You forget that crypto currency scene and its volatility creates a condition that essentially destroys the traditional framework for these deals - a separate idea is needed to accurately adjust to is nature and draw up a contract that is essentially fair for both sides. Your opinion that this is a margin loan is incorrect by the fact that you must consider the exact environment in which you can apply such definitions with some reason.
I am not really sure what you are saying here, or how it is suppose to sell your loan.
You also forgot to mention the reward as well as risk that is both eliminated when I give out the collateral - I am myself forfeiting a chance to profit if the collateral goes above certain levels in the volatile market for a quick x2 or x3 if that happens, as it often does in crypto markets. I will only be able to get my collateral back if the escrow sees that I made my repayment on time - and the lender is assured of collateral disbursement through 3rd party escrow, an essential option which was somehow strangely rejected by some 'legitimate' people on these forums
Not true. You give your collateral to a trusted escrow and the trusted escrow can sell the collateral on your behalf if you request him to do so, the proceeds would first be used to repay the loan and any excess amounts would go to you. This is very similar to you having your collateral on an exchange, only that you are not able to withdraw your collateral to a wallet that you control unless you repay the loan.
Your points are valid only if you consider the profit and advantage of the lender and not the other party - and crypto currency environment as I said does not allow the traditional definitions of these contracts to be applied accurately due to the very different nature of its current 'markets'.
See my above point. You are able to direct the escrow provider to sell the collateral if you no longer think the collateral is something you wish to own.
Also, not sure about you but I have seen members in the past with lower trust rating then either of us handling the amount easily double the portion I am asking for here, and have completed such deals successfully.
You have seen people take out loans for $5,100 worth of bitcoin? Under similar terms? Please post a link to a thread for proof. I generally speaking I have seen mostly very small loans ever end up working out. Like I said before your condition that the collateral will not be sold in the event that it's value drops below a certain point essentially makes this a loan that is secured by nothing more then your reputation that you will repay. Also again, your reputation does not support you being trusted with more then 7.5
BTCAs I said, I try to reach the fairest deal possible within the given framework. I'd say, if the loaner party is willing to risk forfeiting profits from the largely volatile markets with the absolute basic consideration that collateral is not returned until full payment is made, then the lender can accept both the risk and reward of the markets as well. This is a negotiable contract and trade, and balance is essential.
Again I am not sure what you are trying to argue here. I don't want to accuse you of anything but it somewhat looks like you are trying to use "fancy" words in order to make yourself look more qualified to give your loan credibility.
Your points may be understandable to a degree, but not reasonable if you consider both sides of the deal.
The issue I am addressing is that there is not only severe volatility in the markets, but also severe manipulation, outright fraudulent practices that makes the normal 'market' rules almost void in realistic terms.
The fundamental issue of fair practice and balance in these deals must take such circumstantial conditions into account before considering what is legitimate and fair to both sides make the contract. In this case, the market situation makes the liquidation of collateral in case of its value drop (temporary or otherwise) an extremely risk for the one handing out the collateral. If the lender takes that into account, it is not hard to see how this deal can be made more fair if you discount the arbitrary liquidation as an option. There are risks and rewards at play, both decided at split second sometimes.
If btc value drops to a third of itself from the time when I start the loan while the collateral increases in price above that, do I somehow have the right to demand that the lender send the extra amount be sent? The complications are numerous if we begin discussing the possibilities of risk vs reward, so it would be a simpler exercise for all involved to both keep variables to a minimum due to the fact that there are no real guarantees for heavily volatile market such as ours. You mentioned numerous conditions that could be laid out to my 'advantage' - have you perhaps considered that rewards that I potentially forfeit with the collateral are not already counted into the deal?
I do not know what is fancy in your terms, but I can tell you I have laid out the basics as clearly as I can: That both sides reach a compromise and a deal where risks and benefits are roughly on equal terms, and agree to mutual conditions based on that regard within crypto currency market situation.
You seem to argue that collateral in this case will easily drop to nothing, while perhaps not seeing that it can easily also do a x3 in one day. Ignoring or minimizing the reward potential and emphasizing the risk does not sound like a realistic or logical way to determine the validity of a loan offer.
In regards to past such loans or deals, feel free to search the profiles of prominent members or the archives - they are all there for you to see, and there have been good deals made and concluded on the conditions I described.
It's too bad some people simply cannot see past their juvenile understanding of how negotiations work, and simply resort to squealing 'scammer' if it is not 100% to their advantage. It's a balancing act on both sides, and when I have clearly laid out the conditions for the deal it is the job of the potential lender to understand what is explained and decide for himself if he is willing or not. I would certainly not call a lender a 'scammer' simply because they request certain conditions - however that changes if egregious and ignorant conditions are made such as not using a 3rd party escrow, lack of immediate funds to issue the loan (future funds based on nothing but promises), and a complete lack of risk on the part of the lender and much more risk on part of the borrower.
You may have noticed that I initially refrained from any accusations of particular individuals as 'scammers' even though their ignorant ideas of 'deals' could easily be labeled as collateral scams.
I would advise that you see from the perspective of all parties involved, not just that of the lender. Especially not someone who cannot even read the posted conditions and proceeds to mouth off at everyone because the deal is not to their advantage and has no business flipping his tongue at something he made several mistakes on
All offers ongoing, terms as stated on the OP. Negotiations of details welcome.
