Bitconnect was a scam, plain and simple. I'd consider suing them for ponzi if I'd lost a shit ton of money.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Bitconnect was a scam, plain and simple. I'd consider suing them for ponzi if I'd lost a shit ton of money.
If you would like to explain what a Ponzi is , in your eyes, I will point out how Bitconnect doesn't fit that description at all.. sadly misinformed people, who have never looked at how Bitconnect funded itself, are part of the reason, they had to shut the doors.. but They did so before they ran out of money, so Ponzi scheme it wasn't... Bitconnect will be back as an exchange, and those who hold their coins will gain a lot if not all of their money back. and who knows even profits? time to snap up some cheap BCC coins..
Wow so way off base. First off, the coins are not sustainable as there is nothing driving them. Bitconnect will need new investors to be sustainable and who will have any confidence in them? Yes they are a classic Ponzi. Ponzis always have good intentions, Ponzis have incredible returns like Bitconnect. Ponzis thrive under good market conditions because new money keeps flowing in, like Bitconnect, Ponzis, have no real logic or numbers behind them, they feed off of good economic opportunities, such as the price of Bitcoin going up. The only way into Bitconnect was by investing with Bitcoin. As long as Bitcoin kept going up, they were sustainable. As soon as the market crashed, Bitconnect had nothing, no trading bot, no true sustainability so they closed their doors. If they were not a Ponzi, they would have paid back in fiat or Bitcoin, but they chose to pay in BCC, a crypto they knew was worthless. Typical Ponzi. T
Thank you. I guess it will take some time for some to just accept the facts. Until then "bitconnect wasn't a ponzi even when they promised huge interests for lenders that were not sustainable, like at all, and then they ran off with everyones btc"
I guess these defenders are part of the team, or close to it and just don't want people to get ideas like sueing. The main chiefs deserve jail time. Why else defend a obvious scam? What a world we live in.
Hmm, would you agree that it was scam if not ponzi then? Just wondering what is your stance on correct terminology here. Or would criminal activity be the best fit?