Quote from: Vbs on July 02, 2013, 12:11:05 AM

I understand that there is always a good possibility that new assets are scams, but there has to be a line in the sand for considering that it may indeed not be a scam.

I only expect that once more confirmed info comes out about AMC, the first-impression of Ken being a scammer can be retracted.

Thinking everything is a scam/lie is just as bad as thinking everything is trustworthy.

Quote from: friedcat on August 09, 2012, 08:18:17 AM

Q: Why could I trust you?
A: In principle, like scientific theories, trustworthiness can only be
disproved. However some facts might contribute to more confidence: My ID, phone and email have all
been verified in GLBSE. I started running the fund called MU on GLBSE before it updated to version
2. I am also responsible for the GLBSE-listed bond MOORE.

I don't think it's a scam. I think Ken intends to do what he says. But if he succeeds, he will profit handsomely, and shareholders will see no capital gains, and greatly diluted dividends. And even a few mis-steps will leave buyers at todays level (0.001 ) with losses.

Here's a few things Ken has done that Friedcat did not:

1. Pass the IP paid for by stockholders to his own company in exchange for a pittance of a royalty
2. Mark up the assets of his company 35x before offering shares
3. Hire a PR person with a history of scamming people
4. Claim that his company will mine more bitcoins than are available
5. Post lies about his business relationships (e-ASIC is not a major semiconductor company by any metric)