friedcat may want to clearly make a statement on how he wants to implement this (200k:165k or 200k:200k with delayed dividend), before he prepares the next dividend payments and signs off the financial statements.
If this is in fact the position of the company, awesome. It is good to finally have clarification on that point.
Obviously I can't speak for the founders, since I am only an investor myself. Furthermore the original contract is a bit fuzzy on that point, to say the least. But merging unsold shares with the ownership of the founders after the fact would be rather unconventional. Usually any fund raising or IPO is undertaken by third parties (e.g. underwriters), which also commit to eating the stock if the offering is undersubscribed. Now one could argue that the IPO was not undersubscribed but closed early (due to meeting the USD target, not the bitcoin target), which changes the dynamic. It's a legal mess, but given that the company was heavily undervalued in hindsight should ease the pain.
Nevertheless, bitfountain has to decide how they want to handle the issue. Putting the unsold shares on neutral ground (i.e. make it retained earnings dividend) would be the diplomatic solution.