[CLOSING...] MOVETO.FUND - MoveTo Growth Fund

[cytokine]

I had some fun dealing with FUDsters today. You can read my rebuttal here. Needless to say, I can answer pretty much any question anyone throws my way because I know what I'm doing and I do what I say.

Thanks for the book recommendation, looks decent. As long as you aren't promising/claiming consistent returns (I'm not sure that you are), I won't rain on your parade. The ponzis already here are too blatant. How about some subtlety for gosh sakes..

No worries, everything is good . It's just that I had several others that were saying similar things to me over PM, so I decided to put it all to rest in a single post.

I think Pirate just has everyone all emotional, and for obvious reasons.

[1715198879]

1715198879

[1715198879]

1715198879

[1715198879]

1715198879

[1715198879]

1715198879

[1715198879]

1715198879

[1715198879]

1715198879

[cytokine]

As expected, we've been getting some nice rallies in our stronger assets. It just took a bit longer for them to occur than I initially expected, but the market is finally coming around.

NAV per share updated to 1.068447755

I will update the NAV per share again next week. Most likely I'll continue to do this every Friday.

Thanks,
-cyto

[Bjork]

This looks great, I will probably buy ~150 shares or so in about a week.

[cytokine]

This looks great, I will probably buy ~150 shares or so in about a week.

[Ocean6]

I also plan on buying this.

Good job!

[cytokine]

Update today

I'm *considering* a minor modification of the share contract (which would naturally require me to open a 1-month long buy-back offer at the full NAV per share as per the share contract) in order to allow us to invest in a fully insured pirate deposit (via CPA) with a small percentage of our capital - see the insurance discussion here. Please note that with this opportunity we will still have zero pirate default risk, which is a position I have maintained since the start of the fund, and have no intention to ever go against. Regardless, please review this idea and give me your feedback, because I not wish to taint the fund in any manner if investors believe this deal would in some way go against our philosophy. I absolutely will not invest in this without your blessing, so please comment.

Many thanks,
-cyto

[exahash]

Update today

I'm *considering* a minor modification of the share contract ( which would naturally require me to open a 1-month long buy-back offer at the full NAV as per the share contract ) in order to allow us to invest in a fully insured pirate deposit ( via CPA ) with a small percentage of our capital - see the insurance discussion here. Please note that with this opportunity we will still have zero pirate default risk, which is a position I have maintained since the start of the fund, and have no intention to ever go against. Regardless, please review this idea and give me your feedback, because I not wish to taint the fund in any manner if investors believe this deal would in some way go against our philosophy. I absolutely will not invest in this without your blessing, so please comment.

I think maintaining zero pirate default risk is best for the fund, as long as you don't have a better use for the coin (i.e. normal trading).

I have plenty of coin in btcst, so for me, finding bitcoin investments that are not dependent upon pirate is important.  I don't expect a default, but diversify just in case.

If Pirate were to default I suspect the overall market would get hit, which would still affect your nav and share price, so don't think that avoiding direct exposure will completely insulate MOVETO.  If you have some dry powder at that time (even if only via the insurance payout), and your system really is good, you might be able to pick some bargains, ultimately sending the nav soaring when things recover.  

[cytokine]

Update today

I'm *considering* a minor modification of the share contract (which would naturally require me to open a 1-month long buy-back offer at the full NAV as per the share contract) in order to allow us to invest in a fully insured pirate deposit (via CPA) with a small percentage of our capital - see the insurance discussion here. Please note that with this opportunity we will still have zero pirate default risk, which is a position I have maintained since the start of the fund, and have no intention to ever go against. Regardless, please review this idea and give me your feedback, because I not wish to taint the fund in any manner if investors believe this deal would in some way go against our philosophy. I absolutely will not invest in this without your blessing, so please comment.

I think maintaining zero pirate default risk is best for the fund, as long as you don't have a better use for the coin (i.e. normal trading).

I have plenty of coin in btcst, so for me, finding bitcoin investments that are not dependent upon pirate is important.  I don't expect a default, but diversify just in case.

If Pirate were to default I suspect the overall market would get hit, which would still affect your nav and share price, so don't think that avoiding direct exposure will completely insulate MOVETO.  If you have some dry powder at that time (even if only via the insurance payout), and your system really is good, you might be able to pick some bargains, ultimately sending the nav soaring when things recover.  

Ok, so I thought about this and your feedback for a long while, and believe it is best for the fund that we continue to be 100% pirate-free in every sense. So I will not do the insurance deal with CPA.

The following reasons come to mind:

- The thing is, even if we made a small 100% insured pass-through, it still *taints* the fund in the sense that returns cannot then be compared to other non-pirate / pirate investments.

- We miss opportunities to snag great non-pirate investment that will continue to deliver gains long after the pirate ship has sailed.

- If pirate defaults (or even if he just winds down his operations and returns funds) there would likely be a mad rush into non-pirate investments, driving prices up and yields down, so we want to already be holding these investments rather than waiting for an insurance payout.

So to reiterate: I will not do the deal, and we will continue with the current share contract and remain 100% pirate-free in every sense.

Many thanks,
-cyto

[cytokine]

NAV per share updated to 1.0828000403

[silverfuture]

Update today

I'm *considering* a minor modification of the share contract ( which would naturally require me to open a 1-month long buy-back offer at the full NAV as per the share contract ) in order to allow us to invest in a fully insured pirate deposit ( via CPA ) with a small percentage of our capital - see the insurance discussion here. Please note that with this opportunity we will still have zero pirate default risk, which is a position I have maintained since the start of the fund, and have no intention to ever go against. Regardless, please review this idea and give me your feedback, because I not wish to taint the fund in any manner if investors believe this deal would in some way go against our philosophy. I absolutely will not invest in this without your blessing, so please comment.

I think maintaining zero pirate default risk is best for the fund, as long as you don't have a better use for the coin (i.e. normal trading).

I have plenty of coin in btcst, so for me, finding bitcoin investments that are not dependent upon pirate is important.  I don't expect a default, but diversify just in case.

If Pirate were to default I suspect the overall market would get hit, which would still affect your nav and share price, so don't think that avoiding direct exposure will completely insulate MOVETO.  If you have some dry powder at that time (even if only via the insurance payout), and your system really is good, you might be able to pick some bargains, ultimately sending the nav soaring when things recover.  

Ok, so I thought about this and your feedback for a long while, and believe it is best for the fund that we continue to be 100% pirate-free in every sense. So I will not do the insurance deal with CPA.

The following reasons come to mind:

- The thing is, even if we made a small 100% insured pass-through, it still *taints* the fund in the sense that returns cannot then be compared to other non-pirate / pirate investments.

- We miss opportunities to snag great non-pirate investment that will continue to deliver gains long after the pirate ship has sailed.

- If pirate defaults ( or even if he just winds down his operations and returns funds ) there would likely be a mad rush into non-pirate investments, driving prices up and yields down, so we want to already be holding these investments rather than waiting for an insurance payout.

So to reiterate: I will not do the deal, and we will continue with the current share contract and remain 100% pirate-free in every sense.

Many thanks,
-cyto

+1  I invested in this fund specifically for lack of pirate exposure. Not only for the risk either... I want to know for sure what business my investments are supporting and that they are ethical.  Not making any allegations whatsoever but I can't be sure if there isn't full disclosure from the issuer.

[cytokine]

+1  I invested in this fund specifically for lack of pirate exposure. Not only for the risk either... I want to know for sure what business my investments are supporting and that they are ethical.  Not making any allegations whatsoever but I can't be sure if there isn't full disclosure from the issuer.

Thanks for the feedback. I get the feeling a lot of investors feel this way - so it's good for me to fully understand this.

Anyways, glad we got that cleared up. Now: up-up and away we go!

[finkleshnorts]

Lately, something has been concerning me regarding most BTC funds.

Due to this economy being so small, it appears that many investors cross-fund each other, making them sort of codependent and probably more fragile.

Are some of this fund's capital invested in ventures independent of this forum/GLBSE?

I hope that makes sense.

Thanks,

curious bob

[cytokine]

Due to this economy being so small, it appears that many investors cross-fund each other, making them sort of codependent and probably more fragile.

I think that's a great point. That's one additional reason why I didn't do the CPA deal, because CPA itself is backed by various bitcoin institutions pledging capital, which themselves are likely backed by loans and securities (some of which people are probably buying insurance on, creating some circular dependency). The web of interconnectedness here is probably quite mind-boggling if it could be visualized.

However, the level of risk is mitigated by the high dividends of GLBSE assets - with more risk comes more return, and the market reflects that: we have bitcoin currency risk, default risk, no real legal recourse in the event of a default, etc. But if we can get up 30% or so in a few months, then if 10% of the fund defaults we're still up around 20% in total. That's kind of the point of the fund, since you can get higher returns than a bitcoin bank ( which "guarantee deposits" ), but with more risk since you're taking on the market directly.

Are some of this fund's capital invested in ventures independent of this forum/GLBSE?

Not right now. We do everything on the GLBSE except for one outside investment (which is here on the forums). I've considered investing with various bitcoin banks to give us increased stability, but their returns are too low and defeat the purpose of the fund (you can always allocate some of your capital to various bitcoin banks anyway if you want more security/stability with a lower return - in fact, I strongly recommend this provided the bank is safe and trustworthy and has a high asset to deposit ratio).

If you have any other ideas that you want the fund to look into feel free to post it here, but of course you should probably just snag those for yourself if they're promising

[cytokine]

NAV per share updated to 1.1162182324

[silverfuture]

I'm very happy with this fund so far... great work Cytokine!  Just wondering if shareholders are going to get a comprehensive report concerning the funds assets?

[cytokine]

I'm very happy with this fund so far... great work Cytokine!  Just wondering if shareholders are going to get a comprehensive report concerning the funds assets?

Absolutely! I'm going to do the monthly report this weekend. Monthly reports are public and include full financials, performance information, and commentary.

For a sample, see last month's report here.

[silverfuture]

Class act. Thanks!

[ErebusBat]

Stupid question: what is NAV?

[exahash]

Stupid question: what is NAV?

Net asset value

And he actually gives the nav per share, so if you want the nav, multiply by the number of shares outstanding

[cytokine]

Stupid question: what is NAV?

Net asset value

And he actually gives the nav per share, so if you want the nav, multiply by the number of shares outstanding

Thanks for catching this, I'll go back through my posts and add "per share" where I refer to NAV to eliminate the confusion. I'll also have to fix this in the GLBSE share contract.