Topic: Closed (Read 4181 times)
Keep in mind that Obsi also runs the scam asset OBSI.HRPT. The contract change could be an attempt to protect against Nefario intervening with Obsi's other assets when the HRPT collapses.
How about adding "Any situation not covered in the contract shall be put to vote by the shareholders to add an appropriate clause to the contract."?
This statement to add to the contract is merely bringing any unforeseen circumstances back into the fold & control of shareholders. I run my offerings to the best of my abilities and have no intentions of abusing such power. As the asset issuer & manager, I need the latitude to make decisions on how to proceed in certain situations & to decide which situations warrant a motion. Hopefully at some point GLBSE will support polls, making things much easier.
This is quite dishonest of you, Obsi. The entire reason that Nefario intervened in DMC was because Diablo-D3 wasn't running the company in the best interests of the shareholders. With the extra clause you're trying to add the shareholders have no control at all - if you say that something doesn't need to go to a shareholder vote, or that it doesn't violate the terms of the contract, or it's in the best interests of the shareholders, your say on the matter is final no matter how obviously bogus it might be. What is going on with DMC (and who is DMC)?
I think this potentially gives too much power to the issuer. Perhaps you could start by stating that anything unforseen will be put to a vote as a motion to clarify, with the issuer having power to make desciscions only if having a vote is impractical?
DMC's another GLBSE fund and Nefario locked down its operator's access to it after he wiped out 95% of its value through a series of really questionable trades. Basically he created a bunch of DMC shares out of thin air and traded them for shares in other GLBSE companies at ratios that valued those other companies at far more than their actual market value, effectively massively diluting everyone else's shares each time. If the motion passes then Obsi will be allowed to do that, or invest the FUTUREFUND money in his friends' projects and let them siphon it off in over-bloated wages and fees, or anything else he likes. I'm not sure even the limited restrictions that are in the contract would be worth the paper they're printed on, since Obsi will effectively wind up as the sole arbiter of whether he's failed to meet them. I think this potentially gives too much power to the issuer. Perhaps you could start by stating that anything unforseen will be put to a vote as a motion to clarify, with the issuer having power to make desciscions only if having a vote is impractical?
There is a new motion up for vote:
This will help prevent a situation like the one DMC is currently in the middle of, while maintaining the opportunity for the asset issuer to act freely for the benefit of the asset using his best judgment. Essentially adding the Ninth Amendment to the contract instead of allowing GLBSE to define all acts not explicitly covered in the contract as their domain.
Code:
Should we add the following text to our GLBSE contract?
"In the event of exceptional circumstances not precisely covered in this contract, latitude and authority rests
with the asset issuer to freely determine and decide the procedure to mitigate the situation at hand. Anything
not explicitly covered in this contract remains in the domain and control of the asset issuer alone."
This will help prevent a situation like the one DMC is currently in the middle of, while maintaining the opportunity for the asset issuer to act freely for the benefit of the asset using his best judgment. Essentially adding the Ninth Amendment to the contract instead of allowing GLBSE to define all acts not explicitly covered in the contract as their domain.
What is going on with DMC (and who is DMC)?
I think this potentially gives too much power to the issuer. Perhaps you could start by stating that anything unforseen will be put to a vote as a motion to clarify, with the issuer having power to make desciscions only if having a vote is impractical?
There is a new motion up for vote:
This will help prevent a situation like the one DMC is currently in the middle of, while maintaining the opportunity for the asset issuer to act freely for the benefit of the asset using his best judgment. Essentially adding the Ninth Amendment to the contract instead of allowing GLBSE to define all acts not explicitly covered in the contract as their domain.
Code:
Should we add the following text to our GLBSE contract?
"In the event of exceptional circumstances not precisely covered in this contract, latitude and authority rests
with the asset issuer to freely determine and decide the procedure to mitigate the situation at hand. Anything
not explicitly covered in this contract remains in the domain and control of the asset issuer alone."
This will help prevent a situation like the one DMC is currently in the middle of, while maintaining the opportunity for the asset issuer to act freely for the benefit of the asset using his best judgment. Essentially adding the Ninth Amendment to the contract instead of allowing GLBSE to define all acts not explicitly covered in the contract as their domain.
Good idea. Please try to add this to your other GLBSE listings as well. Nefario's involvement with the DMC situation, while perhaps warranted, is potentially dangerous.
FutureFund sale price adjusted to 0.0001195
Dividend representing 50% of this weeks income from the micro-business venture has been paid.
Next week's dividend from the micro-business is expected to be lower due to some supplier issues.
Currently saving up for a 3D printer. We're about 1/4 of the way there right now, much closer if BTC climbs back to the prices we saw over the last week.
Dividend representing 50% of this weeks income from the micro-business venture has been paid.
Next week's dividend from the micro-business is expected to be lower due to some supplier issues.
Currently saving up for a 3D printer. We're about 1/4 of the way there right now, much closer if BTC climbs back to the prices we saw over the last week.
What sort of printer are you getting ? I wouldnt mind buying a 3d bitcoin when its done
I just picked up a couple of these.
Man, if this shares apreciate about 5000% (as we all hope, of course), you're gonna make ONE BITCENT!
Will you be able to manage all that sudden wealth? I just picked up a couple of these.
Man, if this shares apreciate about 5000% (as we all hope, of course), you're gonna make ONE BITCENT!
Will you be able to manage all that sudden wealth?
I just picked up a couple of these.
Woha -was that an almost 6% dividend? 
...and 50% was reinvested, so your business actually returned 11% this week? Yet? In spite of the high Bitcoin price?
Seems almost too good to be true... but of course you won't prove it's all real because revealing anything more would spoil it all, right? Nor verify yourself because you value your privacy... as usual: to believe, or not to believe!
...and 50% was reinvested, so your business actually returned 11% this week? Yet? In spite of the high Bitcoin price?
Seems almost too good to be true... but of course you won't prove it's all real because revealing anything more would spoil it all, right? Nor verify yourself because you value your privacy... as usual: to believe, or not to believe!
What kind of hardware?
I think its probably a reprap or something going by past posts
What kind of hardware?
They considered this, but the methods used would be easy enough for a DIYer to implement and compete.
The only current limiting factors for competitors are the manual labor involved & maintaining supplier throughput.
With the labor issue mitigated, and such a low barrier to entry, everyone & their grandma could step in and get a cut. Demand would shoot up, suppliers would raise prices and the profit potential would dissipate. Those willing to work it as a "hobby" for minimum wage or less would step in and fight over the scraps.
The only current limiting factors for competitors are the manual labor involved & maintaining supplier throughput.
With the labor issue mitigated, and such a low barrier to entry, everyone & their grandma could step in and get a cut. Demand would shoot up, suppliers would raise prices and the profit potential would dissipate. Those willing to work it as a "hobby" for minimum wage or less would step in and fight over the scraps.
Fair enough.
Securing the food supply I believe is crucial to our continued existence. If we can perfect vertical farming techniques,aquaculture, permaculture and algae biofuel it will benefit everyone.
I would if I could, but this particular business benefits from hiding in plain sight. Anyone willing to put in the hours of manual labor or figure out some methods of automating it, as I have, could easily take over a large region and put a massive dent in profits. It has a ridiculously low barrier to entry. Luckily, the automation hardware can be resold at any time, for basically the same price we will be paying for it.
In exchange for my help in automation and initial investment, the people doing the actual daily work have agreed to use only FutureFund purchased automation hardware for at least the next 2 years, with the option to renew or purchase outright at that time, based on ongoing maintenance costs & contracts.
I wish this opportunity could be scaled up beyond 2-3 employees, but it is an easily saturated market where just a few people (with the help of a few automated processes) can pick all the high-profit low-hanging fruit from this tree.
Hardware will likely be ordered soon, if FutureFund does not have enough BTC to cover the cost, I will be buying shares with my personal account to ensure we can get moving on this in a timely fashion.
You might consider setting up a franchise system and manage it so people dont have overlapping areas rather than "employees". I cant think of any bitcoin franchisers yet
As an update to FutureFund's current investment prospects, I have been approached about a micro-business opportunity denominated in fiat.
This venture requires heavy manual labor in at least two steps. I'm "riding along" to observe a soft-launch testing phase today.
I have been brought in with an eye towards increasing the automation & efficiency of the operation
If all goes well in testing, this will require funding in the range of 200-400 BTC to assist in automating a major portion of the current process.
This business is denominated in fiat USD.
In exchange for FutureFund's investment, FutureFund will retain ownership of the automation equipment & cover costs of maintenance. With current exchange rates, estimated weekly ROI is in the range of 1/4 - 1/3 of one percent in fiat.
I will keep you updated. Thank you.
This venture requires heavy manual labor in at least two steps. I'm "riding along" to observe a soft-launch testing phase today.
I have been brought in with an eye towards increasing the automation & efficiency of the operation
If all goes well in testing, this will require funding in the range of 200-400 BTC to assist in automating a major portion of the current process.
This business is denominated in fiat USD.
In exchange for FutureFund's investment, FutureFund will retain ownership of the automation equipment & cover costs of maintenance. With current exchange rates, estimated weekly ROI is in the range of 1/4 - 1/3 of one percent in fiat.
I will keep you updated. Thank you.
Pics or it didnt happen
Securing the food supply I believe is crucial to our continued existence. If we can perfect vertical farming techniques,aquaculture, permaculture and algae biofuel it will benefit everyone.
FutureFund sale price adjusted to 0.000102
Currently in talks with a gentleman regarding an automated 3D printing venture.
FutureFund has 28 BTC to invest and will likely put this into discounted pre-IPO shares on an ASIC mining venture planning to pay daily dividends to allow continued growth of the fund.
Current estimates for cost of launch of the 3D printing venture are greater than 500 BTC. More information will be released in the coming weeks.
Thank you.
Currently in talks with a gentleman regarding an automated 3D printing venture.
FutureFund has 28 BTC to invest and will likely put this into discounted pre-IPO shares on an ASIC mining venture planning to pay daily dividends to allow continued growth of the fund.
Current estimates for cost of launch of the 3D printing venture are greater than 500 BTC. More information will be released in the coming weeks.
Thank you.
This is what im talking about
What he really wants to do is buy out DMC.
So Obsi, how much has FutureFund invested in DMC, which is going to be investing heavily in a green power generation infrastructure, and sounds like the kind of thing this fund is interested in?
FutureFund has not reached it's IPO date yet. Green power generation is one of the areas FutureFund would love to invest in and hope to see great progress made in this area.
Have you considered splitting the power generation side of things into its own investment vehicle?
No, but showing off DMC's high efficiency green computing side is really worth it imo. Not only are we using our own green power, but we're going to be using high efficiency computing combined with high efficiency cooling. Other companies will be green with envy.
So Obsi, how much has FutureFund invested in DMC, which is going to be investing heavily in a green power generation infrastructure, and sounds like the kind of thing this fund is interested in?
I'd go with the Ultimaker if I was personally just getting into it. The print quality is amazing & speed is great.
It's amazing to see it's print detail (That's a finger with it's fingerprints on the left BTW) and it only seems to be getting better.
This is just the type of venture the FutureFund would be interested in backing.
It's amazing to see it's print detail (That's a finger with it's fingerprints on the left BTW) and it only seems to be getting better.
This is just the type of venture the FutureFund would be interested in backing.
Perfect for printing collectible bitcoin chips like cascascius coin
The things you are talking about are multi-billion dollar projects. It doesn't seem like you have any concrete idea about what you hope to achieve with a couple grand raised in a glbse IPO.
You hit the nail on the head, and without verification of who this person is it seems like a scam. If someone comes along and wants to raise money for a 3d printer to start a mini manufacturing business it at least has a business plan
actually thats a great idea, you should do it. I believe 3d printing will be a major player in "the future"
It is a project which requires a certain level of expertise. I cant do it but I hope someone comes along who can because it has great potential.
Its great to get ideas out there in the bitcoin community at least.
I know someone with a makerbot and it can be a PITA if you dont know what you are doing and have some engineering background at least.
The things you are talking about are multi-billion dollar projects. It doesn't seem like you have any concrete idea about what you hope to achieve with a couple grand raised in a glbse IPO.
You hit the nail on the head, and without verification of who this person is it seems like a scam. If someone comes along and wants to raise money for a 3d printer to start a mini manufacturing business it at least has a business plan
actually thats a great idea, you should do it. I believe 3d printing will be a major player in "the future"
It is a project which requires a certain level of expertise. I cant do it but I hope someone comes along who can because it has great potential.
Its great to get ideas out there in the bitcoin community at least.
The things you are talking about are multi-billion dollar projects. It doesn't seem like you have any concrete idea about what you hope to achieve with a couple grand raised in a glbse IPO.
You hit the nail on the head, and without verification of who this person is it seems like a scam. If someone comes along and wants to raise money for a 3d printer to start a mini manufacturing business it at least has a business plan
actually thats a great idea, you should do it. I believe 3d printing will be a major player in "the future"
It is a project which requires a certain level of expertise. I cant do it but I hope someone comes along who can because it has great potential.
The things you are talking about are multi-billion dollar projects. It doesn't seem like you have any concrete idea about what you hope to achieve with a couple grand raised in a glbse IPO.
You hit the nail on the head, and without verification of who this person is it seems like a scam. If someone comes along and wants to raise money for a 3d printer to start a mini manufacturing business it at least has a business plan
actually thats a great idea, you should do it. I believe 3d printing will be a major player in "the future"
The things you are talking about are multi-billion dollar projects. It doesn't seem like you have any concrete idea about what you hope to achieve with a couple grand raised in a glbse IPO.
You hit the nail on the head, and without verification of who this person is it seems like a scam. If someone comes along and wants to raise money for a 3d printer to start a mini manufacturing business it at least has a business plan
The things you are talking about are multi-billion dollar projects. It doesn't seem like you have any concrete idea about what you hope to achieve with a couple grand raised in a glbse IPO.
Verification isn't about guarding against impersonation, it is about having sufficient details to collectively take legal action should this turn out to be a scam. Unless the activities the fund will be investing in are going to be "grey" from a legal perspective (e.g. I fully understand why the owner of the BitcoinTorrentz asset remains unverified), I see no reason to protect your privacy.
Without that full verification, you will get little interest from those with significant funds to invest and the fund will be all the worse for it.
Maybe a better way of approaching this is to ask why you feel the need to remain anonymous ?
Without that full verification, you will get little interest from those with significant funds to invest and the fund will be all the worse for it.
Maybe a better way of approaching this is to ask why you feel the need to remain anonymous ?
The concept is interesting, but no verification worries me, I must admit. Nothing against you personally, but many GLBSE assets with lofty goals have proven to be scams...
What "income generating assets" will you be using for the remainder of 2012?
I'll require full verification be completed before I'll contemplate investing.
Besides that, please share your business background. What history/experience do you have as a venture capitalist ? What's the biggest success and biggest failure to date ? What do you consider sets you apart ? What makes this fund different from the many other venture capital style funds available and GLBSE platform in general ? Why would I want to place a further level of risk between me and the ventures ?
Besides that, please share your business background. What history/experience do you have as a venture capitalist ? What's the biggest success and biggest failure to date ? What do you consider sets you apart ? What makes this fund different from the many other venture capital style funds available and GLBSE platform in general ? Why would I want to place a further level of risk between me and the ventures ?
Waiting for verification first. Might get a few shares if that happens.
Cool. I'll be picking up a few shares.
Closed out. Thank You.
Jump to: