Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FundersClub Ditches Dumb Money By Going Invite-Only

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–19 of 19 posts

Re: FundersClub Ditches Dumb Money By Going Invite-Only

#11

Post by argumentum »

makomk wrote: post #10

This is hilarious because it's right out of the ponzi playbook - financial scammers love to make their schemes invite-only since it gives clients the feeling that they're part of an exclusive club and makes them less likely to question the investment. I doubt that FundersClub is a ponzi or even a scam in the legal sense, but it's entirely possible you'd have to be a sucker to invest and there there will be shadier im…

So you "doubt" that FundersClub is a ponzi scheme or scam (a very very serious accusation), yet you accuse them of employing the same tactics?

By definition, a scam intends to mislead .. it pretends to be what it is not. So if FC does not intend to mislead, it's an honest business and you have no reason to tar it's reputation with the words you've used.

Regardless of what you think of the JOBS Act (which in many reasonable interpretations is a boon to those who would not otherwise be exposed to the opportunities now exclusive to the so called "1%"), it is wrong to tarnish FundersClub with the labels you've used, sans some sort of evidence .. which you don't have because FC is not a scam.

Re: FundersClub Ditches Dumb Money By Going Invite-Only

#12

Post by GregorStocks »

argumentum wrote: post #11
makomk wrote: post #10

This is hilarious because it's right out of the ponzi playbook - financial scammers love to make their schemes invite-only since it gives clients the feeling that they're part of an exclusive club and makes them less likely to question the investment. I doubt that FundersClub is a ponzi or even a scam in the legal sense, but it's entirely possible you'd have to be a sucker to invest and there there will be shadier im…

So you "doubt" that FundersClub is a ponzi scheme or scam (a very very serious accusation), yet you accuse them of employing the same tactics? By definition, a scam intends to mislead .. it pretends to be what it is not. So if FC does not intend to mislead, it's an honest business and you have no reason to tar it's reputation with the words you've used. Regardless of what you think of the JOBS Act (which in many reas…

What makes you so sure that FC is not a scam?

Re: FundersClub Ditches Dumb Money By Going Invite-Only

#13

Post by argumentum »

GregorStocks wrote: post #12
argumentum wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you "doubt" that FundersClub is a ponzi scheme or scam (a very very serious accusation), yet you accuse them of employing the same tactics? By definition, a scam intends to mislead .. it pretends to be what it is not. So if FC does not intend to mislead, it's an honest business and you have no reason to tar it's reputation with the words you've used. Regardless of what you think of the JOBS Act (which in many reas…

What makes you so sure that FC is not a scam?

It's a YC company, I know the founders, who are my batchmates, and they are not a scam. The model they've used to pick startups (I do not know the details) is excellent .. out of our batch they picked many of the most successful companies.

I have no financial interest in FC, btw. I have not invested in any FC co's, though I certainly would if I were in a position to.

Re: FundersClub Ditches Dumb Money By Going Invite-Only

#15

Post by nraynaud »

Invite-only always feels a bit strange to me, in a community where we celebrate the guy who made it alone against the crowd, it seem to foster self-replication. You might end-up with car parks filled with Tesla cars owned by people who all do kite-surf together on the week-end. You've lost the crazy outsider who will shuffle the industry (or make it harder for him).

Re: FundersClub Ditches Dumb Money By Going Invite-Only

#16

Post by wcgortel »

argumentum wrote: post #11
makomk wrote: post #10

This is hilarious because it's right out of the ponzi playbook - financial scammers love to make their schemes invite-only since it gives clients the feeling that they're part of an exclusive club and makes them less likely to question the investment. I doubt that FundersClub is a ponzi or even a scam in the legal sense, but it's entirely possible you'd have to be a sucker to invest and there there will be shadier im…

So you "doubt" that FundersClub is a ponzi scheme or scam (a very very serious accusation), yet you accuse them of employing the same tactics? By definition, a scam intends to mislead .. it pretends to be what it is not. So if FC does not intend to mislead, it's an honest business and you have no reason to tar it's reputation with the words you've used. Regardless of what you think of the JOBS Act (which in many reas…

Many businesses have characteristics of ponzi schemes without being ponzi schemes. You're right that there is a bright line distinction in some places (i.e., if there is actually a fraud), but why is it wrong to bring up that there is a resemblance in some way?

I'd probably also note that the JOBS act, while it does give additional opportunity, doesn't do much for your ability to assess an opportunity. My colleague Jim Allen gives a good overview:

http://blogs.cfainstitute.org/marketintegrity/2012/09/07/job...

Re: FundersClub Ditches Dumb Money By Going Invite-Only

#17

Post by argumentum »

wcgortel wrote: post #16
argumentum wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you "doubt" that FundersClub is a ponzi scheme or scam (a very very serious accusation), yet you accuse them of employing the same tactics? By definition, a scam intends to mislead .. it pretends to be what it is not. So if FC does not intend to mislead, it's an honest business and you have no reason to tar it's reputation with the words you've used. Regardless of what you think of the JOBS Act (which in many reas…

Many businesses have characteristics of ponzi schemes without being ponzi schemes. You're right that there is a bright line distinction in some places (i.e., if there is actually a fraud), but why is it wrong to bring up that there is a resemblance in some way? I'd probably also note that the JOBS act, while it does give additional opportunity, doesn't do much for your ability to assess an opportunity. My colleague J…

doesn't do much for your ability to assess an opportunity

This is YOUR responsibility as an investor, not the governments'. I'd rather not have a government limiting my freedom in the name of protecting me for my own good.

Post reply on HN