Home Sitemap All news Inside SL Opinions Finance News feeds Contact
RSS Feed For All Articles
 


We have 3 guests online
Add to Technorati Favorites
Advertisement
Parallels 

User Rating: / 6

PoorBest 
Written by Guardian Market   
Saturday, 09 February 2008

By Guardian Market, SLR CFO

I cannot predict the future.   All that I can do is look at the past, and attempt to draw lessons from what has happened before, and hope that others can do the same.  That being said, the current situation with JT Financial and SL Wallet (SLW) is reminiscent of what happened with Ginko Financial a few months ago.

Let’s review the facts similarities.  With both institutions:

  • Linden Labs took a new policy action that caused a large run on deposits.
  • The institutions became at best illiquid and at worst insolvent.
  • The institutions decided to convert their existing deposits to equity compulsorily.
  • Depositors have been promised that their new equity will be purchased back at cost over time.

For those of you who have been reading SL Reports for awhile, you know that I was not a fan of Luke Connell’s decision to prohibit Nicholas Portocarrero from purchasing Ginko Perpetual Bonds (GPB) at less than L$1 per share if investors were offering them at such prices.  I wrote about it in an article called “Salt in the Wound: WSE Price Regulation of GPB.  However, this time around I highly doubt that Arbitrage Wise will prohibit himself from buying back SLW shares at less than L$1 per share.  Thus we have a rare gift in the financial markets, the opportunity to see how nearly the same event is handled with a minute difference in the rules of engagement.

This is also time for a hands-on lesson in investor expectations.  While Wise himself will be doing a lot of buying up SLW shares, I suspect other investors will also be willing to purchase at less than L$1 per share in order to make a profit when Wise fulfills his promise of buybacks.   The question is, how much do investors believe Wise will actually make his buybacks. 

If memory serves (since the records have been removed), before Portocarrero was prohibited from buying back GPB, the price fluctuated between L$0.30 and L$0.60.  When Connell made his decision, GPB dropped down to the L$0.20 area, before being delisted at less than L$0.10.

The question is, do investors trust Wise more than they trust Portocarrero?  If so, observers would expect to see prices above those of GPB, or above L$0.60.  If not, they will be lower.  There will be some large depositors who panic and throw the price in downward spikes, I suspect, but most investors will probably be willing to take small or medium discounts on their deposits in exchange for liquidity.  Where the eventual price rests will be the telltale sign, though.  Wise is placing a bet on his own credibility with the market. 

So, to the depositors of JTF/SLW, I now ask you: At what price do you sell?  Time will tell if those who panic are the stupid investors, or the smart ones. 

Comments
Add NewSearchRSS
Guardian Market - SLR CFO     | 2008-02-09 15:37:32
I've been told that SLIB and BCX are also converting their deposits to equity. This will be an interesting financial showdown we're brewing here.
zoggo   | 2008-02-09 15:46:37
After the conversion there will be an exchange without cash balances. Shareholders can only sell if there is new money coming in. This will give a big devaluation of shareprices. End result Shareholders must wait long for their money and prices will drop
Karen Palen   | 2008-02-10 00:37:42
To me the question is not so much trust of Wise but anticipation of the next dumb move by Linden Labs (aka King Linden).

They have consistently acted like some low grade medieval king in destroying whatever assets "residents" build up. I really see no reason npt to expect equally stupid and destructive moves in the near future.
zogg   | 2008-02-10 05:18:16
Correct Karen.

That is what I am missing by the most businees plans presented on the different exchanges. Riskmanagement
Yanik   | 2008-02-10 07:19:19
This is not something cleverly constructed. It's a basic ponzi. Get the money from one to pay the other. Maybe someone could tell us how long, in average, a ponzi scheme can last before it crumbles. That would give us an approximation of how much time Wise has before injecting the missing money in.
Scott Nestler   | 2008-02-10 10:01:22
It's not like we were given options. Hope for the best.
Arnuad Villota   | 2008-02-11 03:40:42
The one difference that I see between the Ginko bonds and the JTF bonds, is that the original Ginko BOnds were worth L$26/share. About two days before the conversion of the bank lindens to bonds, Nicholas did a 100-1 split on the bonds thus lowering the price to L$0.26 which is legit. How the bank customers got screwed was that they were given a 1-1 conversion whereas if they would have gotten a 4-1 conversion then everything would have been legitamate and the price of the stock may have held around 0.26 give or take 10 points.

At least with the JTF conversion everyone will start out with the same conversion rate. How long it will stay at 1L is anyone's guess. But I personally don't think it will lose more than 30% of it's value initially.

I don't necessarily agree with this decision, but I do agree that it was probably not made lightly.

My main concern is that businesses listed on the exchange will have IPO or Treasury monies tied up and will not be able to liquidate quickly to get enough Lindens to run their business. This could have a major cascading effect in the community. I trust that Arb and company have taken this into consideration and will not let that happen.
Arnuad Villota   | 2008-02-11 05:49:52
One other comment. Yanik, in this case I do not agree that this is a ponzi scheme. In order to pay the ridiculous interest rates which banks had to do to be competitive, more Lindens were taken out and invested. Because of the ridicuously high rates, the bank reserves were lower than they should have been in order to invest the lindens into projects that would sustain the rates.

If this were a ponzi scheme, then Arb would just be pocketing the money (as Nicholas was doing) and not investing. Arb has proof of his investments, Nicholas did not.

Also if this was a ponzi scheme, it would have crashed by now. According to the SLWallet prospectus, there are a little over 40Million lindens as cash on hand. I am assuming that part of this cash will go towards keeping the SLWallet stock at a reasonable rate, helping listed companies out by buying back large blocks of shares to keep the companies running, marketing to bring in new customers, etc., etc.. This is only optimistic conjecture on my part.

It makes no sense to "crash" long term investments, especially at a significant loss. If that is done then we all lose, not just Arb.

For those who do not want anything to do with SLWallet shares, invest your loose cash in some solid stocks (YEP!, MECH, MNM, ZEN, LLCA, LNL, etc.) so that it isn't converted. Then when the split happens, you can sell those shares, carefully, and cash out at that time. You might even make money.
Yanik   | 2008-02-11 06:27:58
Arnaud,

you say if it was a ponzi, it would have crashed by now. I'm not saying IT WAS a ponzi. But IT WILL be very much like one. Freezing all balances, then waiting on new customers to pay old one is not what i'd consider safe play. Once no new customers comes in, then you can't pay anymore, unless you can inject money in it by then. I don't know why people rate my previous post with thumbs down. I fail to see why they don't see that. It is pretty obvious.

Then, i'm only commenting. Not whinning. I have a lot of money in stocks, and none i wish to take out short term. But it tickles my nerve that the day i will want, or worse HAVE to get some out, i will probably not be able. I'm not able at the moment.

As for SLW, i don't want them. I'll lose my 0.98 L$ in my account balance, but you bet i'll keep it below 1.00 $L. Unless it goes down. I'll be one the sharks that go for it. But that will be MY choice.

On another note, you just mentionned something that i missed... over 40M on hand??? And the amount needed to solve that mess is around 65M? Hmmmm... Interesting. And i can see another 5M that could be available if Arb would reduce his holding in WPM.
Yanik   | 2008-02-11 06:31:56
Oh, and talk about free speech.... the more thumbs down you get, the lighter the text becomes. LOL
Arnuad Villota   | 2008-02-11 08:22:28
Yanik, I see your point now. I agree that what you are saying may happen, but from what I understand, Arb is oging to liquidate some of his longer term investments but that will take time, thus his decision for the share swap. Like i said that is the way I understand it. So as long as he does that, and continues to limit withdraws in SLWallet until he comes up with the full 65M then I don't think I would classify that as a ponzi. If, on the other hand new depositers start coming in, and he lifts all withdraw limits, then, bingo! you have a ponzi.

Once the split happens and CAPEX is on it's own, then any buying and selling we do will stay within CAPEX, none of that money goes to SLWallet. So if the day after the split, I sell 100,000 shares of MECH and you buy them at a 1.00 a share then I should be able to withdraw 100K less commission without a problem, because the cash is there. You gave it to me via the exchange. It is the way ISE and VSTEX have been operating from the get go to my understanding, and I think it is a much saner way to run an exchange.

I also don't want SLWallet shares, that is why I have no outstanding balance to convert, I have everything tied up in stocks.

As far as the 40M goes, I believe that is what I saw. It makes sense since Arb did liquidate a lot, also he wasn't as exposed as a lot of other banks. But rather than draw down the entire 40M which would leave a bankrupt company, not to mention several other bankrupt companies that depend on JTF right now, I think he wisely limited/stopped withdraws until some semblance of a buyback/payout plan materialized. That is just my opinion and interpretation of what I have seen.
Arbitrage Wise   | 2008-02-11 12:53:11
Yanik - even if money does not come in from new customers, money will come in from us as we 1) Slowly liquidate our remaining assets WITHOUT INCURRING any losses and inject those funds into the system 2) Profit from our businesses and put those profits into the system.

Once the split is made, there will no longer be any withdrawal limits on any system. Any funds we have will go into buying back SLW shares, so as Arnaud pointed out, whoever the seller is will have access to those funds.
Jason   | 2008-02-11 17:04:22
Then why didn't you liquidate your holdings in WPM and other stocks to make up the short fall instead of locking up our Lindens, seems selfish to me
Ed DelRio   | 2008-02-12 12:37:53
Its simple. You're an idiot to trust any of these people with your money. In the end you will get screwed. How many times does it have to happen before people get a clue?
Luke or Nicholas, they're all the same. Children pretending to be bankers while they lose your money or worse run off with it. Some will argue "Oh but I made money!". My response is give it time, you too will be screwed over. Mark my words.
The best place for your $L is your SL account folks. End of Story
robomarx - Why the cash is converted.     | 2008-02-12 17:21:17
Listen people when a bank holds your $$$ Rl its suppose to have ready access to it in order to supply depositors. If there are no buyers for the stock at the initial price then its going to drop, (simple economics, no guessing games here) If the bank has the cash on hand they should return it to depositors. I think alot of people are in denial here.
I DO AGREE IF U HAVE $$$ IN THESE ACCOUNTS BUY SOME OF THE MORE STABLE COMPANIES STOCKS!! PREFERABLY 1 WITH A DIVY!!

Robo Marx
www.slbayauctions.com
www.bluediamondvirtual.com
symbol bdvr on the www.ancapex.net
IntLibber Brautigan     | 2008-02-13 08:56:40
Arnaud, ACE has always operated on 100% reserves, no withdrawal limits, no interest. Since the bank interest ban, ACE's deposits have more than doubled in size.

The business of an exchange is to provide a place for its customers to trade stock, not to be playing games with the customers money. The point of an exchange is to give individuals the freedom to choose who to invest in, not to make those decisions for them, as a bank does.
Arnuad Villota   | 2008-02-14 16:00:02
THanks for the clarification.
anakin   | 2008-02-16 04:40:28
The business of an exchange is to provide a place for its customers to trade stock, not to be playing games with the customers money.


you shoud be the one talking here intlibber;the same freedom you aply on your ancapex by holding over 8mil BNT shares frozen ,that are not actualy Yours , that used to belong to nick and later on to the people who nick defaulted on ,you shoud be the last one here to talk about morality or freedom of market
Write comment
Name:
Email:(not published)
 
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
 
Security Image
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved.

Last Updated ( Saturday, 09 February 2008 )
 
< Prev   Next >