Quote from: Giray on January 20, 2015, 07:11:07 AM

You obviously do not understand the meaning of the word "fact" Wink

And what are the facts?

That's why in this case was the issue Cointerra on Picostocks?
As if you did not try to explain it any "version" does not explain the issue, as it perfectly explains the acquisition 28nm technology. For the 100th shareholders' money.
This is confirmed by Leszek entry in this topic in which he writes that looks ready 28nm technology in order to acquire it.
Is my investment decision was bad? I bought shares when it was not yet announced the delay and mine was to be launched in July 2013.
Global hashrate then was 223.746 GH / s, which is an additional 100,000 GH / s constitute 44% of the Global Hashrate. Mining with Global Hashrate 518.000 was finally launched on 15 December 2013. At that time the Global Hashrate was already 6,502,229 GH / s, of which 44% after deduction would be 2,633,060 Hashrate 100th GH / s. And that should be the finally power of the 100th, does not have any 518.000 GH / s.
Most plunges Picostocks management and sale of shares of MBP 0.30 BTC at the time when they knew that they would delay the project (insiding trader) and sale of equipment designed initially for 100th in the market, which resulted in delays

And more...

im starting to think you are thick - you keep bouncing from MBP to dave to lezsec to cointerra to picostocks. your class-action against this cluster of companies will be laughed out of any law office (unless you are paying them, in which case theyll happily listen to you rant for $100/hr)

1) cointerra is on picostocks. MBP does not operate picostocks. MBP is not cointerra.
2) why would bitfury buy 28nm hardware from conterra when the bitfury 55nm design is better than the cointerra 55nm design?

you say you bought shares prior to July 2013 - if you look at your calander its now Janruary 2015, about 18mos later. The fact that now is when you decide to make a fuss is just moronic because as i said earlier, the 100TH shares are now worth less than 1% of thier initial value.

stop crying about this because your argument is a joke. unless you can clearly state in paragraph (or point) form what you think is owed to you and why - I'm out of here. at this point you're begging for scraps. what's your claim for? $500?