Quote from: iCEBREAKER on October 15, 2014, 09:49:56 PM

1. Can ID use its hashpower and CKpool expertise to start a competitor to ghash.io, or does Con's refusal to support Namecoin merged mining prevent us from offering comparative returns?

I expect Willem to address this aspect when he comes around to provide updates on the pool development. So far I have not seen any development which would offer a comparative offer to ghash.io.

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on October 15, 2014, 09:49:56 PM

2. Who paid for the Cryptomex trading platform fiasco?

The question whether IceDrill funds were used will be covered by the internal audit.

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on October 15, 2014, 09:49:56 PM

3. What happened to our $400k investment in Cointerra stock? Despite dropt's whining this

To my knowledge Digimex still owns its share of Cointerra stock.

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on October 15, 2014, 09:49:56 PM

Quote from: iCEBREAKER on August 12, 2013, 02:29:36 PM

DT, can we order some Cointerra chips too, as a hedge in case Hashfast is delayed or misses spec?

turned out to be a good idea, as they are going to launch a sub-28nm chip, have a spiffy Dell colo, haven't declared bankruptcy, etc. Grin

In terms of BTC, Cointerra was not a good decision. Cointerra was acquired at peak level BTC valuation.

Quote from: WillMilk4Coin on October 16, 2014, 04:50:31 AM

Talk about poor decisions mating with bad luck and having an ugly baby. To argue now that putting all your btc in one HF basket was a bad idea, or exactly when shareholders agreed to funding the development of a pool, or the feeling of being mislead in that a reasonably priced hosting contract had already been secured at IPO launch -or at least why a query for a facility wasn't put out to invested parties when failure was realized is all now moot, however disgustingly frustrating it is. As somewhat concerning our point of contact shifting to some surprise anon may be, the update you've provided is very appreciated. So thank you for that.

Breaking the silence is part of a deescalation strategy I've recommended for a while now. So far no plausible reason was offered for not communicating transparently. Note that it requires some character to come out in January and tell your own investors that you've screwed up a 20,000 BTC deal. Between January and June, Willem still hoped that HashFast would turn around and help them achieving a ROI for investors, but you know the end of that story. The other issues which became apparent with Willem and Ludvig is that self-imposed deadlines are not being observed, which leads to assumptions of bad faith where none should exist.

Quote from: WillMilk4Coin on October 16, 2014, 04:50:31 AM

Quote

maintain the current funds (https://blockchain.info/address/3N9MiKtPiAShS8tJMTpYocXTXRBSkQ2rpg)

~In July we were told ID had accumulated 720 bitcoin. Now, we've got a brand new address with a balance down nearly 200 bitcoin from just over 2 months ago. Not to intentionally sound like an a**hole, but appropriately maintained funds? The machines were still on, yes? I guess this isn't so much of a question, but I expect this sanitized audit will shed some light on who we've been paying and why our balances are going down?

Note that Willem was drawing two salaries from the funds and that some billing items had to be covered. This likely resulted in a short term negative cash flow of maybe 100 BTC between the time of your post and now. On Oct 9, there were still some funds (~75 BTC) allocated for upcoming expenses (25), a reward reserve (25) and as a pool buffer (25).
The internal audit will shine light on this issues. The term "appropriately" simply means that the funds were not used on non-business related items - it doesn't necessarily imply "good use" of funds. Digimex and its officers are still liable for code of conduct.

Quote from: WillMilk4Coin on October 16, 2014, 04:50:31 AM

Quote

Thus, the equipment is currently migrated towards a low-cost mining environment and is expected to yield a positive cash flow for the remainder of its existing lifetime.

~Are the machines currently in this new facility -or in the process of being moved? What is the anticipated remaining lifetime?

25% of the machines are currently in transit to the new location. 75% of the machines will reside at the location in Montreal until Dec.7, when the contract expires, after which they will also be shipped.

Quote from: WillMilk4Coin on October 16, 2014, 04:50:31 AM

~Will distributions be withheld until the audit is complete and the HF bankruptcy comes to a resolution?

The current proposal is to pay out on a fixed schedule (e.g. 50BTC/month) once the audit is sufficiently completed and the shareholder information is consolidated.