A Theory on what pirateat40 is doing

[JoelKatz]

I don't understand what you mean by selling his debt.

I can understand how he could buy it at a discount, which would equate to a partial discount. But selling it? Selling what?

For the last several months, Pirate has likely been buying up Pirate debt. Why not? It's free for him. If he buys 1,000 BTC worth of Pirate debt, those 1,000 BTC just get deposited with him.

Now, Pirate debt is selling for around 50 cents on the dollar. Pirate knows that he's never going to pay his debt back. So he knows the debt is worthless. But he can sell that 1,000 BTC that he effectively paid nothing for and get an extra 500 BTC.

It makes *no* sense for him to buy Pirate debt. It costs him money. How would he get that money back? From himself?

But if he sells Pirate debt, he gets more of other people's money. And it perfectly explains why Pirate bought himself a week or two. This gives him lots of time to make more money by selling worthless debt.

[1714064851]

1714064851

[1714064851]

1714064851

[1714064851]

1714064851

[RoloTonyBrownTown]

Thou shalt henceforth be known as Conspiracy Katz.

[boonies4u]

I don't understand what you mean by selling his debt.

I can understand how he could buy it at a discount, which would equate to a partial discount. But selling it? Selling what?

For the last several months, Pirate has likely been buying up Pirate debt. Why not? It's free for him. If he buys 1,000 BTC worth of Pirate debt, those 1,000 BTC just get deposited with him.

Now, Pirate debt is selling for around 50 cents on the dollar. Pirate knows that he's never going to pay his debt back. So he knows the debt is worthless. But he can sell that 1,000 BTC that he effectively paid nothing for and get an extra 500 BTC.

It makes *no* sense for him to buy Pirate debt. It costs him money. How would he get that money back? From himself?

But if he sells Pirate debt, he gets more of other people's money. And it perfectly explains why Pirate bought himself a week or two. This gives him lots of time to make more money by selling worthless debt.

If he IS planning on paying back lenders, buying back pirate debt with sock accounts would make sense.

[DeathAndTaxes]

It makes *no* sense for him to buy Pirate debt. It costs him money. How would he get that money back? From himself?

Well that isn't exactly true.   

Person sells x BTC worth of debt.
Person creates uncertainty in the market and buys that debt back for y BTC.
Persons profits (x-y) BTC.

Not saying Pirate is doing that but there it isn't correct to say there is no sense in rebuying your own debt.

[imsaguy]

so is it official yet? has anyone heard a peep from pirate since friday?

He's been in and out of IRC changing names between pirateat40 and steamship. It's bizarre really. When he's "steamship" he's been offering to buy pirate debt at reduced rates. No idea if he's serious.

That wasn't the real pirateat40. That pirateat40 (and steamship) did not have the OP prefix (@) in front of their nick. In addition, both @pirateat40 and pirateat40 were in the channel at the same time. It's likely he used an invisible character or typo to change his name to pirateat40. He was also clearly a troll. Can't believe everything you see, and then take it at face value.

You need to learn more about irc.  There cannot be two people with the same nick on the network.  He didn't have @ because it can be given/taken away like nothing.  As to the sarcasm from steamship.. that's true.  Many of the comments from steamship are actually things that were said on the forums by others first, with steamship repeating them and then getting quoted on it back on the forums again. 

[Draino]

so, the super duper genius people who figured out what pirate does, maybe you can offer some insight

i don't understand why pirate wouldn't do forced withdrawals over time to wind things down, instead of continue the ponzi outline to a T

also, for someone who was so insistent on allowing immediate withdrawals, isn't it contradictory to suddenly hold everyone's coins hostage without notice?

[Spekulatius]

I think he is full of BS and will never pay back. Effect on price should be minimal till some serious amounts are payed back and verified.

[hazek]

I think he is full of BS and will never pay back. Effect on price should be minimal till some serious amounts are payed back and verified.

+1

[JoelKatz]

It makes *no* sense for him to buy Pirate debt. It costs him money. How would he get that money back? From himself?

Well that isn't exactly true.  

Person sells x BTC worth of ddebt.
Person creates uncertainty in the market and buys that debt back for y BTC.
Persons profits (x-y) BTC.

Not saying Pirate is doing that but there it isn't correct to say there is no sense in rebuying your own debt.

How is that better than this:

Pirate sells x BTC worth of direct debt.
Pirate profits x BTC.

Or this:

Before he defaults, Pirate buys x BTC of PPTs.
Pirate gets those x BTC back because they pass through.
Pirate defaults.
Pirate sells those x BTC of PPTs for y BTC.
Pirate profits y BTC.

Both of these scenarios are more profitable than yours and neither of these require Pirate to buy his own debt. Notice that they both require him to sell it.

[jimbobway]

It makes *no* sense for him to buy Pirate debt. It costs him money. How would he get that money back? From himself?

Well that isn't exactly true.  

Person sells x BTC worth of ddebt.
Person creates uncertainty in the market and buys that debt back for y BTC.
Persons profits (x-y) BTC.

Not saying Pirate is doing that but there it isn't correct to say there is no sense in rebuying your own debt.

How is that better than this:

Pirate sells x BTC worth of direct debt.
Pirate profits x BTC.

Or this:

Before he defaults, Pirate buys x BTC of PPTs.
Pirate gets those x BTC back because they pass through.
Pirate defaults.
Pirate sells those x BTC of PPTs for y BTC.
Pirate profits y BTC.

Both of these scenarios are more profitable than yours and neither of these require Pirate to buy his own debt. Notice that they both require him to sell it.

If you do accounting outside of the blockchain, you can "counterfeit" bitcoins sort of like fractional reserve banking.  But, if you perform a transaction through a bitcoin client and have it record on the blockchain, then is it really possible for pirate to do what you suggested?

[JoelKatz]

If you do accounting outside of the blockchain, you can "counterfeit" bitcoins sort of like fractional reserve banking.  But, if you perform a transaction through a bitcoin client and have it record on the blockchain, then is it really possible for pirate to do what you suggested?

Yes, absolutely. Pirate accounts were always outside the blockchain. PPTs were always outside the blockchain.

If I deposited 100 BTC with Pirate or used it to buy a PPT, that 100 BTC is still in circulation in the blockchain. In addition, there a 100 BTC Pirate debt and, if it was a PPT, a 100 BTC PPT obgliation. So if you use 100 BTC to buy a PPT, it becomes 300 BTC. (Assuming the PPT operator is honest, 100 BTC of that doesn't really count.)

[jimbobway]

If you do accounting outside of the blockchain, you can "counterfeit" bitcoins sort of like fractional reserve banking.  But, if you perform a transaction through a bitcoin client and have it record on the blockchain, then is it really possible for pirate to do what you suggested?

Yes, absolutely. Pirate accounts were always outside the blockchain. PPTs were always outside the blockchain.

If I deposited 100 BTC with Pirate or used it to buy a PPT, that 100 BTC is still in circulation in the blockchain. In addition, there a 100 BTC Pirate debt and, if it was a PPT, a 100 BTC PPT obgliation. So if you use 100 BTC to buy a PPT, it becomes 300 BTC. (Assuming the PPT operator is honest, 100 BTC of that doesn't really count.)

Pirate asked the PPT operators for their books so he could pay people directly (I think.)  So the PPT obligations could now be removed, and 100BTC to buy a PPT is now 200BTC (instead of the 300BTC.)  Would this be to pirates advantage?

[smoothie]

My theory (with more and more insurmountable evidence each passing minute):

Pirate was running a Ponzi scheme.

Initially everything went well early on. As it grew he couldn't not pay out every week 7% in order to safe face.

Most of the paid out interest was the bulk of other investor funds.

This is where I believe users like GigaVPS could afford 4 BFL 1TH/s mini rigs paid with bitcoin back in June.

Is it that hard to believe that he ran a ponzi?

 

[Raize]

I don't think he ran a straight up Ponzi, but in effect he though his "Forex skillz" were good enough to justify having only 1/5th of the S&T on hand. I also refuse to rule out money laundering for Silk Road. They needed large amounts of clean coin and they needed it for ~6 months. After they got it, they finally had a system in place to properly "clean" coin and no longer needed Pirate's service. This threw Pirate for a loop because he assumed they were going to mass-sell. When they didn't and he did, he realized he was holding large amounts of cash and the demand for Bitcoin was ever-increasing. The result, as the 1Dky address thread is proving, is that Silk Road's claim to have their own cleaning service is bunk now, we're on to their game and we'll be able to track which addresses are Silk Road deposit accounts in the future by watching which ones donate into the accounts that go into future 1Dky addresses.

[koin]

"Forex skillz" were good enough to justify having only 1/5th of the S&T

s&t?

no longer needed Pirate's service.
[...]

Silk Road's claim to have their own cleaning service is bunk now, we're on to their game and we'll be able to track which addresses are Silk Road deposit accounts in the future by watching which ones donate into the accounts that go into future 1Dky addresses.

confused here.  they no longer needed pirate because they have their own and then you say they don't have their own.  or

[dooglus]

s&t?

Savings and Trust?

[anu]

My theory (with more and more insurmountable evidence each passing minute):

Pirate was running a Ponzi scheme.

Initially everything went well early on. As it grew he couldn't not pay out every week 7% in order to safe face.

Na, investors re-invested all their earnings and the compounding interest exceeded BTC 21 Million. 

[smoothie]

I don't think he ran a straight up Ponzi, but in effect he though his "Forex skillz" were good enough to justify having only 1/5th of the S&T on hand. I also refuse to rule out money laundering for Silk Road. They needed large amounts of clean coin and they needed it for ~6 months. After they got it, they finally had a system in place to properly "clean" coin and no longer needed Pirate's service. This threw Pirate for a loop because he assumed they were going to mass-sell. When they didn't and he did, he realized he was holding large amounts of cash and the demand for Bitcoin was ever-increasing. The result, as the 1Dky address thread is proving, is that Silk Road's claim to have their own cleaning service is bunk now, we're on to their game and we'll be able to track which addresses are Silk Road deposit accounts in the future by watching which ones donate into the accounts that go into future 1Dky addresses.

Right pirate's "forex skillz" was to BUY HIGH AND SELL LOW.

Pirate is such a joke. His screen name should be PussyAt30.

[anu]

Pirate is such a joke. His screen name should be PussyAt30.

That name would at least explain how so many guys stopped thinking and rushed at it.

[RyNinDaCleM]

Pirate is such a joke. His screen name should be PussyAt30.

That name would at least explain how so many guys stopped thinking and rushed at it.

Hugulghuguh...Pussy...Doh!