Quote from: ranlo on February 25, 2017, 04:30:26 AM

Quote from: drays on February 25, 2017, 03:21:03 AM

Quote from: ranlo on February 25, 2017, 03:15:17 AM

Quote from: drays on February 25, 2017, 03:12:43 AM

Quote from: ranlo on February 24, 2017, 08:29:36 PM

It's kind of funny to me... I warn people that this is a bad investment *BEFORE THE ICO* and get bashed for it. Now the same people are crying because they feel like they got ripped off. Seriously? I told you. I even explained WHY it was a bad investment. I can't even feel bad for anyone who threw money into it at this point because the signs were so clear and obvious.

To me your post looks really funny. You advised people not to invest in this ICO, and you think that was a good advise? Shocked

You better check things out before posting: this ICO was one of the most successful investments of last year. ICO investors have made from 5x to 20x on their investment, and even now, after all the craziness and dumps, the coin trades at 3x-4x the ICO price!

Do you still think was advice was good?

"My friend put $100 into a known Ponzi and got back $200 before the owner ran and everyone lost. But that was a good investment. I mean, I made 100% ROI so that's good, right?"

That's how I read your post.

Just because you profit off of people stupider than you doesn't make something a good investment. It's like saying going all-in with 2/8 OS in poker is a good move because "one time I won!" No. Statistically you're screwing yourself.

I see your point. But things are not that simple.

Practically 100% of crypto projects are going to be abandoned at some [random] points in not so far future. Thats because technology is evolving, new things arise, and old ones are forgotten. Some projects deliver more before being abandoned, some deliver less. Vidz has delivered something, and that *something* is even going to be used now by another project(even two).

Calling Vidz "ponzi", while backing other crypto projects with tradeable assets, sounds hypocritical to me. They all are ponzi, to some extent. But those are "ponzi" with some good output, not only gambling. So Vidz were - it helped to develop some tech, inspired new projects, and helped to identify new possibilities for development. Thats all any good project could dream to achieve.

The only point which makes Vidz stand out, is everything happened much faster than with most other crypto projects, both good things, and bad ones. Still, the story is not over.

FWIW, I never said that PV, as a project, is bad. In fact, even when I said it was a horrible investment, I noted that the idea and concept behind the technology was awesome (and is why I still follow it to this day). The issue is their business model was going to be an absolute failure. Whether the creator ran or not, you were not going to ROI. It wasn't just improbable, it was nearly impossible. A good investment requires a greater chance of successfully returning ROI than not. This wasn't going to match that.

People bidding up the price on the coins was exactly what a Ponzi would do. There was nothing backing it. The business wasn't profitable, it had no way of really returning enough capital to MAKE it profitable, and therefore the only thing propping up prices was hoping someone was stupid enough to buy it for more than you did. Protip: that's exactly what a Ponzi does and how it works. You're paid by people putting money in after you, in a system that can't possibly exist in a profitable manner.

It's the same concept in the fiat world. You don't invest your money because something looks cool, you do it because their business model makes sense, you have faith that they will earn a profit, and you're banking on their success. If you just throw your money at everyone who says "I have a cool idea" but no business sense, you're going to go broke quickly.

You are conflating "ponzi" and "speculative bubble"... which are completely different things.

This not only a HUGE legal distinction, since "ponzi" is specifically defined in law...
But you ignore the fact that 90% of crypto, junior tech, junior gold, junior oll/gas securities are "speculative bubbles"...
Because ** there is no way to rationally determine if a startup will succeed or even plans to **...
But many experts are quite successful trading and/or manipulating "speculative bubbles" where everything is relative.

And your poker analogy was off base...
Buying VIDZ at the ICO 85 sats may have been a "77", a decent hand... buying VIDZ at 1500 sat on Yobit was "28o" Cheesy

In general, crypto is a new Zero Sum Game of Skill...
And this was demonstrated perfectly in a 6 week time frame by PureVidz...
Where experienced players got out with big profits... but n00bs are now bagholders.

And your last paragraph about "business models/sense" makes no sense where there is zero legal accountability...
There are only "shiny objects" here... and PureVidz was one hell of a "shiny object" for 6 weeks".