[BTC-EQTY] A new Bitcoin Investment Fund - page 2.

stephwen

member

Activity: 83

Merit: 10

Quote from: Chet on May 22, 2013, 08:21:57 AM

Quote from: stslimited on May 22, 2013, 07:57:57 AM

I even went to their irc channel to talk about this, their emphasis on the WoT and forum post count is completely out of touch with reality, leading to even further arbitrary scrutiny to determine legitimacy or the lack thereof. I did learn a little (that the size of my offering was too large for the current bitcoin economy) but since this is the only place to offer securities, we need to fix the infrastructure first before larger and more diverse offerings can be accepted. Which is something I am lukewarm to addressing.

The emphasis on WoT and Post counts is not at all out of line. This is the internet, there is really no other way for people to reasonably judge who they are dealing with. Even with those cautions a lot of scams have happened, a lot of people have been burned.
A time might come when there is a better way but for now until there is a verified track record to look at we have no way of telling a 'real trader' from a 13yr old in mom's basement.
One well written description of a project can too easily be a cut and paste.

The emphasis on post count is a great way for jobless people or teens with a lot of time to spare to gain credibility, indeed. Cheesy

jski

member

Activity: 97

Merit: 10

xaviarlol I started a fund too, but I only have family and friends in it, they trust me....LOL I am going to run that a while before I invite strangers let alone people in the forum. Also unless you have a proven track record, starting a fund with a one-off fee to join is not going to have them flooding your gates. If you are good as you claim to be why not make your money with the performance fee only??

I am always on the look out for funds to invest my funds money in.

MPOE-PR

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 522

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 07:54:09 AM

Though you couldn't possibly know what my experience is, or how qualified I am, you have chosen to put me in the pool of "idiocy" (your words). That's your choice,

It's not me putting you in that pool, it's your own actions putting you in that pool. It is my choice to express this, but it is not however an arbitrary, subjective, personal slant, if that's what you're intimating. The internet doesn't know (and doesn't care) if you're really a dog. As long as you meow you're a cat.

It's your wake-up call, and you're very much welcome to use it that way. Quite frankly I don't care what you assume of me after having a ten ton anvil dropped on your head on your first herpderp post. If you're still here in a year or two, and if you've meanwhile managed to do one or two things that didn't blow up, or at least didn't blow up much more spectacularly than davout's shit, then I'm likely to start listening.

So now. You've got a lot of catching up to do, and hopefully another foot for later.

Quote from: stslimited on May 22, 2013, 07:57:57 AM

I did learn a little (that the size of my offering was too large for the current bitcoin economy) but since this is the only place to offer securities, we need to fix the infrastructure first before larger and more diverse offerings can be accepted.

That's pretty ridiculous stuff. The "current Bitcoin economy" is something like one billion dollars. From what I hear it's you that was judged too small for your proposed offering, not the economy.

Specifically what "we" and specifically what "infrastructure" is this about?

Chet

full member

Activity: 121

Merit: 100

Quote from: stslimited on May 22, 2013, 07:57:57 AM

I even went to their irc channel to talk about this, their emphasis on the WoT and forum post count is completely out of touch with reality, leading to even further arbitrary scrutiny to determine legitimacy or the lack thereof. I did learn a little (that the size of my offering was too large for the current bitcoin economy) but since this is the only place to offer securities, we need to fix the infrastructure first before larger and more diverse offerings can be accepted. Which is something I am lukewarm to addressing.

The emphasis on WoT and Post counts is not at all out of line. This is the internet, there is really no other way for people to reasonably judge who they are dealing with. Even with those cautions a lot of scams have happened, a lot of people have been burned.
A time might come when there is a better way but for now until there is a verified track record to look at we have no way of telling a 'real trader' from a 13yr old in mom's basement.
One well written description of a project can too easily be a cut and paste.

stslimited

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 07:54:09 AM

Quote from: MPOE-PR on May 22, 2013, 07:27:52 AM

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 04:42:39 AM

With all due respect, this sounds like a rant and is nonsense.

If everyone had the same attitude as this, Bitcoin would never have risen to the place it is now. Simply labeling everything as "won't go anywhere, won't work, waste of time" is a pretty terrible position to have for an innovative, emerging technology.

Bitcoin has risen to where it is now precisely because of me imposing this here correct attitude against the inception to early 2012 prevailing mistaken attitude of noobish idiocy that you seem to favor. BTC wallowed around 10 per as long as the Global Scam Exchange folk were the prevailing crowd. This was not a coincidence.

The mere fact that you have the unmitigated gall to presume you know the history when you don't, and the boneheaded cluelessness to then use completely wrong "arguments" built on this resounding, absolute ignorance when confronted by the very people who wrote that history is one of those "only on the Internet" sorts of things. At the very least don't add hypocrisy to insult by prefacing that nonsense with "due respect". There's no respect there, in spite of plenty of respect being due. Claiming otherwise is not helping you.

Also don't misrepresent what I say. It's not a matter of "everything", it's a matter of noob ventures without a chance in Hell. Those aren't "everything" by any means.

For starters, no, I don't/didn't know who you are. What you said initially sounded aggressive and arrogant, hence my initial response to you. But alas your experience appears to have put you in a position to make such a generalization.

While I am not fond of the elitist attitude expressed in your second post, you clearly have been "around the block" on this subject and are qualified to make such assertions. Though you couldn't possibly know what my experience is, or how qualified I am, you have chosen to put me in the pool of "idiocy" (your words). That's your choice, but don't expect people to not react in the way I did (and worse).

I even went to their irc channel to talk about this, their emphasis on the WoT and forum post count is completely out of touch with reality, leading to even further arbitrary scrutiny to determine legitimacy or the lack thereof. I did learn a little (that the size of my offering was too large for the current bitcoin economy) but since this is the only place to offer securities, we need to fix the infrastructure first before larger and more diverse offerings can be accepted. Which is something I am lukewarm to addressing.

xaviarlol

full member

Activity: 153

Merit: 100

Quote from: MPOE-PR on May 22, 2013, 07:27:52 AM

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 04:42:39 AM

With all due respect, this sounds like a rant and is nonsense.

If everyone had the same attitude as this, Bitcoin would never have risen to the place it is now. Simply labeling everything as "won't go anywhere, won't work, waste of time" is a pretty terrible position to have for an innovative, emerging technology.

Bitcoin has risen to where it is now precisely because of me imposing this here correct attitude against the inception to early 2012 prevailing mistaken attitude of noobish idiocy that you seem to favor. BTC wallowed around 10 per as long as the Global Scam Exchange folk were the prevailing crowd. This was not a coincidence.

The mere fact that you have the unmitigated gall to presume you know the history when you don't, and the boneheaded cluelessness to then use completely wrong "arguments" built on this resounding, absolute ignorance when confronted by the very people who wrote that history is one of those "only on the Internet" sorts of things. At the very least don't add hypocrisy to insult by prefacing that nonsense with "due respect". There's no respect there, in spite of plenty of respect being due. Claiming otherwise is not helping you.

Also don't misrepresent what I say. It's not a matter of "everything", it's a matter of noob ventures without a chance in Hell. Those aren't "everything" by any means.

For starters, no, I don't/didn't know who you are. What you said initially sounded aggressive and arrogant, copiously generalized, and unthoughtful, hence my initial response to you. But alas your experience appears to have put you in a position to make such a generalization.

While I am not fond of the elitist attitude expressed in your second post, you clearly have been "around the block" on this subject and are qualified to make such assertions. Though you couldn't possibly know what my experience is, or how qualified I am, you have chosen to put me in the pool of "idiocy" (your words). That's your choice, but don't be surprised when people react in the way I did, and assume you are a douche (or douchette in your case), for lack of knowing better.

stslimited

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on May 22, 2013, 07:37:36 AM

Quote from: stslimited on May 22, 2013, 07:33:51 AM

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 04:42:39 AM

Quote from: MPOE-PR on May 22, 2013, 04:34:49 AM

New people have no business starting "funds". Not now, not ever.

This is a high trust, high competence field. Only people who have been involved in Bitcoin for a long time and with credible results may do this. Anyone else trying to do this 1. won't get anywhere; 2. is a scammer anyway. Whether they plan to or not they're a scammer, it makes no difference. They'll just have a more or less planned out scam, but it will be a scam.

And before you start with the "I've been involved since 2005" Tortilla stuff: no, you haven't. You're not involved now. To be involved you have to actually do something. People using the word "Bitcoin" in conversation aren't involved in Bitcoin, they're involved in conversing.

With all due respect, this sounds like a rant and is nonsense.

If everyone had the same attitude as this, Bitcoin would never have risen to the place it is now. Simply labeling everything as "won't go anywhere, won't work, waste of time" is a pretty terrible position to have for an innovative, emerging technology.

they did the same to me with my company's High Frequency Algorithm Fund, just thought I'd give you a heads up. I had to drastically scale back the size of the proposed offering but this greatly shifted the cost benefit analysis to the point where this market is simply not mature enough for it.

I made the same observations as you as there is literally no way to not be defensive when you are trying to actually get something done, but it won't help, thats all I'm trying to say

Let me quote this from you:

Quote

Okay I was able to look those two funds up.

Jokerdragon's seems to have been running for a year, the screenshots on the blog sites are interesting because some people wanted to see something similar from this offering.

Exchange.ESIF's thread pretty much has the exact same scrutiny as mine, except all by you.

The fact that you're not aware of competing offerings until people mentioned it nor how they are all scammy as fuck should tell you why you should not be doing a "High Frequency Trading Algorithm ETF IPO".

obscure thinly traded scams were LITERALLY the last thing on my mind when I decided to offer this diversification to the bitcoin community

I maintain that market research on exchange liquidity and the hedging algorithm is way more important, obviously this is where we disagreed

the only thing worth caring about from other funds would be to provide competitive maintenance fees or dividends, thats how it should be, but thats not how it is here, I hope you can see this is an obvious roadblock to the bitcoin economy and investment community

Chet

full member

Activity: 121

Merit: 100

The BTC economy actually could use more new ventures.
The problem comes from people jumping in with both feet before they put a toe in the water to check the temperature. Experience in other 'markets' is not enough, BTC isn't other markets, this one is actually free and unregulated.
Since we don't have gov't toadies telling people what to do, and courts and police to back it all up the community takes care of itself.
To get a new venture going you need to spend some time, talk to people, demonstrate your knowledge and trustworthiness.
If you make a new venture that goes badly from the investors point of view there is no practical difference between that and a deliberate scam ....

🏰 TradeFortress 🏰

vip

Activity: 1316

Merit: 1043

👻

Quote from: stslimited on May 22, 2013, 07:33:51 AM

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 04:42:39 AM

Quote from: MPOE-PR on May 22, 2013, 04:34:49 AM

New people have no business starting "funds". Not now, not ever.

This is a high trust, high competence field. Only people who have been involved in Bitcoin for a long time and with credible results may do this. Anyone else trying to do this 1. won't get anywhere; 2. is a scammer anyway. Whether they plan to or not they're a scammer, it makes no difference. They'll just have a more or less planned out scam, but it will be a scam.

And before you start with the "I've been involved since 2005" Tortilla stuff: no, you haven't. You're not involved now. To be involved you have to actually do something. People using the word "Bitcoin" in conversation aren't involved in Bitcoin, they're involved in conversing.

With all due respect, this sounds like a rant and is nonsense.

If everyone had the same attitude as this, Bitcoin would never have risen to the place it is now. Simply labeling everything as "won't go anywhere, won't work, waste of time" is a pretty terrible position to have for an innovative, emerging technology.

they did the same to me with my company's High Frequency Algorithm Fund, just thought I'd give you a heads up. I had to drastically scale back the size of the proposed offering but this greatly shifted the cost benefit analysis to the point where this market is simply not mature enough for it.

I made the same observations as you as there is literally no way to not be defensive when you are trying to actually get something done, but it won't help, thats all I'm trying to say

Let me quote this from you:

Quote

Okay I was able to look those two funds up.

Jokerdragon's seems to have been running for a year, the screenshots on the blog sites are interesting because some people wanted to see something similar from this offering.

Exchange.ESIF's thread pretty much has the exact same scrutiny as mine, except all by you.

The fact that you're not aware of competing offerings until people mentioned it nor how they are all scammy as fuck should tell you why you should not be doing a "High Frequency Trading Algorithm ETF IPO".

stslimited

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 04:42:39 AM

Quote from: MPOE-PR on May 22, 2013, 04:34:49 AM

New people have no business starting "funds". Not now, not ever.

This is a high trust, high competence field. Only people who have been involved in Bitcoin for a long time and with credible results may do this. Anyone else trying to do this 1. won't get anywhere; 2. is a scammer anyway. Whether they plan to or not they're a scammer, it makes no difference. They'll just have a more or less planned out scam, but it will be a scam.

And before you start with the "I've been involved since 2005" Tortilla stuff: no, you haven't. You're not involved now. To be involved you have to actually do something. People using the word "Bitcoin" in conversation aren't involved in Bitcoin, they're involved in conversing.

With all due respect, this sounds like a rant and is nonsense.

If everyone had the same attitude as this, Bitcoin would never have risen to the place it is now. Simply labeling everything as "won't go anywhere, won't work, waste of time" is a pretty terrible position to have for an innovative, emerging technology.

they did the same to me with my company's High Frequency Algorithm Fund, just thought I'd give you a heads up. I had to drastically scale back the size of the proposed offering but this greatly shifted the cost benefit analysis to the point where this market is simply not mature enough for it.

I made the same observations as you as there is literally no way to not be defensive when you are trying to actually get something done, but it won't help, thats all I'm trying to say

MPOE-PR

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 522

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 04:42:39 AM

With all due respect, this sounds like a rant and is nonsense.

If everyone had the same attitude as this, Bitcoin would never have risen to the place it is now. Simply labeling everything as "won't go anywhere, won't work, waste of time" is a pretty terrible position to have for an innovative, emerging technology.

Bitcoin has risen to where it is now precisely because of me imposing this here correct attitude against the inception to early 2012 prevailing mistaken attitude of noobish idiocy that you seem to favor. BTC wallowed around 10 per as long as the Global Scam Exchange folk were the prevailing crowd. This was not a coincidence.

The mere fact that you have the unmitigated gall to presume you know the history when you don't, and the boneheaded cluelessness to then use completely wrong "arguments" built on this resounding, absolute ignorance when confronted by the very people who wrote that history is one of those "only on the Internet" sorts of things. At the very least don't add hypocrisy to insult by prefacing that nonsense with "due respect". There's no respect there, in spite of plenty of respect being due. Claiming otherwise is not helping you.

Also don't misrepresent what I say. It's not a matter of "everything", it's a matter of noob ventures without a chance in Hell. Those aren't "everything" by any means.

ThickAsThieves

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: rini17 on May 22, 2013, 03:59:44 AM

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 01:48:58 AM

Quote from: Chet on May 22, 2013, 01:29:24 AM

get a wot would be a good start
Seriously no one here is going to trust a newbie with 9-10 posts, the btc scams abound.
But since you are claiming investment knowledge tell me what you think of Satoshi Dice stocks atm?

Satoshi is not on my buy list. The problem with them is that when bitcoins appreciate in value, the bet turnover drops lower. This is because people are in the mindset of USD when part-taking in gambling activities. This means that Satoshi revenue growth will continue to be stunted and hamstrung by a rising bitcoin value. This is the opposite of a company like say, ASICMINER, which see high revenue growth on the back of higher bitcoin values.

Also, the entertainment value of their gambling systems are lacking.

Thanks, this shows nicely you haven't a clue and prefer impressions over data. Satoshidice dividends don't show any correlation to bitcoin value so far, despite btc went up over 5x since IPO.
And ASICMINER revenue depends much more on difficulty and sustained technological lead than bitcoin value - that correlation may be even negative. Because if bitcoin rises, more people restart mining on older hardware or botnets.

Jurov, this is entirely incorrect. I showed proof a couple months ago. Total BTC "in" is very much affected by BTC/USD.
Edit: here is the proof https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1834765

I agree with MPOE-PR here, no one new has any business running a fund. Start smaller, show more proof.

xaviarlol

full member

Activity: 153

Merit: 100

Quote from: 🏰 TradeFortress 🏰 on May 22, 2013, 04:47:51 AM

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 04:42:39 AM

Quote from: MPOE-PR on May 22, 2013, 04:34:49 AM

New people have no business starting "funds". Not now, not ever.

This is a high trust, high competence field. Only people who have been involved in Bitcoin for a long time and with credible results may do this. Anyone else trying to do this 1. won't get anywhere; 2. is a scammer anyway. Whether they plan to or not they're a scammer, it makes no difference. They'll just have a more or less planned out scam, but it will be a scam.

And before you start with the "I've been involved since 2005" Tortilla stuff: no, you haven't. You're not involved now. To be involved you have to actually do something. People using the word "Bitcoin" in conversation aren't involved in Bitcoin, they're involved in conversing.

With all due respect, this sounds like a rant and is nonsense.

If everyone had the same attitude as this, Bitcoin would never have risen to the place it is now. Simply labeling everything as "won't go anywhere, won't work, waste of time" is a pretty terrible position to have for an innovative, emerging technology.

When people don't have the same attitude as this, we had Pirate and NYAN.

Please check your priv msgs

🏰 TradeFortress 🏰

vip

Activity: 1316

Merit: 1043

👻

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 04:42:39 AM

Quote from: MPOE-PR on May 22, 2013, 04:34:49 AM

New people have no business starting "funds". Not now, not ever.

This is a high trust, high competence field. Only people who have been involved in Bitcoin for a long time and with credible results may do this. Anyone else trying to do this 1. won't get anywhere; 2. is a scammer anyway. Whether they plan to or not they're a scammer, it makes no difference. They'll just have a more or less planned out scam, but it will be a scam.

And before you start with the "I've been involved since 2005" Tortilla stuff: no, you haven't. You're not involved now. To be involved you have to actually do something. People using the word "Bitcoin" in conversation aren't involved in Bitcoin, they're involved in conversing.

With all due respect, this sounds like a rant and is nonsense.

If everyone had the same attitude as this, Bitcoin would never have risen to the place it is now. Simply labeling everything as "won't go anywhere, won't work, waste of time" is a pretty terrible position to have for an innovative, emerging technology.

When people don't have the same attitude as this, we had Pirate and NYAN.

xaviarlol

full member

Activity: 153

Merit: 100

Quote from: MPOE-PR on May 22, 2013, 04:34:49 AM

New people have no business starting "funds". Not now, not ever.

This is a high trust, high competence field. Only people who have been involved in Bitcoin for a long time and with credible results may do this. Anyone else trying to do this 1. won't get anywhere; 2. is a scammer anyway. Whether they plan to or not they're a scammer, it makes no difference. They'll just have a more or less planned out scam, but it will be a scam.

And before you start with the "I've been involved since 2005" Tortilla stuff: no, you haven't. You're not involved now. To be involved you have to actually do something. People using the word "Bitcoin" in conversation aren't involved in Bitcoin, they're involved in conversing.

With all due respect, this sounds like a rant and is nonsense.

If everyone had the same attitude as this, Bitcoin would never have risen to the place it is now. Simply labeling everything as "won't go anywhere, won't work, waste of time" is a pretty terrible position to have for an innovative, emerging technology.

MPOE-PR

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 522

New people have no business starting "funds". Not now, not ever.

This is a high trust, high competence field. Only people who have been involved in Bitcoin for a long time and with credible results may do this. Anyone else trying to do this 1. won't get anywhere; 2. is a scammer anyway. Whether they plan to or not they're a scammer, it makes no difference. They'll just have a more or less planned out scam, but it will be a scam.

And before you start with the "I've been involved since 2005" Tortilla stuff: no, you haven't. You're not involved now. To be involved you have to actually do something. People using the word "Bitcoin" in conversation aren't involved in Bitcoin, they're involved in conversing.

xaviarlol

full member

Activity: 153

Merit: 100

Quote from: rini17 on May 22, 2013, 03:59:44 AM

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 01:48:58 AM

Quote from: Chet on May 22, 2013, 01:29:24 AM

get a wot would be a good start
Seriously no one here is going to trust a newbie with 9-10 posts, the btc scams abound.
But since you are claiming investment knowledge tell me what you think of Satoshi Dice stocks atm?

Satoshi is not on my buy list. The problem with them is that when bitcoins appreciate in value, the bet turnover drops lower. This is because people are in the mindset of USD when part-taking in gambling activities. This means that Satoshi revenue growth will continue to be stunted and hamstrung by a rising bitcoin value. This is the opposite of a company like say, ASICMINER, which see high revenue growth on the back of higher bitcoin values.

Also, the entertainment value of their gambling systems are lacking.

Thanks, this shows nicely you haven't a clue and prefer impressions over data. Satoshidice dividends don't show any correlation to bitcoin value so far, despite btc went up over 5x since IPO.
And ASICMINER revenue depends much more on difficulty and sustained technological lead than bitcoin value - that correlation may be even negative. Because if bitcoin rises, more people restart mining on older hardware or botnets.

Did you actually fact-check this before making that post?

The turnover at s.dice was roughly 400-600BTC per day in Dec, Jan, Feb, than plummeted to 32 and 127 in March and April (during the enormous bubble). Look at the corrolations of BTC value during the "profitable" months and the last 2 months.

Not to mention the sheer logic - if BTC is worth $260, its very safe to say that a person gambling in BTC when it was $13 per BTC is not going to continue to bet the same volume of BTC.

xaviarlol

full member

Activity: 153

Merit: 100

Quote from: ronaldlee0917 on May 22, 2013, 04:06:21 AM

Why would you raise the fund when you own $1.8m + 160k?
Why don't you convert some of your assets to btcs and invest all for yourself, you keep 100% of the profit this way. 100btc is a piece of cake for a guy that rich.

I have personal BTC assets, though admittedly not that much. Property isn't very liquid, and I'm relatively cash poor. I am starting this small, and if successful the sums will indeed become a lot larger.

ronaldlee0917

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 100

Why would you raise the fund when you own $1.8m + 160k?
Why don't you convert some of your assets to btcs and invest all for yourself, you keep 100% of the profit this way. 100btc is a piece of cake for a guy that rich.

🏰 TradeFortress 🏰

vip

Activity: 1316

Merit: 1043

👻

Quote from: rini17 on May 22, 2013, 03:59:44 AM

Quote from: xaviarlol on May 22, 2013, 01:48:58 AM

Quote from: Chet on May 22, 2013, 01:29:24 AM

get a wot would be a good start
Seriously no one here is going to trust a newbie with 9-10 posts, the btc scams abound.
But since you are claiming investment knowledge tell me what you think of Satoshi Dice stocks atm?

Satoshi is not on my buy list. The problem with them is that when bitcoins appreciate in value, the bet turnover drops lower. This is because people are in the mindset of USD when part-taking in gambling activities. This means that Satoshi revenue growth will continue to be stunted and hamstrung by a rising bitcoin value. This is the opposite of a company like say, ASICMINER, which see high revenue growth on the back of higher bitcoin values.

Also, the entertainment value of their gambling systems are lacking.

Thanks, this shows nicely you haven't a clue and prefer impressions over data. Satoshidice dividends don't show any correlation to bitcoin value so far, despite btc went up over 5x since IPO.
And ASICMINER revenue depends much more on difficulty and sustained technological lead than bitcoin value - that correlation may be even negative. Because if bitcoin rises, more people restart mining on older hardware or botnets.

The value of SDICE has shown some correlation to bitcoin value.

Topic: [BTC-EQTY] A new Bitcoin Investment Fund - page 2. (Read 6110 times)