If BS&T is somehow a ponzi, why would Pirate encourage stable balances? He's offering people running the trust accounts a .5% bonus if they can keep their total trust account balance stable within 5%. Interest payments don't count, but deposits and withdrawals do. If he is indeed a ponzi, why would he be discouraging deposits >5%? Obviously paying out 7% would rapidly overtake deposits <5%, so what's the game plan with that. I'm not convinced Pirate is a ponzi, although I cannot 100% say he isn't since I'm not actually him so I'm hoping someone from the 'other side' can help with this.
OK, so if I'm understanding this correctly, if someone chooses to have their interest paid out and manually reinvests it by sending them back to their deposit address that'd put them over the 5% limit pretty quickly and they wouldn't get the bonus, but if they automatically reinvest the same amount of interest they can increase their account balance by far more than the 5% limit each month. That's quite interesting - it effectively gives an incentive for people who want to reinvest to keep the interest money within the scheme, which means that if it is a ponzi it can keep going for longer because pirateat40 no longer needs to keep as many cold hard bitcoins around for the weekly interest payments. (Plus, presumably if they then decide to manually withdraw a substantial portion of the interest they'd be penalized fot that too.)
Also, remember that he's doing this at the same time as opening up BS&T to new deposits, so that he's no longer going to be dependant on pass-through funds to bring new money into BS&T. What's more, whilst the interest rates on direct investments are still high enough to get people interested they're much cheaper for him than the same amounts of new deposits through passthroughs which are paid the top interest rate. Plus, his incentives for investing more money initially and for automatically reinvesting your interest work much better on individual investors than they do on investors who're going through pass-through funds.
Come to think of it, this doesn't even sound like a very effective way to discourage depositing more money unless you're a PPT or not depositing that much. How much do you have to deposit before the extra interest on the additional deposit far outweighs the reward lost?