Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 180 results by zapeta
I'm not opposed to pool mining, but I have no idea what pools are out there at this point. I think that it would be better to have less variance in weekly payout than we currently experience with P2Pool.
As for the suspension/termination - is there a ballpark number of how many seats are suspended or in danger of termination? What would be the benefit to the rest of us if we started terminating memberships?
One way or another those members paid for seats. My understanding is that suspended seats don't receive donations, and I can't imagine that there is any significant costs associated with of keeping track of those seats that are suspended or near termination. In all likelihood, those members probably won't come back, but imagine the negative publicity that could arise if they did come back and found that their seats has been "terminated".
As for the suspension/termination - is there a ballpark number of how many seats are suspended or in danger of termination? What would be the benefit to the rest of us if we started terminating memberships?
One way or another those members paid for seats. My understanding is that suspended seats don't receive donations, and I can't imagine that there is any significant costs associated with of keeping track of those seats that are suspended or near termination. In all likelihood, those members probably won't come back, but imagine the negative publicity that could arise if they did come back and found that their seats has been "terminated".
Nasty Live Chat is now complete. Thanks to qwk for attending.
EDIT: I have agreed to return the S5+ unit to Bitmain. I am exploring the option to receive an S7 as an RMA unit, while also receiving a credit for a second S7 unit.
EDIT: I have agreed to return the S5+ unit to Bitmain. I am exploring the option to receive an S7 as an RMA unit, while also receiving a credit for a second S7 unit.
Sounds like a good swap.
Looking forward to hearing more about the 2oz seats and the gold plated versions.
Re: [HAVELOCK] SF1 - Announcement of Consultation Poll (Trading Halted)
Thank you for removing the allegations of 'scamming' on the Trust grading system of this forum.
We are not 'attacking the people who may have invested', I think you would find it hard to point at my comments that attack any of the investors. I do not understand how a consultation about a buy back offer or conversion in shares can be labelled 'scam or attempt to defraud investors'.
We are not 'attacking the people who may have invested', I think you would find it hard to point at my comments that attack any of the investors. I do not understand how a consultation about a buy back offer or conversion in shares can be labelled 'scam or attempt to defraud investors'.
You may not be scamming your investors in the traditional sense. However, if I were forced to sell my shares back at 45% of what I paid for them, especially given the promising results that your startups have shown so far (which you mentioned), I'd feel scammed. I wouldn't be surprised if others felt the same way.
In any case, thank you for finally providing some answers to the simple questions I asked several posts ago.
Re: [HAVELOCK] SF1 - Announcement of Consultation Poll (Trading Halted)
If the offer is made, and participating in the buyback is voluntary, I don't see that as an issue. I agree that a lot of people probably got in to the fund without any idea of how long it might take to pay back, and this would give those investors an out.
That seems quite a reasonable statement for someone who downgraded our Trust rating here by posting that:
"Seedcoin scammed users out of at least 1100 BTC. Offered 2 million shares at 0.001 BTC each (2000 BTC total) and then tried to buy them back for .00045 BTC each (900 BTC total), pocketing the rest."
I would be interested to read your explanation about where Seeedcoin has been 'pocketing' the rest since funds which have been raised have been paid out to the startups as planned and along a calendar of drawdowns agreed with both the entrepreneurs and Havelock. If we offered investors BTC0.00045 per unit we would be buying these with new funds raised from private investors and completely unrelated to the SF1 fund raising. That would not be a 'pocketing' but a fresh outlay of bitcoins.
My guess at your reason for offering the buyback was a reasonable assumption given the information we had about the motivation for the buyback offer (no reason given) and where the money would come from (no info before, but you've explained above).
In any case, you haven't even confirmed or denied that the buyback would be voluntary if offered and not forced, and you've twice dodged my questions about the motivation for a buyback offer. By your admission you've raised new funds from private investors. Has someone come along and offered to buy out SF1? What are the terms? This would be something that would affect the decisions made by SF1 investors.
Even if this isn't a deliberate scam or attempt to defraud your investors, your lack of answers makes me feel like Seedcoin is not acting in good faith. Simply answering a couple questions, rather than attacking the people who may have invested, would go a long way to clearing that up.
Re: [HAVELOCK] SF1 - Announcement of Consultation Poll (Trading Halted)
I see this more as an out for those who do not want to continue with the fund. SF1 has been a very different model than most offerings and provided a service that isn't a short term dividend producing security. The price of the security is based on the market price and most people getting involved didn't realize this was a very long term security. The company has distributed most of their funds however one company fell through and no note to what is being done with that funding has been made public.
However look up the companies they funded talk to their owners and you will see that Seedcoin has been very active in providing the service they stated they would offer. From the moment the terms were agreed upon and fund distributed each share represented an unknown amount of equity. That equity hasn't changed( at least to public knowledge) but the market tanked. Why? Because bitcoin securities have such small markets that even one large sell off will tank it and hurt confidence in the market. If you look at how much volume has gone through SFI on Havelock. There hasn't been a ton over the months while bitcoin has gone through major changes. Some people didn't realize this would tie up their bitcoins for so long but a reasonable amount of research on the fund at the beginning would have shown that.
Now for the buy back price 0.00045 Yup its low as thats for more than 0.00075 bitcoins (0.0009 if you add in undistributed funds) that have been distributed your losing a lot however before today or even months ago you couldn't sell out any large quantity at that price. If you read their wording they state that if they made an offer to buy back for that price would you? They are not doing a forced buyback in the way they have phrased this. This is offering those who want their bitcoins out a reasonable offer based on the market. They get cheap shares of their fund and the seller gets instant access to bitcoins. Your only other option was to wait.
If they forced you to sell back then yes I would be very very pissed but right now I think it's just to allow those buyers who want out the ability to get out. They could literally do nothing and let the market go even lower or even just start buying shares at the lowest price points but instead they are looking at offering a deal to at a minimum help the market.
I think the issue is too many investors evaluated the security improperly and had very different expectations than what has happened. I think this is because a lot of bitcoin investors have very little knowledge or training in real investments. I invested in the ipo and slowly have been acquiring more as I personally still see this as a solid long term investment. The only thing I wish we could know is what level of equity is held by the fund in each company. Since we don't know that it leaves a big variable open.
But seriously hit up the companies they have funded on Twitter or email them to verify they are doing what was stated in the ipo which is funding and providing business assistance/consultation to build these into large global companies.
Edit: I'm holding and may consider the second option depending on the terms so long as the offer is reasonable compared to IPO and I don't have to convert all my shares as it's a fair means to diversify and I personally have confidence in the group running it.
However look up the companies they funded talk to their owners and you will see that Seedcoin has been very active in providing the service they stated they would offer. From the moment the terms were agreed upon and fund distributed each share represented an unknown amount of equity. That equity hasn't changed( at least to public knowledge) but the market tanked. Why? Because bitcoin securities have such small markets that even one large sell off will tank it and hurt confidence in the market. If you look at how much volume has gone through SFI on Havelock. There hasn't been a ton over the months while bitcoin has gone through major changes. Some people didn't realize this would tie up their bitcoins for so long but a reasonable amount of research on the fund at the beginning would have shown that.
Now for the buy back price 0.00045 Yup its low as thats for more than 0.00075 bitcoins (0.0009 if you add in undistributed funds) that have been distributed your losing a lot however before today or even months ago you couldn't sell out any large quantity at that price. If you read their wording they state that if they made an offer to buy back for that price would you? They are not doing a forced buyback in the way they have phrased this. This is offering those who want their bitcoins out a reasonable offer based on the market. They get cheap shares of their fund and the seller gets instant access to bitcoins. Your only other option was to wait.
If they forced you to sell back then yes I would be very very pissed but right now I think it's just to allow those buyers who want out the ability to get out. They could literally do nothing and let the market go even lower or even just start buying shares at the lowest price points but instead they are looking at offering a deal to at a minimum help the market.
I think the issue is too many investors evaluated the security improperly and had very different expectations than what has happened. I think this is because a lot of bitcoin investors have very little knowledge or training in real investments. I invested in the ipo and slowly have been acquiring more as I personally still see this as a solid long term investment. The only thing I wish we could know is what level of equity is held by the fund in each company. Since we don't know that it leaves a big variable open.
But seriously hit up the companies they have funded on Twitter or email them to verify they are doing what was stated in the ipo which is funding and providing business assistance/consultation to build these into large global companies.
Edit: I'm holding and may consider the second option depending on the terms so long as the offer is reasonable compared to IPO and I don't have to convert all my shares as it's a fair means to diversify and I personally have confidence in the group running it.
We don't know if this is a forced buyback or not - that was never stated. If the offer is made, and participating in the buyback is voluntary, I don't see that as an issue. I agree that a lot of people probably got in to the fund without any idea of how long it might take to pay back, and this would give those investors an out.
Re: [HAVELOCK] SF1 - Announcement of Consultation Poll (Trading Halted)
SF1 unit price has been lower than 50% of the unit price at the time of the offering (or under BTC0.0005) for the past four months and below BTC0.003 for the past 3 months, last price was BTC0.00015 so BTC0.00045 represents 3 times the latest price (this is also mentioned in the consultation poll announcement).
Not all SF1 unit holders have been holding SF1 units since the offering time, some transactions have been registered below BTC0.0001 per unit so for some unit holders getting BTC0.00045 per unit is a very good deal.
There are legal limitations to the number of shareholders and there is a cost for processing each shareholder's application, hence the minimum threshold to convert units into shares. However, trading will resume as of October 8th 12 noon time EST, anyone with an insufficient amount of units may buy more then.
If, following the results of the poll, we decided to make an offer, we will motivate it in more details then. It is just a consultation for now.
Not all SF1 unit holders have been holding SF1 units since the offering time, some transactions have been registered below BTC0.0001 per unit so for some unit holders getting BTC0.00045 per unit is a very good deal.
There are legal limitations to the number of shareholders and there is a cost for processing each shareholder's application, hence the minimum threshold to convert units into shares. However, trading will resume as of October 8th 12 noon time EST, anyone with an insufficient amount of units may buy more then.
If, following the results of the poll, we decided to make an offer, we will motivate it in more details then. It is just a consultation for now.
The fact that your buyback offer is 3x the current price doesn't change the fact that it's less than 50% of the IPO price. The reason why it's so low? Lack of communication and lack of results, which is on you. You don't get to pat yourself on the back for losing 55% of shareholder value. The fact that some people bought at 0.0001 per unit and will make a pretty decent return isn't relevant to the people who you should care about, those who took a chance on the IPO.
Further, by your own contract, the only case that would warrant a buyback would be: "In case of the acquisition or liquidation or any other major event affecting the shareholder structure of SFI, SFI shall reserve the right to close the listing following a public notice 30 days prior to closure, but in certain circumstances (including but not limited to the death or disability of the director), notice may not be provided in this fashion. Closure may be effected via a buyback of all outstanding shares. "
So, is there an acquisition, liquidation, or major event? If so, what is it? Those would be the only cases that could initiate a buyback. Obviously any of these could affect the future value of SF1, which would help shareholders decide if they should accept the offer, if one is made.
Re: [HAVELOCK] SF1 - Announcement of Consultation Poll (Trading Halted)
For the record, their poll questions:
Also note that their email says "Please note that only SF1 unit holders holding more than 2,000 SF1 units may be eligible, at the time of the offer, to choose to convert their SF1 units into Seedco Holdings Limited shares."
So, for clarification, it's either take the buyback at less than half the IPO price, or have your equity converted to shares of Seedco Holdings Limited, but this option is only available if you have 2000 SF1 shares or more.
Further, the section on buybacks/termination of operation in the IPO prospectus states:
So, was there an acquisition, liquidation, or other major event that would necessitate a buyback? What is the nature of the event? This is something that shareholders would want to know before making a decision regarding their vote on a buyback or conversion.
Looking forward to some answers.
Quote
"Poll question number 1 : If Seedco Management Limited decided to make an offer to buy back the SF1 units at a unit price of BTC 0.00045 (or 3 times the latest unit price), and considering you were eligible to accept such an offer, would you accept this offer?
Poll question number 2 : If Seedco Management Limited decided to make an offer to convert SF1 units into shares of Seedco Holdings Limited, the company holding equity stakes into SF1 startups, and considering you were eligible to accept such an offer, would you accept this offer?
Poll question number 2 : If Seedco Management Limited decided to make an offer to convert SF1 units into shares of Seedco Holdings Limited, the company holding equity stakes into SF1 startups, and considering you were eligible to accept such an offer, would you accept this offer?
Also note that their email says "Please note that only SF1 unit holders holding more than 2,000 SF1 units may be eligible, at the time of the offer, to choose to convert their SF1 units into Seedco Holdings Limited shares."
So, for clarification, it's either take the buyback at less than half the IPO price, or have your equity converted to shares of Seedco Holdings Limited, but this option is only available if you have 2000 SF1 shares or more.
Further, the section on buybacks/termination of operation in the IPO prospectus states:
Quote
In case of the acquisition or liquidation or any other major event affecting the shareholder structure of SFI, SFI shall reserve the right to close the listing following a public notice 30 days prior to closure, but
in certain circumstances (including but not limited to the death or disability of the director), notice may not be provided in this fashion. Closure may be effected via a buyback of all outstanding shares.
Pricing of the shares will be based on the 30-day weighted moving average of the unit prices on the exchange prior to closure.
in certain circumstances (including but not limited to the death or disability of the director), notice may not be provided in this fashion. Closure may be effected via a buyback of all outstanding shares.
Pricing of the shares will be based on the 30-day weighted moving average of the unit prices on the exchange prior to closure.
So, was there an acquisition, liquidation, or other major event that would necessitate a buyback? What is the nature of the event? This is something that shareholders would want to know before making a decision regarding their vote on a buyback or conversion.
Looking forward to some answers.
Check out Scott Fargo's write up on Nasty Mining for Cryptocoinsnews.com.
Nasty Mining and the Nasty Fans Coin: A Different Way to Mine and the Man Behind It.
Nasty Mining and the Nasty Fans Coin: A Different Way to Mine and the Man Behind It.
Thanks for sharing. I really enjoyed the article.
Re: [GLBSE] Introducing: Bitcoin Syndicate, a new mining op trading publicly!
Well, a majority of the coins were stolen from Gox. Glasswalker got too busy to keep things running and the operation was closed and liquidated. People who went through the share claim process after GLBSE closed received a dividend of about 0.0115 BTC/share when the operation was liquidated, approximately in mid Feb, 2013.
Would that be still possible to do now, how do you think?
Maybe, if you contact Glasswalker. In the email I kept from mid-Feb, he said that any funds not claimed 30 days from mid-Feb would be forfeit, but it doesn't cost anything to ask if he's still holding the funds.
Re: [GLBSE] Introducing: Bitcoin Syndicate, a new mining op trading publicly!
So what happened to BTCSYN?
I happen to be one of the early 'small' shareholders. The website is down, GLBSE is too. Was this whole thing a scam?
I happen to be one of the early 'small' shareholders. The website is down, GLBSE is too. Was this whole thing a scam?
Well, a majority of the coins were stolen from Gox. Glasswalker got too busy to keep things running and the operation was closed and liquidated. People who went through the share claim process after GLBSE closed received a dividend of about 0.0115 BTC/share when the operation was liquidated, approximately in mid Feb, 2013.
The minted seats are great, but it's a pretty steep price for 1oz silver.
Well, 1/2 the cost is a donation to NastyFans. Even so, I think pricing is in-line with other products. We also have a much lower price entry point. Here's a cost comparison of another available coin for the sake of argument.
Lealana 1oz Silver 1 BTC Coin
Total Cost with shipping: 1.26 BTC
Cost with shipping minus contents: 0.26 BTC
NastyFans 1oz Silver 1 Seat Coin
Total Cost with shipping: 0.27 BTC
Cost with shipping minus contents: 0.22 BTC
Very good point. Just trying to decide if I want to spend ~$250 for a coin.
Re: MOORE: Mining Bond Beating the Moore's Law (Collecting Shareholder Data)
Looking to sell 774 MOORE shares.
//DeaDTerra
//DeaDTerra
Good luck. I figure they're basically worthless except for the small trickle of dividends that roll in.
Re: .10 promotion from ASICMiner distribution by CanaryInTheMine
Reverse order? Seriously?.....
Seriously...wouldn't it make sense to start with group buy #1 and work towards the most recent orders? Especially since they were willing to be the first to take the risk of buying from you.
Disclaimer: I bought in group buy #1
Re: ASICMiner USB group buy REOPENED! (previous customers only!) .175 per unit!
I'm concerned regarding the 30% tidbit. I think the MOST FAIR way to distribute it is this:
For each buyer, you get 1. If I am reading the spreadsheet correctly that's 97 (150-97=53). Then, if you ordered 4 or more, you get a crack at a second one. 44 people ordered more than 3 (53-44=9). Anyone with more than 10 gets a crack at a third one. That's 7 more (9-7=2). The final two can go to Arklan as a tip.
Thoughts?
For each buyer, you get 1. If I am reading the spreadsheet correctly that's 97 (150-97=53). Then, if you ordered 4 or more, you get a crack at a second one. 44 people ordered more than 3 (53-44=9). Anyone with more than 10 gets a crack at a third one. That's 7 more (9-7=2). The final two can go to Arklan as a tip.
Thoughts?This makes the most sense if we are limited to 30% of the original order.
i got confirmation from friedcat last night: original order is the limit, NOT 30%. 512 units available. everybody is welcome to order their original amount. you'll get it. more then that? we'll see how many are left. i don't think that the original buyers will all step forward, but as you can see from the spreadsheet, that hardly matters.
Awesome. I'll have the payment in for my 5 as soon as possible.
Re: ASICMiner USB group buy REOPENED! (previous customers only!) .175 per unit!
I'm concerned regarding the 30% tidbit. I think the MOST FAIR way to distribute it is this:
For each buyer, you get 1. If I am reading the spreadsheet correctly that's 97 (150-97=53). Then, if you ordered 4 or more, you get a crack at a second one. 44 people ordered more than 3 (53-44=9). Anyone with more than 10 gets a crack at a third one. That's 7 more (9-7=2). The final two can go to Arklan as a tip. Thoughts?
For each buyer, you get 1. If I am reading the spreadsheet correctly that's 97 (150-97=53). Then, if you ordered 4 or more, you get a crack at a second one. 44 people ordered more than 3 (53-44=9). Anyone with more than 10 gets a crack at a third one. That's 7 more (9-7=2). The final two can go to Arklan as a tip.
Thoughts?This makes the most sense if we are limited to 30% of the original order.