Topic: btt - page 17. (Read 407343 times)
Just wondering about this part of the contract
Now with the btct closing shares are worth less than %10 or even %5 of what they used to be. What I am wondering is that does the buyback comes first or the liquidation? because if the buyback then the owner has all the shares therefore distributing the money from sold equipment to himself.
I am sorry I know this might be a stupid question. but I want to be sure.
Also another thing:
Maybe creativex is in the process of finding another manager for basic-mining, and logging in daily to bitcointalk is to negotiate with some people through PMs to take over the establishment? It sounds like a reasonable guess no?
Quote
Should management be unable or unwilling to continue operations of bASIC-MINING,
a suitable replacement, designated by management, will be sought out. If none
can be found all outstanding shares of bASIC-MINING will be bought back at a
price no less than 105% of the 7d Avg price, all assets held by bASIC-MINING
will be liquidated, and the proceeds distributed to shareholders.
a suitable replacement, designated by management, will be sought out. If none
can be found all outstanding shares of bASIC-MINING will be bought back at a
price no less than 105% of the 7d Avg price, all assets held by bASIC-MINING
will be liquidated, and the proceeds distributed to shareholders.
Now with the btct closing shares are worth less than %10 or even %5 of what they used to be. What I am wondering is that does the buyback comes first or the liquidation? because if the buyback then the owner has all the shares therefore distributing the money from sold equipment to himself.
I am sorry I know this might be a stupid question. but I want to be sure.
Also another thing:
Quote
Should management be unable or unwilling to continue operations of bASIC-MINING,
a suitable replacement, designated by management, will be sought out.
a suitable replacement, designated by management, will be sought out.
Maybe creativex is in the process of finding another manager for basic-mining, and logging in daily to bitcointalk is to negotiate with some people through PMs to take over the establishment? It sounds like a reasonable guess no?
Since there is no exchange for bASIC-mining to trade right now, the shares have no 7d average price. I don't believe the company ever intended to use that buy back clause. It would have made it harder for management to be unwilling to continue however as the company never had 105% of the 7d average in reserve and maybe that was the point of that particular clause. A simple liquidation of assets with the proceeds being dispersed to shareholders would be the only logical course of action if it is deemed management is unable to continue.
I don't know that Creativex has logged in but your guess seems to be the most reasonable I have seen!
Take care
Just wondering about this part of the contract
Now with the btct closing shares are worth less than %10 or even %5 of what they used to be. What I am wondering is that does the buyback comes first or the liquidation? because if the buyback then the owner has all the shares therefore distributing the money from sold equipment to himself.
I am sorry I know this might be a stupid question. but I want to be sure.
Also another thing:
Maybe creativex is in the process of finding another manager for basic-mining, and logging in daily to bitcointalk is to negotiate with some people through PMs to take over the establishment? It sounds like a reasonable guess no?
Quote
Should management be unable or unwilling to continue operations of bASIC-MINING,
a suitable replacement, designated by management, will be sought out. If none
can be found all outstanding shares of bASIC-MINING will be bought back at a
price no less than 105% of the 7d Avg price, all assets held by bASIC-MINING
will be liquidated, and the proceeds distributed to shareholders.
a suitable replacement, designated by management, will be sought out. If none
can be found all outstanding shares of bASIC-MINING will be bought back at a
price no less than 105% of the 7d Avg price, all assets held by bASIC-MINING
will be liquidated, and the proceeds distributed to shareholders.
Now with the btct closing shares are worth less than %10 or even %5 of what they used to be. What I am wondering is that does the buyback comes first or the liquidation? because if the buyback then the owner has all the shares therefore distributing the money from sold equipment to himself.
I am sorry I know this might be a stupid question. but I want to be sure.
Also another thing:
Quote
Should management be unable or unwilling to continue operations of bASIC-MINING,
a suitable replacement, designated by management, will be sought out.
a suitable replacement, designated by management, will be sought out.
Maybe creativex is in the process of finding another manager for basic-mining, and logging in daily to bitcointalk is to negotiate with some people through PMs to take over the establishment? It sounds like a reasonable guess no?
Creative is gone I'm thinking fellows.... Show seems over. :-/
Well his wallet still has incoming and outgoing transaction s
I said what I wanted to say. The fact that you don't understand it is based on your imperfect mental model of what has transpired. All offers and sales of securities must be registered with the SEC or qualify for some exemption from the registration requirements. Even the exemptions, if you qualify for them, require a form 144 to be filed with the SEC. So, the legality of what occurred at BTC-TC and LTC-Global is the same as it has been since 1933 (apparently). The fact that you and I didn't know this doesn't make it any more or less murky since last month.
I know as much as the rest of you which means you know that Creativex has been running this revenue share for going on a year and communicating with us on a very regular basis until now. Obviously something has changed and I refuse to believe his intentions are dishonest. He has already liquidated the assets and holdings of LTC-DMF and dispersed those funds to shareholders as a dividend on the closing of LTC-Global (also operated by Burnside). He stated this in his last post on Oct. 7th (in the LTC-DMF forum) and has said nothing else since that day in this or the LTC-DMF forum. We also know that he was considering other options to continue trading at first but those options were and still are extremely limited. I can guarantee one thing - no investors have got stolen. (sorry I couldn't resist)
Take care
I know as much as the rest of you which means you know that Creativex has been running this revenue share for going on a year and communicating with us on a very regular basis until now. Obviously something has changed and I refuse to believe his intentions are dishonest. He has already liquidated the assets and holdings of LTC-DMF and dispersed those funds to shareholders as a dividend on the closing of LTC-Global (also operated by Burnside). He stated this in his last post on Oct. 7th (in the LTC-DMF forum) and has said nothing else since that day in this or the LTC-DMF forum. We also know that he was considering other options to continue trading at first but those options were and still are extremely limited. I can guarantee one thing - no investors have got stolen. (sorry I couldn't resist)
Take care
If you are capable of such thing, I would like to ask to not use insults to defend your position and perhaps make your post more 'to the point'
In my 'mental model', if fraud victims did not complied to all regulations, this does not lessen the gravity of the fraud. What do you find imperfect in that?
I admit that no one knows what are creativex plans but in your 'mental model', if he never show up again, will that mean to you that no fraud has been committed because no one ever step up to explain it to you?
How long will it take to even consider that some wrongdoing has been committed as a possibility?
I sincerely hope that this is not the case but people disappearing and becoming unreachable is usually not a good sign.
The other possibility is that he has been arrested but then I would have expected that we would had some echo from news outlets as they love bitcoin busts stories.
If you read my post, I think you'll find that the only thing which could be construed as an insult was the poke at your use of the word stolen for the sole purpose of adding some humour to an otherwise humourless situation. You might notice I issued an apology for that directly afterward. So to answer your first question, I am quite capable of such a thing.
I am unable to answer your second question since I cannot ascertain your mental model simply by looking at your question. If you remember, you stated that the legal situation was murky. This enabled me to ascertain that your mental model was imperfect. I would need more information to answer your second question.
As for your third question - exactly as long as it takes to sort through the shareholder information which hopefully was transferred to him when BTC-TC shut down, liquidate the assets and disperse the proceeds without the aid of the software which was at his disposal through BTC-TC. I know you are a programmer but I am not so sure about Creativex - he may need considerable time to accomplish that task.
As for your next statement, I prefer to believe that everyone is inherently good and let them prove me wrong. I simply hope that he is in good health.
Take care
You guys should read something - http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm#noreg and ascertain whether it applies in our collective case. I would be hard-pressed to believe that any of you would think otherwise. Given that Creativex is an American citizen, it is in his best interest to remain silent now and possibly forever on the subject of bASIC-mining. We all jumped in and took the risk without fully understanding the regulations and consequences of our actions. It is time for us to grow up and take responsibility for those actions. Perhaps what is really needed at this time is a defence fund for Creativex rather than a scammer tag! You people are the scammers. You are probably in violation of federal and state laws which hardly gives you the authority to second-guess the integrity of Creativex. I would hope that he is retaining counsel if it is required and it would be nice if someone with the know-how would set up a defence fund on his behalf. Does anyone here have that knowledge?
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
no dollars changed hands... as I understand it creativeX only exchanged BTC for dollars to buy mining gear if he even purchased anything in USD.
this is not the same thing as trendon shavers who duped a lot of people into giving him bitcoins and then exchanged them for dollars to fund his gambling habits....
does this mean that people who run WOW guilds and distribute a share of fat loot also have to register with the SEC?
does this mean that EVE online has to register as a money service business?
I'm not a legal expert but the way most tax authorities around the world have taken a position on virtual currencies is when they are exchanged for Fiat currency.. and by logical extension this should also apply to the way the SEC views virtual shares in a virtual business which deal solely in virtual currencies.
as we have seen with the Trendon shavers case... the SEC only gets involved when someone loses a whole lot of real money and files a complaint.
it doesn't seem like money (real or virtual) has been lost in the case of Basic-Mining so I don't think we have too much to worry about at this point.
PS I was watching a doco the other day where the chairman of ASIC (Australias version of SEC) spelled out loud and clear that ASICs primary focus is to go after fraud cases where retail investors have lost a whole lot of money.. now ASIC and the US SEC do operate under different guidelines but ASIC is modeled on the US SEC. I'm sure if you look at high profile SEC cases you will see some similar statements.
It would be nice if we could compare BTC-TC with a game such as monopoly, EVE or WOW so that we could be left to our own devices.
Take care
I said what I wanted to say. The fact that you don't understand it is based on your imperfect mental model of what has transpired. All offers and sales of securities must be registered with the SEC or qualify for some exemption from the registration requirements. Even the exemptions, if you qualify for them, require a form 144 to be filed with the SEC. So, the legality of what occurred at BTC-TC and LTC-Global is the same as it has been since 1933 (apparently). The fact that you and I didn't know this doesn't make it any more or less murky since last month.
I know as much as the rest of you which means you know that Creativex has been running this revenue share for going on a year and communicating with us on a very regular basis until now. Obviously something has changed and I refuse to believe his intentions are dishonest. He has already liquidated the assets and holdings of LTC-DMF and dispersed those funds to shareholders as a dividend on the closing of LTC-Global (also operated by Burnside). He stated this in his last post on Oct. 7th (in the LTC-DMF forum) and has said nothing else since that day in this or the LTC-DMF forum. We also know that he was considering other options to continue trading at first but those options were and still are extremely limited. I can guarantee one thing - no investors have got stolen. (sorry I couldn't resist)
Take care
I know as much as the rest of you which means you know that Creativex has been running this revenue share for going on a year and communicating with us on a very regular basis until now. Obviously something has changed and I refuse to believe his intentions are dishonest. He has already liquidated the assets and holdings of LTC-DMF and dispersed those funds to shareholders as a dividend on the closing of LTC-Global (also operated by Burnside). He stated this in his last post on Oct. 7th (in the LTC-DMF forum) and has said nothing else since that day in this or the LTC-DMF forum. We also know that he was considering other options to continue trading at first but those options were and still are extremely limited. I can guarantee one thing - no investors have got stolen. (sorry I couldn't resist)
Take care
If you are capable of such thing, I would like to ask to not use insults to defend your position and perhaps make your post more 'to the point'
In my 'mental model', if fraud victims did not complied to all regulations, this does not lessen the gravity of the fraud. What do you find imperfect in that?
I admit that no one knows what are creativex plans but in your 'mental model', if he never show up again, will that mean to you that no fraud has been committed because no one ever step up to explain it to you?
How long will it take to even consider that some wrongdoing has been committed as a possibility?
I sincerely hope that this is not the case but people disappearing and becoming unreachable is usually not a good sign.
The other possibility is that he has been arrested but then I would have expected that we would had some echo from news outlets as they love bitcoin busts stories.
It is hilarious that the SEC sees itself as having merit. I was a series 7 stockbroker and I can assure you that theft is the modality of the whole industry, so long as the dupe (customer) is placing his own chits (fractionalized debt notes) on the table. The buyer of stock like Facebook, is going to be a loser, but it is his own stupid fault.
So, since the SEC is a joke, as is the notion of fractional reserve currency, then logically, Eve Online money is a much better investment than the US dollar. Hahaha. Just wanted to point out the hypocrisy ad inconsistencies.
OH! If only one or two lawyers would stand up and call bullshit. But no, they are insect-like, blind like moles, bloodthristy like demonic rats. So, so long as court and lawyering exists, there will be no justice. Good luck to all of you, I only have five shares of BASIC-MINING but admittedly I bought them to "pretend speculate" on a "pretend offshore website", so yeah, I knew the risk. But at least I never bought Facebook or participated in an SEC approved IPO, because that's just fuckin stupid unless you have an insider position.
How much was lost on Facebook ipo? Okay, so let's leave this guy alone until the London Barristers and the SEC become decent and good entities. It will take a long, long time.
So, since the SEC is a joke, as is the notion of fractional reserve currency, then logically, Eve Online money is a much better investment than the US dollar. Hahaha. Just wanted to point out the hypocrisy ad inconsistencies.
OH! If only one or two lawyers would stand up and call bullshit. But no, they are insect-like, blind like moles, bloodthristy like demonic rats. So, so long as court and lawyering exists, there will be no justice. Good luck to all of you, I only have five shares of BASIC-MINING but admittedly I bought them to "pretend speculate" on a "pretend offshore website", so yeah, I knew the risk. But at least I never bought Facebook or participated in an SEC approved IPO, because that's just fuckin stupid unless you have an insider position.
How much was lost on Facebook ipo? Okay, so let's leave this guy alone until the London Barristers and the SEC become decent and good entities. It will take a long, long time.
You guys should read something - http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm#noreg and ascertain whether it applies in our collective case. I would be hard-pressed to believe that any of you would think otherwise. Given that Creativex is an American citizen, it is in his best interest to remain silent now and possibly forever on the subject of bASIC-mining. We all jumped in and took the risk without fully understanding the regulations and consequences of our actions. It is time for us to grow up and take responsibility for those actions. Perhaps what is really needed at this time is a defence fund for Creativex rather than a scammer tag! You people are the scammers. You are probably in violation of federal and state laws which hardly gives you the authority to second-guess the integrity of Creativex. I would hope that he is retaining counsel if it is required and it would be nice if someone with the know-how would set up a defence fund on his behalf. Does anyone here have that knowledge?
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
no dollars changed hands... as I understand it creativeX only exchanged BTC for dollars to buy mining gear if he even purchased anything in USD.
this is not the same thing as trendon shavers who duped a lot of people into giving him bitcoins and then exchanged them for dollars to fund his gambling habits....
does this mean that people who run WOW guilds and distribute a share of fat loot also have to register with the SEC?
does this mean that EVE online has to register as a money service business?
I'm not a legal expert but the way most tax authorities around the world have taken a position on virtual currencies is when they are exchanged for Fiat currency.. and by logical extension this should also apply to the way the SEC views virtual shares in a virtual business which deal solely in virtual currencies.
as we have seen with the Trendon shavers case... the SEC only gets involved when someone loses a whole lot of real money and files a complaint.
it doesn't seem like money (real or virtual) has been lost in the case of Basic-Mining so I don't think we have too much to worry about at this point.
PS I was watching a doco the other day where the chairman of ASIC (Australias version of SEC) spelled out loud and clear that ASICs primary focus is to go after fraud cases where retail investors have lost a whole lot of money.. now ASIC and the US SEC do operate under different guidelines but ASIC is modeled on the US SEC. I'm sure if you look at high profile SEC cases you will see some similar statements.
He definately is doing something
http://blockchain.info/address/1Hfp99tugY4H5FYEoM3hj4JDLzShzZ9ifB
Not only has he been receiving payemnts, but he has been sending some out.
http://blockchain.info/address/1Hfp99tugY4H5FYEoM3hj4JDLzShzZ9ifB
Not only has he been receiving payemnts, but he has been sending some out.
You guys should read something - http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm#noreg and ascertain whether it applies in our collective case. I would be hard-pressed to believe that any of you would think otherwise. Given that Creativex is an American citizen, it is in his best interest to remain silent now and possibly forever on the subject of bASIC-mining. We all jumped in and took the risk without fully understanding the regulations and consequences of our actions. It is time for us to grow up and take responsibility for those actions. Perhaps what is really needed at this time is a defence fund for Creativex rather than a scammer tag! You people are the scammers. You are probably in violation of federal and state laws which hardly gives you the authority to second-guess the integrity of Creativex. I would hope that he is retaining counsel if it is required and it would be nice if someone with the know-how would set up a defence fund on his behalf. Does anyone here have that knowledge?
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Just trying to understand what you want to say.
We all understand that at best the legal situation of basic-mining is/was murky.
Are you saying that now that legal risk become more concrete (IMHO the same as last month) this justify disappearing and leaving the investors wondering if they got stolen?
I'm fine with CreativeX not willing to pursue further because of legal risk. If that is the case, the correct thing to do is to liquidate the assets and distribute back the profits to the share holders.
Not a legal expert but disappearing could make him be in even more trouble if someone having lost few thousands of dollars calls the police.
I said what I wanted to say. The fact that you don't understand it is based on your imperfect mental model of what has transpired. All offers and sales of securities must be registered with the SEC or qualify for some exemption from the registration requirements. Even the exemptions, if you qualify for them, require a form 144 to be filed with the SEC. So, the legality of what occurred at BTC-TC and LTC-Global is the same as it has been since 1933 (apparently). The fact that you and I didn't know this doesn't make it any more or less murky since last month.
I know as much as the rest of you which means you know that Creativex has been running this revenue share for going on a year and communicating with us on a very regular basis until now. Obviously something has changed and I refuse to believe his intentions are dishonest. He has already liquidated the assets and holdings of LTC-DMF and dispersed those funds to shareholders as a dividend on the closing of LTC-Global (also operated by Burnside). He stated this in his last post on Oct. 7th (in the LTC-DMF forum) and has said nothing else since that day in this or the LTC-DMF forum. We also know that he was considering other options to continue trading at first but those options were and still are extremely limited. I can guarantee one thing - no investors have got stolen. (sorry I couldn't resist)
Take care
There is no excuse for disappearing this way. Burnside is probably in bigger trouble and still he managed to organize a controlled shut-down of his site. If creativex doesn't want to / can't pursue the business any longer that's fine with all of us as long as he liquidates the assets and distributes the proceedings accordingly. Staying in silence while logging in here is probably the worst thing he can do.
You guys should read something - http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm#noreg and ascertain whether it applies in our collective case. I would be hard-pressed to believe that any of you would think otherwise. Given that Creativex is an American citizen, it is in his best interest to remain silent now and possibly forever on the subject of bASIC-mining. We all jumped in and took the risk without fully understanding the regulations and consequences of our actions. It is time for us to grow up and take responsibility for those actions. Perhaps what is really needed at this time is a defence fund for Creativex rather than a scammer tag! You people are the scammers. You are probably in violation of federal and state laws which hardly gives you the authority to second-guess the integrity of Creativex. I would hope that he is retaining counsel if it is required and it would be nice if someone with the know-how would set up a defence fund on his behalf. Does anyone here have that knowledge?
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Just trying to understand what you want to say.
We all understand that at best the legal situation of basic-mining is/was murky.
Are you saying that now that legal risk become more concrete (IMHO the same as last month) this justify disappearing and leaving the investors wondering if they got stolen?
I'm fine with CreativeX not willing to pursue further because of legal risk. If that is the case, the correct thing to do is to liquidate the assets and distribute back the profits to the share holders.
Not a legal expert but disappearing could make him be in even more trouble if someone having lost few thousands of dollars calls the police.
I said what I wanted to say. The fact that you don't understand it is based on your imperfect mental model of what has transpired. All offers and sales of securities must be registered with the SEC or qualify for some exemption from the registration requirements. Even the exemptions, if you qualify for them, require a form 144 to be filed with the SEC. So, the legality of what occurred at BTC-TC and LTC-Global is the same as it has been since 1933 (apparently). The fact that you and I didn't know this doesn't make it any more or less murky since last month.
I know as much as the rest of you which means you know that Creativex has been running this revenue share for going on a year and communicating with us on a very regular basis until now. Obviously something has changed and I refuse to believe his intentions are dishonest. He has already liquidated the assets and holdings of LTC-DMF and dispersed those funds to shareholders as a dividend on the closing of LTC-Global (also operated by Burnside). He stated this in his last post on Oct. 7th (in the LTC-DMF forum) and has said nothing else since that day in this or the LTC-DMF forum. We also know that he was considering other options to continue trading at first but those options were and still are extremely limited. I can guarantee one thing - no investors have got stolen. (sorry I couldn't resist)
Take care
You guys should read something - http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm#noreg and ascertain whether it applies in our collective case. I would be hard-pressed to believe that any of you would think otherwise. Given that Creativex is an American citizen, it is in his best interest to remain silent now and possibly forever on the subject of bASIC-mining. We all jumped in and took the risk without fully understanding the regulations and consequences of our actions. It is time for us to grow up and take responsibility for those actions. Perhaps what is really needed at this time is a defence fund for Creativex rather than a scammer tag! You people are the scammers. You are probably in violation of federal and state laws which hardly gives you the authority to second-guess the integrity of Creativex. I would hope that he is retaining counsel if it is required and it would be nice if someone with the know-how would set up a defence fund on his behalf. Does anyone here have that knowledge?
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Just trying to understand what you want to say.
We all understand that at best the legal situation of basic-mining is/was murky.
Are you saying that now that legal risk become more concrete (IMHO the same as last month) this justify disappearing and leaving the investors wondering if they got stolen?
I'm fine with CreativeX not willing to pursue further because of legal risk. If that is the case, the correct thing to do is to liquidate the assets and distribute back the profits to the share holders.
Not a legal expert but disappearing could make him be in even more trouble if someone having lost few thousands of dollars calls the police.
I really dont want to post this.
But after i saw the word bust, i thought dust.
and then poof, you know what happened to the guy who had his liberty dollars. yup in prison for some decades.
USA aka the big American dream. they want there endless fiat money printing scheme keep going to save mankind
.Using bitcoins will only stop this.
ayee another one bites the dust.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E-WasNzVpI
creativeX, i hope everything is ok with you.
But after i saw the word bust, i thought dust.
and then poof, you know what happened to the guy who had his liberty dollars. yup in prison for some decades.
USA aka the big American dream. they want there endless fiat money printing scheme keep going to save mankind
.Using bitcoins will only stop this.ayee another one bites the dust.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E-WasNzVpI
creativeX, i hope everything is ok with you.
What do we do with our shares??
My advice: don't do anything yet.
What exactly can you do with them?
Ha right..I had 8 coins worth that are now worth .04 coins...lol
What do we do with our shares??
My advice: don't do anything yet.
What exactly can you do with them?
What do we do with our shares??
Right now, there is no official word.
My advice: don't do anything yet.
You guys should read something - http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm#noreg and ascertain whether it applies in our collective case. I would be hard-pressed to believe that any of you would think otherwise. Given that Creativex is an American citizen, it is in his best interest to remain silent now and possibly forever on the subject of bASIC-mining. We all jumped in and took the risk without fully understanding the regulations and consequences of our actions. It is time for us to grow up and take responsibility for those actions. Perhaps what is really needed at this time is a defence fund for Creativex rather than a scammer tag! You people are the scammers. You are probably in violation of federal and state laws which hardly gives you the authority to second-guess the integrity of Creativex. I would hope that he is retaining counsel if it is required and it would be nice if someone with the know-how would set up a defence fund on his behalf. Does anyone here have that knowledge?
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Creativex - if you are reading this - take care of yourself.
Why would they target Creativex first?
Kslaughter is a better target with a company 1000x the size as this.
SEC wont fall for the "Belize" business.
How is Cognitive and RSM still functioning?
Jump to: