Pages:
Author

Topic: Attention BMF/NYAN/TU.SILVER investors - page 4. (Read 5838 times)

hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
June 06, 2013, 12:49:46 AM
#5
Posting a response to a post made by burnside in usagi's thread - no point me answering there as one or both of our posts would likely be deleted.

Also, since you've posted the assets you claim to have in the thread, I suppose there's no harm in proving that you are holding them.  You can turn on the public portfolio feature (Account -> Settings, turn it on, then a new URL will appear on the main Account summary tab) and post the URL's.  That potentially would address some of the mods concerns?  Once verified by a community member or two, you could turn it back off.

Showing those assets wouldn't help anything much - due to another problem with the way usagi runs things.  Usagi doesn't properly segregate assets belonging to different companies.

The same wallet holds assets belong to BMF, Nyan, CPA (if it has any), and probably TU.Silver and also stuff belonging to usagi personally.  Usagi has a history of being 'creative' (a polite term) over the ownership of assets and of merrily transferring things between his companies without any transparency or accountability.

You can verify that immediately - just by seeing that BMF and all the others share the same issuing account.  Assets should NOT share the same issuing account unless they are all part of the same concern.

It's doubly stupid when you consider that some of the other assets actually own shares in BMF - which are not even issued as shares in the system as cross-company holdings can't be represented in one account when that account issued both securities.  That's why the (5 months out of date) spreadsheet listing BMF's holdings has seperate columns for nyan, CPA and usagi personally - as he has to calculate the share of dividends for each OFF the exchange due to being too stupid and/or lazy to do it properly.

Needless to say when I was helping him get listed I explained how he'd need different accounts for each security group (the nyans should all share one) but that was in one ear and out the other.  Leaving the current mess where outstanding share counts are inaccurate, dividend payments don't reflect the amount actually distributed, assets are comingled between various assets etc.

Basic incompetence on very simple things like this is another of the many reasons why usagi shouldn't be running securities.  Of course it may not be incompetence - it could just be that it's easier for him to move stuff between securities however he sees fit if they're already stored in the same account.  For many of usagi's actions it's impossible for an outside observer to determine whether it's ignorance/incompetence or dishonesty/scamming - luckily we don't need to determine which it is to know he shouldn't be running securities.
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1006
Lead Blockchain Developer
June 06, 2013, 12:43:43 AM
#4
Trying to make the mods responsible for NYAN.A not paying out definitely irks me.   Undecided

It seems bound to backfire.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
June 05, 2013, 10:42:09 PM
#3
First off let's look at a post JUST made by usagi - specifically at the first paragraph of it.

BMF must be decided first because NYAN owned ~1000 BMF. Second point, the remaining funds on NYAN.A. I'm sure you would like me to repay the full 1 BTC now that BTC has gone up 20x since when NYAN started. Yes, I'll stand by it, but on my terms. And my terms are simple: The securities will list on BTC-TC before June 30th or the deal is off. I'm really tired of making all these grand promises just to coax a listing. No one has gone as far as I have to massage the LTC-GLOBAL moderators to approve a listing. This is really it, no more promises. You have your cake, now you have to decide if you want to eat it or not. That's all I want. A final decision.

This immediately illustrates just how little value usagi places in promises or keeping his word.

He explicitly acknowledges that he has promised to personally repay the 1 BTC/share to Nyan.A investors but states that he will only keep that promise if his securities get listed on BTC-TC.  He's blatantly attempting to blackmail or bribe any moderators unfortunate enough to hold Nyan.A by threatening not to keep his word unless they vote Yes.

He's even bold-faced enough to say "I'm really tired of making all these grand promises just to coax a listing" - explicitly acknowledging that he only makes promises to try to get a result (having already clarified that making a promise doesn't mean he'll actually keep it).

Can you trust someone who will so openly threaten to break their word if they don't get their own way to honour a contract?

In the same post he continues (this time about past events) :

I mean, I agree -- the GLBSE "loose ends" were supposed to be tied up six months ago by getting listed on BTC-TC and making payments/buying back stock. Just like everyone else.... like YABMC, COGNITIVE, or BTC-BOND, RSM, PAJKA.BOND, BITCOINRS, BAKEWELL... etc. Look around. What exactly was the problem with BMF? A bunch of trolls. Nothing ever came of it. I'm still here. I didn't run with the money.

This is, at best, misleading.

At present he is completely able to make dividend payments and buy back stock.  What he can't do is :

1.  Manipulate a market price so as to get investors to sell back at below what they're entitled to.
2.  Peddle his crap to unwitting investors who aren't already his victims.

It's pretty apparent he intends to do 1. with Nyan.A (i.e. pay small/non-existent dividends until investors sell into his low buy orders - hence getting out of his promise to repay in full) and 2. with BMF.

Note that his stated intent at the time of listing was :

"Written Jan 2, 2013:
1. I will acquire and liquidate the assets of BMF to the best of my ability and distribute the proceeds as dividend payments to shareholders of record."

(from https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2318024 - a usagi thread so, as usual, locked and not able to be directly quoted)

Today he says:

I even attempted a force-buy-back of NYAN.B and NYAN.C a few months ago. There was a massive outrage from shareholders. So I paid burnside out of my own pocket to go back and reconstruct the shareholder lists from the database. As a result of that, it has been announced for 2 months now that until the securities trade I will not pay any further distribution payments. I'll take that to mean "Until BMF trades", because really, it's the most important one from the standpoint of shutting down the others.

Again - breaking a commitment to investors because he hasn't got his own way on listing.  In this case holding back funds due to investors to attempt to blackmail/bribe moderators into approving his securities.

Is it safe to trust someone who behave like that to honour their contracts if they don't get their way on everything?  Obviously not.

Will continue tomorrow.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
June 05, 2013, 10:02:53 PM
#2
On a general note, this post belongs in this section - as it is, at root, an appeal to Moderators (on LTC-Global/BTC.CO) in respect of the listing of assorted securities.

The general thrust of argument will be that usagi isn't fit to manage ANY security.  That's a position already accepted as fact by many on this forum - but apparently not realised by at least 4 people.

This topic has an identical title to one by usagi.  That is intentional - both topics deal with exactly the same point (whether usagi's securities should be approved) and should be read in conjunction.  That two threads are needed is the sad reality of life with self-moderated topics (a horrible thing to have implemented on the securities forum).

Usagi's thread is for those supporting approval of his securities (and for those expressing mild criticisms which he feels he can address).  This thread is where the opposing view-point can be freely aired.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
June 05, 2013, 09:51:36 PM
#1
This is a self-moderated topic.  Posts by usagi may be deleted - depending on whether I find them amusing or not.  Posts by usagi apologists (where i'm fairly confident it isn't a usagi sock-puppet - and if there still are any) WILL be allowed to remain.

I didn't particularly want to do this - but feel forced to after usagi:

1.  Deleted a post from me in his thread with the same title as this one (I was fine with just ignoring that as I've wasted enough time on that failure already)
2.  Then responded to that deleted post in the thread for one of my own securities - I've no problem with him occasionally trolling and exposing his ignorance there provided it's actually about my own securities.  I will not, however, accept him dragging discussion of his failed endeavours into threads for my own securities.

Recently I've tried to be constructive towards him and offer legitimate advice on the reasons why he's been struggling to get approval for his securities.  He doesn't see it that way - but my recent comments have been me being nice to him and trying to help him sort his mess out to some extent.  If he doesn't want to take advice or even properly read what is written then fine - I'll stop being nice.  Being nice wasn't fun anyway Smiley

So here, first of all, is the deleted post.  Then in a subsequent posts I'll explain why you should vote NO on all of usagi's current securities and not approve ANY securities he attempts to list.  In brief the reasons are:

1.  He lies habitually.
2.  He routinely makes promises that he fails to deliver on.
3.  He changes his mind as a matter of course - either forgetting and/or lieing about what he's previously said.
4.  He totally ignores the rights of investors - and I don't just mean in his past (admitted by him) conflict of interest over BMF/CPA.
5.  Even when he doesn't outright lie he makes intentionally misleading statements.

I'll explain each of the above points - with examples.  It will not all get posted tonight (in fact little will) - but I'd strongly urge holding off on voting YES (if that was your intent) and changing any current YES votes to Abstain until you've read what I have to say.  You can then verify the accuracy of what I say - and also watch usagi avoid addressing the detail of them whilst denying the allegations themselves (likely with some attempts to attack me - which I'll just be ignoring).  Whilst I'll probably delete some of his responses I'll leave any where he actually attempts to explain any of the specific allegations made - i.e. don't expect to see any of his posts here.

Here's the (pretty innocuous) deleted post of mine:

List of assets taken from BTC-TC account:

   576      B.YABMC
   1,431      BTC-BOND
   50      ESECURITYSABTC
   200      PAJKA.BOND
   137      ESECURITY-SA
   1,100      ESECURITY-SA2
   3,192      LTC-ATF.B1

This is a partial list of distribution paying assets that I would use to restart the relevant listings. Absent are holdings such as ART and BITVPS which currently don't pay distributions. I am not going to provide the full list, for the same reason Deprived refuses to list his individual holdings. However, I would also donate 100 BTC to BMF should it be approved.

Are you saying that those assets belong to BMF?  Or are those assets that belong to various of your assets (including TU.SILVER)?

You refer to me not providing detail of my precise holdings (for my fund).  That is correct.  I do, however, weekly provide a precise valuation of all assets held by it - and exact detail is provided for (typically) around 90% of those holdings (that being cash or disclosed holdings in shares to which I run pass-throughs).  And that's why providing detail of my investments isn't as important as in an investment fund - the valuation of my fund isn't heavily influenced by my valuation of securities it holds.  In an investment fund where little cash is held the valuation of securities held IS the valuation of the fund.

Investors (including potential ones) need either a credible valuation of assets OR a detailed list of assets (so they can work their own out).

A partial list of shares held in an account used for half a dozen securities  is of no use in assessing the value of any single asset.

BMF holds cash as well (a refund was received from BMF but has not been distributed - so there's at least that).

My point is simply that I can't work out the NAV/U of BMF - and I doubt very much anyone else can.  So you're asking for approval for an asset that has SOME assets but which refuses to provide information necessary to calculate any value for it.  If approved that means anyone trading it would be doing so totally blind - with no idea at all what it was actually worth on ANY basis.  That's not good - I can see the attraction of it for your shareholders but I don't support the listing of ANY security which refuses to provide a valuation of assets OR a list of assets.

Here, also for reference, is the current contract for BMF.  Note that BMF is already in existence so should already be following its contract to whatever extent it can.  I'll explain how usagi is already showing clear intent not to bother following his contract before he's even received approval to be listed.  You'll find that to be a common strand throughout much of what I explain about usagi's behaviour - essentially he says whatever he thinks will serve him best without regard for whether it's true and with no real intention of following through when such statements refer to future intent.

Quote from: usagi
Purpose: BMF allows investors to safely diversify among mining companies.
1. BMF will not invest in any company unless the operator is a known
and trusted community member.
2. BMF will not invest in any company unless it has paid regular
dividends for at least sixty days.
3. BMF will only invest in companies approved by shareholder motion.
4. BMF will not invest more than 2% of it's holdings in a company
unless it has obtained the identity of the person operating the
company, or the operator of the company has provided identity escrow,
or is accountable in some other way for the operations of said
company. We do not list in unaccountable, anonymous entities.

Transparency: The fund seeks maximum transparency by fully disclosing
all assets held in the fund at any time.
1. A spreadsheet will be created listing all assets held.
2. An independent financial advisor will be hired to provide oversight
and ensure that things are running smoothly.
3. A support e-mail address will be operated by the manager, to
provide disclosure and give investors the tools they need to make
their own decisions should anything be required.


Dividends: The fund will pass through dividends received by the fund
using a combined growth and income policy.
1. Upon receiving a dividend, the fund will use approximately half the
money to buy more assets (growth via capital gains) and make payments
to shareholders (income via distributions).
2. Dividends will be paid within a reasonable time frame after
receipt; within 72 hours barring any extenuating circumstances.

Net Asset Value
The Net Asset Value (NAV) is the value of all assets in the fund plus
the cash on hand.
The Net Asset Value per share is the value divided by number of units
outstanding. This is also known as NAV/U.

Management Fees
Management will be compensated with 5% of all dividends paid. No other
payment or fees will ever be taken by management.

Underlying Asset Motions
Underlying assets held by the fund may periodically raise motions to
vote. This fund will vote on motions on underlying assets favoring the
best interest of the fund. Shareholder may request a motion for proxy
voting the fund's shares of an underlying asset.

Risk to shareholders
Although research has been put into each underlying asset, Mining
assets in the past have been unpredictable. The fund's value relies on
the the value of the underlying assets. If the underlying asset value
decreases, the entire fund's value will also decrease. Additional
risks to Mining assets include the price of Bitcoin, the price of
mining equipment, the difficulty mining Bitcoins the Bitcoin reward
per block, mining equipment upgrades, as well as many other risks.
This fund does not hedge against any of these risks. Each shareholder
must understand these risks before investing.

Fund Closure
Management reserves the right to close this fund for any reason giving
30 days notice. All assets in the fund including unpaid dividends will
be liquidated on the respective markets and paid to shareholders.
Pages:
Jump to: