If Ken wanted to recoup the money quickly, he would sell the lot at 0.000457 per share and be done with it.
I am not saying the shares will sell for 0.01 (edit: in the near future), but I am saying there is a reason they are listed at that price.
Edit: If Ken is happy to wait months for these shares to sell, doesn't 0.01 become a possibility?
I would expect Ken to recover 100% of money owed to ActM and ONLY THEN distribute the remainder amongst the larger community.
Topic: [ActiveMining] The Official Active Mining Discussion Thread [Self-Moderated] - page 95. (Read 771512 times)
January 23, 2014, 08:43:40 AM
January 23, 2014, 08:37:43 AM
Zum you need to put some reality goggles on.
These 232k of shares will not sell for 0.01 That price will only be attained once we have the farm up are batch selling chips and shipping machines enmass.
The likely average price is 0.004.
That will make 928btc.
If that is shared around everyone will get around 15% of their money back in btc. Do you want to thank this thief again for his generosity?
So we loose 85btc. Good news?
These 232k of shares will not sell for 0.01 That price will only be attained once we have the farm up are batch selling chips and shipping machines enmass.
The likely average price is 0.004.
That will make 928btc.
If that is shared around everyone will get around 15% of their money back in btc. Do you want to thank this thief again for his generosity?
So we loose 85btc. Good news?
January 23, 2014, 08:26:24 AM
...
I imagine that Ken only wants the companies BTC back plus possibly legal expenses which would make sense.
I imagine that Ken only wants the companies BTC back plus possibly legal expenses which would make sense.
The rest of the coin will barely cover the legal expenses. Slaughter Law Belize charges serious coin.
January 23, 2014, 08:23:38 AM
Thanks say,
That confirms my figures above and also supports the information I received from another source.
It would leave 3545btc outstanding less any possible ActM legal costs.
This is based on the assumption that Ken would return all money to Weexchange users after ActM recovered theirs and that all Ukyo ActM shares sell for 0.01btc per share.
That confirms my figures above and also supports the information I received from another source.
It would leave 3545btc outstanding less any possible ActM legal costs.
This is based on the assumption that Ken would return all money to Weexchange users after ActM recovered theirs and that all Ukyo ActM shares sell for 0.01btc per share.
January 23, 2014, 08:20:27 AM
OK if we sell these shares Ukyo wants all the proceeds divided equally not us first and everyone else later. Now do the maths. I don't know how much he owes and to how many people.
mid december he paid 386 BTC, that was about 6,175%,
so in total he owes the community 6251 BTC - 386 BTC already paid out
= 5865 BTC outstanding
January 23, 2014, 08:19:03 AM
OK if we sell these shares Ukyo wants all the proceeds divided equally not us first and everyone else later. Now do the maths. I don't know how much he owes and to how many people.
I've done a little digging and figure that if Ken managed to sell all Ukyo's shares at 0.01btc per share, then after we recouped 106btc for ActM and paid the other 2214btc to the community, there would still be just over 3500btc outstanding that Ukyo would still owe the community.
Lol, you're confusing Ken with Robinhood. Ken never set out to redistribute *anything* to the community.
Where'd you get that sweet shit you're smoking?
January 23, 2014, 08:11:09 AM
OK if we sell these shares Ukyo wants all the proceeds divided equally not us first and everyone else later. Now do the maths. I don't know how much he owes and to how many people.
I've done a little digging and figure that if Ken managed to sell all Ukyo's shares at 0.01btc per share, then after we recouped 106btc for ActM and paid the other 2214btc to the community, there would still be just over 3500btc outstanding that Ukyo would still owe the community.
January 23, 2014, 08:09:58 AM
Interesting how many here defend Ukyo who stole money from the company. I wonder at your motives.
The game mechanics are the same as for the kids defending Ken Slaughter. Ken promised you the moon, took everyone's coin, and lied to you from that point on.
And yet this thread is chock full of Ken defenders. What are *your* motives?
It's not surprising that the thread topic has become "Rage at a Bigger Shit Than Ken". This behavior is a common coping technique among apes.
When a well-adjusted ape is attacked, he attempts to redirect the attackers toward a weaker, more vulnerable ape.
The technique is proving quite successful here.
January 23, 2014, 07:32:42 AM
OK if we sell these shares Ukyo wants all the proceeds divided equally not us first and everyone else later. Now do the maths. I don't know how much he owes and to how many people.
January 23, 2014, 07:20:58 AM
I don't recall him agreeing at all. I actually remember him saying what Ken is doing is blatantly wrong and illegal. He said something along the lines of his personal shares of ACTM have nothing to do with the Bitfunder/Weexchange issue and Ken can't just take them from him.
I remember him saying that as well at the beginning and he clarified in a few earlier posts (Thank you Ukyo)
To be clear: I have no issues with 100% of funds from the sale of all ActM Shares assigned to me to be distributed to weex users.
Everyone should be able to see the numbers.
-Ukyo
Everyone should be able to see the numbers.
-Ukyo
All we need now is Ken to clarify that once his 106 BTC is gained back from shares, will the rest of the BTC from shares sold be given to Ukyo to distribute to WeEx users.
I imagine that Ken only wants the companies BTC back plus possibly legal expenses which would make sense.
January 23, 2014, 07:15:23 AM
Pretty sure our company position is as follows:
If more than one person sue the same person and win, who gets the funds first? The person who won first. We have the shares, we will sell them, we are first. We get paid first.
Our shares
Our leverage
Everyone else can fight their own battle to get money off Ukyo and they can split whats left after we are done.
If more than one person sue the same person and win, who gets the funds first? The person who won first. We have the shares, we will sell them, we are first. We get paid first.
Our shares
Our leverage
Everyone else can fight their own battle to get money off Ukyo and they can split whats left after we are done.
We are owed 106btc and @ 0.01 per share that is only 10,600 shares. The remainder can go to pay off the rest of the community who Ukyo let down financially. Ken becomes the first Bitcoin Robin Hood and ActM becomes hot property. No legal action required. It is an unnecessary danger.
Edit: even if there was a case and ActM won, the legal costs would come out of the Ukyo funds which reduces the available funds to repay the larger community.
January 23, 2014, 07:06:30 AM
Pretty sure our company position is as follows:
If more than one person sue the same person and win, who gets the funds first? The person who won first. We have the shares, we will sell them, we are first. We get paid first.
Our shares
Our leverage
Everyone else can fight their own battle to get money off Ukyo and they can split whats left after we are done.
If more than one person sue the same person and win, who gets the funds first? The person who won first. We have the shares, we will sell them, we are first. We get paid first.
Our shares
Our leverage
Everyone else can fight their own battle to get money off Ukyo and they can split whats left after we are done.
January 23, 2014, 07:02:47 AM
I truly hope you have some plans for the following:
a. be able to distribute funds from the sale to weex users in debt.
or
b. explain to a court appointed handler where portions of my assets are.
(As well as explain to other weex users why your debt is more important than theirs)
Also:
To be clear: I have no issues with 100% of funds from the sale of all ActM Shares assigned to me to be distributed to weex users.
Everyone should be able to see the numbers.
-Ukyo
Edit: ActM is/was a Weexchange user.
January 23, 2014, 06:54:17 AM
zum you aren't quite getting it. He wants the shares split between all weex debtors. If that happens we get 5% of our money back??
He has come out and laid down an ultimatum to Ken and you are thanking him for it?!
He has come out and laid down an ultimatum to Ken and you are thanking him for it?!
January 23, 2014, 06:50:33 AM
We are selling Ukyo shares on Crypto-Trade to recover our losses on Bitfunder.
We will start moving Investors shares to Crypto-Trade within the next 7 days.
We will start moving Investors shares to Crypto-Trade within the next 7 days.
I truly hope you have some plans for the following:
a. be able to distribute funds from the sale to weex users in debt.
or
b. explain to a court appointed handler where portions of my assets are.
(As well as explain to other weex users why your debt is more important than theirs)
Also:
What do you plan to do with all remaining funds?
It is no secret that there are plenty of shares to cover your personal accounts 100btc.
Or is the plan to continue to give no information at all, continue without any new information dates
with the last information of any kind about 5 months ago being a broken deadline so cause the prices
of ActM shares to drop so much you can continue to buy them back for pennies on the dollar compared
to what you pumped them to and be able to claim that all the shares I hold are worth less than the 100btc
you are personally having an issue with?
To be clear: I have no issues with 100% of funds from the sale of all ActM Shares assigned to me to be distributed to weex users.
Everyone should be able to see the numbers.
-Ukyo
Thanks for posting Ukyo and clarifying your position. Here's to a speedy resolution and one that is in all parties interests so that we can put this episode behind us and move forward without any potentially damaging episode that could involve legal action and hurt the entire community.
January 23, 2014, 06:37:27 AM
It is company btc and you are liable for ACtM's related business losses not Kens personal losses. Big difference.
By the way Ukyo, have you released the weex wallet details so people can examine your transaction history?
By the way Ukyo, have you released the weex wallet details so people can examine your transaction history?
January 23, 2014, 06:30:47 AM
If you want to play hard-ball Ukyo lets do it.
I think Ken should sue you for the damage to our business that will have occurred due to these funds being lost. We could have used this money for many tasks but Ken has had to take it off our balance sheet. We have not been able to plan around these funds.
I expect a million dollar law suit would put you into debt for the rest of your life and its something we have a high chance of winning. Lets play ball.
I think Ken should sue you for the damage to our business that will have occurred due to these funds being lost. We could have used this money for many tasks but Ken has had to take it off our balance sheet. We have not been able to plan around these funds.
I expect a million dollar law suit would put you into debt for the rest of your life and its something we have a high chance of winning. Lets play ball.
Who said anything about playing anything?
I simply stated the facts.
Besides, Ken has the right to sue for his personal btc should he choose just like everyone.
However theft for theft for his own personal reasons is probably not good either.
Beit considered theft from me or theft from weex users. I have already said many times
that my intentions were to sell the share to distribute the proceeds to weex users.
There is nothing new in anything I have said. Just putting everything into prospective.
Ken just wants to make sure he gets his personal btc before everyone else.
January 23, 2014, 06:23:07 AM
By the way, I agree that Ken has no rights to sell the Ukyo shares and pays back his debt with him
It's not for you to agree or not, the law is quite simple and Ken is well within rights.
ukyo stating that Ken can sell shares and distribute to we-ex users strengthens ken's decision no end.
January 23, 2014, 06:22:48 AM
nyc77 you joined the forum today. welcome.
January 23, 2014, 06:19:40 AM
Long time lurker (and small time investor) here.
Bad move imho, until now at least. You should have put up your investor's shares first to get an indication of a fair market price, which would have been established within a few days. After that, your block of shares could have been sold for this price, at least to a large part. Putting up this number of shares that you own yourself (if that is even true) for this price plus excluding everyone else is a sign of greed.
Here's to hoping that you will at least start the process within the next 7 days... I think it is the only way you could ever sell that large block of shares. You need to get some large volume trading going and (re)establish confidence in your operation in order to make this work again.
We are selling Ukyo shares on Crypto-Trade to recover our losses on Bitfunder.
Bad move imho, until now at least. You should have put up your investor's shares first to get an indication of a fair market price, which would have been established within a few days. After that, your block of shares could have been sold for this price, at least to a large part. Putting up this number of shares that you own yourself (if that is even true) for this price plus excluding everyone else is a sign of greed.
We will start moving Investors shares to Crypto-Trade within the next 7 days.
Here's to hoping that you will at least start the process within the next 7 days... I think it is the only way you could ever sell that large block of shares. You need to get some large volume trading going and (re)establish confidence in your operation in order to make this work again.
Jump to: