Topic: Bitcoin-Insurance.com (Read 3918 times)

"online-reputation based on some sales" .... i loled ... $14k+ with 50+ people are "some sales"

I dont see this is going anywhere. Everything has already been said, and if someone wants to constribute, he may contact me directly.

If someone want to buy the website (as it is), hit me up. Asking price 200 BTC. My time is too valuable to answer those little kids like "phantastisch" his stupid scammer comments.

I checked that, he is not hosting in germany. so it may not apply, and since he decided to stay completely anonymous the "Abmahnanwalt" would have a hard time and no easy money.
But since he is offering a high risk venture with "online-reputation" based on some sales, he will probably decide to vanish some time. They all denied it, they all did get away with someones bitcoins... 

In that case you are of course aware that providing no contact information/full "Impressum" for your "business" is illegal under German legislation. Your website is a perfect opportunity for an Abmahnanwalt to sue the fuck out of you.

EDIT: Oooh, I see that you do know:


Yeah, that must be it. Insanity. 

No, not for BAKEWELL.

This is a credit default swap. If you don't know what these are then stay away.
This is for people who like to play fast and loose. Both sides of the "insurance" represent high risk and high rewards.
If you are an "average" investor, you might be better off just playing SatoshiDICE.

GIPPT (Gamma Insured Pirate Pass Through) is a GLBSE asset that offered 2.5% weekly interest on "insured" deposits with pirate.  The insurance funds were invested with two other forum members.  A portion of the insurance money made its way back to pirate, so the fund has not yet been able to pay out the full  insurance yet.  The entire fund was questionable from the start because there is no reason to pay 2.5% on a fully insured investment unless the insurance money was earning >2.5%.  Anything earning 2.5% is going to carry some risk.

Your "insurance" is similar in that it is insuring high risk investments with money in "low" risk investments.  The problem is that these investments are often not as low risk as people believe.

I wont provide any informations nor an "impressum" (thats the imprint you were talking about) because the German jurisdiction is insane, for example a user puts a video of youtube on your site and you get sued because the music in the video in copyright protected. I think in the long run, Germany will forbid Bitcoins and everything related to Bitcoins, thats as sure as death and taxes. So Im taking any security layer in can get.


Thank you! like i said, if you dont trust me then DONT PUT ANY MONEY INTO BI


I dont know what Bond / share thing you are running, but in case your costumers hold back, because they are afraid to lose their money with you, an insurance offer could help. CPA might be the better option for you, BI isnt really established at this time and combining "non established" projects together isnt a really booster for none of both

Whats GIPPT? I think that my system is totally different compared to his. So why dont read my initial post before you say that this kind of insurance is a bad idea. As far as I understood Ineedausername gave the money to hashking and imsaguy, and hashking "defaulted". I dont think that to give 50% to one guy is a good idea. I was thinking about 20 assets, each getting ~5% of the pie. Maybe everything is working out for them, according to pirates talk today on #btcst, giving us the first real inforamtions. Further ill keep things low on start, not risking anything I cannot pay back with personal funds. I also talked to usagi, if I may be interested in a CPA contract, adding some additional security.

See GIPPT as an example for why this kind of "insurance" is a bad idea: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=96793.200




Definitely not.  Usagi runs CPA, which provides the kind of insurance that a mining company might look for.

+1.

If I ever create a business where I am handling other people's Bitcoins, I'll definitely release a good deal of personal information.  I'll never conduct business with a "company" who refuses to even tell me the address where they are based.

Why wont you give any Dox Information?

Whats wrong with that? Why does nobody do business like a real world business man with real information? Is the date for closing down the site already fixed?

Bitcoins are not toy money. They are real. Your forum reputation does not account for anything , when you still can vanish back into anonymity.

Yeah, giving out more Information about yourself may even increase your sales , because of trusting customers.

If we want to get Bitcoins widespread into the real world , we have to stop with bullshit like hiding who you are as a Business Operator.

Also if your webserver is in germany ,as your nationality suggests , it is required to have an imprint.

Your aggressive attitude towards this is not helpful in your cause.

So your move.

WTF... You are aware that I already answered this question alone in this thread twice before he asked it again. Someone who actually cannot read or do not want to read does not deserve a proper answer.

This is the last time I will ever respond to this question:


If thats not enough for you, then i recommend NOT TO PUT ANY MONEY INTO BI.

I mean, where are we. Every little fish with 10 BTC asking for my documents. I have a pretty good reputation in this forum. The Insurances will always have a maximum limit for the amount of insurances. I will only release the amount I can cover with my personal funds in case anything "bad" happens. I hold right now alone in GLBSE the value of 1500 BTC, bitcoinmax 500 BTC, mybitcointrade 300 BTC and lend to third persons another 150BTC and will soon lend another $1000 denominated to "Projects".

Its planned to take some of the BTC coming from the extra interest in such a "cold wallet" to cover bigger amounts in the long term. As long as this project doesnt take too much time, i wont take any BTC for myself.

I say it again, if you think that your funds are unsave DONT PUT ANY MONEY INTO BI

That is a really crappy way to answer a legitimate question.

I agree you should not call this insurance, it is misleading. Call it what it is, a CDS, most people have some idea what that is from all the bad press they have been getting from the financial crisis.

The math in the OP seems kinda wonky. When you are calculating a "return on initial capital" You should also include whatever gets put into this scheme, so the actual returns are lower.

It seems to me it would be better to just stick a few bitcoin in a cold storage than to trust you.

I already answered all your questions. Im also on IRC to chat directly with everybody who wants to talk. Eisenhower34 @ freenodes #btcst
If my answers didnt satisfy you, then i demand that you dont use BI.

Are you willing to provide a legal adress under which someone could be held accountable in case of fraud?

I did not find anything on the Website.

If your answer is No , 1. Why not ? 2. You shouldnt be trusted with anyone's money.

hm... was hoping for more feedback.

The key date would be the day where the average drops below 4% for 30 days. For example Obsi is paying out 1% daily for 100 days, then suddenly let the interest drop to 0%. After 26 days of 0 interest, the average droped to 4%, so the key date would be day 126. You also have to keep in mind that you can only buy insurances when someone else is selling them. So its not like you can just jump in a seconds before its too late and grap hundreds of insurances.

But as I already asked above, which asset would you like to have insured? dank? RustyRyan?

You'd then have to revisit your time-scales.

What would defaulting on day 10 of a contract mean - would it:

a) mean that the 30 days was the 30 days ending on day 10 of the contract period?  If so then noone would take out contracts unless the previous 20 days were favourable to their desired outcome.
b) mean that the 30 days was the 30 days commencing on day 10 of the contract period?  If so then the outcome of the contract could potentially not even be know, let  alone settled, until 30 days after the contract had ended.
c) something else?

I frankly dont believe the obsi securities are a good target for what you're trying to offer - as they don't have any clear point at which a default would become apparent (other than him saying he had defaulted or vanishing).  Betting on how much interest he'll pay would be hazardous - as he can set that at will and not disclose any verifable information to justify the decision.  That would allow him (or proxies) to bet on the side of the contarcts which he knew in advance was going to win - the prospect of which is sufficient in itself to totally deter me from gambling on that.

@Deprived: I see your point and you are right. So would changing the terms that an "interest rate of less than 4% on average for 30 days would count as a default" help? So far no policies have been sold, so changing the terms is still possible. I know that its quite low compared to the 1% daily hes offering now, but I also have to attract "sellers" of such policies.

Deprived pretty much has it. Not only is this in no way insurance, but it is in no way useful at this point. Back to the drawing board.

Think part of the problem is what your existing contract is covering.

Here's what it says:

"Event: In case Obsi or the company/individual he invested in doesn't pay back the invested capital this insurance will pay out. Smaller delays of the interest payments, decreases in interest payments and the fate of an individual are excluded from this deal, same as any problem with third partys. The date of the default, is the date of the first missed payment."

The problem is that Obsi' share isn't a bond - and neither he nor the company/individual (if they exist) he invests in have undertaken to ever repay the invested capital.

The most likely scenario for it going wrong is that it's a ponzi all along.  In that case Obsi would be unlikely to say "I'm keeping all your money".  Rather he'd claim that whoever he was passing through to had suffered heavy losses and that dividends would be at zero for a while.  That way he could continue to get more funds in through his other companies (none of them allow share/bondholders to ever withdraw funds) - without being labelled a scammer. (That's IF it's a ponzi).

Your contract doesn't protect against this - yet the above is exactly the scenario I (and I'm sure many others) would want protection against (or more accurately, in my case, to bet on it happening - I wouldn't actually be investing in the HRPT).

IF it's a ponzi/scam then short of him essentially saying "I'm a scammer" there's basically no way to win - and IF he's a scammer then admitting it would reduce the amount he could run with so wouldn't happen.  Your contarct would have worked for pirate - where withdrawlas of pincipal were offered.  It doesn't where there's no way provided for you to ever get your capital back anyway - and hence failure to return capital is something you've essentially agreed to anyway.