Quote from: bitcoin.me on August 22, 2012, 02:24:11 AM

Quote from: Vladimir on August 22, 2012, 02:20:51 AM

Quote from: totaleclipseofthebank on August 22, 2012, 02:08:25 AM

Quote from: bumbo on August 22, 2012, 01:08:19 AM

Quote from: hannesnaude on August 21, 2012, 03:50:57 AM

Another option open to him is to wait until friday, by which time it will be widely accepted by all but the most deluded of his investors that he won't be paying out. Then buy back a large portion of his liabilities for a fraction of their worth (possibly using an alternate identity), and then pay out the rest. In which case he would not technically have defaulted.

I don't really think the second option [the one explained above] will happen. But I am so dumbfounded by the large mass of supporters (some of whom claim to not be investors) who religously maintain he will pay out, even in the face of mounting evidence that he won't, that I am forced to try and come up with plausible scenarios where he doesn't default.

Assuming it's not a scam... this is the most interesting and entertaining contribution I've read in the past few days. People who are still betting against a default probably have exactly this plan in mind. Pirate waits as long as possible so he can buy back his own liabilities cheaply. Then he starts a few payments to initiate another crash and finally buys coins to repay investors. I couldn't come up with a better scheme, it's brilliant.

And if he pulls THIS through, he's earned the Balls-of-Steel-Award, no questions asked.

This is still a default... buying your own liabilities on the open market at a discount is the same thing as repaying debts with a haircut (a default).

Indeed, even if it is done via proxy.

The proxies then would be simply an accessories to fraud, would they not? Is it not also a security fraud? Could it be a ponzi being converted into another form of fraud, like securities fraud?

Its a form of insider trading yes.

Of course it is morally reprehensible. But is it against the law? SEC regulations don't apply to GLBSE assets (or any other form of bitcoin contracts for that matter). And even if you could take legal action, how would you prove it? Seems like a way of getting away without legal ramifications. Still think it's unlikely though. Purely because I don't think it is viable for him to buy enough of his liabilities at a large enough discount. Especially if he has to do so before friday. Last I heard assets with pirate exposure were still selling for 80% of face value. Anyone have an update?