Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 28 results by Juzzers
Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It
Lol, *I* invested in AM? And on Havelock?
P.S: If you're happy with turning 4.5 BTC into 0.25 BTC, I doubt we have much in common. I'm happy making money, you're happy losing it. Spectacularly.
Vive la difference, I suppose.
P.S: If you're happy with turning 4.5 BTC into 0.25 BTC, I doubt we have much in common. I'm happy making money, you're happy losing it. Spectacularly.
Vive la difference, I suppose.
Wow, what a pompous, sad excuse for a human being.
Ignored.
Conventional banking is as dead as a dodo.
Reeeeeeally?
May I ask what is the name of your planet?
Here on a planet called "Earth" there are lots and lots of banks which do a fair bit of business. I don't think any sane person thinks they are all going to magically disappear overnight.
...
Obviously the question is one of reserve ratios. The FDIC you put your unfounded faith in has reserves to cover 0.68% of deposits.
The issue with fiat is not that there isn't enough - it's that too much is printed and faith in it is lost as a crack up boom ensues and the mass of people suddenly realise their mass produced currency is headed into a downward spiral and dump it in favour of unprintable assets.
...
Obviously the question is one of reserve ratios. The FDIC you put your unfounded faith in has reserves to cover 0.68% of deposits.
The issue with fiat is not that there isn't enough - it's that too much is printed and faith in it is lost as a crack up boom ensues and the mass of people suddenly realise their mass produced currency is headed into a downward spiral and dump it in favour of unprintable assets.
...
The .68% figure seems unreasonable to you? Why? Because the FDIC has often failed to make whole the users of collapsed banks?
It is not just the FDIC, though. The entire financial might of the US of A that is threatened when banks fail.
With NeoBee Danny? Not so much
Anyhow, bitcoin financial institutions had a less-then-stellar track record, starting with the awesome Pirateat40's Bitcoin Savings and Trust and recently punctuated by Tradefortress and Ukyo.
But this time it's different.
But we've gotten pretty far off-topic. Danny *wants* to buy into a fiat bank. So you'll take on the risks of *that* bank, too
The too big to fail banks, which are now even bigger, will cause the whole US system to fall over and many other big international banks - and so FDIC covering 0.68% of deposits is a joke. It gives a completely false impression that deposits in these institutions are safe.
However, this does not mean every bank carries the same level of risk. On the contrary when faith is lost in over-leveraged casino banks, people tend to put money into smaller, more local banks.
Therefore the question is entirely about which bank Danny wants to hold a stake in, its levels of leverage and how risky its assets are. What I'm saying is, that could be a far safer prospect than any FDIC insured bank.
A great example is the Bank of North Dakota - a small state owned bank which suffered absolutely no problems during the 2008 financial crises. Why? Because it was a small, safe bank.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/03/how-nation%E2%80%99s-only-state-owned-bank-became-envy-wall-street
I live in the states. FDIC. Trust my bank just a smidgen more than some d00d from Cyprus - the home of secure banking
But you go right ahead and invest.
*Danny's also buying into a plain old fiat bank, so if you're worried about real banks going tits up, you've bet on the wrong horse
But you go right ahead and invest.
*Danny's also buying into a plain old fiat bank, so if you're worried about real banks going tits up, you've bet on the wrong horse
"Yes, the Federal Government (via the FDIC) insures deposits in most institutions up to $250,000. But there is a problem with this insurance. The FDIC currently has far less money in its fund than it has insured deposits: as of Sept. 1, about $41 billion in reserve against $6 trillion in insured deposits."
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-31/why-harvard-economist-pulling-all-his-money-bank-america
The company that insures my car would also fail if every car it insured killed a pedestrian and got sued.
It's frightening that i have to explain the basics of life to the budding financiers on this thread.
Anyhow, the tinfoil hatters here think that more fiat gets printed by teh bankers whenever shit hits the fan. So how is it possible for the bankers to not have enough fiat? They borked the presses?
Obviously the question is one of reserve ratios. The FDIC you put your unfounded faith in has reserves to cover 0.68% of deposits.
The issue with fiat is not that there isn't enough - it's that too much is printed and faith in it is lost as a crack up boom ensues and the mass of people suddenly realise their mass produced currency is headed into a downward spiral and dump it in favour of unprintable assets.
http://www.paulnathan.biz/commentaries/18-the-crack-up-boom.html
I live in the states. FDIC. Trust my bank just a smidgen more than some d00d from Cyprus - the home of secure banking
But you go right ahead and invest.
*Danny's also buying into a plain old fiat bank, so if you're worried about real banks going tits up, you've bet on the wrong horse
But you go right ahead and invest.
*Danny's also buying into a plain old fiat bank, so if you're worried about real banks going tits up, you've bet on the wrong horse
"Yes, the Federal Government (via the FDIC) insures deposits in most institutions up to $250,000. But there is a problem with this insurance. The FDIC currently has far less money in its fund than it has insured deposits: as of Sept. 1, about $41 billion in reserve against $6 trillion in insured deposits."
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-31/why-harvard-economist-pulling-all-his-money-bank-america
Time to finally say something with my lurker account...
I think Havelock CaVirtex (VTX) holders are about to see price collapse. Why?
Exit price is fixed at $30 a share.
Above, user freedomno1 linked to a copy of the original prospectus:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=218435.msg3958831#msg3958831
From the prospectus on page 10:
" 5 The share price will be fixed at $30 CAD per share (due to our Canadian dollar valuation) but priced in BTC. At the time of this writing [March 18, 2013] using an exchange rate of $46.875 CAD/BTC one share will cost 0.64 BTC. The BTC price will change on Havelock every hour as the BTC/CAD exchange rate changes."
VTX will be converted into physical non-tradeable certificates,
The value of the securities which these will be converted into is fixed in the articles of incorporation at $30 CAD, and they are non-tradeable. From Havelock: "to enable holders at the Effective Time to receive physical share certificates... The shares represented by the share certificates are not, and will not be for the foreseeable future, listed on a stock exchange and are subject to transfer restrictions under applicable securities laws."
https://www.havelockinvestments.com/fund.php?symbol=VTX
Current price of VTX at Havelock?
BTC 0.14 (~$118.48)
"Adjusted" exit price?
BTC 0.032ish is 30 Canadian dollars in BTC per share...
An 80% loss instantly vacuuming up all the unprotected shareholder value.
Wow...
I think Havelock CaVirtex (VTX) holders are about to see price collapse. Why?
Exit price is fixed at $30 a share.
Above, user freedomno1 linked to a copy of the original prospectus:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=218435.msg3958831#msg3958831
From the prospectus on page 10:
" 5 The share price will be fixed at $30 CAD per share (due to our Canadian dollar valuation) but priced in BTC. At the time of this writing [March 18, 2013] using an exchange rate of $46.875 CAD/BTC one share will cost 0.64 BTC. The BTC price will change on Havelock every hour as the BTC/CAD exchange rate changes."
VTX will be converted into physical non-tradeable certificates,
The value of the securities which these will be converted into is fixed in the articles of incorporation at $30 CAD, and they are non-tradeable. From Havelock: "to enable holders at the Effective Time to receive physical share certificates... The shares represented by the share certificates are not, and will not be for the foreseeable future, listed on a stock exchange and are subject to transfer restrictions under applicable securities laws."
https://www.havelockinvestments.com/fund.php?symbol=VTX
Current price of VTX at Havelock?
BTC 0.14 (~$118.48)
"Adjusted" exit price?
BTC 0.032ish is 30 Canadian dollars in BTC per share...
An 80% loss instantly vacuuming up all the unprotected shareholder value.
Wow...
Actually the 30 CAD share price is in reference to if CaVirtex is bought out. But there is no indication they are being bought out.
In fact they appear to have simply breached this part of the prospectus (the one they subsequently tried to hide):
Once the IPO is sold out, these shares can be traded on HAVELOCK at user determined prices.
If anyone is a lawyer or knows one familiar with Canadian law perhaps they could contact me or comment on what appears to be a breach of contract. It seems to me that they cannot delist from Havelock without being open to being sued?
Fantastic - not a shred of useful information on the delisting.
Absolutely great - I am so glad I invested in this.
I notice the question of WHEN the IPO document was removed from Havelock has been avoided. This was done a long time before the delisting was announced. That certainly seems like a deceitful action and a deceitful answer.
Absolutely great - I am so glad I invested in this.
I notice the question of WHEN the IPO document was removed from Havelock has been avoided. This was done a long time before the delisting was announced. That certainly seems like a deceitful action and a deceitful answer.
Joseph David: "Firstly I would like to assure everyone that there is no mal-intent in this decision. I will be posting additional details about this decision and answers to many questions on the Havelock site early next week and before trading resumes. Please feel free to e-mail me your questions directly to joseph@cavirtex.com. I will not respond individually, instead I will group questions together and post the questions and answers on the Havelock page for VTX. I will also have further details and clarification about dividends. In the Bitcoin landscape please try to understand that things change and I am doing my best to adapt to the change. Once my update is posted all Havelock shareholders will receive the e-mail."
May I suggest anyone who is posting questions to Joseph David also copy those questions here so that we can all see them and ensure they are being answered. Here is what I just posted:
1. When was the IPO document removed from Havelock?
2. What was the purpose of removing the IPO document from Havelock?
Joseph David: "Firstly I would like to assure everyone that there is no mal-intent in this decision. I will be posting additional details about this decision and answers to many questions on the Havelock site early next week and before trading resumes. Please feel free to e-mail me your questions directly to joseph@cavirtex.com. I will not respond individually, instead I will group questions together and post the questions and answers on the Havelock page for VTX. I will also have further details and clarification about dividends. In the Bitcoin landscape please try to understand that things change and I am doing my best to adapt to the change. Once my update is posted all Havelock shareholders will receive the e-mail."
Well it seems highly likely this is indeed a buy out and perhaps the communications could have been handled better since there was no indication of further announcements in the trading halt message.
I would point out that in the bitcoin landscape perhaps extra care should be taken to reassure investors.
If that's what they're intending to do, they're going to find an onslaught of bad publicity across every form of social media pointing out what a completely untrustworthy group of thieving scum they are.
Look, VirtEx is a sound company with a good product. They've done a lot of things right and deserve a big buy out.
Save your scorn for Lightbox and Havelock. Do you thing NYSE or NASDAQ would allow a company to leave their exchange with a promise to trade stock for "tokens yet to be defined"? They've lost a ton of credibility here.
They do not "deserve a big buy out" they deserve to be shut down.
What makes a company deserving who just knicks off with the money of the people who paid for it's development?
I think we need to start getting people together to see what legal action can be taken since they have clearly breached what they said in their prospectus.
If that's what they're intending to do, they're going to find an onslaught of bad publicity across every form of social media pointing out what a completely untrustworthy group of thieving scum they are.
Look, VirtEx is a sound company with a good product. They've done a lot of things right and deserve a big buy out.
Save your scorn for Lightbox and Havelock. Do you thing NYSE or NASDAQ would allow a company to leave their exchange with a promise to trade stock for "tokens yet to be defined"? They've lost a ton of credibility here.
What have Lightbox or Havelock got to do with anything?
My scorn is for a company who stated in their prospectus "Once the IPO is sold out, these shares can be traded on HAVELOCK at user determined prices."
But instead, are planning to permanently delist, preventing trading of the shares, locking investor's bitcoins away except for what will presumably be a monumental crash during the brief reopening of Havelock whilst everyone scrambles to save whatever they can before their money is swallowed by Virtex.
Or - have I misunderstood?
I don't think you've misunderstood anything and I completely understand your anger with VirtEx. In fact, I share it.
My point is that Havelock should have some protections in place:
"We strive to achieve a very high level of both transparency and confidence, and will be thorougly vetting any applications. We will only accept the highest quality funds into our exchange."
If a company is allowed to abscond with the proceeds of an IPO so easily, you'd have to be nuts to forfeit any btc to any enterprise listed on their exchange.
To play devil's advocate, you can thoroughly vet and check for high standards but you can't stop the fund doing what it wants as long as it's not breaking the law.
I guess Havelock needs some kind of contractual arrangement which would allow them to take funds to court who acted against the interests of shareholders.
I think Virtex takes most of the blame here though. It strikes me as extremely lame that a bitcoin exchange would remove the ability of its investors to continue trading shares in bitcoin.
What are they saying that there's something wrong with bitcoin and they don't want people trading their shares in it? Really smart.
If that's what they're intending to do, they're going to find an onslaught of bad publicity across every form of social media pointing out what a completely untrustworthy group of thieving scum they are.
Look, VirtEx is a sound company with a good product. They've done a lot of things right and deserve a big buy out.
Save your scorn for Lightbox and Havelock. Do you thing NYSE or NASDAQ would allow a company to leave their exchange with a promise to trade stock for "tokens yet to be defined"? They've lost a ton of credibility here.
What have Lightbox or Havelock got to do with anything?
My scorn is for a company who stated in their prospectus "Once the IPO is sold out, these shares can be traded on HAVELOCK at user determined prices."
But instead, are planning to permanently delist, preventing trading of the shares, locking investor's bitcoins away except for what will presumably be a monumental crash during the brief reopening of Havelock whilst everyone scrambles to save whatever they can before their money is swallowed by Virtex.
Or - have I misunderstood?
The only thing I can see is that they are delisting giving non-voting shares to Virtex holders and pocketing future dividends that they give out will be at their discretion.
By doing that they will have less people complaining when they don't pay dividends on the notes they have in holding, and rake in all the profits from the money of the shareholders without any due obligation to give them back the assets
If that's what they're intending to do, they're going to find an onslaught of bad publicity across every form of social media pointing out what a completely untrustworthy group of thieving scum they are.
So let's hope they come up with some answers real quick.
So am I right in thinking the shares priced in BTC on Havelock are being converted to shares priced in CAD on no exchange, leaving investors with no proper avenue to buy and sell thus essentially locking away their money based on "future business objectives" for which there has been no explanation?
Just got this (I'm a a holder of shares):
NOTICE OF DELISTING
TAKE NOTICE that VTX will be delisted from havelockinvestments.com and all trading in VTX will halt on at 4:00pm (MST) on December 31, 2013 (the "Effective Time") to enable holders at the Effective Time to receive physical share certificates of 1612643 Alberta Inc. (operating as Virtex), a private Alberta company. On January 6, 2014, VirtEx will provide notice of the delisting and request registration directions from each holder of VTX via email. It is important to note that registered shareholders have certain rights under the Business Corporations Act (Alberta). The share certificates to be issued represent non-voting common shares which entitle the holder to receive such dividends or other distributions as may be declared thereon from time to time by the board of directors and to receive a pro rata share of any distribution made upon the voluntary or involuntary liquidation, dissolution or winding-up of VirtEx, or any other distribution of its assets among its shareholders for
the purpose of winding-up its affairs. The shares represented by the share certificates are not, and will not be for the foreseeable future, listed on a stock exchange and are subject to transfer restrictions under applicable securities laws.
The decision to delist VTX from havelockinvestments.com was made after considering the company's current position and our future business objectives. As previously disclosed, holders of VTX have always had the right to become a registered shareholder. Please contact us if you have any questions.
------------------------------------------------------------
Question - How do holders get their shares registered?
NOTICE OF DELISTING
TAKE NOTICE that VTX will be delisted from havelockinvestments.com and all trading in VTX will halt on at 4:00pm (MST) on December 31, 2013 (the "Effective Time") to enable holders at the Effective Time to receive physical share certificates of 1612643 Alberta Inc. (operating as Virtex), a private Alberta company. On January 6, 2014, VirtEx will provide notice of the delisting and request registration directions from each holder of VTX via email. It is important to note that registered shareholders have certain rights under the Business Corporations Act (Alberta). The share certificates to be issued represent non-voting common shares which entitle the holder to receive such dividends or other distributions as may be declared thereon from time to time by the board of directors and to receive a pro rata share of any distribution made upon the voluntary or involuntary liquidation, dissolution or winding-up of VirtEx, or any other distribution of its assets among its shareholders for
the purpose of winding-up its affairs. The shares represented by the share certificates are not, and will not be for the foreseeable future, listed on a stock exchange and are subject to transfer restrictions under applicable securities laws.
The decision to delist VTX from havelockinvestments.com was made after considering the company's current position and our future business objectives. As previously disclosed, holders of VTX have always had the right to become a registered shareholder. Please contact us if you have any questions.
------------------------------------------------------------
Question - How do holders get their shares registered?
Re: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It
Quick Update
The original vague range of October 20s is now made accurate at October 27th, when the projected publication of financial reports. This time it will be more detailed and informative than the last time's.
Upcoming scheduled to be happening (in time order):
Imminent repricing according to the market and the quantity.
Immersion cooling exhibition.
Payment system out of pre-alpha.
Blockchain-based exchange out of pre-alpha (whether to migrate whole ASICMiner database is still a serious debating topic).
The original vague range of October 20s is now made accurate at October 27th, when the projected publication of financial reports. This time it will be more detailed and informative than the last time's.
Upcoming scheduled to be happening (in time order):
Imminent repricing according to the market and the quantity.
Immersion cooling exhibition.
Payment system out of pre-alpha.
Blockchain-based exchange out of pre-alpha (whether to migrate whole ASICMiner database is still a serious debating topic).
Anyone have any ideas what this "payment system" is?
Hi all, I've been trying to transfer my shares to ASICMINER-PT on btct.co and have sent a request to friedcat and burnside several times over the last 2 weeks and have received no reply.
Have I missed a message about some new process for transferring shares?
Any help much appreciated.
Have I missed a message about some new process for transferring shares?
Any help much appreciated.