Topic: [BTC-TC] BTC Growth: Capital Growth via Hedge Fund-Style Investing - page 10. (Read 251447 times)
September 10, 2013, 08:18:29 AM
Report will be released on "Monday 16 September at 1 pm UK time". It's Tuesday 10th September today.
September 10, 2013, 08:15:41 AM
Has 1pm UK time come and gone? Do I have the right day?
September 10, 2013, 06:02:30 AM
Have fun throwing your money away, people.
Also, go read the 1262 posts I've made here before you criticize me. Apparently you're not supposed to criticize anyone in this thread until you've read everything they've ever written.
Also, go read the 1262 posts I've made here before you criticize me. Apparently you're not supposed to criticize anyone in this thread until you've read everything they've ever written.
The way he handled your criticism helped sell me.
September 10, 2013, 04:16:34 AM
Have fun throwing your money away, people.
Also, go read the 1262 posts I've made here before you criticize me. Apparently you're not supposed to criticize anyone in this thread until you've read everything they've ever written.
Also, go read the 1262 posts I've made here before you criticize me. Apparently you're not supposed to criticize anyone in this thread until you've read everything they've ever written.
September 08, 2013, 06:50:34 AM
Can we have some indication regarding your inclination to current investment options? How do you feel about the current mining options? How do you feel about alt currencies and similar (payment systems, etc.)? What are some current attractive investments? Do you have some basic understanding of how the Bitcoin protocol even works?
Seems bizarre to issue more than 1m USD worth of shares, without having any history in Bitcoin or giving any indication about how you intend to invest. I may have missed a post where you explain this, but I couldn't find any of this kind of information in the listing documents.
Seems bizarre to issue more than 1m USD worth of shares, without having any history in Bitcoin or giving any indication about how you intend to invest. I may have missed a post where you explain this, but I couldn't find any of this kind of information in the listing documents.
He answered the majority of those questions in the prospectus and in this thread already. He didn't issue more than $1m USD worth of shares... it's around $200,000 worth. Not really sure where you got that number from. Do your own due diligence no one is going to do it for you.
Was around 15 000 000 /300 000 USD a few days ago with price around 150 USD/coin and probably around 10 000 000/200 000 USD worth at the time the first batch was sold if BTC was at 100 USD then.
"Outstanding 20001 / 1000000 Issued"
A high number of issued shares is more to give the asset issuer more/unlimited room to sell shares in the future even thou he/she may not ever intend to actually issue the full amount of shares, if he would have set a limit of 40 000 or 100 000 issued and the fund would go good and he wanted to expand in the future that would have meant trouble, he would then have had to start a BTC-GROWTH2 or something then...
September 07, 2013, 07:55:03 PM
Congrats on reaching 2000 BTC, Greg. That's fairly serious money. Good luck.
September 07, 2013, 01:24:19 PM
Quote
There is around $240,000 worth of shares outstanding, yes, but the btct page includes some intention to issue 1000000 shares, unless he inputted that number with no purpose.
Regardless of the number, where did he "answer the majority of those questions in the prospectus and in this thread already"?
I've read through the thread and prospectus and do not see any information of the type I specified. Would be happy if you could point it out
Regardless of the number, where did he "answer the majority of those questions in the prospectus and in this thread already"?
I've read through the thread and prospectus and do not see any information of the type I specified. Would be happy if you could point it out
Are you sure you've read through it? Cause he specifies that he was doing the IPO in tranches of 20,000. He felt that the first 20,000 shares was sufficient and he's leaving it at that. The 1,000,000 shares is just placed there, it doesn't mean anything.
He isn't going to tell you "attractive" investments, he is keeping his investment strategy private he isn't going to give you "hot" tips for your personal investment.
He isn't messing with mining (you used the term "options", I'm not sure if you mean actual options trading or just choices of mining stocks) either way, he isn't investing in mining companies.
He also discussed investing in non-BTC investments but would focus the majority of his investments in BTC, since that's the point of the fund.
September 07, 2013, 12:34:25 PM
Can we have some indication regarding your inclination to current investment options? How do you feel about the current mining options? How do you feel about alt currencies and similar (payment systems, etc.)? What are some current attractive investments? Do you have some basic understanding of how the Bitcoin protocol even works?
Seems bizarre to issue more than 1m USD worth of shares, without having any history in Bitcoin or giving any indication about how you intend to invest. I may have missed a post where you explain this, but I couldn't find any of this kind of information in the listing documents.
Seems bizarre to issue more than 1m USD worth of shares, without having any history in Bitcoin or giving any indication about how you intend to invest. I may have missed a post where you explain this, but I couldn't find any of this kind of information in the listing documents.
He answered the majority of those questions in the prospectus and in this thread already. He didn't issue more than $1m USD worth of shares... it's around $200,000 worth. Not really sure where you got that number from. Do your own due diligence no one is going to do it for you.
There is around $240,000 worth of shares outstanding, yes, but the btct page includes some intention to issue 1000000 shares, unless he inputted that number with no purpose.
Regardless of the number, where did he "answer the majority of those questions in the prospectus and in this thread already"?
I've read through the thread and prospectus and do not see any information of the type I specified. Would be happy if you could point it out
September 07, 2013, 12:00:39 PM
Can we have some indication regarding your inclination to current investment options? How do you feel about the current mining options? How do you feel about alt currencies and similar (payment systems, etc.)? What are some current attractive investments? Do you have some basic understanding of how the Bitcoin protocol even works?
Seems bizarre to issue more than 1m USD worth of shares, without having any history in Bitcoin or giving any indication about how you intend to invest. I may have missed a post where you explain this, but I couldn't find any of this kind of information in the listing documents.
Seems bizarre to issue more than 1m USD worth of shares, without having any history in Bitcoin or giving any indication about how you intend to invest. I may have missed a post where you explain this, but I couldn't find any of this kind of information in the listing documents.
He answered the majority of those questions in the prospectus and in this thread already. He didn't issue more than $1m USD worth of shares... it's around $200,000 worth. Not really sure where you got that number from. Do your own due diligence no one is going to do it for you.
September 07, 2013, 11:56:45 AM
Can we have some indication regarding your inclination to current investment options? How do you feel about the current mining options? How do you feel about alt currencies and similar (payment systems, etc.)? What are some current attractive investments? Do you have some basic understanding of how the Bitcoin protocol even works?
Seems bizarre to issue more than 1m USD worth of shares, without having any history in Bitcoin or giving any indication about how you intend to invest. I may have missed a post where you explain this, but I couldn't find any of this kind of information in the listing documents.
Seems bizarre to issue more than 1m USD worth of shares, without having any history in Bitcoin or giving any indication about how you intend to invest. I may have missed a post where you explain this, but I couldn't find any of this kind of information in the listing documents.
September 07, 2013, 10:55:57 AM
The first monthly report for BTC Growth will be published in summary form on BTC-TC and in both summary and detailed form on the fund's discussion thread on Monday 16 September at 1 pm UK time. For reference, this is 8 am in New York and 8 pm in Beijing.
For more information on the fund itself, please see the listing documents:
https://btct.co/security/BTC-GROWTH
For more information on the fund itself, please see the listing documents:
https://btct.co/security/BTC-GROWTH
September 07, 2013, 08:01:59 AM
Why don't you call him Ytt? If he can swing your staunch attitude with a phone call, maybe you'd be more at ease?
Please don't. I have no interest in trying to swing anyone's attitude about anything, and I have no intention of spending time on phone-based hand-holding to help anyone feel more at ease.
As I have indicated previously, the detailed documentation which I have already provided reflects a tremendous amount of my personal time and effort, and it is incumbent upon potential participants to read and evaluate what I have already spent that time and effort providing. If potential participants find that this material is in any way insufficient, then they should not phone me to ask for still more personal attention, they should simply make the decision not to participate.
September 06, 2013, 10:37:52 PM
Why don't you call him Ytt? If he can swing your staunch attitude with a phone call, maybe you'd be more at ease?
September 05, 2013, 12:23:23 AM
Lol where are you coming up with this stuff? All I said is that if you're gonna call someone a scammer at least have some real proof. Your spidey sense ain't gonna cut it mate, especially when you are throwing around misinformation.
This is just the beginning of the first wave of many DIY fund managers that may or may not succeed; proof will be in the pudding as you say. I'm sure there are many out there who can do plenty with this kind of funding and less 'real world' experience.
Is he a scammer? IMO the jury is still out, you certainly proved nothing though.
This is just the beginning of the first wave of many DIY fund managers that may or may not succeed; proof will be in the pudding as you say. I'm sure there are many out there who can do plenty with this kind of funding and less 'real world' experience.
Is he a scammer? IMO the jury is still out, you certainly proved nothing though.
I'm not saying he is certainly a scammer. I'm saying he comes across as suspicious to me. I don't need any standard of evidence to share my opinion, and if you want to ignore it you are free to do so.
You can even click ignore if my posts bother you. As I said, it's not my problem if you lose money.
September 05, 2013, 12:19:19 AM
Then comes this gem from him, which you ignored:
Quote
Anyone who takes the time to read and understand anything I have written on the topic -- including picking up my book if they feel the need for "real math" -- will immediately comprehend that my 1990s-era work on quantum decoherence was specifically aimed at debunking quantum theories of mind.
So there goes your number 2 argument.
That's nice. Feel free to read it and tell us all why it's so groundbreaking.
Really? This will be my last post on the subject because I'm over this, but because you just did to me what you have been doing to him all along I think this deserves some love.
Again, no one said groundbreaking. I was just pointing out that you were COMPLETELY wrong about what the book was even about to begin with. Like you thought the exact opposite was true. I was just pointing it out.
Quote
Okay then. If you want to invest with a "Worthy of managing money until proven guilty of fraud" attitude more power too you.
Lol where are you coming up with this stuff? All I said is that if you're gonna call someone a scammer at least have some real proof. Your spidey sense ain't gonna cut it mate, especially when you are throwing around misinformation.
This is just the beginning of the first wave of many DIY fund managers that may or may not succeed; proof will be in the pudding as you say. I'm sure there are many out there who can do plenty with this kind of funding and less 'real world' experience.
Is he a scammer? IMO the jury is still out, you certainly proved nothing though.
September 04, 2013, 11:47:57 PM
Then comes this gem from him, which you ignored:
Quote
Anyone who takes the time to read and understand anything I have written on the topic -- including picking up my book if they feel the need for "real math" -- will immediately comprehend that my 1990s-era work on quantum decoherence was specifically aimed at debunking quantum theories of mind.
So there goes your number 2 argument.
That's nice. Feel free to read it and tell us all why it's so groundbreaking.
The next Pirateat40. Anyone who invests in this is going to get destroyed.
I can't prove that you're wrong but I would at least ask you to ask yourself why someone who has had an impressive career in academia, the professions and industry would 'do a' Pirateat40. Greg would be giving up a lot to do that.
Now if you look at the Dr.'s (yes, I'm gonna say that just because I can, with no valence attached to the signifier) original post nowhere does he say that he had a "successful" or otherwise impressive career. He just states it as such:
Okay then. If you want to invest with a "Worthy of managing money until proven guilty of fraud" attitude more power too you. I'm not a prosecutor trying to get a conviction in a court of law, I'm simply sharing my opinion that I think this guy strikes me as fishy. You don't have to agree with it or like it, nor do I need to care how you feel about it.
September 04, 2013, 11:26:14 PM
Wow. Honestly, I have no skin in the game nor do I really care, but I must say your losing credibility by the second. You clearly avoid addressing the rational counter points he makes and instead choose to attack some ethereal insecurity that you only see because you've ignored the substance of his post.
I'm also not really sure what the substantive points were supposed to be. I'm not going to spend a bunch of time reading and critiquing his papers about "quantum mind theory", (even if they are attempts to disprove it, they would still be pretty pointless to read). I didn't see any particular insight in his other papers that would indicate any kind of exceptional trading skill.some new-agey gobbledygook about 'quantum minds' written in the 90s that isn't even formatted like a proper academic article.
Then comes this gem from him, which you ignored:
The next Pirateat40. Anyone who invests in this is going to get destroyed.
I can't prove that you're wrong but I would at least ask you to ask yourself why someone who has had an impressive career in academia, the professions and industry would 'do a' Pirateat40. Greg would be giving up a lot to do that.
Now if you look at the Dr.'s (yes, I'm gonna say that just because I can, with no valence attached to the signifier) original post nowhere does he say that he had a "successful" or otherwise impressive career. He just states it as such:
I didn't see any particular insight in his other papers that would indicate any kind of exceptional trading skill..
Who said his academic career was his strongest asset for trading? Read his work experience again, see that bit about derivitive strategies and portfolio management? See where I'm going with this?
Quote
If that upsets people, that's too bad I guess. *shrug*
To be clear: what upset people is not the accusation as such, but the fact that you were pulling shit out of your ass and then when it got real you ignored the substance and just kept throwing baseless personal insults. Get real mate, this is real life real consequences your words have weight. Think before you do.disclaimer: i have not invested, nor do i know if this is a scam or not. i just know a bad accusation when i see one. they deserve polarization just like a true scammer does. it's like girl who cried rape but wasn't really raped. it leaves a stain.
September 04, 2013, 03:48:16 PM
Wow. Honestly, I have no skin in the game nor do I really care, but I must say your losing credibility by the second. You clearly avoid addressing the rational counter points he makes and instead choose to attack some ethereal insecurity that you only see because you've ignored the substance of his post.
*shrug* I don't have any skin in the game either. If people really want to invest with this guy, that's obviously their choice. It's obviously not going to be my problem if they do.
I'm also not really sure what the substantive points were supposed to be. I'm not going to spend a bunch of time reading and critiquing his papers about "quantum mind theory", (even if they are attempts to disprove it, they would still be pretty pointless to read). I didn't see any particular insight in his other papers that would indicate any kind of exceptional trading skill.
If that upsets people, that's too bad I guess. *shrug*
Obviously we will see who was right in the long run.
September 04, 2013, 02:31:43 PM
...Plus the whole sales pitch of "I'm super smart so give me your money and don't ask questions, I'll totally make money for you" I'm not seeing enough evidence of super-smartness.
Now it seems to me you're just being offsensive. To the best of my recollection, the only person who has sought to comment on my intelligence at all, in any way, is you -- and you have now done so repeatedly. You have either disingenuously or grossly ignorantly misrepresented my writing on quantum decoherence, you have strung together a few words and phrases about puts and calls without delivering much in the way of actual meaning (and certainly without offering any meaningful engagement with anything I have written), and you have steadfastly refused to offer anything at all of substance or even to do more than "skim" the relevant material I have provided -- apparently preferring instead just to twirl around and spray insults in all directions, in the hope that something will stick.
For my part, I have much better things to do with my time, and it leaves me feeling dirty and grimy even engaging with another human being at this level of conversation.
You know, you actually seem quite insecure about your own intelligence. Clinging to the "Doctor" title so much you put it in your forum handle. I know people who have PhDs in mathematics and computer science, and they never refer to themselves as "Dr." - it reads as more then a little desperate.
The fact that you've had an apparent adverse emotional reaction to someone pointing out your less then stellar academic record further indicates your insecurity about your actual academic abilities and record.
I don't want people to get scammed and lose all their money. I also don't want people to lose all their money by investing with charlatans. I don't think it's "trolling" to pose questions about a fund manager asking for other people's money, especially when they're not even willing to tell people what they're going to do with it. To me, you appear to be presenting yourself as someone who's more successful then they actually are. That presentation seems fundamentally dishonest to me.
If people want to trust you, that's obviously they're choice. But there's nothing wrong with pointing out problems and concerns people should have.
If that bothers you, well, that's just too bad.
Ouch.
I was planning to wait for the first report prior to investing, but this guy talks mostly perty good! ^^^
I was planning to wait for the first report prior to investing, but this guy talks mostly perty good! ^^^
Well, have fun with that - I guess.
Wow. Honestly, I have no skin in the game nor do I really care, but I must say your losing credibility by the second. You clearly avoid addressing the rational counter points he makes and instead choose to attack some ethereal insecurity that you only see because you've ignored the substance of his post.
If you want to call him a scammer go do a background check, do some digging on whois see if he is a fraud or has a history of some nonsense. If this is an elaborate scam this guy is clearly a pro and would have done something like this before. Or maybe, actually read his work and not make incomplete judgments about his work. You're not even good at calling him a scammer.
FWIW, the insecurity you cling so desperately is not even insecurity; it's frustration. It goes without saying that people should question the mans intellect, but you are doing so like a child. If you came with reasonable points, quotes from his book, links to direct content of his papers and pointed out reasonable things we wouldn't be having this conversation. Instead, you throw rocks in the air and hope it lands in the right place. Just poor investigative anti-scammer tactics that are doing more harm then good. Worst part is, now you're trying to make it look like you know what you're doing. And you don't.
September 04, 2013, 01:22:04 PM
Quote
You know, you actually seem quite insecure about your own intelligence. Clinging to the "Doctor" title so much you put it in your forum handle. I know people who have PhDs in mathematics and computer science, and they never refer to themselves as "Dr." - it reads as more then a little desperate.
The fact that you've had an apparent adverse emotional reaction to someone pointing out your less then stellar academic record further indicates your insecurity about your actual academic abilities and record.
I don't want people to get scammed and lose all their money. I also don't want people to lose all their money by investing with charlatans. I don't think it's "trolling" to pose questions about a fund manager asking for other people's money, especially when they're not even willing to tell people what they're going to do with it. To me, you appear to be presenting yourself as someone who's more successful then they actually are. That presentation seems fundamentally dishonest to me.
If people want to trust you, that's obviously they're choice. But there's nothing wrong with pointing out problems and concerns people should have.
If that bothers you, well, that's just too bad.
The fact that you've had an apparent adverse emotional reaction to someone pointing out your less then stellar academic record further indicates your insecurity about your actual academic abilities and record.
I don't want people to get scammed and lose all their money. I also don't want people to lose all their money by investing with charlatans. I don't think it's "trolling" to pose questions about a fund manager asking for other people's money, especially when they're not even willing to tell people what they're going to do with it. To me, you appear to be presenting yourself as someone who's more successful then they actually are. That presentation seems fundamentally dishonest to me.
If people want to trust you, that's obviously they're choice. But there's nothing wrong with pointing out problems and concerns people should have.
If that bothers you, well, that's just too bad.
Ok give it a rest man, everyone understands your position. you think it seems scammy, you think he isn't smart, and you think he should identify himself but he shouldn't share the fact that he has a doctorate. Thank you for being a concerned bitcoin community member, but please just give it a rest now.
Jump to: