Bet
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Bet as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 3,515
- Pages: 8
• name="persistent" value="1" Forgot your password? type="checkbox" Remember Me [email protected]
Sign Up Facebook helps you connect and share with the people in your life.
I will accept JS's $1,000,000 bet Back to Jim Sinclair's JSMineset • Discussion Board • Topic View
Topic: I will accept JS's $1,000,000 bet Displaying all 15 posts by 6 people.
Post #1 Harry wroteon April 18, 2009 at 1:55am I will accept the bet from JS for $1,000,000 that gold will trade at $1,650 on or before January 11, 2011. All that needs to happen for JS to win the bet is that gold touch that figure for one second at any time between now and 1/11/11. I will place sufficient assets in a solid, European bank (no exposure to the OTC mess and one of the most liquid banks in the world). The bank will issue an UNCONDITIONAL letter of credit to JS stating that it will pay him the $1,000,000 within 24 hours if the spot price of gold touches $1,650 for even just a moment, prior to 1/11/2011. I would expect a similar letter of credit from JS, guaranteeing that if gold has NOT lived up to his expectations, that *I* will be paid the $1,000,000 at the close of market, 1/11/2011. There are no other conditions. I accept the bet, and my money is real, and on the table. So....will the reason for not accepting the my offer be that I am offering an "OTC Derivative". A guarantee from a 100% solid bank, backed by assets I have deposited in the bank is the safest possible security. We can hardly leave two suitcases full of cash somewhere for the winner to collect, so a financial institution of some sort would be required to hold the bets, as it were. A world-class bank with no OTC risk, offering it's guarantee to JS of payment based on actual security I will deposit with the bank can hardly be called an "OTC Derivative".....so let's now see if JS's
offer was real. I am serious, and ready to proceed immediately. I can be contacted at the email address associated with this account.
Post #2 Harry wroteon April 18, 2009 at 11:56am Unlike (I suspect) you, I actually DO have sufficient funds to accept the bet. As this is JS's board, what better place to accept the bet. I certainly don't need to prove my net worth to every fawning internet hanger-on, so I have no intention of further interaction with you. And I may not be the chairman of an AMEX company, but I am head of a company that actually has assets. Not to mention income. Not everyone can say that;-) But my money is good, and I am very happy to place the bet with JS. Anyone with even a modicum of market knowledge would understand that JS would be making a complete sucker bet, which is why he almost certainly will not actually participate. Still, if he is sincere, the bet can be tied up in less than ten days.
Post #3 Paul wroteon April 18, 2009 at 12:31pm Post your email Harry! We do not all want to accept you as a friend to do this because of obvious spam possibilities and info gathering. Post more details if you genuinely dare to place a bet.
Post #4 Harry wroteon April 18, 2009 at 12:40pm My email is [email protected] My lawyer would be VERY happy to speak with a qualified representative of JS (or anyone else wishing to make the same bet) to a) confirm that I have the required $1mm, and b) to make the very simple arrangements to put the bet in place. Having said that, for reasons I will explain in due course, I can virtually GUARANTEE you that JS will not take this bet...even though he proposed it. Still, I am ready to perform, right here, right now. Look, I have nothing in particular against JS. His GENERAL advice regarding protecting oneself, etc has been valuable. What HASN'T been valuable are his dismal predictions, as to the dollar, oil, gold, etc, which have been monumentally bad. I don't care if he's a little flaky, following exploitive, dopey Indian gurus, or if he's a typical naive white liberal, as evidenced by his ABSURD statement: "Where is the present day Huey Newton and his Panthers who organized to right wrongs."
As someone who grew up in Oakland and used to see the cheap criminal who was Huey Newton hanging around, beating up hookers, buying and selling drugs, etc, etc, etc, I find it sad, if not hilarious that there are still White, Liberal space cadets around who still romanticize criminals like Newton. Maybe JS really DIDN'T sucker in innocents by taking a shell company (TRE) and puff up the share price, then sell his personal shares to unsuspecting, fawning followers, despite the fact that the company has, apparently, no income, or viable assets. Though from what I can see, I wouldn't bet too much on that particular point. Anyway, all this would mean little if JS's price predictions were sound. Everyone could clean up by following his expert advice. Perhaps gold will hit $1,650 by Jan 2011. Perhaps it will go a lot higher. I myself am long gold both in physical and futures, so I hope so. But his offer of a $1,000,000 bet is a stupid bet. And anyone who understood the makeup of the futures markets would understand EXACTLY why he would be an idiot to make that bet, even if he knew for a 100% CERTAINTY that gold would indeed meet that price/time objective. After he declines the bet I'll explain that point.
Post #5 Paul wroteon April 18, 2009 at 3:29pm Hotmail email mmmm Interesting
Post #6 Harry wroteon April 18, 2009 at 3:46pm I'm not sure why using a hotmail account for public dissemination is "interesting", though presumably you intended to sarcastically imply, without being willing to actually say it, that the use of a hotmail account indicated lack of financial resources. Sorry. I just don't put my private email address on a public website. I can be contacted with great reliability on my hotmail account, and am anxiously awaiting an email of acceptance for the famous $1mm bet. My offer is 100% genuine as ANYONE can find out for themselves if they foolishly wish to bet, on even terms (your $1mm against my $1mm) that gold will or will not (you take the "will") trade at $1,650 on or before 1/11/2011. I will give it a few days, including a direct email to JS, but I can virtually assure you that he will not take the bet, as he MUST know enough about markets to realize that he would be placing a sucker's bet of the highest magnitude.
Post #7 Harry wroteon April 19, 2009 at 2:02am So the fact that I own and operate a substantial property company (which, by the way, has built over $100,000,000 in property in the last 5 years), means I am "exposed". I guess I am exposed as
heading a company that DOES have proven assets, and income. Perhaps you find this a strange concept! This is all quite amusing. I am always amazed at the internet sad-cases and crackpots who inhabit various chat rooms. In any case, my money is ready. I have emailed JS directly, offering to put my lawyer in touch with him to arrange the bet. But as I said, it isn't going to happen. That bet offer was great publicity, but that's all it was. I am perfectly happy to make the same bet, for lesser stakes, perhaps even stakes small enough for jack to afford, with ANYONE who cares to take the bet. Minimum $50,000. 'Same terms. Money deposited in a bank, released to you if gold hits $1,650 on or before 1/11/2011 or to me on that date if gold hasn't touched $1,650. Here's your chance, jack! Instead of just being a no-hoper Lefty in a chat room, you can be a gambling man!! Email me your lawyer's info, and mine will contact him Monday to arrange any sized bet you want from $50,000 to $1mm. I won't hold my breath.
Post #8 Mike wroteon April 19, 2009 at 9:42am i've been through the April archives twice, march once, i can't find Sinclairs announcement about the 'bet'. But my take on it was that the counterparty to the bet wanted to hedge the bet with a side bet[derivative]. Even so, i agree the thing is fishy. This defies reason as the bet takes place outside the market;; 'And anyone who understood the makeup of the futures markets would understand EXACTLY why he would be an idiot to make that bet, even if he knew for a 100% CERTAINTY that gold would indeed meet that price/time objective. ''
Post #9 Chumba wroteon April 19, 2009 at 10:43am First of all, I look very lowly upon devotees of Ayn Rand. Her philosophy is ultimately shallow and a dead end. As for all this farting from John Galt, just put up or shut up. There are 5 postings here from you seemingly talking to yourself or to people that don't exist. If you want to make a bet with Jim then that should be easy. Anyone can take two minutes to figure out how to get in touch with him. I've learned in life that people who make a lot of noise are usually just expelling gasses.
Post #10 Harry wroteon April 19, 2009 at 1:04pm As it happens, *I* don't look with favor upon those who DON'T follow the philosophy of Ayn Rand. She was, above all else, a student of logic and reason. Those who are incapable of practicing or understanding logic, reason....or both, often disparage Ms. Rand.
I write in a straightforward manor and get to the point. Read JS's "reply" to the Barrons article. It is a STUDY in obfuscation and double talk. Hundreds of words designed not to clarify.....but to evade and (he hopes, one can only surmise), confuse. If someone accused ME of something as heinous as pumping up the price of a shell company in order to dump shares on unsuspecting, and love-sick followers, i would write out a clear, concise, POINT-BY-POINT rebuttal. It would repeat each and every charge, and then give the EXACT explanation as to why the charge is incorrect. JS's reply is the exact reply you would get from someone who is guilty, and, having no actual rebuttal, is left with accusing his tormentor of "not understanding" while ignoring each and every specific charge. How hard would it have been to simply say "You are wrong, sir, as demonstrated by the simple and verifiable fact that my current shareholding is xxx, and my shareholding two years ago was yyy, which demonstrates that I have NOT been dumping my own shares while talking them up in public. Moreover, you say my company has no proven reserves or income......here is a schedule showing reserves and income. How could you have missed these in your research?" THAT, would have put the entire matter to bed in an INSTANT. But instead, the roundabout and evasive reply makes it apparent that, at least in this case, the smoke evinces a probable fire. In any case, I HAVE "put up" as you so colloqially phrase it. I have posted here, and sent a direct email to JS offering to accept his offer of a £1mm bet. No response. Nor will there be one.Anyone who understands futures and options would know that betting $1mm that gold would touch $1,650 by 1/11/2011 at even odds would be about as astute as a guy who agreed to bet on the flip of a coin....heads, I pay you $1mm....tails, you pay me $300,000. Only an utter fool would agree to a bet in which he was getting the worst of it to the tune of 300%. And Mr. Rzepa, it is none of JS's business if the counterparty to his proposed $1mm bet hedges it in the market. As long as the $1mm is guaranteed to be there should JS win the bet, that is all that matters. The thing is that JS, being a clever fellow, knows full well that the true odds of his hastily offered and poorly-thought-out bet are about 10-3 against, meaning that if he risks $1mm, the other party should be risking c. $3mm. This is why JS, despite early bravado, will NEVER take this bet, despite the fact that I can EASILY demonstrate my ability to perform.Anyway, enough of this foolishness. I will wait in vain for a reply. In the meanwhile, we all at least have ONE thing in common...which is a belief that gold will be the most logical beneficiary of the ongoing monetary inflation.....though as the past 12 months have amply demonstrated, nobody can say exactly WHEN.
Post #11 Mike wroteon April 19, 2009 at 6:56pm ''Anyone who understands futures and options would know that betting $1mm that gold would touch $1,650 by 1/11/2011 at even odds would be about as astute as a guy who agreed to bet on the flip of a '' Whats that got to do with a bet? Presumably this is a simple bet outside of any market. you say as much yourself; ''As long as the $1mm is guaranteed to be there should JS win the bet, that is all that matters'' None of this will be of any consequence in any case as Sinclair can simply deny your case in public.
Post #12 Chumba wroteon April 19, 2009 at 9:19pm I also operate on logic and reason. What other way is there? I'm just not openly and abrasively selfish and callous about it. The counterpart to logic and reason is heart and soul. You cannot have one without the other. Well, you can, but then you end up with people like George Bush and Barack Obama...and Ayn Rand. "I write in a straightforward manor and get to the point. Read JS's "reply" to the Barrons article. It is a STUDY in obfuscation and double talk. Hundreds of words designed not to clarify.....but to evade and (he hopes, one can only surmise), confuse." That is a blanket statement and as a result is meaningless. As I've stated to someone else who is bitching in a similar manner, please point to specific words and passages and explain your objection. Otherwise, please don't expect anyone to take you seriously. "If someone accused ME of something as heinous as pumping up the price of a shell company in order to dump shares on unsuspecting, and love-sick followers..." Is this the accusation you are making? On what information are you making this accusation? "...the smoke evinces a probable fire." Not when you're trying to blow it up my ass. You seem to have this idea that people who follow Jim Sinclair are into gold because he is. Perhaps you should remind yourself that most if not all of us are probably following Jim Sinclair because he's into gold. I follow several people who are bullish on gold long-term. The people I listen to are those that have proven they have extraordinary insight. All of them are suggesting gold and silver for the long-term. Whether it's $1,650 by 1/11/2011 or $10,000 by 2012 or whatever, the fact is that I personally believe that gold will ultimately mean the difference between flourishing and merely existing in the future. Jim could suddenly tomorrow claim that we should all go out and buy panties to wear on our head, but I'd still listen to Jim's musings on gold because they jibe with what a lot of other smart people are saying. So, once again, I ask you to either put up or shut up. The bottom line is that you are not convincing anyone with your bluster. You're certainly not convincing me.
Post #13 Nick wroteon April 20, 2009 at 4:59pm Jims bet has been on the table for quite a long time. It is not a recent event. Why is it only now that you want to take the bet? If you follow his postings like you say then surely you would have taken up the bet when it was first announced. I agree with you that a bet can be made regardless of whether or not you hedge it elsewhere. I assume Jim would hedge his bets too if this was purely a financial transaction but it s not. He has
made this offer to pit his conviction against any takers. In this case, hedging should certainly not be allowed. You are placing your money where your convictions lie so you should be prepared to lose the lot IMHO. I guess your real problem Harry Harry is that if Jim declines your offer on the grounds that you are not legit then it is his word against yours. Jim has a verifyable history / public profile and so far you have not disclosed yours. If he declines your offer then you lose all credibility. All of it. The only way you can be taken seriously now is if your bet is accepted. So if you really are legit and value your personal honor then it is now in your best interest to do what it takes to make sure JS accepts.
Post #14 Dan wroteon April 21, 2009 at 10:39pm To me this seems like a very odd way to make a bet - post online anonymously without a picture after bashing the company in question. If you are serious about placing a $1 million wager with Jim he can be reached through the Connecticut office. This contact info is available on the corporate home page under Corporate Information -> Corporate Directory. Please note this is for corporate inquiries only - no JSMineset inquiries will be returned or answered here. If the wager is negotiated under the terms originally specified by Jim I am sure he would be happy to announce it on JSMineset. As for the Barron's accusations, any shareholder that needs more information is welcome to contact Jim directly through the above mentioned office and he will be happy to discuss the company in detail with you. We do not discuss corporate details on Facebook or JSMineset. Regards, Dan Duval JSMineset Editor
Post #15 Harry wrote17 minutes ago In fact, I had a reply from JS three days ago asking for contact info. I sent it to him, along with details of the bank in which I propose to place the funds (one of the safest banks in the world, by the way, it could not POSSIBLY be used as a reason not to make the bet as it is safer than virtually any bank out there). So far, I have not heard back. As far as me "bashing the company in question"........ I would be betting with JS, not his company, TRE, needless to say, but I see what you mean. Having said that, I can imagine that NO impartial observer would look at TRE's income and verified assets (nil and dubious, respectively...at least according to any info available to the public).....then read the
Barrons article....then read JS's circuitous reply and not smell a rat. I'm sorry, but it reeks. Why not just give straight answers to the Barrons story, refuting it point-by-point, instead of a roundabout discourse that managed to avoid EVERY specific assertion? I have a lot of money in various juniors......solid juniors with proven reserves, cash in the bank, and a strong possibility of future appreciation (Aurizon, Kinross, Minefinders, Minco). Looking at TRE, at least the info available to the public, and you can see NO reason anyone would pay $1.00 a share, let alone $8.00. If there ARE good reasons, they are certainly well protected from public view. I also found it a bit suspicious that just a couple of days before the article appeared, JS posted a long article on JSM "warning" everyone of "dirty tricks" that were about to be played by the "short sellers". He obviously knew about the Barrons article and wanted to soften up the readers with a GENERAL warning about attacks on Juniors, as this might serve to mitigate the damage in the eyes of the readers of JSM when an article critical of JS's company indeed appeared......"Oh....we were warned about these kind of "dirty tricks", and lo and behold.....here they are." In any case, as before, I am VERY happy to place the bet, and await a reply from JS....though again, as anyone, not just me, can hedge against the whole $1,000,000 loss for less than $300k, it would be one of the biggest sucker bets ever made, if JS actually stepped up to the table and bet. That's why I am 95% sure that he won't, though I will happily accept his money if he does
Facebook © 2009 English (US) • Login • About • Advertising • Developers • Careers • Terms • • • • •
Find Friends Privacy Mobile Help
Sign Up Facebook helps you connect and share with the people in your life.
I will accept JS's $1,000,000 bet Back to Jim Sinclair's JSMineset • Discussion Board • Topic View
Topic: I will accept JS's $1,000,000 bet Displaying all 15 posts by 6 people.
Post #1 Harry wroteon April 18, 2009 at 1:55am I will accept the bet from JS for $1,000,000 that gold will trade at $1,650 on or before January 11, 2011. All that needs to happen for JS to win the bet is that gold touch that figure for one second at any time between now and 1/11/11. I will place sufficient assets in a solid, European bank (no exposure to the OTC mess and one of the most liquid banks in the world). The bank will issue an UNCONDITIONAL letter of credit to JS stating that it will pay him the $1,000,000 within 24 hours if the spot price of gold touches $1,650 for even just a moment, prior to 1/11/2011. I would expect a similar letter of credit from JS, guaranteeing that if gold has NOT lived up to his expectations, that *I* will be paid the $1,000,000 at the close of market, 1/11/2011. There are no other conditions. I accept the bet, and my money is real, and on the table. So....will the reason for not accepting the my offer be that I am offering an "OTC Derivative". A guarantee from a 100% solid bank, backed by assets I have deposited in the bank is the safest possible security. We can hardly leave two suitcases full of cash somewhere for the winner to collect, so a financial institution of some sort would be required to hold the bets, as it were. A world-class bank with no OTC risk, offering it's guarantee to JS of payment based on actual security I will deposit with the bank can hardly be called an "OTC Derivative".....so let's now see if JS's
offer was real. I am serious, and ready to proceed immediately. I can be contacted at the email address associated with this account.
Post #2 Harry wroteon April 18, 2009 at 11:56am Unlike (I suspect) you, I actually DO have sufficient funds to accept the bet. As this is JS's board, what better place to accept the bet. I certainly don't need to prove my net worth to every fawning internet hanger-on, so I have no intention of further interaction with you. And I may not be the chairman of an AMEX company, but I am head of a company that actually has assets. Not to mention income. Not everyone can say that;-) But my money is good, and I am very happy to place the bet with JS. Anyone with even a modicum of market knowledge would understand that JS would be making a complete sucker bet, which is why he almost certainly will not actually participate. Still, if he is sincere, the bet can be tied up in less than ten days.
Post #3 Paul wroteon April 18, 2009 at 12:31pm Post your email Harry! We do not all want to accept you as a friend to do this because of obvious spam possibilities and info gathering. Post more details if you genuinely dare to place a bet.
Post #4 Harry wroteon April 18, 2009 at 12:40pm My email is [email protected] My lawyer would be VERY happy to speak with a qualified representative of JS (or anyone else wishing to make the same bet) to a) confirm that I have the required $1mm, and b) to make the very simple arrangements to put the bet in place. Having said that, for reasons I will explain in due course, I can virtually GUARANTEE you that JS will not take this bet...even though he proposed it. Still, I am ready to perform, right here, right now. Look, I have nothing in particular against JS. His GENERAL advice regarding protecting oneself, etc has been valuable. What HASN'T been valuable are his dismal predictions, as to the dollar, oil, gold, etc, which have been monumentally bad. I don't care if he's a little flaky, following exploitive, dopey Indian gurus, or if he's a typical naive white liberal, as evidenced by his ABSURD statement: "Where is the present day Huey Newton and his Panthers who organized to right wrongs."
As someone who grew up in Oakland and used to see the cheap criminal who was Huey Newton hanging around, beating up hookers, buying and selling drugs, etc, etc, etc, I find it sad, if not hilarious that there are still White, Liberal space cadets around who still romanticize criminals like Newton. Maybe JS really DIDN'T sucker in innocents by taking a shell company (TRE) and puff up the share price, then sell his personal shares to unsuspecting, fawning followers, despite the fact that the company has, apparently, no income, or viable assets. Though from what I can see, I wouldn't bet too much on that particular point. Anyway, all this would mean little if JS's price predictions were sound. Everyone could clean up by following his expert advice. Perhaps gold will hit $1,650 by Jan 2011. Perhaps it will go a lot higher. I myself am long gold both in physical and futures, so I hope so. But his offer of a $1,000,000 bet is a stupid bet. And anyone who understood the makeup of the futures markets would understand EXACTLY why he would be an idiot to make that bet, even if he knew for a 100% CERTAINTY that gold would indeed meet that price/time objective. After he declines the bet I'll explain that point.
Post #5 Paul wroteon April 18, 2009 at 3:29pm Hotmail email mmmm Interesting
Post #6 Harry wroteon April 18, 2009 at 3:46pm I'm not sure why using a hotmail account for public dissemination is "interesting", though presumably you intended to sarcastically imply, without being willing to actually say it, that the use of a hotmail account indicated lack of financial resources. Sorry. I just don't put my private email address on a public website. I can be contacted with great reliability on my hotmail account, and am anxiously awaiting an email of acceptance for the famous $1mm bet. My offer is 100% genuine as ANYONE can find out for themselves if they foolishly wish to bet, on even terms (your $1mm against my $1mm) that gold will or will not (you take the "will") trade at $1,650 on or before 1/11/2011. I will give it a few days, including a direct email to JS, but I can virtually assure you that he will not take the bet, as he MUST know enough about markets to realize that he would be placing a sucker's bet of the highest magnitude.
Post #7 Harry wroteon April 19, 2009 at 2:02am So the fact that I own and operate a substantial property company (which, by the way, has built over $100,000,000 in property in the last 5 years), means I am "exposed". I guess I am exposed as
heading a company that DOES have proven assets, and income. Perhaps you find this a strange concept! This is all quite amusing. I am always amazed at the internet sad-cases and crackpots who inhabit various chat rooms. In any case, my money is ready. I have emailed JS directly, offering to put my lawyer in touch with him to arrange the bet. But as I said, it isn't going to happen. That bet offer was great publicity, but that's all it was. I am perfectly happy to make the same bet, for lesser stakes, perhaps even stakes small enough for jack to afford, with ANYONE who cares to take the bet. Minimum $50,000. 'Same terms. Money deposited in a bank, released to you if gold hits $1,650 on or before 1/11/2011 or to me on that date if gold hasn't touched $1,650. Here's your chance, jack! Instead of just being a no-hoper Lefty in a chat room, you can be a gambling man!! Email me your lawyer's info, and mine will contact him Monday to arrange any sized bet you want from $50,000 to $1mm. I won't hold my breath.
Post #8 Mike wroteon April 19, 2009 at 9:42am i've been through the April archives twice, march once, i can't find Sinclairs announcement about the 'bet'. But my take on it was that the counterparty to the bet wanted to hedge the bet with a side bet[derivative]. Even so, i agree the thing is fishy. This defies reason as the bet takes place outside the market;; 'And anyone who understood the makeup of the futures markets would understand EXACTLY why he would be an idiot to make that bet, even if he knew for a 100% CERTAINTY that gold would indeed meet that price/time objective. ''
Post #9 Chumba wroteon April 19, 2009 at 10:43am First of all, I look very lowly upon devotees of Ayn Rand. Her philosophy is ultimately shallow and a dead end. As for all this farting from John Galt, just put up or shut up. There are 5 postings here from you seemingly talking to yourself or to people that don't exist. If you want to make a bet with Jim then that should be easy. Anyone can take two minutes to figure out how to get in touch with him. I've learned in life that people who make a lot of noise are usually just expelling gasses.
Post #10 Harry wroteon April 19, 2009 at 1:04pm As it happens, *I* don't look with favor upon those who DON'T follow the philosophy of Ayn Rand. She was, above all else, a student of logic and reason. Those who are incapable of practicing or understanding logic, reason....or both, often disparage Ms. Rand.
I write in a straightforward manor and get to the point. Read JS's "reply" to the Barrons article. It is a STUDY in obfuscation and double talk. Hundreds of words designed not to clarify.....but to evade and (he hopes, one can only surmise), confuse. If someone accused ME of something as heinous as pumping up the price of a shell company in order to dump shares on unsuspecting, and love-sick followers, i would write out a clear, concise, POINT-BY-POINT rebuttal. It would repeat each and every charge, and then give the EXACT explanation as to why the charge is incorrect. JS's reply is the exact reply you would get from someone who is guilty, and, having no actual rebuttal, is left with accusing his tormentor of "not understanding" while ignoring each and every specific charge. How hard would it have been to simply say "You are wrong, sir, as demonstrated by the simple and verifiable fact that my current shareholding is xxx, and my shareholding two years ago was yyy, which demonstrates that I have NOT been dumping my own shares while talking them up in public. Moreover, you say my company has no proven reserves or income......here is a schedule showing reserves and income. How could you have missed these in your research?" THAT, would have put the entire matter to bed in an INSTANT. But instead, the roundabout and evasive reply makes it apparent that, at least in this case, the smoke evinces a probable fire. In any case, I HAVE "put up" as you so colloqially phrase it. I have posted here, and sent a direct email to JS offering to accept his offer of a £1mm bet. No response. Nor will there be one.Anyone who understands futures and options would know that betting $1mm that gold would touch $1,650 by 1/11/2011 at even odds would be about as astute as a guy who agreed to bet on the flip of a coin....heads, I pay you $1mm....tails, you pay me $300,000. Only an utter fool would agree to a bet in which he was getting the worst of it to the tune of 300%. And Mr. Rzepa, it is none of JS's business if the counterparty to his proposed $1mm bet hedges it in the market. As long as the $1mm is guaranteed to be there should JS win the bet, that is all that matters. The thing is that JS, being a clever fellow, knows full well that the true odds of his hastily offered and poorly-thought-out bet are about 10-3 against, meaning that if he risks $1mm, the other party should be risking c. $3mm. This is why JS, despite early bravado, will NEVER take this bet, despite the fact that I can EASILY demonstrate my ability to perform.Anyway, enough of this foolishness. I will wait in vain for a reply. In the meanwhile, we all at least have ONE thing in common...which is a belief that gold will be the most logical beneficiary of the ongoing monetary inflation.....though as the past 12 months have amply demonstrated, nobody can say exactly WHEN.
Post #11 Mike wroteon April 19, 2009 at 6:56pm ''Anyone who understands futures and options would know that betting $1mm that gold would touch $1,650 by 1/11/2011 at even odds would be about as astute as a guy who agreed to bet on the flip of a '' Whats that got to do with a bet? Presumably this is a simple bet outside of any market. you say as much yourself; ''As long as the $1mm is guaranteed to be there should JS win the bet, that is all that matters'' None of this will be of any consequence in any case as Sinclair can simply deny your case in public.
Post #12 Chumba wroteon April 19, 2009 at 9:19pm I also operate on logic and reason. What other way is there? I'm just not openly and abrasively selfish and callous about it. The counterpart to logic and reason is heart and soul. You cannot have one without the other. Well, you can, but then you end up with people like George Bush and Barack Obama...and Ayn Rand. "I write in a straightforward manor and get to the point. Read JS's "reply" to the Barrons article. It is a STUDY in obfuscation and double talk. Hundreds of words designed not to clarify.....but to evade and (he hopes, one can only surmise), confuse." That is a blanket statement and as a result is meaningless. As I've stated to someone else who is bitching in a similar manner, please point to specific words and passages and explain your objection. Otherwise, please don't expect anyone to take you seriously. "If someone accused ME of something as heinous as pumping up the price of a shell company in order to dump shares on unsuspecting, and love-sick followers..." Is this the accusation you are making? On what information are you making this accusation? "...the smoke evinces a probable fire." Not when you're trying to blow it up my ass. You seem to have this idea that people who follow Jim Sinclair are into gold because he is. Perhaps you should remind yourself that most if not all of us are probably following Jim Sinclair because he's into gold. I follow several people who are bullish on gold long-term. The people I listen to are those that have proven they have extraordinary insight. All of them are suggesting gold and silver for the long-term. Whether it's $1,650 by 1/11/2011 or $10,000 by 2012 or whatever, the fact is that I personally believe that gold will ultimately mean the difference between flourishing and merely existing in the future. Jim could suddenly tomorrow claim that we should all go out and buy panties to wear on our head, but I'd still listen to Jim's musings on gold because they jibe with what a lot of other smart people are saying. So, once again, I ask you to either put up or shut up. The bottom line is that you are not convincing anyone with your bluster. You're certainly not convincing me.
Post #13 Nick wroteon April 20, 2009 at 4:59pm Jims bet has been on the table for quite a long time. It is not a recent event. Why is it only now that you want to take the bet? If you follow his postings like you say then surely you would have taken up the bet when it was first announced. I agree with you that a bet can be made regardless of whether or not you hedge it elsewhere. I assume Jim would hedge his bets too if this was purely a financial transaction but it s not. He has
made this offer to pit his conviction against any takers. In this case, hedging should certainly not be allowed. You are placing your money where your convictions lie so you should be prepared to lose the lot IMHO. I guess your real problem Harry Harry is that if Jim declines your offer on the grounds that you are not legit then it is his word against yours. Jim has a verifyable history / public profile and so far you have not disclosed yours. If he declines your offer then you lose all credibility. All of it. The only way you can be taken seriously now is if your bet is accepted. So if you really are legit and value your personal honor then it is now in your best interest to do what it takes to make sure JS accepts.
Post #14 Dan wroteon April 21, 2009 at 10:39pm To me this seems like a very odd way to make a bet - post online anonymously without a picture after bashing the company in question. If you are serious about placing a $1 million wager with Jim he can be reached through the Connecticut office. This contact info is available on the corporate home page under Corporate Information -> Corporate Directory. Please note this is for corporate inquiries only - no JSMineset inquiries will be returned or answered here. If the wager is negotiated under the terms originally specified by Jim I am sure he would be happy to announce it on JSMineset. As for the Barron's accusations, any shareholder that needs more information is welcome to contact Jim directly through the above mentioned office and he will be happy to discuss the company in detail with you. We do not discuss corporate details on Facebook or JSMineset. Regards, Dan Duval JSMineset Editor
Post #15 Harry wrote17 minutes ago In fact, I had a reply from JS three days ago asking for contact info. I sent it to him, along with details of the bank in which I propose to place the funds (one of the safest banks in the world, by the way, it could not POSSIBLY be used as a reason not to make the bet as it is safer than virtually any bank out there). So far, I have not heard back. As far as me "bashing the company in question"........ I would be betting with JS, not his company, TRE, needless to say, but I see what you mean. Having said that, I can imagine that NO impartial observer would look at TRE's income and verified assets (nil and dubious, respectively...at least according to any info available to the public).....then read the
Barrons article....then read JS's circuitous reply and not smell a rat. I'm sorry, but it reeks. Why not just give straight answers to the Barrons story, refuting it point-by-point, instead of a roundabout discourse that managed to avoid EVERY specific assertion? I have a lot of money in various juniors......solid juniors with proven reserves, cash in the bank, and a strong possibility of future appreciation (Aurizon, Kinross, Minefinders, Minco). Looking at TRE, at least the info available to the public, and you can see NO reason anyone would pay $1.00 a share, let alone $8.00. If there ARE good reasons, they are certainly well protected from public view. I also found it a bit suspicious that just a couple of days before the article appeared, JS posted a long article on JSM "warning" everyone of "dirty tricks" that were about to be played by the "short sellers". He obviously knew about the Barrons article and wanted to soften up the readers with a GENERAL warning about attacks on Juniors, as this might serve to mitigate the damage in the eyes of the readers of JSM when an article critical of JS's company indeed appeared......"Oh....we were warned about these kind of "dirty tricks", and lo and behold.....here they are." In any case, as before, I am VERY happy to place the bet, and await a reply from JS....though again, as anyone, not just me, can hedge against the whole $1,000,000 loss for less than $300k, it would be one of the biggest sucker bets ever made, if JS actually stepped up to the table and bet. That's why I am 95% sure that he won't, though I will happily accept his money if he does
Facebook © 2009 English (US) • Login • About • Advertising • Developers • Careers • Terms • • • • •
Find Friends Privacy Mobile Help
