Why I used to trust Patrick Harnett

[JoelKatz]

Just because something negative happens to another service provider that had a great track record doesn't mean that the same thing will happen to others with an un-blemished record.

You realize that you're rebutting an argument nobody made. This is likely because the arguments that have been made have no rebuttal. All of the signs of a scam are present. No explanation other than a scam is plausible. Therefore, it's almost certainly scam.

[BinaryMage]

Just because something negative happens to another service provider that had a great track record doesn't mean that the same thing will happen to others with an un-blemished record.

You realize that you're rebutting an argument nobody made. This is likely because the arguments that have been made have no rebuttal. All of the signs of a scam are present. No explanation other than a scam is plausible. Therefore, it's almost certainly scam.

Who is more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?

[chrisrico]

If there's one way to unravel any semblance of professionalism you've built up for your business over many months, it's to have your spouse suddenly appear and start engaging in personal slanging matches with your detractors.

I was immediately reminded of Charles Carreon and wife...

[Scott J]

All of the signs of a scam are present. No explanation other than a scam is plausible. Therefore, it's almost certainly scam.

How can you not understand that it is possible to earn more than 1% a week, making paying out such an amount profitable?

As well as people paying high interest rates for loans, look at the dividend yields here: http://www.stochastically.com/

It's possible some of the deposit schemes are run as ponzis or are some other sort of scam, but to go after Patrick is crazy.

I am honestly upset at the way this forum is going. Healthy criticism is good, but the recent discourse is far from that.

[eroxors]

Several of us have actually done this in reality (well not the risk-free part, we do take on a lot of risk).  This needs to be repeated over and over until you realize that it is actually happening.

Some of us have become very good at picking who to lend to and who not to lend to.  Just because you think it is too risky for you and that you would never try to do it does not mean you have to try to make everyone else stop doing it.

I have no objection to you doing it with your own money. And every explanation I've heard for why other people's money is needed fails the giggle test.

+1 / well said. 

It's the constant need for new money after claims of making large profits.  Tell tale sign of scam.

Tell tale sign of passive-aggressive loser/bully Micon...

This!

[JoelKatz]

How can you not understand that it is possible to earn more than 1% a week, making paying out such an amount profitable?

Not profitable compared to not paying out such an amount.

As well as people paying high interest rates for loans, look at the dividend yields here: http://www.stochastically.com/

Please show me something that we know is not a Ponzi scheme that has consistently paid out 1%/week or more at low risk.

It's possible some of the deposit schemes are run as ponzis or are some other sort of scam, but to go after Patrick is crazy.

It's not just that it's possible, no other explanation is known.

I am honestly upset at the way this forum is going. Healthy criticism is good, but the recent discourse is far from that.

Can you explain why a person with the incredible financial wisdom needed to make that much money would nevertheless be idiotic enough to borrow money at about the highest imaginable rates? The only known explanation for needing so much of other people's money is a Ponzi scheme.

I agree that  the recent discourse is far from healthy criticism. If you have any better ideas, I'm willing to listen. But I fear nothing will work and people will invest in obvious scams no matter what anyone says.

[mb300sd]

How can you not understand that it is possible to earn more than 1% a week, making paying out such an amount profitable?

Not profitable compared to not paying out such an amount.

As well as people paying high interest rates for loans, look at the dividend yields here: http://www.stochastically.com/

Please show me something that we know is not a Ponzi scheme that has consistently paid out 1%/week or more at low risk.

It's possible some of the deposit schemes are run as ponzis or are some other sort of scam, but to go after Patrick is crazy.

It's not just that it's possible, no other explanation is known.

I am honestly upset at the way this forum is going. Healthy criticism is good, but the recent discourse is far from that.

Can you explain why a person with the incredible financial wisdom needed to make that much money would nevertheless be idiotic enough to borrow money at about the highest imaginable rates? The only known explanation for needing so much of other people's money is a Ponzi scheme.

I agree that  the recent discourse is far from healthy criticism. If you have any better ideas, I'm willing to listen. But I fear nothing will work and people will invest in obvious scams no matter what anyone says.

Not patrick, but how about looking at BDK's financials.. Very believable 1%/week.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0Ao892S4MOoDZdGZSbjJVd1ZTbFVLZE5aRE95bE91NVE&gid=21

[WifeOfStarfish]

If there's one way to unravel any semblance of professionalism you've built up for your business over many months, it's to have your spouse suddenly appear and start engaging in personal slanging matches with your detractors.

She's entitled to her opinions.

+1

[WifeOfStarfish]

You should stop now. Your desperate attempts at name calling just makes you look sad and certainly doesn't help the person you claim to be the wife of.

This thread seems a little off track. I am surprised to see people with many posts and elevated forum status make comments like this. I've been around since January and don't say much because of the many people around here that have this type of attitude. Really......would there be someone out there that would claim to be the "wifeofstarfish" and said person not be the real wife......I doubt it. If I was in the shoes of Starfish I would also wan't to invite my wife to the forums to see the kinds of things he may be dealing with and responding to, like this for example.

And lastly....welcome to the forum WifeofStarfish, I'm sure you see how it is around here already.

Thanks Cobra! I'm certainly well-informed about Patrick's bitcoin business - it's my marital money involved too! And I am entitled to be angry when people slander or troll him. He doesn't show it on this forum but he gets affected by all the negativity directed his way.

Anyway, better zip my lip from now on (with the exception of responding to that idiot Micon)

Wendy

[WifeOfStarfish]

If there's one way to unravel any semblance of professionalism you've built up for your business over many months, it's to have your spouse suddenly appear and start engaging in personal slanging matches with your detractors.

I was immediately reminded of Charles Carreon and wife...

Had to look him up and I don't think there's much comparison
Wendy

[WifeOfStarfish]

Tell tale sign of passive-aggressive loser/bully Micon...

You should stop now. Your desperate attempts at name calling just makes you look sad and certainly doesn't help the person you claim to be the wife of.

So it's ok for Micon to say Patrick is running a scam but not for me to express my opinion on his accusation? What a very even playing field this forum is - not

WifeOf Starfish of 26 years today (wedding anniversary)

Really will zip my lip now...

[Bitcoin Oz]

Tell tale sign of passive-aggressive loser/bully Micon...

You should stop now. Your desperate attempts at name calling just makes you look sad and certainly doesn't help the person you claim to be the wife of.

So it's ok for Micon to say Patrick is running a scam but not for me to express my opinion on his accusation? What a very even playing field this forum is - not

WifeOf Starfish of 26 years today (wedding anniversary)

Congrats 

I dont think Micon was breastfed as a child.

[JoelKatz]

So it's ok for Micon to say Patrick is running a scam but not for me to express my opinion on his accusation? What a very even playing field this forum is - not

I think you fail to appreciate the difference between an opinion unsupported by any argument and a reasoned argument. It's not okay to respond to a reasoned argument with a bare opinion and pretend that this in any way invalidates the argument.

Do you have any explanation for why, other than it being a scam, your husband is making so much money he can pay unbelievable interest rates yet doesn't have enough money to pay off his own ultra-high interest rate debt? Because the only reason the rest of us can think of is that he's scamming. If there's some other explanation, we don't know it. And all other such schemes in the past have turned out to be scams.

[WifeOfStarfish]

So it's ok for Micon to say Patrick is running a scam but not for me to express my opinion on his accusation? What a very even playing field this forum is - not

I think you fail to appreciate the difference between an opinion unsupported by any argument and a reasoned argument. It's not okay to respond to a reasoned argument with a bare opinion and pretend that this in any way invalidates the argument.

Do you have any explanation for why, other than it being a scam, your husband is making so much money he can pay unbelievable interest rates yet doesn't have enough money to pay off his own ultra-high interest rate debt? Because the only reason the rest of us can think of is that he's scamming. If there's some other explanation, we don't know it. And all other such schemes in the past have turned out to be scams.

There's no point answering this. You'll believe what you want to. Only wrote this in case my silence was construed as ''hiding something''.

[JoelKatz]

So it's ok for Micon to say Patrick is running a scam but not for me to express my opinion on his accusation? What a very even playing field this forum is - not

I think you fail to appreciate the difference between an opinion unsupported by any argument and a reasoned argument. It's not okay to respond to a reasoned argument with a bare opinion and pretend that this in any way invalidates the argument.

Do you have any explanation for why, other than it being a scam, your husband is making so much money he can pay unbelievable interest rates yet doesn't have enough money to pay off his own ultra-high interest rate debt? Because the only reason the rest of us can think of is that he's scamming. If there's some other explanation, we don't know it. And all other such schemes in the past have turned out to be scams.

There's no point answering this.

But there's a point in pretending to?

You'll believe what you want to.

That's a good one! In case you run short of witty retorts, you may want to add "Says who? and "That's what you think!" to your repertoire.

Only wrote this in case my silence was construed as ''hiding something''.

I don't know if you're a shill or you've been duped, but there are arguments on the other side that you refuse to either acknowledge of respond to. You simply keep insisting on a position not only in the absence of evidence but against the weight of all evidence.

Do you know why your husband needs to borrow other people's money at outrageously high interest rates even though he supposedly has some sure fire way to turn massive profits? Or are you taking his word for it? All logic and reason suggests that someone who had a source of extraordinary wealth would make paying off usurious loans their top priority.

I find your behavior extremely bizarre. If you're attempting to vouch for your husband, you need to respond to the substance of the complaints.

[P4man]

As well as people paying high interest rates for loans, look at the dividend yields here: http://www.stochastically.com/

Which one in particular? most of what I see are:
- Ponzi's, some more blatant than others.
-  mining bonds. Sure, they pay high yields, and are not ponzi's, but they lose value much faster than the dividend makes up for.  If you create a derivative that passes on the dividend of those mining bonds but doesnt account for their free fall market price, you effectively do have a ponzi. This is basically what Diablo did with DMC and see how thats going.

[markm]

I don't understand the argument here. If all my capital is out on loan at some percent interest, why would I not borrow more money at less interest than I loan out at in order to be able to increase the amount I am loaning out and thus increase the amount of interest I am making? It seems to me banks do this all the time, getting bigger is a bad thing all of a sudden? What is the discrepancy? Is Patrick only loaning out a small amount not all that he has available?

-MarkM-

[P4man]

I don't understand the argument here. If all my capital is out on loan at some percent interest, why would I not borrow more money at less interest than I loan out at in order to be able to increase the amount I am loaning out and thus increase the amount of interest I am making?

The question is, why would you borrow it at 1% per week when you can easily obtain credit for less than 1% per month? Even a credit card debt is a lot cheaper. And if Patrick can produce 1.5% per week sustained returns, why would he still have to borrow at all? I would have expected someone like that to be filthy rich, since not the best hedge fund managers in the world or even Madoff ever claimed to be able to get anywhere close to such returns.

[markm]

Borrowing in fiat to loan out bitcoins? SOunds like some nasty exchange-risk there.

General Financial Corp thought they had a good thing going by borrowing from the Canucks, repayable in CDN, to loan out DVC at twice the interest rate. Turned out the exchange rate was prohibitive, so they negotiated an even lower interest rate with the Martians, payable in MBC. But still exchange rates were killing them.

In the end, it turned out that they had to negotiate a loan payable back in the same currency - DeVCoins - as they were loaning out in order to have a viable setup.

After watching that all happen, I would be very cautious of any plan to borrow in one currency to loan out in another...

-MarkM-

[Soros Shorts]

Borrowing in fiat to loan out bitcoins? SOunds like some nasty exchange-risk there.

1) Borrowing BTC to convert to fiat does not make sense. You can get cheaper loans in fiat without the exchange risk.

2) Borrowing fiat to convert to BTC is also risky for both the lender and borrower. In addition to the 10% APR you need to add the exchange-risk. BTC-USD can easily go up by 50-100% or down by 50% over the next 12 months. If I were someone who borrowed USD at 10% APR from by bank, converted that to BTC, and loaned out the BTC to a business venture that operates using BTC (and not USD), I would probably loan it out for at least 10% + 50-100% APR = 60-110% APR. That way the BTC interest takes into account the USD interest and the BTC-USD risk.

3) Borrowing BTC to use as BTC makes more sense. It is difficult to say what a reasonable APR would be. It really depends on whether BTC-USD is expected to rise or fall over the loan period. IMO the APR should be less than 2), but probably still higher than fiat rates.

In summary, because of the exchange-risk component I would NOT consider a BTC loan with and interest rate of 60-110% APR to be usurious. Borrowing in BTC makes sense only when that business needs BTC and not fiat.