Actually, my conspiracy theories are not farcical.  They are rooted in facts and evidence.  Contrarily to you, I have spent a substantial amount of time researching and talking to "clients", both very large and small.  I have even spoken with Simon and Eduardo, with Victor (the CRO) and with Monica. I have read most available testimonies and filings.  I have retained legal counsel like so many here.  I am patient.  So is the legal system. Believe me, I am not known for my sense of humour. "Why hasn't the US attorney or District Attorney made these allegations"... yet?  Your understanding of the legal system is obviously limited.  Just as is the speed at which it moves.  Yet, some of us are building the case and going through the necessary steps to help the authorities.  The liquidation/bankruptcy is only one step, unrelated to criminal procedures.

You keep repeating the "this was a new High-tech Start-up, most fail, HF is just one of them, you should have known better, stop crying" argument like a mantra.  You are either blind or in complete bad faith or you just get a kick out of annoying victims.  Either way, your crass "analysis" of the situation is insulting.

Your defense of HF is beyond absurd.  While I don't believe they mined with our equipment (simply because they didn't produce enough), that does not make them honest.  It is NOT a case of a simple cutting edge technology development that failed.  HF acted with contempt for their "clients", treating them more like "marks" in a con.  They repeatedly and knowingly lied.  They stole and cheated.  They used funds (including BTCs)  for as of yet unexplained reasons.  

My guess would be that Eduardo's house burning down was no accident, but a warning from people he owed money to, either for drugs or gambling debts.  Scared, he took the BTCs from the company to pay off his debts.  After that, HF went to shit and he kept on trying to cover his mess with more lies and false representations.  Simon and Eduardo both deserve hard time.  I would through in some members of the so-called "creditor's council" in the lot for their obvious conflict of interests and unethical, illegal manoeuvres.

Ah!  If Barber said so, then it MUST be true!!!!!

;-)

They are miners/cloudminers.  They buy equipment from everyone.  BFL, HF (or TRIED to buy in this case), KnC, Cointerra, Antminer etc...  So I guess you could say there is a link right there.

I think those are only rumors.  I have been looking through as much as is publicly available, and I would find it very surprising if they were indeed in bed together.  They probably tried at one point to join "forces" (I cringe writing that word), but I don't think anything came out of it.  We would have heard and read something.

HOWEVER, if indeed there are some accusations that justifiably stick, and even perhaps finally some criminal procedures, doesn't that create a precedent that would allow us (I wonder who this "us" is now) to inexpensively file a complaint that would finally go somewhere?  There won't be "more" cash for any of us creditors, but it would fit into Miner Minor's wishes since he said he cared more about revenge than actual cash back.

On that note, were Hashfast's books ever reconciled properly?  Why is it that I remember it not being so and there being still many bitcoins unaccounted for? 

I did, thank you Cedivad.  Perhaps you have a better proposition than that of LQB?  Perhaps instead of killing the deal because of its structure we could have tried to negotiate it in another way that was legally acceptable.  So far, we have nothing Cedivad.  Nothing at all but more expenses.  I don't see how it can be better.  Anyone here can see how it is better?

Didn't they give PRIORITY mining to the Creditors?  Weren't they giving up their claim of circa $6million?  Didn't they propose to pay $2million dollars upfront?  That's what I read from the proposition.  That's what I understood from the Q&A on this forum.  More would have been given back to creditors than what we are all entitled to hope now.

But why bother?  LQB was interested only up to a certain point.  They put a deadline, which is understandable with the growth of the network.  It was declined.  The Judge seems to have disliked the structure of the proposal saying that it was not a purchase but a re-structuration, inadequate under the terms of a bankruptcy.  IT'S OVER!   LQB, which was by far the best proposition we ever had, was not acceptable to the creditor's council... ok.  Let's MOVE ON.  WHAT DO WE HAVE TODAY?  I keep asking this question.  It seems there is REALLY nothing else.  How can that be better?  With the time this is all taking, those that had an ongoing mine and sit on the council are happy it didn't happen, and the CRO is less and less likely to obtain any value from the sales.  Look at what the competition is doing!

What a retard you are.  Still with Liquidbits and Coinware and whatever.  Liquidbits and then Coinware have been in the BTC space since late 2010 early 2011.  They have been mining ever since and were actually first to receive the BFL asics along with GigaVPS.   They invested in every aspect of Bitcoin companies, from non-profits to payment platforms, to exchanges to mining infrastructures to software development etc...  And they have the financial surface to sue those that try to do them wrong, including Hashfast. Is all this relevant? NO.

None of us here care about them since their proposition was rejected.   What's your agenda?  This is becoming downright weird.

Again, what is the CRO doing?  What are the propositions being studied?  Failing that, how is the sale of assets going?

Manufacturers around the world have not been waiting for the Hashfast liquidation to be over.  They are moving forwards at very high speeds.  With all the announcements coming this fall, I wonder what the value of those chips (those that do not depreciate according to the statement made by the Creditors Council legal counsel) will be depreciated down to?  

None.  Period.  You seem very intent on continuing this attack on Liquidbits.  Really what gives?  have you read the transcripts?  Read how Liquidbits files the first Temporary Restraining Order and their legal procedure against Hashfast retaining a top lawfirm (Bingham).  Your allusions are baseless and logic absurd.  Worse.  They ARE USELESS.  MOVE ON.  Liquidbits is now only a creditor --- and yes contrarily to what you ALSO tried to insinuate, they did pay in full the millions sent to hashfast and claimed.  SO why don't we stop with them and focus on the real issues: What is now going on?  What is the Creditor's committee doing?  They MUST be in touch with the CRO.  So why no news now?  The CRO has been on the job for 2 weeks now?  What's the proposed course of action?

+1 as well.  It seems that an incomprehensible amount of energy spent on trying to demonize Liquibits at all costs on this forum.  One really has to wonder why.  Pushing it to the point of remarkably idiotic "research" and reasoning fallacies.  ENOUGH with this already.  Liquidbits proposition is GONE for better or for worse.  Gone. Over.  Part of history.  Past.  Can we move on? WHAT IS GOING NOW, TODAY.  That's all that matters.  What are our options?  Why are we being kept in the dark?  Can't the committee who used to be so vocal in accusing everyone and trashing every option we might have had, provide some information  and give some news?  What is the CRO doing?

Again with Coinware/Liquidbits!  Why?  What's the point? Am I responsible for bringing the topic back?  All I said initially what that I feared we might come to regret their proposition.  Perhaps I should have said "Let's do everything in our limited power to not come to regret their plan".  Let's move on already! They have not been in the loop for some time now, other than being a creditor -- and by very far the largest of all, from what I have read.  They made a proposition to the committee, they argued for it in court and answered questions on this forum (no one else so far did the same). The committee rejected it, the judge rejected their deadline, they went their way.  Is there more, besides the very easily verifiable fact that neither Coinware nor Liquidbits are registered in the British Ocean Territory but in the United States of America?  If anything, the above posts seem to indicate that Coinware / LQB would have had the financial wherewithal to actually pull off the creditor's mega-mine -- but then, again, how is it relevant today?  Who cares?  That ship sailed a while back.  End of story.

The committee said they had other offers on the table, the only thing we saw was the CRO being nominated.  

I think that the only thing that really matters today is: Are there indeed other propositions on the table and if so what might they be?  I have not been able to find out (besides the eventual, possible, nebulous projects such as the Franchise mine for which I never could find any details besides rumors).  The CRO is quiet, perhaps he is working out a deal, or simply preparing to liquidate what's left of the assets at auction.  Anyone knows?  That would be the "gist" of the situation.  The committee should know.  I am sure they are in contact with the CRO.  It is sensible.  Can't they give us any information?  It's hard to imagine that "nothing" is going on.

You lost your way Cedivad.  Your first posts were full of justified anger and action.  Your optimism regarding the judicial system was refreshing.  Wether we were active on the forums or just lurking, I think many of us rooted for you / us. 

Overall, it seems that you overestimated the assets of Hashfast, just as you got used to lashing out too quickly.

I am not scr3.ucr3trs nor do I have any form of communication with him other than this forum. 

I simply do my homework as rigorously as I can.  I base my comments on what I find and believe to be true.

There is no doubt that the current mess has been created by Hashfast's Eduardo and Simon.  Absolutely.  They should remain the real target of our wrath. I agree with you on that.  However, regarding the Creditor's Council, I have a different position than they "worked for us" on a voluntary basis.  I think others, directly on the council are now starting to agree with this.  There were serious conflict of interests.  That is simply a fact.  Not wanting to admit that and the consequences it had, that is "not seeing beyond your nose".  Now, admittedly, this is no longer important as there is nothing that can be done about it any longer.  The reality today is what it is, and in my opinion, there's no reason to be optimistic about the outcome for the unsecured creditors.





 

This being said,

Wow!!!  Really?  No longer an issue?  Hands wiped clean? All forgotten? That easily?  Seriously?  Sadly: probably correct!

Why aren’t we all appalled by the Creditor's Council decisions over the past few months?  It is highly unlikely that such mismanagement, followed by targeted misinformation by family relatives of a lead member of the Council, is caused by simple incompetence or lack of experience.  There is indeed a compelling argument to be made for voluntary sabotage motivated by glaring self-interest.  After having actually read the transcripts, blaming the CFO of a few months (Monica) for everything that has transpired is as absurd as it is unjustifiable.  It was very likely an intentional diversion. 

The truth should emerge ultimately, but it will very probably be way too late for creditors (or anyone) to do anything about it. 

Scammed by Hashfast, and screwed by their Council will likely be Hashfast creditor's epitaph.

Monica is the incompetent person that has run this company into the ground over the last 4 months while she has done nothing to return it to an ongoing concern.   She is now the ONE person that is holding up everything to bring in a CRO.    Considering the only deal that she has come up with in 4 months is one so bad a Federal Judge would not even hear arguments on it, she should step aside quickly.     More value would have been realized if they just accepted chapter 7.
[/quote]



What a cope out.  Monica is CFO.  She is doing her job running the numbers, reporting to the Court (not hashfast btw). She actually has a strong CV as CFO.  I doubt she would risk her career for Hashfast or anyone.   "The only deal she came up with"....  Please, tell me what proposition we had from the Creditor's Council?  Besides a "franchise" deal emanating from Eduardo (still to be confirmed, mind you, but the research on that is fun).  From what I read, (and I'm still trying to confirm as well, so if anyone knows for sure, correct me.  I might have missed something), the IP was marketed and no real bites resulted (btw, in the LB deal, the IP stayed with the Creditors, they only got a licensing deal).  The Chips?  They are being sold (or were being sold I should say) to pay employees and keeping the lights on.  But it's not a depreciating asset right? So who cares if they are sold today or in October?  RIGHT.  Sure.  Of course.  What other deals came to the table besides LB that we have not been made aware of?  Who else has expressed interest and made a formal proposal?  Why are we not being told?  There has to be quite a few I am sure.

Yes Minor Miner.  We have read your venom against LB over and over.  That too is getting old.  The fact is that from what I heared from the audio tapes that is NOT what happened.  LB put an ultimatum on their proposal to the court.  The Judge refused the ultimatum, and didnt like that, perhaps precisely because according our creditor's council, there is NO hurry since the assets are not depreciating.  I also easily found out who LB is banking with: WF and UTB (a big bank, and a small bank) IN THE US.  So I have no idea where this Indian Ocean Bank thingy came from.  I also re-read the LB proposition.  THe fact that it was not liked is OK BY ME.  I have no problem with that.  What do we have today?   LB answered on the forum, made their case, it was refused, end of story.  WHY THE FOCUS on LB now?  WHo cares?  They are no longer trying to make proposal.

WHAT WE ALL WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS TODAY THAT THE CREDITORS COUNCIL HAS?  It has to be meaningfull and significant with a lot of cash up --- Like CEDIVAD said to LB at the time: PUT 10million in a company upfront...  I'd like to see that.  I thought that the creditor's council HAD such an offer on hand.  WHAT HAPPENED?  What are the assets worth (TRUTHFULLY, not a valuation according to Simon Barber or Eduardo Criminal PLEASE).

They can bank with as many banks they want where ever they want.  I don't care.  LB AND its parent company are US companies, and have been for some years.  That's all I would have cared about. There are many btc companies that have banks accounts all over the world in case of problems.  This being said: 1.  which Bank are you refereing to because I didn't see that anywhere; 2. They did propose to put up cash upfront as part of the deal -- vanish to where?  I think the DD on them was pretty thorough, the datacenters they do use are all in the US but the deal was NOT acceptable to the Creditor's council.  Period.  OK. Fine. If there is better, then it was the right call.  3.  Who cares ?  The deal is OFF the table and has been for a while now.  

Can we know what is going on now?  What are the propositions on the table and what is the truth of our outlooks? What better proposition do we have?  Why don't we have any updates at all besides everything being Monica's fault?

Agreed.  Why?  And frankly, blaming Monica is getting really old and annoying.  LB deal has been out of the picture for some time now.  I am now starting to fear that we might all miss their proposition later on. 

I've been slowly catching up on this thread and court tapes.  I think I did hear right when Ashley, the lawyer for the Creditor's Council, told the Court that in the Creditor's opinion, the chips were NOT a depreciating asset?!  Seriously?  What end game does the Creditor's Council want?  It is getting very hard to understand and to believe in them.  I had previously not taken any claims of conflict of interests at the Creditor's council leadership level seriously.  Perhaps this was a mistake and the issue deserves to be revisited.  This being said, even if true, it's getting really too late in the exercise to do anything about it.  I wonder how much HF's assets left have depreciated with the latest rise in network difficulty.