Topic: [Open] 6.4 BTC loan, collateral/escrow, monthly interest, ~5 months. - page 4. (Read 4535 times)

Your logic is still not valid. The lender has the escrow hold the shitcoin (NOBL in your case) for his protection. The lender is protected because there is something of value that can be exchanged for bitcoin in the future when you default on the loan. If the collateral were to be exchanged for bitcoin prior to you defaulting then the lender would not have a problem because they are still protected. There is no logical reason why any lender would object to you not selling your shitcoin.

If you are saying that you cannot have the escrow sell the shitcoin if the price has risen because it is not a term listed in the OP then why don't you add it to the OP? No lender is going to not lend to you because you have this clause.

You are creating "risks" for yourself because you want to be able to argue that you should be able to get a larger loan then what your shitcoin will support.

Because I have ever asked the escrow to sell the collateral that's not even in my possession. Because I can ever make such a request when something is bound with a loan.

Because such a term is there in the OP (no, it isn't).

What, now every escrow myself and my lending party agrees on is somehow in my own pocket?

I like how you make up scenarios that doesn't exist with anyone and pretend it's a real story

I also like how you don't understand what a 'risk' is when you have been told what it means numerous times.

Go whine for dread pirate roberts or something you seem to think on the same wavelength.


Post modern college education seems effective at turning out kids who forget their place.

This bitch LOL

Why don't I ask again. What risks are you taking in giving up your NOBL as collateral? You are able to have the shitcoin sold if the price changes to a level that you want to sell it at.

In theory you could claim the escrow could run away with your shitcoin however looking at the trading volume of your coin it would be difficult for them to sell it for bitcoin.

If you cannot come up with a risk that you are taking by giving up your shitcoin temporarily as collateral then you should admit that you were wrong on that point.

And now, we have a standard textbook example of 'mah rights' LOL

Typical entitled bitch who thinks they can define 'fair' 'balanced' 'valid' or best of them all, 'criticism'.


You may realize there are others giving feedbacks here whose words are well accepted over your own - particularly ones that do not presume to define these words based on their own pathetically transparent biases and spoiled attitude.

Did you just recently get out of college or something I did noticed kids these days have this kind of ridiculous mouth and thinks they are being 'critical thinkers'.

No fair as in how much risk is being put onto the lender. If your offer is really "fair" then why have the several lenders who have posted on here not taken you up on your offer?
Why don't you give some additional examples as to how your collateral (or you) would be at risk by giving it to an escrow to hold while the loan is outstanding? You are not allowed to say that you might not be able to sell it if the price changes because I have already proven you wrong here.
I don't see anyone coming in besides you to say that my points are not correct.
If you were to make a self moderated thread and deleted constructive criticism (like what I have said) then it would result in either a scam accusation opened against you or negative trust being sent to you. Just because your thread is self moderated does not mean that someone who has their posts deleted will not do anything about it.
I have a right to freely discuss the topic at issue. There is no reason why I should not refute your invalid points.

'Fair' in your terms is closely related with 'how much money I can make securely at the expense of the other side's slim benefit'. It's amusing to see how little you understand your arguments amount to just a bitchy whining trying to attain a better deal on your own terms, and your terms only

It's also amusing how you think forfeiture of potential profits and risk possibility of lender messing with the collateral market alone doesn't constitute a risk for the borrower who is giving out the collateral. That's only couple of numerous ways in which the collateral offering party is at risk. Maybe you don't understand the risk of borrowing with BTC when the last week or two alone have proven its value can tank very hard, very fast.
Maybe you haven't thought everything through before bitching and moaning in something which you are clearly not qualified to voice your 'opinions' about.

Of course you are way in over your head after leaving a half baked comment because internet forums allow any half wit bitch to voice his 'opinions' as if it is a 'valid criticism'. You also do not understand this does not shield you from being called out on your mouth when someone cares about their business enough to respond.

Of course, the fact that I made an open thread that isn't self-moderated makes you think you can get mouthy everywhere LOL

I see feedbacks, and then I see ones who just mouths off when they are clearly out of their place. and in over your head. Like you

If you get the message, then scram.

Just because I am a newer member does not mean that I am new to bitcoin nor that I have never dealt with anyone in real life.

Are you familiar how forums work? If someone is offering a trade that is not fair to all parties or all potential parties then someone will speak up.

Your offer is clearly not fair to a potential lender and you have shown that you are unwilling to to negotiate on key aspects of the loan that would protect the lender. Instead you make up arguments that are invalid as to how you are "at risk" when you are really not. 

I am very interested to know that jr.member with 'secondstrade' talking about 190% return and has an anonymous face can mouth off about what is a 'scam' or not, especially about a project where a developer has a public profile and is involved professionally with real money LOL

If you are trying to bitch, then get yourself a public profile and state your case.

If you find terms of a deal you are not even a part of to be disadvantageous to you, then feel free to keep your mouth where it belongs


Maybe you just wander around and stick your nose in a place where it doesn't belong, just to get mouthy on an internet forums. You have provided plenty of proof to that regard, and of course, no history of fair dealing on your part in anyway in the past either

They have been repaid because your noble (NOBL) aka scam coin has not crashed in value. Not because you have been honest.

You clearly are not able to handle any criticism.

You like to use buzz words to make your argument sound valid however it is not

Getting attitude out lol this bitch

I'd suggest you want a little attitude change done to you as well?

Don't worry, all 'suckers' have happily been paid back in full, as is the case with any agreement I make. I'd suggest you watch that mouth of yours if you can't back it up with something straight forward and decent on your own


Best you scram and bother another thread with your attitude if you have that much time to waste getting mouthy with little to back it up with.

I also think this quote from one of your older threads would be appropriate to repost here.


You seriously need an attitude adjustment

The reason it has taken so long every time to get your loan filled it is because you had to wait for a sucker to come across your request. The terms that you are offering are very one sided and the lender is not protected. It is insane to think that your reputation is worth 6.4 BTC so if the price of NOBL crashes then you will have no incentive to repay the loan. Any lender who is willing to lend the exact amount of money that the collateral is worth and is willing to not have the ability to sell the shitcoin if it falls below a certain level then they are asking to lose money.

I think the below quote really describes what will happen best:

I suppose you have nothing but semantics to turn to now that it's obvious you are just asking for better terms, not about discussing whether the loan is legitimate or not. You have poorly started an argument just because you found the terms to be not entirely in your profit

Every single loan offer I made in the past was as simple as they were stated, and never were there any conditions other than 'liquidation upon lack of payment by maturity date'. If a client asked for additional collateral due to market depression, such were discussed with the escrow on a case by case basis. I never used an escrow for trading in my place - and I find it amusing you think 'well this nets you more benefits' when you can't even comprehend if someone might just never have any intention of selling his collateral himself if he held it.

Not to mention, you are also questioning and presuming to know what others would do or prefer in this deal. The terms are greater then those I completed successfully before


Everything you are questioning is a matter of preference, none of which I practiced before. The terms are there, and it's not your place to question a validity of a loan off and keep dragging yourself across the floor on my ankle because you carelessly offered some 'why you no give me best deal and screw your own terms' kind of 'opinion'.

Lastly, are you really trying to mouth off about the last sentence there about 'free money'? Try not to be too transparent about just dragging this out for the sake of bitching eh?

You obviously can't take anything you try to dish out - it's obvious you have nothing to question about the terms, only that you don't like it being not completely to your advantage. If so, you are welcome to suggest as much in other loan threads.

Your complaints are noted by all who are reading this thread

Interest is paid to lenders for two reasons. One - to compensate them for their inability to use their funds during the time the loan is outstanding and two - to compensate them for the risk they are taking that they will lose money on the loan. The fact that no one has taken you up on your offer means that the interest rate you are offering is not high enough when considering the other terms of your loan.
All the escrow is going to do is follow instructions given to them that are agreed upon by both parties of a deal. You would obviously want to sell if the price rises enough, and there is no reason for the lender to object to the sale of your shitcoin as they would be better protected so there is no reason why the escrow would not be able to sell. I think you are playing dumb on this because it counters your argument that you are taking on risk as part of this deal.
Monthly average? You are joking right? No lender in their right mind would agree to allow you to wait an entire month to demand that you deposit additional collateral if the value falls below the amount of the loan.
It sounds like you are resorting to personal attacks in order to defend your position.
More personal attacks. In my experience personal attacks are usually received when the person receiving them are right.
Aren't you contradicting yourself here? You are saying there is no free money, yet you are claiming that the interest rate you are offering amounts to free money to the lender. As I mentioned above your interest rate is clearly not large enough to account for the risk a lender would be taking in making this loan

Anyone who says 30% interest is 'small' when the maturity term is less than 5 months certainly has no business discussing this. Obviously you are being just greedy to the point of ridicule now.

You also have no idea what using an escrow means in this situation. 'Direct them to sell'? 'Good for the lender'? Escrow does not deal in collaterals to buy and sell for the lender or the borrower. Collateral is released to the lender in the event I do not follow through with my side of the deal, and I likewise must follow through and repay the entire loan amount plus interest before I receive back my collateral. Otherwise, the collateral is held and locked down for the duration of the deal. That's the WHOLE POINT of the escrow. Most change or 'request' we would agree on is if I were to be required to add a bit extra on to the existing collateral in case the monthly avg. falls well below the borrowed value.

Do you not understand the basics of these deals, or are you just making up scenarios when you don't understand how a collateral works?

Your post sounds delusional and ignorant at best. If you want to mess around the forums, there are plenty of threads on the first page that are obvious for anyone to see. Unfortunately for you, there is no free money to be had in this offer for either side.

Aside from a rather large interest rate offer to the lender that is.

Yes I did read the OP. You are paying a small amount of interest which would essentially serve as a option premium to allow you to continue be able to repurchase the altcoin at a later date.
There is no reason why a lender would not agree to let the escrow agent sell the altcoin if it's value has increased, that would be just dumb. If the escrow agent were to sell the altcoin for bitcoin then the lender would be more secure and you would have locked in your profits. Everyone wins.
I don't see how the escrow selling the altcoin for bitcoin would not involve them being held accountable.
You would tell the escrow to sell the altcoin on an exchange at a certain price. It would be the same as if you were to input the order yourself however it would take longer to get the order to the exchange

Did you read the OP at all? Did you miss the bit about interest rates that are paid out every 30 days and amount to 30% of the entire principle by the end of the maturity period? I am already agreeing to pay more then what I have in terms of the value of the collateral if you missed that basic term of a loan offering.

Escrowed deal. As in, I have no control over collateral aside from terms with agree on when the time period begin and escrow receives the collaterals.

Escrow would be someone we both agree on, and all communications will be cc'd with respective parties. Who the hell would choose an escrow if he cannot be held accountable?

Interest is continuous paid out every 30 days - considering the quickness and volatility of the crypto markets, your argument can cut both ways.

Just what the hell are you talking about 'nothing to stop me from selling'? I don't think you know what you are arguing about. That's the whole point of an escrow - a trusted 3rd party member we both agree on and has control over the funds during the duration of the deal period under terms we both agree on.

So you are giving someone 6.4 BTC worth of some altcoin in exchange for 6.4 BTC with a promise to repay at a later date?

If the price of the collateral does not rise by the amount of interest due then you will simply default on the loan and run away with the lender's money.

With any kind of loan that is secured by collateral, the lender will ask for something that is worth more then the amount being lent both to give the borrower an incentive to repay and to properly secure their investment.

There would be nothing to stop you from selling the collateral if the price increases. You could direct the escrow agent to place a sell order and would continue to hold the proceeds until the loan is repaid.

'Selling' means you turn over your ownership completely in return for payment. I don't know how you think this is a valid comparison.

Collaterals are dealt according to the potential and benefits of the interested parties. The issue is the matter of volatility in crypto currency markets of course. In actual financial dealings 'in real life', such deals are common enough with both parties considering future and present market conditions. It is an investment as well - and each side negotiates details, plans, etc.

What of the risk that the offering party takes of missing a chance to actually sell that collateral at a higher value at later date while it is held in escrow for the loan? Why do you believe it is a legitimate argument to focus solely on the profits of others - without considering that offering party is also forfeiting potential profits as well in a deal such as this?

In this case your question boils down essentially to 'why do you deserve any kind of leeway in terms of risk', 'Why you no give me virtually free money' while maximizing lender potential profit and completely shutting out any space for the borrower. Consider how entitled such arguments sound.


This is a deal, not a charity cause. Each side weighs their benefits and risks and reaches a compromise. Let's be serious about this.

Why would anyone consider giving a loan using collateral equal to the exact amount of the loan? Isn't that essentially you selling the collateral while having the option to buy it back at a higher price in the future?