Mirror Trading International

[Bandersnatch]

Not sure if posted but someone just sent me this from yesterday.

 

[Spxdxrbxtxs]

www.dishonest.co.za
Serious work in progress

 

[Spxdxrbxtxs]

www.dishonest.co.za
Serious work in progress

Have you contacted @ghoti for usernames and passwords?

 

[Bandersnatch]

Have you contacted @ghoti for usernames and passwords?

Asking yoself?

 

[Spxdxrbxtxs]

Asking yoself?

That kind of a day...
But nah - just trying to get the two ideas linked badly.

 

[Wary GOM]

www.dishonest.co.za
Serious work in progress

Great!
Include Vaultage and Willie Breedt?

 

[newby_investor]

www.dishonest.co.za
Serious work in progress

Looking good so far!

 

[LJ1234]

Some more shilling
https://qr.ae/pNkrrm

 

[LJ1234]

Great!
Include Vaultage and Willie Breedt?

Shouldn't CashFX and Crowd1 be there too?

 

[ShirleyJames]

Looking good so far!

Yip Looking good, I have a good feeling about this, Wonder how long before they pick it up.

 

[MONTHEBIFF733B]

THE ONE CENT TO R87,585,101,828,952,119,371,104,256.00 IN ONE YEAR CLAIM

Ok...

So I have had this idea of laying out a detailed interest calculation to assist the growing suspicious faction of MTI to further open their eyes.
The exponential implications of a yield of 20% per day or a leverage of 200:1, might not strike home for many at face value, but I believe the next calculation bridges the gap as it’s (1) easy to follow, (2) easy to work out and (3) best drives home the exponential absurdity of their claims, as well as the (4) complete unimportance of outside investment. But most importantly it (5)relatably underlines the hysterically fantastical chasm between invested amount and extrapolated result

Please don’t feel patronized by all the detail. This post was created to assist the lurking, confused investor, and not the already convinced math wizz.


Ok here goes...(from here on out I am addressing the investors)
So MTI claims to have had an average of 1% yield every day the last 18 months

So very easily we can say that therefore if we invest R100, we would earn R1 on an average day

!!!!BUT!!!!
In an interview on youtube, Johan Steynberg claims that at any given time, a maximum of only 5% of the investor’s money is used to trade with.

Therefore not the full R100 is put into trade every day. Only 5% of that R100 which equals R5.
The R1 interest earned was therefore not earned trading with R100, but rather earned by trading with a
Maximum of R5.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!THE DAILY AVERAGE INTEREST IS THEREFORE NOT R1 FROM TRADING WITH R100 = 1%, BUT RATHER R1 FROM TRADING WITH ONLY R5 WHICH IS 20%!!!!!!!!

The implications of a daily trading yield of 20% might not jump out at you, but let us show you the absurdity of this statement with an example of investing ONLY ONE CENT

If I were to invest ONE CENT into a platform that yields 20% profit per day, I would have earned a ludicrous [DRUM ROLLLLLLL]

R87,585,101,828,952,119,371,104,256.00
after one year(have Zuma try to pronounce that number) if the miracubot only traded on weekdays

As overwhelmingly impossible as this number seems, you can very easily calculate it by yourself (if you have the patience...but since we’re dealing with hopeless investors’ money here, I’m sure you’ll want to make the effort):


In 2019 there were 261 weekdays.

Calculating the effect of 20% yield can be done by multiplying the investment with 1.2

So a ONE CENT investment would grow like this

Day one - R0.01 x 1.2 = R0.012
Day two - R0.012 x 1.2 = R0.0144
Day three - R0.0144 x 1.2 = R0.01728
Day 4 - R0.0144 x 1.2 = R0.02

You get the picture...at day four we are only at R0.02, but repeat the process for 261 days and see where that calculation takes you!!!!!

So at face value, I am sure that this calculation begs the question: but why are we not seeing these insane yield values in MTI if they use this very bot????

It’s simple...

Between MTI trading days(well there’s no trading, but if we were to entertain their claimed method)
the YIELD GETS DIMINISHED TWICE AND THE CAPITAL GETS DIMINISHES ONCE before trading recommences :

1 - As the investor keeps only 40% of the earnings each day, it means the other 60% is not included in either the investor’s capital, or the following day’s trading. The earnings are therefore devided by 2.5 before being added to the capital


2 - The second diminishing station of the earnings is the claim that only 5% of the investor’s capital gets used to trade. Both the capital and the previous day’s earnings are therefore divided by 20 before being sent to trade according to them.

The zany, unpronounceable figure of R87,585,101,828,952,119,371,104,256.00 is, therefore, attained because IT EXCLUDES THE 2 DIMINISHING STEPS OF MTI. THESE STEPS SIGNIFICANTLY HINDER THE COMPOUNDING ACCELERATION.

It’s therefore easy to understand that interest rate exponentially trumps initial invested amount

But let’s prove it further with a comparative calclation

R1000 000 in trade at 1% per day
= R37,510,357.31 after a year (insane but very pronounceable)

R0.01 in trade at 20% per day =
R87,585,101,828,952,119,371,104,256.00

Further, we can thus also conclude that it was utterly unnecessary for MTI to recruit anyone as they would have successfully attained all the money in the world in under a year by investing just one cent if they had simply excluded the 2 very excludable yield diminishing stations: if you have one cent you can risk it all! No need to trade with only 5% (first excludable station) and also no pesky
investors taking a piece of the pie (second excludable station)



THE END

 

[D@leW]

R1000 000 in trade at 1% per day
= R37,510,357.31 after a year (insane but very pronounceable)

R0.01 in trade at 20% per day =
R87,585,101,828,952,119,371,104,256.00

R 1,000,000*(1+(1/100))^365 = R 37,783,434.33 so I think for that figure you where assuming 365 days of trading in a year and have introduced some rounding error somewhere.

R0.01 * (1+(20/100)) ^ 261 = R 4,637,727,407,278,622,203.09
I can't work out how you got to your total, but regardless the number is stupidly big, and I fail to see why anyone who managed to create a bot like this would license it to MTI in order to make other people rich.

 

[MONTHEBIFF733B]

R 1,000,000*(1+(1/100))^365 = R 37,783,434.33 so I think for that figure you where assuming 365 days of trading in a year and have introduced some rounding error somewhere.

R0.01 * (1+(20/100)) ^ 261 = R 4,637,727,407,278,622,203.09
I can't work out how you got to your total, but regardless the number is stupidly big, and I fail to see why anyone who managed to create a bot like this would license it to MTI in order to make other people rich.

Yeah I used an interest calculator on the net....i could find only one with a “5 day per week” trading variable. So I need to trim the hedges again I guess,but like you said, it doesnt make the point less valid.

I used
Daily compounding
And “5 day per week” trading...

I will regroup and edit tomorrow (after which your reply will look ridiculous)

 

[warrenpridgeon]

They've either shuffled the pyramid around or their data is broken. My test account went from almost 1000 team members yesterday to less than 10 today. I signed it up under one of the top peeps... So maybe they are move people around in the pyramid to modify their earnings?

 

[LJ1234]

They say it is because of maintenance

 

[warrenpridgeon]

View attachment 930077
View attachment 930079
They say it is because of maintenance

As someone who has been building software/systems/apps for 15 years as a profession I can categorically say:



Running a calculation does not affect the underlying data. Maybe they are trying to break the tree apart to run the binary Calc or they've suffered another, more malicious breech.

 

[tetrasect]

View attachment 930077
View attachment 930079
They say it is because of maintenance

I wouldn't be surprised if these "glitches" become more and more frequent. Basically planting the idea in people's minds that even if the website says there's no bitcoin, it's "just a glitch" so there's nothing to worry about. Buys them more time when they decide to make a run for it.

 

[retromodcoza]

As someone who has been building software/systems/apps for 15 years as a profession I can categorically say:

View attachment 930081

Running a calculation does not affect the underlying data. Maybe they are trying to break the tree apart to run the binary Calc or they've suffered another, more malicious breech.

This was my reaction as well. If the underlying data for each user has been modified like that then there is usually only really one option:

1. Roll back to previous backup (If you have one)

If the leaks information about the source of code is true , then these guys won't have the sophistication necessary to recover from modifications at a transaction level. They'll have to roll back. I wonder when the last backup was...

 

[aofafrica]

I wouldn't be surprised if these "glitches" become more and more frequent. Basically planting the idea in people's minds that even if the website says there's no bitcoin, it's "just a glitch" so there's nothing to worry about. Buys them more time when they decide to make a run for it.

What the system says and reality are in no way linked.

Same as what your shopping list says in no way guarantees your fridge contents.

There is no reason for them to zero people's holdings in the back office system when all the money has been stolen.

Most of it already has been stolen, yet sheep still believe a number shown to them by a system entirely controlled by the wolves.

 

[warrenpridgeon]

This was my reaction as well. If the underlying data for each user has been modified like that then there is usually only really one option:

1. Roll back to previous backup (If you have one)

If the leaks information about the source of code is true , then these guys won't have the sophistication necessary to recover from modifications at a transaction level. They'll have to roll back. I wonder when the last backup was...

Annnnnnnd maintenance mode engaged.

Before it happened I refreshed a couple of times and my team size grew by a couple of members... But was still below 10 people when it was around 1000 yesterday.

These oaks are fiddling the data... There's no ways the team sizes should be expanding and contracting without people actually joining or leaving.

The only way this is happening is if someone is messing around in the database... Moving chains of members around (possibly reallocating the profit share under the Founders?). Maybe the binary calc has gotten too big and they are trying to split the tree up and run it on a certain section at a time because the raspberry pi they are hosting it on is running out of ram or cpu power when trying to process it. Either of these options is bad.