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

The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 136 posts

Re: The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

#111

Post by javajosh »

blt wrote: post #105

First warning sign: smiley faces and hashtags in Robocoin's initial email responses. I would expect nothing but professionalism from someone who just sold me a $20,000 product.

This stuck out for me, too. Jordan was far too chummy in his responses. This signals, "I want you to like me so that when I fuck up you will give me more slack." It's not genuine warmth, it's a cynical, sociopathic ploy to garner imaginary "friend credits" that can be traded for real money when need.

(It actually reminds me of how mobile customer service call centers repeatedly, obnoxiously apologize, to the point where they seriously degrade the service. I would much rather a person help me than waste time apologizing to me.)

Re: The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

#113

Post by scott_karana »

icebraining wrote: post #33
Animats wrote: post #27

The fraud level in the Bitcoin world is so high that it makes South Florida look good. There's a working Robocoin ATM at Hacker Dojo in Mountain View, CA. Nobody uses it. Nor should they. 15% bid/ask spread, 5% fee. Incidentally, the retail price for an ordinary ATM machine is $2,000 to $4,500, depending on the features ordered. A standard through-the-wall bank ATM is about $9,500. Even if you order every option from…

Ordinary ATMs have economies of scale not available to Bitcoin ATMs, from simply making bigger purchases to distributing fixed costs (like software development). It's also a much safer business - you can be relatively sure the dollar economy won't crash tomorrow and kill your business.

I'm not sure about this. Since Bitcoin ATMs still dispense cash, why not just retrofit the same hardware?

Hell, why aren't people paying the smaller ATM companies to make custom ones? It's not like banks don't already get custom-shaped ATMs made for them.

Re: The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

#114

Post by icebraining »

scott_karana wrote: post #113
icebraining wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ordinary ATMs have economies of scale not available to Bitcoin ATMs, from simply making bigger purchases to distributing fixed costs (like software development). It's also a much safer business - you can be relatively sure the dollar economy won't crash tomorrow and kill your business.

I'm not sure about this. Since Bitcoin ATMs still dispense cash, why not just retrofit the same hardware? Hell, why aren't people paying the smaller ATM companies to make custom ones? It's not like banks don't already get custom-shaped ATMs made for them.

Since Bitcoin ATMs still dispense cash, why not just retrofit the same hardware?

You can use the same hardware, but when you're buying 10s instead of 1000s of them, it'll probably cost you a lot more per unit. At least that's how it works for most manufactured goods.

Re: The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

#115

Post by res0nat0r »

marklittlewood wrote: post #66
nikcub wrote: post #36

If you're wondering how you should do these types of transactions without putting cash up front, the field is called trade finance. Call your bank - most of them have a trade finance desk, or Google the term. A slightly cheaper way of doing it is to have a lawyer draft a terms of trade or supply agreement with either the funds in escrow with the firm or a bank guarantee. Having your bank finance the trade is worthwhi…

Like a bank is going to offer trade finance on this?!? Seriously. That should be clue enough.

Banks aren't worried about bitcoin displacing them if that's what you are implying.

Re: The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

#116

Post by spacemanmatt »

nols wrote: post #94
sgentle wrote: post #28

"Just so we're perfectly aligned, I want you to understand the relationship that Robocoin has with our manufacturer. We are actually just a reseller of their kiosks with our software." I've heard this from smaller retailers of all kinds of products and, as pointed out in Andrew's reply, it's complete bullshit. The company that took your money is the company you formed a contract with. Any nonsense about "yeah, but th…

I really think that it's not even a smokescreen as much as it's really what they think. "Why should I assume any risk when I'm just a reseller?" is a common thought among many new companies. They don't really see themselves as a business with its own risk as much as a subsidiary of the company. It's just a sign of naiveté among many new entrepreneurs.

A necessary question: What value am I providing?

In their case, they dodged providing any at all.

Re: The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

#117

Post by scott_karana »

icebraining wrote: post #114
scott_karana wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure about this. Since Bitcoin ATMs still dispense cash, why not just retrofit the same hardware? Hell, why aren't people paying the smaller ATM companies to make custom ones? It's not like banks don't already get custom-shaped ATMs made for them.

Since Bitcoin ATMs still dispense cash, why not just retrofit the same hardware? You can use the same hardware, but when you're buying 10s instead of 1000s of them, it'll probably cost you a lot more per unit. At least that's how it works for most manufactured goods.

For sure. But a 400% difference is not usual for bulk purchases.

Re: The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

#118

Post by spacemanmatt »

jordanrobocoin wrote: post #91

Apology letter from Jordan: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2jakg4/the_great_ro...

A sorry-not-sorry post, which is later edited for Jordan's benefit, then apparently he posted an image of the wire transfer in progress and failed to redact the recipient's account details, despite trying!

Would that all of theme were this blatant and easy to identify.

Re: The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

#119

Post by res0nat0r »

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #56
leovander wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that we are on the Internet and everyone gets a voice, but they should have let their lawyers do the talking. Both companies are run by adults I assume, but both are throwing sand in each other's faces running across the playground, in this case reddit, Twitter and HN. Either party can use this as slander I suppose. If Robocoin is still making money, this bad PR might go against them for just a bit, but their "…

I don't think your argument here holds water. Robocoin can't spin this to their advantage. Everyone can read the dialog between the two parties and see what's going on. This is much better way to go about getting reparations than litigation.

I don't see how getting uninformed internet nerd rage on your side is going to somehow be a better fix than an actual legal settlement, which is what most mature companies rely on to fix their business disputes.

Re: The Great Robocoin Rip-off: How We Lost $25,000 Buying a Robocoin ATM

#120

Post by nikcub »

cube13 wrote: post #92
nikcub wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trade finance isn't a transparent market. The costs are higher because the way it works atm is you work with your favorite bank or call 2 or 3 others. There is no real price discovery. There are also high costs in settlement, and a barrier of entry for financing that wouldn't have to exist if you could sell tranches in a distributed way online - similar to kickstarter. An m-of-n transaction with a decent and trusted…

>An m-of-n transaction with a decent and trusted intermediary (or multiple less trusted intermediaries) could also replace bank guarantees, which is the simplest form of trade finance. There are also other opportunities in using bitcoin as proof of ownership or proof that you hold a product. So let's replace banks with... banks? The overhead costs that bitcoin will save are just the wire transfer fees. Beyond that, t…

You would replace a bank with coinbase, circle, someone else you trust or 2, 3, 4, 5 or even 10 other companies or individuals. Similar to a web of trust.

That is just to replace the trust element of a bank, not the financial function. At the moment it is nearly impossible to split trust across more than one institution - which means there is a single point of failure in the trust chain and if 2008 repeats again x% of people will lose funds. m-of-n allows you to distribute that trust, even if its just more banks signing the transactions to begin with.

Further, there are other ways to do proof of reserve with bitcoin that don't involve m-of-n.

In terms of the financing and risk assessment element, you could carve that out in tranches and sell out it on auction. At the moment the $2 trillion p.a trade finance market is limited in entry to only those who have a banking license, hence the thick fees and profits in it. You could open up the financing and terms to an open market, just like crowdsourced venture funding or project funding, or have smaller institutions that specialize in certain types of risk that they better understand (it is crazy that there are a half-dozen major banks who pretend to be able to understand and price every time of import / export finance situation anywhere in the world).

Post reply on HN