Topic: Bryan Micon's List of BTC Ponzi Schemes that should not be listed as "Lending" - page 20. (Read 119665 times)

I believe the Pirate Ship is going to sink before I have the 10+ hrs to research every iteration of the PPT's on GBLSE and every "I'll pay you unreasonable% per week" thread - although I think I am close, just needs more grooming of the list.  After those are done then it's time to investigate all the questionable mining bonds and the obscure scams that don't fit those categories.  After BCST goes boom, this low-level scammery will die down after the entire community sees the damage done.  I'll bet new rules / categories will be created.  I will look into Patrick's thread.

Really?  Sorry for the off topic followup but take a look at what DeBeers or OPEC or ATT  or any other famous monopoly / market maker has done.  You don't have to convince anybody what a "natural price" is..  if you have bought all the cheaper items, then anybody who wants an item has to pay the higher price no matter how smart they are. 

In theory anyway.. market maker theory which seems unlikely to be widely published for similar reasons to the fact that cutting edge crypto isn't immediately published.  In any case, a topic for another thread because I doubt its related to these high yield investments. 

before indoor plumbing they would dig a hole in the ground outside the house.  there was always a tradeoff as to where to dig.  too far and it made for a long walk on a cold night.  too close and your house smells like shit.

i think the securities forum cesspit wasn't dug far enough away.

ughh ...

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/glbse-vhrl-vendors-high-risk-loan-up-to-3-interest-weekly-100800

Good job and congrats on the new venture PatrickHarnett.

The free advertising is definitely a win for the Starfish!

Only an idiot thinks outside the box when there's a 100% perfect solution that doesn't require it.

This is one of the most revealing thread on the forum. If Satoshi would have been as unimaginative as are those ponzi accusing people he would have never been able to invent Bitcoin. Thinking outside the box seems to be completely impossible for them.
But at least it is a good sign about Bitcoin mass adoption, judging by the number of Joe Sixpacks, that apparently have little more than some TV education

yay - I'm famous.

new addition for the list?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/kraken-fund-100913

You can't make much money that way when there are functioning exchanges and you're not producing a product. In fact, you are much more likely to lose money.

There are a large number of complex reasons why this doesn't work, but here's the short version: Say Bitcoins are trading at roughly $10 and are relatively stable. If not for any manipulations, they'd stay basically there. You have a huge supply of both Bitcoins and USD at several major exchanges. You have no inside knowledge others don't have except what you yourself are going to do. (These assumptions are not necessary, but they make things easier to understand to get the basics.)

So you hatch a plan, you'll sell the price down to $8.50 and then buy a bunch of Bitcoins at the reduced price. Now this only works if you understand that the "natural price" of Bitcoins is more than $8.50. Otherwise, buying at $8.50 is no benefit. And if you know this, so does everyone else.

So as soon as you push the price significantly below $10, you are selling to get down to $8.50 at a loss. And everyone else can buy all your coins for less than their natural price. When you succeed and get the price down to $8.50, you will not be the only one buying. And because people know the price is below the natural price, the price will shoot up very quickly. (Many buyers will be induced by the low price and very few new sellers will appear. If idiots panic sell, you won't be only one person on line with USD to buy them out.)

So the further you push the price from the natural price, the harder it gets to move the price. You take more and more losses. And the further you push the price, the easier it is for it to jump back to the natural price, the easier it gets for others to move the price back.

So manipulations have to be much more subtle to have even a chance of working. You have to gradually push the market to convince a large number of other people that the "natural price" is something other than what it would be if not for your manipulations. And the reason this won't work is because there are a number of well-financed people who are too smart to fall for this. It only takes one to make you lose more and more as you try to move the price at a loss and split the gain more and more as you try to take profit as it goes back. Since there are several, this is just not going to work.

he may look stoned, but you look like a shill:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/reeses-9963

Then he does two things: invest and speculate.

Speculation concerns merely the speculation on the increase or decrease of price (not value) of assets. "Someone's gotta lose when someone wins".

Generally I'm not sure about this. Assume a speculator, who invests into a start-up business. As the start-up grows, it creates value, for example by inventing and making new products.

The value of the business grows, and the speculator can now sell his shares for a higher price.

This is not a zero-sum game, as the value of the business, and possibly the value of the entire market, has increased.

Perhaps you meant a narrower definition of speculation?

Why would you think that? I'm genuinely interested in your analysis.

Damn. $10k USD! That's almost as much as what Micon earns on an entire year playing poker as a pro!

I've thought over the futures idea, and am now concluding, without further information, that it is not likely. My reasoning is that a futures market first evolves from the fundamentals and speculation comes into play to add liquidity later.

The fundamental groups are:
1) Miners
2) Businesses

Miners have a strong incentive to use a futures market because it would allow them to lock in the price of bitcoins they haven't mined yet. I highly suspect that a futures market will evolve to be strong in bitcoin in the future because of this. However, most of the miners who would use futures are members of this forum, so we would have heard something about this. It's a shame that Pirate said that GPUMAX wasn't involved in BS&T, because that would have been more interesting to consider.

Businesses would use a futures market if a lot of escrow or other delayed delivery of bitcoins were taking place, but we all know that isn't the case.

Now, it's true that most of any market is speculation. However, no market can be (almost) completely speculation, since speculation is a zero-sum game.

This is an AWESOME article. Expect at least 20 new ~10k USD players from this one.

Oh oh...

Made it into the online media:

The Bernie Madoffs of Bitcoin?
 - http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/15/3243200/bitcoin-ponzi-schemes-savings-and-trust


By Adrienne Jeffries.

So what you're saying is...

Pirate's ponzi is like a series of tubes!



http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-july-12-2006/headlines---internet

The volume at the margin moves faster than the bulk of holdings. A garden hose can move more water than a 4" pipe if there's enough of a pressure difference between the two.

In this manner, small profits can build quickly. It's like the tradeoff between higher IC parallelism vs. clockspeed - either a lot of simple instructions at a high rate, or more complex instructions at a slower speed.

That leaves the issue of a buffer. Even with the ability to move the market, there's still a potential for reduced supply or complete stoppage of the flow. In that situation, guarding against complete failure can be accomplished by having a steady, alternate source of flow. It may not be able to supply the volume of the main operation, but it can pick up some slack.

With the latest rate decrease, the supplemental supply apparently hasn't been able to compensate enough. The other explanation is that Ponzi investment is dwindling. I've suggested that if Pirate were running a Bitcoin-only Ponzi, it would've failed nearly three months ago - just prior to the price level increasing from $5.


The purpose of a business acquiring coins is not the same as an individual. Use is the critical factor, not accumulation. In other words: flow trumps stock. The purchased coins would rapidly reenter the market after being made use of.


You must be Pirate if you have access to the financial information.

Hey everyone - Micon is Pirate! Tear him to shreds!

More facts, less guessing.

Care to tell us how you know what Pirate have on his name ? Are you a close business partner who knows his full financials ?

Oh wait, you are just full of shit as usual.