Usagi is only entitled to his percentage of the equipment not 100%. He cant take the entire amount but has to divide it equally amongst existing shareholders.
He basically stole 30% or whatever percentage of shares he doesnt own.
Somewhat true. Shareholders only get a distribution from any surplus left after all other debts have been satisfied unless they have a secured or preferential interest. So even if usagi is the major shareholder, all other debts of the entity in question need to be satisfied before he can receive
his share of the surplus. All creditors within the same class must be treated equally.
I think in this instance there may be no other debts. The mining gear was BMF's - and they had no disclosed debts. The debts were all CPA's/usagi's own (no way to seperate the two).
The preferential treatment of one shareholder (usagi) over the rest is nothing new. One of usagi's favourite tricks was inflating the price of its own shares (easy to do due to the perverse valuation method used) then buying its own shares back at its own claimed full value, without the same being extended to others. Or at the other end of the scale making a statement in the CPA thread bout how (paraphrasing as cba to find copy of original) "if more people default on us CPA will have nothing left", then buying up shares people panic sold, BRAGGING about getting those shares cheap, then announcing that after all there wasn't a risk of going bust and all was good. And it actually seemed to think doing that was perfectly fine.
I notice in the last mentions usagi made about the BMF insurance thing (in theory BMF is still owed 500 BTC from CPA for that - or would be if usagi ever made a claim against CPA on BMF's behalf) that it's now back to its initial explanation (only eventually made a few months after I raised it - te claims it had been explained multiple times are just outright lies) that the contract was somehow just a "test" - though why BMF needed to actually pay premiums or the shareholders had to be told insurance cover was in place for this "test" to work was never made clear. But if someone has a look in the last posts usagi made on that topic before GLBSE died (posts ofc are now deleted) you'd find that usagi was at the stage of admitting that the BTC was in theory owed and actually talking about various ways to address it - including CPA returning its shares in BMF to BMF. The argument against this (by usagi) was basically that it would hurt CPA - as ever, consistently failing to seperate duties to different entities and advising BMF shareholders based on CPA's interests.