DeaDTerra and I have vastly different definitions of default, as can be observed at multiple instances in this thread. I consider imsaguy, hashking and INAU to be in default as they have failed to repay their obligations within a reasonable timeframe, and have missed deadlines agreed upon during the repayment process.
Okay!
I am starting to feel like a bad guy over here, which I do not want!
Hence me and INAU will pay the dividend out of our pockets for now until we can do either of:
A, There's evidence or it's obvious that pirate will default or that he will not pay out within a reasonable time limit (one-two weeks)
B, Pirate pays us back.
Then we will buy back the bonds.
Is everyone happy with this deal?
//DeaDTerra
Also, what happened to this?
Option A was satisfied.
Hence we stopped paying dividends.
Okay, Well I have talked to nick and he is not letting INAU sell off or withdraw his deposit with him until he has paid back GIPPT/if INAU runs the debt will be re written to the GIPPT share holders.
Good answer, but I would like a little further clarification just because I don't see the answer-
Someday (in non-default based future), Pirate will drop his service and return all deposits. What happens at that point? I assume since you got all the deposits returned to you, you will turn around and buy back all shares @1 btc. Correct?
How big does someone have to be to ask for a direct withdrawal? Is there any price point of GIPPT where you would consider initiating a small pirate withdrawal specifically to buy back shares on GLBSE and cancel out the shares? If you don't do this then I think you are earning interest yourself on value that is no longer present in the market you created... it's an interesting position to be in.
Apologize if these are dumb questions, I like your fund.
Thank you-
I think the bonds are worth hell of a lot more then they are currently, which is kind of sad to see
You guys don't like the asset?
The bonds are worth more than 1.2 BTC, by my math. The market is simply saturated. 1 BTC is a joke for them, because then there's 0 risk for the investor of a pirate default. Pirate defaults, I don't lose
anything. And that is why I pulled out of YARR and won't be buying Goat's bond.
It is not zero risk. If pirate defaults, you have to hope that ineedausername and imsaguy, who are both heavily invested in pirate, do not default on the insurance.
Remember this:
Logic question.
Supposedly, someone offers to lock up 5k in escrow and then insure 5k pirate coins with it, paying 2.5% interest to customers on them. If the same person were to just place the 5k into BS&T and take the whole interest himself, he would never have more risk, but always more profit.
I don't see why anyone would make such an offer.
This is indeed something you must believe otherwise only 5% is risk free.
But it can't get much safer except 100% in a offline wallet.
I have not 1, not 2 but 3 people that need to default for the bonds to reduce in value and in that case you still get my 5%
//DeaDTerra
As said before If all these three people were to default then I would still pay my 5% which I have done.
Now I am still talking to Nick and INAU even though they have defaulted by your definition, they have not run away or abandoned the payback process.
//DeaDTerra
