Starfish BCB - Loans and Deposits

[Shadow383]

So roughly what percentage has now been paid back?

[1715438468]

1715438468

[1715438468]

1715438468

[dooglus]

So roughly what percentage has now been paid back?

In my case, 43.37% of the initial investment, so far.

[bigbox]

By the way, this was the same type of missed risk that resulted in the mortgage collapse. People who thought they were "diversified" didn't realize that a significant fraction of their assets were vulnerable to a drastic drop in the housing market because they were all ultimately tied to residential mortgages.

I'm glad you think it's the same. There have been hundreds of bank failures since 2008 in the USA due to correlated loans that went bad (mortgages). The FDIC guaranteed bank deposits. This guarantee was honored, regardless of whether the bad loans were correlated or not. Patrick also guaranteed his deposits.

http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html

[JoelKatz]

By the way, this was the same type of missed risk that resulted in the mortgage collapse. People who thought they were "diversified" didn't realize that a significant fraction of their assets were vulnerable to a drastic drop in the housing market because they were all ultimately tied to residential mortgages.

I'm glad you think it's the same. There have been hundreds of bank failures since 2008 in the USA due to correlated loans that went bad (mortgages). The FDIC guaranteed bank deposits. This guarantee was honored, regardless of whether the bad loans were correlated or not. Patrick also guaranteed his deposits.

http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html

The FDIC is specifically insurance and specifically assumes the risk of bank failures. In addition, there was no mistake on the part of the people whose funds the FDIC insured. So it would not have been equitable for the FDIC to split the losses with those it insures. (Also, even if equitable, it would have been politically infeasible. Any loss of confidence in the FDIC would defeat the point of the FDIC.)

Yes, Patrick guaranteed his deposits. But as he made quite clear, that guarantee was predicated on his belief that there was no significant correlated risk. (The transcript in the scammer accusation thread makes this clear.) So against someone who didn't make that same mistake, it would be enforceable. But against someone who did, it isn't. If Patrick is responsible for losses caused directly by this mistaken belief, so are others who have that same mistaken belief and it causes the same type of loss. (Unless the agreement was otherwise. It's possible he had different loans with different terms and some weren't predicated on the shared belief that he had limited Pirate exposure. You'd have to look on a case by case basis and decide in each case how to equitably divide the losses.)

[bigbox]

The FDIC is specifically insurance and specifically assumes the risk of bank failures.

Patrick specifically insured his deposits and specifically assumed the risk of loan failures.

In addition, there was no mistake on the part of the people whose funds the FDIC insured. So it would not have been equitable for the FDIC to split the losses with those it insures.

If the FDIC were named Patrick, you would probably say the depositors made the assumption that the banks loans weren't correlated, and thus should share in the losses. You would probably say that regardless of whether the depositors actually made that assumption.

It's possible he had different loans with different terms and some weren't predicated on the shared belief that he had limited Pirate exposure. You'd have to look on a case by case basis and decide in each case how to equitably divide the losses.)

Agreed. My deposit wasn't predicated on shared beliefs of what he would do with his loans, it was predicated on the shared belief that he guaranteed his deposits. He didn't specify exactly what he was going to do with the deposits, or who he was going to loan money to, so we couldn't have had shared beliefs on correlation which is irrelevant anyway. If he spent the money on hookers and blow, I would still expect him to honor the shared belief that he guaranteed his deposits.

[cunicula]

What has become obvious - in hindsight - is that the average level of honesty just isn't high enough.  That's without the scams, thefts, hacks and other crap that goes on.

The second layer of the pyramid defends the integrity of the first layer. Surprise, surprise. As fellow scammers you are quite concerned with protecting your bosses' rep. After all, keeping a steady stream of fish flowing in is how you make money. I see that some of you have reduced your cut over time. Not surprising, since you will need more and more inflows over time to support the pyramid. Can't wait till this blows up.

How much bitcoin is tied up with the scam, anyways? The blow up will negatively affect bitcoin prices if the scam is large scale and some of the fish have taken on bank debt in order to participate. Bitcoin debt crisis causes bitcoin price collapse. Fun times!

edited out some unnecessary stuff

The second layer of the pyramid defends the integrity of the first layer. Surprise, surprise.  Can't wait till this blows up.

I'm interested in your motivation - is it just to stir shit, you want to see those that can't afford to lose their bitcoin suffer, or do you want to gloat when it fails. Your posts do not appear to be genuine in warning (and has the impression of some religious crusade against evil).

(and while starfish are often idiots, this one expects some sort of disruption to the economy when BS&T finally closes it's doors)

In answer to your question, I wanted to help people get out while they still could. However, since most of you chose to ignore me. And now that my predictions have become

obvious - in hindsight -

I will have to settle for

gloat when it fails

[PatrickHarnett]

The above quotes were with reference to BS&T, but I don't expect people to bother to differentiate, and I also expect that you did have your moment of happiness when Pirate disappeared.

[cunicula]

(and while starfish are often idiots, this one expects some sort of disruption to the economy when BS&T finally closes it's doors)

obvious - in hindsight -

FTFY. Apparently you have a selective memory.

[dooglus]

I didn't receive a payment this week or last week.  Did I miss an announcement about this, or is it an oversight?

[BorderBits]

I didn't receive a payment this week or last week.  Did I miss an announcement about this, or is it an oversight?

Don't worry, Patrick rated himself AAA+ so he's sure to pay out.  What could possibly go wrong? 

[mb300sd]

The payments from hashking and patrick stopped at about the same time and they both disappeared... Whats the chances their the same guy and/or working together?

[TheBible]

Whoa, Patrick has a scammer tag?  Why, who ever could have seen the fact that he was a scammer well before all of this?

I do wonder.

I wonder how long my contrary viewpoint will last this time before someone erases it like the good little fascists they are.

[cunicula]

I wonder how long my contrary viewpoint will last this time before someone erases it like the good little fascists they are.

Please, this is a libertarian forum.

[Chang Hum]

It's weird he paid back so much...in for a penny in for a pound!

Well I hope having scammer written underneath your online pseudonym on a forum you no longer participate in has taught you a valuable lesson not to steal thousands of dollars from strangers on the internet Patrick!!

[memvola]

Can someone briefly explain why Patrick got a scammer tag, hopefully without the snide remarks? I'm guessing it's something other than this deposit scheme, or am I wrong?

[MrTeal]

Can someone briefly explain why Patrick got a scammer tag, hopefully without the snide remarks? I'm guessing it's something other than this deposit scheme, or am I wrong?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=124152.0

[Bitcoin Oz]

Can someone briefly explain why Patrick got a scammer tag, hopefully without the snide remarks? I'm guessing it's something other than this deposit scheme, or am I wrong?

He basically gave himself a bailout.

[Soros Shorts]

Can someone briefly explain why Patrick got a scammer tag, hopefully without the snide remarks? I'm guessing it's something other than this deposit scheme, or am I wrong?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=124152.0

For a while now I had feared that Kraken going down would also take down BCB.

[Vod]

I'm starting to sympathize with scammers.

Excellent way to make some coin!

People on here seem to fall for the scams.   

[AndrewBUD]

lol.... Can you guarantee that? ^