1st part - We debated this---as to what kind of number to put in for potential returns on investment...
My point was that the original statement was nonsense. Saying that if you know about EMAs and MACD then you'll know what the returns look like is exactly analogous to saying that if you know what an average temperature looks like, then you'll know how many cherry tomatoes I'm going to grow this year. Since EMAs are statistical properties of markets, and average temperatures are statistical properties of weather, then yes, sure, they have some bearing on investment returns and cherry tomato returns, respectively, but to say that one somehow sheds light on predictions of the other is pure nonsense.
2nd part - The 25% isn't exactly short/hedged against BTC but more of a diversification.
On the contrary, selling BTC to buy fiat -- regardless of whether that's to invest in equities, options, fiat-denominated debt, or cherry tomatoes -- is
exactly what it means to take a short a position in BTC.
Sniff test failed, utterly and completely.
Fair enough, we certainly wouldn't be able to meet SEC requirements if this were a traditional security and respect your decision to not invest with us; bitcoin investments are risky and murky so we can't fault you.
As for your first point, we agree with what you are saying which is why we've tried to make it clear that we cannot give a number for what returns are going to look like. I think we need to re-phrase the orginal point: "...can easily imagine what returns would look like" in the orginal statement. I think you read this as us saying you (as someone familiar) should be able to imagine a specific, singular value. But however, this was intended to mean that those familiar with EMAs and such would imagine that our returns can vary a great deal;
not[/i] "those familiar with EMAs can easily imagine what our returns will be/are going to be", "...can easily imagine a specific single value for our returns", "can easily imagine our returns will be 40%", "can easily imagine our returns will be how many cherry tomatos a homeless person in Portland can fit in their mouth on odd-numbered days in October"
We could have worded the orginal statement alot better and are not so much saying 'you misunderstood us' but rather we miscommunicated to you. We're going to change that part of the text--- if you think you know a good way to re-state what is trying to be conveyed then feel free to share.
and just to touch on your second point: overall we have a more traditional background in finance and investing and still often use various term's traditional definitions rather than the btc community definitions. The traditional finance definition of short means borrowing a security/asset from another party to purchase later with the expectation the security will be worth less when repayment is due. This is why its called 'short' because you are 'short' the original asset (same conext as"I'm $4 short of $100"). Of course, as i'm guessing you already know, forex traders use 'short' differently as well but I'll let you cover that if you choose to.
Anyway, we still appreciate the feedback since it gives us a chance to improve (changing the wording) and wish you the best of luck with your investments.
-Tom and Jeff