Topic: A day in the life of a pirate. - page 15. (Read 31744 times)

As I said that is possible for a short time, but even BTC has slowed its growth now. Its been 30% a few months now.

If pirate is paying 7% a week, saw some article, that's ~44.000%/year.

In short it would have to be way bigger than bitcoin itself, yet no one knows what it even is and its all managed by one dude. Suure totally not a ponzi.

If you buy and sell anything with enough volume you are of course going to "manipulate" the market. There is nothing illegal about that.

So which is it? Is your "business" automated and scalable or does it really depend on "how much [you] want to work"?

pirateat40 is so full of shit and getting away with it (so far), I can actually respect it. Even the irony of his username, as another forum member mentioned in a previous thread.

But, a workable business model for a bitcoin-bank scheme actually occurred to me belatedly, when suckers were daring us nay-sayers in a previous thread, to put our money where our mouth is and bet on a default at betsofbitco.in.

Assume that pirateat40 were to bet his reserves on the bank NOT defaulting, and assume the bank didn't default. If he put enough reserves on there to push the odds to 10:1, or 20:1, with bets week-by-week, then the counter-bets would become the interest gains for depositors. The depositors themselves could place the counter-bets as insurance on their deposits (but that insurance paid would offset their interest gains, obviously). This would be a workable model for a ponzi-bank.

But unfortunately, with only about 40 BTC total in the betsofbitco.in pot and 3:1 odds against default, his claimed reserves are not in the pot so its not a bet worth making.

I don't believe any of this.  There is no evidence that pirate even exists yet alone runs a business.

I personally am on the waiting list for a GPUMAX invite and it has both cost me nothing and returned nothing.  It is completely risk free.

My guess is that pirate is an imaginary entity that does nothing and pays out nothing.

I am considering doing this myself.  It is completely risk free, takes a minimal amount of time, and as far as I know is devoid of any legal consequences.  Plus if my wife finds out I don't think she will care in the least.

Sam

Just a little more to add about how the simplicity of buying and selling at the right time can make money.

1) In the stock market crash of 1989 a good friend of mine managed to double his entire investment virtually overnight (we were teenagers then so I didn't have any money involved).

2) Before the dot.com crash my friend and I managed to double our money buying and later selling shares in Sun Microsystems (turn around approx. 6 months).

3) During the years of the post 2000 property boom in Australia my friend and I easily doubled our money on most investments (and in fact quadrupled our money on plain land investments in a matter a months before the greatest part of the boom cycle ended).

4) During the time of the big influenza scare (2005) I was able to make around 300% in 3 months by buying and selling shares in a company called Biota.

5) The same friend predicted (almost to the month) when the GFC would happen and had moved most of his investments into gold and gold (and other mining) stocks prior to the crash (which basically doubled in value within 2 years).

I don't claim to be any financial guru but without a doubt "timing is everything".

Yes I would like this question addressed too.

Agreed 100% (and note that I am not currently involved with this or any other schemes on this forum).

I think if I get some more free time I will have a play at what I'm suggesting (with much smaller amounts) to see how I can go (have already actually been doing something along the same lines but with vastly smaller sums successfully for a while now).

Of course in all likelihood the system being used would be more complicated than what I outlined (just saying even such a simple idea can at least in favorable circumstances meet the criteria of what is going on). I would assume such a more complex system would also have standing "positions" for both buying and selling to reduce the overall risk (i.e. hedging).

Perhaps, but if you invest in to something that you understand, at least you can gage risk/reward. Kinda hard to do here.

You may be quite correct (I admit I have not done the math here) - this is simply my guess at how this could be working without involving any sort of illegal activity (or being any sort of ponzi scheme).

Sure - would have to agree with that (has zero risk been stated in regards to this scheme/system?).


Stability is of course *not* what you make the profit on - but compared to forex I think the fluctuations in the price of BTC are quite large.

Also to a fair extent any sort of investment that is not just putting money in the bank to get a fixed return is gambling isn't it?

The 7day sum volume in/out still needs to be invested funds * 2 , there simply isnt that volume on the market atm unless his sum volume is very low <10K BTC which I doubt by looking at all his investment/loans activity.

My understanding (which may be wrong as I haven't studied this that closely) was that profits were paid out per week rather than per day - so in that case one would not need to do that everyday.

There is no surefire way to make money buying "low" and selling "high" on an open market, anyone who claims otherwise is either a scammer or misguided.

Thats not to say he may not be trying, I have also wondered if there isnt a relationship and Pirate may have enough funds to manipulate the price, to a degree. Im not quite sure how one can profit from price stability, but even if one can, that doesnt make it guaranteed profitable, there are always limits. And if indeed Pirate is speculating on btc price somehow, then he is gambling with a lot of money that isnt his.

Which brings up the single most important issue Pirate hasnt addressed yet: what kind of risk is involved?

There is one problem in your thinking, if he used the coins invested to keep a 10c margin spread on the exchange and then profit of that(basicly controlling a single point of price control) he would have to trade the same volume(and profit on it at whatever he pays+profit).

By the looks of things he has more than 20K BTC invested with him, that means a minimum of 20K of sell and 20K of buy need to occur profitably everyday to cover the profit margins he offers. We rarely see days on mtgox totally >40k recently, the odd day here and there you would see 50-100k volume over the last month+ and all trading cant happen with himself since clearly he wont be making a profit then

I think that could actually be a very real posiblity (and is a rather simpler and less sinister explanation than most others). Anyone who has done options trading knows that volatility == great profits (and of course great risk).

I have watched the price move up and down > 10% in a single day on Mt. Gox - so if one was was careful (and it was mentioned about how much effort needed to be put in) to be buying and selling even only once per week it is still quite possible that a 10% return could in fact be made just doing this.

It would also make sense why the returns would only be in BTC and the preference would be for people to keep their main investment locked in as the basic idea would be to sell BTC at a high point (in USD most likely) then buy it back again at low point each day (or week I guess) removing the gains in BTC as they are made. It would also explain the desire to get more on board at a controlled rate as this could not scale up too dramatically without undoing itself (due to being the main buyer/seller in the market).

Although Bitcoinica has been credited much for the recent stability it could make just as much sense that a scheme doing exactly this would be keeping the price fairly stable (but not quite as stable as interestingly enough has actually occurred since Bitcoinica has ceased operations).

I had actually thought of doing the exact same thing but have so far been too lazy (and do think there would be a fairly big risk in leaving a large amount of funds on Mt. Gox although perhaps this could be minimised by keeping BTC offline in between the sell and buy cycle).

Not putting all your money into Bitcoins spreads the risk.

Does it have something to do with the price stability around 5$ what he's doing? 

Increased transparency would presumably lead to greater investment as a lot of people are fence-sitters? (I take it that what you do is not possible at an individual level unless scaled massively as you do.) 

Would increased investment possibly outweigh the adverse effects of any competition that more transparency would lead to?

Maybe he found a way to game the system, somehow.


Could it have something to do with transaction fees?  Hmmm...

Nice of you to think of getting me one

Do the goat hop!