Topic: HashFast announces specs for new ASIC: 400GH/s - page 74. (Read 880461 times)
Folks: Simon has hired Ori Katz, not Chris Sullivan. While there are many lawyers, the good ones are not so many. And the best ones fewer still. This is true of humans in every profession. Ori happens to be one of a small group of excellent bankruptcy lawyers who regularly practice before this Court. Ori did pitch the committee, and he was a better choice (though Mr. Sullivan was my first choice). Unlike Ms. McDow, Ori has far more experience representing creditors' committees. But he has no confidential information from the committee or any creditor---he pitched based on the public record info. So Simon was free to hire him. The conspiracy theories are a little thick in some places here. Mr. Edgeworth has (foolishly) failed to listen to me in many respects. You may all come out as well as can be hoped despite some of those mistakes. But they have consumed time and significant amounts of money. Committee counsel is, ultimately, paid by the creditors as a group. So you are all paying for Mr. Edgeworth's decisions. I won't be closely following this forum, so if I miss an insult or falsity, I will trust you all to be duly skeptical. And if anybody wants accurate information, he or she is free to email me directly at [email protected] or through www.hfrefunds.com.
I asked LB to carve out the IP and the claims.
...The fact of the matter is that there are two components to the value of the chips, the mining difficulty, and the Bitcoin exchange rate. There is no guarantee that they will be worth less in the future than they are now and accepting a deal with dubious terms that essentially caps the chips' value at the current level while continuing to expose the creditors to 100% of the current down side exchange rate risk is plainly stupid.
Creditor's claims are listed in US Dollars.
If chips are worth X BTC and creditors would get Y% of their claim back from the sale today.
Please tell me the value of the chips if BTC is $1,000 a month from now and difficulty is 20% higher.
To dismiss his point as "personal speculation on the price of bitcoin" is the same as dismissing your point as "personal speculation on the increase in difficulty".
They are BOTH valid variables that affect the value of chips.
Think back to late October. KNC could not even sell out of their Jupiters when bitcoin was $90. Then they were sold out by November 12 when bitcoin went above $280. Difficulty rose so why did the value of a Jupiter all of a sudden go up so much? It is a perfectly valid counter point to your point.
There is a guarantee that chips will be worth less with time passing, in fact there is mathematical proof these chips will be worth 0 US$ in some point in the future. That point is called the "Price/Power cost equilibrium", and the only unknown is when will it happen, not if it will happen.
I understand what you are saying but you are wrong. Look at the extreme. Bitcoin is $1 Million. Are these chips worthless? The answer is, it depends. You cannot have mathematical proof by looking at one variable when there are two variables.I asked LB to carve out the IP and the claims.
...The fact of the matter is that there are two components to the value of the chips, the mining difficulty, and the Bitcoin exchange rate. There is no guarantee that they will be worth less in the future than they are now and accepting a deal with dubious terms that essentially caps the chips' value at the current level while continuing to expose the creditors to 100% of the current down side exchange rate risk is plainly stupid.
That's the point, the price of Bitcoin has everything to do with the amount of money the creditors will receive under the terms of this deal. If Bitcoin goes to zero the 6 million in debt and equity will be worthless and if Bitcoin goes to the moon the most the creditors will get is 6 million. If you are uncomfortable speculating on the future price of Bitcoin then you should be very uncomfortable with this deal. That's why I think this deal is garbage, it is forcing the creditor body to speculate on the future price of BTC with a capped upside and unlimited downside. It's insane.
You've stated in court repeatedly that you don't know anything about Bitcoin so what basis do you continue to parrot the line that the chips are devaluing quickly?
The fact of the matter is that there are two components to the value of the chips, the mining difficulty, and the Bitcoin exchange rate. There is no guarantee that they will be worth less in the future than they are now ...
The fact of the matter is that there are two components to the value of the chips, the mining difficulty, and the Bitcoin exchange rate. There is no guarantee that they will be worth less in the future than they are now ...
I don't want to get involved into your's and Ray's argument if the LB offer is a good deal or not, since I don't have enough business knowledge to access it, but what you've written above is nonsense. There is a guarantee that chips will be worth less with time passing, in fact there is mathematical proof these chips will be worth 0 US$ in some point in the future. That point is called the "Price/Power cost equilibrium", and the only unknown is when will it happen, not if it will happen. HashFast chips are far from being most power-efficient chips on the market, and as they produce less and less BTC with every difficulty adjustment, at some point their BTC production will be less than electricity cost for their operation, while others more power efficient miners will continue to operate. This already happened a year ago with GPUs, and we have much less than a year for the same thing to happen to power non-efficient ASICs. Chips value is reducing every two weeks, make no mistake about it. If you have a plan what to do with these chips execute it fast, don't delude yourself thinking you have time to take it easy.
I asked LB to carve out the IP and the claims.
...The fact of the matter is that there are two components to the value of the chips, the mining difficulty, and the Bitcoin exchange rate. There is no guarantee that they will be worth less in the future than they are now and accepting a deal with dubious terms that essentially caps the chips' value at the current level while continuing to expose the creditors to 100% of the current down side exchange rate risk is plainly stupid.
I asked LB to carve out the IP and the claims.
No you didn't Ray. You were ready to accept the original deal as is until the committee voiced their concerns on those deal points among others which weren't changed. All I've seen you do is harass the committee with your petty grievances and waste everyone's time. You've stated in court repeatedly that you don't know anything about Bitcoin so what basis do you continue to parrot the line that the chips are devaluing quickly?
The fact of the matter is that there are two components to the value of the chips, the mining difficulty, and the Bitcoin exchange rate. There is no guarantee that they will be worth less in the future than they are now and accepting a deal with dubious terms that essentially caps the chips' value at the current level while continuing to expose the creditors to 100% of the current down side exchange rate risk is plainly stupid.
What do you mean the chips aren't devaluating?? When's the last time the difficulty went down or stayed the same? Difficulty will continue to rise and the chips will devalue. Maybe not at 30% each 10 days like they were before, but difficulty is still rising at a considerable amount (est. 7% this time around).
Putting HF in bankruptcy was the right thing. Now we need to put HF's inventory of chips to work. They have depreciated massively during this bankruptcy, while the committee has done little or nothing to facilitate a deal. If anybody knows anybody who'll make a better offer than Liquidbits', by all means let's have that bidder speak up. We all want the best deal. But for those of you who don't know, LB's offer puts $2 Million cash into the bankruptcy to cover up to that much of the bankruptcy costs, on top of the hopefully $6M the creditors will net from the sale. I asked LB to carve out the IP and the claims. We got most of these changes made. Most of that remains in the estate. If there is a better deal, by all means let's hear it and make it. If not, let's do the deal there is and get the chips mining before they lose more value. And then maybe we'll get lucky and the IP will be worth something. By the way, those who think LB doesn't have the cash to perform: HF's bankrutpcy lawyers thought of that, and asked for due diligence. Plus, it's $2M up front, right? If LB blows it, Rob can try and sell the chips to someone else and we keep the $2M. Maybe, just maybe, Ray has a point. We need to see the formal papers, which will be done shortly. But if the deal is as I understand it, and there are no other buyers, this is a no brainer. A bird in hand . . . .
Hi Ray;You speak of Ray in the same third person way that armyofone used to. I miss that guy.
I think a better deal would be liquidation. Has that been discussed? That gets cash up front. Not promises up front.
I asked LB to carve out the IP and the claims.
No you didn't Ray. You were ready to accept the original deal as is until the committee voiced their concerns on those deal points among others which weren't changed. All I've seen you do is harass the committee with your petty grievances and waste everyone's time. You've stated in court repeatedly that you don't know anything about Bitcoin so what basis do you continue to parrot the line that the chips are devaluing quickly?
The fact of the matter is that there are two components to the value of the chips, the mining difficulty, and the Bitcoin exchange rate. There is no guarantee that they will be worth less in the future than they are now and accepting a deal with dubious terms that essentially caps the chips' value at the current level while continuing to expose the creditors to 100% of the current down side exchange rate risk is plainly stupid.
You're offering no path of solution whatsoever... Good lord, lately it's to wonder if you're not hired by the competition to hinder any progress.
I think the problem is that we have people saying there has been a huge public "auction" process for the assets, yet no one outside of management and the few people that Eduardo handpicked to show have really been told the whole situation and the list of assets. So, should I trust that Eduardo actually did this? I did not see them. I could buy this company easily and obviously am interested in mining. Do you think it is possible that others that may be interested were not called either? I have not see them. Maybe they should be sold off to more than one person? Perhaps, LB will be the highest bidder in this auction. Perhaps, someone will actually bid cash at this auction. That would make them a higher bid than liquidbit's current bid.
Without visibility, we just do not know. I wish I had access to all the information that LB and Ray Gallo seem to get.
Doing nothing is probably a better deal than gifting everything to someone that can steal what's left from you.
By your reasoning nothing would ever happen because, thieves.Miners don't simply disappear from multiple data-centers, LBs could also escrows parts of the mined coins.
What happens if BTC spikes to 10k for 10 seconds? Will you say that you have fulfilled your terms?
I'm sure you could easily devise of a simple valuation mechanism which protect BTC payments from your so problematic but unrealistic price spikes.
You're offering no path of solution whatsoever... Good lord, lately it's to wonder if you're not hired by the competition to hinder any progress.
Hi Ray,
They have depreciated massively during this bankruptcy, while the committee has done little or nothing to facilitate a deal.
I would say that the problem is the debtor that did nothing to facilitate the "deal". They are the ones that kept it devaluating for 6 months from 50M to 0.5M or something.If there is a better deal, by all means let's hear it and make it. If not, let's do the deal there is and get the chips mining before they lose more value.
Doing nothing is probably a better deal than gifting everything to someone that can steal what's left from you.HF's bankrutpcy lawyers thought of that, and asked for due diligence.
Having something doesn't mean using it.We need to see the formal papers, which will be done shortly.
When? I would say that they are running a little bit late.But if the deal is as I understand it, and there are no other buyers, this is a no brainer.
Same fallacy.
Putting HF in bankruptcy was the right thing. Now we need to put HF's inventory of chips to work. They have depreciated massively during this bankruptcy, while the committee has done little or nothing to facilitate a deal. If anybody knows anybody who'll make a better offer than Liquidbits', by all means let's have that bidder speak up. We all want the best deal. But for those of you who don't know, LB's offer puts $2 Million cash into the bankruptcy to cover up to that much of the bankruptcy costs, on top of the hopefully $6M the creditors will net from the sale. I asked LB to carve out the IP and the claims. We got most of these changes made. Most of that remains in the estate. If there is a better deal, by all means let's hear it and make it. If not, let's do the deal there is and get the chips mining before they lose more value. And then maybe we'll get lucky and the IP will be worth something. By the way, those who think LB doesn't have the cash to perform: HF's bankrutpcy lawyers thought of that, and asked for due diligence. Plus, it's $2M up front, right? If LB blows it, Rob can try and sell the chips to someone else and we keep the $2M. Maybe, just maybe, Ray has a point. We need to see the formal papers, which will be done shortly. But if the deal is as I understand it, and there are no other buyers, this is a no brainer. A bird in hand . . . .
So they basically agreed on giving us the IP hold by HashFast LLC:
http://hashfast.org/14-30725.148.pdf
Will we (individuals) have a chance at reviewing their books (and every related bitcoin transaction)?
http://hashfast.org/14-30725.148.pdf
The committee has hired a forensic accounting firm to do exactly what you are talking about.
Will we (individuals) have a chance at reviewing their books (and every related bitcoin transaction)?
Also, left out of MANY of these conversations is the RECOVERIES. When companies are UNDERCAPITALIZED, the shareholders can sometimes be personally liable. There is that money. Notice all the employees that were shareholders? Plus, there is a good chance some of the money that was paid out can be recovered by the estate.
I'm actually quite surprised no one is talking more about this. I mentioned undercap as a reason to pierce the corporate veil MONTHS ago (and have talked about it in a lot of different manufactures threads as all the pre-order schemes seem to have undercap'd their start ups.)
Has HF surrendered their books to the court? Has an independent auditor looked at them yet? Has this request been made by the creditors, is that type of request even an option? There seems to be a lot of unaccounted for monies, I am curious why more people are not actively asking WHERE THE FUCK did the money go and how much of it can the estate get back. Seems to me something that should be done early on.
What public assets do the owners have, anyone do any digging on that yet?
Does the LB proposal let Simon and Edaurdo "off the hook" in terms of liabilities? If it does then why are they willing to do this?
The committee has hired a forensic accounting firm to do exactly what you are talking about.
Excuse me while I slash my wrists! I'm going to assume it will be even worse than this by the time said chips are actually sold. My guess is I'll be lucky to recover 0.08-0.12 on the dollar by the time it's all said and done :/
If you have a LEGITIMATE claim and you have filed with the court, there is a simple form that you can download and transfer (sell) your claim to someone else.If your claim is CLEAN, I will buy it from you for that price.
By CLEAN, I mean a simple order that was not delivered.
Also, left out of MANY of these conversations is the RECOVERIES. When companies are UNDERCAPITALIZED, the shareholders can sometimes be personally liable. There is that money. Notice all the employees that were shareholders? Plus, there is a good chance some of the money that was paid out can be recovered by the estate.
I'm actually quite surprised no one is talking more about this. I mentioned undercap as a reason to pierce the corporate veil MONTHS ago (and have talked about it in a lot of different manufactures threads as all the pre-order schemes seem to have undercap'd their start ups.)
Has HF surrendered their books to the court? Has an independent auditor looked at them yet? Has this request been made by the creditors, is that type of request even an option? There seems to be a lot of unaccounted for monies, I am curious why more people are not actively asking WHERE THE FUCK did the money go and how much of it can the estate get back. Seems to me something that should be done early on.
What public assets do the owners have, anyone do any digging on that yet?
Does the LB proposal let Simon and Edaurdo "off the hook" in terms of liabilities? If it does then why are they willing to do this?
Last Questions:
You told me to look up who the "directors" and "owners" of liquid bits are and provided a link with some mediocre information on it. Since you cited it, I assume as a creditor (and if you had your way, a CAPPED high risk investor in Liquidbits) that this is important information that I should use to base my judgement of your company.
Principle Place of business:https://www.google.com/maps/place/3800+S+Ocean+Dr+%23242,+Hollywood,+FL+33019/@25.989049,-80.120058,716m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x88d9ab5fd3162e83:0x1a3fb261ee43352e
A 200k mediocre condo/office project in Hollywood Florida? Does the building HOA allow condos there to be PRINCIPAL PLACES OF BUSINESS or is suite 242 one of the offices? I assume you rent suite 242 from Hallmark but do not find you registered with the local muni tax department. Perhaps, you can help me. Want to check up a bit on the business that you have run for the last few years. I also do not see filings on where your $5 Million came from with which you base your claim with HF on. That does not seem to be registered at the state or federal level, can you help me here because that is kind of confusing. If you did an offering, it does not appear to be registered either.
Let me know where to look because, I will not become a shareholder (even the BS kind of shareholder you are proposing which is really just a RISK holder that is providing liquidity (a sucker is a better term) in any venture that is not registered and legitimate. If you do not answer this to my satisfaction tomorrow I will ask in open court as I am not willing to be part of any new venture that might have been funded improperly and may be open to investor lawsuits or federal action against it.
Let me know. Since it is does not inspire confidence that the people claiming to need two years to repay me my money do business from a location they are not allowed to. Can you post their business license with the municipality also for me?
I want to make sure this company with 10s of millions of dollars is on the up and up and I can trust them.
I assume they do not have 29MW of power and 8MW of cooling in that small condo, or am I wrong? Hard to take them as credible when YOU TELL US to "go look for ourselves" and instead of a large data center built out as their place of business, we find a cheap condo?
Gee, I am not sure why this does not seem like a joke of a company. Please let me know the answers. Would really like to know if your clients either 1. do not follow local laws and regulations or 2. are hiding a massive data center in a tier two condo or 3. really do not have the resources to do what they claim yet will after they get all of HF's assets for NOTHING down or 4. are not being open and upfront with the people that will be financing the business they are starting for some REALLY good reason?
You told me to look up who the "directors" and "owners" of liquid bits are and provided a link with some mediocre information on it. Since you cited it, I assume as a creditor (and if you had your way, a CAPPED high risk investor in Liquidbits) that this is important information that I should use to base my judgement of your company.
Principle Place of business:https://www.google.com/maps/place/3800+S+Ocean+Dr+%23242,+Hollywood,+FL+33019/@25.989049,-80.120058,716m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x88d9ab5fd3162e83:0x1a3fb261ee43352e
A 200k mediocre condo/office project in Hollywood Florida? Does the building HOA allow condos there to be PRINCIPAL PLACES OF BUSINESS or is suite 242 one of the offices? I assume you rent suite 242 from Hallmark but do not find you registered with the local muni tax department. Perhaps, you can help me. Want to check up a bit on the business that you have run for the last few years. I also do not see filings on where your $5 Million came from with which you base your claim with HF on. That does not seem to be registered at the state or federal level, can you help me here because that is kind of confusing. If you did an offering, it does not appear to be registered either.
Let me know where to look because, I will not become a shareholder (even the BS kind of shareholder you are proposing which is really just a RISK holder that is providing liquidity (a sucker is a better term) in any venture that is not registered and legitimate. If you do not answer this to my satisfaction tomorrow I will ask in open court as I am not willing to be part of any new venture that might have been funded improperly and may be open to investor lawsuits or federal action against it.
Let me know. Since it is does not inspire confidence that the people claiming to need two years to repay me my money do business from a location they are not allowed to. Can you post their business license with the municipality also for me?
I want to make sure this company with 10s of millions of dollars is on the up and up and I can trust them.
I assume they do not have 29MW of power and 8MW of cooling in that small condo, or am I wrong? Hard to take them as credible when YOU TELL US to "go look for ourselves" and instead of a large data center built out as their place of business, we find a cheap condo?
Gee, I am not sure why this does not seem like a joke of a company. Please let me know the answers. Would really like to know if your clients either 1. do not follow local laws and regulations or 2. are hiding a massive data center in a tier two condo or 3. really do not have the resources to do what they claim yet will after they get all of HF's assets for NOTHING down or 4. are not being open and upfront with the people that will be financing the business they are starting for some REALLY good reason?
I am not "missing" the $10M in the court filed document. It CONTRADICTS what you say.
In court: UP TO $10 Million (that means zero to $10M)
In btctalk: Liquidbit's claims $12 Million is IMMEDIATELY put in.
This does not match. I think I trust what is filed with the court.
In public Court: ZERO INFORMATION on chip sales prices and zero public offering of chips.
In Btctalk: Liqudbit's claims to have confidential information that was specifically requested to be kept out of the public record by HF attorney in court.
This does not match. I think I trust the testimony in court.
Valuation:
In public Court: 7-9 Million for the chips. Matches valuation arrived at compared other chips you can buy. Also, since Spondoolies chip just failed to meet goals, the value just went up today.
In Btctalk: Liquidbit's claims everything is worthless YET they really, really badly want to buy it all REALLY fast and do so with our money.
This does not match. I think I trust the testimony in court and the market.
IP:
The IP that Liquidbit's tries to focus on is the next gen. Other companies are still selling miners in stock at $2 GH/s. The 28nm masks are ALSO worth a lot of money.
Supporters of Liquidbit's proposal publicly: Not many. GigaVPS (a guy that gave Josh Zerlan positive Trust) seemed to try but his valuation equates to 80 cents on the dollar for creditors so it supports an open auction process in SMALL lots.
I have been through several of these and have come out okay at getting the money back that people owe me. I feel the same way about this one. There is no need to sell to the first carpetbagger that comes along. That just indicates the need for a PUBLIC sale. None of these assets are even public yet, so what are we debating when Liquidbit's is obviously privy to a lot of information that creditors are not.
Also, left out of MANY of these conversations is the RECOVERIES. When companies are UNDERCAPITALIZED, the shareholders can sometimes be personally liable. There is that money. Notice all the employees that were shareholders? Plus, there is a good chance some of the money that was paid out can be recovered by the estate. We know there was over $20 Million in revenue.
We know they delivered around $5 Million worth of machines. Cost of those machines? Maybe $4 Million if they REALLY screwed up badly. Cost of IP, $2 Million. Cost of Chips in stock: $500,000. There is at least $12,000,000 somewhere.
What we do not know? How many machines Liquidbits actually received. We know they got some but how many? Do they really have a claim still? I do not know that and would like to see in October if they really are still a creditor.
Maybe that is why LB's is in such a rush? So, that we do not see some more of the truth about where all this money went, and just what LB's role with HF really was? How do they get all this confidential information that the rest of us do not?
In court: UP TO $10 Million (that means zero to $10M)
In btctalk: Liquidbit's claims $12 Million is IMMEDIATELY put in.
This does not match. I think I trust what is filed with the court.
In public Court: ZERO INFORMATION on chip sales prices and zero public offering of chips.
In Btctalk: Liqudbit's claims to have confidential information that was specifically requested to be kept out of the public record by HF attorney in court.
This does not match. I think I trust the testimony in court.
Valuation:
In public Court: 7-9 Million for the chips. Matches valuation arrived at compared other chips you can buy. Also, since Spondoolies chip just failed to meet goals, the value just went up today.
In Btctalk: Liquidbit's claims everything is worthless YET they really, really badly want to buy it all REALLY fast and do so with our money.
This does not match. I think I trust the testimony in court and the market.
IP:
The IP that Liquidbit's tries to focus on is the next gen. Other companies are still selling miners in stock at $2 GH/s. The 28nm masks are ALSO worth a lot of money.
Supporters of Liquidbit's proposal publicly: Not many. GigaVPS (a guy that gave Josh Zerlan positive Trust) seemed to try but his valuation equates to 80 cents on the dollar for creditors so it supports an open auction process in SMALL lots.
I have been through several of these and have come out okay at getting the money back that people owe me. I feel the same way about this one. There is no need to sell to the first carpetbagger that comes along. That just indicates the need for a PUBLIC sale. None of these assets are even public yet, so what are we debating when Liquidbit's is obviously privy to a lot of information that creditors are not.
Also, left out of MANY of these conversations is the RECOVERIES. When companies are UNDERCAPITALIZED, the shareholders can sometimes be personally liable. There is that money. Notice all the employees that were shareholders? Plus, there is a good chance some of the money that was paid out can be recovered by the estate. We know there was over $20 Million in revenue.
We know they delivered around $5 Million worth of machines. Cost of those machines? Maybe $4 Million if they REALLY screwed up badly. Cost of IP, $2 Million. Cost of Chips in stock: $500,000. There is at least $12,000,000 somewhere.
What we do not know? How many machines Liquidbits actually received. We know they got some but how many? Do they really have a claim still? I do not know that and would like to see in October if they really are still a creditor.
Maybe that is why LB's is in such a rush? So, that we do not see some more of the truth about where all this money went, and just what LB's role with HF really was? How do they get all this confidential information that the rest of us do not?
I would not ask you to simply trust us however. Hashfast has been making limited sales of chips to keep the lights on and pay some bankruptcy expenses. It is our understanding that they are having difficulty selling these chips at $125 each. Given that there are 27,000 chips remaining for bulk liquidation or transfer to Liquidbits, a valuation of $8 million would equate to a price of just under $300 per chip. In a bulk liquidation scenario, it is highly probable that the unit cost of the chips would be even lower than the current $125, as people/companies buy in bulk to get a lower unit cost, not a higher one. Further the price which one might realistically expect to get for these chips is bounded by the competing chips/rigs in the marketplace. Specifically the BitMain AntMiner S3 is sold in rig form for $0.75 per ghash/s and a power consumption of .77 watts at the wall. When you factor in the cost of mounting HashFast chips, installing cooling units, and in some cases cutting the wafers into chips of about $400 per unit, what you find is that Hashfast’s estate would need to be selling the chips with a final cost of $100 to achieve a cost per ghash of $0.78 in order to compete with chips already in inventory and being sold. Even at this reduced price, they would still be a difficult sell as they have worse power consumption at 1.1 watt per ghash/s
So using a realistic price of $100 per chip, this equates to approximately $2.7 million in chip inventory. The intellectual property consists of little more than plans for a 16nm chip, which would take months and millions of dollars to produce, and then would be at best equivalent to what is already coming out now, and likely much lower performance than what would be available then. Consequently, it would be highly generous to assume a value of $2 million for the intellectual property. In addition, about $1 million (beyond the debts for Hashfast) is owed on this IP, so that the net value would, using a generous value equate to about $1 million.
This results in a total liquidation value of $3.7 million. From this there would need to be deducted the $2 million in priority/secured claims, which by law get paid before general unsecured creditors. This then leaves $1.7 million to be split among $12 million in claims. This would translate to a recovery of about 14% for each general unsecured creditor. If these chips wind up selling for $80 per chip, or if the IP sells for $1.5 million instead of $2million (both entirely likely situations), then the recovery for each general unsecured creditor drops to 10%. In the unlikely event that they are able to get $150 per chip, the recovery for general unsecured creditors would be approximately 25%. This is how we arrived at the estimated recovery rates listed earlier. We stand by these numbers, and think that anyone who thoroughly investigates this matter will arrive at the same conclusion.
So using a realistic price of $100 per chip, this equates to approximately $2.7 million in chip inventory. The intellectual property consists of little more than plans for a 16nm chip, which would take months and millions of dollars to produce, and then would be at best equivalent to what is already coming out now, and likely much lower performance than what would be available then. Consequently, it would be highly generous to assume a value of $2 million for the intellectual property. In addition, about $1 million (beyond the debts for Hashfast) is owed on this IP, so that the net value would, using a generous value equate to about $1 million.
This results in a total liquidation value of $3.7 million. From this there would need to be deducted the $2 million in priority/secured claims, which by law get paid before general unsecured creditors. This then leaves $1.7 million to be split among $12 million in claims. This would translate to a recovery of about 14% for each general unsecured creditor. If these chips wind up selling for $80 per chip, or if the IP sells for $1.5 million instead of $2million (both entirely likely situations), then the recovery for each general unsecured creditor drops to 10%. In the unlikely event that they are able to get $150 per chip, the recovery for general unsecured creditors would be approximately 25%. This is how we arrived at the estimated recovery rates listed earlier. We stand by these numbers, and think that anyone who thoroughly investigates this matter will arrive at the same conclusion.
I'm curious how you know what Hashfast is or isn't selling at what prices? Either this information you're sharing is total BS or you are violating confidentiality agreements with Hashfast and the court under which this information would have been provided to you.
And don't worry guys, the recoveries will now be 0.0002 BTC bigger:
https://blockchain.info/address/1KFrqkEGy6Yq7X4SYCbYoj8HEwfbWVUDJ9
Your answer Greg?
https://blockchain.info/address/1KFrqkEGy6Yq7X4SYCbYoj8HEwfbWVUDJ9
Your answer Greg?
Jump to: