Quote from: raskul on June 04, 2014, 07:04:37 AM

Quote from: Ozziecoin on June 04, 2014, 07:01:11 AM

Quote from: raskul on June 04, 2014, 06:10:01 AM

Quote from: RoadStress on June 04, 2014, 06:07:07 AM

Quote from: Ozziecoin on June 04, 2014, 05:49:43 AM

My board contact says FC intends to flood market.

Let's see if he succeeds with last years power consumption chips.

he is, in essence; succeeding so far... ploughing other peoples dividends into a long... yellow brick road and giving no update or explanation as to why he thinks this is prudent.

"I had your dividends, but I spent them." is as much as I can decipher so far, from this particular debacle.

I have never personally met the man, yet I trust him more than anyone else I've met in bitcoin land or anywhere else. It's strange even to me. Judge a man by his actions, not his words.

and if there are no words, is that not a silent action? not that it really matters, at the end of the day, an investment is an investment; hadn't there been dates announced as to when dividends would start moving? or was that date announcements to tell you there would be date announcements (confusing inasmuch as the actions (not words) served nothing but to merely have caused confusion.)

Can you read?? The May 27th div date was a miscommunication from a board member to the thread. He later corrected it by posting part of the board meeting. FC never set a div date and the aggressive dividends were mentioned by another board member. FC just proposed a split.

See this quote.

Quote from: Jutarul on June 02, 2014, 12:06:24 AM

Gentlemen,

don't get carried away by speculating on the quality of communication by friedcat. As pointed out multiple times, due to the nature of the operation there is little incentive to do extensive IR, other than the necessary accounting and communication through shareholder representatives (board). Instead the focus is on the core business. Friedcat decided to not pass the statements by the board first, but instead releasing them to the public directly.

Regarding the often quoted "aggressive dividends":
Let me take the blame here, because these are not friedcats words. Also I think there is massive confusion about what "aggressive" actually means. Thus let me remove any ambiguity by posting the text from the respective communication:

Code:

(BoardMember1) so I underatand that the next payments to the shareholders shoudl happen in May....
(BoardMember2) regarding dividends, do you have a target for retained earnings vs. dividends?
(BoardMember2) if retained earnings is high we need to consider the security mechanisms for the company treasury.
(FC) At most 1:2. Most retained are for short-time spendings (license, wafer/components order). There are no long-time plan of retaining since we won't buy land/bond/etc.
(BoardMember2) Alternatively AM could get "invested" in related businesses
(BoardMember2) If no opportunities exist I agree to an aggressive dividend schedule

As you can see there is no determination of timing other than FC's statement that short-term spendings need to be covered. The "aggressiveness" describes the overall split between retaining and paying out. That said, even board members assumed that dividends would resume in May with a 1:2 split of retained:payout.

Finally, I am shocked by the amount of outrage caused by what could be considered an uneducated interpretation of some raw data. The resemblance of this being a deliberate attempt to prey on the lack of insight and patience of new investors is strong. As pointed out previously, the financials are hard to read without context and further explanations.

I am committed to provide further information as it becomes available. However, some of the information which is important for company valuation is actually also crucial to pricing sales and thus falls within the realm of confidential information. Thus you cannot expect that this kind of information be released to the public. Anything else would be a level of transparency which is rather uncommon in these industries.