A question: The fundamentals of backing

[Allinlife]

you are a sad person. Keep trying to justify your actions though.

[GauchoFish]

i have asked several people in the real world about this...all of them agree with this sentiment. what then is the backer doing for his money if he gets it back either way? he gets half the winnings for staking a player when he has no risk of losing the money?

what a deal...

anybody want me to back them with the agreement? You give me some collateral for your money, i give it to you, and if you win give me half, if you lose pay me the money or i keep the collateral.

wd

[GauchoFish]

There is a large hole in your logic. It is not a strange coincidence....none of them have confronted this issue yet BECAUSE they have not yet lost.

I'd be interested to hear if they all feel they need to pay him back if they lose. If i thought this was our agreement, i'd not have brought it to this forum.

I thought there was some sort of a general way these things went down, i guess i was wrong.



WD

[GauchoFish]

not that i don't want to pay him...i didn't think that was our arrangement. i have yet to hear a solid reason for why i should.

If we took this to court, who would win?

WD

[lorinda]

You are right.

I would hate to imply that you didn't actually lose at all but in fact just kept the money.

If in any way I have implied that you were trying to steal money that wasn't yours and then justify it in this thread, I apologise.

Lori

[gumpzilla]

Going back to Irie's original post in December where we was offering backing, the quote "The good news is that you don't pay if you don't win, so it's a freeroll." jumps out at me. This certainly seems to offer some room for interpretation; it's not clear at all that this is a loan, for example. So I can sort of understand where you might think that you didn't have to pay back the stake.

However, assuming that you knew what the terms were was clearly a terrible idea, and posting here was gauche at the least. It's pretty shady that you didn't seem to work very hard at clarifying the situation, and then immediately produced enough money to work yourself back up to above the original stake (if I'm understanding correctly) and yet refuse to pay it back. It certainly seems like you were trying to dodge having to pay him back by not pursuing the issue. Yes, perhaps you didn't get the continued support, but did you ask for it?

As others have said, it's hard to say who is in the right without seeing the arrangements. The mysterious lack of communication is no good, though; that I can say with certainty.

EDIT: I see in one of your posts you start jabbering about collateral. What collateral did you put up? I'm guessing it's probably a pretty flawed analogy.

[wuwei]

[ QUOTE ]
i have asked several people in the real world about this...all of them agree with this sentiment. what then is the backer doing for his money if he gets it back either way? he gets half the winnings for staking a player when he has no risk of losing the money?

[/ QUOTE ]

So you thought you were getting money interest free to go play with, and no strings attached if you lost it? Are you a complete idiot? What's in it for the backer?

Less than a month ago, you were a winning player at the $33s with a ROI around 38%? And then you get a backer to go blow $ at the $55s, lose it all in 3 days, and expect to go back to playing your $33s again without worrying about paying it back? What world are you living in???

I don't know what to say. I can't believe I've now posted in this thread twice. Damn I'm lame.

[breezeyo]

I know that I do know all of the details of the agreement, but I equate this to something that happened to me. I bought a digi camera a few months ago on credit and subsequently lost it on vacation. Does this mean I dont have pay my bill? Do you think CapitalOne will say, 'Im sorry this happened, this one is on us.'

[GauchoFish]

its not defensive, i'm provoking a dialogue...there is not right or wrong answer of course...i just want to see what most peoples views of these agreements are

WD

[GauchoFish]

there was no action...i have yet to make up my mind

WD