Topic: Bryan Micon's List of Non-BCST Ponzi's Still Running (with credit rating) (Read 13314 times)
February 16, 2013, 08:17:06 AM
February 15, 2013, 10:27:43 PM
February 15, 2013, 10:20:09 PM
You've missed out Hashking on that list.
February 15, 2013, 03:17:33 PM
October 03, 2012, 10:05:49 PM
Time to break out the autodialer.
October 03, 2012, 10:04:33 PM
I am once again right, and we will once again it will take some time and another scam for you to believe me this time.
In the case of Victor, why don't we judge any future scheme he comes up with on the face value of that.
What you should admit though is that Victor's most recent scheme wasn't a ponzi, on the basis that everyone has been paid back in full, with interest, on time.
going live on DD radio like I do every Wed. at 7pm / would love to debate you on this point.
724-LOL-DONK to call in after 7pm
October 03, 2012, 10:04:06 PM
http://radio.donkdown.com:8000/radio.m3u to listen
call me 724-LOL-DONK to debate / I'll set anyone straight.
call me 724-LOL-DONK to debate / I'll set anyone straight.
October 03, 2012, 09:33:11 PM
I am once again right, and we will once again it will take some time and another scam for you to believe me this time.
In the case of Victor, why don't we judge any future scheme he comes up with on the face value of that.
What you should admit though is that Victor's most recent scheme wasn't a ponzi, on the basis that everyone has been paid back in full, with interest, on time.
going live on DD radio like I do every Wed. at 7pm / would love to debate you on this point.
724-LOL-DONK to call in after 7pm
October 03, 2012, 08:51:47 PM
I am once again right, and we will once again it will take some time and another scam for you to believe me this time.
In the case of Victor, why don't we judge any future scheme he comes up with on the face value of that.
What you should admit though is that Victor's most recent scheme wasn't a ponzi, on the basis that everyone has been paid back in full, with interest, on time.
October 03, 2012, 07:11:21 PM
Micon, I now understand why your wife left you. Women don't like guys who are so predictable as you.
I heard those kind of guys also make lousy poker players...
I heard those kind of guys also make lousy poker players...
You resort to personal attacks instead of responding to this:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1101345
so let me remind me of your words during the Pirate debacle:
You consider that since you dont know how something makes money, its just not possible ? I guess trade secrets and the likes is also nothing but magic.
No, that's not what I said, please try reading it again. It's not that I don't know how it makes money, it's that I don't know how it could be possible that it makes money. So if I try to consider the possibility that it's making money, I literally have no idea what I'm considering.Quote
have nothing against you personally JoelKatz but your approach to validating if something is fact or fiction in the businessworld is absurd. You dont have to believe in it but for the love of spacemonkeys making statements that since you cant imagine how it is functional therefore it cannot exist is beyond retarded.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if I don't know how something could be possible, I cannot consider the possibility of it. I literally don't know what it is I would be considering. My very first step in reasoning would be blocked as I tried to consider the consequences of an unknown thing.And why is it that you need to know everything that goes on with other peoples business?
Is it such a difficult concept to grasp that some people know some stuff you don't know and that they are not obliged to disclose their trade secrets to you?
Just remember how wrong you were here, and how right you believed yourself to be at this time.
You are once again wrong, I am once again right, and we will once again it will take some time and another scam for you to believe me this time.
October 03, 2012, 06:24:05 PM
But - yeah, bank runs are a big problem for reasons I've already given. It ain't rocket science. If the majority of depositors leave a bank within a month - the bank's fucked, and if the bank isn't FDIC (or with CUs, NCUA) insured, remaining depositors are probably fucked, too. OTOH, as you point out, if the majority of depositors withdraw from a ponzi operation - the ponzi op's fucked (well, he'd probably just leave), and the remaining depositors are probably fucked, too. So - could indicate someone's operating a ponzi, but that's no reason for Shit-Brush to get all worked up because his ponzi predictions have almost all come true.
I can't believe I missed replying to this. This is 100% completely and totally wrong. Bank runs are a 100% solved problem. Bank runs do not screw depositors.It's not worth going into detail here, but the basic idea is this simple: Bank runs can only directly cause a liquidity crisis. They can only cause an equity crisis if a bank or lender is so poorly capitalized they should never have gone into business in the first place. Regardless of how much of a run you have, the total value of both the lender's capitalization and its loan equity will always be enough to ensure the depositors get back both their deposits and all earned interest. There may be a delay, but the money will get back to them. (And it's not hard to avoid even the delay, however, the lender will wind up broke with its capitalization gone.)
That lenders don't structure to avoid this problem, despite how easy it is, just shows how inept they are and how indifferent they are to the interests of their depositors. (Or, more likely, how they are too poorly capitalized to operate properly or are outright scamming.)
Any time a bank or lender claims that depositors didn't get their money back (other than a delay where all principal and most interest is returned) because of a bank run, they are lying. The truth is most likely either that they were drastically undercapitalized to begin with , they made bad loans, they operated a Ponzi scheme, or they outright stole from their depositors.
Yeah. There's a reason uppity clerks don't get to run banks IRL.
October 03, 2012, 01:15:39 PM
Vescudero is a scammer. This payback is to build trust for the future.
I laughed. I guess you can always use this argument.
I predicted it first.
vescudero seems to have paid back in full and is thus not a ponzi. im sure you will want to verify that but it is something that you should note.
I suspect they will say that having paid back in full doesn't prove it wasn't a ponzi... Wait for it...
Micon, I now understand why your wife left you. Women don't like guys who are so predictable as you.
I heard those kind of guys also make lousy poker players...
October 03, 2012, 08:38:10 AM
Vescudero is a scammer. This payback is to build trust for the future.
I laughed. I guess you can always use this argument.
October 03, 2012, 08:11:07 AM
vescudero seems to have paid back in full and is thus not a ponzi. im sure you will want to verify that but it is something that you should note.
I suspect they will say that having paid back in full doesn't prove it wasn't a ponzi... Wait for it...
Remember when you were arguing with JoelKatz about how you can't divulge trade secrets when you are running such a cool business?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1101345
because I do.
psy if you hadn't greated gangman style you would have lost all credibility. You are trying to rub it in my face that I called Vescudero a Ponzi. So are you saying because he paid everyone back he is a legitimate business man worthy of much trust from this community? Go on record saying that now to further your battered history here.
Vescudero is a scammer. This payback is to build trust for the future. and also psy - how about giving me credit for calling out all of the scams that clearly were Ponzis. Even if u credit the Vescudero as a loss I'm batting around .900
October 03, 2012, 07:59:32 AM
| vescudero | 1.50% | - | Jun-12 | F | PONZI | https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/closed-vescuderos-risk-free-weekly-term-deposits-at-15-89122 |
nope, going to continue to "slander" as you say "out a scammer" as I say.
This payback is to further build confidence in a longer scam. I'm on record for that now. he is absolutely 100% a scammer. He likely payed back this time because many of his so-called accounts were shills. Take a look at how many sub-100 post users posted "+1 / paid me back in full" - mix those with the guys he really actually paid back and this venture was a cheap way to build confidence for the future.
I will update the OP to reflect this.
October 02, 2012, 08:43:57 AM
| vescudero | 1.50% | - | Jun-12 | F | PONZI | https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/closed-vescuderos-risk-free-weekly-term-deposits-at-15-89122 |
October 02, 2012, 06:57:31 AM
vescudero seems to have paid back in full and is thus not a ponzi. im sure you will want to verify that but it is something that you should note.
I suspect they will say that having paid back in full doesn't prove it wasn't a ponzi... Wait for it...
You would know this because Pirate paid you back in full? lol....
Oh right...."Look guys he pays!"
Do you have any kind of reading disability?
The only one who's talking about pirate is you...
October 02, 2012, 05:22:49 AM
vescudero seems to have paid back in full and is thus not a ponzi. im sure you will want to verify that but it is something that you should note.
I suspect they will say that having paid back in full doesn't prove it wasn't a ponzi... Wait for it...
You would know this because Pirate paid you back in full? lol....
Oh right...."Look guys he pays!"
October 01, 2012, 07:15:22 AM
vescudero seems to have paid back in full and is thus not a ponzi. im sure you will want to verify that but it is something that you should note.
I suspect they will say that having paid back in full doesn't prove it wasn't a ponzi... Wait for it...
October 01, 2012, 06:41:18 AM
But - yeah, bank runs are a big problem for reasons I've already given. It ain't rocket science. If the majority of depositors leave a bank within a month - the bank's fucked, and if the bank isn't FDIC (or with CUs, NCUA) insured, remaining depositors are probably fucked, too. OTOH, as you point out, if the majority of depositors withdraw from a ponzi operation - the ponzi op's fucked (well, he'd probably just leave), and the remaining depositors are probably fucked, too. So - could indicate someone's operating a ponzi, but that's no reason for Shit-Brush to get all worked up because his ponzi predictions have almost all come true.
I can't believe I missed replying to this. This is 100% completely and totally wrong. Bank runs are a 100% solved problem. Bank runs do not screw depositors.It's not worth going into detail here, but the basic idea is this simple: Bank runs can only directly cause a liquidity crisis. They can only cause an equity crisis if a bank or lender is so poorly capitalized they should never have gone into business in the first place. Regardless of how much of a run you have, the total value of both the lender's capitalization and its loan equity will always be enough to ensure the depositors get back both their deposits and all earned interest. There may be a delay, but the money will get back to them. (And it's not hard to avoid even the delay, however, the lender will wind up broke with its capitalization gone.)
That lenders don't structure to avoid this problem, despite how easy it is, just shows how inept they are and how indifferent they are to the interests of their depositors. (Or, more likely, how they are too poorly capitalized to operate properly or are outright scamming.)
Any time a bank or lender claims that depositors didn't get their money back (other than a delay where all principal and most interest is returned) because of a bank run, they are lying. The truth is most likely either that they were drastically undercapitalized to begin with , they made bad loans, they operated a Ponzi scheme, or they outright stole from their depositors.
Jump to: