What are Ginko Bonds worth?

The majority of you bondholders paid 1 L$ for each bond (by depositing into ginko atm), and you are now saying it's unethnical that they get back 1 L$ for them. WSE's decision was in so many ways ethnical and fair. Maybe you don't find it unethnical that somebody just runs a bank offers very nice interrest and suddenly he tells you that he is financialy unable to run that bank, so he offers to buy back your debt at small % of it's worth, how the hell does that sound ethnical ? Allowing a such thing would be to allow fraud.

Whats interresting is that you actualy are so damn opposed to it, wich further proves claims by many that you have no plans what so ever to pay the debt back in full (that is by an avg price of 1 L$ each). If you cannot repay the debt, the company is bancrupt and it's assets should be liquidated, there's no point in blaming other people than yourself for beeing unethnical, you actualy expected to pay just a small % of the debt while getting market speculators to pay most parts of it, that's not just unethnical it is criminal.

That's not what I'm saying at all, because the people selling RIGHT NOW, WILL NOT get L$1 per bond back. They will get what the market is offering. Forbidding me from buying is not helping them in any way, shape or form.

Then it's time to lock a whole lot of people up, because people do this with credit cards all the time.

Q: What are Ginko Bonds worth?

A: Close your eyes...what do you see?

If I was one of those unlucky saps that got duped into this bond thing, I'd just cut my losses and forget about it for a while. Come back to them in a year to see if they turned into anything.

Thats right Andy, If they let Nick buy at less than $1 then his total debt goes down.

You know .. the money he actually told people they earned ..

Yes, that is true.




No, the money I told people I owed them.

can I still get a Ponzi for Christmas?

Nice evasion.

People with credit cards are not banks.

And people that duck out on their credit responsibilities - like you are - are still wrong! But if they enter into a mutual agreement with the bank to settle the debt it's different than what is happening here, because you converted their lindens into toilet paper and there was no mutual agreement to change the terms.

People do what with credit cards... does ginko look to you as a credit card ? Even if so, then you should pay back the depositors NO LESS than the original amount at smaller interrest (this is exactly what ppl do with credit cards). Perhaps you should just get a VISA-PLATINUM and payback the 192m at once ? Actualy the interest on that card would be much less than the daily interest you were offering (0.09-0.13), perhaps you already maxed all your CC's

Evasion?

Lol you have it backwards Ponzi Man.

You are the Evasion Expert.

I dont have other people's money tied up in nebulous non- SL investments that I wont disclose.

He's made it more than clear that he's locked their money up interminably with no obligation to pay it back, and if they want to get out of this morass they have to take a huge loss, which he was more than willing to buy so he could get a discount on what he owed them. What was the figure, 8.3 years to recoup the money?

And not only admits it but thinks WSE is wrong in saying he shouldnt be able to skate on it.

How much do you want to bet he's still taking money out of the kitty for himself and his friends, too? Make it more like 12 years to ever recoup the cash.

You may well be right Colette. Good post.

To clarify certain points that are emerging....

GCS shares are converting to 2 GPB for one GCS

Nicholas P has (in theory) been forbidden by the WSE to purchase GBPs for less than $L1. It would appear he is not too pleased about that and I repeat the message below
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.wselive.com/research/announcement_detail/2212

Market Bond Buyback Ban
Submitted by: Ginko Perpetual Bonds (GPB)
Date: August 13, 2007

Dear bondholders,

I have been informed by WSE management that I am, effective immediately, forbidden from purchasing GPBs at market below the face value of L$1. I strongly disagree with this measure as I believe it is harmful to bondholders. Bonds can only be bought back when I have the full L$196m in cash to issue a liquidation dividend, or when the market value exceeds L$1 by itself. This is likely to take over a year, if not several.

Bond Yield Interest payments of L$0.03 or 3% on the face value of L$1 per bond every quarter are not at all affected by this.

Regards,
Andre Sanchez / Nicholas Portocarrero

------------------------------------------------------

He goes on to say in the previous message

https://www.wselive.com/research/announcement_detail/2211

GCS to GPB Conversion
Submitted by: Ginko Currency Services (GCS)
Date: August 13, 2007

Dear shareholders,

I am sorry to inform you that all GCS shares must be converted to GPBs. All assets held by GCS were either in the form of USD, or ginko account balances. With the bank run experienced by Ginko Financial, we converted a lot of usd to ginko account balances. As Ginko Financial did not manage to recover, all of GCS's assets were converted to GPBs. As such, all GCS shares are being converted into 2 GPBs each.

Regards,
Andre Sanchez / Nicholas Portocarrero

---------------------------------------------------------------

Quote, "Ginko Financial did not manage to recover"

It may have been possible to value the bonds on a mark to market basis before these updates on the basis Nicholas would buy back the debt at a big discount.

However if I am now right he cannot do so except via an alt

So its either (a) (b) or (c) you take your pick although on the face of it I would like to believe the WSE are trying to act fairly by preventing a loan discount repurchase by Nicholas.

Is it just me, or does all this remind you a lot of a Shell Game?

Bet Ponzi would have been better off if he had had Nick working for him.

Wait a sec, Isn't Nick a part owner of WSE?
And, If he is, Wouldn't He be one of the ones who MAKES WSE Policy?
WHY would WSE Forbid Nick from making Good the dept he Incurred in the first place?

The whole idea of this kind of Financial Operation in SL smells of Fish, but something here has gone WAY beyond that Stink.

Angel.

How much property does this Ginko guy still own?

If he still has any land, why hasn't it been sold or given away to reimburse his customers?

If I've learned anything from my time in Brasil and from the stories my Brazilian friends have told me it's nunca paga nada pra um banco brasileiro!

Apparently Nick doesn't make policy at WSE...and I doubt he owns much of anything with them these days!

If I was Luke I would have distanced myself from Ginko as quick as possible!

hehe see why I said Shell game?

It's funny... you people think -I- am the one being harmed by this ban. In a small, limited sense, I am. Getting this all behind me as quickly as possible would give me more peace of mind. But I have no problem carrying this debt at 3% indefinitely, which is what the ban is forcing me to do. I am unhappy because it's a move that is harming bondholders, under the pretense of helping them. You people are used to businesspeople with guilt complexes so you think I should shut up and let you people beat me up. I won't.

Ponzi or not: as an unwitting bondholder (but nonetheless an investor in what I knew to be a very risky investment), I want as many people to be able to buy the bonds as possible.

It's simple arithmetic. Allowing Nick the ability to buy the bonds increases the bond value. That's all I want, increased bond value.

Those who sell now and get less for their investment than what Nick owes them are getting less than they bargained for when they put their money in the "bank", but they're making the decision to get what they can now rather than waiting for the possibility of a better return later.

I regret the WSE's decision to restrict Nick from buying shares. It doesn't hurt Nick, and it doesn't help the bondholders. In fact, it hurts them. The more Nick invests in the bonds, the more he has a stake in making them perform well.

The WSE decision is simply an ineffective way of punishing Nick. If they really thought the whole thing was unethical, they shouldn't have allowed the new listing in the first place. I'm glad they did, though, or I'd be holding zip rather than a prayer.

This wasn't the first bad investment I've made, and it won't be the last. I don't blame anyone but myself, since I knew the facts -- there WERE no facts! I don't have too much pity for folks who lost their (2nd) life savings (empathy yes, pity no). That's what can happen when you make an obviously risky investment!

Ohh I dont think many of us are under the illusion you feel any guilt.

You have yet to give any conclusive information to help your case. Now's the perfect time to outline your plan to pay people back.

Maybe knowing what their money was supposed to be invested in would help, too.

Until you give up any answer more substantial than "That doesn't hurt!" you're actually just beating yourself up by throwing yourself at a wall each time you post.