LOL. Now all of a sudden usagi's backtracking in its other threads and talking about actually claiming on the insurance.
Let's have a quote and comment on it :
...
Guess what puppet, it's not my job to donate personal money to BMF. I do it because I love my shareholders. But I do not love you because you are an evil troll. You are banned from posting on this thread, and your post will be deleted. If you keep posting here I really hope you get banned from the forums.
Couldnt you repair BMF NAV using the insurance it supposedly holds with CPA ?
If not , why not ?
Let's look at two scenarios.
1. Under the contract BMF and CPA can choose to accelerate their obligations to the point where the contract expires. In this case BMF would owe CPA exactly 10 bitcoins. I could do that (and I have stated I have -- although I have not made an exact accounting of it, the figure should be very close to that).
2. CPA could easily "give 100 bitcoins" by returning 200 shares of BMF to BMF. Hell, it could easily give 1,000 shares to BMF (500 bitcoins value). What would this accomplish? Well, CPA would get the money back yes, but it would weaken CPA and indebit BMF to CPA for 2 years. The BMF share price would go up but BMF has been around 0.5 for 2 months now. BMF has a plan for increasing in value. I don't think it is really necessary.
Actually now that you have made me think about it a little more, this looks like the kind of thing a motion could solve.
Do you think I should put this up as a BMF motion? Technically it's BMF that would have to ask for the insurance. I just don't think it's worthwhile to do.
How about option 3:
3. CPA pays BMF 500 bitcoins now. BMF pays its premiums per schedule and in the meantime uses the 500 BTC to make profit.
If BMF can't make profit with bitcoins then what the fuck is it doing in business in the first place? At best the contract was only ever a low-interest loan (as the premiums add up to more than the cover) - so at least take the little bit of benefit the contract entitles BMF to.
And if you take option 1. then here's a summary of how the insurance works out:
If BMF NAV stayed above 1, BMF pays 550 BTC to CPA over 2 years.
If BMF NAV falls below 1, they don't claim from CPA because umm, because well, because it really isn't worht it as they could just give the money back and call it quits.
Wow! What brilliant value that contract would be for BMF - if they're lucky (NAV stays above 1) they lose 550 BTC and if they're unlucky (NAV falls below 1) they only lose 50 BTC. Good job they have such a clever person running them, with no conflicts of interest whatsoever. With a less biased incompetent person in charge they could have mistakenly claimed on their insurance policy when they were entitled to and had cash now.
And option 2.? It's not really worth claiming for?
Let me get this straight. USAGI wrote and signed an insurance policy committing BMF to 550 in premiums. But USAGI ITSELF is saying the policy isn't worth claiming on? Am I really reading that right? Is Usagi really saying that it fucked up so bad that it committed to spending 550 BTC on something of zero value? And bear in mind that if claiming on it now is "not really worth it" then claiming on it later in the contract would be worth even less.
The contract was for 100 BTC payments. The contract even spells out the address to which those coins should be sent and that their amounts should have 12 satoshis added to them to clarify and make transparent their purpose. THAT is the means by which a claim should be settled.
Is usagi trying to audition for BOTH lead roles in a sequel to Dumb and Dumber or something?