Topic: FPGAMINING scam ongoing (Read 5625 times)

More like the "I could be rich by now why did I ever bother with "investing" -damnit" issue? Yeah, I quite remember. Well, lesson learned.

Anyone had any luck contacting through other avenues?

[email protected]

http://lendle.me/users/17105/

http://www.ebay.com/usr/bandbinternetsales

http://www.xboxlivescore.com/profile/moparguy528

http://www.zillow.com/profile/moparguy528/

https://www.tanga.com/users/48457/moparguy528/profile

http://www.resellerratings.com/user/moparguy528

Yes, I do 

I have written it off as "learning expenses"

Anyone remember the FPGAMINING issue?

oh man I just found this thread I think half my portfolio was in FPGAMINING

Hello vrtrasura and thanks for giving me an opportunity to clarify what is going on with FPGAMINING.

I have been in contact with the FPGAMINING guy (I know his name, anyway, from his e-mail) and I had offered to buy all his hardware from him and take over the company. But I didn't get a response to that and being honest I just don't have time to worry about FPGAMINING, I have less than 10 days to wrap up the assets I *do* have access to. So there's nothing I can do short of paying him a visit, which I can't do since I don't live in America anyways.

So what to do with FPGAMINING. I have been placed in the unfortunate position of getting kicked off bitfunder due to a misunderstanding and not allowed to list on BTC-TC without severe restrictions (trading is frozen and forced de-listing on Feb 1st, 2013). As a result I can not give full value to my shareholders. I am currently in a mad rush to complete my fiduciary duty and liquidate the company before we get delisted at the end of the month. This makes me very sad because we have hundreds of BTC worth of securities which we haven't been able to sell. Not to mention securities like FPGAMINING which have clear value, but would just take some time and phonecalls to unravel. Unfortunately, I need to liquidate in the next week so there's no time or reason for me to track him down anymore. So in my case FPGAMINING is going to be a casualty of war. It will be auctioned off for less than 1 cent on the dollar. I mean hey, anyone wanna pay more? You're welcome to bid in the auction forum. That's the only way to establish market value since I am not allowed to trade.

To help soften the blow, I will be donating my entire personal stake in all my companies back to the shareholders. I will also soon be offering an exchange program for the remaining securities. It's either that or liquidate at 1 cent on the dollar and no one wants that. No one sane anyway.

The only way I would be willing to invest time and energy into tracking down FPGAMINING is if I was still running BMF. But as it stands there's no reason for me to do that, I can't keep running the company. It would take community support to change that. I need two votes more, to list BMF. That's it.

The truth is, it would be better for my shareholders (and FPGAMINING shareholders too, FWIW) if I could relist BMF. But even so, we're going to be getting more out of FPGAMINING than anyone else. It will be sold off for about a penny on the dollar.

Usagi did you end up giving up on this?

This guy is long gone. Possibly Nefario has some real information on him and his verification wasn't based on false credentials, but even if Nefario does he's hardly going out of his way to help the bitcoin community these days.

During the investigation, LIMITED contact details should be posted, so that we can contact him and confirm what is going on. This will help a lot of people, including me, when it comes time to disperse BMF's 600+ shares of FPGAMINING. I have a claim on it which is worth over $3,000 US even at his reduced prices, and that's a shitload of money. I am not abandoning that claim and I am going to go after him big time, when the time comes. That time isn't here yet but I know a lot of people are in the same boat as I am. So let's pool our resources, find out WTF is going on, and THEN figure out what we are going to do (probably sue, since I think we know who he is).

This is the only issuer that has got the list (that I had shares in) that didn't even post a statement or anything since then. So yes, I think it's time to reopen the thread.

But what will giving someone a scammer tag, when he has probably abandoned the forum, do?

According to:
http://blog.glbse.com/issers-who-have-been-given-lists-so-far

FPGAMINING has gotten a list of asset holders.  Can we start this thread back up?

Exactly this.

I think it would end up at the bottom of nefairo's never ending list. We might have had a slight chance while GLBSE was up and running but now I think it's just pointless.

I suggested this in the securities thread, and this will be difficult to do now that glbse is down, but moparguy was verified. Not sure if this has been suggested, but it may be possible to get his information from nefario and directly talk to moparguy.  That was the whole point of verification, so that the share holders knew who they were buying shares from.

Puppet, here too? Please, this is not the point! That was discussed many times, and the number of shares he holds is public anyway. I am starting to have enough myself of this manhunt.

Anyway



+1

he's probably doing the same as Obsi:
1) offer great returns for some time
2) stall for some time so that investors panic
3) buy at 50-10% of IPO
4) maybe pay back the few that stayed (maybe not)
5) enjoy scammy profit -with investors even glad they weren't ripped completely, but only 80%! Doesn't this sound like paradise?

I for one am not ok with this, and think it deserves some action to be taken against. 

So you bought over 300 shares now after he stopped dividend payments.
Thanks for confirming my earlier point.

Usagi, does this mean in general it's ok to stop paying dividends to cause a price crash so one can buyback cheap? 

Seems like bs to me.  What happened to all of our funds?  I don't want a buy back at no value compared to the investment we put in.  If he decided to close up shop he because he didn't feel like continuing should, he should return the funds or as much of them as possible.  I bought into this fund because it was verified, and there is text about upgrading to ASIC's, turns ou that was a bad choice but I certainly didn't think he would just quit paying divs.  If he took all the investor money and bought FPGAs great I understand there's nothing to return to us, but it's just wrong to turn around and steal it from us by buying back after forcing a crash.  He probably still has the FPGAs mining away while we sit here wondering if we lost all our money on this.

With no communication it's coming off like stall tactics :/.

The asset issuer trades something of value (the shares) for something of no value (money locked somewhere). This isn't how these things work.

It would not be a pain in the ass if -in case of breach of the contract- the asset get forcibly liquidated using the fund to indemnify (partially) the investors. It could be seen like an insurance, and it may make sense if the asset issuer contribute significantly to it (in advance, not just with the funds raised from investors).

edit: honest asset issuers would be motivated to fund even a 100% insurance fund, since that money remains their -even if locked for a period- until they behave honestly.

This "idea" is exactly the sort of silliness coming from the unqualified. Think about it: if the bond is large enough to indemnify shareholders then it makes absolutely zero sense for a company to list. Herp-derp, company sold shares for 100 BTC of which 100 BTC are held in a bond. What's the benefit of that, for the company?

If on the other hand the bond is less than enough to indemnify shareholders then it's of no interest to scammers. So they list an "asset", sell 100 BTC of "shares", leave 50 BTC in the bond, pocket the 50 and disappear, big deal. It is however a pain in the ass to legitimate shareholders, who now have to pay dividends (presumably) without being able to invest half the proceeds (cause they're in a bond).

This path leads to nothing.


MPEx actually has these fractional values. Grep a contract for:

lol. Another nth-degree scam? That's what happens when you don't stop a scam fast.

Question: who bought 200+ more shares of FPGAMINING after this scam was made public?
Answer: Usagi for his BMF fund.

28/09:
FPGAMINING   300      
https://i.imgur.com/M7gWf.png

Now:
FPGAMINING   515   
http://tsukino.ca/bmf/holdings-nav/

Bonus question: at what price does usagi value them for his NAV calculations?
Answer: 0.7 BTC per share or almost twice GLBSE 5 day average.

So, does usagi know something about FPGAMINING that you dont, or is he just buying up distressed shares that he already owned to temporarily push up GLSBE prices to inflate his book value (and even then doubling that value in his books like he does with most things anyway)?

This is really worth of another thread. It could be entirely voluntary and fractional (e.g. cover an x% of the value of the total shares issued).
With such guarantee (to be managed by GLBSE in case of a proven breach of the contract) many (if not all) investors would be happy to accept a much lower interest, so it would be a positive-sum game since everybody would gain something.

edit: but it is to be solved what happens when someone keeps issuing more and more shares, even after he already defaulted like in this case.

I've suggested this many times to Nefario.  It could be another level of verification (and the only one that would actually matter in my eyes).
"Bonded for X BTC against default" would go a long way in providing a bottom for shares and instilling confidence in GLBSE assets.

That is a good idea, although I would like to see it be voluntary. In the verification section it could have a "Bonded" indicator that could either be a checkbox or an amount bonded.

Good idea. I just contacted [email protected]
My request for a scammer tag remains though.

I think a scammer tag should be applied in this case, or until asset issuer conforms to his or her GLBSE contract. 

A contract should say what a issuer can do.  Anything not on there should be assumed to be breaking the contract.
The only reason as stated in the contract for no dividends is that the administrative and energy costs are the same amount or more than what was mined in bitcoins.

Another way that no dividends may not be paid is that no mining occurred.  Although, in the contract it never states in that the issuer can stop mining.  Thus the mining should continue to the best of the issuers ability.

It states a way to purchase back shares from the secondary market.  This is 1.05 times the average price the asset was traded for the previous 7 days.  I would advise people to make sure they put their shares for sale no less than 1.05 times the 7-day average.

This is a really bad contract.  These kinds of things should go to GLBSE though so the trading can be halted until the issuer stops breaking the contract.  There really should be some kind of bond that the issuer would lose in case they break their contract.

Some questions to ask to determine a good contract or not.
1.  Is it a loan or a percentage of ownership?
2.  If the operation will be shut down, how will it be done, what time frame, and at what cost?
3.  What will the capital raised by selling shares be used for?  If there is excess or unused capital, can those go to purchase back the asset shares or be paid back in dividends?
4.  Who is responsible if operations stop due to unforeseen circumstances.  Is there insurance?
5.  When are dividends and financial reports made?  If they are not made on time what kind of penalty does the operator face?
6.  How can motions be raised?
7.  How can investors see the financials?
8.  How can management be removed?
9.  How will dividends be distributed to shareholders?

https://glbse.com/asset/view/FPGAMINING

There is nothing to investigate: just a look at the contract and dividends paid would take less than 10 seconds.
Then maybe you might consider to tag even someone with much higher rep who is still defending the scammer on his asset thread, so putting innocent bystanders' savings at risk (since the asset is still traded on the GLBSE).

Scammer tags are only for well respected members WTF? Moparguy is verified on GLBSE but I don't understand why someone would have to be trusted to get a tagged profile.

When I first opened this thread, I thought "Oh good. This must be about a well-respected member of the forum who will actually care about the scammer tag." But, then I clicked on the profile.

Seriously, what the hell are you guys thinking? Why should we even bother investigating a case involving such an obvious throw-away account?

I guess there are various ones in charge... Just be patient, the administrators and moderators of this community are overloaded with unusual requirements to judge cases. It is a job which demands a great deal of reading comprehension.

  My sentiment exactly.

Theymos, do you copy?
Is anyone in charge?

Yes, I am really sick of scammers getting away with it because if we aren't super-nice with them they might get upset and not pay back. If you think like this, then in your interest you shouldn't invest as in half the cases you're going to beg scammers to return part of your  money. This attitude is probably the reason offers like FPGAMINING even exist: take money, screw investors, have them all grateful to have part of their funds back after months, no other consequencies. Hell, I don't now why I haven't done it myself yet.

In my opinion, since the hardware was bought with our funds, he should liquidate it and buy back our shares as soon as he can. Or continue paying dividends. No other option -expecially with such blatant refusal to give any detail about when we can expect to see our money back.

You mean the formerly "personal funds" of his investors?

Not tagging a scammer hoping that so he will behave better in the future is silly. He will scam more at any chance.
It would be better tagging him a.s.a.p. and maybe remove his tag once he cleared his mess if he do it fast.

And anyway that is not the only retaliation his investors should opt for. Asking Nefario to freeze his assets maybe another one.

Sure it would warn potential investors, even initiation of this thread was already a big warning.
But looking from morpaguy528 perspective, would " a scammer tag" encourage him to pay back his investors?

Currently he is "still saying" he will slowly buy back shares from mining profits and his personal funds. Today someone bought 73 shares from the ask wall, when the price of the highest bid was twice lower than the lowest ask price. Although it could be just a coincidence...

Giving him a scammer tag would warn potential investors not to buy any more shares.

You are right, contract has been already breached and such a behavior from mining security owner is not only dishonorable but also has its consequences and liabilities for investors.

However, how do you think putting a scammer tag on moparguy528 would help to reimburse investors money? Would it help at all to reach optimal solution on liquidating FPGAMINING?

I am waiting for Nefario too. Just forwarded him your question.

edit: in the meanwhile, a big red scammer tag for moparguy would be appreciated.

https://glbse.com/api/quantity_trading/FPGAMINING

4113 at the moment, much more than last dividend (3900).

Ther's not much to say, original goodwill or not the contract is breached, and we do not see sign a buyback is happening.


Any update on that front?

It is pointless to judge intentions. Just facts matters. And the facts are that a breach of the contract already happened.

He says he is using funds from mining (as well as bought coins) to buyback shares).


This not how he should make it according to contract. But I still wouldn't call him a scammer as at least his intentions seem right. He seems not to have the intention to damage anyone, which (at least for me) is also something that defines a scammer.

For me it remains to be seen if he really buys back my shares to a price where no financial damage is done to me, or if he buys back to the average price, which has significantly dropped due to his announcement.

I missed the part of the contract where it states that he can run with the money whenever. Can you quote it?

So what he is doing with the capital he raised selling bonds? If he bought FPGAs he should run them or sell them. Keeping all for him and say phuck U to his investors does not seem quite right.

Seems that if he will no longer mine what dividends will there be to pay? 

Yes he could, that's also how I see it. But that's also what I meant with "bending the contract in a fraudulent way".

In my personal opinion, that's still scamming.

Edit:

Just reviewed the contract.

He should have bought back the shares immediately if he wanted to close the company. Stopping payments is indeed a violation of the contract.

Not according his contract:


Nowhere his contract says that he can decide to stop paying dividends whenever he likes. On the contrary the contract says that the dividends will grow in time (while he instead reduced them before stopping to pay at all):

Time already showed it: he did not pay dividends on monday 24.

Even if he does everything according to contract.

Stopping payout to drive the prize down just to make a buyback far below the IPO Prise / the prise it was traded before the announcement is scamming. (At least it is bending the contract in a fraudulent way)

If Time shows that he really did it this way than he is a scammer, IMO.

If he buy back shares for the average prize before his announcement to stop payouts, than don't.

"When he likes" in my country means never.
And how about this part of the contract (already breached):

Pretty much unless he had a set price in his contract.

If he says "the price over the past 24 hrs" its in his interest to delay and drop the price as long as possible till people give up and sell for tiny amount.

So anyone can stop paying dividends when he likes and promise to buy back his bonds when he likes at the price he likes? OOOK

It is in his advantage to pay back as slowly as possible, as investors will dump shares at lower prices as their confidence decreases.

This kind of angleshooting has been done before with other assets an no one has gotten a tag for it.

The issuer [ https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/moparguy528-62574 ] of this mining bond:
https://glbse.com/asset/view/FPGAMINING
paid the last weekly dividend on 2012-09-17, that is he stopped unilaterally to pay dividends with no previous warning, then he announced that:


B/S: now there are just bids for 2 bonds above 0.2202 BTC (from an IPO price of 1.0 BTC)


He does not say what he did with the BTC he received for the 3915 bonds he sold, and why he cannot use them to place some serious bids to buy back his "bonds".


He does not say when he will buy back his bonds, nor how much interest he will pay and when, not to speak about asking for the opinion of bondholders.


Last famous words