Quote from: Digiconomist on September 10, 2014, 08:51:46 AM

Quote from: iruu on September 10, 2014, 04:12:21 AM

The second is because the information to evaluate risk isn't available to majority of lenders. Thus the risk as perceived by 'the market' is meaningless. It's obviously riskier than government bonds, sure, but that only sets a very low floor.

Of course there is information available. It's not the first Bitcoin exchange, not the first BVI registered company and also not the first one that does not publish financial statements. There is more than sufficient general (macroeconomic) information on all of this. Also the firm specific information isn't a complete void, just think of system failures, reputation, flash crashes on the platform, etc. There are a ton of variables that relate to credit risk. And of course there are inefficiencies, but this does not make the rate 60-80 times higher than the risk free rate (1 month).

It is just the laughable 'market knows best' notion - now that the rate comes down to below that of most credit card and a lot lower than 8 weeks ago, does that means BFX default risk is now A LOT lower? Everyone knows there's risk, risk of hack, platform crashing, flashcrash, btc crashing, banks account getting frozen or them suddenly wanting to be crooks or having been cooking the books all along, etc.

but what about the return? In honest opinion, I find the current 14% to be low relative to the risk involve - esp given there are other non bitcoin investments out there where one may argue gives 14% but has a lower / more quantifiable risk profile.

But what about when the rate was 150% or higher? Does it justify putting in a few bucks?