That's why I'm posting - not because I invested in pirate or PH - so not quite sure what lesson it is I'm supposed to have learned but haven't.
Do you think Patrick's business model was fundamentally sound? Be honest.
Well, looking at what happened it obviously wasn't (whatever his steps were to ensure his deposits were pirate-free, those steps were clearly woefully inadequate). But what we NOW know isn't particularly relevant to the discussion in this thread.
At the time I had no idea whether it was viable or not. As stated earlier, I avoid investing in anything where the business is undefined. With this sort of lending business, the recipients' businesses are unknown to me - hence I can't assess the risk so won't touch the investment. That's a decision I've made because there's little/no ability and/or willingness for lenders to take action against defaulters - so unless I can be confident there's likely to be no reason for default I won't invest.
The issues isn't whether his business model was sound anyway - it's whether it was KNOWN to be unsound. We already know that wasn't accepted by all - you've already accepted neither PH or MP knew it (or even believed it) and have yet to demonstrate that any significant number of people believed it.