Full Tilt Poker executives should have opened a bank

Business, Finance, Statism
Share

Federal prosecutors have alleged in their amended complaint against Full Tilt Poker that the gambling interest was a “Ponzi scheme,” apparently in part because of the company’s level of cash reserves.

FTP owed approximately $390 million to players around the world, with $150 million owed to U.S. players. FTP only had $60 million on deposit in its bank accounts, however, meaning over $300 million is owed to players worldwide.

This was the result of FTP’s payment processing channels becoming so disrupted that “the company faced increasing difficulty attempting to collect funds from players in the United States. Rather than disclose this fact, Full Tilt Poker simply credited players’ online gambling accounts with money that had never actually been collected from the players’ bank accounts. Full Tilt Poker allowed players to gamble with — and lose to other players — this phantom money that Full Tilt Poker never actually collected or possessed.”

$390 million in liabilities and only $60 million in the bank? That means that FTP had a little more than 15% in cash reserves. According to Wikipedia,

A depository institution’s reserve requirements vary by the dollar amount of net transaction accounts held at that institution. Effective December 30, 2010, institutions with net transactions accounts:

  • Of less than $10.7 million have no minimum reserve requirement;
  • Between $10.7 million and $58.8 million must have a liquidity ratio of 3%;
  • Exceeding $58.8 million must have a liquidity ratio of 10%

So because FTP had 15% in cash reserves, the whole operation is a Ponzi scheme. If only the proprietors had started a bank of the same size, they would have only needed 10% reserves!

Full Tilt Poker executives should have opened a bank Read Post »

The Market Is Awesome. News At 11.

(Austrian) Economics, Business
Share

Yesterday I found myself on the grocery store parking lot with a dead car battery, a trunk full of perishable and a toddler in the back seat. The following times/events are taken from my phone’s history.

  • 10:03am – Called my wife to come get us.
  • 10:05am – Called roadside to get a jump.
  • 10:24am – Service dispatched. I get a text meesage with contact info for the company coming.
  • 10:40am – Service arrives
  • 10:43am – Battery checked. Totally dead. Car is started.

Then I drive across the street and buy a new battery at an auto parts store. Within seconds of purchase it gets installed. I am back home shortly after.

Too bad trying to get things done within the government system of bureaucracy is nowhere near as pleasant or efficient.

The Market Is Awesome. News At 11. Read Post »

Mises Academy Course: “Libertarian Controversies”

(Austrian) Economics, Anti-Statism, Education, Libertarian Theory, The Basics
Share

Next month I’ll be teaching a new Mises Academy course,”Libertarian Controversies.” This is my fourth Mises Academy course (the previous three are Libertarian Legal Theory, Rethinking Intellectual Property: History, Theory, and Economics, and The Social Theory of Hoppe), and my fifth time teaching there (I have reprised the IP course once).

From the course page:

Modern libertarianism is a young, developing and vibrant science. Variants includes classical liberalism, minarchism, and, in its most rigorous form, anarcho-Austrian libertarianism. Libertarians of various stripes are influenced by utilitarian, pragmatic and natural law theories, and by thinkers including Ayn Rand, Hayek, Rothbard, Mises, and others. For decades there has been vigorous debate among different camps of libertarians about a host of controversial issues, from the foundation of rights to the nature of government, and about concrete issues such as abortion, strategy and activism, living in an unfree world, anarchy v. minarchy, punishment and restitution, and so on. In this course, libertarian legal theorist Stephan Kinsella will explore a variety of libertarian misconceptions and controversies, from an Austro-libertarian perspective.

In the discussion about misconceptions, Kinsella will identify a number of common libertarian mistakes, confusions, fallacies or flawed reasoning and propose a solution or more consistent approach. Issues to be discussed include: creation as a source of property rights; labor as being owned; unintentional equivocation (harm, authority, hierarchy, etc.); alienability and voluntary slavery; …

Mises Academy Course: “Libertarian Controversies” Read Post »

Kinsella on Intellectual Property and Economic Development

(Austrian) Economics, Anti-Statism, IP Law, Libertarian Theory, Podcasts
Share

My Mises University 2011 lecture, Intellectual Property and Economic Development (July 27, 2011), is now up. The audio may also be downloaded here; the original PowerPoint slides are here. Streaming audio and a googledocs version of the slides are below.

~*~

Kinsella on Intellectual Property and Economic Development Read Post »

Gregory on “Why Capitalism Is Worth Defending”

(Austrian) Economics, Anti-Statism, Corporatism, The Left, The Right
Share

The prolific Anthony Gregory has a great article up today at LewRockwell.com, “Why Capitalism Is Worth Defending.” His view is that capitalism is “the greatest engine of material prosperity in human history, the fount of civilization, peace, and modernity.” As part of his argument he rejects the calls of some fellow travelers to drop the word capitalism because of its origins (it was coined by its enemies) and because it is used by some corporate capitalist types to refer to their preferred system. As Gregory writes:

even insofar as the word has negative connotations in popular culture, we might still want to adopt it. The anti-Federalists were initially opposed to the label affixed to them by the Hamiltonian statists. But now I would uphold that descriptor with pride. This is an area where we can take a cue from the gay rights activists who were smeared as “queer,” only to proudly appropriate the term for their own uses. … regardless of how we define it, in terms of feeding the masses and sustaining society, I will take flawed capitalism over flawed socialism any day. I will take state capitalism, crony capitalism, or corporate capitalism over state socialism, democratic socialism, or national socialism.

Another interesting insight Gregory makes is the parallel between capitalism itself and the use of the word: “Maybe it takes longer to explain ourselves when we adopt the battle cry of capitalism – it also takes longer to be a capitalist than only a consumer.”

Great piece.

 

Gregory on “Why Capitalism Is Worth Defending” Read Post »

Scroll to Top