ALLLL Aboard thats going Ashort!!!

Apex Capital · Dec 1, 2005

Quote from Perseus:

apex, does it really matter when he reveals his ID? i mean if baron holds the cash then rubber can't possibly win until he does it, or you win if he doesn't.

would his badge ID make a difference in your bet posture?

I just want to see a bet

Trust me Perseus, this kid is full of hot air and nothing else.
He is afraid to reveal anything truthful about himself because the pathetic little attention seeking life that he leads here on ET will crack like Joe Theisman's leg and then his life will sadly come to an end for him.

He is not who he says he is.

He wimped out with Riskarb back in September of 2004 in Chicago in a similar bet and wound-up being a COMPLETE NO SHOW, not once, but twice!

Everyone here on ET already knows he's full of crap and uses about two dozen aliases.
Even if I were to win a bet with him that would require him to leave ET for good, he'll just come back with yet another one of his aliases. That's why I asked for the "one condition".

I thought that he might actually step up to the plate and accept my precondition in a show of good faith by revealing his trading badge. But he knows nothing about good faith.

The only thing that he's good at is talking out of his arse.

rubberbird · Dec 1, 2005

Quote from DHOHHI:

And you wouldn't be violating laws to disclose the fund. Are you telling me that no one knows the name of any hedge fund manager and the fund they're affiliated with? You're more desperate than I thought.

nice try loser.

i've been on ET making calls etc while I manage money, major money. I would be violating many laws if I "advertised" my fund after the way i've been on ET, even simply by naming it. Plus, I don't want any of my investors knowing that I waste time in the sandbox here. that's my problem.

let's put it this way, you loser, if you invested $1M with me, would you be happy if you found out I was behaving like this on ET? Let the investors just enjoy the returns. I don't need any problems with my career. I'll never advertise here, nor would Baron want me to

rubberbird · Dec 1, 2005

Quote from Perseus:

apex, does it really matter when he reveals his ID? i mean if baron holds the cash then rubber can't possibly win until he does it, or you win if he doesn't.

would his badge ID make a difference in your bet posture?

I just want to see a bet

thanks Perseus, but forget it. read in between the lines here. lithium knows that he will never bet, he knows he would lose. so you get alot of smoke and mirrors from this gay blade.

trying reason on a lithium freak will never work.

I repeat, I am willing to accept the bet lithium originally layed out. I already accepted and my lawyer is ready to contact his. so now we'll get alot of smoke and mirrors (and a few mentions of riskarb etc) from lithium loser.

Perseus · Dec 2, 2005

Do not worry so much about the investors, this is a results oriented industry. if you made me 25% per year, I would not care if you made gay porn all day long. I suspect most clients would not come here even if they knew about this place, they just want good returns and good tee times.

rubberbird · Dec 2, 2005

anyone see the old kid n play movies?

a great line from that movie rings true right here on this thread,

"I smell....I smell...p*ssy!"

I thought I accepted a bet right here yesterday. So that would make the ones who initiated the bet, and subsequently ran for their lives "big p*ssies".

My acceptance of lithium capital's bet is still on the table.

El OchoCinco · Dec 2, 2005

Mentioning the name of a fund is not advertising and thus not in violation of SEC rules. The SEC allows hedge funds to have websites as long as they restrict access to specific information to accredited investors. I can easily go to google and find many hedge fund websites. A mention of a fund without any performance figures or strategies is not advertising by any interpretation of SEC rules. Nor is mentioning the name of the fund a violation of ET rules since you are not spamming the board but simply saying a name of a fund.

Quote from rubberbird:

nice try loser.

i've been on ET making calls etc while I manage money, major money. I would be violating many laws if I "advertised" my fund after the way i've been on ET, even simply by naming it. Plus, I don't want any of my investors knowing that I waste time in the sandbox here. that's my problem.

let's put it this way, you loser, if you invested $1M with me, would you be happy if you found out I was behaving like this on ET? Let the investors just enjoy the returns. I don't need any problems with my career. I'll never advertise here, nor would Baron want me to

brokerboy · Dec 2, 2005

Itâs not against the law for you to be an ass. Rubberbird has 2 possible reasons why he makes it hard to ever prove anything he will say. The first is the shame and fallout for being a complete asshole with his actions on here. He pretty much comes off as a bigoted kind of person with his rambling on gays and other things. Sure I make gay or racial jokes but at time I think Rubberbird believes his statements. A truly successful person do not advertise that type of behavior unless he is running for power in Germany. It could also be shockingly that Rubberbird is full of hot air. Itâs very hard to choose and at times I think it could even be both.

Apex Capital · Dec 2, 2005

Quote from optioncoach:

Mentioning the name of a fund is not advertising and thus not in violation of SEC rules. The SEC allows hedge funds to have websites as long as they restrict access to specific information to accredited investors. I can easily go to google and find many hedge fund websites. A mention of a fund without any performance figures or strategies is not advertising by any interpretation of SEC rules. Nor is mentioning the name of the fund a violation of ET rules since you are not spamming the board but simply saying a name of a fund.

Very well said, and indeed true.
Once again, rubberbird is caught spewing a bunch of lies in an effort to validate his typical excuses.
He has no credibility.

rubberbird · Dec 2, 2005

Quote from Apex Capital:

Very well said, and indeed true.
Once again, rubberbird is caught spewing a bunch of lies in an effort to validate his typical excuses.
He has no credibility.

what a lithiumed chicken!

we have a bet, lithium loser.

I accepted YOUR terms, so let's get this moving.

Hey, you're so sure i'm lying it'll be the quickest $10K you ever made. I'm offering lawyers and Baron in an effort to prove that i'm serious here. You are obviously more interested in spewing crap then HONORING your offer.

I still accept your terms.

rubberbird · Dec 2, 2005

Quote from optioncoach:

Mentioning the name of a fund is not advertising and thus not in violation of SEC rules. The SEC allows hedge funds to have websites as long as they restrict access to specific information to accredited investors. I can easily go to google and find many hedge fund websites. A mention of a fund without any performance figures or strategies is not advertising by any interpretation of SEC rules. Nor is mentioning the name of the fund a violation of ET rules since you are not spamming the board but simply saying a name of a fund.

excuse me, sir. I already explained my reasoning.
What if I don't want ET to know my fund? Is that OK with you??
Here it is again. If you want to dispute the following, be my guest.

Quote from rubberbird:

i've been on ET making calls etc while I manage money, major money. I would be violating many laws if I "advertised" my fund after the way i've been on ET, even simply by naming it. Plus, I don't want any of my investors knowing that I waste time in the sandbox here. that's my problem.

let's put it this way, you loser, if you invested $1M with me, would you be happy if you found out I was behaving like this on ET? Let the investors just enjoy the returns. I don't need any problems with my career. I'll never advertise here, nor would Baron want me to

laws such as hedge funds not being allowed to disclose positions to the public. If I did, any of my investors could sue my arse and win. Why is praetorians rationale (which is the same as mine) accepted, but mine questioned. There's no difference between p2 and me NOT disclosing crap.