Bryan Micon's List of BTC Ponzi Schemes that should not be listed as "Lending"

[CoinCidental]

even if he is a horrid poker player "gambler."

How do you know he is a horrid poker player ?

He could be a successful poker player ......unless you know him personally ?

[Frankie]

even if he is a horrid poker player "gambler."

How do you know he is a horrid poker player ?

He could be a successful poker player ......unless you know him personally ?

Sarcasm. Patrick said he would ignore him because as a "gambler" he was untrustworthy. I find that silly for a number of reasons.

For clarity, I don't think poker players are horrid, or that OP is a horrid player, or know OP at all.

[Frankie]

ROFL, you can get money on a freaking credit card cash advance for 0.5% a week. Anyone paying more for loans than that is irrational, a scammer, or a kid who doesn't know any better/can't get credit. I wouldn't lend any of them money.

It's not about whether someone can actually make 0.5-2.5% ROI, it's about whether it makes sense for someone to pay that much for a loan. It doesn't.

A cool you can get an advance on your credit card in Bitcoins? Please link me to that credit card, thanks.

If you can't figure out how a currency exchange works, you probably are not a brilliant fund manager.

[PatrickHarnett]

even if he is a horrid poker player "gambler."

How do you know he is a horrid poker player ?

He could be a successful poker player ......unless you know him personally ?

Sarcasm. Patrick said he would ignore him because as a "gambler" he was untrustworthy. I find that silly for a number of reasons.

For clarity, I don't think poker players are horrid, or that OP is a horrid player, or know OP at all.

Actually, I did not say that.  I commented that I did not view being a poker player as a good credential for giving financial or investment advice.  I was also interested in the irony between poker and a claimed ponzi.

I know (and have worked with ) people sufficiently skilled they could have quit their day job and simply played cards for a living.  I would expect anyone that put reasonable time into something would be good at it, and the people who are less committed will, on average, do worse.

[Micon]

I think bitcoinmax doesn't have a place on that list, since it's only a pass-through. Alternatively, you could try to include all pirate pass-throughs. The starfish maintains a list of the most prominent lenders here:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81542.0

Some of those are definitely not ponzis/scams though, and others are unlikely, so such a list wouldn't be very credible. On the other hand, it may serve as a reminder for lenders to do their own research.

what does "shaking up a volatile market" mean?

If you have enough capital to control a highly volatile market, it may yield high returns. It's obvious that this is being done in the BTC markets. I don't know what this has to do with BTCST though.

it must be stopped or at least exposed and categorized correctly.

Everyone says it must be exposed, but where is the definitive proof?

I suggest you create a bounty for the person or persons who can bring proof that it is a ponzi. I'm sure there are a lot of people who would donate to that (especially the investors themselves). It would be much more helpful than laying down thousands of bitcoins for bets against pirate.

what more proof do you need that a business with absolutely no business function?

[Micon]

I observe poker is a game of chance and there is some skill that can be applied.  But I would prefer not to take investment advice from a card player - I consider that a deficient qualification.

I will concur that experience does not necessarily lead to wisdom.  It depends on the person.  Some people are wise with limited experience.

I happen to be older than 33 (this person) and I object to his characterisation of forum members as "kiddies", elevating himself above others he has no knowledge of.

The credit rating metrics you refer to are a mechanical process as set out in the relevant thread and are based on principles covers by Standard and Poors in their publications on Corporate Credit Ratings.  It looks at the financial ability of different issuers to make good their liabilities.  I do not need to do that, and someone else could easily have done so.  I am not asking anyone to rely on them, and of the 12 requests for information, only 1/3rd have responded.  However, you point here is more about discrediting my point of view rather than looking at the credentials of the OP and the advice he is giving.  If you wish to debate credit ratings, please do so in the relevant thread.

Sir,

your defense of the BTC ponzi industry, which will crumble in a relatively short period of time, is dead wrong.  You mention principles of Standard and Poors & corporate credit ratings in the same thread as BTC ponzi schemes - you are comparing financial ratings based on balance sheets of multi-national corporations whom have to adhere to SEC accounting laws with what amounts to nothing more than a scamming lemonade stand on the internet

[Micon]

The only missing ingredient is how

I have "invested" money in goods and sold them on ebay before making 100-300% (although it took a bit longer  )  so 0.5 to 2.5% is more than achievable IF there is something legitimate behind it

you cant prove its a ponzi without knowing whats behind the scenes

and the ponzi schemers never tell you what is behind the scenes.  Without having read most of them, and with BCST being the largest it appears, can I bet that they claim to be "trading" or "investing" behind the scenes?  what business other than extremely large scale drug sales could yield such staggering results?  do you believe a website with nothing more than a login, password, and a hash to deposit and withdraw has such an amazingly profitable business unit and they unselfishly want the entire BTC community to profit with them?

no, they are all scams.  very small % at the top will profit.  do not assume you will ever get back your initial investment, the interest most of you earn will be a fraction of what you put in when they all finally go busto. 

Although, it will be fun to watch them go busto and bet "correct" - but I will feel bad for the ppl that lost BTC learning their lesson the hard way.  Most of the BTC'ers I've talked to on Seals have been young kids, and I felt that most middle aged or older people would be smart enough to spot these easily.

[PatrickHarnett]

Sir,

your defense of the BTC ponzi industry, which will crumble in a relatively short period of time, is dead wrong.  You mention principles of Standard and Poors & corporate credit ratings in the same thread as BTC ponzi schemes - you are comparing financial ratings based on balance sheets of multi-national corporations whom have to adhere to SEC accounting laws with what amounts to nothing more than a scamming lemonade stand on the internet

I didn't see where I was defending a set of HYIP products, but the principles applied at corporate or local level still apply when considering the ability of a deposit taker to pay back your money.  Thus, it is useful to understand the liquidity of different issuers.

If they are ponzi schemes by design or accident, or some other mechanism for parting people from their hard earned funds, the point that we both agree on is that people need to do their due diligence on different offerings.  I reinforce that point often.  It is also the case, that people chose different products/schemes to invest in and there are definitely some things I steer away from, and others that I an comfortable investing in given the risk/reward payoff.

It would be interesting to see, in your OP table, the degree of proof that goes with each scheme (and listing out all of the Pirate Pass-through products isn't really necessary as the key-stone there is Pirate himself.)  

[Micon]

I've invested a bit of money in Bitcoinmax.  Not much, but some.  I may be fairly new to Bitcoin, but I'm rather adept at life.  I certainly have enough real-life experience under my belt to understand how to mitigate a high risk transaction.  I'm sure that a 6.9% compounded interest rate is not sustainable in the long term, but for now, it seems to be working fine, no?  Of course the whole thing may collapse tomorrow (or sooner), but that's a risk I'm willing to take.  

And, come-on.  Just *getting* into Bitcoin (educating yourself about it, transferring funds, exchanging funds for Bitcoins, setting up wallets, etc...) probably means you have a better than average understanding of risk management.  

Services like Bitcoinmax have value.  They allow people (for various reasons...I'll explain mine in a moment) to do some heavy speculating.  Sometimes that works out, sometimes it doesn't.  It's the individual's responsibility to mitigate the risks.  If Bitcoinmax fails tomorrow (or sooner), I have nobody to blame but myself.  He plainly states that he doesn't guarantee deposits.  He plainly states that all of the risk lies with the depositor.  So, what's the problem, here?  

I take a bit of umbrage when people come around and insist telling me that I'm being scammed.  If I were being lied to, or the risks of the speculation were hidden from me, that may well be the case.  I don't see that happening, here.  

I plan on watching my deposit on a daily basis and start mitigating the risk of said deposit as soon as possible.  This can be done any number of ways, but the important thing is, I'm taking responsibility for my own actions.  

I love Bitcoin and these forums because they are generally anarchistic and unregulated.  I enjoy seeing mutual cooperation come together to solve problems in a void.  There are ways of of determining scams, and the serious people on these boards seem to be coming up with good counters to those scams all the time.  This is how a free, unregulated market is supposed to work.  

I'm not a child.  I understand the risks.  I want to swim in these waters, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

**The reason I'm speculating in Bitcoinmax at the moment is to get my "feet wet" and to attempt to grow a large enough stake where I can start doing lending of my own.  This is a learning process for me.  If I lose my stake, I'll chalk it up as a price of admission.

And, that's all I have to say about that.

while I do not like scams like this and will point out every one that comes up here, I agree they should be allowed to operate for people like yourself that understand they are being scammed but still want to participate.  

these should NOT be listed under marketplace > lending  

makes this forum look foolish to anyone that finds BTC and sees what we mean by "lending" - these ponzi threads are littering the Marketplace > Lending section, which should be reserved for actual lenders

[Micon]

wow, i feel honoured that i'm second only to BST... thanks for the free publicity, micon.

i understand you are running a derivative of BCST, and you feel good about your large customer base.

they will not feel so good about you soon.  You are helping spread a ponzi scheme.  Your actions are shameful and you will see this only after the big collapse. 

It won't be long.  Weeks or months likely.  possible to get most of a year if you can get aggressive investment, but that doesn't seem likely now.

[CecilNiosaki]

I'm still waiting for a response to my response on what you stated about .5% weekly interest to 2% weekly interest.

[Micon]

Micon, so what about the .5%-2.5% per week schemes?  Those are legit right?

link me to example.  likely just a slower ponzi. 

remember Bernie Madoff returned 1% each month like clockwork.  every month 1%.  likely slowest and biggest ponzi ever. 

definition of a ponzi scheme -

can have no underlying business unit to make money, i.e. payments to "investors" must come from new "investors"

2.5% a week isn't always a ponzi, and the majority of legit businesses pull these figures or larger. Hell, I make over 1.2% a week in the Second Life stock market. I also buy ceiling clips for $0.30 direct, and then mark them up to $13.00.

Generalities are a bitch.

You mention business units that profit money to theorize how a business could pay 2.5% weekly interest on money - but if such a profitable business unit existed, say, you could buy something for $.30 and sell for $13 - would you take on investors and share the wealth?

btw Bitcoin Savings & Trust has no such business unit - or no business unit at all - it is all based on deposits to keep the scheme going.  There is a constant flow of depositors that hopefully > constant flow of interest payments, as soon as that balance is negative the operator stops paying.  That's how these work... for over a century. 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

[CoinCidental]

Micon, so what about the .5%-2.5% per week schemes?  Those are legit right?

link me to example.  likely just a slower ponzi. 

remember Bernie Madoff returned 1% each month like clockwork.  every month 1%.  likely slowest and biggest ponzi ever. 

definition of a ponzi scheme -

can have no underlying business unit to make money, i.e. payments to "investors" must come from new "investors"

2.5% a week isn't always a ponzi, and the majority of legit businesses pull these figures or larger. Hell, I make over 1.2% a week in the Second Life stock market. I also buy ceiling clips for $0.30 direct, and then mark them up to $13.00.

Generalities are a bitch.

btw Bitcoin Savings & Trust has no such business unit - or no business unit at all - it is all based on deposits to keep the scheme going. 

How do YOU  know there is no business unit  behind it ?
Do you have any proof that pirate is NOT  making profit  from trading or other means  like he claims to be ?

[Clipse]

I observe poker is a game of chance and there is some skill that can be applied.  But I would prefer not to take investment advice from a card player - I consider that a deficient qualification.

I will concur that experience does not necessarily lead to wisdom.  It depends on the person.  Some people are wise with limited experience.

I happen to be older than 33 (this person) and I object to his characterisation of forum members as "kiddies", elevating himself above others he has no knowledge of.

The credit rating metrics you refer to are a mechanical process as set out in the relevant thread and are based on principles covers by Standard and Poors in their publications on Corporate Credit Ratings.  It looks at the financial ability of different issuers to make good their liabilities.  I do not need to do that, and someone else could easily have done so.  I am not asking anyone to rely on them, and of the 12 requests for information, only 1/3rd have responded.  However, you point here is more about discrediting my point of view rather than looking at the credentials of the OP and the advice he is giving.  If you wish to debate credit ratings, please do so in the relevant thread.

Sir,

your defense of the BTC ponzi industry, which will crumble in a relatively short period of time, is dead wrong.  You mention principles of Standard and Poors & corporate credit ratings in the same thread as BTC ponzi schemes - you are comparing financial ratings based on balance sheets of multi-national corporations whom have to adhere to SEC accounting laws with what amounts to nothing more than a scamming lemonade stand on the internet

Nice comparison you have there.

The truth about the world banking sector is allready out but then again you only look at a deck of cards 24/7 so you clearly have no idea about the LIBOR scandal, HSBC scandal etc.

SEC is non-existing, its bought and paid for by the banks so they can self regulate themself(non-regulation) and if you still think the world is run by those who offer a service(banks) and monitored by capable indepdent SEC offices then sir you have no fucking idea whats going on in this world.

Its time for you to spend atleast 10% of your gambling disease time and find out whats going on in the real world, there is NO REGULATION and it allready crumbled, please note $4.6 trillion missing pension funds due to LIBOR scandal and this is slowly affecting every country.

I have some wisdom for you, first educate yourself before you have the nerve to try and educate others.

Here is a fun read about Bryan Micon: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/news-views-gossip/bryan-micon-rolled-12k-o-town-singers-buddy-19295/

This was one of the GEMs of the quoted forum post made by Bryan Micon on NWP:

Quote:
Get me my [censored] $ back and I'll give you $2k of it. Tell me what you need clarified. If someone wants to take off the month of October and has a car and nothing else to do (I think I have a good shot of finding someone like that here....) I'll pay your expenses for a few weeks to go DOG bounty hunter-style on his ass and of course upload pictures and video to NWP as you go.

LMAO!!!!

Ok, one. But it is only from 10 days ago. Micon launches
SNGDOMINATION.COM

Micon's SNG results:

Micon 578 -$2 $83 -2% -$936 - FullTilt
micon 883 -$4 $92 4% -$3,900 - PokerStars

Just to give you an idea, Micon launches a training site to teach people how to win SNG's but at the same time look at his SNG track record just before launching the site? Micon isnt even a clever scammer, just play retarded.

"give me 12k and i give you 100k tomorrow . . ."

Thats how Micon got scammed, he paid someone 12K cause the guy told him he would get 100K back the day after ie. Micon was happy to invest 12k for 24hrs in return looking for ~833% Interest. Legendary Micon, you go champ of scam detections.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-mBUA-uUDM  -> Priceless, total douche and perhaps an Phil Hellmuth impersonator since he cant stand on his own 2 sticks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdpuTMY6yMU -> Must watch, self proclaimed superstar opens his heart over his own absolute karma-based stupidity. Yes Bryan this is what happens when you scam others out of their money selling pokerbooks with a losing poker playing history on the subject you are training ie. SNG.

The worst thing possible for the bitcoin poker industry is to get Micon involved up front, he will fucking destroy all hope for it.

[CecilNiosaki]

Micon, so what about the .5%-2.5% per week schemes?  Those are legit right?

link me to example.  likely just a slower ponzi. 

remember Bernie Madoff returned 1% each month like clockwork.  every month 1%.  likely slowest and biggest ponzi ever. 

definition of a ponzi scheme -

can have no underlying business unit to make money, i.e. payments to "investors" must come from new "investors"

2.5% a week isn't always a ponzi, and the majority of legit businesses pull these figures or larger. Hell, I make over 1.2% a week in the Second Life stock market. I also buy ceiling clips for $0.30 direct, and then mark them up to $13.00.

Generalities are a bitch.

You mention business units that profit money to theorize how a business could pay 2.5% weekly interest on money - but if such a profitable business unit existed, say, you could buy something for $.30 and sell for $13 - would you take on investors and share the wealth?

btw Bitcoin Savings & Trust has no such business unit - or no business unit at all - it is all based on deposits to keep the scheme going.  There is a constant flow of depositors that hopefully > constant flow of interest payments, as soon as that balance is negative the operator stops paying.  That's how these work... for over a century. 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

Yes, I would. A. It's not wise to risk all of my capital in a single venture - any smart investor knows that B. I would need to bring in additional revenue to fill orders, and if my volume keeps increasing, I would need to keep doing so and/or expand my offering of stock to clients.

It's not unlimited, and I wouldn't offer it at 7% (because I like my money), but to some people, it's worth negating taking all of the risk for that. After all, if you can earn a two dollars for every clip sold and take little to no risk, compared to 12~ profit per clip and taking all of the risk, which would you choose?

[Clipse]

Come Bryan, dont pussy out now.

Respond to my post regarding FACTS about you and your dealings and not pure speculation as you have put forth in this thread.

You sir are an poker community outcast simply due to your ability to act and scam like a retard wherever you go and then getting scammed because you were oozing puss of greed.

[Frankie]

How do YOU  know there is no business unit  behind it ?
Do you have any proof that pirate is NOT  making profit  from trading or other means  like he claims to be ?

Has all the attributes of one: rejecting large deposits early on that would unbalance the scheme, nonexistent and/or incoherent hints about his business model, bonuses for large deposits, early adopters promoting others to join the next level of the scheme, voracious appetite for more capital as the scheme progresses--even though by now he would have made even more money himself if is claims are to be believed.

None of this is consistent with a legitimate investment. The better question is whether you have any evidence, let alone proof, that there is such an investment.

[nrd525]

I've been wondering about Leandro Cesar's Brazilian "Investment Group".
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=46750.0;

He recently got into a bit of trouble with the Brazilian regulatory authorities (for not having a license, not for any evidence of ponzi).  Though it looks like he is planning to keep it going.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=95399.0

What do you think?

[CoinCidental]

How do YOU  know there is no business unit  behind it ?
Do you have any proof that pirate is NOT  making profit  from trading or other means  like he claims to be ?

The better question is whether you have any evidence, let alone proof, that there is such an investment.

I am not making allegations of anything ,i honestly dont know if it is or it isnt

You seem to know for sure its a scam  ,i think you should provide proof ?,not me

[memvola]

I suggest you create a bounty for the person or persons who can bring proof that it is a ponzi. I'm sure there are a lot of people who would donate to that (especially the investors themselves). It would be much more helpful than laying down thousands of bitcoins for bets against pirate.

what more proof do you need that a business with absolutely no business function?

This won't get you anywhere and will result in the rehashing of the good old "debate"s. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it really isn't helping in any way. Quite the contrary, it's making both sides more rigid.

If you really care about the situation, you could do something like what I proposed. Even if it's not successful, it has research value. We need such investigations in other areas as well, and it would be cool to see how far bounties can take us and what kind of difficulties it might bring (it could also have negative consequences, e.g. unnecessarily disrupting business or exposing private trade information, which probably should be restricted by contest terms). For some perspective, AFAIK someone got into a bet with pirate for 5000BTC, and it's almost guaranteed that he will lose. Imagine a quarter of that 45000 USD were spent on an actual investigation by professionals.