Closing

[boonies4u]

Obsi, what exactly do you do?  You are always the top of my dividend chart.

I kick ass and chew bubblegum, and I'm all outta bubblegum.

Nice chart.

[1714137511]

1714137511

[1714137511]

1714137511

[exahash]

Obsi, what exactly do you do?  You are always the top of my dividend chart.

I kick ass and chew bubblegum, and I'm all outta bubblegum.

So are you Duke Nukem or Rowdy Roddy Piper?   

[btharper]

Obsi, what exactly do you do?  You are always the top of my dividend chart.

I kick ass and chew bubblegum, and I'm all outta bubblegum.

One of your few responses aside from daily dividends, and very well played.

[bitcoinbear]

Obsi, any news or update from the mysterious entity you are passing funds through to? How is the lending going?

[HorseRider]

the picture itself can prove nothing. lots of equity and bonds pays less dividend or interest than the money they raised for a long time. and continuous selling shares is normal, too.

HOWEVER, WHAT IS YOUR BUSINESS MODEL?

[bitcoinbear]

Now for a bit of bad news: I will not be releasing any new OBSI.HRPT this Sunday. I usually put up an askwall @ 0.1 BTC for a few hours each Sunday, but the market seems to be shaken and liquidity is lacking. This should give the market a chance to stabilize, and panicky bondholders a chance to get out at a decent price.

Why is that bad news? For current shareholders it is good news because it means the price can go up instead of being held down at the IPO price.

[btharper]

Now for a bit of bad news: I will not be releasing any new OBSI.HRPT this Sunday. I usually put up an askwall @ 0.1 BTC for a few hours each Sunday, but the market seems to be shaken and liquidity is lacking. This should give the market a chance to stabilize, and panicky bondholders a chance to get out at a decent price.

Why is that bad news? For current shareholders it is good news because it means the price can go up instead of being held down at the IPO price.

In theory it's bad news because you can't buy in at 0.1 without paying fees, however the price is low enough right now that it doesn't matter. Though Obsi, I don't see any reason not to put up an askwall, if no one buys in that's still fine, but it's available to those who want it.

[Deprived]

Now for a bit of bad news: I will not be releasing any new OBSI.HRPT this Sunday. I usually put up an askwall @ 0.1 BTC for a few hours each Sunday, but the market seems to be shaken and liquidity is lacking. This should give the market a chance to stabilize, and panicky bondholders a chance to get out at a decent price.

Why is that bad news? For current shareholders it is good news because it means the price can go up instead of being held down at the IPO price.

In theory it's bad news because you can't buy in at 0.1 without paying fees, however the price is low enough right now that it doesn't matter. Though Obsi, I don't see any reason not to put up an askwall, if no one buys in that's still fine, but it's available to those who want it.

The reason not to put up an askwall is to restore confidence.  That applies whether this is a ponzi or not.

Right now a lot of people are concerned it's a ponzi.  When they see he's not trying to sell more shares they'll say "hey! it can't be a ponzi as he's paying out dividends but not taking in any new money."  Then they'll bid the price up and he can put up a new askwall again (once price gos over 1.0 and people start asking for one).

As I said - that holds true whether what he's doing is a ponzi, a pass-through to a ponzi or a pass-through to a genuine business opportunity.  It's people's perception that matters, not the truth (an increase in price/confidence with no new information divulged doesn't add anything to public knowledge of the truth due to this action making sense whatever he's doing).  When people see the price rise their confidence will rise and those who believe the rewards outweigh the risks (including those who don't consider risk at all) will want to buy before the price gos higher.

Right now, even those tempted to buy are waiting as if the price falls they can buy cheaply - he's trying to remove that option by instilling more confidence in the market.  And if the price rises he can also sell back the shares he bought cheaply himself (assuming he actually bought any - which he probably did) for a profit.

Disclaimer: I hold no shares in this and have no intention of ever doing so (unless it's to flip them for a very fast profit).

[btharper]

Today's daily coupon has been paid @ 1% of IPO price.

Thank you.

Hey Obsi, any explanation behind the thread locking for about a day several hours?

Edit: Going to sleep doesn't turn a night into a day.

[The00Dustin]

Hey Obsi, any explanation behind the thread locking for about a day?

I'm certainly not an authoritative voice here, but I'm pretty sure it was less than 12 hours.  Also, considering it was shortly after he posted that he wouldn't be selling more bonds this weekend, I think it is a pretty safe assumption that it was to give people a chance to see that post.

[btharper]

Hey Obsi, any explanation behind the thread locking for about a day?

The thread was locked for less than 4 hours while I investigated an unsubstantiated threat of violence. I've learned not to take such threats lightly after having dealt with unstable "internet warriors" in the past.

I guess someone got spooked and sold their bonds at a loss, then felt they could try and extort some type of gain out of me. So let me take this opportunity to reiterate:

*This is a high-risk passthrough
*I have no control over the outcome
*I limit my personal investments in high-risk ventures to 10% of my entire portfolio, and recommend everyone find the right number to limit themselves to as well.
*I do not take threats to myself or my wife & children lightly.
*Should this opportunity go tits up you will not be getting any special payout from me, no matter how violent you may be.

My apologies on the incorrect timeframe, I edited my post after reading The00Dustin's post but your reply must have been put in about the same time as well.

Sounds like someone who has issues with anger, investing, and economics. Here's hoping you don't have to deal with the crazies in the future.

[Deprived]

Hey Obsi, any explanation behind the thread locking for about a day?

The thread was locked for less than 4 hours while I investigated an unsubstantiated threat of violence. I've learned not to take such threats lightly after having dealt with unstable "internet warriors" in the past.

I guess someone got spooked and sold their bonds at a loss, then felt they could try and extort some type of gain out of me. So let me take this opportunity to reiterate:

*This is a high-risk passthrough
*I have no control over the outcome
*I limit my personal investments in high-risk ventures to 10% of my entire portfolio, and recommend everyone find the right number to limit themselves to as well.
*I do not take threats to myself or my wife & children lightly.
*Should this opportunity go tits up you will not be getting any special payout from me, no matter how violent you may be.

If this opportunity "gos tits up" will you provide investors with details of the individual(s)/company to whom the funds were being passed?  Do you possess reliable information identifying those individual(s)/company (NOT asking for that information - just whether you possess it in case it's ever needed)?

Whilst I totally agree you wouldn't be liable for any funds if the pass-through fails (provided you've acted in good faith) that should not preclude investors from taking action to recover/pursue funds if you chose not to do so yourself.

[The00Dustin]

If this opportunity "gos tits up" will you provide investors with details of the individual(s)/company to whom the funds were being passed?  Do you possess reliable information identifying those individual(s)/company (NOT asking for that information - just whether you possess it in case it's ever needed)?

Whilst I totally agree you wouldn't be liable for any funds if the pass-through fails (provided you've acted in good faith) that should not preclude investors from taking action to recover/pursue funds if you chose not to do so yourself.

This is another good question where assuming the answer is yes isn't incredibly smart.  I would like to know as well.  I assume you wouldn't have any reason not to share this information if your investment vehicle did default, but would certainly want to know what reason you were going to have if you would.

[Deprived]

If this opportunity "gos tits up" will you provide investors with details of the individual(s)/company to whom the funds were being passed?  Do you possess reliable information identifying those individual(s)/company (NOT asking for that information - just whether you possess it in case it's ever needed)?

Whilst I totally agree you wouldn't be liable for any funds if the pass-through fails (provided you've acted in good faith) that should not preclude investors from taking action to recover/pursue funds if you chose not to do so yourself.

I will provide all details I have in the event of default, and I would leave it up to individual investors whether they wish to pursue the issue, as in the event of an actual default it would likely be a bankruptcy situation with any remaining funds eaten up by litigation & shutdown. I am not sure of the regulatory hurdles involved with such a situation, but I would leave that up to them.

A more likely scenario, than an all-out default, is one in which coupon rates are reduced for a period of time while rebuilding from any losses. This is how the problem was handled when the economy slowed in '08-09 (with a temporary hiatus during the worst of it). In a case such as this I will provide notification on this thread with hopefully at least a week's notice, along with updating the OP with estimated minimal coupon rates.

Thanks - that's one of my 2 questions answered (that you'drelease the information you have).

The second one was whether you actually HAVE information that reliably identifies those to whom the funds are passed-through.

At one extreme you could be sending funds to someone who you only know as a nick on irc.
At the other you could be passing through to individuals or a company whose identity you know with 100% certainty.

Put simply: how confident (as a %) are you that you are able to identify the name(s) and addresses of those to whom the funds are passed?  Again - not asking for those names/addressess - it wouldn't make sense for you to release them now.

[BadBitcoin (James Sutton)]

Thanks - that's one of my 2 questions answered (that you'drelease the information you have).

The second one was whether you actually HAVE information that reliably identifies those to whom the funds are passed-through.

At one extreme you could be sending funds to someone who you only know as a nick on irc.
At the other you could be passing through to individuals or a company whose identity you know with 100% certainty.

Put simply: how confident (as a %) are you that you are able to identify the name(s) and addresses of those to whom the funds are passed?  Again - not asking for those names/addressess - it wouldn't make sense for you to release them now.

I'm fairly confident with the information I have. As I said, I'm not sure what can be done with it in the event of a default, but unless this is all an elaborate ruse it should not be a problem.

I would only release the information in the event of default, and only to verified bondholders/trusted forum members, as the threats of violence & witch hunting currently going on have no place in business transactions.

you should report the threats of violence to theymos, there is a line and it seems its been crossed.

[HorseRider]

When the default happens, the investors will get a story. that's cool.

[dust]

Obsi gave some more information on IRC yesterday.  I don't have logs unfortunately, so please correct me if I'm wrong. I am trying to be as factual as possible here.

Obsi claims:

• Obsi is running a passthrough to a business involving lending and debt purchasing
• This business allows its employees to invest in its operations
• Obsi has organized a passthrough with one of the employees
• Obsi can not reveal the business because others could bypass him and take this opportunity directly.

[totaleclipseofthebank]

Obsi gave some more information on IRC yesterday.  I don't have logs unfortunately, so please correct me if I'm wrong. I am trying to be as factual as possible here.

Obsi claims:

• Obsi is running a passthrough to a business involving lending and debt purchasing
• This business allows its employees to invest in its operations
• Obsi has organized a passthrough with one of the employees
• Obsi can not reveal the business because others could bypass him and take this opportunity directly.

Obsi is ben bernanke

[The00Dustin]

Obsi is ben bernanke

Crap!  Sell Sell Sell!!!

[Puppet]

obsi,  would you rate the probability of an investment in this yielding a negative roi higher or lower.than 50% ?