Topic: announcement - page 3. (Read 8617 times)

Yes, and if you really think that means anything you are even dumber than I thought. Also, if you think this kind of juvenile arguing convinces anyone reading this that you are competent and sincere  and that it is reasonable to value your recently ordered hardware 28% above list price and shares at 2x GLBSE 3 month high, you are insulting their intelligence.

IOW, stop wasting my, your and their time, you are as transparent as a quartz glass.

Nice try. For a 6 year old. Perhaps you can put up a single BMF share for sale on bitmit for 50BTC and claim that is the market price?
Thats not market price, thats ask price and its for a single which is readily available, unlike yours.

Edit your link actually also shows singles for sale 30BTC. Did you notice?

BTW, not to sure what to make of DMC. He claimed he sold them for 0.1, but he still lists them. Diablo himself calculated his NAV to be 0.065 (he owns just 3 or 4 different shares, thats it, so not much confusion there). If you want to pretend its worth twice that, and put that in your books, be my guest, but unless he actually sold them for 0.1,  fair valuation for DMC would be 0.065 tops, and api is what it is.

edit: its now trading for 0.55.. someone is having fun pushing it up and down. Dont be fooled, 0.065 is what its worth tops.

As usagi damn well knows, I used the latest numbers available on his site when I posted that, I made a screenshot if anyone doubts that.
He has been doing some trading, here is an updated spreadsheet.



Not much difference, if anything it looks a bit worse.

Meanwhile usagi has been doctoring his shareprices so much it becomes a bit of a joke really. My numbers come straight from glbse API, anyone can verify them, how usagi now gets 60% higher NAV with the same shares and sharecount is... interesting.
He is just putting numbers what he thinks it ought to be worth? Or putting random prices until the NAV gets close enough to the 0.5 he thinks BMF is worth?

Care to enlighten us casual readers as to which numbers Puppet fraudulently changed?

Wrong.

Since usagi wont update and correct his faulty spreadsheet, I thought I would.
Using GLSBE API, these are up to date date numbers, feel free to point out any errors:

*SssMmmAaaSssH*
And its outta here.....

The solution is to peg the expansion of supply to the price, however doing so would kill the speculative value for holders. This would kill bitcoin faster than anything else.

You just explained the main flaw in bitcoin. The fact we wont be able to build an economy because businesses wont be able to get investment in a depreciating currency while they still need to pay their suppliers and the tax man in fiat.

Its the reason loans and securities denominated in bitcoin have all mostly failed as a concept and why the bitcoin economy will eventually stall completely. Its the same reason a depression happened when  the economy was backed by gold. Businesses cant raise money to put on extra staff or buy more equipment to expand.

You are completely incorrect.


This post shows how misinformed Usagi is. Let me lay this out for everyone.

Snip from above quote:

Original cost of 1 share of BMF = 1 bitcoin.
1 bitcoin on June 1stwas worth ~$5.16
1 bitcoin on Sept 19 was worth~$12

Investor A has $5.16 on June 1st, buys a bitcoin, and decides to hold it. Today, he has ~$12 worth of bitcoin.

Investor B has $5.16 on June 1st, buys a bitcoin, and buys 1 share of BMF. Today, that 1 share (assuming a NAV of .50 btc) and total dividends (~.10 btc) would be worth ~$7.2.

This is how you claim that BMF has delivered 41%. Now here is where I explain why that claim is not true:

Investor B's gain had absolutely nothing to do with their investment in BMF, and everything to do with their investment in bitcoin. If Investor B would have bought bitcoin and not invested in BMF, they would have experienced nearly an additional 100% gain. Since Investor B's purchase of BMF is the only difference between them and Investor A, we can conclude that BMF was the cause of the lesser return. IF BMF had a positive ROI, then Investor B's return would have been higher than Investor A's.

ROI for a security is measured in the currency it is based in, so all of the blabber about USD in your post is completely irrelevant.

It goes something like this:
1 share of BMF @ IPO cost 1 bitcoin. It can now be sold for ~.50 btc and has paid ~.10 btc in dividends. That would be a ROI of -40%.

You either have nearly 0 understanding of finance or you are trying to deceive investors and the community; or both. This is not me looking to insult you; this is me stating the truth.

Oh.....right. wait. I think I remember.
at IPO 1BTC = X USD = NAV,
then later (now) 1BTC= (X USD * 2.5 ) or so = NAV = .3 BTC =NAV.....

I used oversimplified math here, but you get the jist of the idea.

yes congratulations, you've realized less profit on the USD than if you'd simply held BTC in cold storage....but you supported usagi while you did it...that's something.

Disingenuous, at best - intentionally misleading investors to move more shares at worst. Overstates the returns, understates the risks.

You IPO'd at 1 BTC, paid a total of just below 0.1 BTC in dividends and you now have a NAV thats around 0.3 BTC. IOW, you lost 60% of your investors coins. How you can twist that in to doing a good job is something only Diablo can understand.

The original investors who bought it at 1.0 are already wishing that.

Bingo, we have a winner.

CPA holdings are not disclosed AFAIK, but  if you read here:
http://www.tsukino.ca/cpa/nyan/nyancat-statements/2012-37-nyan-statement/
You will see CPA holds at least 1100 Nyan shares, so basically all of it. Nyan holds over 1000 Nyan.a/b/c shares
Nyan.b holds 6600 cpa shares.

There is also a much smaller loop with Nyan A which holds 1200 BMF shares, thats almost a third of BMF, and BMF owns a small number of Nyan shares.

There might be many more such loops that we dont know about; eg, I dont know what move.to or futurefund have in portfolio, but its quite possible it holds some usagi assets, while Nyan.B holds Moveto and futurefund shares. If any of them starts crumbling, they all start crumbling and with the fallout of obsiponzi, its hard to see how that will not happen.

Actually there's no real issue with one fund investing in another - the problems arise where the investment forms a loop.

CPA holding BMF shares and Nyan/Nyan.x is fine: it's when one of them also holds CPA that it become a mess.  What it does is form a feed-back loop where changes to the price of one stock alter another which alters another which then alters the first (and so on ad infitum) - amplifying any rises or falls in any one stock price (and making it impossible to properly value any of the stocks in the loop).

Usagi, I will give you some friendly advice: only buy things that the fund is supposed to be invested in. BMF should only be investing in mining. Low risk does not include ponzi schemes. Also, untangle your funds, do not use one fund to invest in another fund, it just makes everything worthless.

For the same reason his/her Nyan.a (only supposed to invest in low-risk securities) does.  Having lost a large chunk of NAV of all his/her companies he/she went for double or nothing on OBSI.HRPT (it's not like what you agree to in your contract actually matters, right?).  Double isn't looking like the most likely outcome, needless to say.

I wonder if he/she gets a mangement fee for all the 'profits' being distributed through dividend (a large chunk of which gos to other usagi companies that can then dividend them back - due to the way they all hold one another's shares)?

Just run NAV down - and keep dividending back and forth taking management fees: great business model (except for investors of course).

Isn't BMF supposed to be a mining fund? Why does it hold ANY of the no relation to mining whatsoever OBSI.HRPT?

Its worse than that. Here is an up to date NAV:



So a total of 1150.6147 for 5147 shares gives 0.22 BTC / share.

edit: outstanding shares are apparently 4392 now as usagi is buying his own crap, so that puts it at 0.262 BTC per share.
Advertising that as "approximately 0.50 " is plain lying.

I would advice any shareholder to take full advantage of usagi's buyback for as long as it lasts.



I assume those FPGAs and ASICs are on order, and therefore fully paid for. Its of course reasonable to put them on your balance. Its not reasonable to put them at 20% over list price on the balance.

http://tsukino.ca/bmf/holdings-nav/ if this the list of your holdings and hardware, how did you arrive at your "The NAV of BMF is approximately 0.50"

It looks more like between 0.26 and 0.283 BTC.
PS! I love your hardware list. Especially that BitForce 'SC' Single 40 GH/s, you got listed as existing asset.