Three words : the long con.
Mark my words.
Mark my words.
Marked
Topic: Why I used to trust Patrick Harnett - page 10. (Read 32654 times)
Marked
Three words : the long con.
Mark my words.
Mark my words.
If there's one way to unravel any semblance of professionalism you've built up for your business over many months, it's to have your spouse suddenly appear and start engaging in personal slanging matches with your detractors.
She's entitled to her opinions.
If there's one way to unravel any semblance of professionalism you've built up for your business over many months, it's to have your spouse suddenly appear and start engaging in personal slanging matches with your detractors.
Patrick is an honest guy providing a valuable service. The fact that his wife wants to defend him is understandable.
If there's one way to unravel any semblance of professionalism you've built up for your business over many months, it's to have your spouse suddenly appear and start engaging in personal slanging matches with your detractors.
Several of us have actually done this in reality (well not the risk-free part, we do take on a lot of risk). This needs to be repeated over and over until you realize that it is actually happening.
Some of us have become very good at picking who to lend to and who not to lend to. Just because you think it is too risky for you and that you would never try to do it does not mean you have to try to make everyone else stop doing it.
I have no objection to you doing it with your own money. And every explanation I've heard for why other people's money is needed fails the giggle test.Some of us have become very good at picking who to lend to and who not to lend to. Just because you think it is too risky for you and that you would never try to do it does not mean you have to try to make everyone else stop doing it.
+1 / well said.
It's the constant need for new money after claims of making large profits. Tell tale sign of scam.
Tell tale sign of passive-aggressive loser/bully Micon...
It is impossible to get risk-free 1.5% weekly interest, I don't care how good you are at "playing the market" or "choosing who to lend to."
This needs to be repeated over and over until people start to get it. Some of us have become very good at picking who to lend to and who not to lend to. Just because you think it is too risky for you and that you would never try to do it does not mean you have to try to make everyone else stop doing it.
Stop picking on Burt, who is smarter (and I bet richer - legitimately/via legal means) than any of his detractors in this thread. Everything he has said is true. Burt is a top bloke! Stop picking on my starfish too. There are actually honest people in business you know. You trolls should find a helpful outlet for your misguided energies. Charitable work perhaps?
Several of us have actually done this in reality (well not the risk-free part, we do take on a lot of risk). This needs to be repeated over and over until you realize that it is actually happening.
Some of us have become very good at picking who to lend to and who not to lend to. Just because you think it is too risky for you and that you would never try to do it does not mean you have to try to make everyone else stop doing it.
I have no objection to you doing it with your own money. And every explanation I've heard for why other people's money is needed fails the giggle test.Some of us have become very good at picking who to lend to and who not to lend to. Just because you think it is too risky for you and that you would never try to do it does not mean you have to try to make everyone else stop doing it.
+1 / well said.
It's the constant need for new money after claims of making large profits. Tell tale sign of scam.
What if the extreme risk is bitcoin itself, but the debit is denominated in bitcoin?
There is risk in the volatility of bitcoin's value and the possibility that bitcoins will become all but worthless overnight and never recover. We can disagree over just how much risk there is, but there's no question it's there. This puts a bit of a drag on everything we do with bitcoins. Fortunately, there's so much friction in the traditional financial system that this doesn't actually hurt bitcoins very much. But we do need better ways to hedge these risks. There are definitely ways today that don't require paying huge fees to get no leverage. But they could be a lot better and that would help a lot.Denominating debts in bitcoin makes the debtor short bitcoins and the borrower long bitcoins. Debts could be a sensible way to speculate on bitcoins if the market wasn't so messed up by fraud. Ironically, it would probably actually help bitcoins if the borrowing market were heavily regulated. (Of course, it's unimaginable that you could get beneficial regulation in the borrowing market without also having horribly harmful regulation in every other aspect. So I'm not suggesting that's a workable solution.)
If the fund operator is making decent money and not exposing their investors to extreme risk, the first thing they'd do with the money they're making, if they're not an idiot, is pay down all their ultra-high-interest debt.
What if the extreme risk is bitcoin itself, but the debit is denominated in bitcoin?
Why do we keep using that number in a thread about a guy offering 67.65% APR? That interest rate is still ridiculous so there's no need to overstate it.
Yeah. 1%/week is around 67% APR. 1.5%/week is around 117% APR.Quote
I think it's pretty easy to generate plenty of funds to cover this rate. Considering bitcoin fell ~30% in the last few weeks I also don't think it's unreasonable to offer a little over twice that per year for protection. The thing I totally agree with you about is the "guarantee" It's more likely the issuer thinks it's low risk and willing to risk reputation on that fact. As the holdings get higher, reputation means less and less.
The main problem is that investors have no way to assess risk. Funds compete based on the reward, which creates a huge incentive to increase risk.Fundamentally, it's this simple: If the fund operator is not making decent money, there's no good explanation for why they'd go to all this trouble and risk other than that it's a scam. If the fund operator is making decent money and not exposing their investors to extreme risk, the first thing they'd do with the money they're making, if they're not an idiot, is pay down all their ultra-high-interest debt.
I know Patrick is legitimate, because one time, there was this little yellow dude that owed him money, so he decided to "Reclaim" his funds with his Kickboxing talents. Sadly, the little yellow guy was psychic, and destroyed Patrick. But I made sure I placed a strategic ice cube, so when that little yellow guy came a knockin, he "fell down on the job"
Long story short, Patrick got his money back, and paid his investors. While he "spruced up my paint" in gratitude.
+1
Long story short, Patrick got his money back, and paid his investors. While he "spruced up my paint" in gratitude.
+1
What's idiotic is paying 100% APR to do it with zero leverage.
Why do we keep using that number in a thread about a guy offering 67.65% APR? That interest rate is still ridiculous so there's no need to overstate it. I think it's pretty easy to generate plenty of funds to cover this rate. Considering bitcoin fell ~30% in the last few weeks I also don't think it's unreasonable to offer a little over twice that per year for protection. The thing I totally agree with you about is the "guarantee" It's more likely the issuer thinks it's low risk and willing to risk reputation on that fact. As the holdings get higher, reputation means less and less.
One was pointed out to you and you just write it off as "publicity stunt".
Yes, it was quite clear in that case that they didn't actually need investment money. They were basically just taking it to see if it worked. And the high interest rate loans were cut off very quickly.Quote
TBH I think that's more laughable (paying high interest for publicity) than to short or hedge risk against volatile bitcoin exchange rate.
The amount of money involved was very small. There's nothing wrong with shorting or hedging against volatile exchange rates. What's idiotic is paying 100% APR to do it with zero leverage. I have no objection to you doing it with your own money. And every explanation I've heard for why other people's money is needed fails the giggle test.
One was pointed out to you and you just write it off as "publicity stunt". TBH I think that's more laughable (paying high interest for publicity) than to short or hedge risk against volatile bitcoin exchange rate.
Several of us have actually done this in reality (well not the risk-free part, we do take on a lot of risk). This needs to be repeated over and over until you realize that it is actually happening.
Some of us have become very good at picking who to lend to and who not to lend to. Just because you think it is too risky for you and that you would never try to do it does not mean you have to try to make everyone else stop doing it.
I have no objection to you doing it with your own money. And every explanation I've heard for why other people's money is needed fails the giggle test. Some of us have become very good at picking who to lend to and who not to lend to. Just because you think it is too risky for you and that you would never try to do it does not mean you have to try to make everyone else stop doing it.
How much of your net worth would you feel comfortable keeping in bitcoin? What you are suggesting could be devastating if for whatever reason bitcoin crashed and a person had most or all of their profits invested in their bitcoin business. But if you borrow and all your debits are in bitcoin you don't care the exchange rate. It's a way to short.
So you're saying that someone with the investment genius to consistently land low-risk, ultra-high-interest Bitcoin loans would also pay an APR over 100% just to short Bitcoins?! Seriously?!There's not any that pay out 100%+ APR that I would say are trustworthy, so no. I'm not saying that.
edit:
but this guy seemed to have pulled it off for a short period of time
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ciucius-guaranteed-weekly-term-deposits-at-15-closed-availability-87780
How much of your net worth would you feel comfortable keeping in bitcoin? What you are suggesting could be devastating if for whatever reason bitcoin crashed and a person had most or all of their profits invested in their bitcoin business. But if you borrow and all your debits are in bitcoin you don't care the exchange rate. It's a way to short.
So you're saying that someone with the investment genius to consistently land low-risk, ultra-high-interest Bitcoin loans would also pay an APR over 100% just to short Bitcoins?! Seriously?! It is impossible to get risk-free 1.5% weekly interest, I don't care how good you are at "playing the market" or "choosing who to lend to."
This needs to be repeated over and over until people start to get it.
Let's discuss a specific example. Let's say I have 10,000 BTC and lend out half of it at an average monthly interest rate of 10%, profit per month is 500 BTC.
There is more demand for loans so I have a choice, I can lend out more of my own BTC and eliminate my operating capital buffer or I can take on deposits.
Let's say I am able to get people to deposit 5,000 BTC in two month CDs at an average monthly interest rate of 6%. I lend it out at the average monthly interest rate of 10%, additional profit per month is 500-300=200 BTC.
So, I have increased my profit by 200 per month and I still have my 5,000 BTC operating capital.
With this example in mind please describe your concern.
Why wouldn't you return 400 BTC of deposits after 2 months? There is more demand for loans so I have a choice, I can lend out more of my own BTC and eliminate my operating capital buffer or I can take on deposits.
Let's say I am able to get people to deposit 5,000 BTC in two month CDs at an average monthly interest rate of 6%. I lend it out at the average monthly interest rate of 10%, additional profit per month is 500-300=200 BTC.
So, I have increased my profit by 200 per month and I still have my 5,000 BTC operating capital.
With this example in mind please describe your concern.
Jump to: