[ANN] Spondoolies-Tech - carrier grade, data center ready mining rigs - page 67.

RoadStress

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Unacceptable on August 29, 2015, 03:24:54 AM

So,Spoondolies is going the way of KnC Huh

Imagine that......whoda thunk Huh

Don't base your opinion on a single isolated incident like this reported by a (very) problematic dude without hearing the other side story.

Edited: Added more words to my statement.

Unacceptable

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Searing on August 28, 2015, 11:58:35 PM

Quote from: notlist3d on August 28, 2015, 08:36:10 PM

Quote from: quakefiend420 on August 28, 2015, 06:21:10 PM

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 03:48:50 PM

Quote from: notlist3d on August 28, 2015, 11:33:08 AM

Quote from: Tigggger on August 28, 2015, 11:24:39 AM

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 09:07:24 AM

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

Yea but were talking international laws. Will be a pricey battle and lawyers don't come cheap. And add a specialization of international sounds like a pricey case.

But holy cow on amount. Did you use links that you can show all this or counting on Spondoolies on data?

They locked me out of the system when they went through they "disown dogie he's bad for bitcoin" phase, as if I was the bad guy. [Because I asked for payment and was refused]. They've sent plenty of data, there is no question from either side that they owe a commission for this (and lots of other) sales. This is with the manually set 5%, but I was actually on a tiered commission as follows:

Code:

    5% for conversions of up to $100,000 in one quarter
    10% for conversions between $100,000 and $500,000 in one quarter
    15% if you cross the $500,000 bar in one quarter

Approaching June 2014 I had met the first $100k of sales, and so was already on the 10% rate. The actual commission for that sale is therefore $96,100, which along with lots of smaller ones exceeds $100,000 that is unpaid.

Wow, I'd be suing them if I were you.

A lawyer is going to take a good chunk chances are though. And I still think dealing with international will eat up cash even quicker on the lawsuit.

But now I can see why Guy and Dogie had words a few times. That is a lot of cash.

Hell I'd get a lawyer to sue them for a signed agreement that he would charge no more then I could get from what they owed me ..on a worse case senario..if the $$$ are lost anyway
I'd rather screw them over with the PR of such a method to force them to pay ..even if only the law firm I hired got all the $$$..just saying an't much....but it the $$ are lost for doing nothing anyway ..at least you could ruin their PR and make them spend some $$$ to to fight your case. (hey it an't much but not sure I'd sit and just take it..) Probably a law firm
would NOT take such on spec..but hey they might take it far enough to see if you could get 'something' with a settlement..but anyway I know zip just my 2c worth you probably have alread done the above looking into this.

So,Spoondolies is going the way of KnC Huh

Imagine that......whoda thunk Huh

Searing

copper member

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1465

Clueless!

Quote from: notlist3d on August 28, 2015, 08:36:10 PM

Quote from: quakefiend420 on August 28, 2015, 06:21:10 PM

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 03:48:50 PM

Quote from: notlist3d on August 28, 2015, 11:33:08 AM

Quote from: Tigggger on August 28, 2015, 11:24:39 AM

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 09:07:24 AM

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

Yea but were talking international laws. Will be a pricey battle and lawyers don't come cheap. And add a specialization of international sounds like a pricey case.

But holy cow on amount. Did you use links that you can show all this or counting on Spondoolies on data?

They locked me out of the system when they went through they "disown dogie he's bad for bitcoin" phase, as if I was the bad guy. [Because I asked for payment and was refused]. They've sent plenty of data, there is no question from either side that they owe a commission for this (and lots of other) sales. This is with the manually set 5%, but I was actually on a tiered commission as follows:

Code:

    5% for conversions of up to $100,000 in one quarter
    10% for conversions between $100,000 and $500,000 in one quarter
    15% if you cross the $500,000 bar in one quarter

Approaching June 2014 I had met the first $100k of sales, and so was already on the 10% rate. The actual commission for that sale is therefore $96,100, which along with lots of smaller ones exceeds $100,000 that is unpaid.

Wow, I'd be suing them if I were you.

A lawyer is going to take a good chunk chances are though. And I still think dealing with international will eat up cash even quicker on the lawsuit.

But now I can see why Guy and Dogie had words a few times. That is a lot of cash.

Hell I'd get a lawyer to sue them for a signed agreement that he would charge no more then I could get from what they owed me ..on a worse case senario..if the $$$ are lost anyway
I'd rather screw them over with the PR of such a method to force them to pay ..even if only the law firm I hired got all the $$$..just saying an't much....but it the $$ are lost for doing nothing anyway ..at least you could ruin their PR and make them spend some $$$ to to fight your case. (hey it an't much but not sure I'd sit and just take it..) Probably a law firm
would NOT take such on spec..but hey they might take it far enough to see if you could get 'something' with a settlement..but anyway I know zip just my 2c worth you probably have alread done the above looking into this.

notlist3d

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: quakefiend420 on August 28, 2015, 06:21:10 PM

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 03:48:50 PM

Quote from: notlist3d on August 28, 2015, 11:33:08 AM

Quote from: Tigggger on August 28, 2015, 11:24:39 AM

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 09:07:24 AM

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

Yea but were talking international laws. Will be a pricey battle and lawyers don't come cheap. And add a specialization of international sounds like a pricey case.

But holy cow on amount. Did you use links that you can show all this or counting on Spondoolies on data?

They locked me out of the system when they went through they "disown dogie he's bad for bitcoin" phase, as if I was the bad guy. [Because I asked for payment and was refused]. They've sent plenty of data, there is no question from either side that they owe a commission for this (and lots of other) sales. This is with the manually set 5%, but I was actually on a tiered commission as follows:

Code:

    5% for conversions of up to $100,000 in one quarter
    10% for conversions between $100,000 and $500,000 in one quarter
    15% if you cross the $500,000 bar in one quarter

Approaching June 2014 I had met the first $100k of sales, and so was already on the 10% rate. The actual commission for that sale is therefore $96,100, which along with lots of smaller ones exceeds $100,000 that is unpaid.

Wow, I'd be suing them if I were you.

A lawyer is going to take a good chunk chances are though. And I still think dealing with international will eat up cash even quicker on the lawsuit.

But now I can see why Guy and Dogie had words a few times. That is a lot of cash.

quakefiend420

legendary

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 03:48:50 PM

Quote from: notlist3d on August 28, 2015, 11:33:08 AM

Quote from: Tigggger on August 28, 2015, 11:24:39 AM

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 09:07:24 AM

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

Yea but were talking international laws. Will be a pricey battle and lawyers don't come cheap. And add a specialization of international sounds like a pricey case.

But holy cow on amount. Did you use links that you can show all this or counting on Spondoolies on data?

They locked me out of the system when they went through they "disown dogie he's bad for bitcoin" phase, as if I was the bad guy. [Because I asked for payment and was refused]. They've sent plenty of data, there is no question from either side that they owe a commission for this (and lots of other) sales. This is with the manually set 5%, but I was actually on a tiered commission as follows:

Code:

    5% for conversions of up to $100,000 in one quarter
    10% for conversions between $100,000 and $500,000 in one quarter
    15% if you cross the $500,000 bar in one quarter

Approaching June 2014 I had met the first $100k of sales, and so was already on the 10% rate. The actual commission for that sale is therefore $96,100, which along with lots of smaller ones exceeds $100,000 that is unpaid.

Wow, I'd be suing them if I were you.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: notlist3d on August 28, 2015, 11:33:08 AM

Quote from: Tigggger on August 28, 2015, 11:24:39 AM

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 09:07:24 AM

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

Yea but were talking international laws. Will be a pricey battle and lawyers don't come cheap. And add a specialization of international sounds like a pricey case.

But holy cow on amount. Did you use links that you can show all this or counting on Spondoolies on data?

They locked me out of the system when they went through they "disown dogie he's bad for bitcoin" phase, as if I was the bad guy. [Because I asked for payment and was refused]. They've sent plenty of data, there is no question from either side that they owe a commission for this (and lots of other) sales. This is with the manually set 5%, but I was actually on a tiered commission as follows:

Code:

    5% for conversions of up to $100,000 in one quarter
    10% for conversions between $100,000 and $500,000 in one quarter
    15% if you cross the $500,000 bar in one quarter

Approaching June 2014 I had met the first $100k of sales, and so was already on the 10% rate. The actual commission for that sale is therefore $96,100, which along with lots of smaller ones exceeds $100,000 that is unpaid.

edgar

legendary

Activity: 1859

Merit: 1001

Some of you may recall how long and exhausting it was for me to squeeze a few shekels out of them.

Genuinely sorry for dogie, cant see them coughing up even a % of that much ever if not by now.

notlist3d

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Tigggger on August 28, 2015, 11:24:39 AM

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 09:07:24 AM

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

Yea but were talking international laws. Will be a pricey battle and lawyers don't come cheap. And add a specialization of international sounds like a pricey case.

But holy cow on amount. Did you use links that you can show all this or counting on Spondoolies on data?

Tigggger

legendary

Activity: 1098

Merit: 1000

Quote from: dogie on August 28, 2015, 09:07:24 AM

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

That's pretty scummy of them, 50k is surely worth involving lawyers.

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: TheRealSteve on August 28, 2015, 05:02:05 AM

I'm pretty sure dogie had posted some minor details, but either that's deleted, or edited away. I only remember because I thought "... why hasn't Bicknellski commented on this yet?", and it's then that I realized Bick had not been around for a while.

Anyway, you can still piece together a few things:

Quote from: hedgy73 on June 29, 2015, 07:46:25 AM

I'm owed $134.50 in commission for a couple of sales while running their signature but because I signed up to the hardware option he's not prepared to offer me it in btc or cash even though there isn't a hardware option and probably never will be.

Quote from: dogie on June 30, 2015, 11:48:04 AM

Its a shame, I'm owed at least 400x more than you and still also $0 from them.

400 * $134.50 = $53,800. And they say there's little profit in Bitcoin

As I've said in other threads, its far more money than Bitmain has ever, ever, ever paid and yet the trolls will claim I'm biased against Spondoolies because Bitmain contracted me for work Roll Eyes

. Its also worth noting that both CanaanCreative and Bitmain paid their invoices on time, Spondoolies has not paid a penny.

Its not under NDA (both a non confidential activity and pre-exists the NDA which was signed for a very specific purpose). tldr they received a huge sale from my affiliate link, retrospectively changed the terms from a much higher tiered commission rate down to a flat %, then retrospectively changed the amount to be store credit, both of which breached their original agreement. The ~$50k is just what they admit to (but won't pay).

TheRealSteve

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

FUN > ROI

I'm pretty sure dogie had posted some minor details, but either that's deleted, or edited away. I only remember because I thought "... why hasn't Bicknellski commented on this yet?", and it's then that I realized Bick had not been around for a while.

Anyway, you can still piece together a few things:

Quote from: hedgy73 on June 29, 2015, 07:46:25 AM

I'm owed $134.50 in commission for a couple of sales while running their signature but because I signed up to the hardware option he's not prepared to offer me it in btc or cash even though there isn't a hardware option and probably never will be.

Quote from: dogie on June 30, 2015, 11:48:04 AM

Its a shame, I'm owed at least 400x more than you and still also $0 from them.

400 * $134.50 = $53,800. And they say there's little profit in Bitcoin

notlist3d

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Searing on August 28, 2015, 12:36:21 AM

Quote from: dogie on August 27, 2015, 06:45:04 PM

Quote from: Minor Miner on August 27, 2015, 05:34:06 PM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:39:59 AM

Quote from: TheRealSteve on August 26, 2015, 07:13:46 AM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:02:13 AM

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad Wink

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons? Sorry I am out of loop.

tldr they signed a letter of intent to merge [buy and integrate] Spondoolies with various terms, such as a 3 year exclusivity agreement on Spondoolies products, the transfer of staff (Guy, the CFO etc). BTCS made a small % purchase of Spondoolies stock in order to give them enough cash to tide them over while the formalities get done. Either party could theoretically cancel the transaction although there are some pretty harsh cancellation terms. For example, if Spondoolies wanted to "be bought out" by someone else, BTCS would be due $1M IIRC.

The thing is, BCTS don't appear to have enough cash to make this deal work at the crazy valuation they previously put on Spondoolies even if it was a falsely high one. It appears that they were hoping to raise even more money (on top of the $15M they've burnt through), or issue a tonne of shares. Either way, Spondoolies owes me money and isn't paying.

owes you money? if it is not in a NDA or something could you elaborate? If this is not to personal a guestion..if so disregard it. ... (after seeing KNC go from a good company in 2013 to the dark side ie NUN to PORN STAR in a flash ethics wise... in 2014...kinda concerned about spondoolies falling to the zombie ASIC apocalypse due to greed as well ..probably not but just saying)

I'm sure it is within a NDA. Sadly some information that is not made public is due to them. They are a pain. I suggest anyone avoid NDA's at all costs.

I can say I don't have one with SP so I'm just speculating here. But most likely Dogie would like to tell us much more, but cannot due to an NDA.

Searing

copper member

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1465

Clueless!

Quote from: dogie on August 27, 2015, 06:45:04 PM

Quote from: Minor Miner on August 27, 2015, 05:34:06 PM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:39:59 AM

Quote from: TheRealSteve on August 26, 2015, 07:13:46 AM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:02:13 AM

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad Wink

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons? Sorry I am out of loop.

tldr they signed a letter of intent to merge [buy and integrate] Spondoolies with various terms, such as a 3 year exclusivity agreement on Spondoolies products, the transfer of staff (Guy, the CFO etc). BTCS made a small % purchase of Spondoolies stock in order to give them enough cash to tide them over while the formalities get done. Either party could theoretically cancel the transaction although there are some pretty harsh cancellation terms. For example, if Spondoolies wanted to "be bought out" by someone else, BTCS would be due $1M IIRC.

The thing is, BCTS don't appear to have enough cash to make this deal work at the crazy valuation they previously put on Spondoolies even if it was a falsely high one. It appears that they were hoping to raise even more money (on top of the $15M they've burnt through), or issue a tonne of shares. Either way, Spondoolies owes me money and isn't paying.

owes you money? if it is not in a NDA or something could you elaborate? If this is not to personal a guestion..if so disregard it. ... (after seeing KNC go from a good company in 2013 to the dark side ie NUN to PORN STAR in a flash ethics wise... in 2014...kinda concerned about spondoolies falling to the zombie ASIC apocalypse due to greed as well ..probably not but just saying)

vpn1

newbie

Activity: 33

Merit: 0

Second miss-step this time with irrevocable repercussions. First was that failed attempt to sponsor the Russian character and his Havelock IPO where checks and balances were not in place.

The second and now catastrophic is this BCTS bullshit. Having dealt with them before at the top level, I can assure there exists a slimy rot, slick fast car salesman aspect to their operation. In other words, big hat no cattle.

They early on tested the waters in acquiring used Spondoolies - other machines, saturating these and other forums with marked shills and 'established' traders in used equipment's. All under the pretense of buying your used equipment outright. At the end of the day the sales pitch would be after an agreed price was set and sales mechanism, to introduce the highfalutin "CEO" penny stock company man you dawdle and hum and hawed like he was some sort of mega business man, only to turn around at the end of the day to offer shares in his make believe company for the hardware you have. Not a penny to their name. Trade your hardware for their shit shares.

Guy is unfortunately and fortunately a straight shooter yet naïve. They are in going to be in a world of hurt getting wrapped up in this educated penny stock company. All goodwill, honesty and all straight shooting will go crooked. In fact I would bet money the silence you see right now is Spondoolies sitting around their conference table saying "is he a drayer or what"/:

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: Minor Miner on August 27, 2015, 05:34:06 PM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:39:59 AM

Quote from: TheRealSteve on August 26, 2015, 07:13:46 AM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:02:13 AM

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad Wink

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons? Sorry I am out of loop.

tldr they signed a letter of intent to merge [buy and integrate] Spondoolies with various terms, such as a 3 year exclusivity agreement on Spondoolies products, the transfer of staff (Guy, the CFO etc). BTCS made a small % purchase of Spondoolies stock in order to give them enough cash to tide them over while the formalities get done. Either party could theoretically cancel the transaction although there are some pretty harsh cancellation terms. For example, if Spondoolies wanted to "be bought out" by someone else, BTCS would be due $1M IIRC.

The thing is, BCTS don't appear to have enough cash to make this deal work at the crazy valuation they previously put on Spondoolies even if it was a falsely high one. It appears that they were hoping to raise even more money (on top of the $15M they've burnt through), or issue a tonne of shares. Either way, Spondoolies owes me money and isn't paying.

TheRealSteve

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

FUN > ROI

Quote from: Minor Miner on August 27, 2015, 05:34:06 PM

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons? Sorry I am out of loop.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11222700

Quote from: http://www.spondoolies-tech.com/blogs/news/18454916-spondoolies-tech-signs-letter-of-intent-to-merge-with-bitcoin-shop

Arlington, VA – (Marketwired – April 28, 2015) – Bitcoin Shop, Inc. (OTCQB: BTCS) (“BTCS” or the “Company”), a blockchain technology company that engages in transaction verification services, announced today that it has signed a Letter of Intent (“LOI”) to merge with Spondoolies-Tech Ltd (“Spondoolies”), a digital currency server manufacturer.

Unacceptable

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Minor Miner on August 27, 2015, 05:34:06 PM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:39:59 AM

Quote from: TheRealSteve on August 26, 2015, 07:13:46 AM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:02:13 AM

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad Wink

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons? Sorry I am out of loop.

I believe BTCS is buying & hosting the majority (if not all) of the next gen miners from SPT Roll Eyes

Minor Miner

legendary

Activity: 2478

Merit: 1020

Be A Digital Miner

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:39:59 AM

Quote from: TheRealSteve on August 26, 2015, 07:13:46 AM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:02:13 AM

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad Wink

Dogie;

Can you summarize this company and what it has to do with Spons? Sorry I am out of loop.

p3yot33at3r

sr. member

Activity: 266

Merit: 250

Quote from: TheRealSteve on August 26, 2015, 07:13:46 AM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:02:13 AM

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

Ah, you were referring to BTCS - for a moment there I thought you meant SP-Tech - my bad Wink

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Quote from: TheRealSteve on August 26, 2015, 07:13:46 AM

Quote from: p3yot33at3r on August 26, 2015, 07:02:13 AM

Can you provide proof/links that verify this statement?

See the financial statements section of their SEC filing (also referenced in the article); http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1436229/000149315215003734/form10-q.htm#a_002

If you just want the raw financials they're here, p&l, balance sheet and cash flow: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=btcs. In the 3 months to March 2015 they had $38,000 revenue while their costs were $3,380,000.

Topic: [ANN] Spondoolies-Tech - carrier grade, data center ready mining rigs - page 67. (Read 1260395 times)