Topic: ASICMINER: Entering the Future of ASIC Mining by Inventing It - page 50. (Read 3917058 times)
March 12, 2015, 01:07:18 PM
I doubt AM is without value IF someone can figure out all the millions of loose threads in the inner workings. Only the customer list, IP and name of the oldest and most iconic ASIC company in the world has to carry some value. The problem is the informal and frankly terrible company and leadership structure.
March 12, 2015, 12:54:00 PM
TaT is out. and has been for a long time.
Yes, that's what the picture I just pasted says. It also mentions that TaT has passed control of the underlying assets, along with his seat on AM board, to
Unless I'm not fully understanding Bitcoin passthroughs, one needs to control the securities one resells, or how does that work?
Well it likely means TAT sold his whole position to Havelock
Although I'm not sure according to the transfer and TAT message Havelock is a board member so I'm kind of curious why the Panaminian group hasn't said anything about it.
March 12, 2015, 09:04:58 AM
I believe it's highly unlikely that friedcat gave his business partner an exchange deposit address, to which he does not hold the private key and which could change at any time (exchanges get hacked, go offline etc). It is of course possible but seeing that this address received automated payouts for multiple months it is just extremely unlikely. It's not like the received transactions were only pocket change:
https://blockchain.info/tx/8b06f02c7ed75f511a40c4b32949eb3f23e6c638967315fe863532638eb8b131
There's an interesting website out there that automatically does the grouping addresses together that are used as common inputs, www.walletexplorer.comhttps://blockchain.info/tx/8b06f02c7ed75f511a40c4b32949eb3f23e6c638967315fe863532638eb8b131
They also list some common known wallets; exchanges like Bitstamp, BTC-e, etc, pools, services, etc.
For that address, they have it listed as huobi.com exchange.
http://www.walletexplorer.com/wallet/Huobi.com-2?from_address=19iVyH1qUxgywY8LJSbpV4VavjZmyuEyxV
March 12, 2015, 08:24:02 AM
TaT is out. and has been for a long time.
Yes, that's what the picture I just pasted says. It also mentions that TaT has passed control of the underlying assets, along with his seat on AM board, to
Unless I'm not fully understanding Bitcoin passthroughs, one needs to control the securities one resells, or how does that work?
March 12, 2015, 08:01:31 AM
TaT is out. and has been for a long time.
March 12, 2015, 07:56:51 AM
I'm really curious to see what happens when/if the boss himself comes back at some point. He may have to hie indefinitely, which would be sad 
March 12, 2015, 07:45:49 AM
So... Havelock has control of the underlying asset & is board member?
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5247381 <==Thread locked
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5247381 <==Thread locked
March 12, 2015, 07:21:19 AM
.
.
.
According to the latest status the BE300 is confirmed and working. However, to bring the chip to market requires FIXED COST + COST PER CHIP + BUILD OUT COST. The funding situation for this is dire and it would require a new investor or a big buyer who has to be certain that he gets what he is promised. There are two scenarios where this could be quickly achieved:
a) A bitcoin price explosion would release dormant capital instantly shifting the reward/risk ratio.
b) A new type of investor who enjoys preferred treatment over AM Shareholders for the financing of the BE300 tech. Likely implemented as a joint venture.
I will collect further questions via PM and answer them publicly. I am certain I missed a few important points in this post.
Regards
.
.
According to the latest status the BE300 is confirmed and working. However, to bring the chip to market requires FIXED COST + COST PER CHIP + BUILD OUT COST. The funding situation for this is dire and it would require a new investor or a big buyer who has to be certain that he gets what he is promised. There are two scenarios where this could be quickly achieved:
a) A bitcoin price explosion would release dormant capital instantly shifting the reward/risk ratio.
b) A new type of investor who enjoys preferred treatment over AM Shareholders for the financing of the BE300 tech. Likely implemented as a joint venture.
I will collect further questions via PM and answer them publicly. I am certain I missed a few important points in this post.
Regards
I think you yourself are either being fooled by whoever is/was running ASICMINER the last months or you are lying to us. This is bitcoin and we can (to some extent) see what amounts of money are controlled by this company.
I'd like to invite everyone to take a look at the blockchain. We have proof that the address 1ERszMSERwHNR9Xty73KZXpsg1jjBXWcHh is controlled by friedcat. (https://www.bikeji.com/t/1228, partial translation: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10717889).
1ERszMSERwHNR9Xty73KZXpsg1jjBXWcHh is an input of the following transaction: https://blockchain.info/de/tx/e63990fc8ff8d19479a93698ed7dfb1169221657431be51b485a58fb8941a6b1 The sender of this transaction is the owner to every private key to every input-address of this transaction. In other words:
Friedcat is not only controlling 1ERszMSERwHNR9Xty73KZXpsg1jjBXWcHh but also 19iVyH1qUxgywY8LJSbpV4VavjZmyuEyxV and every other input address of the above transaction.
Now 19iVyH1qUxgywY8LJSbpV4VavjZmyuEyxV is handling a whole lot of transactions. It is directly and indirectly exchanging with a few multi-signature addresses, which are most likely also controlled by friedcat and whose combined value exceeded 150,000 BTC at times. Definitely more than enough to produce large quantities of BE300 and definitely more than enough to pay AMHASH.
I don't have the time right now to go into more details regarding blockchain-transactions and I don't think it's even necessary. What really is necessary right now is for someone responsible to clarify what friedcat was/is doing at 19iVyH1qUxgywY8LJSbpV4VavjZmyuEyxV and why he should be allowed to just vanish with all these funds?
You got the 1ERsz... address wrong - AM mined directly to this address, but with all the transactions going on there, it looks like some exchange deposit address.
March 12, 2015, 07:11:16 AM
While it was somewhat foreseeable, I held the unreasonable hope that things would turn around, because financials were always unclear.
With the amount of money AM made (they paid out 240k BTC!!!), how can they be broke? It seems as if they paid out too much, or money was misappropriated in the last year. Also, the chips had good test results, so I don't see how they weren't ordered _3 months ago_. Before all this unfolded. Should have been first order of business.
As bitter as I might be about the lost BTC, I made a few 10k in fiat, and 10x in BTC, so it's hard to be too pissed off about it.
With the amount of money AM made (they paid out 240k BTC!!!), how can they be broke? It seems as if they paid out too much, or money was misappropriated in the last year. Also, the chips had good test results, so I don't see how they weren't ordered _3 months ago_. Before all this unfolded. Should have been first order of business.
As bitter as I might be about the lost BTC, I made a few 10k in fiat, and 10x in BTC, so it's hard to be too pissed off about it.
Because "exit scam" presumably on FC's part:
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/darknet-slang-watch-exit-scam
March 12, 2015, 07:07:53 AM
While it was somewhat foreseeable, I held the unreasonable hope that things would turn around, because financials were always unclear.
With the amount of money AM made (they paid out 240k BTC!!!), how can they be broke? It seems as if they paid out too much, or money was misappropriated in the last year. Also, the chips had good test results, so I don't see how they weren't ordered _3 months ago_. Before all this unfolded. Should have been first order of business.
As bitter as I might be about the lost BTC, I made a few 10k in fiat, and 10x in BTC, so it's hard to be too pissed off about it.
With the amount of money AM made (they paid out 240k BTC!!!), how can they be broke? It seems as if they paid out too much, or money was misappropriated in the last year. Also, the chips had good test results, so I don't see how they weren't ordered _3 months ago_. Before all this unfolded. Should have been first order of business.
As bitter as I might be about the lost BTC, I made a few 10k in fiat, and 10x in BTC, so it's hard to be too pissed off about it.
March 12, 2015, 06:43:57 AM
Best case scenario: they get investors with fresh money, giving them a priority deal - diluting current shareholder's stake worse than 1:1 on new capital.
But that's not an option:
Introduction
ASICMINER is a virtual identity totally held by investors of the Bitfountain company. The Bitfountain company's business includes mining with self-built ASIC devices, as well as the sales of them. Currently ASICMINER shareholders holds 163,962 shares, while Bitfountain shareholders holds 236,038 shares. ASICMINER shares have the privilege of getting all net profits till 0.1BTC/share from the day when dividends began to be paid. They also have the exemption of dilution, which means that each ASICMINER share always equals to 1/400,000 of the total profits and voting power of the summed value from both ASICMINER and Bitfountain.
ASICMINER is a virtual identity totally held by investors of the Bitfountain company. The Bitfountain company's business includes mining with self-built ASIC devices, as well as the sales of them. Currently ASICMINER shareholders holds 163,962 shares, while Bitfountain shareholders holds 236,038 shares. ASICMINER shares have the privilege of getting all net profits till 0.1BTC/share from the day when dividends began to be paid. They also have the exemption of dilution, which means that each ASICMINER share always equals to 1/400,000 of the total profits and voting power of the summed value from both ASICMINER and Bitfountain.
LOL you can believe that. AMHash itself is proof that they will stretch those definitions. Maybe they will "create" a joint venture with the IP so that other parties can invest and benefit from the IP same as it happened with the hashing. The reality is that if there's no capital to keep the ball rolling they will do whatever either openly or via technicisms or just secretly.
March 12, 2015, 06:30:35 AM
BTW, bitmain website is down.
The are being blackmailed to pay a ransom or face DDOS attacks
March 12, 2015, 06:30:16 AM
Sell the company to BITMAIN and get this over with, man... Bitfountain should just sell their shares or the IP or whatever and buy the shareholders out... Aww man this is sad...
Why would bitmain want to buy it? Their 28nm chip is in the same ballbark as BE300, and its safe to assume their next gen is already being worked on and might arrive before they could get BE300 up and running.
BTW, bitmain website is down.
Bitmain's website seems to be working fine for me
March 12, 2015, 06:20:53 AM
If they have something worthy they can start producing in smaller amounts and regrow from there.
But don't steal the electricity this time.
March 12, 2015, 05:54:35 AM
Sell the company to BITMAIN and get this over with, man... Bitfountain should just sell their shares or the IP or whatever and buy the shareholders out... Aww man this is sad...
Why would bitmain want to buy it? Their 28nm chip is in the same ballbark as BE300, and its safe to assume their next gen is already being worked on and might arrive before they could get BE300 up and running.
BTW, bitmain website is down.
March 12, 2015, 05:45:30 AM
Sell the company to BITMAIN and get this over with, man... Bitfountain should just sell their shares or the IP or whatever and buy the shareholders out... Aww man this is sad...
March 12, 2015, 05:15:19 AM
The Chinese government will get the true story out of them.
Their lies are naive.
I see no other option than taking legal action.
March 12, 2015, 02:28:11 AM
Obligatory depression post:
5000 shares at the peak of AM = 30,000 BTC+ @ that times BTC price = $150 BTC) = 4.5 million
Today: $18k and change.
Indeed that is a scary decrease from a paper millionaire to a pauper well half a year wages
Is one giant drop
March 12, 2015, 12:02:56 AM
So if someone was to bail the company out and fund new equipment, could they elect a new board, establish new leadership, and remove who they see fit to remove?
Just hold your breath and wait the other board members to be kidnapped
Seems like the company got so far in spite of the board itself.
March 11, 2015, 11:40:10 PM
So if someone was to bail the company out and fund new equipment, could they elect a new board, establish new leadership, and remove who they see fit to remove?
Jump to: