Topic: Starfish BCB - Loans and Deposits - page 18. (Read 60523 times)
Patrick, can you please expose what you previously thought to be pirate's business model? If not, why not?
The only rating that matters is a backed rating. Patrick's personal credit ratings (not the deposit-taker ones) were / are the best example of this. He was / is willing to put up his own money to back a borrower. That's a service worth using.
Note the past tense. Until some of the other aspects of this gets sorted that is a low priority.
So you're proposing something that is/was already happening, using ratings that people deride as being gameable (otc ratings), with the only noticeable different being a well organized website?
Exactly. If the ratings system sucks, someone else can come up with a better one (use eBay ratings or something). If someone wants to borrow but doesn't provide reputable rating sources, they can pay higher interest rates. And if someone doesn't do their research and invests in only one risky person and loses all their money, oh well. It won't affect everyone else.
The well organized website can provide the service of sorting loan applicants based on their risk, assign them an interest rate if it's not done bidding style, make it easy to split your investment across a whole bunch of borrowers within your chosen categories, process and distribute payment receipts, and do collections of defaulted loans if needed.
This forum doesn't come close to any of that.
As an example, I have 1000 coins with HashKing that I don't worry about,
I think you are giving him too much credit. His other actions strongly suggest that he knows fully well the likely consequences. His posting tactics (including those of his wife -- sorry, it's true) seem to go a bit too far for him to be just an "honest fool."
current time frame seems to be 10 October 2015
As an example, I have 1000 coins with HashKing that I don't worry about,
Ouch.
And a lot happens in a week. Yes, it sucks, and it was due to be repaid on 10 October, but that is not the current time frame.
As an example, I have 1000 coins with HashKing that I don't worry about,
Ouch.
So you're proposing something that is/was already happening, using ratings that people deride as being gameable (otc ratings), with the only noticeable different being a well organized website?
Exactly. If the ratings system sucks, someone else can come up with a better one (use eBay ratings or something). If someone wants to borrow but doesn't provide reputable rating sources, they can pay higher interest rates. And if someone doesn't do their research and invests in only one risky person and loses all their money, oh well. It won't affect everyone else.
The well organized website can provide the service of sorting loan applicants based on their risk, assign them an interest rate if it's not done bidding style, make it easy to split your investment across a whole bunch of borrowers within your chosen categories, process and distribute payment receipts, and do collections of defaulted loans if needed.
This forum doesn't come close to any of that.
blah blah blah two pages of stuff
Update for today:
I sent out some payments last night. Several of 100 and a couple smaller and a couple larger - not a strict pro-rating based on withdrawal requests, but I considered it important to get them out to people.
I have several additional withdrawal requests received overnight, so they will get added to the queue. They will be paid as funds are returned. For clarity, the interest rate change is Friday and will be 0.25%/week because it makes the payments a little easier. If you would like to move onto weekly interest payments, please pm.
I do suspect some people were using loans from me to invest in Pirate. Others were investing in mining equipment and that is possibly as illiquid, but it is similar to the beginning of the year when people were borrowing for gambling.
and, I am sorry that I am not able to execute the withdrawals in a timely fashion and that so many people are caught up in this. Irrespective of the other events, I have responsibility to those that have placed trust with me, and despite my best efforts I have failed to meet the standards required.
Update for today:
I sent out some payments last night. Several of 100 and a couple smaller and a couple larger - not a strict pro-rating based on withdrawal requests, but I considered it important to get them out to people.
I have several additional withdrawal requests received overnight, so they will get added to the queue. They will be paid as funds are returned. For clarity, the interest rate change is Friday and will be 0.25%/week because it makes the payments a little easier. If you would like to move onto weekly interest payments, please pm.
I do suspect some people were using loans from me to invest in Pirate. Others were investing in mining equipment and that is possibly as illiquid, but it is similar to the beginning of the year when people were borrowing for gambling.
and, I am sorry that I am not able to execute the withdrawals in a timely fashion and that so many people are caught up in this. Irrespective of the other events, I have responsibility to those that have placed trust with me, and despite my best efforts I have failed to meet the standards required.
As an example, I have 1000 coins with HashKing that I don't worry about,
Exactly. A few posts up I read Patrick has 1000 BTC at hashking, and "isnt worried about it"..
Link? I searched this thread and found no mention of Patrick having any exposure to HK.
Sorry, different thread:
As an example, I have 1000 coins with HashKing that I don't worry about,
Just as an update, I also received a pretty large (partial) repayment. I 100% believe that Patrick intends to, and will, pay what is owed. Maybe it's time to start the bets? Somebody call Matthew 
Same as it works on Lendingclub: people who wish to borrow post an explanation if why they want money, how they plan to repay, and any ratings they have (OTC or something easier to use would work well in place of a credit score). If they are untrustworthy, their interest rate would be way high. And if their loan doesn't get filled, then they have no business borrowing. On the other hand, if they have good ratings and are good at paying back, their interest would be low.
From the investor's side of view, they will lend out to a lot of borrowers, spreading their risk as much as possible. In the end, if they lend at 2% per week to a bunch of people, but only half actually pay back, then we all know that the actual market rate out there is closer to 1%. And if someone wants to lend to some people who are high risk and are will into pay 12% a week, well, then it's those specific lender's problem, not everyone else's.
What is missing is really just a well organized website to facilitate this.
So you're proposing something that is/was already happening, using ratings that people deride as being gameable (otc ratings), with the only noticeable different being a well organized website?
Exactly. A few posts up I read Patrick has 1000 BTC at hashking, and "isnt worried about it"..
Link? I searched this thread and found no mention of Patrick having any exposure to HK.
I wish we didn't even have these "banks." We don't need them. Bitcoins are already safely stored via private keys, so no need for safe vaults, and if you want to invest or earn money from others investing, just make a service like Lendingclub.com and take a percentage from that. If you are going to dump all the risks of your "bank" onto your users, at least let them chose the level of risk they are comfortable with. A bitcoin-based lendingclub will allow people to borrow none if needed, will allow people to invest if they want to, and will be A HECK of a lot more accurate at determining true rates of returns on loans. What we have now (the 2%+ per week) is wish full thinking, hiding behind insolvent banks and stressed out, shady bank operators.
How do you really know what the people on lendingclub are going to do with your money? How would you translate that over to bitcoin?
Then i misunderstood. I wasn't aware that patrick lent out to other operators, and i don't see why he would unless it was to invest in PPT. I thought we were talking about operators lending out to individuals.
Individuals can invest in PPT too.
I wish we didn't even have these "banks." We don't need them. Bitcoins are already safely stored via private keys, so no need for safe vaults, and if you want to invest or earn money from others investing, just make a service like Lendingclub.com and take a percentage from that. If you are going to dump all the risks of your "bank" onto your users, at least let them chose the level of risk they are comfortable with. A bitcoin-based lendingclub will allow people to borrow none if needed, will allow people to invest if they want to, and will be A HECK of a lot more accurate at determining true rates of returns on loans. What we have now (the 2%+ per week) is wish full thinking, hiding behind insolvent banks and stressed out, shady bank operators.
Then i misunderstood. I wasn't aware that patrick lent out to other operators, and i don't see why he would unless it was to invest in PPT. I thought we were talking about operators lending out to individuals.
There may also be an equity crisis that is masquerading as a bank run.
Things may be much worse than Patrick thinks they are, even if he is 100% completely honest. (Though naive, it's not like lots of people didn't tell him this would happen.)
Things may be much worse than Patrick thinks they are, even if he is 100% completely honest. (Though naive, it's not like lots of people didn't tell him this would happen.)
Exactly. A few posts up I read Patrick has 1000 BTC at hashking, and "isnt worried about it".. Hashking is a broke scammer who invested all his money (and money that wasnt his) with pirate. Who knows how much more such toxic debt Patrick holds? He may not know himself, but my guess is a lot of it went directly or indirectly to pirate through a myriad of schemes, bonds and "insurances", and that only just began to unravel.
At least in patricks situation, unless he wasn't being honest.
Jump to: