Topic: Closing - page 6. (Read 20643 times)

I admit I have a hard time even pretending this is not a ponzi, but even if this explanation was true it has to seem a *little* suspicious that the payouts jumps between either 0.5% or 1% and stays on exactly those numbers? He was putting a lot more effort into it in the beginning.

I think it is a valid question.

If I understand correctly, since the recent drop of the BTC/USD price last weekend, there is a surplus in the dividend buffer and so the payments are at the upper limit, 1%?

I notice you've just been paying 1% og .5% pretty much every day lately, instead of some seemingly random number. Did you get bored of pretending that the dividend is based on real income?

We're impolite investors here so allow me, thank you for the 1%.

Generally speaking, a contract has terms that state that the favored party's failure to enforce a provision does not amount to a waiver of tha provision.  Also, generally speaking, contracts are enforced using lawyers and judges (unless there is a binding arbitration clause, in which case they are enforced that way).  The GLBSE, and presumably this contract, fall outside of "generally speaking."  With nefario being the judge, jury, and executioner when it comes to GLBSE, it is not unreasonable to avoid breaching a contract in either direction.  Moreover, Obsi has stated the funds will be placed in a buffer, which implies that he is not keeping more or less money as per your example.

Generally speaking, doing something that is more favorable toward the other party of a contract (i.e. paying out extra dividends to bondholders) and less favorable to yourself (i.e. Obsi keeps less money) is totally fine and would not be considered a breach of contract.

Pirate already took one ball and Obsi will take the other.

screw you guys I'm in balls deep, god owes me this after pirate.

lol

To keep the ponzi going longer of course.

How can you possibly think this random stranger is earning 1% a day (~3600% APR), especially after the whole pirate fiasco...

Obsi, next time you wanna be all cute and what not, just ask. 

Thanks for removing this form your signature. BTW, I never told you I did not say that. But you know that.
All happy now? I am  

So it is more poking fun at EskimoBob, rather than advertising for your bond? I guess if one was familiar with EskimoBob's conversations it makes sense, sort of. It is still a dumb thing to have as your signature.

I have to say I agree with EskimoBob, it is taken out of context. He was not praising you, he was dissing you. To use that as an advertisement is a bit shady to say the least. If nobody is saying anything nice about you, just don't quote anybody.

I see you quote me from IRC in your signature to sell your investment "opportunity". Problem is, you have ripped it out of context. 

At the moment, Obi's signature looks like this:




OBSI.1MHS was a loser form day one. There was actually a small chance for a capital gain but Obsi fucked it up for everyone by dumping a load of shares on the market.
As of today, OBSI.1MHS is close to worthless and there is a tiny buy order at 0.065. This turd was issued at 0.25 BTC. Then he dumped more of this garbage on the market at 0.16! Yes 36% loss to everyone. For free!    
Read and weep: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.987433

How did I get out of this OBSI.1MHS turd? Obsi stared to buy back this garbage at 0.25 and I sold those few I had right away. Why? Because I did not wanted to get involved with something as mismanaged as this turd (some still call it "bond", probably  just for fun).


This buyback was followed by a dump of shares at 0.1 BTC! WTF is all I can say... LOL

Obsi, remove my name and the quote from your signature at once.  It's misleading and out of context.

Those examples are perfect, they allow him to respond and we can all learn.  Prior to them you hadn't really given him anything to respond to that you couldn't have gleaned from previous posts already.  Thank you.

1. I appreciate you taking the time to lay out examples of the issuers business operations. However, your examples do not include many important factors such as:

a. lag-time regarding employing newly raised capital.
b. lag-time regarding conversion and transfer back for dividends.
c. any form of estimated default rate (which has to be somewhere in the double digits on such high risk, high interest loans)
d. your equation assumes 100% of capital is employed 100% of the time.
e. as the total amount of working capital increases, it will become more difficult for the issuer to employ it all. With 10,000,000 shares issued, the current potential marketcap is about $1,439,200. Of course, we are a long ways from that, but it is important to note. As total working capital increases, it is a risk for shareholders.

I know you probably left most of these points out intentionally to keep is as basic as possible for people to understand. It is good to highlight these potential risks though. I am just trying to help provide clarity; just as your are.

2. As stated before, I would just like to see a greater dialogue between the issuer, investors, and potential investors. Bitcoinbear has already responded that today's dialogue has helped him understand the issuance better. I think helping create a dialogue for the sake of investor awareness is a very good thing.

Maybe instead of saying "dumbed-down" you could say "here, let me simplify it for clarity". Thanks for going through that, it was nicely simple and made the situation more easy to understand.

If I may make a guess, it sounds like Obsi is investing in some sort of short-term loan system. These usually have very high rates and fees, but for people who have bad credit they are sometimes the only option, so it is not strange to have such a high rate of return. I presume he does not want to disclose who is receiving the money because they have a limit of incoming capital needed, and if we all go invest with them Obsi would have less oportunity to invest. The morality/ethics of such institutions can be debated (I don't think Senbonzakura is going to invest here anytime soon) but it is not completely unrealistic from the bits and pieces Obsi has let out.

Please correct me if I am wrong (maybe you can say if I am on the right track?)

Alright, for starters, don't take my hostility personally, I am just getting tired of reading the same, tired, already answered questions (and large amounts of trolling) over and over (in all of the "too good to be true" threads I am watching).  That having been said, I have two questions for you:

1) Rather than "dumb down," what would you like me to call it when I do the math for you?  See the third week later in example one and the second week later in example 2, with the USD interest rate consistent, if I didn't skip a week and use the higher exchange rate, the earnings one week later in example 2 would be much higher than the 1% max I am showing is the minimum OBSI gets.  This is, of course, assuming I didn't royally screw up the math, but it is easy to follow, and the math in either case has already been explained without an example.

2) What additional discussion do you seriously expect to see?  Everything I said has already been said or at least implied in this thread.  There isn't much more that can be discussed.  That having been said, since you don't seem to have gathered this (also implied earlier in this thread):  I don't think there are multiple borrowers at this point.  I think there is one borrower who is making high risk USD loans.  When that borrower's operation is fully funded, on more money will be borrowed.  This might be when you assume there will be additional borrowers, but is it not possible that the original borrower may be expanding to new locations?  That is what seems to be implied earlier in this thread.

Note also that everything I refer to being said or implied earlier in this thread comes from OBSI.

There is no need to promote such hostility within this thread. To state you will 'dumb things down' is uncalled for. I am merely a cautious observer looking for clarity. As OBSI is completely unverified and the business model of this issuance is very vague, surely he does not mind answering questions. Again, there is no need for hostility or 'charged' statements.

When the exchange rate is high the issuer does in fact get more working capital by selling shares and converting from BTC to USD (or whatever fiat currency he is operating within.) However, as the  issuer must convert back to BTC for dividends, the exchange rate does not affect shareholders so long as the exchange rate remains the same. Of course, BTC is volatile in nature, and we can expect the exchange rate to continue to fluctuate.

With a higher exchange rate and more working capital per share sold, he becomes able to make a wider variety of loans, which increases the chance of a default, but the default would be a smaller portion of the overall debt portfolio. This, could be viewed as a positive. However, as total working capital increases, it becomes more difficult to properly employ it to receive an adequate ROE. As there is a total of 10,000,000 total shares issued, with weekly to bi-weekly sales, a situation could arise in which the issuer is unable to employ a large amount of capital. This would be felt by all shareholders as their dividends began to shrink.

I am merely helping further highlight particular risks, inquire information from the issuer, and create a dialogue with the issuer, investors, and potential investors. Clearly this issuance is high risk, and for that reason I believe people should be talking more and not less. Clearly my posts have created some dialogue. I hope in the future, it will continue and that it will not contain any statements about individuals feeling the need to "dumb down" concepts for others, or any other nonsense such as that.