Topic: GLBSE new TOS and share transfer services suspended (Read 2493 times)
The problem is when a company has multiple founders. I think the person who creates the ticker should be allowed to send shares to any account(indefinitely or for a short amount of time after IPO (days/weeks), and maybe even receive shares through the send system. Other than that I understand your reasoning for suspending trades.
I will work with GLBSE to pay whatever fee is necessary.
Pre-sales were my idea to help sales along.
Pre-sales were my idea to help sales along.
And that's not a bad idea at all. It just highlighted a potential problem for us that needed to be addressed.
Transfers have not been suspended indefinitely, we just need some time to work out the best way to implement them.
gigavps' asset issue will move along on time.
We're sorry for the miscommunication of our intent here, but getting some dialogue going with our clients about these items is certainly proving to be a helpful process, and one that we will continue going forward.
Quote
You can't kill the OTC market, and it's disappointing to even see you try.
This.You people are killing yourselves, and I'm not saying this because MPEx will eat your lunch: it will anyway, with this or without this most recent clusterfuck.
I'm saying this because MtGox yielded, and who the fuck do you take yourselves for, with your piddly coupla k's volume a month? Jesus.
I will work with GLBSE to pay whatever fee is necessary.
Pre-sales were my idea to help sales along.
Pre-sales were my idea to help sales along.
I hope this doesnt mean a reversal in the bonds ive already paid for, and a future increase on the agreed pre-sale price for them.
in worst case price increase would be .5 % of fees
(this is how I understood the transfer stop drama)
without transfers between accounts this becomes pita
There are discussions about this issue taking place in a few threads and I'd like to consolidate it all into here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/glbse-ipo-handling-and-interaccount-transfers-discussion-thread-75890
Thanks.
Thanks.
I hope this doesnt mean a reversal in the bonds ive already paid for, and a future increase on the agreed pre-sale price for them.
GLBSE should just charge a fee to transfer shares or bitcoins between accounts. Problem solved.
The OP was not clear on that point.
Due to abuse, we are suspending the asset/share transfer service on GLBSE.
So, I have several hundred bitcoin in different shares in GLBSE, and now I can't trade them for some unspecified time due to some unclear reason. Are you trying to kill your exchange?
Please explain what you are actually doing i.e. suspending trading indefinitely? That is what you've said.
//DeaDTerra
Due to abuse, we are suspending the asset/share transfer service on GLBSE.
So, I have several hundred bitcoin in different shares in GLBSE, and now I can't trade them for some unspecified time due to some unclear reason. Are you trying to kill your exchange?
Please explain what you are actually doing i.e. suspending trading indefinitely? That is what you've said.
That shouldn't be happening.
The only difference in function is that you can't directly transfer shares between accounts. Regular trading should still be possible.
Due to abuse, we are suspending the asset/share transfer service on GLBSE.
So, I have several hundred bitcoin in different shares in GLBSE, and now I can't trade them for some unspecified time due to some unclear reason. Are you trying to kill your exchange?
Please explain what you are actually doing i.e. suspending trading indefinitely? That is what you've said.
issuer already paid fees for creating the IPO
and there will be secondary market trading with fees
and some of the shares will also make it in the initial offer
I don't fully understand this move to cancel transfers & even the ipo/7 seems no longer be linked from main page / menu
and there will be secondary market trading with fees
and some of the shares will also make it in the initial offer
I don't fully understand this move to cancel transfers & even the ipo/7 seems no longer be linked from main page / menu
Sounds like a second exchange will be created if this is too big a problem.
Also, it is common in an IPO for there to be several shareholders of the asset and only a portion are sold at IPO time. If GLBSE attempts to halt that activity then the operators are commercially naive (stupid) and it falls outside of the TOS as it is prior to being on that particular exchange.
On a related note, I discussed with James a stake in his operation back in January, but due to circumstances, was not able to invest (We were talking $10k-$20k at the time). If you think a simple exchange like GLBSE wants to retroactively reach into those arrangements, you're dreaming. I'm quite happy to run a bulletin board trading service for a Giga issue if required (I'll wear my professional company secretary hat (ACIS) for that), and do it for free.
Also, it is common in an IPO for there to be several shareholders of the asset and only a portion are sold at IPO time. If GLBSE attempts to halt that activity then the operators are commercially naive (stupid) and it falls outside of the TOS as it is prior to being on that particular exchange.
On a related note, I discussed with James a stake in his operation back in January, but due to circumstances, was not able to invest (We were talking $10k-$20k at the time). If you think a simple exchange like GLBSE wants to retroactively reach into those arrangements, you're dreaming. I'm quite happy to run a bulletin board trading service for a Giga issue if required (I'll wear my professional company secretary hat (ACIS) for that), and do it for free.
There are some valid points being raised here.
We are currently discussing it, but Nefario isn't available at the moment so don't expect an immediate response.
If you have any other comments please don't hesitate to make them.
We are currently discussing it, but Nefario isn't available at the moment so don't expect an immediate response.
If you have any other comments please don't hesitate to make them.
This sounds stupid to me. It's somewhat akin to you claiming ownership over our paper share certificates and preventing us from exchanging them in person. You can't kill the OTC market, and it's disappointing to even see you try. MtGox does not attempt to police it, and if anything facilitates it by creating MtGox codes for both fiat and bitcoin quantities (even though this sometimes means lost fees for them).
I appreciate that you'd have liked to see your fees attached to gigavps's 10k btc, but the shares are his to sell however he wants, and doing this is short-sighted and detrimental to glbse. If anything, the move seems like an excellent way to kill any kind of good will people had towards you.
I appreciate that you'd have liked to see your fees attached to gigavps's 10k btc, but the shares are his to sell however he wants, and doing this is short-sighted and detrimental to glbse. If anything, the move seems like an excellent way to kill any kind of good will people had towards you.
Ummm I don't see any mention of fees at all in the above TOS so what rake is there to be paid? Normally fees etc would be specified in TOS wouldn't they?
ANOTHER SUGGESTION: Before the IPO put all the BTC that has been collected pre IPO into an account an BUY the shares (paying the rake to GLBSE) then allow him to distribute them post fees to the proper buyers.
There are a lot of ways to handle this.
Like I said work something out before this whole thing goes down the toilet.
There are a lot of ways to handle this.
Like I said work something out before this whole thing goes down the toilet.
The ability to transfer assets between accounts was intended for users with multiple accounts to be able to freely move their assets between them. Users have been taking advantage of this function to avoid trade fees. Obviously that is not sustainable for us as an exchange platform provider, and required us to make this change.
Well this is NOT spelled out in your TOS. The pre-sale has already happened. No one knew it was abuse. You and Giga get together and work this thing out pronto before it becomes another long drawn out clusterfuck like the Goat episode. There is a lot of money at stake here. A lot of people have already paid for shares.If the issues it that you did not get your cut then I suggest you work out an agreement for Giga to pay you some BTC to cover what you would have made on the sales. Then put what is allowed and what is not allowed in your TOS. You cannot change things mid stream like this.
The ability to transfer assets between accounts was intended for users with multiple accounts to be able to freely move their assets between them. Users have been taking advantage of this function to avoid trade fees. Obviously that is not sustainable for us as an exchange platform provider, and required us to make this change.
Jump to: