Putting your money where Pirate's mouth is.

[RoloTonyBrownTown]

No half-assed nonsense on my part.

No way.  It's full blown nonsense or nothing!

[1715485784]

1715485784

[1715485784]

1715485784

[Vandroiy]

No half-assed nonsense on my part.

No way.  It's full blown nonsense or nothing!

You got it! I push this hard so that either I or the supporters have to explain themselves in the end. No evasive maneuvers.

[copumpkin]

hey Vandroiy, can i ask why you are not hedging your bet?? 66BTC at 65 weeks is all it would take...
seems rather illogical not to.

No. I'm clear on my stance, my BS&T exposure is and remains zero.

It's illogical for the same reason you don't play the Ponzi in the first place. No half-assed nonsense on my part.

If your certainty about him being a Ponzi is anything less than 100% (and you said it was 98% last time I asked you), it isn't necessarily illogical to hedge. To be really simplistic about it, you think that there's a 1/50 chance you'll lose 5000 btc and and a 49/50 chance you'll get 10000. Simple expected value will value your "bet portfolio" at 9700 btc at maturity, but your one-year 2% value at risk is 0. Both of those could improve, depending on your model of his default probabilities over time, if you were willing to hedge



So basically, "DAMMIT THE PONZI IS COLLAPSING AND I NEED YOU TO DEPOSIT YOUR MONEY INTO IT, OTHERWISE I CAN'T GET MINE OUT".

[imsaguy]

… because of one or many of the following assumptions/premises …

• No business can earn 7%+ a week over the course of a long term.
• …

Have I missed something?

Sure you have missed something. The above point is not an assumption, but a trivial truth (except for the mathematically challenged) in a non-inflating currency like bitcoin.

This discussion needs people with some minimal mathematical ability. It would be better for the few others to shut up and stop advertising their stupidity.

Here is a little mathematical exercise for you. At 7% per week, how long does it take for one bitcoin to collect a compound interest of 10 million bitcoins? The first to answer this question correctly gets BTC0.1 from me (raising the question how long it would take for that tiny amount).

I'll simplify the question to make it easier for you, imsaguy, so you have at least a 50-50 chance of getting it right. Does it take more or less than five years?

So while you were all busy getting condescending assuming I don't know math, you were too busy assuming and missed a key fact:  how long has pirate been doing this?


 I won't wait for your answer and instead tell you: less than 1 year.  Now tell me if less than 1 year is considered long term in most businesses. 

(waits)

Great, now that we know pirate isn't considered long term business yet, tell me how likely it is that a business can earn 7% a week in the short term.

You see, the ponzi tinfoil has blinded you.  Pirate never claimed he was going to sustain this for years and years.  As he's slowly reduced the rates, instead of you guys saying "oh, he's bringing his rates in line with a maturing business" you guys are claiming "its the end of the ponzi".  Quite literally, you guys take anything you see and twist it to fit your theory, even if there's a reasonable explanation otherwise.  Go watch X-Files or something, you'll feel better.

[imsaguy]

hey Vandroiy, can i ask why you are not hedging your bet?? 66BTC at 65 weeks is all it would take...
seems rather illogical not to.

No. I'm clear on my stance, my BS&T exposure is and remains zero.

It's illogical for the same reason you don't play the Ponzi in the first place. No half-assed nonsense on my part.

Actually, your exposure is 5k btc.

[unclescrooge]

Just to give a ballpark idea, since this thread started (July 4th) my net change in storage is +9.96%. 

Including the profit made, or only the deposit?

[bitcoinBull]

Just to give a ballpark idea, since this thread started (July 4th) my net change in storage is +9.96%. 

Including the profit made, or only the deposit?

lol good one.

[bitcoinBull]

There really is no reasoning with you because you flat out see it as a ponzi because of one or many of the following assumptions/premises, even though they may/may not by faulty:

• No business can earn 7%+ a week over the course of a long term.
• No business would borrow at 7% a week over the course of the long term.
• No business would continue to borrow at 7% over the course of the long term, instead opting to use their own funds/profits.
• Pirate has an insatiable appetite for more coins.
• Pirate won't reveal his day to day business operations.

Have I missed something?

That's a pretty comprehensive list, I think you covered all the bases.

Ok, now that we established the reasons you think its a ponzi, it is much simpler to talk about.  Saying 'ponzi ponzi ponzi' doesn't make it one and its hard to rebut.


Now please explain how those items make pirate a ponzi. Don't pull in other stuff, use those items.  You said it was a comprehensive list.

Right off the bat, I see items 1,2, and 5 as being patently false and not ponzi behavior, which leaves only 3 and 4, both of which need citation/documentation.

1. "patently false because i can imagine a scenario of 7% profits per week". Why not 10% per week, or 33% per week?
2 & 3. You said it
4. "pirate doesnt always accept new accounts." it makes sense to limit short-term growth, since it increases overall time and therefore overall size.
5. he said it himself. he wont and i dont blame him.

A large percent value for 1 (7%/wk is large) combined with 5 is a ponzi every time. Is there one historical example which turned out to be genuine profits? Because there are countless examples of ponzis. Which makes the claim of non-ponzi an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence.

[DutchBrat]

Why is it so hard for people to believe that loans can be made for 1% per day or even much higher ?

www.wonga.com

They say they 'only' charge 1% a day so 'only' 365% per year but the govt makes them display the APR (compounded interest); a whopping 4214% per year

Remember, this is an FSA regulated company, seal of approval by the UK government, not some dodgy loanshark around the corner

And believe it or not: they only lend money to people that have a certifiable income....but obviously can't get a loan from a bank or have acces to a credit card...

So now imagine what rate of interest you can charge when you lend to higher risk people without being regulated.....

Just saying....

[hgmichna]

Here is a little mathematical exercise for you. At 7% per week, how long does it take for one bitcoin to collect a compound interest of 10 million bitcoins? The first to answer this question correctly gets BTC0.1 from me (raising the question how long it would take for that tiny amount).

239 weeks, 0.1btc -> 1K86jhmEgnXLREKjE5gimH9zvwBVFcQi7t thanks

Fair enough. 10 bitcents on the way. 238 would have been a bit closer, so the next person who calculated that may also collect 0.1 BTC. SimBesh? Wallet address? Just for fun.

Addendum: Oops, the first calc also came from you. I overlooked that. And as the following message explains, 239 is actually correct under the assumption of whole week steps.

[dooglus]

Fair enough. 10 bitcents on the way. 238 would have been a bit closer, so the next person who calculated that may also collect 0.1 BTC. SimBesh? Wallet address? Just for fun.

The thing is that after 238 weeks you didn't yet earn 10 million BTC, and after 239 weeks you did.  Since interest is paid weekly he rounded up to the next week.

[hgmichna]

If your certainty about him being a Ponzi is anything less than 100% (and you said it was 98% last time I asked you), it isn't necessarily illogical to hedge. To be really simplistic about it, you think that there's a 1/50 chance you'll lose 5000 btc and and a 49/50 chance you'll get 10000. Simple expected value will value your "bet portfolio" at 9700 btc at maturity, but your one-year 2% value at risk is 0. Both of those could improve, depending on your model of his default probabilities over time, if you were willing to hedge

I could imagine some other considerations. One is that the time spent to do the hedging might be better spent on something more profitable. Then there is the weird problem that some simple-minded victims might get angry when somebody takes and spends the money they have just been robbed of, without any risk to himself.

[hgmichna]

Fair enough. 10 bitcents on the way. 238 would have been a bit closer …

The thing is that after 238 weeks you didn't yet earn 10 million BTC, and after 239 weeks you did.  Since interest is paid weekly he rounded up to the next week.

Yes, that is correct (with the assumption of whole weeks). Sharp thinking.

[bitcoinBull]

Why is it so hard for people to believe that loans can be made for 1% per day or even much higher ?

www.wonga.com

They say they 'only' charge 1% a day so 'only' 365% per year but the govt makes them display the APR (compounded interest); a whopping 4214% per year

A company offering loans is totally different than someone asking for loans. Obviously, their profit is limited by the number of borrowers they can find (it doesn't scale with the amount of capital they have). Which is another sign that pirates a ponzi: there are lots of lenders but no borrowers. If there are no borrowers, nobody is paying the interest..

[myrkul]

Why is it so hard for people to believe that loans can be made for 1% per day or even much higher ?

www.wonga.com

They say they 'only' charge 1% a day so 'only' 365% per year but the govt makes them display the APR (compounded interest); a whopping 4214% per year

A company offering loans is totally different than someone asking for loans. Obviously, their profit is limited by the number of borrowers they can find (it doesn't scale with the amount of capital they have). Which is another sign that pirates a ponzi: there are lots of lenders but no borrowers. If there are no borrowers, nobody is paying the interest..

No *visible* borrowers. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[bitcoinBull]

Why is it so hard for people to believe that loans can be made for 1% per day or even much higher ?

www.wonga.com

They say they 'only' charge 1% a day so 'only' 365% per year but the govt makes them display the APR (compounded interest); a whopping 4214% per year

A company offering loans is totally different than someone asking for loans. Obviously, their profit is limited by the number of borrowers they can find (it doesn't scale with the amount of capital they have). Which is another sign that pirates a ponzi: there are lots of lenders but no borrowers. If there are no borrowers, nobody is paying the interest..

No *visible* borrowers. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

True, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[myrkul]

No *visible* borrowers. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

True, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

To be fair, I agree. But just because we don't see who he's lending to, doesn't mean they're not there.

[mp420]

Maybe he's lending his money to an even bigger ponzi scammer who's paying 8%/week. Which would make his business legit but just as certain to fail.

The only other far-fetched scenario I can think of where his business might be legit is that he's tremendously wealthy (so that he has managed to pay all the interest from his own pocket instead of dipping into the borrowed principal) and he has some inside knowledge about BTC dropping to very close to $0 (below $.01 at least) very soon, so he can eventually pay back all his outstanding debt with no effort (having sold all the bitcoins while they still have value).

To be clear, I do not really think either of these is true. It's a ponzi scheme alright.

[copumpkin]

Why is it so hard for people to believe that loans can be made for 1% per day or even much higher ?

www.wonga.com

They say they 'only' charge 1% a day so 'only' 365% per year but the govt makes them display the APR (compounded interest); a whopping 4214% per year

A company offering loans is totally different than someone asking for loans. Obviously, their profit is limited by the number of borrowers they can find (it doesn't scale with the amount of capital they have). Which is another sign that pirates a ponzi: there are lots of lenders but no borrowers. If there are no borrowers, nobody is paying the interest..

Oh man, who knew that all those companies issuing corporate bonds with no borrowers of their own were Ponzis?? This will be the next major financial scandal of the century! The entire fixed income market (way larger than the equity market!) is the largest Ponzi in history. Madoff should hang his head in shame.

[thezerg]

nanotube the 100 BTC fee you are getting is pretty good but you know you can put that 10000 BTC to WORK for you!!! 

I hear someone's offering 7% a week on deposits; guy's name is pira-teat or something --  what DOES that mean anyway, "burning nipples" maybe? 

Over the course of the bet you'd make 1.3 million BTC.  Its a SURE thing!!!

>>> btc = 10000
>>> for i in range(0,18*4): btc=btc*1.07
>>> print btc
1305064.551270706