Talk:The Million Pound Note
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Will Sandberg in topic Ponzi scheme?
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Isn't that a Ponzi-scheme?--80.141.219.160 (talk) 16:45, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- No. The businesses that Adams patronized did not invest any money with him, nor did they expect to get back more than the fair value of their goods/services. They just gave him stuff on credit. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- But nothing of all that money really belongs to him. And this cannot go on forever. If not a Ponzi-scheme, then what is his method called? It strongly reminds me of the crisis we are currently facing worldwide.--80.141.201.141 (talk) 22:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- In a Ponzi scheme, the crook gets money which he is supposed to invest, with the promise of a fat return. Adams only got products and services and he did not offer to later pay more than they were worth. He was just buying on credit. It wasn't all that different from using a credit card. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- The gold mine is a textbook example of a pump and dump stock swindle, "artificially inflating the price of an owned stock through false and misleading positive statements, in order to sell the cheaply purchased stock at a higher price." After incurring at least 6000 pounds in debts (the equivalent of a million dollars today) which he had no way to pay back, he got stock with borrowed money, drove the price up to 20,000 pounds, telling the "widows" to "buy, buy, buy," while he was selling. Will Sandberg (talk) 04:20, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
- In a Ponzi scheme, the crook gets money which he is supposed to invest, with the promise of a fat return. Adams only got products and services and he did not offer to later pay more than they were worth. He was just buying on credit. It wasn't all that different from using a credit card. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- But nothing of all that money really belongs to him. And this cannot go on forever. If not a Ponzi-scheme, then what is his method called? It strongly reminds me of the crisis we are currently facing worldwide.--80.141.201.141 (talk) 22:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Value
editJust for anyone interested, £1,000,000 back in 1903 would have been worth about $4,000,000 at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.40.250.239 (talk) 22:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Equally of interest - how much would it be worth as of 2010 ?
- I tried the "inflation calculator" at the website http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/historic-inflation-calculator
- ( This requires 2 steps: one for years up to 1971, and one for years 1971 to 2008. )
- 1 million pounds in 1903 - adjusted for inflation - has a 2008 value of... £1,028,865,800... that's one Billion... with a B
- He is promised "a job" if he does not spend the note within 1 month...
- but in 1903, what "job" - even if worked a lifetime - is going to net £1M ?
- 86.25.120.64 (talk) 10:18, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
BBC says the 1954 movie is “The Million Dollar Note”
editBy the way: A BBC story headed “Who, What, Why: Could the US get a $1tn platinum coin?” at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20951417
solemnly says that the 1954 movie’s title is “The Million Dollar Note” yet cutely provides a hyperlink to the present Wikipedia article headed “The Million Pound Note” as if nobody will notice the discrepancy.
Not even the title that Mark Twain gave to his short story mentions “dollar”.
Let’s see whether the BBC issues a correction.