Topic: announcement (Read 8617 times)

Nah it's not in USD.

"2. CPA will not be liable for loss greater than 500 bitcoins."

Clearly says that the loss against which BMF is insured is denominated in BTC.  Plus usagi has always stated nav in BTC anyway.

As far as nav being below 1.0 - it's pretty obvious that usagi did the insurance policy right when it had got nav back to or close to 1.0 (the last reported nav was .866 2 weeks before the insurance was agreed).  Usagi specifically stated that signing the polict meant that "This contract means we will likely begin paying dividends again by next week."

You see the nature of the contract is such that it COULD be agreed when nav was actually slightly below 1.0 - in those circumstances they'd make an immediate claim on it, but CPA would still get 550 back from BMF long-term.  If the initial payment needed were low (and BMF didn't collpase horribly like it did) then CPA  would still make a tidy profit from it - and the deal could be viewed as making good sense for both parties.

I repeat: if you interpret the contract that way (and believed both BMF and CPA had rosy futures), then signing it make good sense for shareholders both parties.  BMF got some immediate cash to restore NAV to 1.0, CPA got an income stream etc.

The problem came when both BMF and CPA then lost a ton of capital, CPA couldn't afford to cough up 500 BTC (in 5 chunks of 100 of course) and usagi decided to stiff the BMF shareholders to prop CPA up.

Signing the contract wasn't the problem (though it SHOULD have been properly explained and motioned as usagi represented the other party to it too).  Not honouring it is a HUGE problem.

That policy does not make sense. Ignoring Usagi's trouble calculating what a NAV should be, at the time the contract was "signed" the NAV was below 1.0, so there should have been an imediate payment to bump the NAV up to 1.0.

Usagi, am I reading this contract correctly? When is BMF going to ask CPA for the insurance payment?

Or is it actually insurance to keep NAV above 1.0 USD, since you seem to like those so much?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1229467

Link to the policy and other relevant info in that post.

Do you have a link to the text of this contract? Usagi starts so many threads I am not sure where to find it.

In context that probably is the likelier explanation.

Still wondering why CPA hasn't paid out on its NAV insurance contract...

Or did Usagi just get caught with their pants down fixing the poll? Why would you even do that for such a worthless poll?

This is pretty concerning however, "GLBSE reporting the data wrong". How is that possible? Maybe the result to every motion to date is in fact bogus?

It does manipulate, as many times as you push that button is as many times as it votes. How do I now this I just recently had a vote I clicked the button 3 times, You all know how slow it is lol. At the end it had more votes then I have shares total LMFAO.

I did not!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill


I do not have any relationship with Usagi or his business. We only share the same membership status in this forum. It appears that the outstanding shares are not a safe indicator to determine how many votes a motion can receive. This situation only shows that you and other users have been making clueless accusations against Usagi management, since you cannot even agree with the stock market vote system.

Let's verify some available data:



https://glbse.com/asset/old_motions/BMF

From the motions already carried by Usagi it is an indication that the system is able to receive nay votes.

But, why so many votes? I am not sure, but I will try to guess. Every security issued must give a right of vote. If this is the case, then it is completely reasonable as to why there are so many votes, including Usagi votes:

https://glbse.com/asset/view/BMF



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Usagi and your new shill, I have a question:
As of today, BMF only has 4983 shares outstanding and staring from 2012.09.19, BMF never had more than 5347 shares outstanding. So, how did you manage to get  8148 "Yea's"?

Meh :

1.  A large chunk of those votes were you I'd bet.
2.  "All of my shareholders are happy." is not supported by the facts.  All the vote shows is that the ones who VOTED were happy.
3.  Anyone with half a brain who wasn't happy would have sold out by now - and no longer have a vote.
4.  Why do you think you were able to buy back shares at below IPO price?  It can't be because the shareholders were ecstatic about your management of the company. 

You bought out all the unhappy ones (at a loss to them) - what's left is those who don't pay attention, the terminally stupid and probably a few unfortunate souls who haven't been around for a while.

Typical usagi spin/gloss.  The vote wasn't even announced in the main BMF thread - just in one of your numerous "Important: I'm an attention whore - please listen to my bull-shit and don't argue with me" threads.

Oh - and how DID you get more yes votes than have EVER been in circulation?  You didn't by some chance transfer unsold ones to yourself to vote with (then send them back) did you?  I asked nefario about that particular nasty little trick a while back (by PM) but got no answer - so assume it IS possible for a company owner to generate as many yes votes on a motion as they like.

WOW! Congratulations, Usagi.

Not one single nay vote after all accusations against your management...

Priceless!

 

My most recent posts are not talking about determining the value of BMF; they are talking about how to properly calculate ROI and differentiating between total return.

If bitcoin dropped to $2, investors who paid usd for btc and bought BMF would still be worse off than if they had just bought bitcoin with USD and held. Both of those routes would lead to a loss, but as BMF has a ROI of -40%, those individuals would have a greater loss.

Please read this post and see that 'Investor D' is an example of an individual you think would be celebrating if btc fell:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1226979

I am not sure that you are understanding completely. You say that investors "would be celebrating BMF right now." That seems true, but isn't it also just as true for other assets?

If you knew bitcoin was going up, why would you invest bitcoins in something that is tied to fiat instead of just investing in bitcoin? Trust me, if the bitcoin price had dropped to $2, you'd be celebrating BMF right now. Because of bitcoin's volitility, it is only useful to value companies in USD, and thus should be treated as a regular USD investment and not part of your BTC investment.

At the risk of being called "troll" or "sockpuppet" I was going to ask a question about BMF.

Since discussion is discouraged here it should move to https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/usagi-falsifying-navs-manipulating-share-prices-and-misleading-investors-113708.

Oh thats easy.
Two days ago you held 200 ABM shares and they traded for 0.125. Today you have 210 shares and they traded for 0.45. Do I really need to explain?

For those not seeing it, these are very very low volume shares with an enormous spread. Usagi seems to focus primarily on making his books look better than they really are, so he buys a few shares way above of any reasonable NAV estimate, so GLSBE share price shoots up, and if no one sells, which happens a lot with those low volume assets, particularly without any bid walls,  he can put those inflated values in his books.

He did the same with CPA,  BMF,  DMC etc. Spend a few BTC and you can put a multiple of it as "asset value" in your books. And even then he seems to think its a good idea to increase that value further.
.

A P/E ratio has little relevance to a balance sheet. The fact that you are not using the term correctly makes it less relevant. Some of my previous posts advocate using book value as a basis for specific calculations, as it is a 'current' value and not dependent on a 12 month period. A P/E ratio is current market price divided by past 12 month earnings. Since ABM and BMF both have not existed for 12 months, a P/E will be inaccurate. You can not simply extrapolate by multiplying the past 3 months by 4 or 4 months by 3 to reach a 12 month period, or however you seem to think it works.

Your new system basically allows you to just make up random values that aren't based on real information.

I have not 'changed my tune.' All of my posts are very in-line with one another. Anyone can go to my post history and read the posts I made regarding your business operations. They would see I use bath math and principles of finance to illustrate specific points and show when you are incorrect.

Apparently you have not read my thread
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.919121

In the event of liquidation all share holders will get a final dividend.
This will include:
- last time mining revenue payment
- a share in the mining hardware sales income

Greetz