Topic: HAVELOCK DE-LISTS AMHASH (Read 2863 times)
You have three related Topics running, I made a mod edit in one of your threads (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/havelock-is-co-responsible-for-amhash-lets-get-our-money-back-986763) linking your other two topics, please continue your conversations in that single thread. I'll be locking these two so that people can reference them.
Aside from pursuing Havelock, i am in contact with a good friend in the Russian gov. with good contacts within the Chinese government, i am pushing this hard so this case gets to be known by a high ranking Chinese official, if i get the case there, then there is sure death penalty for AM and Rockminer as this will be pushed from gov to gov and from top to down in China.
READ THE WRITING ON THE WALL CHINESE SCAMMERS, THE FIRING SQUAD IS WARMING UP FOR YOU.
READ THE WRITING ON THE WALL CHINESE SCAMMERS, THE FIRING SQUAD IS WARMING UP FOR YOU.
A quick update re:AMHash
There is a good chance that contract holders will get a significant portion of their principal back. The details are currently being worked out. Please understand that there is currently a lot of blame shifting going on, but AM management shows an active interest in breaking the gridlock in order to be able to concentrate on getting the business back on track.
Right now I'd like to provide the following clues
a) You will not get 100% on the principal amount. While this may hurt AMHash buyers, please note that AM is certainly not making a profit from this failed product in any way.
b) If you consider litigation or are in talks with a lawyer, you may want to wait this one out. Chances are that after taking into account the cost of litigation or lawyer fees you end up with less %. Also the contractual situation is very complex - you may end up suing the wrong company.
c) You may have to prove your contract. Please make sure that you got proper documentation ready. However, if you hold a contract through one of the platforms, there may be a consolidated method which doesn't require proof.
d) If AM recovers from this crisis, there may be more coming down the pipeline for affected people in form of discounts.
I'd like to remind everyone that I am not a company representative, which means I cannot warrant for the correctness of the information provided. Unfortunately the company cannot announce anything until the details have been worked out. Act accordingly.
Also, if you'd be so nice and cross post this to inform AMHash holders - I don't have a map for where AMHash was marketed.
There is a good chance that contract holders will get a significant portion of their principal back. The details are currently being worked out. Please understand that there is currently a lot of blame shifting going on, but AM management shows an active interest in breaking the gridlock in order to be able to concentrate on getting the business back on track.
Right now I'd like to provide the following clues
a) You will not get 100% on the principal amount. While this may hurt AMHash buyers, please note that AM is certainly not making a profit from this failed product in any way.
b) If you consider litigation or are in talks with a lawyer, you may want to wait this one out. Chances are that after taking into account the cost of litigation or lawyer fees you end up with less %. Also the contractual situation is very complex - you may end up suing the wrong company.
c) You may have to prove your contract. Please make sure that you got proper documentation ready. However, if you hold a contract through one of the platforms, there may be a consolidated method which doesn't require proof.
d) If AM recovers from this crisis, there may be more coming down the pipeline for affected people in form of discounts.
I'd like to remind everyone that I am not a company representative, which means I cannot warrant for the correctness of the information provided. Unfortunately the company cannot announce anything until the details have been worked out. Act accordingly.
Also, if you'd be so nice and cross post this to inform AMHash holders - I don't have a map for where AMHash was marketed.
Last time I looked most of Havelock's income was from AM and AMHash trading. What will keep them going now that both of these are dead?
Yeah that's what everyone is wondering... They really need some legit stocks. I always figured that they would be an excellent platform for trading cloud mining contracts, but now that even AMHASH has gone belly-up, I don't believe in honest cloud mining operations for the time being, man...
There are no legit stocks in bitcoin so that will not happen.
How would you define legitimate?
Last time I looked most of Havelock's income was from AM and AMHash trading. What will keep them going now that both of these are dead?
Yeah that's what everyone is wondering... They really need some legit stocks. I always figured that they would be an excellent platform for trading cloud mining contracts, but now that even AMHASH has gone belly-up, I don't believe in honest cloud mining operations for the time being, man...
There are no legit stocks in bitcoin so that will not happen.
AND THIS PROVES HAVELOCK's BRIBE ATTEMPT!!
From my perspective, if you're gonna collect monthly fees and host companies on your trusted platform, in order to maintain that trust in situations like this is to have insurance incorporated into the business payment model. Either that, or do a more thorough background checking format that ensures you don't have epic scam artists putting their bellies up to your bar.
1. I'm pretty sure that if I buy shares of AAPL on E-Trade, they're not insured if the ghost of Steve Jobs takes his turtleneck and $178Billion and skips town with it, or they do something really stupid like start selling $17k gold digital watches. I'm the one who bought Apple shares, it's my problem if they go belly up.
2. I've never tried, but I'm going to guess it will be a tough sell explaining to your insurance agent that your Panamanian shell company that specializes in exchanging unregistered securities outside the jurisdiction of any major exchange regulator wants to insure the full value of the shares traded on your platform, in the case that those Chinese registered companies, controlled by a mastermind known only by an internet forum name, decide to abscond with the anonymous virtual currency you paid them in. I could be wrong though, it might just be a checkbox on the application form.
3. If ASICMiner had failed the background check that one of these exchanges would be able to provide, there would be literally 0 Bitcoin "stock exchanges" left. ASICMiner might have screwed over everyone, but they did produce the first Bitcoin ASICs and made a crapload of money before being listed on exchanges. Compared to a most of the crap mining bonds or obvious scams like NeoBee or ActiveMining, they were a gold standard. Then again, all of these illegal stock exchanges going belly up wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.
Well, if anything, the whole thing is a highly interesting experiment and we - as a society - may learn from the mistakes and can build on what remains and proves to be successful.
From my perspective, if you're gonna collect monthly fees and host companies on your trusted platform, in order to maintain that trust in situations like this is to have insurance incorporated into the business payment model. Either that, or do a more thorough background checking format that ensures you don't have epic scam artists putting their bellies up to your bar.
1. I'm pretty sure that if I buy shares of AAPL on E-Trade, they're not insured if the ghost of Steve Jobs takes his turtleneck and $178Billion and skips town with it, or they do something really stupid like start selling $17k gold digital watches. I'm the one who bought Apple shares, it's my problem if they go belly up.
2. I've never tried, but I'm going to guess it will be a tough sell explaining to your insurance agent that your Panamanian shell company that specializes in exchanging unregistered securities outside the jurisdiction of any major exchange regulator wants to insure the full value of the shares traded on your platform, in the case that those Chinese registered companies, controlled by a mastermind known only by an internet forum name, decide to abscond with the anonymous virtual currency you paid them in. I could be wrong though, it might just be a checkbox on the application form.
3. If ASICMiner had failed the background check that one of these exchanges would be able to provide, there would be literally 0 Bitcoin "stock exchanges" left. ASICMiner might have screwed over everyone, but they did produce the first Bitcoin ASICs and made a crapload of money before being listed on exchanges. Compared to a most of the crap mining bonds or obvious scams like NeoBee or ActiveMining, they were a gold standard. Then again, all of these illegal stock exchanges going belly up wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.
Waiting for the inevitable...
Last time I looked most of Havelock's income was from AM and AMHash trading. What will keep them going now that both of these are dead?
Yeah that's what everyone is wondering... They really need some legit stocks. I always figured that they would be an excellent platform for trading cloud mining contracts, but now that even AMHASH has gone belly-up, I don't believe in honest cloud mining operations for the time being, man...
Last time I looked most of Havelock's income was from AM and AMHash trading. What will keep them going now that both of these are dead?
Well, honestly... What's actually the difference between putting trading on hold and delisting the stock for the time being? They said they will continue trading once FC turns up or the situation gets rectified. Or is it another slice to acceptance?
Dayum, can't believe you got jacked for 170 coins. No wonder you told them to F off when they tried to toss you some peanuts to make you 'go away'. Just curious but what made you want to play/invest with that many coins on HL?
Srsly?? why R U DOING THIS with THAT MUCH money??
No offense, EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO INVEST IN BITCOIN ALWAYS....ALWAYS told, "Never invest more than you are willing to lose!"
I am willing to lose, MAX, like 5-7 BTC in trading and exchange activities. Why were YOU willing to lose 170 BTC? What are you holding 2000 BTC or something? Is 170 BTC that little of your holdings to where you can just 'brush it off?'
I mean, I've lost my own on stuff here and there - like my deposit on alpha-Technologies, but WOW...you sir, take the Cake. It's not even like you were doing something as a vendor on EVO and you lost your money, locked in escrow, with no hope. YOU HAD A CHANCE to NOT invest in this, but let greed prevail.
From my perspective, if you're gonna collect monthly fees and host companies on your trusted platform, in order to maintain that trust in situations like this is to have insurance incorporated into the business payment model. Either that, or do a more thorough background checking format that ensures you don't have epic scam artists putting their bellies up to your bar.
What kind of background check should be done?
(Honest question, since I'd love to hear what could be improved in this ecosystem).
The failure rate is absolutely abysmal, but from my perspective is that alot of businesses are owned and operated by people in countries where it's very hard to obtain legal recourse or identification.
From my perspective, if you're gonna collect monthly fees and host companies on your trusted platform, in order to maintain that trust in situations like this is to have insurance incorporated into the business payment model. Either that, or do a more thorough background checking format that ensures you don't have epic scam artists putting their bellies up to your bar.
They are too quick to delist it. Of course they can suspend the trading or just formally write in fund's description that it is non functional, investigations, restructuring going on or smth. Or will not be functional again, waiting for resolution etc. But they have to make it so its not fogotten like it was never there. Because it was 
And everything is not finished..
And everything is not finished..Because they know that AMPonziHash will not be paying anyone back. Someone stole their hash rate and all
They are too quick to delist it. Of course they can suspend the trading or just formally write in fund's description that it is non functional, investigations, restructuring going on or smth. Or will not be functional again, waiting for resolution etc. But they have to make it so its not fogotten like it was never there. Because it was And everything is not finished..
And everything is not finished.. 
it would be nice if havelock disclosed the withdrawl fees properly, instead of skimming off the top of what they say goes to the network.
straight up theft on havlocks part as they do not disclose this
straight up theft on havlocks part as they do not disclose this
Well you could just go ahead and see which amount miners get in fees for withdrawal transactions issued by Havelock. I don't think that withdrawal fees are of any significance right now considering the situations at hand.
it would be nice if havelock disclosed the withdrawl fees properly, instead of skimming off the top of what they say goes to the network.
straight up theft on havlocks part as they do not disclose this
straight up theft on havlocks part as they do not disclose this
Jump to: