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

We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

blog.stablegains.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 388 posts

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#371

Post by kasey_junk »

tptacek wrote: post #368
kasey_junk wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you believe this company is an outright fraud (I don’t have an opinion) “shrug its crypto” is a horrendous defense for the funds backing it. At a bare minimum they should be doing due diligence for their own investors to prevent losses if not the higher standard of being a good citizen and shutting down the fraud. We would not think it’s ok for a fund backing pharma startups to give cash to Avon Barksdale…

I think I'm saying that YC by design funds companies at a point where it's too early to reliably determine whether they're an outright fraud. And YC can't shut down anything; they invest relatively little money and take zero control over their portfolio companies. The best they can do is performatively kick companies out of the program, so they can't access Bookface or whatever.

I don’t think public disavowals by early investors are performative. I think that would go a long way to limiting the damage actually.

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#372

Post by unicornmama »

pid-1 wrote: post #71
braingenious wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously! I know this may be an unpopular opinion on this site in particular, but after seeing this I would never even consider raising money from YC. I would not be comfortable having the fate of my business in any way tied to a group of people that are so fucking dumb that they invested in the money version of a perpetual motion machine. Seriously, this is the fucking stupidest thing I’ve seen in _YEARS_

> Seriously, this is the fucking stupidest thing I’ve seen in _YEARS_ C'mon, let's not forget about NFTs.

Wait till you hear about "Soulbound" NFTs.

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#373

Post by pyrale »

ReflectedImage wrote: post #333
koheripbal wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What most people don't understand about finance is that there are fundamental rules that you really cannot break without consequences. Anyone who has studied quantitative finance knows that it is a HARD science. I worked with a Nobel prize winner in economics, and the math dominated. There was no politics, no opinions, no ethics involved. It really is a science. Most social media characterize finance as some ethical…

The maths used in economics is widely known to be wrong. When informed the maths in economics is wrong, the economists don't go and fix their maths either. Economics is more like sociology with some random incorrect formulas written on the black board as set dressing. Economics might in self loathing claim they are the "dismal science", but the cold hard truth is they simply speaking are not doing their jobs properly…

You're not talking about the same "economics". Quantitative analysis, as the person wrote, is pretty good at predicting things.

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#374

Post by stevebmark »

ulzeraj wrote: post #353
stevebmark wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a sample letter: Dear government I'm trying to subvert, I complain about the instability of your useful, fiat currency, so I entered into a get rich quick scheme with no intention of reporting gains on my taxes. This obvious scam fell apart. Please punish them with the government system I don't believe in.

Are we blaming victims now? What’s next? It was her fault for wearing those clothes?

I think comparing getting scammed by get rich quick schemes to that is a morally reprehensible comparison.

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#375

Post by robocat »

formerkrogemp wrote: post #363
robocat wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The industry terms are: angel and seed investors -> venture capital (A,B,C round) -> private equity. Yeah, there are grey areas. First Google hit says: https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/careers/jobs... VC doesn’t want to get out early #386. What drives their decisions is far more complex than your pithy summary.

> VC doesn’t want to get out early #386. What drives their decisions is far more complex than your pithy summary. Ah, yes, VC's decision making process is too great for us mere mortals to understand. Their motivation and calculus are beyond our ken. Woe to the uninformed laypeople who cannot fathom their singular desire for money and influence. The nuances of 'make more money' justify the great wealth which their dis…

You original comment was low quality, and now you are doubling down by being rude. I definitely think your reply breaks site guidelines. I suggest you read the section below the heading Comments https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I admit my second comment wasn’t much better, sorry.

VCs want to hold on to their successful investments as long as possible, with some limitations depending on the contracts for when LPs expect their money back. VCs obviously do not sellout their successful investment(s) as early as they could, usually they are buying into it and doubling down instead.

In some situations a VC might push to sell early: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/drive-bydeal.asp In others, they won’t, as is mentioned in that article. Perhaps if there is a good IRR they might wish to delay marking to market for as long as possible, so they can tell a story on their existing funds based on numbers that are not realistic? It really depends on the particular fund, the VC, the current market, and the specifics of each investment.

Disclaimer: I am an engineer.

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#376

Post by tptacek »

kasey_junk wrote: post #371
tptacek wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I'm saying that YC by design funds companies at a point where it's too early to reliably determine whether they're an outright fraud. And YC can't shut down anything; they invest relatively little money and take zero control over their portfolio companies. The best they can do is performatively kick companies out of the program, so they can't access Bookface or whatever.

I don’t think public disavowals by early investors are performative. I think that would go a long way to limiting the damage actually.

Fair enough. I mean, it's performative by definition! This company appears dead in the water. But you're right, sometimes the performance itself has value.

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#377

Post by ulzeraj »

stevebmark wrote: post #374
ulzeraj wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we blaming victims now? What’s next? It was her fault for wearing those clothes?

I think comparing getting scammed by get rich quick schemes to that is a morally reprehensible comparison.

Gravity in both situations may not be comparable but victim blaming is always reprehensible.

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#378

Post by braingenious »

unicornmama wrote: post #372
pid-1 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Seriously, this is the fucking stupidest thing I’ve seen in _YEARS_ C'mon, let's not forget about NFTs.

Wait till you hear about "Soulbound" NFTs.

Oh my God. I had not heard about this. I have no words.

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#379

Post by TheDudeMan »

elliekelly wrote: post #166
puranjay wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tell you right now that there is absolutely no safe yield in crypto currently that goes beyond 4% on a “safe” stablecoin like USDC. For truly safe (as in, huge value locked, never been hacked), the yield is more like 1.5-2% All the high yield is in algoponzis or new protocols that carry massive protocol risk

There is absolutely no safe crypto. Full stop.

There is also no safe stock, right?

(No need to list the differences between stocks and cryptocurrencies.)

Re: We’re discontinuing the Stablegains service

#380

Post by formerkrogemp »

robocat wrote: post #375
formerkrogemp wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> VC doesn’t want to get out early #386. What drives their decisions is far more complex than your pithy summary. Ah, yes, VC's decision making process is too great for us mere mortals to understand. Their motivation and calculus are beyond our ken. Woe to the uninformed laypeople who cannot fathom their singular desire for money and influence. The nuances of 'make more money' justify the great wealth which their dis…

You original comment was low quality, and now you are doubling down by being rude. I definitely think your reply breaks site guidelines. I suggest you read the section below the heading Comments https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html I admit my second comment wasn’t much better, sorry. VCs want to hold on to their successful investments as long as possible, with some limitations depending on the contracts f…

> Your original comment was low quality, and now you are doubling down by being rude.

I was not the original commenter with whom you were speaking. I'll admit that my comment could be rude, and for that I'm sorry. The length of the mockery was a bit much, but I don't think it was uncalled for. To assume that venture capital exists without the primary motivation and purpose of making money is misleading at best and delusional more generally. Tangential motivations such as investing for impact or being motivated by other considerations don't change the underlying goal and assumption of the act of venture capital.

> I admit my second comment wasn’t much better, sorry.

Placing venture capitalists within some special class whose reasoning or motivations are beyond the understanding of most people is where I take umbrage. Yes, there are considerations such as the underlying technology, exit strategy and timing, rounds of investing, and risk assumption. The vast majority of the time venture capital is performed under advisement of attorneys, accountants, and consiltants. Venture capitalists perform no special function beyond writing the check, transferring the money, and rarely coaching or dealmaking with founders. However the chief expectation is outsized returns for above average risk in a least a few of the ventures to make up for all of the startups that failed. If the aim was social good, there are very many worthy causes and charities that need that capital. 'Stablegains' is not and was not a charity working for the collective good of society and neither are an alarming number of startups and YC-backed startups these days.

Post reply on HN