A question: The fundamentals of backing

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]

I find it very interesting that EVERY SINGLE poster whose name I recognize as having read QUITE OFTEN agree's with Irie, and all of the people who agree with me are people who I don't recognize all that well. Seems you 'lifers' are a tight knit group.

Raptor, SuitedSixes, Atticus, Scuba Check, Stuipid Sucker...can anybody come up with a list of six names who post more on this forum? Seems comraderie, familiarity and the lack of (forgive me but its late and i'm quite tilted over this) a productive life outside of this forum, overrides all sense of logic and reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your accusation of "home cookin'" (as we call it in Mississippi) is offensive and unsupported by any evidence whatsoever. I am neither Irie's "buddy" nor your enemy. You asked for opinions, and you received them. For my part, my response would have been identical even if it were my first post on this board.

For your information, by the way, I may be a frequent poster, but I have only been on this board since early February, which a click on my profile would easily have revealed. Perhaps you should take a closer look at the facts before making accusations.

My arguments to you consisted of simple logic and statements of morality. Never once did I say or imply anything akin to, "Gee, Irie is a cool guy, you should pay him." Your refusal to address the arguments I and others have made in a reasonable manner makes it evident that you are only looking for vindication for your decision, and aren't truly interested in the opposing view.

Ad hominem attacks such as this post are a clear sign of a person who has no rational argument to make, and simply wishes to attempt to discredit the other side, while sidestepping the argument entirely. They are fallacious, wholly without merit, and should be beneath you.

[NegativeEV]

[ QUOTE ]
You can get a venture capitalist to invest in your business under almost those exact terms. It's done all the time. He'll take much more than 50% though.


[/ QUOTE ]

A venture capital funding arrangement would never be structured in a manner similar to this deal. The funding from a venture capital firm would almost always be either equity based or debt based with a feature that allows conversion to equity. Equity means ownership. This means participation in ALL FUTURE EARNINGS even if the "borrower" gets additional funds from other sources. Your analogy supports the position that Irieguy is entitled to 50% of future earnings, but I don't think the analogy is appropriate anyway because this deal is not similar to venture capital funding.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
That defeats the whole purpose of what is attractive about having a backer.



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



Man, I do now feel sorry for you. This statement is so naive...


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



Why? He'd be better off backed my MasterCard. Especially with no mentoring.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why is that? Better off by Mastercard. Mastercard requires minimum payments, regardless whether or not your profitable.

You could argue that he would have been better off by Mastercard, but you'd be also arguing that he was a fool to use a backer. Which I would concur with.

Reasons to use a backer.
A. TJ Cloutier used to accept "backing" when he entered tournaments. His winnings were shared with his backee, and if he lost OOTM, well then he had no obligation. But there's a defined horizon of time here - the tournamant.

B. That financially, it would be more painful to risk your own capital, due to lifestyle issues. Therefore, you'd be willing to split your winnings with a backer. And that you felt confident in your skills as a player, that if properly bankrolled, you'd be a winning player at higher stakes. Properly bankrolled means whatever amount that is adequate to live through the swings of any level. (Which by the way, is potentially another flaw in the agreement you made.)

Unfortunately, the time horizon in this arrangement is far more open. This, IMO, is a lot more like loan sharking. With one difference. The backer doesn't break legs/arms/ribs (that I know of). And if you never play poker again, well then that's part of the risk/loss. But to come back one week later...

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
You also, clearly IMO, owe him 50% of any profits until you pay back the bankroll.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he started with $1000, then lost it, then wins $100, is this a "profit"? Does he owe Irie $50?

Theoretically, he could pay Irie 50% a month forever, never actually pay off the principal, and never see $1 of profit for himself.

For example....
Starting roll: $1000 of Irie's money.

Month 1 - Lose $1000
Month 2 - Win $1000 (Pay Irie $500)
Month 3 - Lose $1000
Month 4 - Win $1000 (Pay Irie $500)
Month 5 - Lose $1000
Month 6 - Win $1000 (Pay Irie $500)

The result: he is down $500 of his own money, and he still owes $1000 to Irie. Irie has received $1500 in payments so far.

I'm not siding with the villian. I'm just trying to figure out what is going on here.

[EarlCat]

[ QUOTE ]
They are fallacious, wholly without merit, and should be beneath you.

[/ QUOTE ]

*pounds the table* [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[microbet]

Profit = Current Bankroll - Original Bankroll

[EarlCat]

[ QUOTE ]
Why is that? Better off by Mastercard. Mastercard requires minimum payments, regardless whether or not your profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, but if Gaucho lost, say, $1000 of Irie's money, then used his own bankroll to win $1000, he hasn't profited at all, but the general consensus seems to be that he "owes" Irie that money. Ok, this sounds like a 0% loan, but Gaucho's expectation was that he was good enough that losing it all was a slim possibility. Had he won, he'd be paying back the original amount plus 50% of his profits. He'd only be paying MasterCard 10-24% yearly regardless of profits. Since he such a good player (supposedly) and expects to win, MasterCard is a better move.

[ QUOTE ]
You could argue that he would have been better off by Mastercard, but you'd be also arguing that he was a fool to use a backer. Which I would concur with.

[/ QUOTE ]

This also appears to be the case. I surely didn't say using MC was the BEST option. Just better than this type of loan.

[ QUOTE ]
Reasons to use a backer.
A. TJ Cloutier used to accept "backing" when he entered tournaments. His winnings were shared with his backee, and if he lost OOTM, well then he had no obligation. But there's a defined horizon of time here - the tournamant.

[/ QUOTE ]

Say Cloutier got enough backing in one lump sum for 50 tournaments. Wouldn't the horizen of time be those tournaments? Wouldn't this be the same for SNG's? (Believe me, I'm not taking Gaucho's side here...trying to stay objective)

[ QUOTE ]
B. That financially, it would be more painful to risk your own capital, due to lifestyle issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the more reason a loan is a really really bad idea.

[ QUOTE ]
This, IMO, is a lot more like loan sharking. With one difference. The backer doesn't break legs/arms/ribs (that I know of).

[/ QUOTE ]

No, Irie doesn't strike me as the violent type.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it so clear cut? He did win. It doesn't say "if you don't win using the initial stake." It says "if you don't win."

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, I'll buy that. But how long after he starts winning again is he bound to pay out the 50%?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say a reasonable answer would be as soon as he's made back the roll he was loaned. Up until that point, he hasn't shown a true profit over it.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]

Actually, I'm thinking of changing my name to "Gramma" and buying the debt from Irie.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL, it would be no more than he deserves.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Raptor, SuitedSixes, Atticus, Scuba Check, Stuipid Sucker...can anybody come up with a list of six names who post more on this forum?

[/ QUOTE ]

How about The Yugoslav? He's #1.

FWIW, I'm a relative newbie here on 2+2 (3 months.) I don't know Irieguy. I live 2500+ miles from him. I've never met him, nor know what he looks like (unless that crazy pic on the singles ad is for real [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]) I've never PM'd him, nor rec'd a PM from him. He takes humor in insulting me.... But I insulted Scuba, so mine is more fun


I seriously find it disrespectful that you lump me in with this line of thought. You don't know me. The reason you've lumped me in here is because I am questioning your integrity. I question whether you have a moral or ethical code to your life. Perhaps this is an introspective moment for you. I hope you see that this is what this is about.