Topic: [BitFunder] IceDrill.ASIC IPO (235 Thash Mining Operation powered by HashFast) - page 34. (Read 378671 times)
May 07, 2014, 01:58:08 AM
I also dont want to give so much personal information to some unknown HK company, and as i know, its only needed to have possibility to sell shares? I dont want to sell. Just pay me dividends to my bitcoin address. I think that i will newer sell my IceDrill Shares, or if i will, cryptomex maybe closed by this time. Any options?
May 06, 2014, 11:49:58 PM
. And regarding the buy-back: I would probably settle for halve of the IPO price or even less. At least my nerves would thank me that.
You are joking right? Can you walk me through how you think 230TH/s of hashing power is worth HALF the IPO price?
It is worth about 1,500 to 2,000 bitcoin total.
I have not calculated anything. Maybe it's just worth 1% of IPO price or even less. What Do I know. I don't follow the mining market any more that closley. What is your estimate based on e.g. gigahash.io share prices?
May 06, 2014, 04:55:32 PM
We need more clarification on this issue
In my mind it clarifies rather simply as "We want to justify stealing your BTC, either by your refusal to jump through every last hoop as many times as we say, or by using some of the information we have demanded against you."
May 06, 2014, 04:02:07 PM
We need more clarification on this issue
In my mind it clarifies rather simply as "We want to justify stealing your BTC, either by your refusal to jump through every last hoop as many times as we say, or by using some of the information we have demanded against you."
May 06, 2014, 03:44:39 PM
I have done many KYC/AML requirements, never had to give so many information, that form is ridiculous, it looks like a survey...
And apparently I cannot obtain verification on CrytoMex, I don't have a passport...
We need more clarification on this issue, and a workable solution.
And apparently I cannot obtain verification on CrytoMex, I don't have a passport...
We need more clarification on this issue, and a workable solution.
May 06, 2014, 03:38:35 PM
. And regarding the buy-back: I would probably settle for halve of the IPO price or even less. At least my nerves would thank me that.
You are joking right? Can you walk me through how you think 230TH/s of hashing power is worth HALF the IPO price?
It is worth about 1,500 to 2,000 bitcoin total.
May 06, 2014, 01:40:24 PM
There seems to be a misunderstanding.
I don't think this form has anything to do with Wallets or ownership of shares at all. I believe it's what the SFC (Hong Kong's Securities Commision) is requesting IceDrill have each "PU" Holder complete in order to be compliant and allow "Trading" on this platform.
The document does request quite a bit of information though.
A good question would be, Can whoever refuses to fill this form out sign the agreement and simply not have their shares listed on Cryptomex but still receive payments?
If not then that means the SFC is telling IceDrill they will be in violation by sending Dividends or "PUs" out without having each "Customer" fill out that form.
Now as far as share buy backs,
Does anyone who wants this honestly think IceDrill has enough BTC to buyback everyones shares? No.
If you wanted a "Buy Back" it would likely happen at bits on the bitcoins that were used to purchase the "shares" and this is even if the SFC would even let them do that, you would still likely have to sign a paper waiving your right to a bunch of things with the buyback.
I don't think this form has anything to do with Wallets or ownership of shares at all. I believe it's what the SFC (Hong Kong's Securities Commision) is requesting IceDrill have each "PU" Holder complete in order to be compliant and allow "Trading" on this platform.
The document does request quite a bit of information though.
A good question would be, Can whoever refuses to fill this form out sign the agreement and simply not have their shares listed on Cryptomex but still receive payments?
If not then that means the SFC is telling IceDrill they will be in violation by sending Dividends or "PUs" out without having each "Customer" fill out that form.
Now as far as share buy backs,
Does anyone who wants this honestly think IceDrill has enough BTC to buyback everyones shares? No.
If you wanted a "Buy Back" it would likely happen at bits on the bitcoins that were used to purchase the "shares" and this is even if the SFC would even let them do that, you would still likely have to sign a paper waiving your right to a bunch of things with the buyback.
Maybe you are right. However, during the IPO we did not have any clause about Hong Kong regulations. And regarding the buy-back: I would probably settle for halve of the IPO price or even less. At least my nerves would thank me that.
May 06, 2014, 01:36:35 PM
please fill in 5 pages of private details to register you shares........
errr.... NO
errr.... NO
May 06, 2014, 11:33:43 AM
+1 to no KYC
It's an enormous amount of information compared to the previous requirement (a BTC address and an email address). As Bar says, we need to understand why the information is required and what our (alternative) options are.
Also unsure about PUs being immediately cancellable if the mine is "unprofitable". Unprofitable for whom? What happened to the guarantee that IPO buyers would get x BTC per share before others take profit? If "unprofitable" means for PU holders (hopefully the case), shouldn't the PUs auto cancel after e.g. 10 years of zero profits. Otherwise a future, less scrupulous owner/operator might cancel the PUs after a short period of no profits (caused by anything - paying upfront costs or failing to reinvest, for example) before continunig to mine for profits.
It's an enormous amount of information compared to the previous requirement (a BTC address and an email address). As Bar says, we need to understand why the information is required and what our (alternative) options are.
Also unsure about PUs being immediately cancellable if the mine is "unprofitable". Unprofitable for whom? What happened to the guarantee that IPO buyers would get x BTC per share before others take profit? If "unprofitable" means for PU holders (hopefully the case), shouldn't the PUs auto cancel after e.g. 10 years of zero profits. Otherwise a future, less scrupulous owner/operator might cancel the PUs after a short period of no profits (caused by anything - paying upfront costs or failing to reinvest, for example) before continunig to mine for profits.
May 06, 2014, 10:57:41 AM
There seems to be a misunderstanding.
I don't think this form has anything to do with Wallets or ownership of shares at all. I believe it's what the SFC (Hong Kong's Securities Commision) is requesting IceDrill have each "PU" Holder complete in order to be compliant and allow "Trading" on this platform.
The document does request quite a bit of information though.
A good question would be, Can whoever refuses to fill this form out sign the agreement and simply not have their shares listed on Cryptomex but still receive payments?
If not then that means the SFC is telling IceDrill they will be in violation by sending Dividends or "PUs" out without having each "Customer" fill out that form.
Now as far as share buy backs,
Does anyone who wants this honestly think IceDrill has enough BTC to buyback everyones shares? No.
If you wanted a "Buy Back" it would likely happen at bits on the bitcoins that were used to purchase the "shares" and this is even if the SFC would even let them do that, you would still likely have to sign a paper waiving your right to a bunch of things with the buyback.
I don't think this form has anything to do with Wallets or ownership of shares at all. I believe it's what the SFC (Hong Kong's Securities Commision) is requesting IceDrill have each "PU" Holder complete in order to be compliant and allow "Trading" on this platform.
The document does request quite a bit of information though.
A good question would be, Can whoever refuses to fill this form out sign the agreement and simply not have their shares listed on Cryptomex but still receive payments?
If not then that means the SFC is telling IceDrill they will be in violation by sending Dividends or "PUs" out without having each "Customer" fill out that form.
Now as far as share buy backs,
Does anyone who wants this honestly think IceDrill has enough BTC to buyback everyones shares? No.
If you wanted a "Buy Back" it would likely happen at bits on the bitcoins that were used to purchase the "shares" and this is even if the SFC would even let them do that, you would still likely have to sign a paper waiving your right to a bunch of things with the buyback.
May 06, 2014, 10:32:32 AM
+1 to everything.
By the way. If you are so worried about people not handling their wallets responsivley you can request a signed message as it was requested to register for the Google ID thing. This is enough to verify that I have control over my keys and don't have the address on GOX. Divs should have been sent out long ago by sendmany. Very very suspicious! Noone wants to give out their details on the net. Bitcoin enables this. What you propose is a clear step back to the stoneage!
By the way. If you are so worried about people not handling their wallets responsivley you can request a signed message as it was requested to register for the Google ID thing. This is enough to verify that I have control over my keys and don't have the address on GOX. Divs should have been sent out long ago by sendmany. Very very suspicious! Noone wants to give out their details on the net. Bitcoin enables this. What you propose is a clear step back to the stoneage!
May 06, 2014, 10:14:17 AM
will, don't you guys think the form is too detailed?
I don't think it is necessary for us to fill so much information. I don't want to risk my private information.
As somebodies already said, we have BTC address registered in your record. Why can you just pay the dividend to the address first?
For further trading, we can register account in CryptoMex first and claim our shares by signature using BTC address.
I don't think it is necessary for us to fill so much information. I don't want to risk my private information.
As somebodies already said, we have BTC address registered in your record. Why can you just pay the dividend to the address first?
For further trading, we can register account in CryptoMex first and claim our shares by signature using BTC address.
May 06, 2014, 10:13:32 AM
For those that don't want compliance Will must buy back the shares. Compliance was never mentioned at IPO.
Will, will you now scam or do what is right?
Will, will you now scam or do what is right?
May 06, 2014, 10:09:41 AM
I am not able to meet the newly imposed requirements. Please proceed with buyback of my shares.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Thank you for your cooperation.
May 06, 2014, 09:52:44 AM
E-mail dated April 30th, required response by May 6. Actual date received: May 6.
I haven't even read it yet because I only saw the notification on my phone as I was leaving the house this morning, but I'm none too pleased. This is pathetic and speaks greatly to the character of the administrators involved. I'll be looking into my legal options and doing some research into submitting complaints of fraud and solicitation of unlicensed securities before I make any moves from here. I suggest the rest of you do the same.
...2015...I haven't even read it yet because I only saw the notification on my phone as I was leaving the house this morning, but I'm none too pleased. This is pathetic and speaks greatly to the character of the administrators involved. I'll be looking into my legal options and doing some research into submitting complaints of fraud and solicitation of unlicensed securities before I make any moves from here. I suggest the rest of you do the same.
Thank you for pointing that out, as mentioned, I haven't had the opportunity to read the docu.
May 06, 2014, 09:44:13 AM
E-mail dated April 30th, required response by May 6. Actual date received: May 6.
I haven't even read it yet because I only saw the notification on my phone as I was leaving the house this morning, but I'm none too pleased. This is pathetic and speaks greatly to the character of the administrators involved. I'll be looking into my legal options and doing some research into submitting complaints of fraud and solicitation of unlicensed securities before I make any moves from here. I suggest the rest of you do the same.
...2015... I haven't even read it yet because I only saw the notification on my phone as I was leaving the house this morning, but I'm none too pleased. This is pathetic and speaks greatly to the character of the administrators involved. I'll be looking into my legal options and doing some research into submitting complaints of fraud and solicitation of unlicensed securities before I make any moves from here. I suggest the rest of you do the same.
May 06, 2014, 09:35:53 AM
Don't want to trade PU's, don't want to sign anything that stupid as this piece of shit you send to me. When buying shares I wasn't sign for such a bullshit. You have my wallet address, send dividends there or buy back my shares.
+1
May 06, 2014, 09:33:59 AM
E-mail dated April 30th, required response by May 6. Actual date received: May 6.
I haven't even read it yet because I only saw the notification on my phone as I was leaving the house this morning, but I'm none too pleased. This is pathetic and speaks greatly to the character of the administrators involved. I'll be looking into my legal options and doing some research into submitting complaints of fraud and solicitation of unlicensed securities before I make any moves from here. I suggest the rest of you do the same.
I haven't even read it yet because I only saw the notification on my phone as I was leaving the house this morning, but I'm none too pleased. This is pathetic and speaks greatly to the character of the administrators involved. I'll be looking into my legal options and doing some research into submitting complaints of fraud and solicitation of unlicensed securities before I make any moves from here. I suggest the rest of you do the same.
May 06, 2014, 08:59:39 AM
These questions are invasive and poorly written.
How would an 'illiterate' person even be able to read the 'vulnerability' section, let alone any part of the document? why should it matter if i am 'unsophisticated'? how would I qualify such a description? etc etc.
Which of these questions are legal requirements? Most of them read like a user survey or data mining than legitimate questions laid out by some regulatory framework.
I don't feel comfortable giving out this sort of information to a firm that can't even put together a legible and comprehensible document which is supposedly required by law.
It is also ridiculous to expect anyone here to give you bank details and expect that they will be comfortable accepting fiat payments rather than bitcoin straight into a bitcoin address. This is 'bitcointalk' after all.
How would an 'illiterate' person even be able to read the 'vulnerability' section, let alone any part of the document? why should it matter if i am 'unsophisticated'? how would I qualify such a description? etc etc.
Which of these questions are legal requirements? Most of them read like a user survey or data mining than legitimate questions laid out by some regulatory framework.
I don't feel comfortable giving out this sort of information to a firm that can't even put together a legible and comprehensible document which is supposedly required by law.
It is also ridiculous to expect anyone here to give you bank details and expect that they will be comfortable accepting fiat payments rather than bitcoin straight into a bitcoin address. This is 'bitcointalk' after all.
May 06, 2014, 08:43:42 AM
.....
The main problem with direct payments is not technical, it's social.
....
Good, so when first dividends? I'm fine to take risk that some day I may loose access to wallet or whatever. It's mine risk, not yours so you should be fine with that, don't you?.The main problem with direct payments is not technical, it's social.
....
You have all info to successfully pay dividends to me. There's a "cold wallet" thing. Just make sure that share's stored there will recive dividends and we are good.
I'M NOT WILLING TO GIVE INFO TO SOME HONG-KONG COMPANY ABOUT MY PENIS SIZE.... I'M LIVING THOUSANDS KILOMETERS AWAY FROM HONG-KONG AND MY PENIS DON'T REACH THERE....
EDIT: I'm very calm person, but this news just boiled my blood in vains...
Jump to: