Topic: [Havelock] HASH - Mining Equipment Sales, Contracts, More - page 2. (Read 7205 times)

There's nothing being shown here that isn't already public or disclosed to my knowledge. At least, nothing about Benny's personal background is new to me. I don't believe last names determine a person's character. If I did I would be screaming for the return of the Monarchy, not investing in a company.

@NotLambchop
Can you help me to understand how your post shows Benny is involved in RentalStarter?

@Gleb Gamow
I also did a cursory Google search of Benny and his background. I wasn't able to find anything that dissuaded me. What about having an obscure 3rd cousin who played pro football in the 80's and been in jail the past so many years and an old Angelfire website makes you uncomfortable?

Like I said, if you want to dig so much read the 104 pages on litecointalk. All the current investors already knew the relationship between Branny and Ben lol. You post it likes it's some grand uncovering.

Lol, he props the price, he owns shares, but... he's uninvolved?  How desperate are you to sell your bag of tasty D to a greater fool?  How "invested" r u?


Nah.

I have never met Art Schlichter in my life. We share an unfortunate last name, and a very vague relationship (3rd cousin, I believe).

As for the rest of your post(s), I am unsure what it has to do with me. I own one apartment - the one I live in with my wife and child. The vast majority of your post involves my brother. I am not involved in RentalStarter in any capacity.

Otherwise, feel free to dig up whatever you like on me. I am glad to answer whatever questions you have of me.

Lol. 

Benny Schlichter: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/benjamin-schlichter/9/a9a/8b4



Brandon Schlichter: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/brandon-schlichter/a/152/138



Nowhere on brother Benny's Linkedin page does he mention he's ever been involved in Real Estate - full- or part-time - a nice piece of info to add if such were the case, don't you think?: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/benjamin-schlichter/9/a9a/8b4

Blast from the past: http://www.angelfire.com/oh3/redreign/BPS.html


Benny and Branny seem to be pretty close bros. What are the odds of the latter also being in Bitcoin?

Geez, who would've thunk it?: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/rentalstarter-a-midwest-real-estate-investment-company-215230. I guess that explains why Benny opted to not mention real estate on his Linkedin page.

To Be Clear: https://www.facebook.com/RentalStarter



In case you're wondering who Michael Dupree Jr is: https://www.facebook.com/mdupreejr and https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaeldupreejr of http://easybitllc.com/about/team/

https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/benny1985-85217


https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/branny-120190


http://www.sba.gov/community/discussion-boards/greetings-garage-sales-tracker


http://who.godaddy.com/whoisstd.aspx?domain=new-hiphop-songs.com&prog_id=GoDaddy&k=7a9DYNi6BmRv+MlmG2MMvhKJmk+H5Mi+wsvIi8tDlHmAOR1ddEmh1k5YBB73NlTpPpoa5qj7MDQ%3d

What's up with these Hong Kong based businesses?: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9427554/Public%20release%20for%20RentalStarter.pdf



In case you'll ever need Benny and Branny's real FB pages: https://www.facebook.com/ben.schlichter and https://www.facebook.com/circleville respectively.

I'll leave it up to Benny and Branny Schlichter to inform you folks on how they're related to Art Shclichter, all three from Circleville, OH.

104 pages? How about this for a good read?: http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2011/02/09/when-her-hope-became-despair.html

If you're interested you can read about how that year has gone here.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1727172


Amazing how about a year ago Benny went from the above to on the heels of garnering a million bucks via Havelock, an entity not in good standings in the Bitcoin community.

I'm about to pen something else, but first need to check the facts.

Well starting off with some forum trust is good bonus since you have litecointalk cred as well.
I looked at your prospectus but i'll need to analyze it more later.

But a few initial questions

By utilizing volume purchasing power through hardware fabrication and acquisition, BuyAHash can grow our own, very profitable in-house mining farm, as well as sell excess supplies to an emerging $1 billion market, with very little competition. In 2013, BuyAHash grossed approximately $450,000 USD, with gross profits of approximately $40,000. We note that the 2013 P&L statement represented at most, 9 calendar months, and 12-month gross revenues exceeded $750,000 USD.

At what exchange rate were these estimates made?

Through retail and mining, we’ve also acquired contracts to sell cryptomining hardware to one of America’s largest PC retailers, Micro Center, which currently generates over $1 billion USD in annual revenues, with retail stores in over 30 states in the United States of America. Through volume sales via partnership, we can continue to leverage our volume-buying power with fabricators, reducing the price of all hardware-related products within the cryptocurrency mining sphere.

If I get this part correctly this will include retail sales as well as internal mining.

General questions
How do you plan to combat difficulty increases
Who are your preferred suppliers of mining hardware or will it be in house
What is your estimated ROI @ the present exchange rate.
What is the estimate ROI on those tables factoring in the increases of Bitcoin difficulty set at 5% avg increase 25% avg increase 0% etc.
Edit in: Think its set to 0 If I read correctly

Edit: 104 Pages on litecointalk to read through lol so sorry if I asked the same questions and it was in there but I'll leave this post as is since it can act as a general reference point.
https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=3126.0

NotLambchop: I'm glad you are comfortable with your understanding. However, it appears that this level of understanding is somewhat inadequate to grasp the structure needed to do this legitimately as the regulation is sill going to be in flux as crypto goes more mainstream. Ben is doing the homework and the IRS and SEC are on board with all the Ts are crossed and Is dotted to make sure that this is not and unregistered security offering. If you don't think that this investment is for you, then pass it right along to look elsewhere for another one that you like better.
It appears from your trust profile that you seem to very frequently troll securities posts and also use multiple alt accounts. On taking a quick look through your post history and recent posts, it seems you kind of make trolling an art form. Hey guys, it seems we have an infamous celebrity here! lucky us!

Ben, thank you for keeping up with fighting the good fight and having the patience to try to explain things to this person. Though, I'd have to say that it may not be worth it since it seems that they infrequently have anything nice to say. I think it's probably safe to ignore this one, but thanks to them for the thread bumps

I'm really looking forward to picking up more shares once this goes live on HL!

^Nah, What Benny's doing (by starting this thread, by dealing with Havelock etc., etc) is facilitating the sale of unregistered securities.  Even if we allow that [HK whatever] is a separate legal entity.
But this is easily proven false simply by scraping Litecointalk/earlier Bitcointalk threads.

Further, 506c is a SEC (read USA) exemption, having nothing to do with HK companies selling "virtual units" or "membership seats" through unlicensed Panamanian exchanges to non-US persons.

Then there's the problem with resale of securities sold with 506c exception.  The problem being "can't be done for at least a year."  Restriction put in place partly to stop this sort of muppetry.

So I'm pretty comfortable with my understanding.
Ty for chiming in.

You might be misunderstanding that this IPO is for BTCI, rather than CS LLC. If you want to invest directly with CS LLC then you must be accredited and find other means, to which, I'm not sure what offerings, if any, are available. CS LLC is not seeking direct funds from Havelock, so what Havelock does or doesn't have to facilitate the SEC doesn't matter.

Lol, 506c, while allowing general solicitation, requires you to sell only to accredited investors.  Havelock has no mechanism in place even for basic AML, forget verifying investor qualification.  You've got to be either pretty desperate or astoundingly cocky to try this.


Nah, it's simply embarrassingly inept.  It's transparent what you wish to accomplish (trust me, you didn't invent HK/BVI/SA shells), the problem is the haplessly amateurish way you went about it.

Reading your prospectus, all I could think about was the hopeful cargo cultists building landing strips, replete with straw airplanes and even control towers, "to make other planes come."  Just like they've seen Americans do.
U no wat tho?
These Melanesian weren't clever enough to fool them big smart airplanes.  The planes of plenty never came.  Heartbreaking.

To be a bit more blunt:  To you your "prospectus" might seem not much different from the one you've started out with, but to others it's as convincing as a straw cargo plane.

BTW, these forums are a treasure trove of evidence to any TLA choosing to bother.  Talk about paper trail  

*So many gems I missed
Fun with words:  Declare HASH a religion.  Your investors are your disciples, your employees donate labor, in exchange you bless them with money, your warehouse--church property.  Thinkin' fellars like us, if we just put our heads together...  No telling what we could do!

Thanks for the great questions -

I will be posting our 3rd party audited financials for 2013 tomorrow. I had hoped to be able to provide both 2013 and H1/2014 at the same time (bringing us up through June 30th, 2014), but one of the banks we've done business with was very slow on providing statements that I can send to our accountant for auditing (they are there now, and they are working on producing the statement as we speak). Its my hope that we can provide both the 2013/2014 financial statements prior to asking anyone for funding, so you can have that extra piece of due diligence available to you prior to making a decision on weather to invest in the offering or not.

Re: "Employee issuance" - that is actually for previous investors that are being added to Havelock. 0 shares are for myself, or staff of Coin Services LLC. Due to the regulations mentioned in the previous post, I do not believe I can (legally) own tradable shares on Havelock. I only own membership units of Coin Services LLC.

On the statement regarding ROI - I understand that it doesn't include difficulty and price adjustments. This is why the variable was called out in the document. The reason for that is that its difficult to calculate a fiat-based ROI on cryptocurrency devices since there are innumerable factors that go into a cost analysis for a future that you, nor I, know. This is why I merely included base, known, values regarding electricity, monthly yield, and cost of machines when comparing a commercial/industrial setup vs. a retail setup. The last four pages which call out YTD earnings use much more conservative figures that expressly call out what we believe we can generate in both fiat and BTC values, including increasing electricity costs, based on increasing difficulty.

If your curious about distribution in the US, I would suggest you travel to your nearest Micro Center to validate our legitimacy. To the last of my knowledge, every one of their stores stocks our products.

Early in the year when we were figuring out the best structure to handle both domestic US investors and foreign investors along with the investment being made in crypto-currency, it was planned to keep the two entities (Coin Services LLC and Big Trend Capital Investment Limited) completely separate. This would allow the foreign investment received to fall under Reg. S for an exemption from formal registration and simply withholding under IRS tax laws. (This was the wording you saw in the post).

As such I asked John to provide nominee services while I retained complete control of BTCI Ltd. via a power of attorney and control of the company
seals. Since then, the SEC and the IRS have become more clear on how to define usage of cyptro-currencies and as such and while it was decided to use the same structure we kept the same execution plan and we wanted to keep very clear distinction of the two offerings. We do not need to make it clearly two distinct entities, hence this posting explain and linking the two together for more transparency.

BTCI does hold 40% of the Member Units of Coin Services LLC. This amount of units is the basis of the investment on Havelock for foreign investors. US investors will invest directly with the US LLC via a Reg. D 506c exemption we have obtained from the SEC. To avail ourselves of both exemptions we do need to keep the two offerings separate from each other and will do such through the onshore and offshore entities.

While it seems confusing and complex, our goal is to maintain compliance with the many SEC laws governing private placement and foreign investment. Many other startups who have raised funds in crypto did not take the time, money or effort to keep in compliance and these are the stories we all have recently heard that shake the foundation of crypto investing.

Dividends, based on the Reg. S exemption can be paid from Coin Services to BTCI to pass on to Havelock for distribution to investors and we have tried to structure the dividend payout to have the least amount of withholding taxes as possible to put more return in the hands of the investors.

Aw jeez, not one of these again. I swear, this is something like the fourth or fifth time a "super-amazing-mining-company" has attempted to create an offering on Havelock, even if this one is selling hardware as well.


Since when is noting (without a source, I might add) previous year's earnings considered a business strategy?

This is sort of the standard prospectus we've seen time and time again. Hype, incredibly over-exaggerated financials, lack of any meaningful information, and (my favorite) the tiny section where they disclaim the investors' fraction of the company they just funded. I see in this case you've reserved BTC3,520 ($2.28M) for yourself employee issuance.

I also like the hardware descriptions on page 12(?...seriously, no page numbers):

Where * denotes that you exclude all important variables in Bitcoin mining, completely and drastically skewing the reality of the situation. It gave me quite a chuckle

Anyway, no need to go any further at this point. Creating a direct-from-distributor store / in-house miner combo is a fairly nice idea, but whoever helped you develop this offering has absolutely no grasp on what it means to develop a Bitcoin security. There's no sensible reason why this venture should be funded.

Watching with great interest!

Keep up the great job Benny/BAH/Hash