I feel for the people who invested money in 2013 and were told the project would be launched in jan 2014.
Dan keeps referring to that fund raiser as "small" yet didn't it raise more than 1000 BTC worth of funds over btc/ltc/bankwire?
If I was you Dan I would take a big chunk of Emu for yourself, IPO off some of the rest and make sure you do the original investors right.
There has been full transparency in the launch shedule and anyone who felt "cheated" were offered a 100% return of their investment or keep their investments in the project. Their investment has not vanished. They have chosen themselves to still be part of the project - even though it has been postponed alot (lets be honest).
The initial IPO did not reach 1000.
Does it really matter how much was fundraised?
As I remarked Dan keeps referring to it as "small", when actually it was a considerable amount of money. I have heard the bank wires/cash transfers alone are > $100k. And unless people I know are mistaken, the total raised is over or very close to 1000BTC.
Quite frankly I don't give a flying duck how much is fund raised, it just piques my interest Dan has an agenda of downplaying the contribution of the initial investors, when in fact they raised him a shit ton of money and paid his wages for a year.
Noone had a reason to complain because their money was taken. Whoever wanted it back, even after the theft, got it back pretty fast.
No idea why you are talking about the theft, I haven't even mentioned it.
So if someone thought, this all takes to long he got the money back and could invest in whatever shitcoin.
Not really. The deadline was pushed back again and again, with promises it was coming soon. Suddenly now Dan rewrites history and says in Jan there was a dramatic change in direction as if he made people aware the project would be delayed a year.
The way the theft was handled was the fairest thing I have seen ever in the crypto world. I mean, noone could have really done anything, when Dan would have vanished BEFORE the theft. Noone could have done much either when he would have said "Sorry, but the money is gone". So the fact, THAT he paid back funds worth hundreds of BTC is a good prove that he is serious about the whole project (its one of many proves, but lets stick to the subject here).
I'm not questioning if he is serious about the project. Again, I have no idea why you're bringing up something else irrelevant to my post.
That said, how do you actually know Dan has paid for the loss out of his pocket? If everyone wanted their BTC back, how do we know the end amount wouldn't be 450 BTC short? We don't. It seems a surefire bet that the Emunie market cap will rise a good amount on launch so if he keeps quiet and pretends to have covered the loss, no-one will ever know. I stress that is speculation and hypothetical. But in this community I trust nobody.
Finally: If the dev of a great project/idea, that finally gets succesful and maybe even changes the world of economy, gets a piece of the cake, whats wrong about it? Dan works on this for almost two years now, from his own funds. As a good businessman, of course he takes a chunk, just like everyone else who makes an investment.
Now I'm starting to think you have issues reading/comprehending. Nowhere do I object to Dan making a good profit. I even said he should take a big chunk of Emu for himself. I certainly would.
It will be interesting to see how this one pans out.
