Topic: [CLOSED] S.DICE - SatoshiDICE 100% Dividend-Paying Asset on MPEx - page 3. (Read 316434 times)

Terra doesn't have his keys with him to ensure that when he gets hit by a bus his investors are fucked.

Not only trading was halted, S.Dice-PT has already paid their shareholders in full, taking 0% cut, and this happened like 3 days ago. I'm not sure why GSDPT has not been halted, and also why it hasn't paid its shareholders, surely there's internet in Spain?

https://bitfunder.com/asset/G.SDICE
And
https://btct.co/security/GSDPT
Are the PTs I operate
//DeadTerra

I believe you have S.DICE-PT confused with GSDPT.  They're different passthroughs as far as I know.  Trading is halted on S.DICE-PT (on the BTC-TC exchange), but GSDPT is still trading.

Thanks. Just bought quite a lot of shares below 0.0035

No,
The argument is that it was not a dividend but a buyback and hence I can't take a % of it.
It is a valid argument and hence I won't be taking any cut.
//DeaDTera

Will you take 5% out of it?

Once I get back to my dedicated computer, I will do the buyback
Terrible sorry for the delay but it was an unexpected event.
//DeaDTerra

Regarding the Gamma SatoshiDICE Pass Through (G.SDICE)



So basically he is on holiday so cannot do the buyback just yet.

sunnankar, you smell of shill pretty bad.

Are you in fact trying to deny the evidence that purports a high level of deceit and manipulation occurring within this situation. As it has been restated many times, this is not an issue of legality, but one of ethical concern. It may be perfectly legal to put live insects and spiders into a hot frying pan... It is society's role to be outspoken when it feels, 'what is deemed legal/illegal' does not match what the opinion of the public is. Hell, we're all here in bitcoin land because we're unhappy with the legal printing of money, frac reserve banking, corporate interest regulations etc. This is no different.

Just because what is occurring is 'allowed' to occur, DOES NOT infer we should allow for it to continue unhindered, as if we were okay with how it happened.

There isn't much of a straightforward way for Erik to prove once and for all the legitimacy of his claims, but his track record of lack of explanation towards other unscrupulous behavior indicates that this is no different... A mound of (justified) accusations are at Eriks feet but all he is willing to do is sweep them under the carpet.

How you can possibly say we should negate this potential multi million dollar scam simply because you can see no clear solution...When there is a plethora of evidence that strongly suggests Erik has fleeced his investors due to his newly acquired bitcoin lust.

How you can say that he doesn't at least owe his investors an in depth explanation, supported by evidence of his recent actions is beyond me. Many people (rightly so) feel wronged by Eriks actions and it it is important that these issues get addressed. Millions of dollars is not a trivial matter.

Regarding the difference between the lawyer or investment banker and the relationship of the CEO, in this case it seems to come down to the usurping of a corporate opportunity versus the agency relationship. Given the large premium it is highly unlikely there was any usurping of a corporate opportunity and even if there was then shareholders have been adequately compensated or at least enough that they have very little left to grieve about. There appears to have been no fraud or self-dealing; in fact, to the contrary it seems as if Erik was managing SD for free when he should have been drawing a salary.

In regards to (a), it is impossible for Erik to either prove or disprove whether he did engage in insider trading.

As a result, (b) is an irrelevant question.

So, it is not that Erik is ignoring the question but merely that it is impossible to definitively answer.

Sure, it smarts a bit selling shares a day before the buyout. Personally, I have been zapped like this more than once in the public markets like NYSE or NASDAQ so I know what it feels like. But that is also part of what makes the markets so fun.

It is what it is and no one forced the sale the day before the buyout nor was there any fraudulent information, unless that is what you are asserting?, disseminated by Erik to which you would reasonably rely on to your detriment in making the sale.

I think I debunked this with actual USD numbers here.

I heard of someone who had been accumulating shares since the second IPO @0.0064 at the start of February 2013 (company value of $16 million). His continued buying was careful, always making sure P/E based on expected profits was below average. This strategy justified buying around 0.0030 or $40 million end of April, giving him an average buy price of $30 million.

Equally he started selling when P/E became way overvalued based on expected profit, which happened in the weeks before the buyout when turnover was collapsing while company was still valued around 0.0018 or $17 million. If it was not for the seemingly irrational large bullish buyer in the weeks leading up to the buyout, the price would have likely dropped even more keeping the P/E acceptable, and he would have held on to all shares.

After the buyout his average sale price was around $30 million, the same as what he payed for it. However if he would not have sold 1/3th of his shares for $20 million, just 1 day before the buyout, he would have made +20% instead of just breaking even. On the other hand he was at -40% loss if there would have been no buyout and value of shares would today still have been 0.0018 (or $17 million).

No returns = not rewarded for the risk taken = wasted time and energy. That can happen but if it's due to neglect of the CEO towards the business than it's justified to feel disappointed and address it I think.

how does this deal impact shares of g.sdice on bitfunder? 

the day the announcement came out - equivalent shares spiked up on bitfunder but it still seems to be a tradable security on that exchange....

any thoughts on what happens on bitfunder?   do shareholders just receive a dividend and then its delisted?   

I didn't wait to find out and have made a nice profit in just a short amount of time but seems strange you can still buy/sell these shares if indeed it has gone private and been sold...

Guys.....

The deal has been done, people have been paid. Get over it and move onto other investments.

If you are not accusing Erik of acting illegally then what are you discussing and to what end? It is fairly clear from the facts which can be articulated, not some non-articulated emotions, that the MPEx contract was complied with.

He has already made statements and conducted the deal. For whatever reason, more likely your own investment decisions rather than the investment, you are angry and upset with the outcome. Additional statements cannot prove or disprove what you are seeking. Instead it would take blockchain analysis with cooperation from MPEx that would disclose confidential information in violation of the MPEx account agreement. Consequently, I think it is a fairly fruitless search.

The tender offer was at a 75% premium to market. And that is measured in BTC; almost all shareholders, either IPO or otherwise, have or should of made tremendous gains with SD using USD, a more stable unit of account, as the numeraire.  So profits have been exceptional both ways. Sure, you may think your shares are worth more than that but the MPEx contract set the terms and MPEx shareholders have no voting rights. And a premium, instead of a discount, sure is nice! I remember when one of my Canadian oil stocks that paid a monthly dividend got bought out for a 65% premium to market by the Chinese. Sure, I thought it was worth more because it has merely had a bad quarter from the refinery's performance but oh well. Pick up the profits and move forward.


No, for the reasons stated in this article.

I think we don't even have transactionIDs, right?

Has anyone done any analysis on where the money (btc) came from and went to?

Maybe we can find out more from the blockchain.

Well as a sidenote the hero member that didn't do their research needs to review this thread and see if abu made a good point.  
Pg 100 reference
Misterbigg was just trolling on the other hand pretty sure luv was not

Either way keeps observing the seller will eventually reveal itself someday I think

+1

Well, technically you do have the choice: it's called Trust, you can post your trust to him here.
AFAIK scammer tags have been obsoleted long ago, I'm not sure why people aren't using trust more...

Insider trading is fine when done with a moral conscience, not with greed. It's going to happen in the Bitcoin domain, but that's why we have to watch for signs of when it is being abused.

Of course, the whole nature of Bitcoin and related assets tied with it is quite heavy on the anonymity aspect of things. This allows for relatively easy insider trading and the such. What we're doing is calling him out on it. There is enough evidence to strongly indicate that Erik has in fact manipulated the course of events to lead to this situation ending strongly in favor of himself at the expense of others.

For all we know Erik could have 'sold' the company to himself, as to entirely reclaim it before actually turning it into something competitive with the market. A few months of bad  news to ensure a cheaper buy back, then the "I'm even giving you extra!" B.S ...You're allowing us to maybe break even, not including those who started to sell as this unfortunate coincidence shower continued to pour.

To discount the evidence of what is certainly deserving of the label 'suspicious' would be making a fool of yourself. Erik likely did this exactly because, as you said it's easily viable and quite difficult to prove or disprove; But if Erik expects to walk away from this car crash without answering to some questions, he's gonna need a scammer tag.