Bitponzi.io - fair ponzi with automated hourly payments, 150% in 150 hours.

[bitponzi.io]

You don't understand how it works actually. Please read the program description.
As for the payments - no problem up to several thousands hourly payments.

Also if you have 25 BTC this is a good way to earn 12.5 btc... Pour 25 btc in. People will think there is plenty of money and pour in their own 1 btc amounts... But they are just paying you in reality. There is going to be enough suckers thinking there is plenty money in, you will have your 12.5 BTC before it collapses

Also how many payments can there be in a single transaction on the blockchain? I imagine the system might have trouble if it suddenly have to pay to 100 different adresses every hour?

[1715085585]

1715085585

[1715085585]

1715085585

[dooglus]

yes it's doable, but actually our fees are also very easy to see - this is just 1% of the total deposited amount, can be checked at blockchain.info

Suppose you have collected 100 BTC in deposits, your fee is 1%, and your public address currently holds 1.1 BTC.

I can tell that so far you have collected 100 BTC.
So I can tell that you've "earned" 1 BTC in fees.
But I can't tell whether you've withdrawn your fees or not.

So maybe you already withdrew the 1 BTC, and the fund has 1.1 BTC to pay out future payments.
But maybe you didn't, so the fund only has 0.1 BTC to pay out future payments.
Or maybe you took out some but not all of the 1 BTC fee, so anywhere between 0.1 and 1.1 BTC is available for payouts.

This ambiguity makes it impossible for potential investors to make informed decisions.

[bitponzi.io]

Sure it's possible
When (and if) Etherium is online. There are gonna be other alts which allow this, this is certain.

We thought about that, but it seems really cumbersome to take it from each deposit.
That probably would raise a lot of questions. But I get your point.

Let's make the following rule - we withdraw 1 BTC each time we get new 100 BTC in deposits.
That is as soon as we have 100 BTC in deposits we withdraw 1 BTC, as soon as we have 200 we withdraw another 1 BTC and so on. If we cannot withdraw it due to low balance we wait till we have sufficient balance. We're here for a long term program, we don't need to take 1btc out and damage the program.

OK, so you get lots of tiny deposits, and for some of them taking 1% would mean taking less than a transaction fee which is very wasteful.

So how about this:

Each time you make an hourly payout, you pay yourself however much you're owed, based on all the deposits you've received since the last time you paid yourself.

That will usually not add enough to the transaction size to require any extra fee, and makes it clearer to everyone how much is really in the fund. As it is I don't know if you own 0.01 or 0.99 BTC of the fund in unclaimed fees.

Is it not possible to add in the 1% into the ethereum contract? What about if you used open transactions since the idea was even grandma can make contracts but the gui never came to fruition.

[bitponzi.io]

Yes I get your point, for now we'll withdraw it by 1 btc each 100 btc, but we'll make an automated script to withdraw the fee, I think it should be per 24 hours after all.

yes it's doable, but actually our fees are also very easy to see - this is just 1% of the total deposited amount, can be checked at blockchain.info

Suppose you have collected 100 BTC in deposits, your fee is 1%, and your public address currently holds 1.1 BTC.

I can tell that so far you have collected 100 BTC.
So I can tell that you've "earned" 1 BTC in fees.
But I can't tell whether you've withdrawn your fees or not.

So maybe you already withdrew the 1 BTC, and the fund has 1.1 BTC to pay out future payments.
But maybe you didn't, so the fund only has 0.1 BTC to pay out future payments.
Or maybe you took out some but not all of the 1 BTC fee, so anywhere between 0.1 and 1.1 BTC is available for payouts.

This ambiguity makes it impossible for potential investors to make informed decisions.

[bitponzi.io]

Updated our website, please check. We'll add more stats to it within a couple of days.

[sidhujag]

Sure it's possible
When (and if) Etherium is online. There are gonna be other alts which allow this, this is certain.

We thought about that, but it seems really cumbersome to take it from each deposit.
That probably would raise a lot of questions. But I get your point.

Let's make the following rule - we withdraw 1 BTC each time we get new 100 BTC in deposits.
That is as soon as we have 100 BTC in deposits we withdraw 1 BTC, as soon as we have 200 we withdraw another 1 BTC and so on. If we cannot withdraw it due to low balance we wait till we have sufficient balance. We're here for a long term program, we don't need to take 1btc out and damage the program.

OK, so you get lots of tiny deposits, and for some of them taking 1% would mean taking less than a transaction fee which is very wasteful.

So how about this:

Each time you make an hourly payout, you pay yourself however much you're owed, based on all the deposits you've received since the last time you paid yourself.

That will usually not add enough to the transaction size to require any extra fee, and makes it clearer to everyone how much is really in the fund. As it is I don't know if you own 0.01 or 0.99 BTC of the fund in unclaimed fees.

Is it not possible to add in the 1% into the ethereum contract? What about if you used open transactions since the idea was even grandma can make contracts but the gui never came to fruition.

OT already is out , can it not do the smart contracts?

[bitcoin4eva]

I am actually highly surprised that I have got paid every hour with the amount that I should have. I'm going to invest more once the cycle I'm in completes!

[bitponzi.io]

Excuse me what's OT?
As far as I know smart contracts like that are not supported by any live system at the moment.
It could work even with Bitcoin, if they didn't kill scripting

Sure it's possible
When (and if) Etherium is online. There are gonna be other alts which allow this, this is certain.

We thought about that, but it seems really cumbersome to take it from each deposit.
That probably would raise a lot of questions. But I get your point.

Let's make the following rule - we withdraw 1 BTC each time we get new 100 BTC in deposits.
That is as soon as we have 100 BTC in deposits we withdraw 1 BTC, as soon as we have 200 we withdraw another 1 BTC and so on. If we cannot withdraw it due to low balance we wait till we have sufficient balance. We're here for a long term program, we don't need to take 1btc out and damage the program.

OK, so you get lots of tiny deposits, and for some of them taking 1% would mean taking less than a transaction fee which is very wasteful.

So how about this:

Each time you make an hourly payout, you pay yourself however much you're owed, based on all the deposits you've received since the last time you paid yourself.

That will usually not add enough to the transaction size to require any extra fee, and makes it clearer to everyone how much is really in the fund. As it is I don't know if you own 0.01 or 0.99 BTC of the fund in unclaimed fees.

Is it not possible to add in the 1% into the ethereum contract? What about if you used open transactions since the idea was even grandma can make contracts but the gui never came to fruition.

OT already is out , can it not do the smart contracts?

[bitponzi.io]

If you have been burnt with scam ponzies it is understandable. Otherwise not so much, since the whole machinery of our operation is completely open for everyone to see. You can see actually when you should be getting paid and when probably you will have to wait.

I am actually highly surprised that I have got paid every hour with the amount that I should have. I'm going to invest more once the cycle I'm in completes!

[sidhujag]

Excuse me what's OT?
As far as I know smart contracts like that are not supported by any live system at the moment.
It could work even with Bitcoin, if they didn't kill scripting

Sure it's possible
When (and if) Etherium is online. There are gonna be other alts which allow this, this is certain.

We thought about that, but it seems really cumbersome to take it from each deposit.
That probably would raise a lot of questions. But I get your point.

Let's make the following rule - we withdraw 1 BTC each time we get new 100 BTC in deposits.
That is as soon as we have 100 BTC in deposits we withdraw 1 BTC, as soon as we have 200 we withdraw another 1 BTC and so on. If we cannot withdraw it due to low balance we wait till we have sufficient balance. We're here for a long term program, we don't need to take 1btc out and damage the program.

OK, so you get lots of tiny deposits, and for some of them taking 1% would mean taking less than a transaction fee which is very wasteful.

So how about this:

Each time you make an hourly payout, you pay yourself however much you're owed, based on all the deposits you've received since the last time you paid yourself.

That will usually not add enough to the transaction size to require any extra fee, and makes it clearer to everyone how much is really in the fund. As it is I don't know if you own 0.01 or 0.99 BTC of the fund in unclaimed fees.

Is it not possible to add in the 1% into the ethereum contract? What about if you used open transactions since the idea was even grandma can make contracts but the gui never came to fruition.

OT already is out , can it not do the smart contracts?

http://opentransactions.org/wiki/index.php?title=Smart_contracts

[sherbyspark]

Hey Guys, I was doing a simulation of the scheme and came with a massive discrepancy at the end.
In My simulation I assumed,every investor deposits 100 $.  and payout is 10$ every hour(with max payout 150%).


I also assume, that every new investor invests after a fixed time(1 hr). So after every hour as seen in the excel sheet payout grows.
At the end of 15 hrs. I assume no more investors take part and the payouts are done till 30th hour(which is 15 hrs after which the last investor deposited)
However, at the end Bank is still left with 300..Which is the discrepancy I am getting.
I summed up the payouts and it amounts to 2250(for 15 investors).
But numbers dont match, can someone find the error I made in this, and any predictions on how the program will end at the last cycle?


Here is the link to the excel sheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-sj-fjSmklP0B_2djH1OkDep49R6kaaKFq0x81SfVHU/edit?pli=1#gid=0

[dooglus]

can someone find the error I made in this

Yes. The balance after the first hour is 100, after the 2nd is 190 (2 deposits, one payout) and after the 3rd is 270 (3 deposits, 10 payout the first week and 20 the second.

It goes on like this:

[sherbyspark]

Thanks dooglus. Kind of a silly miscalculation there. It also shows that the system will bust really fast after a few initial returns(unless profits are reduced).
I have updated the Excel Sheet to also reflect(scroll down) how the payouts will stop happening or happen at less intervals even if people continue investing after that.
It will stop/ paid out in less intervvals after a few more rounds of returns(unless the subsequent investments are much bigger than 100).


Also, looks like the current cycle has come to an end with only 0.3BTC left in the address, and has paid out around only a 50%-60% back who deposited on 9th July. Payouts will now happen only if the balance goes above 0.3 BTC, and will probably happen after bigger intervals(in the case more deposits occur).

[bitponzi.io]

You are more or less correct.
The math model is different though. The key here is the increase of the deposits by 50% each cycle. In this case no payments are missed. if it does not go like that - system slows down waiting for new funds.

Thanks dooglus. Kind of a silly miscalculation there. It also shows that the system will bust really fast after a few initial returns(unless profits are reduced).
I have updated the Excel Sheet to also reflect(scroll down) how the payouts will stop happening or happen at less intervals even if people continue investing after that.
It will stop/ paid out in less intervvals after a few more rounds of returns(unless the subsequent investments are much bigger than 100).


Also, looks like the current cycle has come to an end with only 0.3BTC left in the address, and has paid out around only a 50%-60% back who deposited on 9th July. Payouts will now happen only if the balance goes above 0.3 BTC, and will probably happen after bigger intervals(in the case more deposits occur).

[thExit]

You are more or less correct.
The math model is different though. The key here is the increase of the deposits by 50% each cycle. In this case no payments are missed. if it does not go like that - system slows down waiting for new funds.

Thanks dooglus. Kind of a silly miscalculation there. It also shows that the system will bust really fast after a few initial returns(unless profits are reduced).
I have updated the Excel Sheet to also reflect(scroll down) how the payouts will stop happening or happen at less intervals even if people continue investing after that.
It will stop/ paid out in less intervvals after a few more rounds of returns(unless the subsequent investments are much bigger than 100).


Also, looks like the current cycle has come to an end with only 0.3BTC left in the address, and has paid out around only a 50%-60% back who deposited on 9th July. Payouts will now happen only if the balance goes above 0.3 BTC, and will probably happen after bigger intervals(in the case more deposits occur).

The 50% increase is correct, in my earlier simulation it looked like the scheme needed two new Users to pay to an older User, but the two new Users, after deducing what needed to be paid, were left with more or less half of their initial deposit. In the real scheme they are not left with anything, as all the funds go to payments, but the math adds up. The number of the new participants needed every cycle may be impossible to reach, unless there is an ever-increasing interest in this operation.

http://s12.postimg.org/ymagrwogt/10_Level_Pyramid_v22.jpg

[blacksmithtm]

GG. This ponzi ran out of money way too fast, compared to the amount that was sent to it. Maybe its possible to tweak the payouts so they take longer and the incomming investments dont neccesarily have to get bigger and bigger very fast. But probably not possible.

[bitcoin4eva]

Oh well I thought it was too good to be true :-/ I got propably 70% of my money out of it though.

[bangboom]

Oh well I thought it was too good to be true :-/ I got propably 70% of my money out of it though.

Only 70% what happened to the rest ?

[dooglus]

Oh well I thought it was too good to be true :-/ I got propably 70% of my money out of it though.

Only 70% what happened to the rest ?

Lots of people made 50% profit. That profit came entirely from later investors.

If you get in early enough, you profit.
If you get in at the end, you lose.

Of course, the scheme could keep paying out for a while, in which case Eva could well end up making a profit after all (at the expense of the people who join even later).

[bitponzi.io]

This is rather unexpected I must say. There was an influx of funds several days ago but then it suddenly petered out. Unstable cashflows kill ponzies. We won't stop it, new funds will be used to pay old deposits, so the program goes on. Using this experience we'll tweak the payment scenario and launch a parallel program soon. The Ponzi experiments will continue.