Quote from: will on August 13, 2013, 02:41:08 AM

Quote from: Deprived on August 13, 2013, 02:01:07 AM

Would suggest you get DT or someone to confirm that issuers don't keep (or receive as 'management fees') any IPO funds (they're all used to grow the mine)

Confirmed (see FAQ 2, Q4).

Quote from: Deprived on August 13, 2013, 02:01:07 AM

before repeating again that they don't receive anything until investors have recouped their investment.

See IPO wording @ bottom:
Clause added in benefit of public shareholders
No dividends will be paid to the holders of private shares until holders of public shares have received an accumulated dividend of 0.0016 BitCoin per share.

Quote from: Deprived on August 13, 2013, 02:01:07 AM

As the issuers have never claimed or committed to that...

This statement is factually incorrect.

Think we're talking at cross-purposes.

You're talking about what happens with mining revenue - and payments to shareholders from profits. I'm talking about what happens with funds raised from IPO.

It has nothing at all to do with dividends. What happens with funds raised from IPO varies (especially around here):

Sometimes the shares are sold directly by the company - and funds raised become the property of the company (and thus used to the benefit of teh company).
Sometimes the shares are treated as being sold by a previous owner - and so go the that owner (the issuer).
Other times it's a mix of the two.

My concern was (and remains) that the last is the case - that investors don't actually get the benefit of all funds raised from IPO. I asked a few questions about this pages back but received no reply. There's more to it than just whether immediate cash benefit is taken - such as whether other revenue from secondary usage of facilities is also treated as profit for investors.

One of the reason I had the concern was because no disclosure was being made of how much was raised from sale of private shares. That lack of disclosure made no sense IF all funds raised were being used for the company - as the amount raised from sale of private shares would HAVE to end up being made public whenever first accounts were produced (even if not disclosed as a liine item it could be worked out by subtracting the value of public sales from the total listed IPO revenue).

Another reason is simply that other IPOs have gone that route - raising $X then giving investors $X/Y (Y being >1) worth of assets in return.

A final reason was the repeated reference to fixed number of hashes per share - which makes no sense when the final performance of the hardware isn't known.

But I asked my questions before so don't really want to keep repeating them if they aren't going to be answered - there were other issues I raised such as the degree of care that had been taken when agreeing contracts for delivery of hardware.