Topic: [HAVELOCK] Bliss Devices - Scrypt ASIC, IPO Monday May 22nd 11 AM EST (Read 4155 times)

Once the Offering has closed at 11 EST. All Units sold during the IPO will be bought back, refunding everyones Bitcoins back 1:1.

This is an open and free market, some companies will be funded and some will not.

We thank everyone that has supported the Bliss Devices team.

Havelock Investments

don't worry - this is a failure, thank God.

Wow, the input from Bliss and Havelock on this seems to have ground to as abrupt a halt as the IPO. I wonder how many of the 890 shares sold were bought by insiders just trying to create the illusion of demand, as NotLambchop has suggested. Really hard to understand in light of what's been shared and what's come out, not to mention everything that *wasn't* said in the Prospectus, how anyone would be buying shares at this point. 

I will lighten up when I'll see those crooks in jail. The goverment wants bitcoin regulated, but people had paid with dollars for nonexisting products and there is little to nothing they can do about it.

Sirs!

Allow me to place this offering in perspective.  Just 880 of the 30k shares have been sold thus far, most on the first day.  To "prime the pump," so to speak.
A harmless prank pulled by our fun-loving Panamanian colleagues at Havelock.

Lighten up, Gentlemen!

I find it hard to believe that people can actually write such an amount of BS in such a restrained amount of space.

I will start with a really simple question: If you are looking to raise $4M, where are you incorporated?

        So, you valuate your company at $17,859,500. What, in the world, do you have that could possible worth that much??? Does the company owns any properties that can be sold in case of failure (considering Abram Kottmeier involvment the chances of that are somewere between 99% and 100%). You want to raise money from "investors" and also from preorders. In that case, you can (and you should) acceps escrow with preorders because you fund your company trougth investors and you said yourself that is a high risk  of this business failure! You actually ask for money for a product and after that you say you need more money to produce it. Please people try to see the outrageous scam behind this. How can some people be so greedy??? Thei didn't get enough with HashFast???  Shame on you and shame on the "investors" that will sustain this. You deserve to loose your money and you can quote me on this.

-edit-
    Shame on Havelock for sustaining this, I'm out, never to open their page again. Let's put an end to this and let the bots fight each other.
-edit-
        

By Havelock's rules, open trading does not begin until all rounds are closed or the offering deadline is reached.  It would defeat the purpose to even have rounds if we were to start open trading anytime before then.

Founders are also equity holders, as with IPO unitholders.  Our business is about equity growth and not purely a cash business like other offerings on Havelock.  The management needs to have the flexibility to determine how much cash get plowed back into the business to maximize equity value.  If you are more interested in dividend payments vs. equity growth, then this is not the right investment for you, nor if you cannot handle any intrinsic risk of investing in early stage startups.

Abram's prior experience with Hashfast although brief has been invaluable with regards to avoiding past mistakes in this industry, implementing proper business practices, and better understanding the market, and nothing to do with his other experiences whatsoever.

Because you wouldn't pay them a dime if you knew it.

Abram Kottmeier is not the only ex HF employee adopted by this new "company".

Where is BlissDevices incorporated?

Why wasn't this information in the prospectus?  Havelock has to take a look into this.

Victims of bankrupt bitcoin miner company Hashfast will recognize Abram Kottmeier in Bliss Devices' promotional youtube video.  

Kottmeier is linked to male prostitution in the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as to a hardcore pornography company specializing in extreme torture-like abuse porn.

Be very careful with this company.  I wouldn't touch anything having to do with Kottmeier with a 10 meter pole.

For more information, read up in the main Hashfast thread in the bitcoin mining hardware section.

This investment reminded me of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DT7bX-B1Mg.
Happy investing (cheers for joy).

Thanks very much for the follow-up, Paul. This does help to clarify things, though there are a few key questions, for me, still not addressed.


This is sensible enough, but the obvious question is whether Round 1 investors are locked in for the long haul or have the opportunity to offload this risk to an interested third-party at some point -- i.e., when will open trading on BLISS shares begin?

Clearly it's against your best interests to initiate open trading too soon as that would undercut the IPO market as the sole source of BLISS shares. On the other hand, without any commitment to there being an open unitholder-to-unitholder exchange for shares, the amount of risk increases substantially for every investor. Personally, I was interested in investing but will not purchase units without a written commitment concerning the start of open trading. I understand that this may classify me as something other than a "true investor" in your business model in that I'm looking for a risk mitigation strategy that doesn't tie me in long-term, but I suspect that you're not going to find nearly enough "true investors" here to pony up 1136 BTC, let alone 9318. If you honestly want to raise that kind of money through retail BTC investors, you need to create a more favorable investing environment and provide more of this detail up front.


What percentage of profits will be paid back as dividends, as opposed to reinvested in the company? This is crucial information but I cannot find it in the Prospectus or any of your posts. It's wonderful on the surface to make this statement about investor payback, but if you'll indulge the skepticism, it's not worth very much without supporting details: you could easily refrain from making any dividend payments to unitholders at all -- both investors and founder shares -- and still benefit immensely from your Founder holdings and all the revenue raised if you go ahead and just reinvest 100% of profits into the business. That is, dividends mean more to us third-party investors than they do to you, so I'm not convinced that the incentives are as aligned as you suggest.

Again, I have to express disappointment that none of this information is contained in the Prospectus and that it's taking interested and supportive (really!) parties here on a forum to try to extract it. You guys clearly have great expertise and this is an exciting venture but the scarcity of information is raising flags for me. A 9318 BTC IPO should warrant more than a PowerPoint deck framed as a Prospectus. I believe that if you were to devote more effort to rigorously documenting and sharing the business details, you'd find more success than the 33BTC you've raised in the first day of trading.

Thanks again and best regards.

So essentially, you are just trying this out. If it works and you get a bunch of BTC, cool, if not, oh well.

Your lack of commitment is scary.

There's also a good chance that we can raise enough capital through large purchase deals that Round 2 does not need to be fully subscribed to be a viable business, in which case, Round 2 will stay open.  We are being conservative by not committing to something unless it's guaranteed.  Again, Round 1 investors will get the benefits of the low equity pricing albeit with higher risks.

so basically ... anyone who invests in Round 1 risks losing all their money if Round 2 is not sold out in full.

Thats crazy! Who would risk that!

Yes, of course.  If we complete Round 1, we will aggressively pursue other funding sources.  Typically it's the hardest to close the first round -- investors don't like to feel alone.  There is definitely a risk of not being able to complete the funding to cover NRE, which is built into the price discount, however, remember that Round 1 investors also get highest liquidation preferences if we were to sell our IP assets.

Thanks for the clarification Paul.

One more detail; If round 1 sells, but subsequent rounds do not, I assume that you will seek the capital shortfall from other sources?  In other words, in this scenario, what is the risk that round 1 investors will have invested in a non-viable business due to lack of capital?

Let me clarify the terms.

In the event that Round 1 does not fully close, all Round 1 investors will receive a refund on their total investment.

In the event that Round 2 does not fully close, all Round 2 investors will receive a full refund on their investment.  However, Round 1 investors will not receive a refund since this capital will have been used to pay our vendors for services rendered, hence the deeper discount from Round 2.

In the event that Round 3 does not fully close, no refund will be offered to any investors, as we will be a viable business.  We are currently working with large clients on product deals that do not involve raising money on Havelock, as well as funded by preorder from our website and bridge loan financing.  Havelock serves as a supplement funding source for non-US investors for our core strategy of pre-selling to large industrial customers.

Also, Founder shares cannot be traded or receive any dividend payments until all previous investors are paid back in full, starting with Round 1, 2, etc.  These terms incentivize us to generate enough profits to fully pay back our investors before we receive any profit distributions.  We are fully committed to building a long-term viable business and hence have structured the terms in such a way for us to do so.

Sorry for the confusion and hope this clarifies things.

-Paul

i would like to know this too, currently there are 29,000 remaining.. lets see what happens next.