Thread: Q and A with BoN on the phone - Marek

Biggfredd,

Your intial post in this thread does hold some valuable points, but they do in no way relate to pips.

Your post is full of assumptions which makes it clear that you haven't loaned anything to pips and if you did, you haven't tried to understand what its all about.

If you would have loaned USD10k on 1/1/2005 that would have bought you roughly (not exactly but for argumentary sakes) 400 units.

These units form your principle and they have a shelf life of 180 days.
After that, as far as you are concerned they faporize.
However during this period of 180 days you were to receive 1.9 (initially) later 1.85% interest per day that NYSE was open for trading.
Meaning the interest is paid on the full principle during the whole 180 days.

Now if you take out the holidays and the weekends, 180 calendar days may amount to roughly 125 trading days,

The rol produced can either be reinvested or taken out, but if you take it out to get your investment back, you would need about 50-55 days (trading) to get your principle back.
After that, you would still have your principle on loan so from then on if you would decide to reinvest your returns, the principle would grow upwards from USD185 a day, but at the end of the first 180 days, your principle would decrease with 10k.
'
This was the situtation how pips functioned.

Your remarks about why someone would loan from someone else at a rate of 2% a day instead of whatever rate he could get from a bank or other institution, does also show that you do not understand what it was all about for BM.

I hope you see that you made too many assumptions not based on the pips situation as it was.

I'm not going to argue about % returns and stuff like that.

Originally Posted by biggfredd

That still doesn't answer my question: What is the annualized % rate that has to be earned on those funds to provide that profit, whether it's 130% or 160% in half a year?

As far as I know, the company already had a significant amount invested and that was largely put to work for the members, too. (because of your "greed" point of view you might not believe this) In addition, each loan would stay in the pool even after expiring for the individual member. How big the actual annual rate was depends on how big those numbers were and might also change over time.
It does suggest, though, that the required return on the whole would be lower than the paid out return on the loans. (which would make it below 260% / annum, unless the part belonging to the members grew to big)

Bigfred,

It is obvious that you will take everyone's post and twist it to fit your lack of knowledge about investments as a whole. In my previous post I demonstrated what I, as a complete novice did with just a little research on my first day of trading, about 83% return on my leveraged amount. I then wandered off a little into some territory that I was not as familiar with and still made about 17.5 %. It was on the third day that this novice trader wandered out into some fast moving commodities that I knew next to nothing about and lost most of my money.

My point is...If I had just stayed with what I knew, I already had 41.5 days worth of 2%. I could have waited until the next decent move in that which I knew and stayed way ahead of the game. But I was trying to prove to myself in the three days that I had decided to take off of work, that I could do this day-trading thing.

There are people who trade the same fundamental and technical analysis every day and have no need to venture into unfamiliar territory, and are not, therefore unecessarily putting funds at risk.

I know the ability to do this is there. One day when I KNOW that I have the discipline to step back when I am unfamiliar with something, I will probably trade again.

That may also be good advise for you. If you are not necessarily familiar with something, you may also need to step back.

Lloyd(mmfast)

Whoever said PIPs had to trade a 2% return per day??
$100M can trade a 0.5% return quiet comfortably, and affort to pay 1.9% back to the members , who,s total fund amounts to, say $0.1M of that $100M figure. With underwritting you can trade 3, 4 and more times this figure, return less profit as markets demands fluctuate, but still remain in a viable and profitable position whilst still paying a fixed return to your investors.
You will never see this kind of operation anywhere else where an investor can add his funds into an already established and well funded portfollio and return more profit than the fund produces, dollar for dollar.
Dont take those figures as gospel because there is more to PIPs than trading and I dont know where you got the figure of $10,000 from, 99% of members started out with $425 only. Perhaps you would care to work out how much such an account is worth now given a start date of 13th Feb 2004.
Maybe it will keep you occupied :0)
Regards
paddy

Originally Posted by biggfredd

$10,000 grows to $23,150 in six months. We can reasonably assume this would be reinvested, and the $23,150 would grow to $53,476.56 in a year. This is a staggering 434.77% return, not 260%.

You're the one who wanted to leave compounding out of it and discuss the life of a single loan, isolated. If you want to calculate with compounding now, that's a whole different calculation.

biggfredd,

I don't think you're looking for answers.

If it talks like a banker,and adds like a banker..........

Ok biggfredd.........if nobody else is going to say it I guess I will step up and do it................ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Ok......... I mean really...........are you trying to convince US or YOURSELF?
Really...........let it go please. I mean for the love of GOD, you said you arent even involved with PIPS so whats the point?

Originally Posted by Admin

2)
Q. What is the result of your investigation? Or what have you found so
Far?

A. We have reason to believe that things arent all as they should be, and therefor have our Deputy officer to review the findings, before we send it to the public prosecuter. BoN is now positive twards further investigations of pipsinc findings. And further investigation are only done when we have Strong reason to believe "not good conduct of business."

Hello Everyone,

When the discussion about Marek contemplating the call to BN (or BOM is also correct) he had soooo many people, including Bryan lambasting him. I promptly posted my support in Marek's decision to take action and get us the answers we deserve, and now it seems most people are agreeing with what was done... I guess better late than never.

Why do so many of the members here refuse to read everything and just take excerpts out of context, and formulate more speculation and denial (I particularly liked the one about, "maybe there are those that don't want this program to work and that's why it was investigated.")? I'm still laughing at that one!

The majority of the posts show that many still only read what they want and disregard the rest. You really need to read everything and then see what is happening! Taking excerpts from above about "things aren't as they should be..." IS NOT the most important part of that answer people! The most damaging part is what immediately followed... "and therefore have our Deputy officer to review the findings, before we send it to the public prosecuter.

If that doesn't say they are simply getting thier "ducks in row" before sending it to a prosecutor to files formal charges, I don't know what does! My post supporting Mareks also asked the biggest thing we all seem to keep avoiding.

If our ROL was REAL as posted August 15, 2005, where is the money, who has it and how do we get it back? If the money wasn't really there, then the posting was fraud and there really isn't any money. If it was fraud, we hopefully have some recourse. Either way, if the PIPS investor membership needs representation somewhere down the line (certainly not yet), there have to be several lawyers (maybe hundreds) in our own PIPS membership here that would know exactly what to do. Any attorneys out there?

I still don't know exactly WHAT the invesigation IS, just what we have been told. We know it is investigating PIPS, and related companies which also includes PicPay, but for what EXACTLY! Is it poor business practices (which could be an infnite number of things), improper recored keeping, embezzlement, cheating customers, lying to investors, too many dishes in the sink (that was supposed to be a joke), fraud ... a million other things we can all speculate about? (this should be great fodder for the "out of context except" members and conclusion jumpers!)

The bottom line is... where is our money?

There is only ONE answer and nobody knows what that answer is until this investigation is over or something else is learned. If this was a huge scam, ponzi, or whatever you want to call it, our money is gone and the posting to our ROL was fraud! If it isn't a scam and other things are being investigated, then the money is still there somewhere, and it is due to us!

Those are the ONLY 2 possibilities! One is TRUE, One is NOT! Either our money still exists, or it doesn't!

The answer to Marek's question quoted above, says they are getting ready to send this to a prosecutor... not my words taken out of context, but what was actually written. Again, please read it all people! The key phrase is "Before we send it to the public prosecutor." That, in and of itself still does not mean that our money is gone because of fraud... it DOESN'T SAY THAT ANYWHERE! But is does say someone or something is on the verge of getting prosecuted.

The term "Prosecution" is used in a criminal case isn't it? So what is the crime? Is the crime and our money related? I don't know and neither does anyone else, so don't jump to conclusions as sooooo many people here do! I have my feelings but will not post it, for one reason only. It is a feeling, an assumption, and "gut" but not fact. None of us have facts... yet!

But we do know more now than we did before thanks to Marek and whether or not Bryan is an innocent party to this, or guilty as sin, is also 100% assumptive, conjecture and speculation. What did bother me a lot, and still does, is his total absence and disappearance. I personally know if I have done nothing wrong, I wouldn't be hiding, I'd be shouting from the rooftops... but that's just me!

Am I a cheerleader... NO! Am I naysayer and gloom and doomer... NO! Am I a troll... absolutely not (read my other posts). I am an optimistic person and still hope the ROL reportd on August 15th wasn't fraud, because that would mean our money is/was real and we have a right to it. The BOM is getting ready to conclude their investigation (per the answers obtained from Marek), give it to their deputy officer for review and then send it to the public prosecutor... This does not bode well for PIPS.

We all can hope and pray until we are blue in the face and dead and buried. Prayer, faith, hope, trust and well wishes cannot change fact, and cannot change whatever the real TRUTH is. We all have no other choice but to wait and see what TRUTH is revealed. The one fact we all need, and the real truth we deserve is the answer to: "Where is our money?"

Geo

Nicely worded post Geo.

The BNM investigation was instigated by a group of investers in the UK.This was entirely due to the withdrawal delays.

BNM will eventually conclude thier "audit" and then all will be revealed.