Topic: P - page 18. (Read 78397 times)

That's the whole point, you stupid goat - Pirate wants the bond holders to "sue" him, so he can pay them directly, and the money does not go through your cheeky hands.

That makes no sense. Pirate owes the PPT operators the balance on their accounts. He can't decide he doesn't like what they might do with the money. It's none of his business.

He has no choice. He owes the funds to the PPT operators. He can't decide he doesn't want to pay them back and would rather pay someone else instead.

That's outright absurd. That would be like my boss deciding to pay my mortgage instead of paying me my salary, because maybe I won't pay the bank back the money they loaned me.

I agree with Goat. Pirate's obligations are to *his* account holders.

As for the authority to settle, I would think the legal argument could be sustained that PPT holders have the authority to enter into partial settlement agreements with Pirate. However, they cannot release Pirate from liability for the damages a partial payment will do to their bond holders because they are intended third party beneficiaries. This kind of sucks for Pirate. But as I understand it, it's the law. Intended third party beneficiaries can sue for damages of a breach, even if the parties of the contract release the damages. (It's not completely clear if PPT holders are intended third party beneficiaries though, but I think they are.)

http://www.legalflip.com/LegalWordOfTheDay.aspx?id=23

Where things get really confusing though is this -- if all PPT operators settle for a partial payment, does that make Matthew lose his bet? Does a default to an intended third party beneficiary count if the direct party agrees to a partial payment? (Again, in addition to me not having money that I can afford to lose, these kind of vague terms in the bet are the main reason I didn't accept Matthew's bet.)

Wanna see Pirate's MIXING of funds ?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1142230


Separate Operation ? Limited Liabilities ?......NOT A CHANCE.

yep, which keeps bringing me back to the suspicion that Pirate is not filing any sort of legal work either. For all we know he is attempting to rouse everyone to buy more time and move any who were thinking of taking legal action away from doing so..

On the fraud matter, I would think by the very nature of his stated business it would be almost impossible for him to be in such a position without their being fraud involved. If he was turning over BTC for cash in hand on a weekly or more frequent basis even. Then he would have a very, very difficult time proving a loss of more than a few points between any one exchange. If he was slowly moving further and further away from returning to a parity liquid BTC state with each continued exchange period then he would be negligent at best for not alerting his creditors at the first instance of such a situation.

The creditors can easily show that they continued to entrust Pirate with operating funds because he at no time indicated his model was not maintaining the quick(weekly or less) and equally beneficial profits that were stated to be paid to creditors. If he was aware that his credited balance would suffer at any such exchange then he would have been bound and obligated to stop circulating funds at that time and to notify creditors immediatly.

Your lawyers would know better than I will, that's for sure. What I do know, is that something stinks.. And the only way for the funds to not be availavle would be for Pirate to knowingly deviate from the stated means of operation at some point.



Or, it's just a damn ponzi and he is trying to stall as long as possible to make his escape.

P.S. It would be awfully helpful in determining some finer points of where things went wrong if I had access to more of the original deposit addresses from some of the larger lenders... Please PM them to me. Your info will not be shared or used in any manner that could implicate anyone. It is for research and documentation purposes only.

cheers

How easy is it to establish fraud in Texas?  Something can be as sketchy as hell and still not meet the legal standard required for being considered "fraudulent".  Are people going to take the risk of litigating when doing so opens up the IRS and AML can of worms?

the problem is that he is a fucking liar - so nobody should believe him.

Goat claims to have 40k BTC with BTCST. he can safely release upto 40000 bonds of this asset on the market. what is the problem?

Let Walker texas ranger handle it  

..and let's pray that one of those Mt.Gox transfers was used to make a Car and/or Mortgage payment

of course there is a way.
goat and nefario don't even need to help with the process.
someone with glbse account can just act as a proxy - people would be transferring the bonds to him, together with the withdrawal address (with a message that goes off GLBSE) - and pirate would be sending money to that address.

so goat, the only thing you can do now to save yourself from the shit hitting the fan, is ordering your bitch to shut the service down - then indeed there would be no way...
but that would also be like GLBSE committing a suicide.... so, is nefario so much engaged to you - or isn't he? i guess we will find out soon...

Trust me. He will be the PRIDE of PLANO if I don't get paid.

Libel ? NOT A FUCKING CHANCE - ALL TRUTH.

It is Texas so litigation would not be able to take his house (unless he purchased it by illegal means), but everything else is open to forfeiture.  People can declare bankruptcy but that is only for outstanding debt, that does not include fraud.  If that fraud was done over the internet then that is wire fraud.

Do eeet

Didnt Saddam Hussein try that by blowing up the oil fields when the US invaded ?

McKinney Courier-gazette and Plano Star

You should try the Dallas Morning News as well.

dude, you are clueless

there is no way for Goat or any other GLBSE PPT issuer to provide what pirate is asking and certainly there is no way for Pirate to pay directly to GLBSE PPT bond holders.
furthermore GLBSE PPT bond holders are not BTCST Trust sub-accounts

One advantage of having a court handle something like this is the protection of the interests of third parties.  There are plenty of instances, this being a prime example, where there can be a principal-agent conflict of interest between some of the large claimants, who actually have leverage over Pirate, and smaller or more ancillary stakeholders, who do not.  When a judge has to sign off, there is less of a chance of an arbitrary settlement that only protects a few prominent creditors at the expense of others.  

Well, if all else fails, I am still a fan of the 'Scorched Earth' way of doing things.

If I can't have it - neither can he..... and I will move my claims to the IRS, Homeland Security and Customs/Immigration.

I know people in the US think litigation is the answer to everything, but what value is there in filing a lawsuit at this point?  It's just an expensive way to reach the very same settlement you'd reach without involving courts.