[e-gold-list] Re: Inquiring Minds.
Lin Ronald wrote In my opinion there is only one bad guy and that is e-gold.Not because they have decided to withold payments to Costa Gold, who apparently have proven that they are the owners. Yet again I must say... e-gold did not withhold Costa Gold's funds. e-gold transfered the funds from Costa Gold's account to Omnipay's account without a hitch. When Omnipay received mulitple conflicting instructions on what to do the funds, including reports of a security breach, they put the money into an escrow account until everything got sorted out. I am much more willing to believe Omnipay than Costa Gold during this "No, you didn't" - "Yes, I did" escapade. Omnipay has stuck by their user agreement and I have seen nothing to say otherwise. From what I have seen, Costa Gold quickly underwent a transformation from a "offshore investment opportunity" to a "offshore game" when questioned. They went from promising very high yield returns to saying it was a game and to not count on receiving anything. Every single e-gold account holder whether he owns the account for playing games, investing, investing in games , buying shares form another individual or from a Licensed sharebroker or buying something from Amazon... has become a very valuable member of the alternative currency system called e-gold. Yes... I apologize for my rash condemming. I have just become fed up with people complaining, and thus providing negative publicity, that e-gold is a only a tool for scammers. We have scammers posing as scammees, scammees trying to force e-gold to violate it's non-repudiation policy because it wasn't their fault, and many other variations on the theme. Now since many thousands of those people have been recruited to egold as a result of playing the eebiz, or costa gold investment/game, its logical that e-gold should be liable to pay some sort of commission to the owners of these investments or games for bringing them on board! Why? Why should e-gold thank the entities who bring in users who aren't willing to learn what e-gold is really about? Once the marks realize they've been had, many of them scream to high heaven that it is e-gold's fault. Few are willing to learn what e-gold is really about. You could almost go as far as to say that these web based businesses have exploded e-golds membership. Yes. However it is with the type of users I have described above. Does it therefore follow that a Secret Agenda has been presented to e-gold in order to stop them from paying the costa gold funds? e-gold is NOT involved in the current imbroglio with Costa Gold! Leaving emotions aside, its obvious that e-gold are making a public relations blunder and that is my reasoning for casting them in the Bad Guy role. They are not the bad guy. They perfectly lived up to their side of the bargain. If you want to bitch, moan, and complain about somebody, direct it towards Omnipay. However, they lived up to their side of the bargain as well. Viking Coder --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: Inquiring Minds
quote: I am much more willing to believe Omnipay than Costa Gold during this "No, you didn't" - "Yes, I did" escapade. Omnipay has stuck by their user agreement and I have seen nothing to say otherwise. end quote Be truthful, "Viking", you haven't seen diddely from OmniPay about this farce of "justice". Please, if I'm wrong, tell me the date and time on the last post from OmniPay (to this list or ANY other) where OmniPay states THEIR side of this story, along with the legal justification for holding onto 1.1 MILLION of someone ELSEs egold . The godly owners and operators are still in their ivory towers contemplating their compounded fees, or something, I guess ... are YOU privy to something that WE should know ? .. give it up, dude. quote: From what I have seen, Costa Gold quickly underwent a transformation from a "offshore investment opportunity" to a "offshore game" when questioned. They went from promising very high yield returns to saying it was a game and to not count on receiving anything. end quote "Viking", why even bring this into the conversation? Is it just a juvenile effort to try and sling some mud? .. From what I've seen the REAL issue is OWNERSHIP of the funds .. NOT whether e-god(r)etal APPROVES of the BUSINESS that Costa REALLY is ... or, is it? Perhaps you are giving us some insight on what e-god/OmniPay is REALLY doing ? Is e-god/OmniPay REALLY making a statement that IT DISapproves of the type of business some foreign "Ltd" is running ? Should we now EXPECT that the e-god/OmniPay will pass judgement on our CHOICE of business on the internet ? Will we now start seeing additions, to the Holy Agreement, listing APPROVED types of ventures in which e-gold may be used ? Perhaps they SHOULD do this so that we come to KNOW where they all REALLY stand in this issue .. I think that, perhaps, we are getting to the REAL heart of the issue here .. thanks, for getting me started, "Viking". quote: and thus providing negative publicity, that e-gold is a only a tool for scammers end quote* "Viking", you are rambling again ... keep to the issue ... you keep trying to SWITCH the issue over to something else. quote: Why? Why should e-gold thank the entities who bring in users who aren't willing to learn what e-gold is really about? Once the marks realize they've been had, many of them scream to high heaven that it is e-gold's fault. Few are willing to learn what e-gold is really about. end quote What IS e-gold REALLY about if NOT using it to get goods and services ? Should we just convert our bux to gold and then just LOOK at it ? We (gamers) put our bux into gold and then try to KEEP IT SPENT into "games" ! ! We DON'T want it to sit idle, gathering dust .. I thought all of you folks were looking, recently, at how FAST the gold was being TURNED OVER .. and it made you EXCITED that, someone, was actually finding a USE for this service. Does YOUR statement mean that all of US are WRONG ? should we NOT USE IT ? But, I digress. The REAL issue is about ownership .. Costa owns it, wants it back, and OmniPay/Escrow/E-Gold/Brothers/Sisters/Whoever .. WON'T give it up ... and it does NOT appear that the Holy Agreement SUPPORTS that move on their part. All of us "USERS" are now wondering how safe ANY of our funds are in the "gold" system .. AND, since "E-gold.com" is the ROOT of all of the gold "stuff" then questions also arise as to the TRUSTWORTHYNESS of ALL SERVICES BASED ON E-gold.com . "E-gold" OWNES the ball, the game could STOP, anytime. If OmniPay is the ONLY culprit here then I, respectfully, submit that ALL "service providers" help to clear up this STIGMA on "providers". If Costa is the culprit here then I, respectfully, subit that ALL the "service providers" help COSTA clear up this stigma on "providers". (and let Costa retain its foreign RIGHT TO PRIVACY) If the government of the U.S. is involved in e-gold/OmniPay business, in order to make a statement against "Costa"-types of business on the internet, then there is NO hope for ANY of this. The TRUTH WILL prevail, eventually. The OmniPay folks AND their escrow folks should NOT trample on the rights to privacy of "foreign individuals" .. this issue impacts the privacy rights of ALL of us ... you too, "Viking". LaMarr M. Dell Sr. Joes Tatoos .. Identifying Marks Covered Up --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: Inquiring Minds
... end quote Be truthful, "Viking", you haven't seen diddely from OmniPay about this farce of "justice". Please, if I'm wrong, tell me the date and time on the last post from OmniPay (to this list or ANY other) where OmniPay states THEIR side of this story, along with the legal justification for holding onto 1.1 MILLION of someone ELSEs egold . Reid Jackson's post (look the date/time up yourself, it'll build character) explained everything for you, but -- much like user-agreements of all sorts, apparently -- you refuse to read it. This makes your arguments pretty weak, as others have repeatedly shown. ... quote: From what I have seen, Costa Gold quickly underwent a transformation from a "offshore investment opportunity" to a "offshore game" when questioned. They went from promising very high yield returns to saying it was a game and to not count on receiving anything. end quote Exactly, Viking. "Viking", why even bring this into the conversation? Is it just a juvenile effort to try and sling some mud? No, it speaks to the character (or lack of same) of the owners (whoever they are this week) of "Costagold" when they change the wording on their site to "game" from "investment." You may not LIKE it, but it's a good point anyway. .. From what I've seen the REAL issue is OWNERSHIP of the funds .. NOT whether e-god(r)etal APPROVES of the BUSINESS that Costa REALLY is ... or, is it? Please, lamer, just call a Ponzi a Ponzi. This "BUSINESS" bs is wearing a bit thin. Perhaps you are giving us some insight on what e-god/OmniPay is REALLY doing ? Is e-god/OmniPay REALLY making a statement that IT DISapproves of the type of business some foreign "Ltd" is running ? Should we now EXPECT that the e-god/OmniPay will pass judgement on our CHOICE of business on the internet ? Read Reid Jackson's message. http://www.free-market.net/forums/e-gold0008/messages/573449902.html Will we now start seeing additions, to the Holy Agreement, listing APPROVED types of ventures in which e-gold may be used ? Perhaps they SHOULD do this so that we come to KNOW where they all REALLY stand in this issue .. I think that, perhaps, we are getting to the REAL heart of the issue here .. thanks, for getting me started, "Viking". Nobody gives a crap about what this Ponzi Scheme does, their concern is over which thief (the authorized thief, presumably) gets to run off with all the suckers' (your) money. Since there's evidently more than one thief giving more than one set of instructions about a LOT of $$$, along with a claim (from Costa themselves!) of being hacked, I don't blame Omnipay for going slow. Now, do e-gold Ltd. and OmniPay have NEARLY as much of a problem with offshore entities that aren't scams? I doubt it from the messages I've seen here. quote: and thus providing negative publicity, that e-gold is a only a tool for scammers end quote* "Viking", you are rambling again ... keep to the issue ... you keep trying to SWITCH the issue over to something else. The issue is scammers, like it or not, when it comes to "Costagold." You can try to make their (late) "game" claim for the "investment" they offered to suckers, but don't EVER expect that to fly here. quote: Why? Why should e-gold thank the entities who bring in users who aren't willing to learn what e-gold is really about? Once the marks realize they've been had, many of them scream to high heaven that it is e-gold's fault. Few are willing to learn what e-gold is really about. end quote What IS e-gold REALLY about if NOT using it to get goods and services ? What are Ponzi schemes, a good or a service? (I'm guessing "service," but only in the barn-yard sense of the word.) ... The REAL issue is about ownership .. Costa owns it, wants it back, and OmniPay/Escrow/E-Gold/Brothers/Sisters/Whoever .. WON'T give it up ... and it does NOT appear that the Holy Agreement SUPPORTS that move on their part. See http://www.free-market.net/forums/e-gold0008/messages/573449902.html All of us "USERS" are now wondering how safe ANY of our funds are in the "gold" system .. If you keep on clicking your "egold" to scammers like "Costa Gold," I'd say "not very safe at all..." ... If OmniPay is the ONLY culprit here then I, respectfully, submit that ALL "service providers" help to clear up this STIGMA on "providers". If Costa is the culprit here then I, respectfully, subit that ALL the "service providers" help COSTA clear up this stigma on "providers". (and let Costa retain its foreign RIGHT TO PRIVACY) Costa's "foreign RIGHT TO PRIVACY" isn't (and shouldn't be) their biggest concern, IMO. They have a user agreement (which Costa apparently tried to circumvent) and their user agreement says nothing about taking the fall for scammers. Viking made the best suggestion, forget the gold for ten years and then go back and claim the loot when the law's not sniffing about. One
[e-gold-list] RE: Inquiring Minds
Okay, "jammer99" here's a question for YOU ... Do YOU think that "scam" sites, "ponzi" sites, and other versions of "game" sites are the ONLY sites that have problems with egold/OmniPay/escrowgods ? you stated: quote: What are Ponzi schemes, a good or a service? (I'm guessing "service," but only in the barn-yard sense of the word.) end quote** How about a site that sells information on setting up foreign IBCs, trusts, bank accounts and helps folks to line up their passports and citizenships ? Is this a service or do they sell goods? There is a site at http://permanenttourist.com that has most of its products behind a "members only" script . In this section they have a report available called "The Dark Side", which gives out priviledged information about sites that have been know to give poor, to non-existant, service/goods. In that report e-gold is mentioned in its own little section. Quote: e-gold. They froze our account without court order, kept it frozen for almost two months, and then unfroze it. We didn't receive any clarification from them while the account was frozen. When they unfroze it, they claimed that one of our clients had paid us with e-gold which he had obtained fraudulently. Of course, they didn't say which client it was or how exactly he had obtained the e-gold... so we were unable to cancel the client's order or even verify the truth of this claim! Be careful with these guys! As of November 2000 we keep receiving reports about e-gold delaying out-exchanges and ignoring (or lying to) customers. This smacks either of growing pains - or of serious liquidity problems! In addition to this, the SEC is currently investigating e-gold... which could result in account seizures in the not too distant future. In either case, e-gold is definitely not a place to keep substantial amounts of money. end quote*** Now, it is MY contention that there are a LOT of LEGAL ( in YOUR sense of the word ) companies out there that HAVE had bad dealings with e-god/OmniPay and DON'T mention their cases because they FEAR futher action from the e-gods Most folks are trained to utter only socially correct statements and, on this list, it looks like it would be "socially correct" to only PRAISE the e-god facility ... bs If this service wants to EVER get off the ground, permanently, it needs to make some CHANGES ... we (some) the "users" are all NOT happy ... I am trying to highlight a problem that needs addressing in a more courteous and informative manner. CUSTOMER SERVICE ... with BOTH e-gold AND OmniPay is atrocious ... the penalty for this is, loss of business and, perhaps, death of the concept. So far YOU have supported e-golds LACK of customer service . and now you, and others, want to start dictating WHICH companies CAN use e-gold ... but you want us to pass a "agreement" exam first ... do you use anything MS ? could you pass the MS agreement test, Symantec test, etc,etc,etc .. BS . these "agreements" are for the lawyers benefits, not guidance for users ... if I started trying to give "opinions" about the "agreement" then someone would accuse me of practicing law without a license translate mine, give me a "users" version. quote: Omnipay says it follows US laws end quote*** "Follows" (as in obeys) I can understand ... ENFORCING is NOT the same .. especially when the enforcement is assigned to duely appointed folks (of which e-gold/OmniPay is NOT one) and those folks even get PAID for the enforcement. "Enforcers" we got plenty of. I don't think that there is ANY clause in the Holy Agreement which says that e-gold/OmniPay SHOULD (or CAN) TRY to be an "enforcer" branch of the U.S. gov. LaMarr M. Dell Sr. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: Inquiring Minds
Quote: e-gold. They froze our account without court order, kept it frozen for almost two months, and then unfroze it. We didn't receive any clarification from them while the account was frozen. When they unfroze it, they claimed that one of our clients had paid us with e-gold which he had obtained fraudulently. They will freeze an account if they suspect it was involved in a security breech. E-Gold is not a perfect system. Be aware. Now, it is MY contention that there are a LOT of LEGAL ( in YOUR sense of the word ) companies out there that HAVE had bad dealings with e-god/OmniPay and DON'T mention their cases because they FEAR futher action from the e-gods I disagree here. They have too much respect for the rights of others, despite what you might think, to harrass customers who cause problems for them. Of course, that's just an opinion. If this service wants to EVER get off the ground, permanently, it needs to make some CHANGES ... we (some) the "users" are all NOT happy ... But do you really believe that one of those changes is to allow someone, with access to an account, to OutExchange 1 million dollars without presenting identification??? and now you, and others, want to start dictating WHICH companies CAN use e-gold ... Did you know that last February, E-Gold did not allow ANY companies to operate in the E-Gold system if they appeared to be gaming establishments, without: 1) disclosing publicly their e-gold accounts; 2) disclosing publicly their entire liability list, (updated regularly); 3) maintaining a gaming license ON their website; as well as complete identification? These rules were changed with the new User Agreement to only require identification! And still no one reads the User Agreement that THEY MUST CHECK OFF before they can open an account. Go figure... Craig --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
Douglas Jackson wrote: Sidd responded: (to my blasphemous questioning whether the Perth Mint ( Kitco, Monex, Fidelitrade, ScotiaMocatta etc.) holds any physical metal specifically to back their unallocated "storage" accounts) So the unallocated metal is always physically in the vault... I disagree. http://www.perthmint.com.au/depository/download/information_pdf.shtml Provision 2.3.c) "PMDS may use or deal in all or part of the Client's Unallocated Precious Metal for its own account as if it were the owner." entirely guts any meaning from Provision 2.3.b) that talks about "maintained in bulk storage on a fungible basis". Note also the words "Allocated Precious Metal is Precious Metal in a physical form (ie: bars, coins)..." in the Clause defining allocated (2.2.a), and their absence in the unallocated part (2.3). I got my first tip-off of the slipperiness of this sort of language from the "Model Commodity Code" that was promulgated in the US around 1990 by the Industry Council for Tangible Assets and which has language that "deems" all sorts of financial instruments as acceptable substitutes in contractual situations relating to bullion/physical obligations. The combination of these provisions do not require the Mint to hold any metal in any vault to back their unallocated "storage" liabilities. The absence of storage fees is a further indication that a significant proportion of their reserves are performing assets (loans instead of bars). What they (and everyone else) call unallocated storage is simply banking. Yup. There's a really big gold banking industry out there. 'cause gold is money with it's own interest rate. Which (gold's interest rate) happens to be higher than the Yen! Gold bank defaults? Won't surprise me. This is why there could be a quick doubling of the price of gold in a month or a few months when gold finally takes off. And that should be just for starters. Bob --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
What business do you do? I'm a programmer (i.e. coder). Viking Coder --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: Inquiring Minds.
In reply to a post from Craig I think:( I deleted the mail yesterday) I am amazed and annoyed to see that you have made a judgement on the credibility of Costa Gold. This in fact shifts the focus of the issue in the search for the bad guy. In my opinion there is only one bad guy and that is e-gold. Not because they have decided to withold payments to Costa Gold, who apparently have proven that they are the owners. Rather for this reason: Every single e-gold account holder whether he owns the account for playing games, investing, investing in games , buying shares form another individual or from a Licensed sharebroker or buying something from Amazon... has become a very valuable member of the alternative currency system called e-gold. Now since many thousands of those people have been recruited to egold as a result of playing the eebiz, or costa gold investment/game, its logical that e-gold should be liable to pay some sort of commission to the owners of these investments or games for bringing them on board! Especially since e-gold would love these players to tell their friends and other associates to use the e-gold service for , paying the rent, buying groceries etc etc. You could almost go as far as to say that these web based businesses have exploded e-golds membership. If e-gold have a serious desire to continue and expand their business, eventually to have thousands of Main St users, surely its logical that they would strive to keep their existing customers happy. You may recall that the million dollar holiday place in Australia was discovered by poor, funloving surfers. Their word of mouth developed it into Surfers Paradise. Were the original promoters of Las Vegas law abiding and honest enough for you Craig to not feel bad every time you visit? Does it therefore follow that a Secret Agenda has been presented to e-gold in order to stop them from paying the costa gold funds? If this is the case then we all are in deeper than we think! Leaving emotions aside, its obvious that e-gold are making a public relations blunder and that is my reasoning for casting them in the Bad Guy role. I have no agenda with Costa Gold or Blosta gold or Mosta Gold. Just the simple facts. To survive the web you must act like a spider otherwise you will become a fly ( from someone else ...not me :-) Lin Ronald , New Zealand ++ Lin Ronald New Zealand. ICQ # 5099646 http://www.citycashflow.com/id.cfm?ccf=LN 25% per month. Its being done now! Safely! ++ --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
Hi, would some one please MAKE SURE that the person who uses the pseudonym "Viking Coder" takes a look at this web url, below ? This "Coder" person (who won't reveal identity) makes quick judgements as to whether (or not) a site is "legal" .. or, in "its" (don't know if "he" or "she") opinion is a SCAM ... here's what "Viking" said: quote: Game sites are different than scam sites. I am fully supportive of gambling sites, as long as they sell it as gambling. Once they begin to call it HYIP (High Yield Investment Program) or any form of "investment opportunity", it becomes a scam. It is a scam because they claim to guarantee the payouts. Have you ever been to a legitimate casino that guarantees a significant payout on every bet made? end quote Now, just to set the record straight, please, ALL of you (but especially "Viking Coder") go to this url and check out the CLAIM as to what is offered . And, next time (before you drag out the hangman for a midnight stint) check out YOUR facts before YOU go ranting and raving about who YOU don't want using your precious e-gold. http://costagold.com/members/index.htm ** I find that "Costa" is VERY "up front" with information about how THEY work and what one may expect from them .. the fact that I don't know the owners by name doesn't bother me one bit. I don't know the owners of even one tenth of the stores that I "shop" here in town. Most folks, these days, don't bother to do a lot of research into things so it's easy to fall into the trap of repeating the last witty sound that we heard. THAT is the reason that I'm posting the Costa site url .. so that ALL of you can take just TWO MINUTES and see, for yourself, the truth as to WHAT "Costa" is all about ... All of us are different. Different tastes in food and different tastes in "entertainment". Some of you surf the porn sites for "entertainment", some of you surf the "chat rooms" for entertainment .. some of us play the "game" sites. Perhaps YOU would NOT put YOUR money into "Costa" .. but, just because YOU don't like it, should I be cut off from it also? Where does it all end? Who gets the FINAL say about WHICH sites stay on the inet and which get tossed out? In the end, doing it THIS way, the inet will have a handful of sites for you to go to and they MAY not touch on YOUR interests at all ... personally, I DO NOT like the "hangman" justice of "Viking Coder" and hope that "it" NEVER gets in a position to have ANY say over who "goes" and who "stays". Personally, I've got several thousand tied up in this "frozen asset" GOD play of OMNIPAY/EGOLD/G$SR, whoever, .. and MY payout is being held up by "them", whoever .. yes, I'm a "winner", but "they" have MY PAYDAY funds. I have seen the documents (posted on the Costa site) that Costa sent to e-gold as "proof of identity" .. and I'M satisfied ... If egold would release the funds to the LAWYER that presented those documents I could get paid .. Who, really NEEDS "satisfaction" at this point? Costa, is an agent/owner. E-gold, is an agent. The "escrow" folks, are agents. Isn't it the Ltd./players of the Costa game ? We had some postings here as to why e-gold uses an offshore IBC (to seperate the "real people" from the "business"), doesn't this apply to Costa just as well ? Why can't the lawyer for the COMPANY get the funds? E-gold, whoever, wants the PEOPLE also, WHY ? We (the players) were satisfied with our agent, Costa, enough to buy tickets to the game .. and we TRUST OUR AGENT, Costa, to make the payouts. Once distribution of the funds is completed we will find that MOST of it goes to the "players", but some of it stays with Costa it's right there on the site folks, the WHOLE explaination is there. Now, again, back to WHOMEVER is making this decision to HOLD the funds that belong to others, what is your TRUE agenda? WHY aren't YOU satisfied when the rightful owner is ? How much do you plan to KEEP FOR YOURSELF in "FEES" ? Do you see this as an OPPORTUNITY FOR INCOME for YOURSELF ? Do you feel that you can do this, over and over, and have ANOTHER SOURCE OF INCOME for the e-gold/GSR/OP kitty ? Doesn't your collective conscience bother you, even a LITTLE bit, for the THOUSANDS of Costa winners that are being made to wait for their "paydays" ? Do you feel that you can "KILL" Costa by holding these funds and making the players mad at COSTA (why would we get mad at THEM for something YOU are doing)? Do you feel that by stopping the flow at Costa the players will feel that something is "wrong" with the game and NOT go back to it (should they start up again) ? Truthfully, e-gold, aren't you REALLY trying to "kill" the Costa game ..? Don't you have enough backbone to come out from behind YOUR veil of secrecy and make a statement about your TRUE intentions or are you going to CONTINUE your SNEAKY, BACK ALLEY type of political justice? Playing GOD over OTHER folks
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
LaMarr Dell wrote: This "Coder" person (who won't reveal identity) makes quick judgments as to whether (or not) a site is "legal" A dead worm could figure out if Costa is legal within a minute. Hello?! I find that "Costa" is VERY "up front" with information about how THEY work and what one may expect from them .. the fact that I don't know the owners by name doesn't bother me one bit. Then why do you care who VC is? Why do you defend 'someone' that just stole 1,000,000? Most folks, these days, don't bother to do a lot of research into things so it's easy to fall into the trap of repeating the last witty sound that we heard. Your the best! THAT is the reason that I'm posting the Costa site url .. so that ALL of you can take just TWO MINUTES and see, for yourself, the truth as to WHAT "Costa" is all about ... Truth: Give us all your money :) Thanks buddy! some of us play the "game" sites. If it was JUST a game no one would really care about the outcome. Personally, I've got several thousand tied up in this "frozen asset" GOD play of OMNIPAY/EGOLD/G$SR, whoever, .. and MY payout is being held up by "them", whoever .. yes, I'm a "winner", but "they" have MY PAYDAY funds. That's right, blame someone else. YOU are the one who gave your money to a scam that broke their own rules. OmniPay and e-gold have followed their rules. I have seen the documents (posted on the Costa site) that Costa sent to e-gold as "proof of identity" .. and I'M satisfied How can you prove that those documents were sent? ... If egold would release the funds to the LAWYER that presented those documents I could get paid .. I'm a lawyer (trust me, I have a fancy web site that says so ;) if I send some documents can I get the gold? We (the players) were satisfied with our agent, Costa, Very logical. Translation: I am satisfied you stole my money, thank you. Now, again, back to WHOMEVER is making this decision to HOLD the funds that belong to others, what is your TRUE agenda? Maybe to run a business and follow their posted User Agreement. Pretty simple really. You got scammed, we all do (my running total is about 15,000 annoying dollars), just learn from it :) If you ever do get any money back it will be because Omnipay had a pretty good user agreement that they are sticking to. And hear you are yelling at them, tsk, tsk. Send them some flowers and movie tickets and thank them for doing the best they can. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
This site, that involves 'GAMING'; does it have a license from any jurisdiction? If it had no license, does it have a fixed place of business? Also, this idea that Costa Gold is a GAME just started a couple of weeks ago when Stock Generation won their case against the SEC, where the judge ruled that as long as the site indicated that it was a GAME then the charges against Stock Generation would not apply. Costa Gold has not been advertised as a GAME for very long. I doubt if all the people that sent money to them thought that it was a game. Craig --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
- Original Message - From: "Jeff Fitzmyers" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "e-gold Discussion" [EMAIL PROTECTED] You got scammed, we all do (my running total is about 15,000 annoying dollars), just learn from it :) If you ever do get any money back it will be because Omnipay had a pretty good user agreement that they are sticking to. And hear you are yelling at them, tsk, tsk. Send them some flowers and movie tickets and thank them for doing the best they can. Just one question, assuming that CG doesn't ever supply enough of whatever Omnipay wants, how will anyone ever get their money back? Looks to me as if it doesn't matter a bit whether Costa takes it out and runs off with it, as is being implied without any evidence of that actually being the case, or Omnipay just keeps it forever. Please don't try to make anyone think that Omnipay/e-gold are concerned about protecting those who put that money in the CG account, they are only concern about protecting themselves from being sued for giving it to the wrong person. I don't blame Omnipay for putting a stop on the transfer when they received the conflicting instructions for the transfer but, I believe they are well aware now that it is the account owners who are requesting the release of the funds. Perhaps, if Omnipay where to release the funds, Costa MIGHT run off with it and they might NOT, at least there would be SOME chance that those who paid in could get something back. As it stands now, those who paid in are definately NOT getting their money back. Gary --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
What business do you do? --- Viking Coder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: LaMarr Dell wrote This "Coder" person (who won't reveal identity) makes quick judgements as to whether (or not) a site is "legal" .. or, in "its" (don't know if "he" or "she") opinion is a SCAM ... here's what "Viking" said: This is the second time I've posted this spiel. I hide (I wish I could express sarcasm in plaintext) behind the psudeonym "Viking Coder" because I am being truthful. I could lie and call myself "Melissa Jackson" or "Brent Spencer" or "John Jacob Jingleheimer Smit" because that name is my name too. How would you know the difference? Once you have done business with me, you will learn my 'secret identity'. Viking Coder (very proud of my psuedoANOnymITY) --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] = Dagny Taggart __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
David Hillary wrote If it costs 1% p.a. for metal storeage then how come goldmoney stores it for 0.5% p.a.? I suspect they are going to be subsidizing their storage costs with funds received from their transaction fees. Their transaction fee is capped at 1 gg (their term for an AUG). This means that their transaction fees are potentially much larger than e-gold's. 1% capped at 50 US cents vs. 0.1% capped at 1 gg (currently US$8.30) I suspect that e-gold will reduce its agio eventually. Probably not, unless they change their transaction fee structure. Viking Coder --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
E-god is U.S. based .. but it doesn't feel safe tucking the gold away on IT'S shores, it sent it away to Nevis .. have you ever wondered "why" ? E-god is NOT a "foreign individual" (IBC, Ltd, etc) it is a U.S. Corporation .. so WHY the Nevis move ? Would that move put the gold OUT of the reach of the SEC, IRS and other self appointed collection agencies should something go dreadfully wrong with the management of E-god ? Exactly WHICH law enforcement agency (DDU) does EGOLD have to answer to ? And to WHICH court would we need to plead our case should EGOLD go astray ? In addition to these thought provoking questions there is MORE evidence that E-god does NOT respect the rights of the "foreign individual" .. they have YOUR money (in gold) and really don't give a damn WHAT your rights are .. yet they keep YOUR gold OFFshore (probably to give an "edge" to THEIR "rights" ?) ... The U.S. gov has a favorite way of answering all of the questions one might ask of it about LOST "rights" .. they say, "We're doing it to protect YOU, .. it's for YOUR benefit". And the people lose one "right" after another. I would BET that E-god gives the SAME answer for the Nevis move as the U.S. gives .. but, really, what's the bottom line impact of that move for the MANAGEMENT/OWNERSHIP of E-god ? Now, WHERE do YOU fit in when you want YOUR gold BACK ? Is is possible that E-god could just thumb it's collective nose at you and walk away with YOUR gold ? You betcha ! ... CAN do ANYtime they feel like it btw .. here's the latest from the "Costa" fiasco .. ask Costa THEIR opinion quote: ***CostaGold Update*** Thursday, February 15, 2001 Hello Members, This is a short update to inform you that a copy of a letter sent to e-gold today is posted on the Costagold site for everyone to view. In essence, it states that the request made by e-gold and the divulgence of the information they are requesting Costagold to provide is an unlawful act under both the laws of Nevis where e-gold has said they are incorporated and Dominica where K.F.T.J.Ltd has proven its incorporation. It then goes on to request the immediate release of the funds to CostaGold. Thank you for your patience as we resolve this matter. Your faith in our efforts is appreciated. Jon Robert end quote and if you took your case to court (in the U.S.) and WON then which U.S. agency has the empowerment to go to Nevis and COLLECT the gold that you won the right to in court ? NONE and ALL you have done is "win" a case ... no enforcement. LaMarr M. Dell Sr. Exchange your "rights" for gold .. E-gold.com --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
E-god is U.S. based .. but it doesn't feel safe tucking the gold away on IT'S shores, it sent it away to Nevis .. have you ever wondered "why" ? There's no gold in Nevis. The gold is in a bullion bank in Toronto. E-god is NOT a "foreign individual" (IBC, Ltd, etc) it is a U.S. Corporation .. so WHY the Nevis move ? Would that move put the gold OUT of the reach of the SEC, IRS and other self appointed collection agencies should something go dreadfully wrong with the management of E-god ? No, but it might make it less likely that a plaintiff in a lawsuit against GSR, could convince the court that the gold behind the e-gold system was an asset of GSR, if the gold was in a trust, under the care of two corporations, incorporated in two non-US countries. I believe that part of the split was the idea to separate the gold, which belongs to the account holders, from any liabilities that GSR might incur. Let's say that GSR DID honor a wire request for one million dollars but did not go through the process of identifying the person requesting the wire. They could be liable for gross-negligence in a case like this, (if they were wrong), and it seems unlikely that anyone would move that much money out of an account without trying to find out who it is requesting the move. Exactly WHICH law enforcement agency (DDU) does EGOLD have to answer to ? And to WHICH court would we need to plead our case should EGOLD go astray That would depend in which manner they went astray. In addition to these thought provoking questions there is MORE evidence that E-god does NOT respect the rights of the "foreign individual" .. they have YOUR money (in gold) and really don't give a damn WHAT your rights are .. yet they keep YOUR gold OFFshore (probably to give an "edge" to THEIR "rights" ?) ... Isn't that why Costa Gold's offshore, with no public record of its officers, so that they are accountable to no one? Is is possible that E-god could just thumb it's collective nose at you and walk away with YOUR gold ? You betcha ! ... CAN do ANYtime they feel like it All Costa Gold has to do is file a lawsuit against GSR. Of course, they would have to identify themselves to a court to do that, and I don't think they will. Of course, they could wait 10 years, until the statute of limitations for fraud expires, and THEN sue to resolve this. Craig --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
E-god is NOT a "foreign individual" (IBC, Ltd, etc) it is a U.S. Corporation .. e-gold Ltd. is a Nevis Corporation not a US corporation ? C --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
quote: All Costa Gold has to do is file a lawsuit against GSR. Of course, they would have to identify themselves to a court to do that, and I don't think they will. Of course, they could wait 10 years, until the statute of limitations for fraud expires, and THEN sue to resolve this. Craig end quote something for ALL of you service providers and promoters of egold to think about is the "reputation" that E-god is building. Right now this "Costa" thing has been going on for weeks (and, according to Craig, it MAY go on for YEARS) .. does it look like Costa is going to just walk away ? There is OVER ONE MILLION DOLLARS US IN GOLD on the table. Think about WHERE that gold came from ... E-god account holders .. NO one else ... thousands of them .. and they are ALL talking about what E-god is doing to THEM .. the ACCOUNT HOLDERS are the ones paying the price for E-gold.coms "requirements" ... BAD PUBLIC RELATIONS are the result. Now, what about a situation where some OTHER corporation is thinking about putting THEIR payroll into gold .. and payday rolls around, and E-god decides they "need to know" who the owners REALLY are (and those owners are "foreign individuals") ... payroll WON'T go out, and UNhappy employees are the result. Now, tell that OFFshore corporation what a good thing egold is ... It is my understanding that the Kennedy family (and many other super wealthy families) are REALLY paupers .. ALL of their "wealth" belongs to trusts and IBCs .. do you think any of THEM is going to step forward to show proof of "ownership" should E-god demand it ? Under the international laws governing HOW THEIR BUSINESS IS SET UP they should not need to. Even U.S. corporations should recognize that others have RIGHTS also. E-gold need only observe what minimum is required for "due diligence" and then RELEASE the funds .. stop this farce about IDENTIFYING THE "TRUE OWNERS" ... Lawyers are contacting you, e-gold, get serious ... what is YOUR true agenda ? Where is the legal requirement that says you have to drag this out ANY more ? WE are satisfied that you have performed "due diligence" and WE are satisfied that "Costa" has provided ENOUGH identification and WE would like you to release OUR gold ... but WE aren't running the show, are WE ? Do WE have any say in how far YOUR "e-gold" idea will get on the internet ? You betcha :)) WE have "rights" also Has everyone heard about "Internet Dollars" ? Here is a little email I received from the folks there .. Oh, I believe ANY of the service providers CAN switch your gold into I$ REAL easy .. I$ are a LOT more flexible also .. quote: LaMarr shalom, I$ is a code based system. Thus has no way to know the owners of its emoney. It is like (if) the US authorities will come to the US Central Bank and ask the bank officials to tell them who has 100$ with this note number. I suggest you use it, thus understand its stength. FYI, Arik Schenkler - CEO Internet Dollar is the money of the Internet - http://internetdollar.com end quote*** See ? NO IDENTITY REQUIRED .. SWAP FUNDS IN TOTAL PRIVACY ... I$ ... LaMarr M. Dell Sr. Swap "gold" for "I$" KEEP your identity PRIVATE p.s. would any of you service providers like to acknowledge that YOU can help "swap" our funds ? or should we just go to the site to do it ? p.p.s. I suggest that ALL unhappy COSTA players cast your VOTE by kissing "e-gold" good-by. Costa, switch your payroll system. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
Right now this "Costa" thing has been going on for weeks (and, according to Craig, it MAY go on for YEARS) .. does it look like Costa is going to just walk away ? There is OVER ONE MILLION DOLLARS US IN GOLD on the table. Tough decision. Identify yourself, receive one million dollars, and be held accountable -- or not. Think about WHERE that gold came from ... It came from people who were thinking they were going to get an extremely high, quick, return on an investment -- which is not possible if Costa Gold sells the e-gold and takes the cash. It's not even possible if they don't, since no such legitimate investment can grow at those rates. E-god account holders .. NO one else ... thousands of them .. and they are ALL talking about what E-god is doing to THEM .. the ACCOUNT HOLDERS are the ones paying the price for E-gold.coms "requirements" ... BAD PUBLIC RELATIONS are the result. That works both ways. I like the idea of knowing that GSR acts prudently when requests to withdraw e-gold are made. Now, what about a situation where some OTHER corporation is thinking about putting THEIR payroll into gold .. and payday rolls around, and E-god decides they "need to know" who the owners REALLY are (and those owners are "foreign individuals") ... payroll WON'T go out, and UNhappy employees are the result. Corporations who wish to have anonymous accounts should NOT use e-gold for this purpose. Most people, and corporations, who intend to acquire large amounts of e-gold would first read the user agreement. Why didn't Costa Gold? Now, tell that OFFshore corporation what a good thing egold is ... It is my understanding that the Kennedy family (and many other super wealthy families) are REALLY paupers .. ALL of their "wealth" belongs to trusts and IBCs .. do you think any of THEM is going to step forward to show proof of "ownership" should E-god demand it ? Under the international laws governing HOW THEIR BUSINESS IS SET UP they should not need to. Even U.S. corporations should recognize that others have RIGHTS also. It wouldn't matter if the Kennedys had others acting with a 'power of attorney'. I can't imagine any legitimate business or bank allowing wires to be issued from anonymous sources. The person ordering the wire may not be a Kennedy, but he will be identified. E-gold need only observe what minimum is required for "due diligence" and then RELEASE the funds .. stop this farce about IDENTIFYING THE "TRUE OWNERS" ... Lawyers are contacting you, e-gold, get serious ... what is YOUR true agenda ? Where is the legal requirement that says you have to drag this out ANY more ? WE are satisfied that you have performed "due diligence" and WE are satisfied that "Costa" has provided ENOUGH identification and WE would like you to release OUR gold ... but WE aren't running the show, are WE ? So, are you an owner of Costa Gold? Craig --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
Let's get one item straight right now. e-gold, i.e. e-gold ltd. fulfilled it's user agreement flawlessly. e-gold ltd., without a due diligence check, transfered over US$1 million worth of e-gold from the account of Costa Gold to the account of Omnipay/GSR. Omnipay/GSR then received several conflicting instructions on what to do with the funds. They even received reports that Costa Gold's security had been breached. Upon receiving this information, they made IMHO a very smart decision. Omnipay/GSR, NOT e-gold ltd., put the $1 million worth of e-gold into an escrow account. In other words, even Omnipay/GSR doesn't have the money, a trusted group of lawyers/escrow agents is in control of the money. Now on to my comments about other people comments... LaMarr Dell wrote : E-god is U.S. based .. but it doesn't feel safe tucking the gold away on IT'S shores, it sent it away to Nevis .. have you ever wondered "why" ? : e-gold is not U.S. based. They are a Nevis based corporation. The last time I checked, Nevis was not legally held in any form or fashion by the United States of America. The gold isn't in Nevis. It is in escrow at the Bank of Nova Scotia in Toronto. The escrow agents are Central Escrow Agency, Ltd. SnowDog wrote : All Costa Gold has to do is file a lawsuit against GSR. Of course, they would have to identify themselves to a court to do that, and I don't think they will. Of course, they could wait 10 years, until the statute of limitations for fraud expires, and THEN sue to resolve this. : Correct. At which point they would receive 116,329.97 AUG (128,683.6 AUG minus 10 years of agio fees). Which is still a significant amount of money. So here is my suggestion to Costa Gold. Find some other way to scam people for 10 years that doesn't involve e-gold and then raise a ruckus and sue for receipt of the funds. LaMarr Dell wrote : p.p.s. I suggest that ALL unhappy COSTA players cast your VOTE by kissing "e-gold" good-by. Costa, switch your payroll system. : Please! Tell this to all the other scammers out there as well. Leave e-gold alone! We do not need scammers or the mass herds of sheep, who wish to place blame on anybody but themself, that they bring with them. They are the ones giving the bad reputation to e-gold, e-gold ltd., Omnipay/GSR. Viking Coder p.s. LaMarr, why do keep referring to e-gold as "e-god"? I have never, nor I am currently, nor will I ever, fall to my knees and worship the Jackson brothers (Reid Doug); or even James Ray. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
quote: they made IMHO a very smart decision. Omnipay/GSR, NOT e-gold ltd., put the $1 million worth of e-gold into an escrow account end quote** e-gold, OmniPay, GSR .. same thing .. "egold" for short. We ALL know, at least by now we all SHOULD know, that they are ALL the same people .. quote: a trusted group of lawyers/escrow agents is in control of the money. end quote** "trusted" by whom ? Costa has done what it LEGALLY should do to REclaim THEIR funds but the "trusted" folks won't give it up ... THEY (the escrow folks) aren't happy . Part of those funds are MINE and I DON'T trust 'em .. how much are they eating up in "fees" while they are playing their GOD game ? and as it sits it loses value .. how much will FINALLY go back to Costa ? someone is making a tidy sum just sitting there LOOKING at it. quote: e-gold is not U.S. based. They are a Nevis based corporation end quote* Last time I looked at it I found that ALL of the "holy Trinity" (egod, OmniPay and GSR) ARE located in the U.S. ... residents, citizens and offices ... the fact that THEY went offshore to set up THEIR corporation says that they would RATHER be under the laws of some OTHER country .. why's that ? Maybe for the SAME reason that "Costa" is ? yet they (AND YOU) **FAULT** "Costa" for that kind of move, h.. double standard? quote: So here is my suggestion to Costa Gold. Find some other way to scam people for 10 years that doesn't involve e-gold and then raise a ruckus and sue for receipt of the funds. end quote*** so then, as the spokesperson for egold/OP/GSR YOU are saying that YOU are the one to decide who is "honest" and who is NOT ? you DON'T need a court of law or jury or evidence or ANY of that other stuff that usually gets in the way of the hangman? AND, all of these so called "game sites" should NOT use e-gold for ANY of their activities ? the Players should pull out their gold and use some OTHER currency format ? is that YOUR desire ? quote: Please! Tell this to all the other scammers out there as well. Leave e-gold alone! We do not need scammers or the mass herds of sheep, who wish to place blame on anybody but themself, that they bring with them. They are the ones giving the bad reputation to e-gold, e-gold ltd., Omnipay/GSR. end quote* yep! ! that is EXACTLY what YOUR decision is .. there it is in PLAIN sight for ALL to see. Okay game OPERATORS AND PLAYERS, the word is in (or "out") YOU ARE NOT WELCOME HERE ... LEAVE TOWN AND DO NOT TAKE ANY E-GOLD WITH YOU btw, "Viking"?, should YOU turn in all of your national currency ? because drug dealers use it, gambling houses use it, houses of prostitution use it, beer halls use it, covert activities use it, . what currency do YOU use ? you don't want currency with ANY stigma attached to it in YOUR pocket, do you ? good luck in trying to find it.. Do you want "clean money" ? you ONLY get that after "money laundering", and I think some "big boys" are offened at that "game" also. quote: LaMarr, why do keep referring to e-gold as "e-god"? I have never, nor I am currently, nor will I ever, fall to my knees and worship the Jackson brothers (Reid Doug); or even James Ray. end quote*** well, since you DON'T get it, I'll explain (I think MOST folks already see the inference) .. e-gold has set its **SELF** up to play "GOD" over other folks financial matters. The rules they are laying down (and making up as they go) are NOT to make some government happy (so they SAY) .. they just want to be "God" figures over your financial future .. and they would like for this power to extend WORLD WIDE .. Get it now ? LaMarr M. Dell Sr. E-Gold .. Changing the world of "currency" .. to meet THEIR needs. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
p.s. LaMarr, why do keep referring to e-gold as "e-god"? I have never, nor I am currently, nor will I ever, fall to my knees and worship the Jackson brothers (Reid Doug); or even James Ray. Not even Jim??! --- "A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] RE: inquiring minds
-Original Message- From: Douglas Jackson precisely what risk(s) does Lloyd's insure the Mint against http://www.perthmint.com.au/depository/faq/insurance.shtml ? What are the liability limits of the Lloyd's policy? Could you fax me a copy of the pertinent provisions of the Lloyd's policy? Are they insuring the Mint's performance vis-a-vis unallocated deposits too? or are they insuring against losses of physical specie relating to physical security etc.? From Perth mint user agreement: 2.5 Insurance PMDS shall ensure that a Client's Precious Metal is stored at PMDS's risk and insured against damage or loss for 100% of its market value. I am not a legal expert, but that seems fairly clear to me... maybe I have missed something, it will be interesting to see the reply you get from the mint, please post it. Would they pay in gold? Good question. As for that, does the State set aside a reserve to enable it to perform in the event it must cover the Mint's unallocated deposit liabilities? Does it publish financial statements detailing its exposure to the Mint's unallocated deposit liabilities? Again From the User agreement: 2.3 Unallocated Precious Metal Unallocated Precious Metal shall be stored by PMDS on the following terms: a . The Unallocated Precious Metal purchased by the Client shall be recorded in the Client's Metal Account on the PMDS register maintained by The Perth Mint. b. The Client shall own, as an owner in common, an undivided interest in a pool of Unallocated Precious Metal maintained in bulk storage on a fungible basis with the Unallocated Precious Metal of other owners, which will not permit the identification of the Client's Unallocated Precious Metal. c. PMDS may use or deal in all or part of the Client's Unallocated Precious Metal for its own account as if it were the owner. d. Any gain or loss arising from the use of or dealing in the Client's Unallocated Precious Metal shall accrue to PMDS's account. e. Any use of or dealing in the Client's Unallocated Precious Metal by PMDS will be without prejudice to the Client's right at any time to instruct PMDS to sell or take delivery of Allocated Precious Metal equivalent to the type and quantity of Unallocated Precious Metal in the Client's Metal Account. Note point b. the storage is "on a fungible basis..." From websters.com: fun.gi.ble (fnj-bl) adj. Law. Returnable or negotiable in kind or by substitution, as a quantity of grain for an equal amount of the same kind of grain. Interchangeable. n. Something that is exchangeable or substitutable. Often used in the plural. So the unallocated metal is always physically in the vault... Point c. and d. allow the mint to use the unallocated gold to trade BUT point e. is notable: "...without prejudice to the Client's right at any time to instruct PMDS to sell or take delivery of Allocated Precious Metal..." Add to this the Lloyds insurance, and the Govt guarantee, not to mention the Perth mint's impeccable track record for over 100 years and IMHO the unallocated storage at Perth mint is VERY secure. While on subject, what proportion of its unallocated deposit liabilities does the Mint typically reserve against with physical metal? Interesting question, but taking into account that the WA is the third largest producer of gold in the world, my take is that they have pretty substantial reserves "in the ground" Finally, how much gold liability is the Mint exposed to with its unallocated storage facility? I wonder if they will answer this... Regards, Sidd. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[e-gold-list] Re: inquiring minds
heh Doug rocks ... Questions that a Kitco Pool Gold Account (or Monex (Atlas), or FideliTrade (Group Ownership Service) [or any other party soliciting unallocated "storage" deposits] depositor would do well to ask.. Questions submitted to the Perth Mint 13 Feb 2001 .. --- You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: archive@jab.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
