Why this part is not being mentioned at all in the OP? Is the initial capital at risk? Is there a certain minimum percentage of profits guaranteed whatsoever? (regardless of the "expected" returns) In the worst-case scenario a package containing our inventory is intercepted and stolen. In this case we should have insurance of the sticker value of the inventory. In the second worst-case we get a law-suit, which would cripple and put a stop to our operation ASAP. Catching a law-suit would be a nightmare to deal with, but so long as the op stays below the radar I personally don't think we will get a law-suit. Third worst-case is the payment processor freezes or blocks our accounts with our money still trapped inside. This would be a devastating blow to the operation. In-terms of risk. I feel that it's a mixed bag. I have proven my method works with prior testing, I encountered some problems but I have reiterated and made my method even more stable since the first iteration. The inventory is solid 18K gold and in the event of insolvency the gold can be sold at spot and recuperate between 60 to 70% of the monetary capital.   Sounds good, thank you for the elaboration! If the project does not stay below the radar, and we get a law-suit, are "we" (ie. the investors, aka funders) will also included in that law-suit? (that someone might possibly fill out -if I understood this correctly- if we do not manage to stay below the radar)?
Why this part is not being mentioned at all in the OP? Is the initial capital at risk? Is there a certain minimum percentage of profits guaranteed whatsoever? (regardless of the "expected" returns) In the worst-case scenario a package containing our inventory is intercepted and stolen. In this case we should have insurance of the sticker value of the inventory. In the second worst-case we get a law-suit, which would cripple and put a stop to our operation ASAP. Catching a law-suit would be a nightmare to deal with, but so long as the op stays below the radar I personally don't think we will get a law-suit. Third worst-case is the payment processor freezes or blocks our accounts with our money still trapped inside. This would be a devastating blow to the operation. In-terms of risk. I feel that it's a mixed bag. I have proven my method works with prior testing, I encountered some problems but I have reiterated and made my method even more stable since the first iteration. The inventory is solid 18K gold and in the event of insolvency the gold can be sold at spot and recuperate between 60 to 70% of the monetary capital.   Sounds good, thank you for the elaboration! If the project does not stay below the radar, and we get a law-suit, are "we" (ie. the investors, aka funders) will also included in that law-suit? (that someone might possibly fill out -if I understood this correctly- if we do not manage to stay below the radar)?

Why this part is not being mentioned at all in the OP? Is the initial capital at risk? Is there a certain minimum percentage of profits guaranteed whatsoever? (regardless of the "expected" returns) In the worst-case scenario a package containing our inventory is intercepted and stolen. In this case we should have insurance of the sticker value of the inventory. In the second worst-case we get a law-suit, which would cripple and put a stop to our operation ASAP. Catching a law-suit would be a nightmare to deal with, but so long as the op stays below the radar I personally don't think we will get a law-suit. Third worst-case is the payment processor freezes or blocks our accounts with our money still trapped inside. This would be a devastating blow to the operation. In-terms of risk. I feel that it's a mixed bag. I have proven my method works with prior testing, I encountered some problems but I have reiterated and made my method even more stable since the first iteration. The inventory is solid 18K gold and in the event of insolvency the gold can be sold at spot and recuperate between 60 to 70% of the monetary capital.   Sounds good, thank you for the elaboration! If the project does not stay below the radar, and we get a law-suit, are "we" (ie. the investors, aka funders) will also included in that law-suit? (that someone might possibly fill out -if I understood this correctly- if we do not manage to stay below the radar)?

Why this part is not being mentioned at all in the OP? Is the initial capital at risk? Is there a certain minimum percentage of profits guaranteed whatsoever? (regardless of the "expected" returns) In the worst-case scenario a package containing our inventory is intercepted and stolen. In this case we should have insurance of the sticker value of the inventory. In the second worst-case we get a law-suit, which would cripple and put a stop to our operation ASAP. Catching a law-suit would be a nightmare to deal with, but so long as the op stays below the radar I personally don't think we will get a law-suit. Third worst-case is the payment processor freezes or blocks our accounts with our money still trapped inside. This would be a devastating blow to the operation. In-terms of risk. I feel that it's a mixed bag. I have proven my method works with prior testing, I encountered some problems but I have reiterated and made my method even more stable since the first iteration. The inventory is solid 18K gold and in the event of insolvency the gold can be sold at spot and recuperate between 60 to 70% of the monetary capital.   Sounds good, thank you for the elaboration! If the project does not stay below the radar, and we get a law-suit, are "we" (ie. the investors, aka funders) will also included in that law-suit? (that someone might possibly fill out -if I understood this correctly- if we do not manage to stay below the radar)?