Defending the LOP

[coldwarvet]

It's none of my business, or anyone else's, how much money the rest of us have invested in the IQD.

However, assuming most of us have followed the advice of "don't invest more than you can afford to lose," I find it curious that the people who advocate for the position that equates to the least return on their/our investment (aka, the LOP) do so with such great passion.

Please explain WHY it is so important to you to defend your position, expending so much time and effort to do so, when you believe that your investment won't pan out the way you originally thought.

From a pure time management perspective, it doesn't make sense to me. Just askin'.

[billio0]

Hi coldwarvet,

I too find it extremely puzzling that these folks insist on taking this particular point of view, and have spent a considerable amount of time trying to put it to rest myself. I have tried to point out that what we own as IQD investors is not some exotic investment instrument such as stocks, bonds, derivatives, options, or any other kind of esoteric device for making money.

What we have is actual money already; albeit foreign currency of a not yet internationally recognized country. But, it is still legal tender purchased legally with legal currency, and as such it must be honored by the issuing country based on the value they assigned to it before we bought it. And, if they intend to change its value to a lesser value for whatever reason, they must change the value of all of their currency in circulation accordingly, and cannot under any circumstances somehow single out that currency that we own and possess for a lesser value, but leave all the rest alone and intact; meaning that which is held by large investors, corporations, and most importantly, other governments.

That is the premise of my argument and position on the LOP issue. I have never said that it could never happen, because such a stance would be foolish. A country can and will do whatever it wants to anytime it wants to. What makes this situation so very different and unique is that with Iraq they MUST raise the value in order to survive and prosper; NOT lower the value, which would be financial suicide in my opinion.

I'm glad you brought the subject up again, but hopefully in the next few hours or days it shall become a moot point as we all head to the various cash-in locations to reap our just rewards for all of our efforts.

Thanks again!

[WesParsons]

It's none of my business, or anyone else's, how much money the rest of us have invested in the IQD.

However, assuming most of us have followed the advice of "don't invest more than you can afford to lose," I find it curious that the people who advocate for the position that equates to the least return on their/our investment (aka, the LOP) do so with such great passion.

Please explain WHY it is so important to you to defend your position, expending so much time and effort to do so, when you believe that your investment won't pan out the way you originally thought.

From a pure time management perspective, it doesn't make sense to me. Just askin'.

I'm considered a 'lop'-ster so I'll take a stab at it.

To me, I don't really care if you believe it or not, my concern is for folks who have invested a ton into this opportunity and have no game plan for failure....when this thing lops, and folks are expecting a big windfall, lots and lots and lots of families are going to be hurting.

I'm more passionate about getting folks to consider that a lop is a distinct possibility and should have some planning around that.

What I can't stand is the head in the sand mentality that keeps folks at risk.

Look at it this way....if I'm wrong everyone wins big time...if I'm right, no body is prepared...why not just put some thought into your game plan should this thing tank and if I'm wrong, you won't care after it RV's but if I'm right you'll be very thankful you had a plan in place...

[Dinarius Rucker]

It's none of my business, or anyone else's, how much money the rest of us have invested in the IQD.

However, assuming most of us have followed the advice of "don't invest more than you can afford to lose," I find it curious that the people who advocate for the position that equates to the least return on their/our investment (aka, the LOP) do so with such great passion.

Please explain WHY it is so important to you to defend your position, expending so much time and effort to do so, when you believe that your investment won't pan out the way you originally thought.

From a pure time management perspective, it doesn't make sense to me. Just askin'.

My take is that there are two reasons...

1) Some- and it is obvious who those few are, just love to be the antagonist. Whether they truly believe it or not,

it is just fun for them to swim upstream; and

2) Some people are just more comfortable hanging onto a worst-case scenario. If it doesn't turn out the way we

all hope, they can find comfort in saying "Well, I knew it!" Things coming out all rosy is just more than some can handle.

[TFK]

Nice statements people!!!

Very concise and right to the point. Only problem is the LOPSTERS just don't listen to your arguments. It's literally a waste of time to debate them as you will soon see on this post!

LOPSTERS, please go crawl under some rocks, way deep down in the sea, and don't come back up till this is all over.

You just bum everybody out! Thanks!!

[Dalite]

We all learn the best, from what affects us the most.

I can't address the term LOP.

That term is from the social engineering the Pumpers did to give such a negative connotation to anything other than RV that it would never receive rational discussion.

It was apparently very effective, from what we are currently witnessing.

I first drank deeply from the Pumper's Kool Aid. There was always a perceived need to purchase more Dinar, and quickly; as the RV was always eminent .

There was a clearly defined cycle of emotions that started just before payday, and deflated only momentarily at the first of the next week, only to be pumped up by the promise that the next weekend's RV would be bigger and better than last week's RV.

All the while, whenever the term RD was used, it was quickly termed to be the more socially acceptable L word, and all the leaders quickly assured a LOP would never happen.

They didn't lie. The L word gives plausible deniability. It deflects from the real world possibility of the more likely RD being the outcome.

Gradually, more and more thoughts defected back to the real world, and, timidly at first, the option of RD was introduced into discussion.

By then, the only accepted outcomes were RV or LOP.

Since the concept of RD was never allowed discussion, the gap widened; reinforcing the negativity of a RD by again only allowing it to be. Referred to as a LOP.

Now, the CBI is starting to get very specific in their news releases. They are beginning tp pierce the veil of the Pumper's Social Engineering.

Make no mistake, when this finalizes, and if it does turn out to be a RD, rather than a RV, a few things will happen.

First, folks will realize there was no chance of a LOP happening, as it is non statutory in definition.

There will be great despair; some will consider very dark decisions.

It goes downhill from there.

I cannot say with absolute certainty, which branch it will take - RV, or RD.

All I can do, as a caring human being, is to try to share what my research has led me to understand, reinforced by what the CBI has announced, and try to help soften the blow.

I hope to be able to apologize for every mention of RD, in-between great swells of ecstasy, if a straight RV occurs.

Believe me, nothing would give me greater pleasure.

In this, as in all things in life, we have hope for the best, but be prepared for the worst.

Even a RD, followed by eventual RV is still a great financial opportunity for profit.

I doubt this answers any questions, but my intentions are not profit driven, nor am I fulfilling any bent desire to cause others pain...

Like everyone else here, I am still seeking clarity...

[billio0]

Hello WesParsons,

I think you just made the point that we all consider so unpleasant and undesirable: you said, "When this thing LOP's," which is far different from IF THIS THING LOP's. You see, our counter-point is that you seem to view it as inevitable, while we do not. That is the biggest distinction between us, and why it tends to fuel such heated exchanges when the subject arises.

Might I suggest that you at least consider that it might not, and as a consequence begin to think a little more positive about it.

Thanks!

Edited June 24, 2011 by billio0

[HYDRANT]

YOU NO WHO CARES IF IT DOES OR DOESNT YOU CANT DO ANTHING ABOUT IT------LETS JUST WAIT AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS----YOU HAVE 4 CHOISES WHEN THIS BABY RV-S---LOOSE MONEY-----BREAK EVEN-----MAKE A LITTLE-------OR MAKE ALOT------AND GRINN EAR TO EAR AT ALL THE PEOPLE WHO SAID IT WAS A SCAM-----I FOR ONE WHANT TO LAUGH AT ALL THE PEOPLE WHO SAID IT WAS A SCAM------YOU HAFT TO TAKE A CHANCE SOME DAY IN LIFE AND I DID ON THIS ONE

[WesParsons]

But, it is still legal tender purchased legally with legal currency, and as such it must be honored by the issuing country based on the value they assigned to it before we bought it. And, if they intend to change its value to a lesser value for whatever reason, they must change the value of all of their currency in circulation accordingly, and cannot under any circumstances somehow single out that currency that we own and possess for a lesser value, but leave all the rest alone and intact; meaning that which is held by large investors, corporations, and most importantly, other governments.

As a believer in the LOP, I agree 100% with everything you've said above.

I believe we bought a legal tender

it will be honored by the issueing country

that they will change it's value at the same constant rate they change the value of all of their currency in circulation.

My additional points are that

Because they have the ability to change a currency's 'valuation' and 'denomination' they can and will remove the three 0's from their economic transactions by equating the existing larger denominations with their new lower denomination counterparts.

They will not keep both larger and smaller denominations in circulation and will remove the triple 0 currency's as they are collected.

They will remove 3 decimal places from all transactions, pricing, debits, credits and payments.

What used to cost 4,000 dinar will now cost 4

and you can either pay for it with 4 of the new 1dinar note

or 4 of the old 1000 dinar note

if you pay with a 5 dinar note or a 5000 dinar note your change could come back either as a 1 or a 1000 since they'll all be interchangeable yet equal

See, once the structure has been set it won't really matter if the retailer has all their old pricing switched over or not, it won't matter if you have all new currency or not, the raising of the 3 zero's makes it all irrelevant.

For example say you go into a store and buy something that currently sits on a shelf with a 9,000 dinar price tag on it.

Does that store have to re-price that product down to 9dinar? nope, just ignore the 0's

pay for it with 10 dinar or a 10K dinar note it won't make a difference

you could buy a product with a 9,000 price tag on it and pay with two new 5 dinar notes and get a 1000K note back as change...

the actual sticker no longer matters, once they throw the switch, the 3 zero's are ignored

Wes

Hello WesParsons,

I think you just made the point that we all consider so unpleasant and undesirable: you said, "When this thing LOP's," which is far different from IF THIS THING LOP's. You see, our counter-point is that you seem to view it as inevitable, while we do not. That is the biggest distinction between us, and why it tends to fuel such heated exchanges when the subject arises.

Might I suggest that you at least consider that it might not, and as a consequence begin to think a little more positive about it.

Thanks!

You're right, my bad. I hold dinar, have a stack on my desk I look at every day and hope and pray they run out of time to do anything but RV this thing! My life would be greatly improved.

I will pick and choose my words more carefully.

I know when it comes to discussing something that potentially shatters a persons dream or even puts them into a position of fear or worry the emotional side of the brain takes over and conversation goes backwards. If I trigger that with how I phrase my thoughts I'm negating the reason I engaged in the debate in the first place.

Wes

P.S. someone above mentioned that terminology is part of the issue, so for my purposes I've chosen the term "LOP' but believe that person to be more accurate with the term 're-denomination' . So if it's more effective to refer to it as RD instead of LOP, I'm fine with that because in my mind they mean the same thing.

Edited June 24, 2011 by WesParsons

[Stradergrl]

It's none of my business, or anyone else's, how much money the rest of us have invested in the IQD.

However, assuming most of us have followed the advice of "don't invest more than you can afford to lose," I find it curious that the people who advocate for the position that equates to the least return on their/our investment (aka, the LOP) do so with such great passion.

Please explain WHY it is so important to you to defend your position, expending so much time and effort to do so, when you believe that your investment won't pan out the way you originally thought.

From a pure time management perspective, it doesn't make sense to me. Just askin'.

EXACTLY how I feel!!!!!!

[billio0]

Hi again WesParsons,

Let me again try one last time here. These are your additional beliefs as stated:

"My additional points are that

Because they have the ability to change a currency's 'valuation' and 'denomination' they can and will remove the three 0's from their economic transactions by equating the existing larger denominations with their new lower denomination counterparts.

They will not keep both larger and smaller denominations in circulation and will remove the triple 0 currency's as they are collected.

They will remove 3 decimal places from all transactions, pricing, debits, credits and payments."

Read more:

You contend that both large and new smaller denominations of currency WILL NOT co-exist. Likwise, you believe that the large denoms we hold in our possession WILL NOT be exchanged by the CBI for smaller denoms of equal value, but shall instead simply lose their face value forever, and become one one-thousandth of their current worth. If this is true, then all dinar notes shall have a similar loss in value, which would in my opinion defeat the entire purpose of what Iraq is attempting to accomplish; namely to have an internationally recognized currency.

My larger point is that no matter what Iraq does with any new currency they put in circulation, the value of that which is already in circulation MUST TOO have adequate value. If it immediately becomes worthless by 1000%, this will signal to the world that they in fact have no intention of honoring their debt to all governments, and investors large and small that made it possible for them to ge to this point where they may again join in with the world community of nations in both trade and commerce. To not honor those debts is to say, THANKS SUCKERS! Our purchase/ownership of their existing currency is a promissory note from Iraq to honor the now existing value of that note. Any attempt to do otherwise shall not work; again, in my opinion.

And, I for one just don't buy it. Maybe I am a dreamer, but I think that I am not alone.

Thanks again!

[keepmwlknfny]

Its not a matter of defending it that it WILL happen....at least not for me....just a matter of discussing the possible outcomes and planning for every scenerio.....I dont know what will happen...I hope it doesnt RD...thats not what any of us want here...

Its also a matter of explaning to the people who have followed the gurus words too closely that RD do happen, and a RD is NOT out of the picture for the situation in Iraq....which is why this is not a guaranteed million dollar maker....

So yes, heated debates do occur on this subject because some want this to make us all millions so bad that they neglect to realize what COULD happen and they have had dreams of being rich drilled into their heads so much and for so long that they cant possibly acknowledge anything else happening...

I see many arguments for why they cannot RD and why they wont RD, simply come from false forum facts that have been passed around from site to site by many gurus to solidify this investment as to only one possible outcome....

Instead of some people verifying information for themselves and using a little bit of common sense with it, they just blindly accept whatever sounds good to be the absolute truth and nothing else....

Im simply hoping for the best, and planning for the worst....keeping a mind open to both sides of this investment....

So yes, I still spend a lot of time reading and browsing through the forums looking for just that one bit of information to arrive that will solidify this investment taking one direction over the other.....

[PapaJohn]

All we really know is that CBI has told us more than once they plan to RD in one way or the other. They have been leading the world to this point. Now I agree an RD is not the best news and would make all of us sit in this mess even longer to get some sort of return.

BUT, I ask myself “Self?” “Yes Self!?” “ If I were about to RV a country would I tell the world OR would I TRY and scare off most with RD talk, GOI instability, etc.?” “Would I tell the world the RD in about to go down so to not only prevent more $$$ from leaving the country but to also get some investors to dump their holding as fast as they can?!?!”

My answer to myself is that for one if I truly needed my $$$ back from this investment at this point with the news I know I would have those Dinar’s on Ebay before I finished this sentence. Secondly we all only know what we are told and I think there is still a chance that this may just work out but that just what I choose to believe.

Did you know:

The US in the past had $1,000 - $10,000 - $100,000 notes:

“series of 1934 $100,000 gold certificate. This is the highest-denomination note ever issued by the United States. These notes were only used in transactions between Federal Reserve banks up until the early 1960s. The largest notes ever to circulate publicly were $10,000 gold certificates and Federal Reserve notes.”

http://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/numismatics/moneyintrans/nncstory2b.htm

We know they are going to be introducing lower denoms because they just told us. So they release them and slip a little RV in there and then over time like with the US $10,000 notes they float in and are trashed. A $10,000 USD is still worth $10,000. I hope for all you Dinarians in the Universe that we have an RV. You all deserve it! ****End talk with self****

[WesParsons]

Billio

I believe both denominations will co-exist for however long it takes for the larger bills to be collected through the banking system as to remove them from circulation. As a business makes it's deposits, they will pull the larger bills and replace with smaller denomination ones.

My larger point is that no matter what Iraq does with any new currency they put in circulation, the value of that which is already in circulation MUST TOO have adequate value. If it immediately becomes worthless by 1000%, this will signal to the world that they in fact have no intention of honoring their debt to all governments, and investors large and small that made it possible for them to ge to this point where they may again join in with the world community of nations in both trade and commerce.

no no no. the debt has an associated value to it, but it's not defined by the printing on the money, it's defined by the value of the money

if I owe you 100.00 bucks it's a hundred bucks, doesn't matter if that's 5 20's or 100 singles or 400 quarters

I think I understand what you're saying (and maybe this is the crucial point at last)

What I hear you saying is that if they delete the 3 zero's the money is going to be even that much more worthless meaning:

today a 25,000 note has an exchange rate of 1170/1 would cost an american about 22 bucks (for arguements sake)

if they drop those zero's and make that 25K note only a 25 note that american investor now holds something worth only .22 cents

in essence making things much much worse than what they currently are and causing folks to need a ton of cash to do anything.

My understanding is that instead :

The raising of the 3 zero's is a decimal place issue.

Issuing a 25 dollar dinar and having that being equal to the current 25,000 dinar in value means also moving the other side of the exchange rate by 3 decimal points simultaneously.

The rate of exchange has to go up in order for that 25note to match the 25K note so that they can maintain the same value.

This is not a revaluation of the currency though, it's simply the math needed to maintain the current currency valuation.

Wes

[dinarck]

Well said Wes and Keep. My whole stance on this "LOP" thing is that it is what we are being told by the CBI. That is really the bottom line. Of course we don't want it to happen but we can't ignore it either. I guess some just enjoy being lied to constantly and feel that if they disagree with a RD then it won't happen. This whole notion of how we are the bad guys is stupidity. All I am trying to is open peoples eyes to the possibility. Some want to stay asleep and that is fine but I for one want to know what is going on whether it be bad or good. Some only want the good and pretend like there is no bad which is a joke.

[billio0]

Hi again WesParsons, and all those who agree with the LOP:

Your following point below is well made:

"My understanding is that instead :

The raising of the 3 zero's is a decimal place issue.

Issuing a 25 dollar dinar and having that being equal to the current 25,000 dinar in value means also moving the other side of the exchange rate by 3 decimal points simultaneously.

The rate of exchange has to go up in order for that 25note to match the 25K note so that they can maintain the same value.

This is not a revaluation of the currency though, it's simply the math needed to maintain the current currency valuation."

Wes

I have never disputed the possibility of an RD, or LOP actually happening. What I instead place my belief and hope in is the fact that Iraq is not independent of the world's governments when it comes to this issue. Their ability to change the value, or international exchange rate of their currency is not exclusive of those whom have made it possible all these years for them to do so. They all have much invested in Iraq, and in the case of our USA that is considerably more than a few billion US dollars. In fact, I venture to say that the bulk of the USA debt is due to the investment made in Iraq over these past 20 years, and certainly since 2003.

Thus, I have always said that no matter what happens with the IQD, the focus should be on how that new exchange rate affects those other countries in terms of lifting their own debt burdens. Yes, Iraq has had a very difficult time under UN sanctions, but then so have many of the largest and wealthiest countries in the world while shouldering the burden that Iraq presented. They have all waited patiently for Iraq to basically grow up and face its responsibilities to the world, yet they keep acting like small children afraid to make adult decisions. So, what has now happened is that the world governments have said enough is enough. We will again protect your DFI funds in our banks from outside claims, but your time to grow up is over. What I interpret that to mean is that payback time has arrived.

Now, we do know from articles and information posted here over the long haul that the intention has always been for Iraq to NOT have to pay back what they owe these countries with current monies or assets, but instead to use their hard assets such as oil & gas as collateral for future payment in a roundabout manner. Thus, their currency reserves would not be subject to significant claims for payment, and they instead could focus on rebuilding their infrastructure and economy simultaneously.

I'm sure most of you have heard this more than once, and as I am not an expert on anything but myself, I read what comes down the pike just as you do. Anyway, as I have always seen this investment, the key lies not in any other factor or intel/rumor from a GURU, but in what the largest group of investors involved in the country of Iraq stand to gain, and when. We as the smallest of investors shall gain likewise when the big hitters do, and in a similar manner, meaning not by one percentage point less than they do, based upon what we individually own of their currency. What I mean here is that we cannot be singled out in any meaningful way to receive less value for our investment than anyone else, at least as best I can figure out.

The date of June 30, 2011 has been set as the date for Iraq to basically grow up and take full responsibility for its DFI funds, its citizens, and most importantly, its obligation to us all who have provided funding and support to them these many years. To have them only make a move to help themselves exclusive of those who made this possible is the crux of my position for no LOP. To LOP is to say we the leaders of Iraq, whether CBI or GOI, do not care what help you provided us. We are now free of you, and could care less whether you lose a dime or a dollar in heping us all these years. That, I believe would be the beginning of the end for Iraq. In other words, to LOP is to lose everything they have now, because the world shall not wait much longer, nor will its own citizens!

Thanks again for bearing with me, all.

Edited June 25, 2011 by billio0