Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 37. (Read 771520 times)
February 04, 2014, 06:37:30 PM
Just you.
February 04, 2014, 06:23:26 PM
Just me or have ukyos shares been pulled?
February 04, 2014, 05:19:35 PM
You made the point that Ukyo could declare bankruptcy. This is why we have to have a fire sale at this time. Should Ukyo declare bankruptcy, the court would put a stay on selling any of his assets, and Active Mining would be stuck until the court confirmed that our lien on the shares comes before other debtors.
So, this is the reason for putting up the shares at this time ahead of other shareholders being allowed to trade.
What ken is saying is "this is why we couldn't wait to list these shares"
What ken isn't saying is "we are purposely holding back everyone elses ability to trade so we can sell ukyo's shares"
I am sure you would like to believe this. And of course intent is impossible to be certain of in any case.
But actions speak very clearly. And the action here is dumping shares while continuing to not allow anyone else to trade.
February 04, 2014, 05:14:42 PM
No, I am not willfully withholding shareholder access to their shares to have unimpeded access to the market. I am liquidating the shares due to the above reasons.
Ken, you gotta be upfront with us. Are you waiting to put shareholder shares up until ukyo's shares have been liquidated? This is something that you should state out in the open.
Let's not forget normal action for Ken would be to sue Ukyo for the money owed and Ukyo has already stated that if anyone were to sue him he'd just declare bankruptcy and that no one would get paid.
Ken has no obligation to Ukyo's debts and only has obligation to his shareholders regarding this transaction.
That said; I don't think anyone really has issue with the price... the real issue is that Ken has started trading shares before he's returned access to our own. If we were open trading right now the market would set that price not Ken. We should have resumed normal trading before Ken dumped those shares; you can make what ever excuse you want about it... it just is wrong to do it this way.
Ken has no obligation to Ukyo's debts and only has obligation to his shareholders regarding this transaction.
That said; I don't think anyone really has issue with the price... the real issue is that Ken has started trading shares before he's returned access to our own. If we were open trading right now the market would set that price not Ken. We should have resumed normal trading before Ken dumped those shares; you can make what ever excuse you want about it... it just is wrong to do it this way.
You made the point that Ukyo could declare bankruptcy. This is why we have to have a fire sale at this time. Should Ukyo declare bankruptcy, the court would put a stay on selling any of his assets, and Active Mining would be stuck until the court confirmed that our lien on the shares comes before other debtors.
So, this is the reason for putting up the shares at this time ahead of other shareholders being allowed to trade.
What ken is saying is "this is why we couldn't wait to list these shares"
What ken isn't saying is "we are purposely holding back everyone elses ability to trade so we can sell ukyo's shares"
February 04, 2014, 05:06:15 PM
No, I am not willfully withholding shareholder access to their shares to have unimpeded access to the market. I am liquidating the shares due to the above reasons.
Ken, you gotta be upfront with us. Are you waiting to put shareholder shares up until ukyo's shares have been liquidated? This is something that you should state out in the open.
Let's not forget normal action for Ken would be to sue Ukyo for the money owed and Ukyo has already stated that if anyone were to sue him he'd just declare bankruptcy and that no one would get paid.
Ken has no obligation to Ukyo's debts and only has obligation to his shareholders regarding this transaction.
That said; I don't think anyone really has issue with the price... the real issue is that Ken has started trading shares before he's returned access to our own. If we were open trading right now the market would set that price not Ken. We should have resumed normal trading before Ken dumped those shares; you can make what ever excuse you want about it... it just is wrong to do it this way.
Ken has no obligation to Ukyo's debts and only has obligation to his shareholders regarding this transaction.
That said; I don't think anyone really has issue with the price... the real issue is that Ken has started trading shares before he's returned access to our own. If we were open trading right now the market would set that price not Ken. We should have resumed normal trading before Ken dumped those shares; you can make what ever excuse you want about it... it just is wrong to do it this way.
You made the point that Ukyo could declare bankruptcy. This is why we have to have a fire sale at this time. Should Ukyo declare bankruptcy, the court would put a stay on selling any of his assets, and Active Mining would be stuck until the court confirmed that our lien on the shares comes before other debtors.
So, this is the reason for putting up the shares at this time ahead of other shareholders being allowed to trade.
February 04, 2014, 05:03:23 PM
No, I am not willfully withholding shareholder access to their shares to have unimpeded access to the market. I am liquidating the shares due to the above reasons.
Ken, you gotta be upfront with us. Are you waiting to put shareholder shares up until ukyo's shares have been liquidated? This is something that you should state out in the open.
February 04, 2014, 04:55:01 PM
If Ken was an honest guy, people should expect to get .0025 in dividends for their .0005 investment, or 500% ROI*. But people aren't buying Ken's stories, that's why they're not buying his shares.
Actually they bought 57000+ shares last 24 hours.Sure, there are pro financiers here who are convinced that a 20-fold price drop means "awesome deal."
Mistakes happen.
February 04, 2014, 04:51:53 PM
How should i prove when i transferred the shares to amc-tender when i cant login to bitfunder anymore? There arent emails sent out too it seems.
You sign a message with your bitcoin address. Uh. No that's for people who didn't send their shares to AMC-TENDER. You should have taken a screenshot of your transaction log to show how many shares you have, your username and what date/time you sent your shares to Ken.
A screenshot? Interesting... i really found one. Though i remember that it was said that no screenshot is needed. People that did so now have a problem when ken really wants to know the date of transfer for share transfer to CT.
Though those are theoretical problems anyway when we dont get the chance to claim the shares.
February 04, 2014, 04:51:14 PM
A) Yes, it seems like all the shares are getting bought up
B) Either someone is very foolish or someone is very clever
C) Could it be that there are people who have long term faith in Active Mining?
D) Yes, Ken did screw up several time. Let's not enumerate all the screw-ups
E) Despite all that, Ken might just succeed with this company anyway
F) Only Ken has the data required to make an accurate guess of what will happen
G) The focus has to be on 1) renewing trading and 2) getting machines produced
H) Ken should not bother with the silliness of this marvelous thread except to take the advice of those who are knowledgeable
I) An advisory board WAS a good idea and should have worked except for one little factor
B) Either someone is very foolish or someone is very clever
C) Could it be that there are people who have long term faith in Active Mining?
D) Yes, Ken did screw up several time. Let's not enumerate all the screw-ups
E) Despite all that, Ken might just succeed with this company anyway
F) Only Ken has the data required to make an accurate guess of what will happen
G) The focus has to be on 1) renewing trading and 2) getting machines produced
H) Ken should not bother with the silliness of this marvelous thread except to take the advice of those who are knowledgeable
I) An advisory board WAS a good idea and should have worked except for one little factor
February 04, 2014, 04:50:44 PM
Still 80000 to sell until we are allowed to trade... *sigh*
well someone just bought 16k... perhaps not so long to wait after all
February 04, 2014, 04:49:23 PM
I) Do you all remember what things were like so long ago?
...
...
I remember using Roman numerals...
Anyhow, ActM shares are currently trading on CT. *YOUR* shares aren't trading, but that doesn't matter -- Ken's shares aren't selling either now that he bumped the price to .0006.
So it all works out.
February 04, 2014, 04:48:05 PM
Still 80000 to sell until we are allowed to trade... *sigh*
February 04, 2014, 04:44:29 PM
If Ken was an honest guy, people should expect to get .0025 in dividends for their .0005 investment, or 500% ROI*. But people aren't buying Ken's stories, that's why they're not buying his shares.
Actually they bought 57000+ shares last 24 hours. February 04, 2014, 04:39:57 PM
I) Do you all remember what things were like so long ago?
II) bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=189240.0
II) On April 27, 2013 the CEO of Active Mining requested that we all vote to get Ukyo to list ACM on BF
III) It all started just nine months ago
IV) When will it end?
V) Um.....when will trading start again?
VI) Ok, so we are looking at this: cryptostocks.com/securities/56
V) Buy Orders
Price Quantity Amount
0.001704 1 0.001704
0.001703 6 0.010218
0.001700 18 0.030600
0.001500 6 0.009000
0.001000 1 0.001000
0.000100 1 0.000100
0.000003 333 0.000999
0.000002 5,000 0.010000
0.000001 1,000 0.001000
VI) Sell orders (BTC)
Price Quantity Amount
0.003900 100 0.390000
0.003940 1 0.003940
0.003946 2 0.007892
0.003950 2 0.007900
0.004991 2 0.009982
0.004999 226 1.129774
0.005991 2 0.011982
0.006500 100 0.650000
0.006900 15 0.103500
0.006991 2 0.013982
VII) Have all of Ukyo's shares been sold?
II) bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=189240.0
II) On April 27, 2013 the CEO of Active Mining requested that we all vote to get Ukyo to list ACM on BF
III) It all started just nine months ago
IV) When will it end?
V) Um.....when will trading start again?
VI) Ok, so we are looking at this: cryptostocks.com/securities/56
V) Buy Orders
Price Quantity Amount
0.001704 1 0.001704
0.001703 6 0.010218
0.001700 18 0.030600
0.001500 6 0.009000
0.001000 1 0.001000
0.000100 1 0.000100
0.000003 333 0.000999
0.000002 5,000 0.010000
0.000001 1,000 0.001000
VI) Sell orders (BTC)
Price Quantity Amount
0.003900 100 0.390000
0.003940 1 0.003940
0.003946 2 0.007892
0.003950 2 0.007900
0.004991 2 0.009982
0.004999 226 1.129774
0.005991 2 0.011982
0.006500 100 0.650000
0.006900 15 0.103500
0.006991 2 0.013982
VII) Have all of Ukyo's shares been sold?
February 04, 2014, 04:35:06 PM
...
With 20 or 30 shares selling at 0.01BTC over 2 weeks it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine the price was too high...
With 20 or 30 shares selling at 0.01BTC over 2 weeks it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine the price was too high...
Nor does it take a rocket scientist to tell that .0005 is way too high, but someone bought. I guess it's not just rocket scientists who "invest" in this failscam
At current BTC prices people will get 100% ROI on the purchase price within the first month of mining. $0.1/share mining revenue...
1. BTC price is irrelevant when calculating ROI -- both the investment and ROI are in BTC. Learn to BTC.
2. If Ken was an honest guy, people should expect to get .0025 in dividends for their .0005 investment, or 500% ROI*. But people aren't buying Ken's stories, that's why they're not buying his shares.
*going buy the incorrect definition of ROI used on these boards.
February 04, 2014, 03:56:34 PM
...
With 20 or 30 shares selling at 0.01BTC over 2 weeks it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine the price was too high...
With 20 or 30 shares selling at 0.01BTC over 2 weeks it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine the price was too high...
Nor does it take a rocket scientist to tell that .0005 is way too high, but someone bought. I guess it's not just rocket scientists who "invest" in this failscam
February 04, 2014, 03:49:57 PM
Lol, OK. Who's the boss trader that just bought [email protected] and put them all up @0.00069999?
Disciple of the 99.99 school of trading?
Disciple of the 99.99 school of trading?
February 04, 2014, 03:48:45 PM
I had to dig this up to show you guys, all of Kens bullshit is predictable from this point on.
With 20 or 30 shares selling at 0.01BTC over 2 weeks it doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine the price was too high. But why not congratulate yourself on that prediction. No-one else spotted it:
I would not buy them at 0.01 right now. The news and situation right now suggests a price of 0.004BTC per share and above for this company.
Your post would make sense if he sold them at .005, or even .0025.. but no... add another zero in there and you can clearly see this old cunt has valued his own company as almost worthless
February 04, 2014, 03:47:05 PM
~53,000 shares @ .0005 and now we're seeing some light buying @ .0006.
The 55nm chips alone should pay back all of the 0.0025btc per share. Then we have the custom 28nm. These buyers are lucky sods.
February 04, 2014, 03:44:31 PM
That's kind of scary seeing so little volume with the share price at 0.0005 for nearly 24 hours. I don't even want to think about what the bottom is going to be when that built up tension gets released of people wanting to get out.
I can't wait!!!
Jump to: