[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold list
Craig Spencer wrote: The e-gold list has a new hero: Patrick Chkoreff! For replying to the most egregious and ignorant economic and monetary nonsense with patience that is truely superhuman. Hear hear! Give the man a tip! http://fexl.2cw.org/ Sidd --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
I have found that people basically fall into two types based on their pattern of discourse. 1) Those who speak for the purpose of expressing truth. 2) Those who speak for the purpose of advancing an agenda. Since there is very little shared purpose between the two types there is seldom much value in more than a rudimentary conversation between them. Classic! Indeed Craig -- there are people who directly and loudly state their agenda, and state exactly who they are speaking to and speaking about, and who address ideas. And then, there are those who have agendas, constantly shift positions, bounce between clearly advocating something and merely commenting, and make points obtusely! heh heh! -- --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
I have found that people basically fall into two types based on their pattern of discourse. 1) Those who speak for the purpose of expressing truth. 2) Those who speak for the purpose of advancing an agenda. Hi Robert, You give an excellent explanation how indeed the persons of category 2 try to prove their point (literally), which is reasonable according to their 'agenda' , which is the result of their past experiences, etc... And why do i become philosophical about the truth? To date every post, including all of mine, have all been a mere expression of oppinion, assumptions based on past experiences or generally accepted knowhow. Considering then that an oppionon is based on a perception and that in turn a perception is an assumption by reason of presumed statsis (which does not exist in the universe) we arrive at the sad fact that all people necessarily fall into the second category, because 'Truth Is', is can not be made, relayed, assumed or spoken. 'CLAP' back to real life. Everybody who posts here has an agenda. This would be true if there was not a second approach to truth, and that is exactly the approach that will be used by the people of category 1 The second approach is 'elimination of possibilities' until only one is left standing (hopefully). Then this one possibility left is considered true. And that's how you will recognise the person of category 1 who is simply seeking the truth, not talking his agenda. It is really easy to recognise them and Craig is right in his observation that they rarely meet or agree with the 2nd type. The 2nd type is more a kind of politician, and when the 1st type is speaking the other one is constantly trying to figure out what is on type 1's agenda, but there is no agenda, so there is constant misunderstanding and type 2 will continuously try to pin down type 1 on some agenda. The approach is simple: For example TGC 's management can be honest or they can be dishonest scammers. Type 1 person considers both possibilities and tries to see if one can eliminated. If he can eliminate (totally or partially) the possibility that they are scammers, then he is gaining evidence (or even certainty) that they are honest. That's more or less what I have been trying to do all the time. Similarly the shares they issue can be overvalued, fairly valued or undervalued. If I can eliminate two possibilities I am left with the truth about these shares and I will know whether to buy them or not. This approach does not start with any 'agenda', it starts with 'I don't know' (and I am trying to find out). That's why the type 1 person asks lot of questions. The type 2 person doesn't ask questions, he is continuously trying to prove his 'opinion' But many things cannot be proved directly, many things can only be known indirectly by disproving the opposite possibility(ies). So, it easy to understand why jpm insists that I state I am believing TGC is a scam, because he assumes that must be my agenda. But I am simply trying to eliminate possibilities, but have failed, so I am left in the 'I don't know' space as far as this TGC shares go.. Enough philisophy.. Danny --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
I see what you mean but the problem if you don't know their names is that this trustworthy management X can at any moment decide to sell its entire 90% stake to untrustworthy management Y, and you won't even know about it. This is a tough one. I will say this, though. It might be very unwise for a company like TGC to publish the names and locations of their insiders and to state their asset, liability, income, and expense figures publicly. That sounds like an invitation for trouble. That's totally fine. But it simply means their company is most unsuitable to do a public stock offering. Not being able to provide even the most basic information to the public shareholder, means you will have to offer the shares at a significant discount to their real value. In such case it is much better to do a private placement. I have no objection as long as it is considered a kind of lottery ticket, but because on the DBourse site they quite clearly suggest that this is how stock markets should be run, than I say oh oh, wait a minute... In a technical sense I think many of us can agree that this is how a stock market should be run. A very well designed interface matches bid and ask and that's that. Well, we have to differentiate between the exchange and the stocks that are trading on it. Here the interests are mixed (which can raise some questions of its own), but usually these are carefully seperated. The exchange mechanism on DBourse is good, much like the electronic platforms that are already operating for the normal stock markets. No problems there. The questions I am raising is about the TGC stock offering. But obviously your objections go beyond that. You want to see: 1. Names and addresses of principal management and owners. 2. Detailed and audited financial reports. Even incomplete or unaudited information would be better than nothing. Right now you are like a merchant who has bought $1000 apples. And if you ask him how much kg he doesn't know, if you ask from whom he bought them he also doesn't know, if you ask where he sent the money he also doesn't know. All he knows is that he believes the apples will be good. This would look like a joke in most people's eyes. So for example, if Goldmoney were to do an IPO, we would already know about James Turk and the whole governance structure. But it sounds like many would also insist on public detailed financial reports showing exact net profits and the like, perhaps audited by Deloitte and Touche. The company itself would insist on it because it will help them realise the full value of their shares. In absence of vital information they have to sell them at a discount. Why a management would be interested to sell a part of their business at a big discount? Sorry, but if you asked TGC for this kind of information, I think they would politely decline. That is what we call an impasse. No, didn't ask them anything.. Thousands of those stocks also pay no dividends whatsoever, trade at high multiples of earnings (if any), and are diluted from time to time. But they do satisfy (1) and (2) above, which might be somewhat reassuring I suppose. Paying no dividends is not a problem. It simply means the money stays in the company's bank account, or is reinvested in extra capacity or new business ventures. As you own a fixed share of the company it means your stocks are becoming more valuable. Trading at high multiples to earnings is not in the hands of the company. If crazy investors bid up a stock into the stratosphere, there is very little you can do about it. It could happen to TGC stocks too. BTW, there are plenty of stocks trading at less than 10 times earnings for the moment. And because TGC doesn't publish any earnings numbers, you'll never know at what earnings multiple they are trading.. Everybody can see that Yahoo shares are trading at a ridiculous 100 times earnings again, but nobody forces you to buy them and nobody stops you to short them at this price. The information is very easy to find, so that is completely fair to everybody. You can also see what the insiders are doing. Bill Gates has been selling Microsoft shares with both hands since 1999, so any retail investor who took the trouble to check the information could be out of Microsoft shares near the peak. But most investors don't look at these things at all, they just buy what has been going up and sell what has gone down, which is exactly the recipe to loose in markets. They deserve to loose, and bring them to DBourse and they will manage to loose there too. It is not so hard, if you do your homework. If you don't believe me just have a look here: http://www.wealth-lab.com/cgi-bin/WealthLab.DLL/viewrecombase?id=182 Look down the page This are the trades I have done since Dec 02, as you can see only 1 small loss. (QQQ is a share that represents all stocks in the Nasdaq 100) Now, you'll understand why 7.2% anually in risky shares is nothing to
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
At 9:53 PM -0400 7/8/03, Craig Spencer wrote: I would like to nominate: Danny Van den Berghe as hero of the e-gold list. ... He might also qualify as a hero of DBourse. Fans like me have a hard time finding anything wrong with anything TGC ever does. They came along at the right time and made a fun way to use e-gold, while forcing people to think in terms of grams!! We all knew back then that for-sure someday JP, Snowdog, and I would remotely play against eachother, and now, thanks to TGC e-gold being there, we HAVE! Danny's standard seems to be perfection, or close-to-it, which is very-good for the e-gold list but (fortunately for the shareholders!) DBourse/TGC is not exactly competing with perfection in the stock-market game these days -- and won't be until my financial-crimes-vocabulary quits-growing for a year or more! Reputation-capital is the easiest kind to spend, but it's also the hardest thing to ever-earn-back once it's gone/damaged...The fun thing about DBourse for this old cypherpunk is that they've so-far managed to neatly sever personal identity from reputation, and that has interesting implications for money markets in the future IMO. JMR --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
I would like to nominate: Danny Van den Berghe as hero of the e-gold list. He has fielded every specious argument that has been thrown at him and calmly explained it with superhuman patience. He has refused to be brow beaten, not responded to disparagement in kind, repeated himself tirelessly when ignored and intransigently upheld freedom, reason and common sense against all assaults. Hi Craig, Thanks for the compliment. But I am not after awards. For me it's just an excercise in expressing myself better, and when I don't enjoy it I'll just do something else. I doesn't matter to me whether people buy these TGC shares or not. But that doesn't mean I cannot busy myself exposing the many flaws in this offer. I know people like jpm very well, because my father was exactly the same, always talking just 1 inch besides the point, especially when you hit on a weak spot in their reasoning. And when you bring them back a couple times and there is no way out , they do their final trick of last resort by turning around 180 degrees and suddenly saying they agree 100% with you, and did so all the time (which is just another escape, because they don't really agree at all). Very predictable people. So I got like 20 years training how to deal with that, and that's why jpm is having such a good day with me. Regards Danny --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
Danny, get a grip. I didn't bother replying to Craig's pandering on list because I didn't want to embarrass you further. I'm sorry if your father is a moron or has other character flaws, or you had other childhood problems. You are simply a rumour mongerer. Not much more or less. In every email you hint that TGC (or indeed me, or others) is a scam. You won't come out and STATE that that is your opinion, but you repeat endlessly that it could be the case, you've heard it is the case, it could well be the case. (Even after reading this email, you still won't simply state that that is your belief.) Now come the ad homemein attacks (in a round-about manner, of course). Your point devolved from wanting regulation, to self-regulation, to your type of self regulation, to RJR being a better investment than TGC. Your grasp of history and facts is Fantastical, from your expositions of how capital streams are valued to your expositions of share market history. The notion that TGC shares are crap because there is not enough information is an ordinary idea expressed loudly by many. But you can only express, or indeed see, your opinion as a categorical, arrived Truth (you are probably not even aware that in every email your argument results in you using one of the two phrases -- it is common sense or obvious) and you wrap every other paragraph in rumour mongering. e-gold and GoldMoney's governance are often violently criticized, but no-one adds rumour mongering to their criticism. -- --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
I didn't bother replying to Craig's pandering on list because I didn't want to embarrass you further. That's strange, I never saw you forego an opportunity to embarrass on this list... It appears to me that you were embarrassed that JPM was not nominated as hero of the e-gold list. But, don't worry, I don't take trophees so you can have it. I'm sorry if your father is a moron or has other character flaws, or you had other childhood problems. Trying to be friends? You are simply a rumour mongerer. Not much more or less. In every email you hint that TGC (or indeed me, or others) is a scam. Is this what you have problems with: an investment with this many risks (unknown address, unknown managers, unknown size of the business, unknown profits, unknown growth rate, unverifiable number of shares they issue, ...) EOQ Now, this are simply 'facts', not rumours. If you can find any of this unknown information you are welcome to bring it. Stating what is 'unknown' in this share offer is not spreading a rumour... You won't come out and STATE that that is your opinion, but you repeat endlessly that it could be the case, you've heard it is the case, it could well be the case. I have never said something like: 'I have heard it is the case...' I have repeatedly said 'what COULD be the case' That is just a normal logic process of considering the different possibilities and trying to eliminate some of them. Unfortunately we have so little information about TGC and DBourse that very few (if any) possibilities can be eliminated. This is just a procedure of trying to do due dilligence on it. Has nothing to do with spreading rumours. In fact I can accuse you of spreading rumours, because you are continuously touting what a succes TGC and DBourse is. Now, if you have only the evidence that we have , then you are spreading rumours (positive ones in this case) for which no proof is available, at least not to the public investors. I am wording myself with 'could be...'. That is not spreading rumours, that is talking about possibilities. You are making unfounded statements (= rumours) So before you accuse me of being a rumour mongerer, here are some of your recent statements: These are GOOD THINGS -- likely why the share issue has been such a runaway success. ... IT IS A FLABBERGASTING SUCCESS. The first laissze faire unregistered! unlicensed! unregulated! share issue has happened - and look at the figures. EOQ So, I'll repeat my question. What evidence you have for these rumours (even in capital letters..).? What reliable figures have you seen? (Even after reading this email, you still won't simply state that that is your belief.) I never 'believe' anything, so why I should state that I believe TGC is scam if I don't know it and have no evidence for it? I simply 'don't know' , that's what I have been saying all the time. I 'don't know' and we are discussing what TGC and DBourse 'could be' Why do you have so much problem with that? Now come the ad homemein attacks (in a round-about manner, of course). That was just a strategy to have you come out. By telling my father that he would suddenly turn 180 degrees and agree with me, he always did exactly the opposite and came out with all the arguments he could find. Then the matter could be really settled. But it worked only a few times because he learned the lesson and stopped going too far into argument altogether. I figured it would work the same with you , and I was lucky. Your point devolved from wanting regulation, to self-regulation, to your type of self regulation, to RJR being a better investment than TGC. You were continuously running away into the regulation topic, so I just followed you there. And I did not say that RJR is a better investment than TGC. I just stated that RJR gives 10% annual dividend and asked the question why one should invest in risky TGC shares that give only 7.2% People can look up the numbers for RJR themselves and make their own decision which investment is better. The notion that TGC shares are crap because there is not enough information is an ordinary idea expressed loudly by many. TGC shares are closest to junk bonds, when we try to classify them. With junk bonds also your principal is at risk. With TGC a little more so, because we can't even figure out where the principal is being held. Junk bonds are also considered crap by many, but they usually give 10 - 15% annual returns, so that helps a little. Cheers Danny --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
Danny's standard seems to be perfection, or close-to-it, which is very-good for the e-gold list but (fortunately for the shareholders!) DBourse/TGC is not exactly competing with perfection in the stock-market game these days It's not about perfection. I actually like imperfections much better. Because imperfection means 'opportunity to do something'. A perfect world would be very very boring. Also it will be good to know that there are many private companies that do not publish their numbers, profits, managers names etcetera. The shares are only in private hands. I am all in favor of this. But when a private , in this case even secret, company goes public with some of its shares, it is only a natural outcome that these public investors will want to know at least a few things about it. Otherwise they will be completely at the mercy of an unknown management... Danny --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
At 03:07 PM 7/9/2003 +0300, Danny Van den Berghe wrote: But when a private , in this case even secret, company goes public with some of its shares, it is only a natural outcome that these public investors will want to know at least a few things about it. Otherwise they will be completely at the mercy of an unknown management... It depends on what you mean by unknown. We do not know their personal names and locations and I definitely prefer it that way. However, we do know their pattern of behavior, which is to be consistently reliable with lots of money entrusted to them by strangers. TGC shareholders are trusting a digital entity based on that entity's established reputation. I advise limiting any investment to an amount you can afford to lose without feeling soul-shattering paroxysms of grief. I find it difficult to summon much empathy for those who by their own admission put their entire life savings into Enron stock, especially when nearly every investing pundit under the sun stresses the virtues of diversification. How about instead putting 5% in Enron, 5% in Worldcom, 2% in Proctor and Gamble, etc., 25% in gold, 25% in various bonds, etc.? Then when Kenneth Lay Bernie Ebbers, whose names we do know, turn out to be bad apples, you stoically and honourably kiss 10% of your net worth goodbye and get on with your life. I guess in America it's better to lose everything and get a sympathetic victim guest appearance on CNBC. Yes, I wish TGC had been more specific up front about the proportional size of the issue and about voting rights, although honestly I'm not too worked up about voting rights. -- Patrick --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
On 9 Jul 2003, at 11:38, Danny Van den Berghe wrote: Thanks for the compliment. But I am not after awards. Of course not. That is one of the reasons you deserve one. For me it's just an excercise in expressing myself better, and when I don't enjoy it I'll just do something else. I have found that people basically fall into two types based on their pattern of discourse. 1) Those who speak for the purpose of expressing truth. 2) Those who speak for the purpose of advancing an agenda. Since there is very little shared purpose between the two types there is seldom much value in more than a rudimentary conversation between them. The concerns of the first seem largely irrelevant to the second except when they appear to bear on his agenda. And then the second's concern is not with reality like the first but with the likely impact on his agenda, overcoming that impact and discovering the first's non-existant ulterior motives. Best, CCS -- - Virtual Phonecards - Instant Pin by Email - - Large Selection - Great Rates- - http://speedypin.com/phonecard/start.html?af=743 - -- ** * Craig Spencer * * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * ** --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
-- On 9 Jul 2003 at 20:10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In every email you hint that TGC (or indeed me, or others) is a scam. If it is not a scam, the next one like it will be. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 9OvyHbxxDlv0fnN0JkzFvFvOjIUDJH5kHFB5wqJb 4+E+E3LvQHrAa7D9/2MgF7i0sjmPniEZ9udXzB3AZ --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
-- Danny Van den Berghe wrote: But when a private , in this case even secret, company goes public with some of its shares, it is only a natural outcome that these public investors will want to know at least a few things about it. On 9 Jul 2003 at 9:04, James M. Ray wrote: Agreed. I'm sure more information will come in time, but I'm also sure that 100% of the people (possibly including you!) will never be satisfied. Others (including me!) will say that knowing who Kenny Boy Lay is didn't help Enron shareholders very much... The fact that existing state sponsored institutions for protecting smaller shareholders failed is a reason for building better ones, not a reason for not having such institutions at all. For all we know the guys issuing these shares have just come out of several bankruptcies and a long jail term for financial fraud. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG G6CQoVynmihl/hJ6zBNjMo8Ef2IBnBJ0eoKWj1d3 4bT88bMk8lU7oGRkfp5K/OreAt02OAtWfAQ/S3Jq/ --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
Agreed. I'm sure more information will come in time, but I'm also sure that 100% of the people (possibly including you!) will never be satisfied. I would rather say that 95% of the retail investors is too easily satisfied. The only information they want to see is whether the stock is going up or down. That's why you get these stock crazes where stocks go up because they are going up, self-fulfilling prophecy, just fueled by the greed of the small investors and by the comments on CNBC... until everything collapses. Only 5% investors (like me) really look at the numbers that are published. Others (including me!) will say that knowing who Kenny Boy Lay is didn't help Enron shareholders very much... Well, it certainly didn't hurt. It is more an indirect advantage, knowing the names of the management also their personal reputation is at stake, and they can be held liable when really gross fraud /theft would be taking place. Really, the company releasing verified information to its shareholders is not a question of regulation, it is a question of realising more shareholder value. A transparent company is perceived as more safe by the investing public, so they are willing to pay more for such shares. That benefits both the private owners and the public shareholders (who doesn't want to see his shares rise in value?). The company management is simply serving its own interest by giving as much reliable information to the stockholders as possible. When a management chooses not to do so the question arises why? Because they want their shares to sell at lower prices??? Several independant observers warned that something was badly wrong at Enron more than a year before it collapsed. Simply because they analysed the books and saw that very strange tricks were being used to keep the books in balance (and show profits..). But nobody listened, because the stocks were rising and all the rest didn't interest them. Danny --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
At 9:35 AM -0700 7/9/03, James A. Donald wrote: The fact that existing state sponsored institutions for protecting smaller shareholders failed is a reason for building better ones, not a reason for not having such institutions at all. For all we know the guys issuing these shares have just come out of several bankruptcies and a long jail term for financial fraud. ... True, so the question becomes how to build a better one? Since I also agree with your other message (that if TGC is not crooked, the next anonymous share issuer probably will be crooks!) I'd say the answer is to do it. Institutions that actually protect shareholders will spring up. As it is, Danny and this list have made DBourse be more specific already simply by sending messages to this list, so there's already something that's working for shareholders. Will an ultimate- shareholder-protection system which develops organically protect shareholders perfectly? Of course not, but as I've repeatedly said, DBourse only has to live up to a minimal (distressingly-minimal, actually!) standard of behavior to become a vastly superior alternative to most shares listed on the NYSE. JMR PS We 'have' played once, we *MAY* play again, but the important thing is the ability to play! As for Enron somehow being held liable, last I heard Andrew Fastow was building a $15 million dollar house here in FL (it's no accident OJ's also here -- sigh!). Anyway, I could use that kind of liable, but I wouldn't expect it after getting busted for something like Enron! --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
I have found that people basically fall into two types based on their pattern of discourse. 1) Those who speak for the purpose of expressing truth. 2) Those who speak for the purpose of advancing an agenda. Hi Craig, Where would you place someone who tries to balance personal well being with public service? Speaking the truth without concerning oneself with the possible consequences for others is simply being selfrighteous. While we are at the subject, what indeed is truth? Non-mathematical truth is at best a matter of perception, and at worst thinly veiled opinion, wouldn't you agree? In basic, rhetoric argumentation the rule is to analyze what are presumed the facts, invalidate counterarguments based on either acepted facts or common perception, bringing examples for and against one's own point of view and then explaining why the examples against one's view are not applicable before proofing one's own hypothesis based on 'correct till proven false'. Anyone who does not follow this rule would necesarily need to fall into your second category by merit of the fact that he or she 'wants to be right', an agenda by any definition. Where does this leave us? At the assumption that apart from mathematic theory there is no truth? The problem with that assumption is that mathematics itself is based on a set of generally accepted hypothesii. In advanced mathematics one then learns that this presumed truth everything else is built on, indeed is a selective state of existence, selected for no other reason but to have a basis on which to built the rest. Once one reaches quantum mechanics, or indeed philosophical trigonometrie (some call it mental majick) at the other end of the scale, it becomes quite rapidly obvious that all rules are false by reason of non-static existence. This is to say, as universe is not static, no rule based on any statis is true. And why do i become philosophical about the truth? To date every post, including all of mine, have all been a mere expression of oppinion, assumptions based on past experiences or generally accepted knowhow. Considering then that an oppionon is based on a perception and that in turn a perception is an assumption by reason of presumed statsis (which does not exist in the universe) we arrive at the sad fact that all people necessarily fall into the second category, because 'Truth Is', is can not be made, relayed, assumed or spoken. 'CLAP' back to real life. Everybody who posts here has an agenda. Which truth would like us to store for you today? Cheers, Robert. budget privacy website hosting http://www.cyberica.net budget privacy domain registrations + mail http://www.u2planet.com/cfdomaintrust.html --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
Otherwise they will be completely at the mercy of an unknown management... It depends on what you mean by unknown. We do not know their personal names and locations and I definitely prefer it that way. However, we do know their pattern of behavior, which is to be consistently reliable with lots of money entrusted to them by strangers. TGC shareholders are trusting a digital entity based on that entity's established reputation. I see what you mean but the problem if you don't know their names is that this trustworthy management X can at any moment decide to sell its entire 90% stake to untrustworthy management Y, and you won't even know about it. Buying TGC shares is taking a bet on the future honesty of management X or Y or Z I advise limiting any investment to an amount you can afford to lose without feeling soul-shattering paroxysms of grief. That's definitely a good advice. Just consider it a kind of lottery ticket that promises you a monthly prize (= dividend) and you will be fine. When people like jpm become so defensive when something negative is discussed about it, it either means they have invested too much into it, or it means they are the owner and feel personally attacked. I have no objection as long as it is considered a kind of lottery ticket, but because on the DBourse site they quite clearly suggest that this is how stock markets should be run, than I say oh oh, wait a minute... I find it difficult to summon much empathy for those who by their own admission put their entire life savings into Enron stock, especially when nearly every investing pundit under the sun stresses the virtues of diversification. How about instead putting 5% in Enron, 5% in Worldcom, 2% in Proctor and Gamble, etc., 25% in gold, 25% in various bonds, etc.? Then when Kenneth Lay Bernie Ebbers, whose names we do know, turn out to be bad apples, you stoically and honourably kiss 10% of your net worth goodbye and get on with your life. Absolutely. Even audited numbers will not make stocks 100% safe, because there is always the possibility that the auditor is being bribed. Just like wearing a safety belt in a car will not always save your live in a car crash, and actually in a few cases it will even cause your death. Stock markets , as they are now, are exactly the same case. And some people focus too much on Enron , Worldcom,... when you talk about stock markets. Don't forget that 1000 nds of stocks are trading without problems and big scandals Yes, I wish TGC had been more specific up front about the proportional size of the issue and about voting rights, although honestly I'm not too worked up about voting rights. The voting rights are not so important in the sense that you are not going to use it all the time. It is just another instrument to keep the management honest. But if their names are not known, it doesn't make sense to have voting rights. Danny --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
At 08:18 PM 7/9/2003 +0300, Danny Van den Berghe wrote: I see what you mean but the problem if you don't know their names is that this trustworthy management X can at any moment decide to sell its entire 90% stake to untrustworthy management Y, and you won't even know about it. This is a tough one. I will say this, though. It might be very unwise for a company like TGC to publish the names and locations of their insiders and to state their asset, liability, income, and expense figures publicly. That sounds like an invitation for trouble. They are, after all, a dreaded CASINO dealing in fearsome trans-national DIGITAL GOLD, and there might even be some AMERICANS playing there. If you wanted to design something to inflict maximum hissy-fits on control freaks with too much starch in their collars, this would be nearly ideal. I have no objection as long as it is considered a kind of lottery ticket, but because on the DBourse site they quite clearly suggest that this is how stock markets should be run, than I say oh oh, wait a minute... In a technical sense I think many of us can agree that this is how a stock market should be run. A very well designed interface matches bid and ask and that's that. But obviously your objections go beyond that. You want to see: 1. Names and addresses of principal management and owners. 2. Detailed and audited financial reports. So for example, if Goldmoney were to do an IPO, we would already know about James Turk and the whole governance structure. But it sounds like many would also insist on public detailed financial reports showing exact net profits and the like, perhaps audited by Deloitte and Touche. Sorry, but if you asked TGC for this kind of information, I think they would politely decline. That is what we call an impasse. There are two groups of people here. Those who will trust some of their money to an entity with a well established reputation and good indications of success but no public list of principal management and no public financial reports, and those who will not. And some people focus too much on Enron , Worldcom,... when you talk about stock markets. Don't forget that 1000 nds of stocks are trading without problems and big scandals Thousands of those stocks also pay no dividends whatsoever, trade at high multiples of earnings (if any), and are diluted from time to time. But they do satisfy (1) and (2) above, which might be somewhat reassuring I suppose. Frankly, I would be curious to know TGC's net profits last quarter, and might even be curious to know for example that TGC is 90% owned by Joe d'Estonia and Katherine d'Malaysia. But I'm even more curious to see what the dividend will be next July. That is, after all, the bottom line. -- Patrick --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] Re: Hero of the e-gold List
Shalom, Sorry, but if you asked TGC for this kind of information, I think they would politely decline. That is what we call an impasse. There are two groups of people here. Those who will trust some of their money to an entity with a well established reputation and good indications of success but no public list of principal management and no public financial reports, and those who will not. But the question is why they needed the IPO? If a company wishes to become a public entity it has to discover everything about itself. If they want to keep their information un-disclosed - they should have kept themselves as a private company. Their IPO raised a lot of questions, some were mentioned on this list. Are all shares entitled to a dividend? Are there different kinds of shares? I am not sure - I have seen an answer to those questions. Arik Schenkler - Chief Money Maker Internet Dollar electronic money system - http://InternetDollar.com --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
[e-gold-list] RE: Hero of the e-gold List
Sounds like worthy qualifications for a best and fairest award. :) Regards, Ian Green http://107242.e-gold.com From: Craig Spencer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 9 July 2003 11:53 AM I would like to nominate: Danny Van den Berghe as hero of the e-gold list. He has fielded every specious argument ... calmly explained ... superhuman patience. He has refused to be brow beaten, not responded to disparagement in kind, repeated himself tirelessly when ignored and intransigently upheld freedom, reason and common sense against all assaults. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common viruses.
