Pages:
Author

Topic: [BTC-TC] BTC Growth: Capital Growth via Hedge Fund-Style Investing - page 4. (Read 251637 times)

full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100

Disagree with me if you like. But this is how i see it. no fancy words. no bullshit. facts.


Facts require concrete evidence. You have offered nothing but a hypothesis.
No facts. All bullshit.

I said he would lose your money, and he did. Maybe you should re-evaluate how you apportion the burden of proof.  

His investment decisions didnt lose money, the entire bitcoin security market tanked at the news of btct's closure.
Show me one fund or security that didnt go down in value, then I might listen to you.
sr. member
Activity: 330
Merit: 255
The second full 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 Tuesday 1 October at 1 pm UK time. This early date will bring our reporting in line with calendar months.

Discussions are continuing about moving the fund to another exchange -- nothing substantial to report yet.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10

Disagree with me if you like. But this is how i see it. no fancy words. no bullshit. facts.


Facts require concrete evidence. You have offered nothing but a hypothesis.
No facts. All bullshit.

I said he would lose your money, and he did. Maybe you should re-evaluate how you apportion the burden of proof. 

He lost the money cause of some unforeseen and extreme circumstances. You weren't saying "BTCT is going to close down, and it's going to cause the market to crash, don't buy in!" You said "I don't trust this guy, you shouldn't buy in." He had improved the NAV according to the first report and was very transparent with everything, and is STILL transparent with everything. So don't even try to act like you knew what you were talking about, you were spouting bullshit and still are.
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
He's also not hiding his real identity or his company. If your going to accuse something of being a scam it helps to have a story that makes sense. You have no proof of your accusations or even a well thought out theory.

Neither did Pirateat40
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100

Disagree with me if you like. But this is how i see it. no fancy words. no bullshit. facts.


Facts require concrete evidence. You have offered nothing but a hypothesis.
No facts. All bullshit.

I said he would lose your money, and he did. Maybe you should re-evaluate how you apportion the burden of proof. 
member
Activity: 110
Merit: 10
He's also not hiding his real identity or his company. If your going to accuse something of being a scam it helps to have a story that makes sense. You have no proof of your accusations or even a well thought out theory.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100

Disagree with me if you like. But this is how i see it. no fancy words. no bullshit. facts.


Facts require concrete evidence. You have offered nothing but a hypothesis.
No facts. All bullshit.

oooooooo fanboy...you going to get burnt.....but youre right Wink
it's because the way he's set it up is there is no evidence....it's one of those BEAUTIFUL scams.

Im not a fanboy, and in fact I hold no shares. Your baseless accusations got on my nerves.
sr. member
Activity: 347
Merit: 250
On the surface due to the lack of transparency and gregs stance on btct's closure, this is confirmed a scam.

Hypothetically, say you:
1) take 2000BTC from the BTC community.
2) Let it sit in a wallet for a month.
3) Announce that 25% has been lost due to trading.
4) Give back 1500BTC to the community and keep 500BTC for yourself.
5) go pay off your mortgage

Anyone can do this. This greg guy just happens to be good at writing which made people think he's a smart and trustworthy guy. He is smart!
Trustworthy? how the fuck should we know?!?!?! have you met the guy? NO

If he does not move the fund to another exchange or reveal exactly where the BTC went. this is confirmed a SCAM.
(even if he does reveal where it went. can we trust him? NO)

Disagree with me if you like. But this is how i see it. no fancy words. no bullshit. facts.


Theres no way $65,000 would pay off most mortgages. Thats a fact for most people.
member
Activity: 60
Merit: 10

Disagree with me if you like. But this is how i see it. no fancy words. no bullshit. facts.


Facts require concrete evidence. You have offered nothing but a hypothesis.
No facts. All bullshit.

oooooooo fanboy...you going to get burnt.....but youre right Wink
it's because the way he's set it up is there is no evidence....it's one of those BEAUTIFUL scams.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100

Disagree with me if you like. But this is how i see it. no fancy words. no bullshit. facts.


Facts require concrete evidence. You have offered nothing but a hypothesis.
No facts. All bullshit.
member
Activity: 60
Merit: 10
On the surface due to the lack of transparency and gregs stance on btct's closure, this is confirmed a scam.

Hypothetically, say you:
1) take 2000BTC from the BTC community.
2) Let it sit in a wallet for a month.
3) Announce that 25% has been lost due to trading.
4) Give back 1500BTC to the community and keep 500BTC for yourself.
5) go pay off your mortgage

Anyone can do this. This greg guy just happens to be good at writing which made people think he's a smart and trustworthy guy. He is smart!
Trustworthy? how the fuck should we know?!?!?! have you met the guy? NO

If he does not move the fund to another exchange or reveal exactly where the BTC went. this is confirmed a SCAM.
(even if he does reveal where it went. can we trust him? NO)

Disagree with me if you like. But this is how i see it. no fancy words. no bullshit. facts.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
As always, I am prioritising my efforts in a way which I believe best serves the interests of all participants in the fund.
I will emphatically not be discriminating on the basis of position size.
This sounds like a prophylactic unrolling, with your own intrests in mind.
sr. member
Activity: 330
Merit: 255
At least give us an estimate of when the next update will come?

As already indicated, the original intention was to publish the next report early, on 1 October, so as to bring our reporting in line with calendar months.

Hopefully all participants will understand, however, that Burnside's countdown to 7 October being only 12 days away introduces a high level of uncertainty. As always, I am prioritising my efforts in a way which I believe best serves the interests of all participants in the fund.
sr. member
Activity: 330
Merit: 255
Can you give an update on how things stand now, things seem to be settling down some, and I would assume you picked up some shares at firesale prices, so what is the fund NAV looking like now?

Barring further major market upheaval, I'd like to steer clear of daily, weekly, or on demand interim reports; there's quite a bit of other work to be done in terms of keeping things stable, taking advantage of the general carnage where we can, and evaluating the options for going forward.

Stay tuned...
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 500
It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye
Can you give an update on how things stand now, things seem to be settling down some, and I would assume you picked up some shares at firesale prices, so what is the fund NAV looking like now?
sr. member
Activity: 330
Merit: 255
This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange...

...bring an argument if you have one...unsubstantiated allusions to problems of another party is both unproductive and reprehensible...unnamed "functionality" issues?

If you sincerely want to go a few rounds with me over this, then feel free to start by finding a few colleagues who have spent some time investing out there in the real world -- as distinct from nothing more than during Bitcoin's brief infancy -- and ask them what real investors think of the "functionality" of MPEx, ask them what they think of the bot's option pricing, and most of all be sure to ask them what they think MP's FAQ answer about options hedging says about his credibility (unless he's long since deleted that out of sheer embarrassment).

Then, if those discussions with your more experienced colleagues haven't led you to question deeply whether MP's monthly PR budget of 12 BTC is even being well spent or is simply being wasted, feel free to PM me. If you have any actual substance to discuss -- rather than merely hurling personal insults -- then when I have the time, I'll consider replying. And we'll both be able to find out whether anything good can come of your insistence that you really want to have this discussion with me.

Otherwise, we're done here.
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
Merely having an exchange is quite a few light years away from actually offering a credible plan forward.

This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange, but if MP has plans for a land-grab in this space -- say, by introducing significant improvements in functionality and value proposition to coincide with the sudden availability of a large number of issuers currently evaluating the merits of potential new homes, then I'm all ears. PM me, and I'd be very happy to hear what he's offering.

A land-grab would imply that there's potentially valuable land to be had, and given attitudes like yours that presume it's the exchange, and not you, that needs to have a plan, there's no apparent reason for any such actions.

As to your vague dismissals: bring an argument if you have one, or else you can acknowledge that yes, indeed, you fucked up. Making unsubstantiated allusions to problems of another party is both unproductive and reprehensible. You picked a play pretend exchange built so shakily it couldn't stand for a year and have the gall to suggest that the actual exchange, which has stood on its own as the only correctly built, actually secure, lasting example has unnamed "functionality" issues?

That'd be part of the ignorance I pointed out to you, along with presuming that me taking the time to point this out has anything to do with "arguing" or "advertising".

Lol, obviously if no one uses it, it's not going to have problems. What's the point of listing on an exchange that charges $3750 to sign up and is used by no one?  (That's 30 bitcoins just to trade, not to issue securities) There clearly is none. There is zero reason for anyone to bother doing it.

Btw, just out of curiosity are you still pretending to be a woman, who works Mircea Popescu, rather then Mircea Popescu himself?  

I think that information would be helpful for people trying to evaluate your sanity, and thus business credibility.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 522
MPOE-PR, surely you understand that longevity and functionality are not mutually inclusive?  It is entirely possible for a platform with extensive functionality to exist only briefly, and perhaps even easier for a platform with no functionality to exist indefinitely.

As far as I can see, MPEX has never had a public fund traded on its platform before. I cannot understand why a fund which already HAS been exchange-traded in the past would need to be the party bearing a proposal here.

You are confused. Something that occurred on scammy BTCT, just like something that occurred on scammy GLBSE, may not use this putative "experience" as some sort of authority. It is anti-experience and anti-authority. These funds you speak of are significantly less respectable, less serious and less worthy of consideration for being run by people clueless enough to have listed there, exactly in the way some guy who spent a summer as a witch doctor in the Amazon is less likely to be considered for a serious hospital position than someone who did not.

The general point about longevity and functionality in the abstract is plainly irrelevant. MPEx still has most of the BTC financial trade to date. More than GLBSE over its lifetime, more than BTCT over its lifetime, more than half of the sum of it all over its lifetime.

This isn't going away just because random noobs can't afford a little BTC or don't know how to use computers effectually.
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
♫ the AM bear who cares ♫
Merely having an exchange is quite a few light years away from actually offering a credible plan forward.

This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange, but if MP has plans for a land-grab in this space -- say, by introducing significant improvements in functionality and value proposition to coincide with the sudden availability of a large number of issuers currently evaluating the merits of potential new homes, then I'm all ears. PM me, and I'd be very happy to hear what he's offering.

A land-grab would imply that there's potentially valuable land to be had, and given attitudes like yours that presume it's the exchange, and not you, that needs to have a plan, there's no apparent reason for any such actions.

As to your vague dismissals: bring an argument if you have one, or else you can acknowledge that yes, indeed, you fucked up. Making unsubstantiated allusions to problems of another party is both unproductive and reprehensible. You picked a play pretend exchange built so shakily it couldn't stand for a year and have the gall to suggest that the actual exchange, which has stood on its own as the only correctly built, actually secure, lasting example has unnamed "functionality" issues?

That'd be part of the ignorance I pointed out to you, along with presuming that me taking the time to point this out has anything to do with "arguing" or "advertising".

MPOE-PR, surely you understand that longevity and functionality are not mutually inclusive?  It is entirely possible for a platform with extensive functionality to exist only briefly, and perhaps even easier for a platform with no functionality to exist indefinitely.

As far as I can see, MPEX has never had a public fund traded on its platform before. I cannot understand why a fund which already HAS been exchange-traded in the past would need to be the party bearing a proposal here.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 522
Merely having an exchange is quite a few light years away from actually offering a credible plan forward.

This is not the time or place to debate or advertise your own exchange, but if MP has plans for a land-grab in this space -- say, by introducing significant improvements in functionality and value proposition to coincide with the sudden availability of a large number of issuers currently evaluating the merits of potential new homes, then I'm all ears. PM me, and I'd be very happy to hear what he's offering.

A land-grab would imply that there's potentially valuable land to be had, and given attitudes like yours that presume it's the exchange, and not you, that needs to have a plan, there's no apparent reason for any such actions.

As to your vague dismissals: bring an argument if you have one, or else you can acknowledge that yes, indeed, you fucked up. Making unsubstantiated allusions to problems of another party is both unproductive and reprehensible. You picked a play pretend exchange built so shakily it couldn't stand for a year and have the gall to suggest that the actual exchange, which has stood on its own as the only correctly built, actually secure, lasting example has unnamed "functionality" issues?

That'd be part of the ignorance I pointed out to you, along with presuming that me taking the time to point this out has anything to do with "arguing" or "advertising".
Pages:
Jump to: