Bitcoin mentioned around Reddit: James Altucher referring to himself in the third person in every paid content ad definitely makes bitcoin look super legit and not like a ponzi scheme. /r/EnoughLibertarianSpam
A brief about how the current bailouts are illegally violating the constitution.
https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/mc200420/ BITCOIN This is an explanation why the Feds recent actions are illegal. Its from John Hussman's new post which also talks about the spread of SARS-COV-2 and stock market valuations and internals. Both the Federal Reserve Act and the recent CARES Act places very clear restrictions on the types of assets that the Federal Reserve can purchase, and the conditions that must be satisfied in order to purchase them. Congress went so far as to include a section in CARES to emphasize these requirements “for the avoidance of doubt.” Put simply, Fed purchases under the Federal Reserve Act are restricted to assets that are explicitly guaranteed as to interest and principal by the U.S. government, or that has a claim to sufficient collateral to avoid losses to the public. The securities that the Federal Reserve is legally allowed to purchase are: a) Section 14 open market purchases of securities that are fully guaranteed as to interest and principal by the U.S. government or a foreign government; b) Section 14 purchases of “commercial bills of exchange” arising out of commercial transactions. What are those? See the definition in Section 13(2), which defines commercial bills of exchange exactly as they’re commonly understood: arising out of commercial transactions, secured by agricultural products, goods, or merchandise, with a maturity of less than 90 days, and specifically prohibited from “covering merely investments, or issued or drawn for the purpose of carrying or trading stocks, bonds, or other investment securities, except bonds and notes of the government of the United States.” c) Section 13(2) discounting (i.e. prepayment) of commercial, agricultural, and industrial paper (again, bills of exchange); d) Section 13(3) emergency lending to individuals, partnerships, and corporations, restricted to discounting notes, drafts and bills of exchange, and contingent on collateral (“security”). Section 13(3) also requires that these activities must be for “the purpose of providing liquidity to the financial system, and not to aid a failing financial company, and that the security for emergency loans is sufficient to protect taxpayers from losses.” e) Section 13(4) and 13(6) lending for payment of sight drafts for agricultural transactions, and bankers acceptances which typically arise out of merchandise transactions. That’s it. The menu is very specific: either government securities, or those that are backed by a pledge of collateral “sufficient to protect taxpayers from losses.” This principle is consistent with the U.S. Constitution: only Congress has fiscal authority. The Federal Reserve does not. If this is not taken seriously, the Fed could purchase whatever security it wished, at whatever valuation it might choose, and the American public would be on the hook for any losses. On April 9, the Federal Reserve announced the creation of the “Secondary Market Corporate Credit Facility” (SMCCF), that would leverage $75 billion of CARES funding from the U.S. Treasury to buy as much as $750 billion of corporate debt and ETFs. The initial allocation from the Treasury covers $50 billion for “primary” lending (directly to companies), and $25 billion for “secondary market purchases” of outstanding corporate bonds from investors. That Treasury funding is fine. Congress allocated the $75 billion in Treasury funds as part of the CARES Act. Every dollar provided by the Treasury acts as a Federal guarantee for the equivalent amount of corporate obligations that the Federal Reserve purchases. The problem is that the Fed intends to leverage these funds 10-to-1 without taking actual collateral pledges from the underlying companies. This exposes the public to outright losses in the event that declining market prices or corporate defaults reduce the value of these bonds by even 10%. As a result, the newly created SMCCF is either a Ponzi scheme at public expense (if the Fed plans to allow portfolio losses to exceed 10%) or a 1987-style portfolio insurance scheme (if the Fed plans to liquidate securities into a falling market in order to cap its losses at 10%). Section 13(3) requires updates every 30 days on the “value of collateral” – that’s going to be an interesting dance if we break the March lows. In any event, even here, the SMCCF is already illegal. Uncollateralized junk bonds are being treated as their own collateral. What makes this so brazen is that when Congress approved the CARES Act, it wrote the terms and conditions section like a children’s book, “for the avoidance of doubt” – to prevent exactly this sort of abuse of public funds. Specifically, here is section 4003(c)(3)(B), which limits how the $500 billion of 4003(b)(4) funding provided for businesses, states, and municipalities may be used: 4003(c)(3)(B) FEDERAL RESERVE ACT TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS APPLY. – For the avoidance of doubt, any applicable requirements under section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act, including requirements relating to loan collateralization, taxpayer protection, and borrower solvency, shall apply with respect to any program or facility described in subsection (b)(4). CARES Act Section 4003 and Federal Reserve restrictions (violated) Has the Federal Reserve taken collateral pledges from the companies underlying these “loans”? Has the Federal Reserve ensured that “the security for emergency loans is sufficient to protect taxpayers from losses”? Nope. Instead, what’s going on here is that the Fed is treating the SMCCF as if it is a “business” in itself. It is then treating the corporate bonds and ETFs purchased by that vehicle as if those unsecured bonds are the “collateral.” Yes, that’s right. Uncollateralized junk bonds are being treated as their own collateral. Of course, that’s also why Section 13(2) of the Federal Reserve Act was written to prevent this sort of thing, prohibiting discounting of corporate securities “covering merely investments, or issued or drawn for the purpose of carrying or trading stocks, bonds, or other investment securities, except bonds and notes of the government of the United States.” The whole operation is a hand-waving attempt to the purchase of assets that are wholly rejected by the provisions of 13(3), and may ultimately be impossible to close without a loss to the Fed, which is a loss to the public, which is fiscal policy, which belongs to Congress, not the Fed. Again, it’s fine for the Federal Reserve to use the $75 billion of Treasury funding as “collateral“ that confers a federal guarantee on $75 billion of corporate loans and security purchases. Those funds are part of the amount that Congress, in its singular constitutional role, has allocated for public support for corporate lending. In contrast, additional purchases to “leverage” that funding are neither secured by non-financial collateral, nor have security sufficient to protect taxpayers from losses. They are illegal, both under Section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act, and under Section 4003(c)(3)(B) of the CARES act, which “for the avoidance of doubt” specifically invokes 13(3) “requirements relating to loan collateralization, taxpayer protection, and borrower solvency.” The newly created SMCCF is either a Ponzi scheme at public expense (if the Fed plans to allow potential portfolio losses to exceed 10%) or a 1987-style portfolio insurance scheme (if the Fed plans to liquidate securities into a falling market in order to cap its losses at 10%).
https://preview.redd.it/bly69bsxwu051.jpg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4ddf296c34fc92b73ef0655d05e7d689909fa161 Now that we almost familiarized ourselves with the basics of cryptocurrency, the Swipe team would like to shed light on the most common misconceptions about it. In this article, we aim to discuss the reasons why these myths exist and correct the common tales behind them. 1.Cryptocurrency is A SCAM NOT. We have to set this record straight once and for all. Cryptocurrencies are the digital counterpart of physical currencies. The only difference is this kind is purely virtual, meaning it doesn’t physically exist. Instead of going through any central authority (bank), it runs in a blockchain, a digital ledger that lets users safely and easily transact and store cryptocurrencies. So why do people think that it is a scam? It is because of the bad players who try to take advantage of this new technology. A lot of new and naïve crypto investors fall into Ponzi-type schemes that promise huge investment returns at a little or no risk at all. Scammers will also try to lure people in making them believe they offer related services in return for crypto payment. The concept of cryptocurrency is to make the current financial transactions easier, which is why some fall for this bait. These types of investments and services should be viewed skeptically. If there are people who are trying to scam you of your money, there will also be people who will try to scam you of your cryptocurrencies. But this doesn’t mean that money and cryptocurrencies are a scam. In cryptocurrency, there is no central authority to re-check the user’s transactions. In cryptocurrency, there is no central authority to re-check the user’s transactions. Users must be responsible enough when managing their crypto assets and activities. 2.It is NOT SAFE AGAIN WRONG. Cryptocurrencies are safe unless people expose themselves to illicit transactions. Remember, even the most successful businesses get highjacked, so what is the possibility that cryptocurrencies will be immune to it? Most of the cryptocurrency transactions run in a blockchain, a digital ledger that uses cryptographic measures to process and transactions, making it more likely impossible to be compromised. However, this doesn’t mean that your cryptocurrencies are totally immune to hacking and phishing. Some users choose to manage their cryptocurrencies themselves, but there is also a number who rely on exchanges or digital wallets run by different parties. When using devices and software such as mobile applications to manage crypto funds, one must make sure that their device is free from any malware and viruses and that they set strong passwords for wallets and accounts that deal with their cryptocurrency funds. Remember, cryptocurrency transactions are irreversible, so one must make sure that their devices and applications are virus-free and secured. But how can the users prevent this from happening? Prior to purchasing cryptocurrency, do proper research on which exchange and digital wallets are perfect for their lifestyle. Check if the company is properly regulated and compliant with the existing laws. Swipe Wallet carries numerous licenses around the world. At present, it has a Virtual Currency Wallet License, and Virtual Currency to Fiat Exchange License issued both in Estonia covering the European Economic Area. Aside from this, setting up a strong password and enabling two-factor authentication (if applicable) are strongly recommended. This adds an extra layer of security to your software, making it less prone to any cyberattacks. 3.It DOESN’T HAVE A VALUE THERE IS. In fact, as of writing, one Bitcoin is priced at $9,096.37, which you can spend and convert any time through the use of your digital wallets. Cryptocurrencies offer a faster way of receiving and sending money through the use of blockchain technology, a better alternative to the usual bank remittances people do. It actually works like fiat currencies, only that cryptocurrencies are decentralized and not run by any central or governing authority. Skeptics don’t believe in cryptocurrency because they think it doesn’t have any intrinsic value just because of its digital nature, and it is not backed up or supported by anything (government or central authority). So, why the prices go high even if some people say it doesn’t have any value? Simple explanation: though cryptocurrencies are prone to volatility, remember it has a finite supply. As more demand for crypto supply increases, its prices go higher. This shows that cryptocurrency users have trust in the system, giving it more value. Proving that you always don’t need to see it physically in order to believe in it. A good cryptocurrency user must realize that due to the relatively new concept or market of cryptocurrency, it is prone to a lot of constant gains and losses. When acquiring these, one must have an open mind that the prices may increase and decrease anytime. Having a diverse investment portfolio (not just in cryptocurrency) helps to reduce the risk of huge losses. 4.Cryptocurrency SUPPORTS Illegal Activities DEFINITELY WRONG. This is one of the biggest myths that surround the cryptocurrency industry. The reason behind this is the misconception that cryptocurrency transactions are entirely anonymous, making people believe that it was made for illicit activities. Most cryptocurrency transactions are traceable through the public address shown in the blockchain. However, it is only limited to the amount and address, not the identity of the sender. This concept made bad entities try to abuse the latest technology discovery. But this doesn’t mean that tracking their details is a difficult task. Bitcoin, Ethereum and other digital currencies, and wallets implement their own ways to track transactions through a KYC or Know Your Customer service without asking too much of personal information than most of the normal banks do. 5.Funds are EASILY STOLEN YES and NO.How so? There is a big possibility of funds getting stolen if the users will not practice precautionary measures when managing their cryptocurrencies. Even in fiat currencies, if people will just leave their money somewhere unsafe or in shady institutions, it will be prone to theft. As a general rule, having tight security measures on a chosen crypto trading platform and wallet will help lessen any tendency of experiencing unfortunate events. Users have to make sure they are only dealing with reputable trading platforms and wallets. There are a lot of users who fell victim to fake wallets. To avoid making this big mistake, ALWAYS do a background check and don’t just trust what search engines show right away. People who are not careful enough to make security actions and discern any fraudulent sites will be prone to having their cryptocurrencies stolen. Cryptocurrency transactions are irreversible, and if you fell into these traps, your money will be long gone for good. Remember: everything is digital in Bitcoin. People must be extra cautious in making transactions as there are a lot of bad people who are evil enough that will try to steal your hard-earned money. Wherever people go, there will always be bad players who will try to find ways to outsmart people. These myths sprouted because there are people who are victimized by scammers. It is important to stay vigilant anddo proper researchbefore making necessary transactions to avoid fraud.There are no shortcuts to success. No matter how advanced the technology is, nothing beats the decisions made by a responsible and critical consumer. --- This blog article is also posted at:https://sw.pe/blogcryptomyths
https://i.imgur.com/oucavJo.jpg A) This is a work in progress. (trying to make this neater and add things that people post) These things have been collected from forums / posts in various places (official forums, reddit groups etc)..and are here to be sifted through and examined to see which are true and which are not. Anyone is welcome to comment both agreement or disagreement. B) ANY CORRECTIONS please send a message and reference the lie number *** I want to remove false info ASAP*** Or make a post in this thread. If there is anything in this list that shouldn't be here, it will be removed. C) If you'd like me to add a lie, PLEASE make a post in this thread! Include something like ADD THIS LIE and make a short description d) ASM /Allsportsmarket / the company means any or all of the proxies and identities of CWH , NSEI, Sportshares.net etc ------------------------------------ A while back, Chris claimed people on reddit were "lying" and that he would respond "point by point" to any "lies" told by redditors. I have begun to compile a list of all of Chris' lies from various sources.
To Chris Rabalais / Allsportsmarket.com : You are more than welcome to respond "point by point". Please include a lie number...and respond and explain how it isn't a lie....
Lies of Chris Rabalais
1)This is and was an investment He has always claimed this was an investment, and still does. He claims you will get a return...yet from the other side of his mouth, he makes sure to mention that this is a "donation." Not one of us would have donated to him without the chance of a return / profit. None of us. This was a donation....to Chris Rabalais...NOT an investment. Still to this day when askign for money he makes suree to put in DONATION but then out of the other side of his mouth he claims you will get a return..or profit..and says you are an investor / insider etc.....This is NOT an investment. This is a DONATION to a very inefficient "charity" claiming you will someday see a "return" on it. 2) Investors into ASM would get a return on their investment -- profit from it He is still promising people a return...many people show a 'profit' on their account statement but are unable to cash out. Unable to withdraw etc...Chances are, If you have made a "profit" from this on paper, you cannot withdraw it. 3) He was in the process of registering the company shares with the SEC The SEC has stated point blank he has taken NO STEPS to register the company shares. It is in the complaint. 4) The company shares were ABOUT to be registered, and once they did...they would have even more value and we would miss out unless we bought in Not only did he say it was in process, he claimed many times they were very close to getting the shares registered and when they did, they would have more value..and investors would be sorry if we didn't jump in on this "rocketship". 5) Chris knows how to get the shares registered with the SEC or has any clue what he is doing in terms of registering the shares According to the SEC , Chris Rabalais has no idea HOW to even get the shares registered...and that is in their complaint as well. Meanwhile for years Chris was claiming he knew what do do to get the shares registered. 6) "This may be the last chance to jump on this great opportunity" How many times have we all heard this lie? This or that program is ending....you'll never get another chance at giving money to Chris Rabalais again...but then shockingly...there's another even better offer in a couple days/weeks... 7) If you don't give X amount of money right now , the lights might suddenly go out on ASM..and you'll lose your "investment" Another lie they tell is that if you don't give money, they will go out of business and you will "lose your investment". Bullcrap , they're not shutting off their free money machine....until someone MAKES them. Oh and you have no investment. Two lies for the price of one. 8) This is not a ponzi scheme Chris has addressed the ponzi issue only VERY briefly over the years. He recently claimed it isn't a ponzi because the "last guy in can still make money" but that would require MONEY coming in from others...so he gets around the truth by omitting that its not the "guy" its the "last money in " which is nearly the same thing... the people who put their money in last will lose....that is a ponzi. The Judge in the Seth Leon case said so...and I hope another judge says so soon. (See here: https://www.reddit.com/ASMEunfiltered/comments/e61nya/summary_of_the_seth_leon_case_with_update/ ) 9) The sports shares have value Chris claims they have value because they area "claim on future dividends" which is a lie. That is not any definition of real or intrinsic value...and even if it was (it isn't, IMO) the claim on future dividends is a LIE because every penny of that future dividend money relies on new money coming into the market...which is a ponzi...which is valueless 10) You would be able to cash out (sell your holdings, pay off your bonus margin and keep your profits) He changed the rules when the market started imploding. For years he promised investors they could sell their shares, pay off our margin and take our profits. No one would've bought in if they thought they could never do this. Even after he froze people's ability to cash out...he kept claiming that we would be able to soon...and urged people to buy more margin because all of the profits would be able to be kept. 11) Chris would stop selling margin Recently, there was a conference call where key members of the team called for an end to the margin offers..NOT because they were a scam (they are) but because it was no longer possible to ignore the implosion of the pilot market and the collapse was being blamed on margin....Chris agreed to end margin and made announcements to this end. In a short time, he realized that promising people money on margin profit was his only revenue...so he HAD to start selling margin again...He knows it is worthless, promised to stop selling it....and lied. 12) Different celebrities, politicians, business people were about to come on board and help us PHIL COLLINS' WIFE!, Mark Cuban, Jon Bon FUCKING Jovi, Roger Goddell, Snoop Dogg, Brian Austin Green, Trump (speaker at zero club), Labron James, meetings with MLB people, Jack MA / Alibaba.......god knows how many other names this guy drops as potential people who are going to help or who we are 'reaching out' to in order to get them to help us. (help me add to this list) 13) ASM would have a "liquidity event" and be able to make money off of our company shares There was going to be some liquidity event where we could sell our company shares to other investors...of course it never happened. 14) The new york times ad was going to be about ASM or helping our investment There was NO MENTION of ASM or AllSportsMarket in the new york times ad and it didn't do a single thing to help ASM become a legitimate company. The only thing it did (from memory) was bash gambling. 15) The trips to Israel, funded by the investors, were something worthy of doing with the money... Chris bragged and posted pictures of his trips to Israel...but what did they have to do with ASM? How was spending "donations" (investments) for him to go to Israel supposed to help the company? Clearly this was a waste. 16) the Hero club events he goes to (more travel) help ASM in any way whatsoever I have never seen any evidence that spending who knows how much of the investors' money has been wasted on this,yet chris continues to act as if his membership in the Hero Club is a wise way to spend money...I have seen no evidence that the Hero club has done anything bust waste money. 17) donating to ASM is helping anyone or doing anything other than putting money in HIS pocket... Quite simply, Chris "donates" 10% of the money given him, if we are to believe that. So He has given (according to him) 150k+ to a hunger charity. They have (according to Chris) matched this 7x, so the 150k donation has turned into a millionish dollars worth of charity. Sounds good right? Well in doing so, Chris has just wasted 90% of the money. Instead of 150k, had we all simply given our 1.5 million to this same charity....and they matched it 7x...we would have turned our money into 10+ million dollars for charity. So essentially, even by Chris' own numbers...we have wasted 9 million dollars of potential charity....by paying Chris's rent..cars etc.. all so that he can take 90% and give 10% to charity....to me, this is wasteful and we would be better donationg directly to the 7x charity the entire 100% rather than wasting the 90%. 18) The ASM 'real market' was a real money market Chris started the real market to fool us into thinking it was actual money. He later then changed the name to "pilot market" after taking people's REAL money..so he could have the excuse "HEY this is a PILOT market!!!" when you cant withdraw...otherwise why call this a "real" market then suddenly change the name to "pilot"? 19) the ASM pilot market was going to transition with your holdings to a 'regulated' or 'exempt market' and you would be able to keep your profit from the pilot market So it has been promised to us that the pilot (which was the real market) market will transition to another market..where.....where you'll STILL be able to keep your profits...so..guys..KEEP BUYING BONUS MARGIN lol.... 20) If there is a good enough plan, Chris will happily step down in January 2020 and let someone else change the direction of the "company" Chris claims "give him till December" and if no one is happy he will step aside if that's what everyone wants...IF there is a plan he likes..LOL..we will see...but I am guessing he will not. 21) The pilot market is working He has claimed the pilot market is working and proves that ASM is functional...yet the market has collapsed and he has frozen everyone's accounts from withdrawing..or paying off margin..etc...but the real/pilot market has been a disaster. Here is him contradicting himself and admitting that the pilot market does NOT work : https://vocaroo.com/bsbcnHWDF8z . This is an admission thatthe pilot market as it is now is busted and will never work without being completely re-designed (revenue sharing etc). The worst part of this is he KNOWS the pilot market is not working yet he is still selling margin to buy stocks on this market.....that to me is criminal. How can he do this? 22) The learning market is working and proves that the math and numbers are correct and functional Claims have been made the learning market is working..LOL...anyone who has touched the learning market knows it is completely dysfunctional...and not any kind of advertisement or positive experience... 23) Bonus margin has some sort of value other than to put money in his pocket He claims bonus margin has value. It doesn't. Its worthless. If he tries to deny this..ask him why he is selling it if it has no value? Ask him how he plans on turning something with 0 value into something with value. This is the core of his scam right now..selling WORTHLESS bonus margin with no value for real money...which he donates 10% of and the rest goes to expenses...and his salary & rent etc... 24) Chris "had alper" double check the math in 2009 , and the market math is fine.. Oh god...so in one of the videos, Chris claims he had Alper check the math in 2009 and alper told him the numbers work. This is such utter horseshit, and mainly designed to deflect responsibility for the failure of the market..so he can blame it on Alper. Chris knows the math doesn't work. Alper knows the math doesn't work..and Alper & Chris know that margin is worthless...and they know the market is a failure...they have to know this... 25) special clubs like "ASM Black", "Insider programs", "Advisory Councils" etc etc are anything other than him trying to get even more money out of your pocket All of these programs are just designed to get you to give them more money..there is no real benefit to being a member in them. The insider program just basically stopped people from being able to withdraw sooner....who knows what ASM black was..and this advisory council...what was that? Give Chris 100$ to listen to more youtube rants? Ok...whatever new club or council they will come up with next is a bunch of crap designed to make you feel special as you give them your hard earned money. 26) The NDA he sent via email before spamming you with more ads is legally binding We all know the NDA he sent via e-mail was worthless..it was hilarious.....and unenforceable.... 27) They would provide investors with financial documents / audit / detailed information at the end of October 2019 Yeah so will we ever get to see the "audit" ? Doubt it...they are not transparent with any pertinent info. Who is paid what? Who holds what shares? What shares have been granted to who? What money was paid by NSEI to who , and for what? "Seal of transparency" my ass. 28) The SEC filing suit against him could be viewed as a positive in some ways I forget how he worded it but he basically claimed the SEC suit was some sort of opportunity for something positive for him. The one positive thing I can think of is it stopped him from getting more money from suckers... 29) He didn't "really" lose the case against Seth Leon He made all kinds of excuses and claims the only reason he lost against Seth Leon is because Seth Leon sent the papers to an old address....LOL (see here: https://www.reddit.com/ASMEunfiltered/comments/e61nya/summary_of_the_seth_leon_case_with_update/ ) Make NO mistake..Chris LOST the case. The court found "AMPLE EVIDENCE" of fraud by Chris Rabalais. 30) It was Trump's fault (Govt shutdown) that he didn't get paperwork done with the SEC LOL...I hope this is what he tells the Judge 31) It was Jason's fault that "a letter" wasn't sent to the SEC regarding the NRHL Blame it on a guy who doesn't work for the company any more... 32) It is alper's fault the math/numbers don't work because Chris asked alper to "check the numbers" in 2009 Blame this on Alper.....when he has known for YEARS the numbers do not work 33) there were "saboteurs" who tried to wreck the "deal" with NRHL, who came from reddit..*but luckily they saved the deal! Remember the saboteurs? remember how they "saved" the deal with the NRHL? Remember how the NRHL was going to be huge for ASM? Yeah none of these things were true....MAYBE a guy (gregson?) tried to contact the NRHL to find out if they were even real.. but NO ONE thought the NRHL was going to be a good thing..and NO ONE wanted to transition their money to a market led by roller derby..because it was and is a stupid idea. 34) There were lawyers (zero club? friends?) who were going to help with the SEC defense for free Chris had an army of lawyers, some of the best in the country and who had never lost...but yet he had to beg the court for a free lawyer because he can't get a lawyer to represent him...LOL 35) "secured by blockchain" - Chris claims this tech is in use now but what is it exactly other than bullshit? On one of his latest videos he claims the blockchain technology is protecting the ASM market right now...BS. There is no technology that I have seen. There hasn't been anything said about what this even is or does. Ace hasn't even been heard from since around August has he? They can't even get an android app...the blockchain bullshit is just more jargon and buzzwords...trying to get you to give them money...there is nothing behind this "secured by blockchain" trademark...other than words...otherwise why not explain exactly what it is, and how it works ..etc... 36) Chris is going to counter sue the SEC and prove that he is a legitimate business LOL.. with his free lawyer? 37) All cryptocurrencies are a SCAM Notice he screams and cries FRAUD at many things, but he is a fraud himself. Typical tactic...accuse others of what you are doing. Also, there is some real value in some cryptos, like bitcoin...unlike a sports share on ASM. Its called 'proof of work' ...that has real value that can even be measured..by electricity use, processing power etc...I am not arguing it has a lot of value, or even that it is as valuable as the price....but it is above zero, unlike a share in a sports team on ASM. I'm also not an expert nor to I condone investing in crypto... 38) Gambling is more of a problem than ASM / NSEI Again, he screams and cries about how dirty Gambling is...but at least legal gambling is regulated, and you have a chance to win. Unlike ASM... 39) They were working on an Android app , and needed donations for it One of the reasons I donated early on was because of seeing the IOS app, and the promises of making an android app.In fairness this might not have been a lie....but if theyre not going to make an android app , then say so. 41) They lied by omission and did not tell investors about the SEC suit until August 2019 So someone else came and announced the SEC lawsuit on the reddit forum in August 2019. There is some strong evidence that Chris knew about this in April 2019 or even earlier like maybe Oct 2018...and if he knew about it before it was announced , then he witheld this information from all of us.. 42) The NFL / MLS "Deals" We very nearly had a deal with the NFL and MLS...or have / had a chance to make deals with them...its all bullshit. The guy cant even make a deal with roller derby leagues...and we are expected to believe he is making deals with major leagues? 43) Wefunder / Crowd Funding We started the process to sell shares through we-funder....but they turned us down. Guess what Chris "forgot" to tell us all? THE REASON they turned us down...because ASM / CWH doesn't pass the "smell test"? What was the reason? It seems like maybe the reason was the UNREGISTERED SECURITIES? I mean there had to be a reason..what was it? 44) Share Buyback They were going to buy back company shares from investors....and at times stated the shares were so valuable they would gladly buy them back for X amount because they were sure to go up in price...but when push comes to shove they NEVER will buy this worthless junk back......even for 1 penny. A lot of the 'tyes men' have stated they would also buy shares back from unhappy investors but of course they never do this in reality. 45) Telling the truth, even if it is harmful to Chris / ASM is some type of Slander or Libel Chris would like you to think that calling him out on fraud and lies is some type of "libel" or "slander" but as anyone knows...telling the truth is not slander or libel. He is trying to scare people from telling the truth. Blowing the whistle on his fraud is NOT slander or libel. Period. He is the CEO of a company that he sold shares of stock in, fraudulently. He must and will be held accountable. 46) The market cap number is a legitimate indicator of the validity of ASM Chris love to throw around market capitalization numbers (4 Billion LOL) as if they mean anything at all or indicate that this market is healthy. They include the learning market (fake money) and the margin (also fake money). If you subtract the learning market, the bonus margin, and the money "used" by chris for data, rent, cars etc...you have pretty much zero market cap in reality. 47) ASM has a way of checking if an investor is accredited: See here: https://www.reddit.com/ASMEunfiltered/comments/eacs69/new_lies_regarding_searching_for_for_accredited/ . In my understanding , one of the ways (in some cases) un-registered securities can be sold is if it is to an "accredited" investor. The SEC has said Chris has no means of checking this. I would personally believe the SEC at this point....and I will count this as a lie until it is proven that Chris / ASM actually does have a way of legitimately checking accreditation. 48) The reason Chris withheld the fact the SEC was investigating him and suing him was because the SEC told him he couldnt tell us. BULLSHIT. In the audio Chris makes absurd claims that he couldnt tell "investors" of his problems with the SEC because they told him not to talk about it. Yet meanwhile he kept taking money from investors as if everything was fine..KNOWING that trouble was brewing and KNOWING that the shit was going to hit the fan. Show me a letter by the SEC that says he can't warn his investors of an impending action by them SHOW IT TO US. If you show this to us, I'll remove this lie. It doesnt make any sense because the SEC exists to protect us from predators like Chris , so why would they tell him he cannot warn us of problems with the SEC????? MAKES ZERO SENSE. Does not pass the smell test. This is a lie by omission..taking our money , pretending things are fine....but KNOWING problems are coming. The bottom line: Chris didnt say SHIT about this anywhere that I know of until AFTER it was posted publicly that the lawsuit was filed...I heard about this online before it was ever mentioned by chris in any conference call or statement by him. 49) Not sure if this is technically a "lie" or not but the guy / ASM has at least 10 twitter accounts...here are a few of them: 1) https://twitter.com/AllSportsMarket 2) https://twitter.com/rabalais_cva 3) https://twitter.com/asmclients 4) https://twitter.com/thesportsvote 5) https://twitter.com/SportsFolios 6) https://twitter.com/MySportsWiki 7) https://twitter.com/chrisrabalais 8) https://twitter.com/NuSportsEconomy 9) https://twitter.com/ASMFreeApp 10) https://twitter.com/ASM_Advisor (not 100% on this one but it looks fake) ..etc..... It looks as if this one: https://twitter.com/ASMFreeApp has a bunch of bots or paid 'farm' followers. So, while not a 'lie' exactly...very odd and shady behavior. 50) In the "Investors Q& A" found here: https://tinyurl.com/spbznmf They failed to disclose the Seth Leon case, the failed attempt at bankruptcy discharge of the fraud debt, and failed to disclose the debt owed to Seth Leon. So they lied in the sections about Legal Problems and they Lied in the sections about Debt. This is in a Q&A involving potential ionvestors so they are lying to potential investors about the risks. 51) Chris will "fact check" and respond to every accusation made against him and prove that these things are lies told by "known liars" https://i.imgur.com/HaGfekN.jpg So a couple of weeks ago, Chris said he would fact check all of the "lies" told about him...so I thought I would do him a big favor and make a huge list. His claim was that everyone saying all of these things are "known liars" and none of these things is true. He says they are all bogus "claims" made by "liars." He said he would refute these"claims." Well guess what asshole? Every songle person reading this is probably a victim of yours, and they KNOW all of these things aren't "claims" ... they are facts. I have done my best here to stick to things that are universal..that we have all witnessed as investors. Now (shockingly) chris refuses to "fact check" any of these "lies." He says he will respond only if you sign your name and send him a private e-mail or make a post on his censored and controlled website where he has to approve any post before it is seen by the public... So I will add this as yet another lie. He will never refute SHIT. He is a thief and a liar. and a con man....and CAN"T refute anything said above. Period. More than likely if anyone posted this list on his forums, he would NEVER allow it to stand....so how is anyone supposed to get this list "fact checked"? The only Known liar here..well..I think we all know who that is... You would think he might want to address these things publicly instead of making people ask via e-mail and leaving a cloud of suspicion for potential investors to see..and maybe he would rather answer one time,rather than a bunch of separate e-mails......but I guess when there are literally no answers to any of these things, the only solution is to try and hide it more...
9 Rules of Crypto Trading That Helped One Trader Go from $1k to $46k in Less Than a Year
No, the successful trader is not me. I’ve gotten lucky a few times and I’m still refining and trying out strategies; on the other hand, I’m part of communities of people who trade on a daily basis to grow their portfolios, and while some of the results can be attributed to luck, a majority of it is based on fundamentals, good habits, and experience. The Result of Good Habits Miles is the co-founder of Pure Investments. In May 2017, he started off by playing with $1,000, which he accumulated through saving 10% of his paychecks for a while. Today, he is at $46,000; i.e., he grew his portfolio by 46x in less than a year. Similarly, after starting Pure Investments back in September 2017, Miles got one of his first community members, who goes by the pseudonym SP on the Discord channel. When SP started, he put in $40,000. By January 2018, he had over $1 million (today it’s ~$800k due to the recent Bitcoin crash). While markets like cryptocurrency are extremely volatile and all investors are subject to its price fluctuation including Miles, SP, myself, and you, good habits will help mitigate the losses and maximize profits. Nine Rules of Crypto Trading Please note that none of this is investment advice. Invest at your own risk!
Only invest what you can lose. During the recent crash in January 2018, hobby-investors got burned. Reports of frustration and losses came at the cost of broken monitors, smashed laptops, and heavy monetary losses. While the rules are in more particular order of importance, it’s safe to assume that this is the most important rule, the rule to rule the rules. As soon as your money is converted into cryptocurrency, consider it lost forever. There is absolutely no guarantee you can get it back. Losses don’t simply come from dips in the market; extraordinary factors such as hacks, bugs, and government regulation can mean you’ll never see any of your money again. If you are investing money you can’t afford to lose, you need to take a step back and re-evaluate your current financial situation, because what you’re about to do is an act of desperation. This includes: using credit cards, taking out mortgages, applying for loans, or selling everything and traveling the world (as glamorous as that sounds).
Always pay attention to Bitcoin. Most altcoins (every cryptocurrency except Bitcoin) are pegged more closely to Bitcoin than Asian currencies were to the USD during the Asian Financial Crisis. If Bitcoin price pump drastically, altcoins price can go down as people try to exit altcoins to ride the BTC profits; inversely, if Bitcoin prices dump drastically, altcoin prices can go down, too, as people exit altcoins to exchange back into fiat. The best times for altcoin growth appear when Bitcoin shows organic growth or decline, or remains stagnant in price.
Never put all your eggs in one basket. Diversify. While the potential to earn more is increased with the amount of money you invest into a coin, the potential to lose more is also magnified. Another way to think about it is to look at the cryptocurrency market as a whole; if you believe that this is just the beginning, then more than likely the entire market cap of cryptocurrencies will increase. What are the chances that this market cap increase will be entirely driven by one coin vs. being driven by many coins? The best way to safely capture the overall growth of cryptocurrency is to diversify and reap the benefits of growth from multiple coins. Also, fun fact — Between January 2016 and January 2018, Corgicoin has increased by 60,000x, and Verge has increased by 13,000x. During the same period, Bitcoin has increased by 34x. While you would have gotten impressive gains from Bitcoin, expanding into other coins could have landed you potentially larger ones.
Don’t be greedy. No one ever lost money taking a profit. As a coin begins to grow, the greed inside us grows along with it. If a coin increases by 30%, why not consider taking profit? Even if goals are set to 40% or 50%, you should at least pull out some of the profit on the way up in case a coin doesn’t reach the goal. If you wait too long or try to get out at a higher point, you risk losing profit you already earned or even turning that profit into a loss. Get into the habit of taking profits and scouting for re-entry if you want to continue reaping potential profits.
Don’t invest blindy. There are people in this world who would sell a blind person a pair of glasses if they could make money. Those same people play in the cryptocurrency markets and use every opportunity to exploit less-informed investors. They’ll tell you what to buy or claim certain coins will moon, just to increase the prices so they can exit. Due to the highly speculative nature of the cryptocurrency markets today, a good investor will always do his or her own research in order to take full responsibility for the potential investment outcome. Information coming from even the best investor is, at best, great information, but never a promise, so you can still get burned.
Don’t FOMO. This is a spot that people most frequently lose money on. A dash of manipulation, two tablespoons of media hype, a cup of CME and CBOE announcements, and a generous handful of FOMO drove Bitcoin prices from $10,000 to $20,000 in December. Since that time, Bitcoin fell to a low of $9,000 and is currently sitting at around $11,000. It’s easy to look back and say, “if only I waited one month, then I could’ve bought at $9,000 instead of waiting for Bitcoin to hit $20,000 again for me to break even.” But the reality is, the combination of 1) being greedy, 2) investing blindly, and 3) FOMO were likely large contributors to the purchase at an all-time-high. Even in the crazy world of cryptocurrency, if a coin pumps that quickly, it will correct — it’s a matter of time. Speculative pumps are almost always followed by dips. While trying to jump onto a train going full speed sounds like something straight out of a James Bond movie, I’m sure most of us can agree we would probably save some limbs if we just waited for it at the next stop.
Categorize your investments and look at the long picture. In the process of your research, you’ll eventually realize you’re coming across a few different categories of coins. For some of them, you believe they have good teams, great vision, amazing publicity and a track record for successful execution. Great! Put these into medium or long-term holds and let them marinate into a delicious tenderloin. When the price dips, don’t even consider panic selling because anything in your medium or long-term portfolio should remain untouched for a set amount of time. BNB is a good example of a coin Miles considers a long hold. Recently, it dipped 20% for a while, and within our community, we witnessed some sell-offs to preserve investments. A week later, it jumped up almost 3x for a period of time.
Always learn from your mistakes. Never accept a total loss. Always evaluate the situation and try to figure out why it happened. Take that experience as an asset for your next move, which will be better because you are know more now than you knew before. We all start off as amateurs, and we have all lost money throughout out trading experience. In his first month of trading, Miles went from $1,000 to $300. I’ve lost a lot by selling at losses inspired by fear. No one is perfect, no one wins every single trade. Don’t let the losses discourage you, because the reality is they’re making you better trader if you choose to learn from them.
If you are doing any active trading, set stop losses. For any coins not in your medium or long-term holds, always set stop losses. This is important for several reasons — the most obvious is mitigating your losses. But more importantly, you force yourself to decide on a point of acceptable loss, and because you now have a reference point, you are able to measure your effectiveness to keep or adjust for future trades. Sometimes, during a market dip, altcoins can plummet, and stop losses can lead to profitability by automatically selling for fiat that you can use to re-enter at lower prices.
10 Bonus — always check the ticker symbol. Ticker symbols are not universal, and may vary from exchange to exchange in rare cases. Those cases, though, can come back to bite you. For example, Bitcoin Cash trades on some exchanges as BCH, while it trades on others as BCC. BCC is also the ticker symbol for BitConnect, which was recently outted as a Ponzi Scheme. If you bought BCC under the impression was Bitcoin Cash, you would’ve lost a lot of money.
You Don’t Have to Go At It Alone While these rules are by no means the only lessons you need, they’re definitely a great starting point. Sometimes, though, things are easier said than done, such as watching your portfolio value plummet and still having the iron willpower of resisting the sell button. One of the best solutions I’ve found to this was to join a community of like-minded cryptocurrency investors. Educated and smart crypto-traders, as well as the community members, will all be there to support your efforts and will be holding with you in the rough times. On top of that, the cryptocurrency market travels at lightspeed compared to other markets. New coins enter the market on a daily basis (in 2016, there were about 550 different coins, today there are about 1,500), and each one has news every day. I’m not doubting your ability to consume and analyze news, but that level of information bombardment will always be more effectively consumed as a group. In these communities, you’ll see members link news and relevant articles about coins you’ve invested in and coins you’ve never heard of. The community will definitely expand your knowledge much faster than doing it all yourself. The Pure Investments community, as well as many other communities out there, have a free and paid membership. The paid membership is similar to the free one in that each one can access the community, but the paid one has more hands-on guidance from the analysts, and you can learn more through the education sections.
Cluey Learning is a ponzi scheme - Australian investors and parents stay away!
I write this as a concerned investor who recently was approached to consider an investment in Cluey Learning. Cluey Learning is selling a dream equivalent to a Bitcoin Scam. I wrote this to ensure that Australian investors do their proper research before losing more money in this venture. If you want a copy of their investor presentation email us at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) and we will send you a copy. https://www.clueylearningscam.com/post/cutting-costs-maximizing-results Recently, Cluey Learning has been trying to raise capital at an approximately $45 million valuation with less than $1 million Aud in sales. This translates to a 45x sales multiple which is as high as companies like Zoom which are already profitable, at massive scale, with a disruptive technology advantage (the world’s number 1 beneficiary of the Coronavirus disruptions arguably). For some context, Kip McGrath has a valuation of $40 million and was founded 44 years ago and has revenue of $18 MM with $2.5 MM profit. Cluey Learning has been raising capital largely because of a lack of education technology expertise in the Australia market. This article should help to summarize why Cluey is a dangerous, speculative investment that will lose investors significant amount of money by only talking about their revenue and brushing over their growing operating losses. There are a number of fundamental issues with the Cluey Learning business that are not being accurately described to prospective investors. More info: https://www.clueylearningscam.com/post/cutting-costs-maximizing-results
Smart Investors Don’t Believe in Pure Tutoring Marketplaces: Tutoring marketplaces are poor businesses which sophisticated investors have largely stayed away from. People have tried and failed to monetize purely 1-1 online tutoring like tutor.com and tutorspree which have all stopped operating. Companies like Eurekely in New Zealand have also tried and failed to monetize and have been unable to raise any external financing. Varsity Tutors, after raising much money, continues to be unprofitable with slowing growth rates and declines in investor confidence.
Tutoring Marketplaces Haven’t Been Profitable: There are no large, profitable 1-1 tutoring marketplace businesses in the world. The world’s profitable, successful education companies include New Oriental, Tal Education Group and Benesse rely on large class sizes and premium brands which enable them to avoid the business of just matching students and tutors up and trying to capture a spread between them. Fast growing education technology companies such as Byjus monetize video content which has limited direct service costs. VIPKids has burnt through hundreds of millions of dollars of venture capital financing and is still not profitable and has had large issues fundraising in recent rounds despite the substantially more attractive backdrop of China which has more students with a higher willingness to pay and a much larger population and deeper adoption of tutoring and online learning offerings.
Commonly Cited Examples of Success in Tutoring Are Misrepresentations: Chegg, a Silicon Valley company, talks a lot about its tutoring business but it does no paid acquisition marketing because it knows this is unprofitable and upsells tutoring to its database of leads that use its subscription homework services and subscription textbook services.
Competition For Online Real Estate from Offline Players: Cluey Learning will, unless they dramatically change their advertised business, continue to lose money and lose progressively more money because the margin they can make from a student will continue to be less than they spend to acquire customers. Being online doesn’t give you any advantage acquiring students. KipMcGrath and other strong competitors continue to bid online for the same keywords that Cluey Learning is burning investor money on except Cluey has a far less economical business.
Unprofitable Unit Economics: KipMcGrath charges students approximately 55/hour for a class of 4 students and pays the teacher around 25/hour. This gives a revenue of 220 and a cost of 25 with a margin of 89%. Cluey Learning may charge around $50 and pay the tutors $30 and take a <50% gross margin which is virtually impossible to make any profits once you pay acquisition costs of customers (ignoring even the cost of salaries)
Huge Cashburn: Cluey Learning claims more than 160 employees on LinkedIn. If one assumes only 75 are full-time with an average salary of 100,000 the business is burning half a million or more a month. While Cluey can show more revenue by burning more money, this revenue is ultimately only being achieved by an unsustainable cash burn that the management team knows cannot easily change.
Dramatically Overestimated Target Market: Cluey, despite a focus on Australia, is already claiming a massive valuation citing a huge tutoring market. This market simply doesn’t exist anywhere like the scale being asserted. If you add up the tutoring revenue of major players across Kip McGrath, Matrix Education, NumberWorks, Dux College and private tutoring the market probably is $50 million or less per year annually across all of Australia. Players like Kip McGrath have been in the market for 40+ years and have had to leave Australia and go to the UK and NZ to find more growth because of caps in the domestic market. Cluey is talking to investors about a 1 billion+ market which overestimates the market size by 20x or more.
Cluey’s segment is particularly not growing fast: The highest spenders of tutoring tend to be from the Chinese-Australian community in Sydney at the competitive private schools. These students make up a significant amount of total revenue (Matrix alone is estimated to do $20 MM Aud of the revenue). These students prefer offline tutoring-in-general with highly specialized tutors. Cluey’s family centred, fun approach to learning targets a totally different demographic that is more akin to the students of Kip McGrath. As such they do miss and will continue to miss, the main segment of tutoring spending that is actually growing.
The macroeconomic environment for fundraising is collapsing: A business that is structurally unprofitable and relies on more and more rounds of funding burning cash to acquire revenue will not be able to continue indefinitely. Softbank’s portfolio of struggling companies like Oyo and WeWork show this clearly.
More info: https://www.clueylearningscam.com/post/cutting-costs-maximizing-results Overall, Cluey Learning is not a fraudulent business by the definition of law. They can unknowingly make inaccurate claims about the market size. They can unknowingly have overly optimistic claims about their unit economics. Given the experience of the team at Cluey, it is unlikely they are unaware of how inaccurate some of these claims are but we can give them the benefit of the doubt. The key message for investors is beware. Cluey is charging 45x their revenue last year for a business with a small target market size that isn’t growing very quickly, with a structurally unprofitable business model that has failed in far more attractive geographies and depending on investors who haven’t done proper research into their model to write the cheques to fund their multi-million dollar cash burn. Investors beware. It doesn't take any skill to spend your hard earned $1 to buy $0.50 cents of revenue, show all the fast revenue growth to the next investors to keep the ponzi scheme going. Ask to see their profits, their unit economics, their operating expenses and the truth will be blindingly obvious. More info: https://www.clueylearningscam.com/post/cutting-costs-maximizing-results
TL&DR Basically rant why I don’t want to face bitcoin core supporters constant lies and I don’t want to have anything to do with bitcoin core (btc) anymore. Bitcoin was always about sending safely digital money to anybody, anywhere and without need of central authority. It was very clearly stated in first discussions and first promoting materials, that whole idea is for it to work instantly with no fees, or very little fees and it is for everybody equally and anonymously. Nobody was ever suggesting that bitcoin is finished product. Probably it is fair to say everybody were expecting some kind of problems and different and unforeseen circumstances that could potentially kill the project any minute and instantly. Many of users could also see potential new use cases and phenomenal possibilities for the future. Bitcoin got quickly recognised as very risky but very promising technology that could change the world. Things like that don’t happened every day. Evolution of bitcoin was inevitable. Every aspect of bitcoin needed protection and improvement to face problems. Oh boy, but how I’m surprised what way it all went. Maximum blocksize was introduce by bitcoin creator as a temporary measure to mitigate problems bitcoin was vulnerable at the time. It was always suppose to be increased when needed and Bitcoin creator (Satoshi Nakamoto) even said how to do it effortlessly. That max block size was trivial temporary fix that not many at the time realised how big obstacle for bitcoin it will become. Unfortunately for all of us, Satoshi left the project, before sorting it out. Instant transactions were removed when “replace by fee” feature and increasing transaction waiting time in mempool from, I think 3 days to 14 days, were introduced. It was done to allegedly make it easier to estimate correct fee needed to pay to get to next block. In effect though, it enabled race to the top of the fees where in order to keep up with increasing volume, it was better to increase fee above everybody else or face staying in limbo of unconfirmed transaction for two weeks or more in case some party chooses to rebroadcast transaction. What is more terrifying, transactions couldn’t be safely used as instant anymore, as a sender could potentially double spend transaction with sending funds to different than original address with higher fee and more chance to not get rejected. Instant transaction was basically killed. Now we all had to wait for confirmations, preferably 6 of them. Originally, that was only advised as extra safety measure for bigger purchases, but now thanks to rbf, it is a must. Plus fees were encouraged to go up. Foundations for high fees were set by rbf and 1mb block size. When volume came with increasing adoption and interest from new users, fees skyrocketed to above 1000sat/byte. You could send with lower fees and get lucky, but basically fees were extremely high. Also, not every transaction is simple. This 1000sat/byte could easily result in fee on 100gbp for transaction if you were using many unspent outputs. That killed adoption. Period. You can’t use bitcoin to send money if you have to pay transaction bigger than often value of transaction itself. Low fee or no fee aspect was killed and even vanished for a while from bitcoin.org site. Important part is, that all of that above could have been justified. As I mentioned before, bitcoin is not finished and it is vulnerable so any changes should be tested, not rushed. I can understand that. What is more, I can not demand from bitcoin developers changes. I can propose changes myself and even show how to do it though. But here is the tricky part. Bitcoin core developers killed all progress by censoring every discussion that was not in line with central party rhetoric. You want to talk about big blocks? Ban. You want to ask about why not? Ban. But, but… Ban. So changes can not be proposed anymore and discussed. It was possible to get ban even when taking part in discussion elsewhere or agree to something core didn’t approve and “obviously” being not in line. Well done guys, you just created central authority that stand against everything that bitcoin was for. How big fees were justified? By pushing blame on users. It must be stupid to use bitcoin they said. When you using it you are taking precious resources. You are bad for bitcoin. Bitcoin is not money, it is store of value!!! Just buy and hold. Sorry. Just buy and “hodl”. Be stupid meme reader. Than tell others to buy and hold. Create perfect ponzi. This is what bitcoin core is now being used mostly for. Solutions proposed and introduced. Segwit or Segregated Witness. (didn’t help) Reorganisation of transaction record that changes the way transaction size is being counted and also fixes malleability issue. At the time of introduction it was being compared to approximately equal to increase to 1.7 mb block size. Now opinions and calculations are vary. Some give it more, but most are very confusing anyway. As misinformation is very common in bitcoin world, I leave it for everybody to check it themselves. Segwit was mostly needed to introduce Lightning Network that required transaction malleability to be fixed. In normal bitcoin use, it wasn’t really big problem, but lightning apparently had to have it sorted this way. Lightning network Fascinating concept really I must admit. It is different layer working on top of bitcoin block chain. Instead of sending every transaction on chain, users were encouraged to use this so called settlement layer, where only final balancing is written on chain. In theory, when network will be big enough and everybody will connect, closing final balances will never be required or for very long time plus when something goes wrong. Lightning network is in even bigger beta than I thought and I don’t think I can say more about its technical side, but already I think it might be very interesting someday. It should not stop on chain scaling though. My problem with Lightning network is more on idealogical level. It to much looks like trying to replicate existing banking system (I might be totally wrong on this) and there was LIE spread before introducing LN that everybody needs to run full node. It is a lie. Obvious lie. First of all, the definition of full node has been changed. Originally full node was node that was doing all functions of node and that includes mining. Mining is now highly centralised and it has very big entry price, so normal user rather can’t run full node efficiently. Definition has changed to call non mining nodes a full node. That implies they are important to bitcoin network. They are not. They are important for Lightning network though, as user has to be connected to it all the time via they're own node. Not only Lightning Network is build on bitcoin chain but also on the lie and misinformation. That is very bad. Any discussion to put things straight as they are result in ban in every communication channel controlled by central authority of core devs. Every day I come to reddit or any other social media, I see plenty of lies, usually from people that do not lie, and I am sick of it. Bitcoin is evil, bitcoin is broken, bitcoin is taken over by malicious group, that luckily forked away in August last year and is marked as btc. Bch chain restored the original value of Bitcoin. Central authority is gone. If it happens again, we will fork away again. It is low fee or no fee system for everybody. It is fascinating again. There is new development. Look on memo and blockpress. If you can’t see implications of this, I don’t know what to say. Now is the time people have to choose though. Bitcoin cash has low volume. It is possible people don’t want uncensored money, social network, or network in general. Maybe they need Lambo dream and ponzi scheme? Maybe. I don’t know. But I’m off from btc and I am not coming back.
Bitconnect (BCC) Is A Zombie Shitcoin, Since It Still Exists After Epic USD 2.7 Billion Collapse
https://preview.redd.it/g0ky0k0lhb321.png?width=540&format=png&auto=webp&s=bc5c3b2e431e9511fb1dca1f9779b284890c2bff http://genesisblocknews.com/bitconnect-bcc-is-a-zombie-shitcoin-since-it-still-exists-after-epic-usd-2-7-billion-collapse/ After intense scientific research, the experts at GenesisBlockNews have discovered a new type of shitcoin: the zombie shitcoin. The definition of a zombie shitcoin is a shitcoin that already totally died, but somehow continues to have trading activity and a value. Bitconnect (BCC) is the first identified zombie shitcoin. Bitconnect was a typical ponzi scheme where people thought they were getting profits by holding its native token, BCC, but really they were just being paid with the money from new investors. Once the cryptocurrency market began to decline in December 2017 and January 2018, and new investments dried up, Bitconnect imploded like the infamous Chernobyl nuclear reactor. The market cap of BCC declined from USD 2.77 billion to USD 20 million within a month. It is important to note that USD 2.77 billion would place Bitconnect in #4 today, ahead of Stellar, Bitcoin Cash, EOS, Litecoin, Tether, etc. The fact that the native cryptocurrency of a ponzi scheme was able to gain such a high market cap is illustrative of how naive, and honestly outright stupid, the crypto space got. People were dumping truck loads of money into the pockets of the Bitconnect scammers, since they thought they could get quick profits, instead of doing research and investing in cryptocurrencies that have real potential. This same story has been repeated for thousands of ICO scams, but perhaps Bitconnect is the most obvious example. Currently BCC has a price of USD 0.68 and a market cap of USD 7.4 million. Not only that, but CoinMarketCap indicates that BCC has daily volume of USD 10,000 on average, and there was a 100+% rally in August 2018. This firmly indicates that BCC is indeed a zombie shitcoin. People are still paying actual money for a cryptocurrency which totally died an entire year ago. The only advice we have, after watching zombie movies, is to shoot BCC straight in the head. Bitconnect already died in the crypto equivalent of a nuclear meltdown, and now it walks the Earth as an undead cryptocurrency.
Wealth Formula Episode 188: Ask Buck Part 2 (Transcript part 2)
So all right next question and we're already going pretty late this is a long question, okay this is a very long question or at least my answer is going to be very long because this is from Eric. He says this is a hypothetical question if you could participate actively and/or passively and only three of the following alternative investment types over the next five to seven years which ones and why. Okay so there's a long, there's a laundry list of different things here which I think it's useful to go over. These are all things I think the reason Eric has them is because they have been the subject of podcasts of mine over a period of time. Let me give you my personal opinion on each, it's not again not investor advice right this is not it advice, this is my opinion but I'm gonna go through each one that's on this laundry list and just give you a short little feedback from my opinion okay and then I'll come back and I'll give you my three favorites. So self storage units okay I like self storage. I like self storage because it's resilient to the cycles, the recessionary cycles etc and the issue like anywhere else though is you got to find the right operator. You can also you know you could probably learn to do this. I have not necessarily you know learned to do this but I think it's a good business, you know especially with the demographic changes, the boomers as they retire and they leave their you know big houses and they move somewhere warm like Florida or something like that then they got to put their stuff places and that makes it great or you can raise rents very quickly in these things. You basically nickel dime people up you know significantly every year the challenge is finding where do you invest and so I'll tell you that you know I'm not a big fan of funds. I know there are some funds out there I'm not a big fan of them because I like to know what's in the portfolio and I know for a fact that some of the funds are basically you know just a bunch of properties that no one wanted to take down an individual asset necessarily and so they all kind of got grouped together. I like self storage but the deal has to be just right. It has to be just the right location etc etc okay and by the way I think again and from an inflationary standpoint it's a great, great place to be too but you gotta find the right deal. I'm sure we'll get hopefully we'll get one this year in Investor Club. Mobile home parks. Mobile home parks now this should be a good place for hedging the economy because of low-income housing right because of the low income housing play right there's always gonna be people who need it. The problem is okay let me back up there are people who own mobile home parks who are doing really well and if you want to get it in into that I mean hey more power to you I mean there's people who are doing well and and they're making decent money but always just look it as a pure cash flow play okay and if you buy it on your own you may get who knows fifteen twenty percent cash on cash and you know you get a you're gonna know how to run these things. I don't know very much about it. I hear it's not necessarily that hard but you know I mean obviously the professional operators are probably gonna do more with it but you can still make their basically cash counts right now. Here's the problem with investing in them as a limited partner though is that most of funds I see they might be giving you nine ten percent and for me for that kind of low-income housing, I mean this is really like you know Class D stuff right, I mean this is below apartment buildings so nine ten percent is just not enough right and the reason why that you're only getting you know eight nine ten percent is because well I mean the operators are taking the other half usually. If you can learn to buy these on your own then it might be worth it but the reality is that in a fund model or a syndicated model there isn't gonna be a lot of upside there, right? I mean think about it. What do we do in the apartment space? We have the ability to raise rents quite a bit and improve these properties. You can even take a property that has you know currently has residents who are you know C plus residents and all of a sudden you know you've got some hipsters in there and also you've opened up a new completely different kind of asset right? You can do that with apartments but in mobile home parks you really can't do that, you can't do that. I mean seriously like how much can you raise the rent on a mobile home park, you know people are living in mobile home parks if they move up too much then they don't live in mobile home parks anymore so the bottom line is the appreciation on there is gonna be limited. The upside is gonna be limited and that means the annualized return will be limited okay because you're not gonna be able to rely very much on appreciation. It's going to be your cash on cash and think of it that's all. So I'm not a big fan. I'm just not a big fan because if you think about it the next thing on the list here, large multifamily 50-plus units. Well for me this is my number one asset class. I mean people gotta live somewhere and unlike mobile home parks you can get significant IRRs annualized returns by value-add through inflation and gentrification all these things that you really are limited in mobile home parks, you know you can't count on all that with mobile home parks and the reality is for investors if you look in you know Investor Club, our yields are just just as good as but the better than what you're seeing in the funds for mobile home parks and they're much higher quality assets in the right hands. In my opinion is even as a limited partner this continues to be the best place for not only capital preservation and growth capital preservation but also growth in the next five ten years. Okay so small multifamily in other words see you don't want to be a limited partner okay, you want to buy ten, 20 units etc. Well I used to do that more. I don't really do that anymore and I did really well right I mean I did really well with that kind of strategy. If you're a good operator then great go for it. The problem is that okay so say you're buying like a you know a million dollar asset you're gonna put in two hundred, two hundred fifty thousand dollars in that one asset to just buy it. The problem is that the risk profile is significant there if you don't know what you're doing right now as opposed to you know spreading your two hundred, two hundred fifty thousand over four deals in a syndicated deal and getting exposure to you know ten times more doors all of a sudden you've got two million dollars you know you've got two hundred two hundred fifty thousand dollars of equity sitting in one deal and his buck stops with you so if you are comfortable with that by all means I was comfortable with it I didn't necessarily like it and so what I would what I would say is if you're the type of person who really wants to get into the real estate game and be a landlord then go for it otherwise don't. Understand that it's very different to have a ten, twenty unit apartment building than it is a two hundred unit apartment building. One you're a landlord, the other one you're managing a small business so just be aware of that. Single-family homes is the next one on the list and I'll just tell you I just don't like them enough for our, not for our demographic, meaning like accredited investors, because you know you have the ability to do something a lot more scalable right, just through syndications and getting lots and lots of exposures. The thing I don't like about single family homes here's the deal, there's not enough scalability, there's too much Capex, okay so one roof and one furnace each unit and everyone I know who owns five or six single-family homes wishes they didn't own five or six in a single family homes they want to sell them. These get to ten and they're like this is terrible and you know I get a hundred dollars per property and then the next thing you know one month I get a five thousand dollar furnace to replace, so I'm not a big fan. So with multifamily if you're gonna do it on your own I would recommend that an award the way I think that most people who are probably not natural-born landlords should do is its consider syndications. When you get more scale and exposure to more doors, things become more stable, cash flow becomes more stable,there's less risk and in reality what we're seeing in our you know in our limited partnership opportunities is that the returns are you know better than probably most people can do on their own. The next one on the list is agriculture. Agriculture followed by CBD, specialty coffee, chocolate, well so let's start with you know some of these things because I know they've been on my podcast before, and just understand that when I have something on a podcast it does not mean I am advocating for it or saying that you should invest in it or that I even like the deal. All right so let's start with some generalities. Agriculture is fine. The stuff that I see some of the stuff that I'm seeing out there in the podcast ecosystem that you're mentioning concerns me okay and one of them is that I don't like foreign investments very much. I've had some experience with them I've realized the implications of those and I won't do them again, certainly with a smaller operator and the reason for that is that if things go wrong there you have very little recourse okay, yeah very little recourse and it's very difficult you know you have to know your operator very well. You have to trust them because if something happens overseas good luck trying to you know get any sort of retribution, ain't gonna happen right so be very careful with that, I know people get excited about it you know they go on some sort of you know they go on some sort of like investment trip and they come back and you know they're excited, they heard about something like this and it's shiny and bright and stuff like that well why what's the point, I just you know the best place to invest is right here in the US okay. The other thing is agriculture in general I would say it's fine, it's gonna be low yield and also I will say that when there's some thing like it doesn't grow three years and won't yield any cash flow for that period of time what seriously you're okay with that? Okay I'm not. And then on top of that when you sign the contract on these things look at the fine print. Look at what your exit is because you should never invest in anything unless you've thoroughly thought about how you're going to get out of it and some of these things have that problem as well. I'm not a big fan personally. Okay now CBD and I've seen that come up in the ecosystems a lot lately I again I CBD again that space is full of charlatans I would just be careful you know I see stuff people like yeah we're gonna go do this in California right well listen I live in California okay and let me tell you right now everybody I know around here knows this to be true. There is a glut of pot in California you know and apart from a selective highly skilled business people who are in the space, everyone else is gonna get killed, they just are there's this is like you know the horse has already left on this one right. People think I'm gonna do CBD in California guess what there's a few people have thought about this before you and if you're coming into this space and you have no previous experience in you know pot in CBD and all this stuff you're gonna be you're way behind. Okay and the last thing is that unless you are a major player like you got serious pockets behind you I would stay away from this because there is there is like so many laws and so many things to dodge in the space. All I can tell you is I have yet to see you know personally you know from anything that I've been you know sent that's in the US in California anything like that I would be comfortable investing in. Okay now I know there's you know startups and things like that and if you want to spend a little bit of money and those from you know people who know what they're talking about I get it but I would definitely look at that as a fairly high risk thing but for heaven's sake you know just don't listen to a Podcast or you know get an email about hey we're gonna start growing pot in California you want in just please think okay. Let's see the next one I'm going to skip oil and gas because I think I have a question coming up about oil and gas here in a moment. Cryptocurrency again listen it's an asymmetric risk type thing shouldn't be your bread and butter thing at all I mean 5-10 percent max in this bucket of asymmetric risk things that could go I mean the reason I do it is a listen, Bitcoin goes up by you know 10x which I honestly personally think it will you know in the five to 10-year horizon I want to be able to to enjoy that. Now it's not something that I would spend a lot more than that on. Personally I only put money in there that you know keeps me from you know it's the money that I would just spend on things that will you know like a fancy car something like that's what I do. Life settlements okay life settlements just as a reminder what are they? Life settlements are when you buy somebody else's life insurance policies, so maybe somebody's you know 80 years old in real bad health they would like money now they don't have any you know they're not worried about their kids don't need any money anymore so you can buy these policies from them. A lot of times that you know 50 60 cents on the dollar which is a much better deal for them than not getting any money or just you know trying to pull out cash value, it's generally going to be more than the cash value so it's an interesting play. We've talked about this before. We actually have a webinar on it at hedgetheeconomy.com if you're interested. So you're investing life settlements, you know you're basically looking and saying I'm a little worried about the economy and maybe I have a self-directed IRA or solo 401k because you know honestly the other thing is that this is not a tax sheltered type investment so you have to think about that as well, you think to yourself I want to hedge I want a small part of my portfolio something that I feel very comfortable is gonna be there. Well out of all the things that are guarantees in life, death is probably the only one that, people used to say death and taxes but you know I mean the president United States paying taxes has no guarantee in life right I mean death is the only guarantee in life so that it might be worth it, check it out for yourself, hedgetheeconomy.com. Now, notes. Notes it's sort of broad. Notes basically being liens on property for the most part, a lot of times that's what it's indicating. It really depends on the operator you know, I would you know look at it as you know if you look at AHP Servicing you know with Jorge’s company I have looked at this in terms of short-term kind of places to put money for liquidity that I can pull out you know if there's a liquid fund like AHP Servicing for example, but I like appreciation and so that's the problem right, so you might get nine, ten percent cash on cash in notes, you might do a little bit better but you know you're not getting any tax advantages. So with multifamily real estate I mean I can still get nine, ten percent cash on cash and then I get twenty percent plus I are ours typically and you know the nine, ten percent I got is tax deductible so it's really the tax equivalent of making like fifteen percent. So you know fortunately if it's me I do equity over any kind of real estate debt and mostly it's because of the tax advantages. Now if you are gonna do it again, look at your qualified money like IRAs, 401ks etc and you know look at a fund. I also think this is one of those things where you really have to look at the operator. I do like Jorge. He's one of the smartest guys I know so AHP Servicing certainly would be something to consider and I so like liquidity the component of this is a nice place to keep it for a period time. And understand it's not without risk either. This is non-performing paper, but again that's where the operator comes in and you know I think Jorge is a really smart guy so I feel fairly comfortable with that. Gold and silver well honestly I don't see the point as I've said earlier, I mean gold and silver are hedge to inflation so this real estate cash flows and frankly I don't believe in the zombie apocalypse narrative that I have heard before you know where you buy that monster box of silver coins which by the way I did because I drank the kool-aid a few years ago and you know there's this idea that you know you're the only thing that's gonna be able to buy anything is a monster box of silver that's the only thing that people are gonna accept. Well I just don't think that's gonna happen so for me why not buy real estate at least you know you know you can force appreciation etc. Now if you're super paranoid on real estate just you know limit your leverage I'm not saying don't own gold a silver I'm just saying think about it before you go and drink the kool-aid on the you know the fear-based stuff there music royalties and we did have a podcast on that honestly I just don't know much about it but you know some people seem to be doing okay with it I wouldn't make this a core holding unless you were in the business and really know what you're doing. I would put this in your high risk profile. Artwork, similar. Listen I like our work is like gold in my view and if you are an art buff and you really know what you're doing then go for it but I'm not. Some people like vintage cars like me to enjoy it and allow it to appreciate. I think art is similar to that right, so it goes into that pile that I've talked about before where it's like if you have an inch you know if you're one of those people who buys stuff you know nice stuff and you know you want nice stuff well art not fine art and vintage cars are fun but they will appreciate so I think art is similar to that. I know we podcast on fractional ownership apart you don't get the same effect because you know get to keep it in your house but you know you do get to they do keep it in a gallery so that's kind of neat however you know what I'm not a big enough art guy to do this so I'm gonna stick to bread-and-butter stuff instead like real estate, websites, online businesses, if you know what you're doing this can be very profitable. The problem is that most people don't know what they're doing and I have looked into these things a little bit on behalf of people and I've been a little suspicious at least if some of the sites they seem like Ponzi schemes to me but I don't know for sure. Okay but if you know what you're doing with this this is a great space I mean you can make a lot you can make a decent money with this. I've done that private lending well private lending you know as opposed to notes I guess you're just lending to flippers and stuff I mean I would suggest that this is not a bad thing to do if you know how to do it. I know if there's some people who do it pretty fairly prolifically in our group here's what I would suggest though if you're worried about the economy or at all and lending the home flippers is probably one of the riskiest thing you can do but how can you mitigate that risk? Well you may just loan at you know fifty percent loan to value right and in that situation if they can't pay you back at least you've got a property that you can take over at 50 percent of the cost right now. I definitely would not be you know doing super high loan-to-value type notes or private loans and then you know obviously there's some stuff like Lending Club and stuff I have not really you know looked into much, but I think some people have where you can do some of that as well but okay so that's the big list of my favorites. Large scale real estate like apartments and self storage and one that you didn't mention on here that we talked about earlier, Wealth Formula Banking. For me that stocks and bonds that's equity and basically a bond a structure for me right and that makes up 90% of my investments right there and then the rest of its you know shiny stuff, asymmetric risk stuff like Bitcoin gives me exposure to something that could explode and make me a lot of money potentially with a small investment, but if I lose it and won't go crying so you know bottom line is that I mean the the moral of this story is keep it simple. I think one of the things that I noticed that a lot of people are doing because of the podcast ecosystem and I'm somewhat to blame for this because they think you know we do put on different types of things but we've really narrowed that down a lot is that my advice would be that what I have noticed in my own investing success track record over the last 10 years is the stuff that makes money tends to be pretty boring right like real estate I mean at least I've done so many things in the last 10 years and you know the thing that keeps paying me is the stuff that's the most boring. So don't go look out look for shiny objects okay don't look for foreign investments don't look for you know crazy stuff when it comes to your bread-and-butter stuff keep it boring right I mean seriously you know you've got a if you're a limited partner you find a with an operator that keeps delivering why are you looking like for 10 different things. Okay I understand there's a need for some diversity but okay maybe two or three different things and maybe similar types of you know you find good operators you stick with them but you don't need like ten of those I mean it's silly right, just pick a few things and if there's some you know stuff like Bitcoin or something like that really interests you and that's kind of fun for you then you want to buy some you know vintage cars or something like that do that, but stay boring. There's an eloquence about boring that I have experienced in the last decade that I can just say from my experience over time it's not as boring when you get those nice payouts. So anyway we still have a bunch of questions and I've been going for almost an hour so I'm going cut it off and there will be therefore a part 3 Ask Buck. But I do want to thank you and for for having all these questions and we will have part three of Ask Buck next time. Thanks for joining Wealth Formula Podcast. This is Buck Joffrey signing off.
I was talking with a friend who isn't in the space and was just flippantly saying Bitcoin was just a Ponzi scheme. I looked up Wikipedia to refute him with the definition and it hit me that BTC in its current form IS a Ponzi scheme by definition. "A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator generates returns for older investors through revenue paid by new investors, rather than from legitimate business activities or profit of financial trading." (BTC doesn't actually do anything of value now) "Often, high returns encourage investors to leave their money within the scheme, so the operator does not actually have to pay very much to investors." (just HODL?) "Since the scheme requires a continual stream of investments to fund higher returns, once investment slows down, the scheme collapses as the promoter starts having problems paying the promised returns (the higher the returns, the greater the risk of the Ponzi scheme collapsing). Such liquidity crises often trigger panics, as more people start asking for their money, similar to a bank run." I've been a HODL'er since 2013 but can't defend BTC to anyone anymore. It doesn't actually DO anything now. A store of value is a terrible model IMO. You're just hoping new people put money in so it grows. There is no actual product now. I feel like the smart money got into BTC in the early days who saw the vision, now the smart money is getting out seeing the writing on the wall.
Hey everyone. I’ve never posted here before and I don’t really post often anyways, but I need some advice. If this isn’t the right place for this kind of post I apologize in advance, but I don’t know what else to do. I don’t suffer from BPD personally, but I am 99% sure one of my best friends from childhood does. He was always an outcast when we were younger, kind of a strange kid and usually rubbed people the wrong way with his humor (he didn’t have boundaries). I could tell he didn’t mean to come off that way and we became friends in middle school, but most people disliked him. Because of that, people made fun of him, his appearance mostly (a chubby kid with red hair). We stayed friends throughout high school where he began to play sports and became more like everyone else, he seemed like just a normal kid. He still had an immature sense of humor, but he was definitely better than before. But soon I started to notice something that wasn’t quite right. He started telling these stories about certain things he did, but they became literally unbelievable. I know people exaggerate sometimes, so some of the details that seemed too crazy I just brushed off. It’s not like I hadn’t embellished some of my stories in the past. The thing was, he would swear they were true and wouldn’t back down from them. This got worse and worse until he told me he could “hack” into the grade book and change our grades. He was very convincing, but in the end it turned out to be a lie, as a lot of things with him turned out to be. I figured he would grow up and change as he got older, but I was dead wrong. In college we stayed in touch, but not too much. He came to visit a few times and nothing ever got too unbelievable until I came back home after my sophomore year. He had now told me he was an overnight millionaire from bitcoin he had found on an old hard drive he happened to dig up (it took two years for him to confirm to me this was a lie). I couldn’t believe it, but I tried to because he was my friend. That lie changed his whole life in the worst way possible. He was a fraud, a fake, and he kept up the facade even to this day. He dropped out of school, started experimenting with steroids, psychedelics, and adderall. He began trading stocks and cryptocurrency and tricked people into building a trading bot for him. Then stole their product and their money. He got other people to invest with him after announcing his success on social media. Basically ran a Ponzi scheme to keep clients and steal money. He really did invest the money, but people would never see it again. A couple of my close friends invested a couple thousand with him and he eventually took off with the money and never spoke to them again. Despite all this I’m still here trying to help him. I know it may seem obvious to people on the outside that this was a lie, but he lived it like it was the truth. And that made everyone else believe him. In his mind, it is the truth, but for me it’s so frustrating to watch this happen to him. He’s extremely smart and his life could be totally different. I know he struggles with depression as he’s mentioned suicide to me before among other things. I’ve tried to break the barrier of lies into the truth, but he’ll never let me get past the surface. I know he wants to tell me, I believe he really does, but I don’t know the right way to confront him without making him feel like a complete failure. It’s a very fragile situation especially in his mental state. Deep down I always knew, I have a pretty good intuition and I’ve struggled with lying in the past. It takes one to know one... but this has just gotten absolutely out of hand. If anyone has any advice on what I can do or the correct way to approach this situation, please let me know. I would do anything to help my friends, especially this one. Thanks in advance. TLDR; A good friend of mine since childhood has started living a lie for the past few years. He became an “overnight millionaire” and then ended up stealing people’s money in what was most likely a Ponzi scheme. I’m pretty sure he has BPD and I’m afraid he’s going to commit suicide. I want to help, but I don’t know how to confront him. Thanks for any advice!
Medium of exchange is the primary function, "store of value" is the secondary function. The "store of value" model alone can not be anything more than a greater fool scheme.
There is a very common misconception that Bitcoin's primary use case is as a store of value (which is being used to justify it not working well as a currency.) The truth is, Bitcoin's primary value proposition is that it is a functioning medium of exchange. The "store of value" aspect is secondary to that. There is no "store of value" if it is not also usable as a currency. BSCore says literally the opposite of this, making people believe store of value is the primary function, giving them an excuse/cover to erode Bitcoin's primary function, medium of exchange. In the pure "store of value" model, Bitcoin is basically a Ponzi scheme since the end result can only be you selling it to someone else for a higher price. This is also called a "greater fool" scheme. Since it's not useful for anything, you hold it just to make profit from the price going up right? And for you to realize that profit, you have to sell it to someone for a higher price than you bought it for. Now that guy has to do the same thing. Everyone all the way down the line has to do the same thing, but this can not go on forever as eventually there will be no greater fool to sell to. The scheme implodes. That is why the pure "Store of Value" model is flawed. The "Store of value" can only be secondary to it being used as a currency. People using Bitcoin as a currency is what truly drives demand, this is because in order for people to reap the financial benefits of using Bitcoin as a currency, they must first trade something of value for Bitcoin. This creates real, organic demand for Bitcoin, forcing the value of the tokens to rise, due to the limited supply. Someone asked: "But what about Gold, Land, diamonds, etc. Aren't these a store of value?" Again, these items not just a store of value since they have real life use cases, which makes them a store of value. Gold as a conductor is special because it does not tarnish meaning it has a long usable life in circuitry. Diamonds have unique physical properties that make them useful in specific applications like cutting things. Land has real life value for obvious reasons, say crop production for instance. So all of these assets are a store of value yes, but that is only because they have another useful, primary function, which is what makes them valuable, allowing them to store value. So we can see that like the previously listed items that have a real value adding function, that allow them to act as a store of value, Bitcoin also has a primary function as a useful medium of exchange, allowing it to be a store of value. If Bitcoin is only being sold as a store of value with NO use as a medium of exchange than it is the definition of a bubble. Complimentary to this concept is understanding how the Velocity of Money and Metcalfe's Law force the value of the tokens in a limited supply system to rise exponentially. The forced rise in value is based on the number of transactions being performed, proving that being useful as a medium of exchange is important. Sharpen your understanding with this relevant reading from the Arsenal of Truth: https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4dfb3bitcoin_has_its_own_e_mc2_law_market/ https://medium.com/@zeptochain/the-million-dollar-bitcoin-4c108f3706b https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5uljaf/bitcoin_original_reinstate_satoshis_original_32mb/
Hi there, I was reading a bunch of posts on this sub, and I think its hilarious/sad how accurate you guys portrait the delusion in the crypto space. I think you are spot on for most projects that are just buzzword spewing fool suckering Ponzi schemes that offer no real value, but there are some projects that have real usecase. So here are my main bags, that I think shouldn't be grouped with all the useless scams and if its just because how the devs act on a moral scale: Nano, Holo. If you allow it I would like to talk about my own conclusions, and you can then decide if you want to call me a stupid butter or not. I am looking to debate with someone who opposes my views, not shill you my bags, they are pretty small anyway. I will talk about Nano since it is the most promising in my opinion. I am aware that its speculation and risky, but I personally think that holding some in addition to my fiat savings is a smart move, in case adoption will grow. I put a portion of my surplus salary into Nano every month. To be honest the project makes me excited and not just for the possibility of moonlambos. Let me explain: You probably heard the basics: Fast, free, green blah blah. While those are parroted all over, lets stop and think for a second. These are definitely positive characteristics, if you like it or not. Something I see here often is people claim a coin is useless because nobody uses it. My answer to that is that we are still extremely early, and it is correct to say that it is 99.9% speculation. I am speculating that Nano will be used for some usecases in our growing sharing economy on the net, which will rise demand and therefore the price. Also more usage will get better stability. So let me give you some usecases I can think of: 1) I want to read a paywalled article on a site I never use. I will not pay a subscription now just to read one article, but if I could use a browser plugin to pay the journalist x Nano and unlock that specific article I would love to. 2) Tipping on social media. Lets be honest reddit gold is mostly useless. I would much rather gift a user that helped me with some issue, made me laugh super hard or pointed out a logical flaw in my argument some Nano, which he can actually use to purchase something of value at accepting vendors. The nano tip bot already allows this both on reddit and on twitter. 3) Streaming a song could have a micropayment directly to the artist, and I would be willing to pay more than the sub 0.01$ Spotify pays per play. Same with other art. Imagine for example a VR art gallery and each piece you look at you pay a small amount. If you want to you can donate to the artist or even buy a high-res picture that you can print. Now there are other criticism I read, like lack of stability, deflationary currency, vulnerability to spam, the devs using their dev fund (really?), the supposed shill army, and a bunch of people that are misinformed how the protocol and consensus on nano works. I personally think most of these criticisms are not huge issues, although I have to say I am not an economist and never understood why deflationary currency is always inherently bad. I get that it encourages holding, but from an investment standpoint that is an advantage. So this is where you will cry Ponzi I guess. About the shill army on reddit I will just say this. People can be excited about new technology especially if it has such a potential to fundamentally disrupt how we view and use money. After 2008 I don't want to exclusively depend on FIAT anymore. Nano is the idea of Bitcoin but it actually works. If you disagreed with the premise of Bitcoin in the first place I won't change your mind, but maybe consider that not the entire crypto space is run by greed and scam. Bitcoin isn't a scam its a good idea but with too much limitations. It still got a lot of hype from excited people, and again, not purely out of a desire of getting rich. Nano is the same in that way. I am looking forward to hopefully a civilized discussion. My point is a decentralized currency that allows microtransactions without fees IS useful even if it is just a glorified decentralized spreadsheet. That doesn't invalidate its usefulness.
The fundamentals of bitcoin as an asset exist and they are stupider than you can imagine
tldr; tldr; Hodling is deflationary and all those wild price swings from bitcoin are changes in the fundamental value of bitcoin. Really. tldr; Imagine there is a market where $100 worth of goods are sold every day using 100 bitcoins which cycle around. Then each bitcoin would be worth $1. Now suppose that 50 of the bitcoins were being held in anticipation of growing in value so only 50 bitcoins were cycling each day. For all the goods in the market to be sold every day each bitcoin will now be worth $2. Introduction There has been a lot of discussion about what the fundamental value of bitcoin is. The consensus view in this subreddit is that the fundamental value is zero. I argue in this post that the fundamental value of bitcoin is whatever the price is right now, or a something close to it. This is because the fundamentals of bitcoin are stupid. Unimaginably stupid. Bitcoin as Currency Bitcoin is a terrible currency compared to normal statist filthy fiat. Bitcoins are often permanently lost due to hacking or easily made mistakes. Transactions take considerable time to be confirmed. The price is highly volatile. But this post isn’t going into those issues in depth. There is little evidence for mainstream Bitcoin use. A report by Morgan Stanley on the acceptance of Bitcoin from online retailers found that only 3 out of the 500 online retailers tracked accepted Bitcoin payments, a decrease from 5 in the previous year. The report concluded: “Bitcoin acceptance is virtually zero and shrinking”. The number of transaction on darknet markets is large. On darknet markets users buy illegal products using cryptocurrencies (not just Bitcoin). Due to their illegal nature, it is impossible to know the exact value of transactions that take place on them. Between February 2011 and July 2013 the darknet market Silk Road had 1,229,465 transactions comprising 9,519,644 bitcoins in revenue. Darknet markets, along with ransomware payments are the only uses where there is evidence of a substantial number of bitcoin transactions taking place. To work at scale darknet markets require cryptocurrency to pay for goods on sale. The anonymous nature of cryptocurrency allows transactions to take place without the buyer or the seller knowing anything about each other (although if a buyer has drugs mailed to them the seller will know who they are). If darknet markets used another form of payment then law enforcement could buy something and then track both the money going to the seller and the commission paid to the darknet market. It isn’t true as many people have claimed that nothing backs bitcoin. Bitcoin is backed by darknet markets. There are a few kinds of people who buy bitcoin and want to spend it. They include drug buyers, those who need to pay off ransomware, money launders, fraudsters, and a few others but for simplicity’s sake I will just call them drug buyers. Likewise, there are a few types of people who sell products for bitcoin but again for simplicity’s sake I will call them drug sellers. Non-circularity Bitcoin is a currency with a property that I call non-circularity. With Actual Money, when I buy something in a shop, the money I paid with goes towards the wages of the staff, rent and the products themselves among other expenses. This money then flows on to others. When a drug seller receives bitcoin in exchange for their drugs they can’t use the bitcoin to pay for their groceries or to pay their rent. They must exchange the bitcoin for filthy fiat to buy food. The inability to use bitcoin for further purchases means it is a non-circular currency. Bitcoin is a medium of a medium of exchange. A full bitcoin transaction thus consists of three parts:
A drug buyer goes to a bitcoin exchange to get bitcoin in exchange for filthy fiat
The drug buyer goes to the DNM to exchange bitcoin for drugs from the drug seller
The drug seller goes to the bitcoin exchange to get filthy fiat in exchange for bitcoin
An exchange is any place which matches buyers and sellers of bitcoin. This includes online exchanges like Coinbase as well as LocalBitcoins which matches people for face to face transactions. As nobody receives bitcoin for payment except drug dealers, the only place for drug buyers to get bitcoin is an exchange. The extreme volatility of bitcoin means that drug buyers and sellers try to complete the process as quickly as possible and avoid holding onto bitcoin. Perfect Price Unstickiness For normal currencies prices are sticky. That means that nominal prices do not respond quickly to changing economic conditions. In contrast bitcoin has what I call perfect price unstickiness so the price of goods in bitcoin changes almost perfectly to changes in the value of bitcoin. This is because prices for items which can be bought with bitcoin are never actually set in bitcoin, probably due to the high volatility. Instead they are set in fiat. The amount in fiat can either be listed directly, so $US50 for these drugs, or the price can be listed in the converted amount of bitcoin, 0.005BTC if 1 BTC = $US10,000. Changes in the price of bitcoin on exchanges are instantly reflected in the prices of drugs in bitcoins on darknet markets. Hodling Another feature of bitcoin that should be considered is that people hodl bitcoin. The word comes from a typo of ‘hold’. Bitcoin is often bought on exchanges not for use as a currency to buy drugs, but as an asset in expectation of a price rise. Hodlers are the third type of user of bitcoin along with drug buyers and drug sellers. Although they don’t use it. What’s the difference between an asset that is held and one that is hodled? This is admittedly vague, but an asset is hodled if it is being held, it can be held for long periods at low costs, it can but isn’t generating any income and there are no plans to generate income from it soon. Cash under the mattress is being hodled, cash in my wallet that I am going to buy stuff with soon is not. Money in my bank account is generating income and so is not hodled. Bitcoin held in anticipation of price rises is being hodled. Bitcoin bought to buy drugs but which has not been used yet is not. Gold stored in a vault is being hodled, gold used for electronics purposes is not (jewellery is a harder case). A vacant block of land with no plans to develop it or use it for anything is being hodled but one that is soon going to have an apartment block built on it is not. Commodities can be held and do not generate income until sold but it is expensive to hold most commodities for long periods of time. This prevents most commodities from being hodled. Velocity The velocity of money is the average number of times a unit of fiat changes hands in a period. You can skip the next three paragraphs as they are a little annoying and you can get by without them. Just know that I am defining the velocity of bitcoin as what the velocity of bitcoin would be if no bitcoin was being hodled. Due to hodling, the velocity of bitcoin under the conventional definition can vary wildly. Consider two cases. Both have 100 bitcoins, 100 transactions a day and all non-hodled bitcoins are spent each day. The first has no hodled bitcoins, the second 50 hodled bitcoins. The first has a velocity of bitcoin of 1 transaction per day, the second is 0.5 per day. I want a definition of velocity of bitcoin that is not impacted by changes in hodling. I did consider doing this analysis through changes in velocity but the final formula is easier to understand if we find a definition of velocity of bitcoin that is independent of the level of hodling. The definition that achieves this is (Length of Time)/(Average length of time to complete transaction). When there is no hodling the two definitions agree but the new definition is unchanged by any rise or fall in the level of hodling, which is what we need. From this point on when I refer to the velocity of bitcoin I am referring to the second definition. The actual time to complete a bitcoin transaction seems to be over a week. In an interview one vendor claimed that it took one week for the bitcoin to be released from escrow and longer to convert it to actual money. Intuitive argument Assume that the amount of drugs sold on darknet markets changes little from week to week. If the price of bitcoin doubles over the week then the number of bitcoins flowing through the darknet markets will halve. So where have the bitcoins gone? Drug buyers and sellers don’t have them. The only option is hodlers. In fact, it was the hodlers buying the bitcoins that caused the price to change. Formula The conventional formula for the relationship between velocity of money (V), nominal amount of money (M), price level (P) and real economic activity (Q) is V*M = P*Q I am going to change that equation slightly so it now concerns the velocity of bitcoin (V), the total number of bitcoins (M), the price level of bitcoin (P), the total value in fiat of all economic transactions (Q) and the proportion of bitcoins that are hodled (h). If h*M bitcoins are being hodled then there are (1-h)*M bitcoins being used in economic transactions. The new equation is V*(1-h)*M = P*Q Next we isolate P: P = V*(1-h)*M/Q If the price level changes from 1 to 1.1 that means that there has been 10% inflation over the period and that the value of bitcoin has fallen. To find the value of a single bitcoin we have to take the reciprocal of P and that gives a formula for the true value of bitcoin: 1/P = Q/[V*(1-h)*M] In the rest of the post when I write the price of bitcoin I mean the price bitcoin sells for on exchanges. I establish in the next section that this price must be close to the true value of bitcoin. Equilibrium This section uses the flow of bitcoin model established earlier. We assume no activity from hodlers and that economic users do not hodl bitcoin (not true but it simplifies and does not hurt the model). Furthermore, we assume that all activity on the bitcoin exchanges happens, then all activity on the darknet markets happens. Drug sellers sell their bitcoin to drug buyers, then drug buyers use the bitcoin to buy drugs on the darknet markets. Neither the exchanges or the darknet markets charge commissions. I use specific numbers but my reasoning is easily generalizable. To establish why the equation is true we must consider what happens if the actual price is higher or lower than the price given by the formula. First let us suppose that the price is lower than the price predicted by the formula. Over the time period of a day suppose that Q = 100 (so $100 worth of transactions a day), V = 1 (transactions take a day), M = 100 (100 bitcoins) and h = 0.5 (50 bitcoins are hodled). This gives a predicted price of $2. Suppose the price is instead $1. Every day there are $100 worth of drugs available to be sold and buyers willing to buy $100 worth of drugs. At a price of $1 and with only 50 bitcoins available for economic use each day that means that only $50 worth of drugs can be sold. This would drop Q to 50 and immediately correct the equation. However, there are buyers and sellers who want more drug dealing than that. Some buyers are not going to be able to get their drugs given the current price. Some of them will be willing to pay higher prices for bitcoin to guarantee they can have their drugs. Suppose that the drug sellers have 50 bitcoins (hodlers also have 50). They want to sell their 50 bitcoins to drug buyers on an exchange. Some drug buyers then bid the price of bitcoin up to $1.10 (for example). This benefits other drug buyers as now $55 worth of drug transactions can take place each day. In this way, the price will be bid up to $2, the equilibrium price. If the price is $1 and the drug buyers have the 50 bitcoins then they will spend the bitcoins to buy $50 worth of drugs and then we are in the situation above. Now suppose the reverse happens and the actual price is higher than the predicted price. Let the actual price be $4, with all the same example values from the previous example, so the predicted price is $2. On the exchange drug sellers have 50 bitcoins worth $200 to sell. Drug buyers want to buy $100 worth of bitcoin. At this price only 25 bitcoins are sold. To ensure they sell more of their bitcoin, drug buyers bid down the price. If the price does not immediately reach $2 then the left-over bitcoins will be held by the drug sellers until the next day when the price will be bid down again. The drug sellers holding bitcoin for a few extra days is not the same as hodling because they are actively trying to sell them on an exchange but they haven’t because the price isn’t in equilibrium. They could instead decide to sell only 25 bitcoins and hodl the other 25. This would raise h to 0.75 and the price would be in equilibrium again. Now suppose that the drug buyers have 50 bitcoins and the price is $4. Then $100 worth of drugs are bought with 25 bitcoins. The drug sellers will not be able to sell their bitcoin as drug buyers already have enough bitcoin to buy the next round of drugs they want. The drug buyers spend their last 25 bitcoin and drug sellers now have 50 bitcoins and the situation is as above. In conclusion, the price of Bitcoin is fundamentally determined by speculators and brought into equilibrium by criminals. Inflows and Outflows of Hodling The previous section treated the level of hodling as constant, except when drug buyers or sellers decide to hodl extra bitcoins that are in their possession. Now we will treat the amount of hodled bitcoins as changing. The next topic to consider is the relationship between filthy fiat spent to hodl bitcoins and the bitcoin price. To calculate how much it costs to raise the hodl ratio from 0 to h we assume that the bitcoins are bought continuously. We integrate the function Q/[M*V*(1-t/M)] between 0 and h*M. The result is (Q/V)ln[1/(1-h)]. To double the price of bitcoin by taking h from 0 to 0.5 will cost (Q/V)ln(2). In fact, it will always cost this amount to double the price of bitcoin as we can see by finding the difference between the total value of hodled bitcoin when we consider hodling levels of h and (h+1)/2. This means that the price of bitcoin rises exponentially when a constant amount of new money buys bitcoin to hodl. I would illustrate this with a log-scale graph but I don’t know where to find one. It also means that the market capitalisation of a cryptocurrency gives very little idea about how much the cryptocurrency is worth. It is an impossibility for all hodlers to receive the Actual Money that they think their bitcoin is worth. Volatility People hoping to get rich and their buying and selling bitcoin is what causes bitcoin’s extreme volatility. Theoretically this could be stopped if there was a bank where hodlers could deposit their bitcoins and earn interest. However, for this to work would require the existence of a bitcoin bank which is not a Ponzi which seems like an unlikely outcome. Hodling Gold A quick digression into gold, but I suspect someone has already thought of what follows. We can consider gold like a conventional commodity with conventional supply and demand curves (the real world for all commodities is more complicated but this is going to be quick). But people also hodl gold. If hodlers decide to buy $100 million worth of gold produced in the year, then that will change the equilibrium price. The new price is such that the difference between the quantity demanded by non-hodlers and the quantity supplied at that price multiplied by the price is 100 million. If the overall level of hodling declines then the reverse happens. The hodlers sell an amount of gold, that amount is the difference between the amount supplied and demanded. The hodlers earn that amount multiplied by the new lower price. (I assumed people bought a fiat amount of gold and sold a volume of gold to make things easier). Without another hodler to take on the gold or an improvement in market conditions, the hodlers are guaranteed a loss. To make a profit hodling gold you need there to be hodlers to sell it on to (or an improvement in the underlying factors). It follows that all the gold hodled in the world today cannot be sold without causing the fundamentals of gold to collapse. With 40% of the gold produced in 2017 being hodled this will eventually become a significant issue. Full Reserve Banking Another place where we can consider the impact of hodling is full reserve banking. It is a form of banking where banks are required to have cash on hand equal to the full amount in all demand deposit accounts. The bank does not lend this money. This contrasts with the present system where banks are only required to have a certain fraction of this amount on hand, called fractional reserve banking. Money in a fractional reserve bank account is not being hodled (or is, but to a more limited degree) as it is being lent on to other people and it is generating income for the depositor. Deposits under full reserve banking are hodling. They are like cash stuffed under a mattress but have better security. In a recession people increase their saving rates. Much of this additional saving will be in liquid assets because of fears of economic trouble. This rise in deposits under full reserve is an increase in hodled cash which then causes deflation. This is a big problem in a recession. (Somebody else has probably already made this observation). Velocity and Value Consider the equation of bitcoin’s value again. Notice that the value increases when V decreases. Which means that the length of time to complete a transaction has increased. Bitcoin is an asset and a currency and its value as an asset increases as the length of time it takes to complete a transaction increases. This is a minor bit of stupidity which surprised me but seems obvious in retrospect as if bitcoins take longer to be processed then they must be worth more so that all transactions can happen. (This is assuming that a decrease in V does not also cause a decrease in Q which might be caused by drug buyers and sellers switching to a different cryptocurrency). Hodler Behavior With one exception which I might make in another post I make no assumptions about hodler behaviour. I think they are buying and selling with no rational basis. But there are two rational reasons why someone would expect the price of bitcoin to rise: increased economic activity using the cryptocurrency in the darknet markets or an increased level of hodling in the future. The DNM is an actual economic activity but due to its illegality knowing anything about the amounts involved is impossible for almost everyone as is predicting their trends. Future hodling levels are also impossible to predict, unless you run a pump and dump. We can’t expect any sort of rational behavior from hodlers. Nakamoto Scheme Preston Byrne developed the concept of a Nakamoto Scheme to describe cryptocurrencies because of how they differed from Ponzis and pyramid schemes. While bitcoin has been frequently called a Ponzi or pyramid scheme it is clearly something different. There are no “dividends” paid or any sort of organised structure. There are similarities, notably early adopters make their money at the expense of later adopters. Like in pyramid schemes hodlers try to convince new people to join in. It is best to consider bitcoin as a type of asset which is uniquely suited for a pump and dump. When hodlers buy bitcoin, and encourage others to do the same (the pump) the fundamental price of bitcoin really is raised by these actions which helps the pump. To add to Byrne’s work, we should put the properties of cryptocurrency assets at the centre of the scheme. A Nakamoto scheme works like this: first create a cryptocurrency and keep most of it for yourself. Then release it and try to get as many other people hodling as possible and try to get the darknet markets to adopt it (I’m looking at you Monero). This increases the fundamental value of the asset. Then dump your hodlings. Pocket the actual money. This is probably legal right now. But I’m not a law-knowing person. For the hodler the Nakamoto scheme is like going to a party. You arrive and leave later on. If there are more people at the party when you leave compared to when you arrived then you’ve made a profit. There is also drug dealing going on at the party. The change in the level of drug dealing also impacts your profits. You have to try and get more people to come to the party and be careful of everyone else at the party who have the exact same incentives as you. It is a weird new form of scam. Lower bound on price While the price of bitcoin can theoretically be infinitely high there is a lower bound on the price when the hodling ratio is zero. For given levels of Q, V and M the value of bitcoin can never go below Q/[V*M] (the highest possible price for bitcoin is when 1 satoshi is equal to the value of a transaction). Some bitcoins have been permanently lost due to people losing their wallet keys or bitcoins being sent to the wrong address. If we suppose that H is the proportion of coins that have been permanently lost then the actual lower bound is Q/[V*(1-H)*M]. Note that a hodler losing their coins does not change the present fundamental value of bitcoin. What could cause bitcoin’s price to go lower? Besides a mass hodler sell-off the obvious reason is a permanent decline in Q. What could cause this? Law enforcement have successfully shut down many darknet markets but others have replaced them quickly. What could really hurt darknet markets is increased government scrutiny of exchanges. When governments realise that bitcoin has no use beyond criminal transactions and speculation they might decide to treat every bitcoin transaction as inherently suspicious and regulate exchanges heavily. This will make bitcoin much harder to use for criminal transactions and thus greatly decrease Q and the value of bitcoin. Previous work This post is not entirely original. Satoshi himself said that if a bitcoin user wanted to give a donation to everyone else then they should delete the keys to their wallet and increase the value of everybody else’s bitcoins. I realised that someone who hodled a bitcoin would temporarily have the same effect. More significantly Joseph C Wang came up with a formula very similar to mine. A significant difference is that he thought increased economic activity with bitcoin would not cause an increase in bitcoin’s value but an increase in its velocity. My model has nominal prices of drugs in bitcoin falling when Q increases. Wang has prices remaining the same and the velocity of bitcoin increasing to handle the extra transactions. I developed my formula before I became aware of Wang’s work. Further Topics This post is over 4000 words so I have not gone into depth on a few subjects like the costs of block rewards (higher than you think), shocks like darknet market shutdowns, why bitcoin can’t fall to a liquidity trap, how to value a cryptocurrency that isn’t being used for economic transactions and why it makes sense that bitcoin and bcash had a higher combined value at the time of the fork compared to bitcoin alone. If there is demand I’ll put together a second post which will cover these issues.
Bitcoin is not a ponzi or pyramid scheme In summary, bitcoin fails to meet the requirements for being classified as a ponzi or a pyramid scheme. There are no promises made on the technology that can’t be transparently verified or understood, nor any reward incentives directly available for recruiting others to join. One of the biggest myths regarding Bitcoin is that many consider it as a fraudulent, Ponzi scheme. But very few actually understand what a Ponzi scheme is.. It is not wise for people to draw conclusions without a proper understanding of any topic whatsoever. A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investing scam promising high rates of return with little risk to investors. The Ponzi scheme generates returns for early investors by acquiring new investors. Definition: A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent game plan where a schemer proposes a false investment proposal to the public, The schemers or investment companies running a Ponzi scheme does not hold any license or registration as declared mandatory by the federal and state laws and regulations. Bitcoin is a Ponzi Scheme. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies seem to fit the definition provided pretty well: "A Ponzi Scheme is a fraudulent investment operation where the operator generates returns for older investors
The Unfolding of Onecoin- How a Ponzi got so Big with Tim Tayshun Curry from the BBC's Missing Cryptoqueen Podcast series Tim Tayshun Curry from the BBC's Missing Cryptoqueen podcast series has ... Crypto.com Is A Ponzi Scheme (MCO/CRO) I truly believe crypto.com MCO and CRO is a highly sophisticated ponzi scheme. I believe extreme caution is crucial when investing in cryptocurrencies and I ... 24/7 Live Bitcoin Algo Trading on Deribit Exchange (DeriBot) Bitcoin Trading Robots 156 watching Live now Tackle Trading Halftime Report Jul 10th 2020 (Prepare for the next 2 wks of earnings ... Strong Towns' Chuck Marohn: Why Suburban Growth Is a Ponzi Scheme - Duration: 6:11. Streetfilms Recommended for you. ... Bitcoin: How Cryptocurrencies Work - Duration: 9:25. Why Onecoin Not Ponzi scheme By Dr Ruja Ignovota... We have discuss about above the topic... Subscribe to our channel#cryptoglobalindia and the press the bell icon for the regular update.. Like ...