Disclaimer: I hold no financial interest in Pirate@40's endeavors, nor do I condone investing in shady 7% a week schemes.
I have recently been approached about my current position of Bitcoin Savings & Trust. While in the past I have remained fairly negative about BS&T, accusing the fantastical rewards as impossible and the entire business as a scam, with recent proceedings I have been forced to change my position. Although I refuse to accept that investors in BS&T have made a smart business decision, I am now forced to agree that the dice have turned their way and investors in BS&T will be receiving their full investments, plus interest, back.
Below is my rationale, point-by-point for structure.
I have recently been approached about my current position of Bitcoin Savings & Trust. While in the past I have remained fairly negative about BS&T, accusing the fantastical rewards as impossible and the entire business as a scam, with recent proceedings I have been forced to change my position. Although I refuse to accept that investors in BS&T have made a smart business decision, I am now forced to agree that the dice have turned their way and investors in BS&T will be receiving their full investments, plus interest, back.
Below is my rationale, point-by-point for structure.
- Trusted operator: Pirate@40, although I have previously discounted this fact, is well-trusted in the Bitcoin community. This is both a white and red flag, admittedly, as investors may not have participated if a non-trusted member formed BS&T
- Known operator: In similar vein, Pirate@40 is supposedly well-known among investors, having disclosed a factual name and picture. Admittedly, well-known Ponzi schemes have done the same; Bernie Madoff and Charles Ponzi not excepting. However, when the choice exists to be anonymous, Ponzi operators are likely to take it.
- Continued communication: In an environment like Bitcoin's now, and building upon experience from Madoff and Ponzi, a true Ponzi operator would likely choose to fly to an exotic country and cease communication. Pirate@40 has done neither.
- Payback: While all Ponzi operators have historically attempted payback when the operation is collapsing, the situation involving Pirate@40 is distinct in certain ways. The crucial difference here: Pirate@40 has closed the scheme himself. With the option of simply taking all the money and leaving, paying back a few investors is not constructive to his goals.
- Financial incentive: At this point, with many PPT bonds in free-fall, Pirate@40 himself has the option of purchasing a large amount and reducing his debt. This gives him a financial incentive to repay his lenders. Additionally, Pirate@40 runs a reportedly successful business in GPUMAX, profits from which would disappear if Pirate@40 chooses to vanish.
I think it's more a Madoff than a Ponzi.
Failure to pay back doesn't need to be planned from the beginning to be very real. There is a fine line between risky gambling disguised as safe investment and actual machinated fraud. However profitable his "shady" operations may be, I'm willing to believe he won't be able to pay up. That's what the bet is about. There are many signs pointing to it.
- failed attempt to tank the market during last weekend.
- stupidly passive-aggressive behaviour. Denial.
- he paid a couple small accounts with coins from his mining operation.
- he won't come clean at this point, with neither proof of solvency nor information on this supposed assets (there are plausible explanations for this particular point, though).
I believe he thought he could pull it off. Thus, all the contradictions you mention against the "planned it from the beginning" theories. But numbers don't seem to add up and I'm in the "he won't be able to make it" camp.
I also think he's still trying and is under massive pressure. But worst comes to worst, will he pay up as much as he can and be a fraud + broke? or be just a fraud and run with a large share of the bounty?
