Go to the SL Capital Exchange headquarters and open an account now!

Important: Please read our disclosure.

Home Portfolio Trading IPO CEO Rules Forums Affiliates Help
 

All posts by Jaysabi Jenkins

Feb 22nd 2008, 14:21
Jaysabi Jenkins 		General Investment Discussion » If you can wait... And the wolvs don't get ya... someday you may get your mo
Juice Trading is a Pipe Dream!
I'd at least feel better if I was consistently hearing that the money to buy back all the shares of SLW was coming from all the income from Wise's businesses, which on the face of things at least appear to be generating profits. But I have only heard echoes of that. What concerns me is this pipe dream that this investment in this crummy sports betting (juice trading) product will pay out. I've visted the website, I've read the propositions, and I'm not impressed in the least. Even the website looks amateurish. If you can't even design an impressive website, who's going to take such a ridiculous sounding product seriously? I mean, this product is literally promising to print you money, based on it's ability to find overlapping odds on hundreds of sports betting websites. There are only a few problems with this, but they are HUGE:

1) This would require people to have accounts with hundreds of sports books, and who really wants to take the time to do that?
2) Sports gambling is a rather shady business to begin with, and although I don't doubt there are literally hundreds of these sites on the internet, any idiot with a website can run one. Do you really think there are hundreds of "credible" sports books on the internet? Would you trust your bank account and credit card information to all of them?
3) This would require at least the cooperation of all these sports gambling sites in order to update their odds or make them easily accessible, and do you really think that these sites are going to be willing to do that when it will slice into their profits? In order for everyone to win doing this, the sites have to lose. I doubt they'll be accommodating.
4) The largest market of people who could possibly use this product (United States citizens who are the richest in the world and therefore have the largest amount of disposable income) are prohibited by law from gambling on the internet, and it is left to the banking industry to make sure they are not complicit in illegal internet gambling. Good luck establishing accounts with hundreds of sports books when you're credit cards and banks won't allow you to deposit money off shore in anything that hints of being illegal.

Now, these are just things off the top of my head. If being reimbursed for SLW shares is contingent upon juice trading being a success, we are all screwed. But if it's just a matter of time for Arb's other businesses to generate enough money to buy back the SLW shares, then we have a chance. The question is, which situation are we facing?

I'd like to think that Arb is not like the other banking scams, but from what I've seen so far, and the after evaluating the "investment" that has sucked up all our deposits, I don't see reason to be optimistic. All we really have right now is shares of SLW and promises of their future worth, and that's nothing different from what any of the other scams have offered.
Feb 22nd 2008, 22:20
Jaysabi Jenkins 		General Investment Discussion » If you can wait... And the wolvs don't get ya... someday you may get your mo
Re: If you can wait... And the wolvs don't get ya... someday you may
Arb doesn't have the money to buy the shares back at 1.03, that's why everyone is in this mess. That won't change in the short term, regardless of what the market does. He only offered this conversion so people who desperately needed to get their money out right now could do so, the trade off being that they only get a percentage back. The money people are getting out right now isn't coming from Arb, it's coming from speculators who are buying shares on Arb's promise that someday they'll be worth 1.03 each. Arb won't buy the shares back until he's got the cash to do it, and he doesn't now, which is why there are 85 million shares of SLW floating around instead of L$85M being refunded to depositors.

And according to what Arb has said, he'll pay 1.03 or a 20% premium on the market value at the time of the buy back, whichever is higher. So if the shares are trading at 2.00, a 20% premium on that would be 2.40. It seems that with this promise, the share price should be doing nothing but going up. You can plainly see that this is not the case though, and that shows you in black and white how much stock people are putting in Arb's promises. (Pun intended) :D
Feb 23rd 2008, 09:36
Jaysabi Jenkins 		General Investment Discussion » If you can wait... And the wolvs don't get ya... someday you may get your mo
Re: If you can wait... And the wolvs don't get ya... someday you may
That article you just posted is about state owned banks. Since we have no state owned in the US, or in SL, this isn't the same.

Although depositors are insured by the FDIC in the US, which reimburses depsitors up to $100K if a bank fails, but this is so uncommon nowadays because of the STRICT regulation of the banking industry. There is no regulation of the banking industry in SL, or at least there wasn't before the LL ban. And for all the griping about it, it needed to be done. There was no safety net, it was just a matter of time before all the remaining banks failed on their own. Real life banks can't afford to pay 36.5% APY because so few investments in RL return at that rate, why does every assume SL banks would be different, especially when they are based on RL investments?
Feb 27th 2008, 12:29
Jaysabi Jenkins 		JT Financials Discussion » SLW shares disappearing?
SLW shares disappearing?
There are now only 84,999,942 shares of SLW on the market according to the research page under SLW, which means 58 shares have disappeared from the market. Does this means they were bought back or has something else happened?

(And if they were bought back, was it at 1.03 as promised?)
Feb 27th 2008, 12:31
Jaysabi Jenkins 		JT Financials Discussion » Ok, Mr Wise... Time to put up or shut up.
Re: Ok, Mr Wise... Time to put up or shut up.
58 shares have disappeared, maybe this is the start of the fabled "buy back." Though at that rate, it'll take about 15,000 years.
Feb 27th 2008, 20:45
Jaysabi Jenkins 		JT Financials Discussion » Ok, Mr Wise... Time to put up or shut up.
Re: Ok, Mr Wise... Time to put up or shut up.
I doubt it is the start of the buy back, I was being facetious. I'm really just curious as to what happened to the 58 shares.
Mar 1st 2008, 22:42
Jaysabi Jenkins 		SL Wallet Public Forum » Buy Back Question
Buy Back Question
How is the buyback functioning? Is Arb buying the shares himself so that the buyback will be complete once Arb owns all 85 million shares, or is it functioning in another manner?
Mar 2nd 2008, 07:02
Jaysabi Jenkins 		SL Wallet Public Forum » Buy Back Question
Re: Buy Back Question
Edited by moderator Mar 2nd 2008, 09:33
I'm sorry to be a bother Arb, but your answer has raised two more questions I hope you can answer.

1) From what you said, it makes it sound like the buyback will be over once the market price reaches 1.03, and then all outstanding shares will be treated as holdings in a public company. If the buyback is over once it hits 1.03 and you will not be buying back any more shares, that seems open to the possibility of still leaving many people out in the cold. The only thing inflating the stock price of this company to 1.03 is your willingness to buy the shares at that, once the buyback stops the share price, in all likelihood will drop considerably, and this is likely to happen before everyone who wants their shares converted back to cash has a chance to do so.

If I may suggest, once the stock price has reach 1.04, it would be safe to assume that the buyback is over. Everyone who wants their money has been told to sell at 1.03, so ostensibly, once the market price reaches 1.04 you could safely assume that everyone who wanted their money out has been taken care of, and anyone still holding on to shares is doing so as a willing participant in a publicly traded company. If you could please comment on this idea, I'd appreciate knowing what you think.


2) My second question: can you say where the money to buy back shares is coming from? This may have been answered before, but information is spread in so many different places it's impossible to find answers to questions. Is the money coming only from fees generated from the exchange, or is it from google adsense, or a combination of all JTF businesses or is it neither/none or a combination of others? The reason I ask is because I can't really distinguish between all the JTF businesses/products.

3) That actually brought up a third question. What is the difference between SLCX and SLW? They actually appear to be the same thing to me.

Thanks in advance for taking the time to straighten me out.
Mar 4th 2008, 08:02
Jaysabi Jenkins 		SL Wallet Public Forum » Buy Back Question
Re: Buy Back Question
Well, I got my answer from the transcripts to part 3 at least. SLW has no ability to generate income right now. The only value to the shares is based on promises in the future that someday it will be blah blah blah. Just more promises.
Mar 4th 2008, 08:57
Jaysabi Jenkins 		SL Wallet Public Forum » SLW buyback today
Re: SLW buyback today
Edited by moderator Mar 4th 2008, 11:28
[quote]WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE THE CEO OF THE OFFENDING FIRM DO TO FIX YOUR LIQUIDITY ISSUE? HOW WOULD YOU RECOMMEND THEY PAY YOU BACK WITH FUNDS THEY DO NOT HAVE?

This would make them insolvent, correct?[/quote]

I'd actually like to answer this question.

I'd have the CEO step down, immediately, so that the company can attempt to rectify the situation he caused, or at least did not steer clear of. Now, I know that sounds unfair because 'how could he have seen the LL ban coming' and blah blah blah. My question is, how could he have NOT seen the ban coming? Everyone with the gift of simple logic realizes that banking is one industry that MUST be regulated, less some scammer or idiot bank manager cost people their life's savings. When people continually get screwed out of money, something has to be done to change it, and I cannot fathom how a businessman like Arb would fail to see that LL would be financially liable for scammers if they did not regulate SL banking, thus something would be done. That's shortsightedness and not a good quality for a CEO. And unfortunately, the CEO is the fall guy in a company when something disastrous happens. Someone used an analogy that I rather liked, about kindergarteners being judged by effort, and adults being judged by results. Here, the results were disastrous. Sometimes you catch a bad break, that's life. That's the risk you assume when starting a business.

Now, this company is ALREADY insolvent. You as much admit it yourself, "how would you recommend they pay you back with funds they do not have?" That's insolvency. The definition of insolvent is: "not solvent; unable to satisfy creditors or discharge liabilities, either because liabilities exceed assets or because of inability to pay debts as they mature." Their liabilities exceed their assets, which is the reason they converted their debt into equity in another company. In RL when this situation occurs, the people owed money take the company to court and have a judge force a sale of the assets to liquidate everything so people can get as much of their money out as possible. That has not been done here. We've been put off that option because it's messy, and because a lot of people want to believe Arb when he says he's going to fix it. You're not granted such leniency in RL, and I imagine he's only been able to take advantage of his opposition's extreme lack of organization and desire to actually do something about the situation other than complain. If the people were organized, things might be different, because there are some livid people out there over this mess.

And one further thing that really peeves me. The SLW prospectus boasts that "To date, not a single customer has lost money with us. While we are unable to process all withdrawals at this time, we are confident that we will be able to repay all customers money that is owed to them and any interest that they have earned."

FALSE. I'd go so far as to call it a downright LIE. How many people have lost money because of Arb, and in how many ways? Let me list a few I can think of off the top of my head:

1) Everyone who had their deposits converted to shares of a company that has no cash flow has incurred a loss. You can see the losses in your portfolio, it might say something like 1000 shares SLW, value $L510. That used to be $L1000. That's an unrealized loss, but it's still a loss.

2) Anyone who has sold their shares at less than $L1 has incurred losses. Those are realized losses, and they hurt the most.

3) The opportunity cost of having your money inaccessible here when it could be actually invested in something else (anything else) that does not pay their dividends in empty promises. It's a less tangible loss, but a loss all the same.

That makes 3 different ways people have lost money with Arb. Not even close to his ascertation that "To date, not a single customer has lost money with us."

AND

This is the worst part of this whole deal: Arb's promised buy back is proceeding at market value, not the promised $L1.03 per share. Not only is this a broken promise, it's downright dubious, though I must admit completely in keeping with his character as of late. Arb defenders will quickly jump at this and chastise me something along the lines of 'he told people to sell at 1.03, if they're not doing that, that's their own fault.' Well, not exactly. He told people he would buy the shares back at 1.03, and he's not doing that. That's not our fault. He could easily devise a system in which shares are converted back to cash at a rate of 1.03- it's just the reverse of what he did the first time. But he doesn't want to do that because he can buy back the company at a fraction of the price (against his promise to do otherwise) at the expense of those people he promised to reimburse. Arb told people their money was safe (it was not), told people he would honor all withdrawal requests (then shut down the ATMs), told people it was just a matter of time before he liquidated assets and got people their full money back (then did a debt to equity conversion and forced people who were in a jam to sell at a loss), and what's worse is that HE'S ONE OF THE PEOPLE BUYING YOUR SHARES AT A DISCOUNT! All these other problems *might* be stomachable if it weren't for this last, most heinous offense. People, do you understand? SLW has NO CASH FLOW and NO ASSETS because it has no product to offer the market. Read the transcripts of the shareholder meeting and you get this information from the source. The ONLY thing that gives SLW shares value is Arb's promise that he will buy them back at 1.03. But now he's not even doing that. He caused this problem and now he's now a bigger part of the problem. How could he POSSIBLY be the solution? He's now said that there would be no forewarning on buybacks, because 'that would force us to pay a premium on the shares.' No, that would force him to buy the shares back at the price he promised! Clearly, he doesn't want to do that. I am not one who believes this whole thing was a conspiracy to enrich Arb, but clearly he is opportunistic enough to break his promise about the buyback price and enrich himself by buying these shares at market value, despite the dozens of (now empty) promises he's issued. Not only has he allowed a system where the wolves are feeding off the sheep, he's one of the wolves.


So, yes, given all these reasons, I consider Arb's words worthless, and see him as unfit to try to salvage this situation, and would have him step down as CEO, and sell his stake in the company to someone with real answers. Short of someone with real answers, I would accept someone who either thinks about the implications before they make a promise, or has the decency to follow up on them with something other than more shallow promises.