]

There is another easy way to see what is going on...someone trace some coins they deposited with him a few months ago. If he's selling coins in person, they would have made one move from you to a known pirate wallet, then a consolidation, then a move to his customer's wallet, then his customer would be sending them to another counterparty. All coins would move at least twice in the week that you deposited them, likely in the first few days. Then, they might sit for a few weeks and move again.

Now, most of these addresses would likely only be used once...so, someone would have to spend some serious time on the block chain.

If GLBSE didn't mix coins, people in the pass throughs could look themselves.

[copumpkin]

Pirate currently has enough bitcoins to clear the entire MtGox orderbook that is currently visible.

Can you define what you mean by the visible orderbook?

gox has a dark order book so the market is not scared when large trades happen. or this is the way it used to be done.

It doesn't do that anymore, and it'd take some serious effort (more coins than will ever exist) to clear the visible one:

[13:20:52] <gribble> There are currently 26449801 bitcoins demanded at or over 0.0 USD, worth 1328905.42752 USD in total.

[copumpkin]

a known pirate wallet

wat.

[mrb]

Maged, if you want we could do some sort of insurance or bet on pirate defaulting. That way you can stay in BTC.

BTC is an experiment and well... this is how it goes:)

That doesn't help me if BTC is worth 50% of what it was before he defaulted.

Actually, Pirate defaulting should cause BTC to gain value.
My reasoning is that Pirate is likely long on Bitcoin. I expect him to keep most of the stolen BTC, while a fraction of the defrauded people will likely re-buy part of the BTC they lost.

[Philj]

perhaps he meant enough coins to move off where the mtgoxlive ticker shows. below $5.25 right now

[waltmarkers]

a known pirate wallet

wat.

Your deposit address with pirate is a known pirate address, and most likely the next one after that would be a pirate controlled consolidation address.